Search the Community

Sourdough Scott and I played hooky and snuck out detecting between storms. I took him to a place and showed him where I found a few bits once before which was about a 30' x30' knob of bedrock. I went over it one more time with the 7000 and found nothing so I figured I would send Scott there with his 6000, knowing that I had left absolutely nothing. Dang it! The son of a gun found 4 bits that the 7000 missed. I got skunked that day but I'll eventually get over it. So I can't say which detector is the best for final cleanup.

The 8" coil is my favourite of the smaller coils, being the smallest, more of a specialty coil as you're not going to cover ground with it, but it's ideal in this situation you're in there and I would not be at all surprised if it picked out gold you're currently missing with both combinations. A compromise is the 10" as it gets a more normal ground coverage with just a little less sensitivity which of course means a little less depth on the smallest bits but a bit more depth on bigger bits but even coils like the 15" Concentric are very competitive with the 8" on small gold, only falling slightly behind more similar to the 10" while providing plenty of other benefits and would be my overall pick of coils. If only Minelab made more coils for the 7000, or at least sanctioned other brands to do so to make them more mainstream I think these 6000/7000 comparisons where people favour the 6000 by a large degree on smaller gold would largely disappear.

6000 vs 7000 people are really missing the point here on the settings they are using. If you run a 6000 in difficult, wiggly lines, however you want to call it. You can miss gold at a certain size and depth. That same nugget two inches deeper and the 6000 will get it. The 7000 in difficult has less of a problem with this phenomenon, although it is still present. I have good evidence to back this up. Look at the last minute or so from this video and it will prove it. this video is testing the algoforce but just by chance I witnessed this exact situation when running the 6000 over the test nuggets.

This is largely an illusion caused by the lack of coil options. Yes, there is likely some pieces a 7000 will miss the 6000 won't and also vice versa but the number isn't near what it appears to be, I think. The 7000 has a well-known depth advantage as the gold gets bigger though. Sounds like a spot to hit with a VLF if it can handle the soil, as a VLF truly does pick up smaller bits the 6000 and 7000 can't see at all. There is no one detector that excels at it all, largely due to design choices by the manufacturer to sell more detectors. And Dig4gold has a point there, now more than ever I'm flipping rocks to get results, it pays off.

That’s a valid point. Nearly all of the targets would have been easily recovered using the 6. The point is, this area was detected well with the 6000 on previous trips with no targets being heard. The 7000 picked up 3 signals in close proximity to each other and were recovered from good depth. This resulted in rocks being moved and gravel shifted in order to cover the ground well. What you saw in the clip was a result of that activity. If we didn’t take the Zed with us on this trip, the gold would still be in the ground. I’m not putting down the 6000, (it is actually our go to machine) I was just pointing out what happened and how the 7000 really does sniff stuff out that the 6 can’t hear. The two machines are a fantastic combination. The small patch area was detected really well with the Zed until I was satisfied that there was nothing else to be found. The problem I did face was the machine was trying to tell me something but no matter what I did, it could not give me enough information and lock onto a target. As this was a flood gold deposit, I assume that there will still be some small pieces present and possibly some pan size specs. With Easter coming up, and family visiting, the plan is to head back with my daughter and grandson to have one more play at the patch. This time the 6000 and a pan will be used. It is amazing how the 6 can absolutely scream on a small piece and yet the 7000 won’t even hear it. Im hoping they can have some fun and share in the thrill of holding some pieces of gold. I’ll report back if the 6 does find anything.

In all fairness the pick is a large target for the GPZ 7000 & as we know the 7000 is king when it comes to larger targets at depth. He also had moved that rock that he got the signal from with the 7000. Had he moved the rock & then waved the 6000 over it I am sure he would have got that signal with it. So did he really get a scrap the 6000 missed? He didn't give it a chance & should have waved the 6000 over it after moving the rock so I am not a believer. He also should have waved the 6000 over the ground he had cleared for the 7000, maybe he did but he didn't say, but most likely waved the 7000 over it & only got that signal he showed after moving that rock. I would definitely believe he could have got a bigger bit of gold at depth with the 7000 that the 6000 wouldn't have got. How many of you have got gold from moving a rock/rocks no matter what detector you are using? All of you I bet. D4G

That’s some really nice gold, thanks for sharing! More people in the U.S. are cleaning up small gold missed by the 7000 with the 6000 than the other way around, so your video makes for an interesting counter perspective. In general if you hunt ground that was well hunted with with a GPZ 7000 by following up with a 6000 you will find smaller bits the 7000 missed. Conversely, in deeper ground, following a 6000 with a 7000 is likely to find larger deeper gold the 6000 missed. It can work both ways.

