GPZ 10" Xcoils In USA

[Jin]

4 hours ago, Jonathan Porter said:

Having a good Ferrite balance that is fixed to the units operating temperature in this case is best,

I wasn't sure how long it took to get to operating temperature so did my ferrite balance on start up and then again after half an hour of detecting. Through out this detecting session I would check the ferrite on the ground to see if any response was coming from it.

[Andyy]

20 hours ago, jasong said:

 I will definitely try out semi auto and the ferrite again when I get back into the field and see how it affects both the z14 and x coil balancing. The semi auto update did not yet exist when I had to stop detecting to go back to work so it's kinda new to me. I detect all over the country in different ground types Arizona to Colorado, good to know how to adjust for each.

But that leads me to a last question: is there a circumstance you can conceive were Auto would be used instead of semi auto now? Also, would manual still be preferable in cases where the soil is very consistent, or is there no advantage to using manual on the GPZ now?

I have been in areas before where I never achieved complete balance off the ferrite even with the 14" coil.  Now I am understanding that people really need to be cognizant of "Saturated signal", "X signal", "Ground mineralization signal" and "Salt Signal".  Sometimes I think this can be tough to determine.   Obviously ground mineralization can be ground balanced with side pumps.  Deciphering whether there is salt signal, has also been discussed previously.  Saturation has been discussed in this thread and instructions were given to determine if this signal exists.  (I still need to follow through to see if this method clearly identifies saturation in my soils)  It would be nice for the machine to tell us the amount of these components so that we can best tune the machine.  Maybe that will be a future machine.

I am not sure if I will get out testing this weekend, but if I do, I have a place in mind that had very noisy ground, and is a lot shorter of a drive (which is a plus).  Then I can try to raise the coil off the ground to determine if saturation is present.  It is possible saturation has been giving me issue for some time (even on std. coils) and I just thought it was ground signal that was not balancing.  Things I would like to try with the ferrite (specifically for the Xcoil) are: 

1) how well auto works (no ferrite use)

2) semi-auto (with ferrite) using recommended technique by JP

3) semi-auto (with ferrite balance only over the front tip of the coil)

4) semi-auto (with ferrite raised on rocks 6-8 inches)

 

 

[Jonathan Porter]

In my opinion Auto is only there now in case I break or misplace my Ferrite. If people do not see the point of the Ferrite then I HIGHLY recommend they use the Auto mode to at least give the detector the chance to calibrate the X signal naturally. Auto might be the only way people can use the X coils in areas with a lot of X signal.

Absolutely you can detect in MANUAL, I often do and it does provide the maximum depth achievable assuming both X and G are calibrated properly to the former and localised ground balance conditions for the latter. 

If ambient temperatures are north of 15 Deg C in the morning then usually the X balance does not move very much, I allow an hour for things to settle down electronically, but seriously 30 minutes should be plenty if the ambient is getting above 20 DegC. It only takes seconds to check the Ferrite balance, so long as the residual signal is small then there’s no need to fret.

JP

[Andyy]

 **** TRIP 2 ****

The main purpose was actually to test ferrite balance in saturated ground, but I wasn't going to drive back to the first areas I spoke of.  That is way too far for some simple testing.  I have another area where I found my first gold patch.  Strangely enough it was on a GPAA claim.  Who would have thunk.  Those claims are beaten down and squeezed dry, right?   Me and a friend both laugh about this place.  We very often go back to the general area to beat down the skunk.

