Issue With Axiom And Ground Noise

[Gone Bush]

Back out to the creek.
0.11 sitting on the surface above maybe 7-8 out of 10 variable ground and with manual ground balance target signal was clear at about 125 mm or 5 inches using speaker.
Surprisingly, headphones made little difference. 
Using headphones with 6000 usually makes about an inch difference in what depth you can hear a 0.10 gram or less target.
This is likely more an indication that 6000’s speaker is rubbish and Axioms is actually usable than anything else.
Ground balance window cut this air test in half.
Made the plastic thingy with the 0.11 in it to bury and pull out of the ground a bit at a time to test depth but forgot until I was about to leave.
Went back and buried it and took video.
Turns out I didn’t hit the record button properly at the start but did at the end.
Got a nice recording of putting the phone back in my pocket and driving home.
Anyway, not as good as the air test. That was enough to stop anyone at about 5 inches.
Running fine, sensitivity 8, manual tracking, medium speed, target response would definitely stop ME at 5 inches deep.
Unless you are used to a machine running this hot it would have been easy to miss with these settings.
Running fine, sensitivity 5 or 6, manual tracking, medium speed, target response would definitely stop anyone at 4 inches deep.
These settings would pull up almost anyone. Clear sharp signal well above the threshold.
Where we mostly detect up north on varying terrain with a predominance of shallow laterite gravels, I think Axiom will at least equal the 6 on weight and do so with a much more bearable threshold.
Cant stress highly enough that tone adjustment is one of the best things about Axiom. Use it.

So, in this ground, comparing to my experience with the 6 in this same location, I would suggest it is equal on depth but better at providing a signal far enough above the threshold to be heard.
On ground with less variable and less heavy mineralisation where I can run at sensitivity 8 constantly, I think there will definitely be more depth than a 6000.
Always remember, when saying ‘more depth’, it’s fractions of an inch, not feet.
To be fair, a Nugget Finder 16 x 10 on a 6000 is pretty unbeatable so if you are even a little sensible, unlike me, and only have a single tier one detector, unlike me, there is no need to sell your 6000 and buy Axiom.
Just put that 16 x 10 on your 6 and kill it.

Like I have said previously, it’s FOR ME an overall a better package than 6000 and really just the next step in detector evolution, at least until something new comes out in a couple of years to once again take back the title.

Steve H, somewhere on here, once said that ‘gun to his head, he still thinks 6000 has the edge’.
In just a turn on and go scenario I would agree.
However, once you get the hang of this thing, (especially tone adjustment), I think it’s pretty even.
What I like most about Axiom are the things the 6 doesn’t have. For me, that makes it my choice.

Edit: Really want to side by side Axiom and 6 on some moderate ground with standard mono coils on both.
While the 11” mono that comes standard with the 6 is an unreliable piece of shit, it is amazingly sensitive and I think might be better than the standard 11 x 7 mono on Axiom.
I don’t mean depth here, just sensitivity to shallow small nuggets like 0.05 and smaller.
Surface area of the Axiom 11 x 7 semi elliptical is less than the surface area of the 6’s 11” mono so typically the 6’s standard coil should go deeper on the same sized target.

Sorry for the pointless parts in the videos like waving the coil over the test nugget for like 30 seconds, they are me playing to learn what Axiom does in different circumstances.

 

[Gone Bush]

5 hours ago, goldenoldie said:

Great feedback GB in regard to the Axiom.

Also, since have mentioned the 6000 in your review of the Axiom, then when you said you detect with the 6000 up at max sensitivity, so is that up at the max Manual setting or Auto+ setting with a threshold as well?

And as you are to head back to the creek it would be good to video the 6000 in operation at the same location also?

 

6000 maxed out is Auto+2, or segment 12 or as far as it will go then turn the threshold back on.

I lent the 6000 and NF 12 x 7 I brought down with me to a mate to see if he likes it.
Get it back Monday night but then he wants Axiom for a week to try it.
Ive got commitments for the next couple weeks anyway but when I have them together I will definitely do a side by side video and put it up.

[goldenoldie]

Thanks for your reply GB on your setting for the 6000.

Also look forward when you are able to perform that side-by-side video with a similar size coil on the 6000 as well, the NF 12x7 mono.

[Gone Bush]

22 minutes ago, goldenoldie said:

Thanks for your reply GB on your setting for the 6000.

Also look forward when you are able to perform that side-by-side video with a similar size coil on the 6000 as well, the NF 12x7 mono.

You gear used says have a 6000?
I wouldn’t bother with Axiom if you already have a 6000.
Just get the 12 x 7 and 16 x 10 NF coils and go hard. Save yourself a pile of money as well.

The NF 12 x 7 is an awesome coil, much smoother than the standard 11” mono but does loose some depth.
Ideally you would cover everywhere possible with the 16 x 10 then change to the 12 x 7 to poke into those places the bigger coil won’t fit. This would leave very little behind. 6000 maxed out with 16 x 10 NF will get anything Axiom gets.
Maybe a larger mono on Axiom running hot might give it an edge, but until I can try that I doubt it.
6000 with NF 16 x 10 is just that good.
 