I don't think that it's a problem in this case. A magnet moving relative to the ferrite rod antenna would definitely be a question mark though. 👍🙂

Hey All, My favorite haunt is a group of closed claims in the hills along a lava bed nearby. Also hit schools, fairground, parks, camping spots, trails and dirt roads along the claims. Detectors: Bounty Hunter Land Ranger (original, not the Pro) Quickdraw ll (same vintage) Pointers: F-Pulse (love this thing) Home brew pointer made from a lumber scanning wand with a beefed up coil on ferrite core Coils: Standard 8" BH coil 4" BH coil 10" BH coil (New) CORS Fortune (NEL Sharpshooter) 9.5" x 5.5" DD coil

When swinging, I find my hand feels more natural when it's resting on the bottom of the handle. That gives me about an inch and a bit of clearance to the bottom of the control box. I'll probably still put a thin layer of tennis racquet grip tape as I did the same with the 7000 and 2300. Probably got so used to the foam grips from the SD days right up to the 5000.

I found this guy's video interesting; he bought a 12" Concentric X-coil prototype for his GPZ off Dave Dench and was using it to compare to other coils/detectors for his own interest really but decided to film some stuff. He's not associated with X-coils in any way and bought both of his X-coils and the 12" Concentric he is using is a prototype and never released to the public for sale so he was lucky to be able to buy it off Dave. I already own all the coils in question in the video so already knew my results so I wasn't all that interested in that part of the video however what stood out to me in his video was the performance difference between Normal and Difficult on the 6000, I've heard a lot of people say there is very little in it, I always felt differently that difficult is fairly neutered compared to normal but I put it down to my soils, then I see this guy's video in Western Australia's red dirt and he's seeing the same as I do by the looks of it. You can skip to about the 10-minute mark to just see the difference he's seeing between normal and difficult on the 6000 if you don't have interest in the GPZ side of it. He found some targets and compared the detectors and coils on them, the targets turned out to be gold. I guess the people confident that there is very little difference between normal and difficult could be basing that off their soil where normal isn't working as well as it can so its performance is hindered making it more like the performance of difficult but for people that can run in normal on the 6000, they will quite clearly see the difference in performance between the two modes with normal being significantly better. The GPZ is the same although I think the performance difference is much more dramatic, if I had to run the GPZ in difficult I'd be quite disappointed by its performance as I've been spoilt by my soil conditions meaning I can mostly run in normal everywhere and I think that's partly why some think the 6000 is doing better for them than the 7000 did, as the 6000 even in difficult is better than the 7000 on very small gold in standard coil setups regardless of which of the modes you're in. In 7000 with a smaller coil in soils that it can run effectively in normal is a beast so I hope if there ever is a GPZ 8000 they have improved the ground handling enough so people stuck in difficult can experience the power of normal in their soils and that I think will be the key to the 8000's success along with offering the right size and types of coils. I even go as far as putting up with a noisy normal than switching to difficult on the GPZ as I've proven to myself time and time again that if I was in difficult on the GPZ, I'd miss so much gold and by the looks of his video he would be missing a lot of gold in difficult on the 6000 he'd find in normal too. If he had not cleared the rocks around where the nugget was to get the GPX coil very close to the ground it would entirely miss the gold in difficult but likely would find it in normal.

I'm really hoping the sales on the 6000 and 7000 is early indication they are clearing stock for new flagship gold models and not just axing the EQ600 and backdoor fixing the 6000 coil issues. And I hope we get surprised and it's not a GPZ8000 but something new entirely. H1 or something. Hybrid PI/Z, I know that's all buzzwordy, but I want to see something truly new after this long of a wait.

