Steve Herschbach Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 Highlights:"Fors Gold+ unmasks identical to XP GMP (with both low & high conductors in multi-co-locate with iron)""the 10" concentric coil lends itself with a slight edge (over all other coils/options) as a slightly better micro-jewelry hunter""10" elliptical concentric coil unmasks approx 11% better than the 10" elliptical DD coil. 10" elliptical coil also unmasks better than 5" DD coil"Full details at http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,95264 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathray Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 10" elliptical coil also unmasks better than 5" DD coil...thats surprising! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Herschbach Posted December 6, 2015 Author Share Posted December 6, 2015 Concentrics do have better ferrous id capabilities over DD coils so it is not entirely unexpected? The catch with Tom is all his tests are in low mineral ground. He gets depths double in Florida over what I get on the west coast. The mineralization also adversely affects concentric coils. May be more to that story once he does some real world testing. This opens up possibilities because I have a FORS Gold Plus in hand and just got my new DEUS so if the weather cooperates I can do a little checking to try and confirm all this, plus see what happens with the new DEUS coil. I also wonder how the FORS Gold Plus handles flat steel, as that is their weakness compared to the DEUS and CTX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Herschbach Posted December 8, 2015 Author Share Posted December 8, 2015 Actual field testing now commencing at http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,95264,95385#msg-95385 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Herschbach Posted December 10, 2015 Author Share Posted December 10, 2015 Part 3 http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,95264,95463#msg-95463"The FGP's performance in heavily iron trashed-out sites is indeed stunning. Not many detectors survive/perform in the sites that I have subjected the FGP to. Right now........ I can (only) say that the FGP is in the top 10% of the 'relic hunting' units on the market. The % may be much better ((and I'll find out))....... but, for now...... I can comfortably/conservatively rate the unit in the top 10%." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Herschbach Posted December 12, 2015 Author Share Posted December 12, 2015 Final Part 4 at http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,95264,95593#msg-95593 "Direct (no handicaps given) head-to-head comparison to the unmasking flagship GMP in 'maximum validated/variables removed' fashion dictates that the FGP is within 3% of the 'unmasking capabilities' of the GMP...... as long as soil mineralization was low. There was one particular target that the GMP would absolutely NOT detect; yet, the FGP presented a 80% confidence of the presence of a non-ferrous target. The FGP was correct..... as a small ball of 14-Ga (solid core) copper wire was recovered at 6.5" depth...... in a carpet of square nails. There were a few targets that the GMP called 'non-ferrous'...... even to the point of correctly calling the conductivity of the non-ferrous target...... that the FGP could never see. In a nutshell; the FGP is less than 3% shy of the performance of the GMP......... both in real-world unmasking...... and real-world depth capabilities." "Taking the FGP into medium-mineralized dirt (T2/F75 4-bar dirt)......... the FGP did not perform so well. A dime at 5" would start to break up...... whereby, the FGP would start to ID the dime as ferrous/non-ferrous about 50% of the time. The GMP would ascertain 7.6" with proper ID. Greater depths of the dime....... to approx. 9.8"....... and the GMP would ID the target as non-ferrous...... yet, not 'dime'; but (most importantly) not 'iron'." If I was asked to sum up everything Tom reported it would be that the FORS Gold+ exhibits world class ability to pull non-ferrous targets out of dense ferrous trash. However, this also appears to be coupled with a decided weakness on high conductive targets like silver dimes in bad ground. Not very surprising for a machine on the high end of the mid frequency range but a bit disappointing. Part of this however is Tom is using a 9" round coil on the XP GMP versus the 5.5" x 10" DD on the FORS Gold+. When comparing coils for depth it is the coil width that counts more than the length so the FORS is in effect running a smaller coil. The main question I would have is how the FORS Gold+ would compare for depth on a silver dime compared to a 19 kHz Gold Bug Pro or F19. Now that the F19 is finally available in gold and black I may have to find out. Ultimately though we are talking about a detector designed first and foremost for gold prospecting for any issues it may have with detecting coins are secondary. Anyone that was to ask me about detecting both gold nuggets and coins well, I would aim at the Nokta FORS CoRe instead. Check out the Nokta FORS Gold+ Photo Tour More details and gold finds with Nokta FORS Gold+ at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/tags/forums/nokta%2Bfors%2Bgold/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now