Got about 70 hours on Axiom now and I think if you are a lunatic like me and need to run a detector close to the redline the whole time, Axiom handles that a bit better than 6000. Has a higher redline than 6000 as well.
Time will tell if that means any substantial or verifiable gain’s over 6000. Like I said 6000/NF 16 x 10 is just that good.

 

[Steve Herschbach]

4 hours ago, Gone Bush said:

You gear used says have a 6000?
I wouldn’t bother with Axiom if you already have a 6000.

I agree. People who have a 6000 should in general just go detecting and be happy. This is more about if people don't have a 6000, then the Axiom is an option to consider. Simple as that. But selling 6000s to get Axioms makes little sense unless you are specifically fed up with the 6000 for some reason. Then the Axiom is the closest viable alternative.

[Gold Catcher]

7 hours ago, Gone Bush said:

So, in this ground, comparing to my experience with the 6 in this same location, I would suggest it is equal on depth but better at providing a signal far enough above the threshold to be heard.

This is one example where the Z has a distinctive advantage over the 6k: it has a volume control (not to mistake with threshold level) for modulation of a target’s audio response relative to the target signal strength. When I am forced to apply filters for the Z (which I hate to do), or I need to change timings due to difficult ground conditions, I dial up the volume a bit. This usually makes targets stand out better over the dumbed down threshold noise. The 6k totally misses out on all of that due to automation, and the normal to difficult timings change on the 6k does not much for stabilizing the detector in hot grounds, or to make targets stand out better, IMO. This makes me wonder if the adjustable GB settings of the Axiom might be its biggest advantage over the 6K? Having control over the GB strength allows for fine tuning to just get the right balance without overdoing it, as Steve was suggesting. I hope the next GPZ will have a similar control feature, not just having the choice to lock the X signal or to go to manual.

GC

[oldcoinhunter]

GB, will the 16x10 NF find the smallest bits as well as the 12x7 and the standard 11 on the 6?

[Gold Catcher]

I think I have heard enough to be convinced. I will pull the trigger and get on the order list.

GC

[Gone Bush]

5 hours ago, oldcoinhunter said:

GB, will the 16x10 NF find the smallest bits as well as the 12x7 and the standard 11 on the 6?

More detailed explanation of my 16 x 10 praise is required.

Firstly, I have never had one on the end of my own 6000 but Michael, a friend who is a tester has.
Had a brief play with his but that’s all.
In November last year, he came with me out to a place where we have maybe 20 well hammered patches.
I put him on a patch that has had 4500’s, 5000’s, 7000’s and me with a 6000 over it including with the Minelab 17” elliptical mono.
Shallow ground rarely more than 12” deep. Laterite gravels with mostly small quartz and one quartz blow.
Very open flat ground so no need to use a smaller coil for access.
After a whole day, he had 27 pieces.
Two of those where less than 0.05, so didn’t weigh on field scales and where less than 4” deep.
Obviously missed by everyone previously.
The rest varied from 0.05 up to 0.7 and where all much deeper, some on the bedrock more than 10” down.
These deeper pieces where beyond the reach of both the standard 11” mono coil and NF 12 x 7.
And I missed it all with the 17” mono. Never did like that thing. In fact, at this point in time, I dislike it so much I don’t even remember where it is.
Michael has been detecting for almost twice as long as me and is the best operator I know but was still using varying sensitivity on 6000.
It took me a month to convince him to run it maxed out with threshold back on and that’s how he was using it on this patch.
So, both of us using identical settings, and he, with the 16 x 10 pulled almost 4 grams from a patch we had all labeled as finished.
Just that one day was enough for me to know that given a location where it’s size is not an impediment, it’s the coil to have on a 6.
Even to the point we will be revisiting, yet again, patches previously considered finished.
To answer your question, yes, in my experience the 16 x 10 is just as sensitive as the standard 11” mono.

Other friends have the 14 x 9 Coiltek Goldhawk and have had similar success.
I’m a Nugget Finder fan because the NF 16 x 10 will reportedly be 100 grams lighter than the Coiltek 14 x 9 and after 8 hours swinging, at my age, that’s noticeable 

Currently, Axiom with its 11 x 7 semi elliptical is pretty equal to 6000 with the NF 12 x 7 and, given it has settings not available on 6000, it will be daily use.
If my own NF 16 x 10 arrives before I can get a larger mono for Axiom, likely Axiom will temporarily be second fiddle to 6000, at least up until a similarly sized mono is available for Axiom and I can try to utilise all that extra gain.
Yes, I’m a whore. Don’t care in the least about brand. Only care about what’s in the bottle at the end of the day.

Hope this helps.








 

[Gold Catcher]

I have been going back and forward with this, but I am landing now to get my first Garrett detector ever.  So, you are still excited about the Axiom? Is the GB control as useful as I am reading? Is the reduction in ground noise cutting into selectivity/depth?

GC