I think Steve hit the nail right on the head.... aside from the 'Detector tech hitting the wall' question, Minelab, as the world leaders in detector technology, are slowly failing....even if they dont see it. Competition is here with much more to come. The GPZ7000 replacement has been sitting on the bench for a couple years now and without the actual 'hitting the ball outta the park' analogy coming true, then all the small, incremental improvements aint gonna be enough to sway the serious purchaser into ditching their Legacy GPX, 6000 or 7000 machines. As Minelab's own motto goes 'Performance is Everything' and this actual, serious performance increase will be the ONLY thing that keeps ML at the top of the heap. Not only do the serious guys buy a lot of detectors, but their in-field results drive sales. Nothing sells like success....

I rounded off the small change on all the numbers 🙂 Batteries can be had for as little as $30 so that's insignificant too and you can use it for other purposes outside of detecting like charging your phone so it's' a multipurpose investment, not specific to the detector, and in my case at least I didn't need to buy coils, although adding a coil like the Sadie on isn't going to break the bank and I couldn't resist buying one for the Algo, I just hope Sadie supply can keep up with demand for those wanting one as it's a pretty good coil on it, although the spirals are more sensitive and I'd only use the Sadie for the size. Not sure how that translates to people in bad ground, they may prefer the less sensitive Sadie over a Spiral? It's within the price range it can be purchased for a bit of fun, VLF pricing really. I bought one for that reason, it's not like I needed it although the more I use it the more I see its potential for purposes outside of gold prospecting. I also think of the 7000 as the everyday machine (Not that I use it every day, or even close) and the 6000 the take out when I feel like it or need the lighter machine, I just yesterday took the 6000 as it shrinks down small for a backpack hike, I'm sitting here now with jelly legs and can barely walk from the big mountain hike yesterday, picked 3 little bits with the 6000 and 12x7" NF though so for me at least that's some success.

Gold detectors already do this to some degree. They look at both X (ferrous) and C (conductive) components of a signal as separate entities. The problem is that gold nuggets are in that unfortunate zone of overlap between X and C I think so they have both components and eliminating or reducing one could affect nugget signal. But as with everything - there are places where this is a bigger problem than other places, and more detector control would allow an experienced operator to change settings and adapt. I think it's possible right now actually. To some degree, I think this may be an end goal of Geosense, but I'm unsure. Maybe that was an application of the patent? The 6000 is more advanced than you give it credit for Simon, and I'm saying this as one of it's biggest critics. I'm guessing it's because you tend to hunt the same places and stick within small, defined areas. Most of the positives I've found relate to using it as an exploration machine. The 6000 blows away the 7000 in conductive ground (salt), even with a 10" X Coil on the GPZ. Yet, it retains the sensitivity of the GPZ with the 10". I can explore salty ground 4x faster with the 6000 than I can with the GPZ due to both it's performance in salt as well as the weight reduction. It's far more sensitive than a 5000 with an 11" round too. Also, I'm not ready to sell Geosense short or underestimate it just yet. I have documented well my issues with what I perceive it to be doing and how it can negatively affect a detectorist without them even realizing it, but I also still use Auto+ almost entirely, it's just too convenient when covering tons of different grounds types while exploring. When in variable ground, it does well adapting and letting me concentrate on other things besides fiddling with settings - it saves tons of time for me and I expect the next iteration will be better. This stuff here is why I said earlier they really need to get exploration prospectors on the testing crew. Because that's exactly the strength of the machines like the 6000 and they need to start getting input from people that can point out things that I feel a lot of current tests may underestimate if not miss entirely.

It’s not $2000, it’s $2300 plus a battery plus a coil etc. I’m still waiting on mine, I’ll buy one because I’m a metal detector tragic and they’re cheap enough for a bit of play. I just couldn't justify an Axiom in Australian dollars!! From my Algo expectations perspective, I’m already in the boat described above because I view my GPX 6000 in the same light compared to the 7000 which is my everyday machine. I only put the 6000 on when I want to muck around and have some fun, so with the Algo when I get it I’ll just be targeting ground where a very early sampling PI has an advantage, they don’t have smooth so why go into nasty variable high X ground? 🤪 I have numbers of locations ideal for a nice little light weight thing-a-me-bob like this and I look forward to pinging a few tiny bits in low mineral ground that gives all the VLFs conniption's due to the MANY MANY hot rocks driving you ka-boing ka-boing nuts. 😂 JP

