GPX 6000 Manual Vs Auto Preference

[Aureous]

I'm always at manual (top 2 setting positions) with threshold on. I tried auto 1 a lot and didn't see a huge benefit. I've now found almost 1550 pieces for the year with 30-40 hours a week behind the stick. I use the NF 12x7 almost exclusively now. There are only tiny increments of actual gain being experienced between each click. But manual gives you more adaptability for ground conditions. Remember, Minelab's idea of gain on PI detectors is like forcing your ears open wider, rather than actually sending more power to the coil or altering the pulse train. You can safely lower the settings and not lose a lot. Its more like adapting the detector to the ground conditions rather than real-world boost.

[phrunt]

On 11/25/2023 at 7:15 AM, Gold Catcher said:

I mostly use manual (threshold always on). Auto appears less stable for me most of the times. Re manual, don't be afraid of reducing gain if needed. It will remain very sensitive with only a marginal loss at depth. I like 7 or 8 in Normal. It then will get nice and smooth, so nice for a change. And I never had a single case where I heard a signal at 10 but not at 7 or 8. 🙂

GC

This makes complete sense, if you're running in manual 7 with a nice smooth threshold and you flick to Auto+ and it sees it can squeak a bit more out of it and takes you up to about manual 9 and the detector gets a bit more unstable it's to be expected.

What I've been indicating is manual 10 is better than Auto+, not that Auto+ isn't better than Manual 7 or 8.

I'd been wishing for a fixed ground balance on the 6000 since the day I got it, not so much a fan of this auto stuff.

My impression is people had been saying Auto+ can run higher sensitivity than Manual 10, and that's not what I've ever once been able to replicate.

On a side note, I don't need to bring hot rocks along with me, while my soil is mild there are no shortage of hot rocks to spoil your day with a VLF or in some spots the 6000.  Nothing worse than digging a deep hole in hard ground only to find the 6000's been giving you the excitement and typical nugget sound over a deep hot rock.  Maybe a useful tip for someone though, part of my problem I suppose is the 6000 can't balance out plenty of hot rocks, some types it can and does well on so maybe I need to occasionally balance on that type rather than when they're just a problem.

[Gold Catcher]

1 hour ago, phrunt said:

This makes complete sense, if you're running in manual 7 with a nice smooth threshold and you flick to Auto+ and it sees it can squeak a bit more out of it and takes you up to about manual 9 and the detector gets a bit more unstable it's to be expected.

Yes, at 7 or 8 I see that as the Auto wants to dial up. But what I was meaning was that switching from manual 9 or 10 to Auto would not make things better, and the threshold would even get more erratic at times. 

GC

[Gold Ryder]

Ive found close to 500 nuggets on Auto 1. But my smallest nugget was on manual 10 at .023.   Personally I think A1 is the deepest most stabile setting. 12x7 nugget finder.  

[phrunt]

The funny thing about gold detecting is you never know what you've missed.

[Nedkelly]

37 minutes ago, phrunt said:

The funny thing about gold detecting is you never know what you've missed.

Yea I agree phrunt. After going over numerous patches for years with various detectors, settings and coils up to and including the gpx 5000 I finally decided that they where finished. But after hitting them with the gpz 7000 and gpx 6000 with various coils only to find out they weren't finished. You just don't know what you're missing.

[dig4gold]

35 minutes ago, Nedkelly said:

Yea I agree phrunt. After going over numerous patches for years with various detectors, settings and coils up to and including the gpx 5000 I finally decided that they where finished. But after hitting them with the gpz 7000 and gpx 6000 with various coils only to find out they weren't finished. You just don't know what you're missing.

That is why we are always wanting the next release detector/coil. They bring old haunts back to life. All be it with the 6000 mostly smaller/deeper gold. The fun thing is we all have our old patches that had seemed to of dried up until the new kid on the block comes to being. Then it is game on again..... for a while. Then we are waiting for another "new kid on the block". The bigger gold though does seem to have become very scarce. 

D4G

[Nedkelly]

2 minutes ago, dig4gold said:

That is why we are always wanting the next release detector/coil. They bring old haunts back to life. All be it with the 6000 mostly smaller/deeper gold. The fun thing is we all have our old patches that had seemed to of dried up until the new kid on the block comes to being. Then it is game on again..... for a while. Then we are waiting for another "new kid on the block". The bigger gold though does seem to have become very scarce. 

D4G

Yes the bigger chunker pieces usually are the first to go. I seem to finding lots of light porous type bits and species lately. I'm sure there's still some solid nuggets down deeper,  just out of range. Might need a grader or dozer to take a skim or two off to reach them though LOL. 

[dig4gold]

1 minute ago, Nedkelly said:

Yes the bigger chunker pieces usually are the first to go. I seem to finding lots of light porous type bits and species lately. I'm sure there's still some solid nuggets down deeper,  just out of range. Might need a grader or dozer to take a skim or two off to reach them though LOL. 

Yep.....👍

D4G

[Aureous]

Its widely accepted that changes/advances in tech will be providing prospectors more gold on the same spots for generations probably. The 'All the gold is gone' adage was debunked when the SD2000 was released. Its been re-proved on almost all models since.