Lackluster Reports From Australia On GPZ 19 Coil

[Swegin]

15 hours ago, Tortuga said:

It can't be that bad. I just can't imagine Minelab would develop and sell such an expensive coil with such minimal improvement over the stock one. 

The same story has to have been repeated over the years whenever a new, hot coil comes out. Grumpy purchasers dump all over the new coil on the forums then later on you find out half of them don't even own it. I'm still holding out some hope for it. 

The same could be said about dealers who over promote a product just for sales.

[cobill]

Well based on this chart from another forum, the GPZ 19 coil in mild soil is out-performing what the Aussie air-tests are showing. Maybe their soils are negatively impacting the air-tests.

 

Bill

[jasong]

Bill, that chart is from the marketing material from Minelab, not from a forum. But notice how Normal outperforms on bigger gold with the 19"? I've been inferring it needs to be tested in Normal on 4umer since the first result was reported. When this chart was first released I made the same observation here. That's why we need US tests too, because a lot of us run in Normal in quieter soil.

From the marketing material it appears to be a coil tailor made for the SW with lots of quiet soil, low salt, and a history of patches with lunkers. It kills me to not be able to test this myself haha oh well. I notice Minelab changed their testing procedure to reflect the same procedure I used in my last test video (And also stole my "Metal Detectives" video title lol...considering their propensity for suing companies for IP)

[Norvic]

The clue to those negative reports is to look back in the past and check out those same people and the reports they gave when the Z originally came out. Then look down the track a bit and if you look closely and are a real detector detective you`ll find the answer. Take notice of these early reports, don`t get a 19", tis good for those who have a 19".

[cobill]

From my understanding, the above chart was made based on actual in-ground test results in their ML test-beds on mild soil. Sure it may be marketing material, but it is from scientific testing...not "mathematical assumptions". 

I've ordered mine for 2017 detecting.

Bill

[jasong]

Norvic, data is universal and should speak for itself, judgement of a person's character is personal. If test results are spurious then the thing that proves that is more test results and more data, replicability is at the heart of science, character judgement should be irrelevant.

It's like watching a picture load, pixel by pixel. Eventually the photo becomes clear, but it can't happen if we selectively keep or discard pixels based on external factors, we eventually change the picture itself, and that's what bias is.

 

[Norvic]

Jasong, I agree with you in principal, unfortunately incorrect data brings results that doesn`t lead to advancement as history portrays over and over.

Tis reality that humans make mistakes, my data on the 19" is in conflict with other data so far but it is far to early and imprudent for me to even consider adding my data to the mix, and as experience has taught me in regards to detectors and coils, use of such is a very personal experience. Thus my data will certainly be false to some, that data only has to lead me to gold, tis a individual thing certainly not a reflection on a persons character.

[phoenix]

2 hours ago, Norvic said:

The clue to those negative reports is to look back in the past and check out those same people and the reports they gave when the Z originally came out. Then look down the track a bit and if you look closely and are a real detector detective you`ll find the answer. Take notice of these early reports, don`t get a 19", tis good for those who have a 19".

Norvic hi
I am staying out of the kaos that is currently happening on the Aussie forum because I am sick of being negative on the 7000 all the time.   
I got my 19 the day they were released and me and one of my mates that`s undecided about whether to get the 19 or not, went to a local test bed that has targets simulating nuggets ranging from 3 grams to 2 ounces at various depths. My mate runs "difficult" ground, "high yield" with a gain of 17.  Regardless of the settings I used the 19 did not out perform the 14" coil on ANY of the targets and the one that disturbed me the most was the 19" coil couldn`t hear the 2 ouncer @ 20" as well as the 14" could.   Your suggest that I just wrote that in order to trick you into not buying a 19" coil is laughable.
  I haven`t given up on this coil yet because after all, I am not looking for man made targets, I am looking for gold that is actually in the ground, but after 5 outings in what was once the richest goldfield in the world I have only found one nugget that went 0.46 gram
cheers Dave

[Norvic]

Got you Dave, I`m guilty of never using a man made test bed, it is out in the field in Momma Natures test bed where my swinging is done, hopefully weather permitting I will soon be running my 19" over ground that proved (to me) minelabs Zs 40% gain over the 5000 with the coils at that time. I say that because I believe the new age coils narrowed that gain somewhat.

I have faith in MLs marketing "claims" their machines have consistently came up with the goods for me since they become involved in this game.

I do know one thing, I will need a better harness system then I have used with the 14", perhaps I`ll join the "Stranger with the hipstick on each hip".

[phoenix]

 

17 minutes ago, Norvic said:

I do know one thing, I will need a better harness system then I have used with the 14", perhaps I`ll join the "Stranger with the hipstick on each hip".

Mate the first time I ever used a swing arm was the day after I bought the 19, I`ve never seen a need for one, but with the 19" coil I think a swing arm is a must have.  It makes the coil way lighter.

cheers Dave