Most of you think I have all kinds of free time but the actuality of it is that my free time is very limited. Yes I sell detectors for a living and so keeping customers happy and income coming in is a must. As you seen the extra price of fuel makes for more of a challenge to get away and then trying to schedule the Field Training we offer along with testing of new and upcoming gear is challenging. To make things worse, we have had one of the wettest and most cool Springs in history here in Idaho and it seems about the time I plan for more testing a big storm rolls in. Anyway, I was able to put some time aside and run the new CoilTek GOLDHAWK (why do I keep wanting to call it GOLDENHAWK?) coil on my GPX-6000. I selected the 10" Ellip MONO as I knew the site had been pounded with a GPZ-7000 and a good year with the GPX-6000 and 11" MONO coil. I was not expecting much but either way, those are the sites that I want to test, the so called CLEANED OUT patches. It took all of a minute and 3 feet to find my 1st. The 10" Ellip MONO GOLDHAWK coil is lighter so I can hunt for longer periods of time. It's more compact and allows for hunting in tougher terrain and up against boulders and tree roots where nugget like to hide. It's greater sensitivity to smaller bits, certain specimens and or highly collectible wire gold. I won't go into detail of why a couple well known GPZ-7000 users missed this nugget and or how a veteran GPX-6000 user missed this nugget, but will say this. They missed it and I found it with the new compact 10" ELLIP MONO GOLDHAWK coil by CoilTek.

I don't know why anyone is expecting a $2000 detector to do better than a $9000 and $10,000 detector and pull stuff out of flogged patches with them. It might find the odd bit but it's not going to be a game changer in that scenario. The Target ID may help in the trashier areas to come out with something too. The idea I think behind the E1500 is to bring a very cheap detector to market for people that don't want to pay the high pricing of those detectors yet still have a rather large percentage of the performance of them on the bread-and-butter smaller gold most people are finding. If your idea of buying it is because you want it to do better than your GPZ or GPX 6000, you're wasting your money. They're already beyond the first batch too, I've got a second one being shipped to me at the moment from another batch for a friend that lives in a country they can't ship too, he's picking it up in NZ on his holiday here in a few weeks. I think it's a fantastic detector and has great coin, jewellery and beach appeal which I can't say that about the 6000 or 7000, so it offers something there too, but it's not going to destroy the 7000 or 6000 on old patches, although if the 7000's using the stock coil or NF 12" I'd give the E1500 the edge on some smaller gold.

I find the speculation that the E1500 will somehow outperform detectors costing much more money to be, well, how to put this nicely… questionable at best. If this detector was GPX 6000 class it would be stupid to sell it for one quarter the price of a GPX 6000. I don’t think Alex is stupid. Here is the current price structure in Australia as of today after Garrett just introduced the lower priced stripped down Axiom package: 1. GPZ 7000 $10,499 2. GPX 6000 $8,999 with two coils 3. Garrett Axiom $4,999 with one coil 4. SDC 2300 $4,399 5. E1500 with Sadie & Battery $2649 6. Minelab Manticore $2499 7. Gold Monster $1299 I have pretty solid information in hand indicating that you are going to get what you pay for. The E1500 is a very affordable option at close the price of a top end VLF and will outperform said VLFs on gold in mineralized ground. Time will tell but I think the E1500 will fall short of SDC 2300 and Axiom level performance, essentially being a bridge between VLF detectors and those models. The 6000 and 7000 will continue to rule the roost but at twice the price of the SDC/Axiom level you are not getting twice the depth. Pulling a number out of my ass I’d assign a very debatable expectation of about a 15% increase in overall performance at each major step up in price. People can of course argue that number all day long but I think it is very important to give newbies some sense of reality. Twice the money does not get twice the performance. Gains are more like 10% - 15% - 20%…. pick your number, but it’s not double, triple, quadruple. If I was still selling detectors I’d explain to this new customer that they can go find a gold nugget with a Gold Monster or a Manticore. I’d explain that for not much more than a Manticore they could get an AlgoForce E1500 and be able to deal with mineralized ground and hot rocks that will give the VLF models real trouble. I’d tell them that for substantially more money they could get some very solid bang for the buck in the Axiom/SDC range, a step up from E1500 but still not top tier. Finally, I’d tell them that if money is no object and they simply want the best performance they can get, to look at the 6000 or 7000. I’d comment that out of the box with provided coils the 6000 would have the edge for smaller gold, and the 7000 the edge on larger gold. Adding aftermarket coils (and more money) to the 7000 can close the gap between it and the 6000 on small gold, but nothing you do to the 6000 will have it hitting the big stuff as deep as the 7000. That would be my short and sweet sales presentation and I offer it up as the most simplified big picture no B.S. look at the scene as you are likely to find. My somewhat educated opinions only, feel free to toss in trash bin if you don’t agree. In the States this would be the situation if the E1500 could be had here, updated 5/1/24 with new Axiom option: 1. GPZ 7000 $8,999 2. GPX 6000 $6,499 with two coils 3. SDC 2300 $3,599 4. Garrett Axiom $2,999 with one coil 5. E1500 with Sadie & Battery under $1999 6. Minelab Manticore $1699 7. Gold Monster $799

