jasong Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 15 minutes ago, Lunk said: I don’t think that will happen, just by virtue of ZVT vs PI; ZVT simply has more grunt on the big stuff. I'm not so sure. A 19" spiral Evo on a dinosaur relic of a 4500 can equal or outperform the Z14 on some smooth surface (like Q stuff) nuggets around ~1/4oz. a 17x13 Evo can come into the ballpark on 2-3+ gram stuff, even GB type angular gold. The 6000 has faster sampling, better EMI filtering, better ground balancing, better ground timings, and conceivably more RX gain to take advantage of those advancements. Plus a 17" mono. It's a beast of a machine compared to the 4500 on paper. I don't understand how that won't outpunch the GPZ on big gold. Or really all gold for that matter unless they also restricted the RX gain in order to not out compete the Z on depth. What am I missing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunk Posted February 13, 2021 Author Share Posted February 13, 2021 5 minutes ago, jasong said: I'm not so sure. A 19" spiral Evo on a dinosaur relic of a 4500 can equal or outperform the Z14 on some smooth surface (like Q stuff) nuggets around ~1/4oz. a 17x13 can come into the ballpark on 2-3+ gram stuff, even GB type angular gold. The 6000 has faster sampling, better EMI filtering, better ground balancing, better ground timings, and conceivably more RX gain to take advantage of those advancements. Plus a 17" mono. It's a beast of a machine compared to the 4500 on paper. I don't understand how that won't outpunch the GPZ on big gold. Or really all gold for that matter unless they also restricted the RX gain in order to not out compete the Z on depth. What am I missing? When I say big gold, I mean multi-ounce to multi pound nuggets. Guess you'll have to do some side by side comparisons when you get one. Looking forward to your report! 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Catcher Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 21 minutes ago, afreakofnature said: I know, was thinking that too. ? What to do? ? Perhaps selling some expensive dowsing rods to raise some cash for the real thing ? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
araratgold Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 IMHO, Minelab should provide comprehensive test data before release so that us mug punters don't have to spend $8K AUD to " suck it and see " ! Rick 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunk Posted February 13, 2021 Author Share Posted February 13, 2021 2 minutes ago, araratgold said: IMHO, Minelab should provide comprehensive test data before release so that us mug punters don't have to spend $8K AUD to " suck it and see " ! Rick That would be nice! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasong Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 That would be pretty cool. But... I'm guessing they are between a "40% deeper" rock and a "GPZ nugget depth/timings test chart" hard place when it comes to releasing test data. Both that claim and the chart data they provided us for the 7000 release were met with near endless criticism. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northeast Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 2 hours ago, araratgold said: Minelab should provide comprehensive test data before release They did ?? But seriously, it does indicate that the 6000 beats the 5000 on every size of nugget. Of course it does not say in what ground and with what settings and did the 5000 have a Commander coil or an 11" NF Evo on it or was it an air test or an in-ground test, etc. And yes, you would hope that with the backlash from the GPZ 7000 40% deeper claims, the Minelab marketing department might have learnt some lessons there (I should add that I have no opinion on the 40% deeper claims and whether they were accurate or not). 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
araratgold Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 And that is what I meant when I said comprehensive. That chart doesn't tell you a whole lot ! Rick 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trent King Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 4 hours ago, jasong said: If it's that much more sensitive on small gold than the GPZ, and it can run bigger coils, plus it has better EMI and ground filtering which then allow for higher RX gains, why exactly would the GPZ still be better at depth on bigger nuggets? Especially with a 17" mono on the 6000. I'm guessing the small gold increase in sensitivity comes from earlier sampling. But with all that noise filtering why not give us a lot more RX gain to play with too, unless it's kept lower intentionally to not outpunch the GPZ? I don’t think it’s intentionally dumbed down. It seems to be a 5k with extra timings, and a great new design. But as we know the faster sdc timings are highly unlikely to give depth on big bits, those timings really excel on species and funky shaped bits. When I’m pushing I will give it a good testing on big bits vs the 5k, but I would be expecting very similar results. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.8761b3d9b3da119b9e6d1912f67275ad.jpg)
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