After getting out to the claim at midnight, I set up the detector.  Surprisingly, ground balance was fine and so was the ferrite balance.  So much for testing that.  Next best goal for testing is to determine if the 10" coil gets gold missed by others.  Well this place has been hit by every machine you can think of, including the VLF's.  Well after checking the main hillside area, I had nothing.  Only one boot tack I found that everyone missed.  Then I headed down to the stream where I had found gold before.  Lots of pieces had been found here.  But the area had been worked hard by drywashers and detectors, too.  My buddy with an SDC2300 basically cleaned this place out.  Last time I was here, I got the skunk.  It was starting to look the same this time.  But then after hitting the sides of the wash, I got clear signal.  And by the way my rule for this hunt was that I wasn't going to get down and dirty and make the gold appear by using the tricks of the trade like digging out areas and moving rocks.  I wanted to see if got what other machines had missed, not what other techniques had missed.  But nobody should have missed this signal.  There actually seemed to be a couple signals.  The first two signals were the biggest pieces.  But I kept hearing more and more signals.  I dug down another 4-5 inches through the schist and pulled out another 4pcs for a total of 6 (all of which in a 2'x2' area).  I had hit this specific spot before and found gold about 10' away.  But here I am with more.  I am not really sure how the larger pieces were not heard with the GPX5000 I used previously down this wash.  

So I still have no conclusion on the ferrite ring other than I know I can use the other coil to lock in the ferrite balance, so I am not too concerned.  Does this coil find what other machines cannot see, well that is hard to say.  I know SDC,GPX and GPZ's have been over these areas.  I think a lot of the gold on the hillside patch was gone over.  I may have just been lucky on this spot.  But it *is* strange that it was not far under the bush or hidden or difficult to reach.  Anyways, not much to conclude with this test other than this coil operated smoothly at this location and still finds gold.

I do really like the small pinpoint accuracy of this coil and how light it is.  Not very big gold (total of 2 grams), but I am only showing it to give an idea of its capability in the states.  It does seem to add an inch or two depth on the .1g pieces.  This is what I would expect for a 10" coil.

 

 

      

[afreakofnature]

Andyy you mentioned your friend has an SDC.  Any way you two could do a comparison on targets?  Maybe video it?

[Andyy]

Maybe when it cools down.  At 112F, not many people are getting out.  Very few go out at night like me.

[afreakofnature]

Ah wasn’t thinking temps Andyy.  Its been in the 90s here still too hot but better than snow for me.

Yeah on a cool day and if your buddy would too.  Even though its an 8” to 10” and different tech I’m still curious.  If I was closer I’d help out with mine.

[Andyy]

On 7/10/2019 at 1:00 PM, Jonathan Porter said:

Absolutely you can detect in MANUAL, I often do and it does provide the maximum depth achievable assuming both X and G are calibrated properly to the former and localised ground balance conditions for the latter. 

To be honest, I have never used manual, other than to click over with the user button so that it stops tracking ground balance.  If you left the unit in manual then I understand you have to press the button, in which case you are quick tracking every time you press the button, correct?  Maybe your point in operating in manual is that you do not ever press the button.  You just switch back to Semi Auto if you think ground balance is needed.

If your X and G are calibrated properly, you believe that more depth is achievable?  This is confusing to me as I would think the machine reading and balancing to the current changing conditions would give the best depth all of the time.

[jasong]

22 minutes ago, Andyy said:

If your X and G are calibrated properly, you believe that more depth is achievable?  This is confusing to me as I would think the machine reading and balancing to the current changing conditions would give the best depth all of the time.

This is what I was getting at too when I asked JP about Manual last page.

Since Manual stays balanced to the ferrite, and the ferrite balance is supposed to be the best, I can't understand what the purpose of manual is at all since Semi Auto also stays balanced to the ferrite and also tracks to the ground as the coil moves which should be the best possible ground balance. I didn't see the purpose for either Auto or Manual anymore, that being the case.

The only thing that makes sense to me is when you want to be unbalanced to the ground for some reason. This used to be a technique with VLFs to filter some hotrocks out or make them sound more obvious. The GPZ to me feels like a mega VLF acting like a PI so there might be some use for a technique such as that in hot ground - I'm not in hot ground enough to have really tried anything like that though.

The only other reason I could think of is in soil that doesn't change hardly at all - at which point maybe Manual completely bypasses some GB filtering circuitry and in fact does get slightly better depth?