If they are coming out with new detectors, I feel they need to be actually new at this stage. Like the 7000 was. It was a new paradigm. Adding a few controls and tweaks to an old machine doesn't do much for me anymore personally. If it's fractional improvements on old ideas, I'll just wait for a new Algoforce or Nokta or whatever at 1/4 the price, no hurry. Stop milking the same cow already, Minelab. The 7000 and 6000 seemed steps in the right direction finally, I hope they don't go backwards with something like a revamped 5000. Design for exploration prospecting in addition to sensitivity, and get some of exploration prospectors on the testing crews so the engineers have an ear towards the types of concepts that are import there too. If they revamp anything, it should be the 6000 and 7000, not the 5000 IMO. And even a revamped 7000 at this stage would be a letdown to me as I think a new redesign and model would be better in almost every way. The concept of putting X old detector in Y new updated package has no appeal to me anymore for any model, unless it's done fairly quickly after release - like 2 years. That's just me though. Tech moves too fast now, times have changed.

The 6000 with more control would be nice, I wouldn't buy it as I've already bought a 6000 and it's a significant investment already so just having more control wouldn't be worth the money to me as much as I'd like it, still think that's how the 6000 should have been but I understand the logic behind making it simple for African prospectors who just don't care and just want to find gold and quickly before someone else does to put food on the table. The 7000 lightened up and with a concentric col I already have, by using lighter alternative coils. No way in the world would I pay another 10 grand for that even if it was Gold Monster weight or less. The 5000 pro is the most appealing out of the list there, although my 5000's already on a full carbon shaft, has a light weight battery, has an SP01, the thing it lacks is the small gold/specimen benefits. I'd rather the 5000 Pro have a screen for settings rather than another box, so modern miniaturized electronics would be nice. I don't get in the water enough if at all to need the Sovereign, but I think that would probably be a popular unit as water hunters are the most neglected group of detectorists by the looks of it. Long story short, I wouldn't buy any of the above detectors, no doubt plenty of people would though, especially ones in good gold areas.

Here's a few things on my Minelab dream list: A 6000 with a lot more control - independent threshold, tone control, front end gain adjust, more timings etc. A 7000 that's gone on a diet - don't need the GPS, and a nice mid size semi-elliptical concentric would be great. A gpx5000 Pro version - full carbon shafts, SD series khaki green box, a small internal battery to give me 6 hrs run time, but still able to hook up the external battery pack. External manual tune pot like the 3500. No coil supplied. And a little bit of SDC/6000 timing magic for an improvement on specimens. Actually, if they did this, I probably wouldn't need the first two ☺️ Heck they can even stuff my sP01 circuit inside if we're really dreaming. A Sovereign type machine that's fully waterproof, i.e. a Garrett infinium style control box that I can chest mount. Aqua Sovereign or Excalibur III? None of the above is using new technology, so quite achievable, and would sure get me wanting to upgrade.

