Is Garrett About To Release A New Gold Prospecting Pi?

[Jonathan Porter]

I’ve kept out of discussions on this one till now, way too much click bait being thrown into the water over and over again so I’m just not going to bite especially on a device I know nothing about. My runs are on the board and so are the runs of the equipment I use so there is nothing to defend there AFAIC. And in spite of what gets said I am more than willing to try any detector if it raises my interest enough, I’ve done this so many times over the years. Axiom is no different, if its good then I’ll say its good theres no gag over my mouth regardless of my affiliations and I’m no social media wannabe who has to draw a crowd and lots of views to be considered an Xspurt!!

Two things from my perspective on what I’ve seen on the Axiom so far; one is the form factor, now there are two very sensitive PI machines that are super light weight and ergonomically delightful (Axiom opinion is based on what I’m reading and seeing)

The second is there is no mention of Difficult timings, I presume Normal timings only in 4 flavours. But I do see DD coils on the list so time will tell on how it goes up against the ML offerings using Difficult in our Australian variable soils. I know in the case of the ATX the DD coil was the best option in the ground I tested in and it worked pretty well.

Now to expand on the Normal timings concerns, I found a couple thousand ounces or more with ML PIs using Normal timings all over Australia in the years before “Smooth”, I became adept at it and that skill set is still there, so Normal timings do not scare me away from the Axiom. Based on what I’m reading the Axiom is handling bad ground in a very nice way so till I actually use one or see one being used I’m happy to keep an open mind on that one.

JP

[Steve Herschbach]

Official word is "upcoming weeks" which makes it seem imminent, when in fact there are 52 upcoming weeks in a year. Plan could be to roll out next week, and then whole thing come to a screeching stop over some last minute issue. My advice is believe them when you see them, but if you want to be optimistic, they seem to think they will be shipping in August sometime. Being realistic I'd say more like September availability, but whatever.

[jasong]

Normal and Large mode both are described as timings to use in "highly mineralized soil" in the manual. Sounds like they are some flavor of the difficult timing? Normal doesn't appear to mean what Minelab defines Normal as.

Fine seems to mean the opposite to Garrett as it means to Minelab too. I think Garrett's definition is more intuitive and is more like what many people who ran in Fine Gold back in the day thought it should be doing, but it did the opposite. 

The Axiom timings seem to combine both the gold and ground modes into one mode. 

[Steve Herschbach]

48 minutes ago, jasong said:

Normal and Large mode both are described as timings to use in "highly mineralized soil" in the manual. Sounds like they are some flavor of the difficult timing? Normal doesn't appear to mean what Minelab defines Normal as.

Fine seems to mean the opposite to Garrett as it means to Minelab too. I think Garrett's definition is more intuitive and is more like what many people who ran in Fine Gold back in the day thought it should be doing, but it did the opposite. 

The Axiom timings seem to combine both the gold and ground modes into one mode. 

More accurate names might be "Short Pulse Delay" Medium Pulse Delay" and "Long Pulse Delay", and the difference is not dramatic between the settings, with the exception of Salt, where the pulse delay is long enough to eliminate a saltwater return signal. So maybe call Salt "Super Long Pulse Delay." Eliminating a saltwater signal will also eliminate the smallest gold signals. This is an issue with the physics involved when using conductivity / eddy current retention as the basis of your detecting technology.

Small Gold Signals and Salt Settings

[Gold Catcher]

I wonder in what category the Axiom would fall, if it were a ML detector. Gold detector or treasure detector? It appears to be a PI treasure detector with gold capabilities, so perhaps something like a supercharged PI-Nox?

GC

[jasong]

Just now, Steve Herschbach said:

More accurate names might be "Short Pulse Delay" Medium Pulse Delay" and "Long Pulse Delay", and the difference is not dramatic between the setting with the exception of Salt, where the pulse delay is long enough to eliminate a saltwater return signal. So maybe call Salt "Super long Pulse Delay." Eliminating a saltwater signal will also eliminate the smallest gold signals. This is an issue with the physics involved when using conductivity / eddy current retention as the basis of your detecting technology.

Small Gold Signals and Salt Settings

Sounds like it opens the door to potentially use the old GPX trick with Salt Coarse in non-salt ground on the Axiom with Salt when detecting flats scattered with a ton of tiny bits of wire or tin slaw buried like 0-1" deep. A way to do "size discrim" essentially.

Is it pretty much just the pulse delay changing, such that larger target depths are mostly unaffected as long as it's used in mild ground?

[Steve Herschbach]

11 minutes ago, Gold Catcher said:

I wonder in what category the Axiom would fall, if it were a ML detector. Gold detector or treasure detector? It appears to be a PI treasure detector with gold capabilities, so perhaps something like a supercharged PI-Nox?

GC

It's a gold nugget detector. You might try and use it for other stuff, with varying results, no promises.

[Steve Herschbach]

15 minutes ago, jasong said:

Is it pretty much just the pulse delay changing, such that larger target depths are mostly unaffected as long as it's used in mild ground?

I am just giving the most simplistic, understandable answer possible. I have no inside information of what exactly each mode is doing. They could be very simple or very complex on the processing side. Might be best if I say nothing at all - just trying to be helpful. No doubt my offhand comments will be seized on as "proof" as to why the Axiom can't be as good as some other detector with "superior" processing.

[Gold Catcher]

Thanks, Steve. That begs the question if the Axiom would not be a better choice than the 6000 for areas with high mineralization (like most of CA). One option would be to trade in the 6 k, get the Axiom, and then safe the money for the next GPZ. Difficult choices.....

GC

[Steve Herschbach]

3 hours ago, Gold Catcher said:

Thanks, Steve. That begs the question if the Axiom would not be a better choice than the 6000 for areas with high mineralization (like most of CA). One option would be to trade in the 6 k, get the Axiom, and then safe the money for the next GPZ. Difficult choices.....

GC

I’ve used the Axiom is the worst magnetite laden serpentine ground I can find in California, and the Axiom just purred along. I have yet to need anything but the Fine setting, Slow speed, ground grab. Do the ground grab bounce a few times, go detect. People can say whatever they want about the machine, but it just works, with no fuss. Once set, power off, power back on, all settings retained. From a full reset my steps are:

1. Go to full sensitivity
2. Volume so that loudest target is not too loud. Wave over pick and set. Volume is actually a volume limit, does not lower all volume, just high end cutoff. If you want a normal full range volume, use headphones with a volume control. In that case set detector to full volume, and adjust headphones to suit.
3. Set threshold to suit, for me a bare tone, others may prefer quiet.
4. Go into menu and change speed from default Medium to Slow (it’s smoother/quieter)
5. Do a ground grab ground balance.
6. Optional. Once all other settings adjusted, do an EMI cancel if it seems necessary.
7. Start detecting, stay low, go slow