A new model is going to have to do a lot more than be lighter with some minor benefits, if it doesn't all it will do is drive up the sales of aftermarket coils for those who have waited out buying them in hope a new model comes out that's significantly better. I just don't see a new GPZ coming anytime soon. I'd love to be wrong, but I doubt I am. It will either be good and I'd want to own one, although I doubt,I'll be buying it as it will be another very overpriced detector for someone in my position with little gold to be found or it will be not as good as many hope and drive-up sales of aftermarket coils for the 7000. The 6000 already increased the sales of GPZ aftermarket coils, a new 7000 is going to do the same. People think do I invest another 10+ grand (Australian) on a new detector for some better performance, or a couple of grand (Australian) on my existing one and it also gets better performance for a lot less money, how close it is to the new detector is what we will have to wait and see, they may just wait until the 6000 and 7000's are all old in another 5 or 6 years and release it then, that way it's just a new model not needing to be that much better performing as people are looking to replace older detectors with problems anyway, and it can have all the modern lightweight features and whatever Bluetooth is around at the time, and better screens, batteries and whatever else other industries invent to improve the product.

There are two markets. The hobbyists who do it for the sunshine, long walks and social outings. Lots of that here and some in Australia. Then there are the serious guys - plenty in Australia but the huge market is Africa. You can always sell hobbyists stuff. People detect for coins and jewelry and relics and some people will go detect for a few small nuggets. I lean more the other way - gold was always a way to make money for me and I did quite well with it. And those Africans? They are putting food on the table. So Minelab can come out with a multifrequency Gold Monster 2 or a lighter weight GPZ 8000 and there will be sales to be had from hobbyists. But the serious folks, the people who expect their detecting to pay for itself and then some..... that HUGE Africa market? Minelab will only see real sales numbers that matter from a detector that makes dead ground light up again. Ground that no longer pays with a GPX 6000 and a GPZ 7000 must pay with a new model. If not, it is game over because the hobbyist market is a pittance compared to the worldwide market for serious gold detecting. Technology hit the wall? Dreamers want to dream but my decades behinds the scenes experience and contacts with engineers do not allow me to wear those rose colored glasses. Minelab faces their hardest task ever - one upping themselves just one more time. They have been eking out gains on ever smaller gold and that has been working up until now. But hitting stuff smaller than a GPX 6000? We are into VLF country at that point, and what really is the point? I am the guy Minelab needs to sell. I'm ready to hang up nugget detecting entirely as not worth my time. If I just want to go detect for fun I can do that at a local park or at the beach and have as much or more fun as wandering around NOT finding good gold. The Aussies want a detector that will hit a 6 ounce nugget at enough extra depth it makes them toss a modded GPX or a X Coil outfitted GPZ 7000 to the side in favor of the new model. What I really need is more depth on one gram to 15 gram nuggets. Not a "oh gosh it seems like that signal is a bit better" imaginary difference on a buried test nugget. I need a machine that when I bury this 1 to 15 gram nugget, there is no signal at all with a GPX 6000 or GPZ 7000 and a strong signal with this new machine. No BS hair splitting, but a genuine "bang" versus dead silence. If the new machine can do that then I will buy the new one and be happy and Minelab shareholders will be ecstatic. The Africa Gold Rush and more will reignite for one last round, aided by higher gold prices. Minelab will sell piles of them, and at no doubt eye watering prices. But can Minelab deliver? As somebody with more than a wishful thinking aspect about what it takes to make that happen, I'm not very hopeful. At some point the well does really run dry, and I frankly just shake my head knowing what I know at the blind faith in the idea that detectors will never hit a wall for depth. There are genuine reasons for why that is not true and good reason to believe Minelab is having a difficult time beating what is already available. I'm quite certain there will be something to sell, some statistic generated by a positive result in some circumstance. No doubt pictures of some gold found on "well pounded ground." All I can say is I am that guy that has always, without hesitation, ditched my last Minelab the second a new version came out, and never regretted it. Not this time. I will wait until I see inconvertible proof that the wall has been truly burst through and nuggets are popping right and left out of ground we all have now about given up for dead. Until that happens it's all just opinionating and wishful thinking.

That's right. Weight alone would not cut it for me neither. After a full day of detecting with the 7000 I need 4 Advil to feel almost good at night. That would give me 137 years of pain free detecting, assuming I spend 8k on advil ($0.04/pill) and detect every day, instead of spending 8k for a light weight (and otherwise nothing) gpz 8000. 😁 GC