GPZ 7000 Performance (Underwhelming??)

[Prickly Prospector]

37 minutes ago, Northeast said:

I could rarely use Normal with the 7000 due to ground conditions but I think even at low sensitivity Normal can give you an edge over Difficult.  

I actually found High Yield/Difficult to not be that great of an option.  I did also run no smoothing.   

Ended up running a lot more in General/Difficult as per a suggestion from @Jonathan Porter  and found it far better on the bigger pieces (5 gram plus) but also still pretty good on the small stuff 👍

 

Not the first to mention this to me. But I do love my flyshit, and after a few tests alternating between general/difficult, I felt better making a second pass with the deeper settings if I found anything, as opposed to going home empty handed... Even if it was only 0.001g (I generally only do half day trips.)

 

[Prickly Prospector]

22 hours ago, Tony said:

I don't have a problem with his testing methodology (thumbs up to hole he drilled) but why dumb a detector down so badly even if it is for comparing two coils.

I'm sure those more knowledgeable will correct me. But drilling a verticle hole and taking any soil/mineralisation between the target and the detector out of the equation is generally considered far from ideal?!

AKA..Air test?

(no offence Tony)

 

[phrunt]

40 minutes ago, Prickly Prospector said:

I'm sure those more knowledgeable will correct me. But drilling a verticle hole and taking any soil/mineralisation between the target and the detector out of the equation is generally considered far from ideal?!

The coil is swamped everything around it, a tiny hole would make no difference although there are those that point out the halo effect, I believe it's very real, especially with iron and copper but not metals that don't leech much into the soil like gold and silver.  I do feel sorry for people that are forced to detect in difficult though,  massive difference in performance between normal and difficult from my point of view, the flip side is they tend to be the people that have the chance of finding more and bigger gold 🙂 If I had to find my little tiddlers in difficult, I'd struggle to find much at all but I'd rather be looking for gold in places like Australia where difficult is the norm.

I maintain my position that if they can ever get normal like mild soil performance in difficult soil conditions, they have a GPZ 8000, all I have to do is flip my GPZ to difficult to be disappointed, I'll do a video showing the difference on some targets next time I have the GPZ out, where normal slams on it, difficult walks right over it, thats if my GPZ plays nice, it has a bug that switching between normal and difficult can make the audio drop out and I have to turn it off and on again to get it to work, contacted Minelab for warranty, known fault, no resolution, not going to fix it, move along.

[Alexnov]

2 minutes ago, phrunt said:

Катушка поглощает всё, что находится вокруг неё, и крошечное отверстие не будет иметь значения, хотя есть те, кто указывает на эффект ореола. Я считаю, что он вполне реален, особенно в случае с железом и медью, но не с металлами, которые не сильно проникают в почву, такими как золото и серебро. Мне жаль людей, которые вынуждены искать в сложных условиях, хотя, с моей точки зрения, разница в производительности между обычными и сложными условиями огромна. С другой стороны, у них, как правило, больше шансов найти больше и крупнее самородки 🙂 Если бы мне пришлось искать своих маленьких самородков в сложных условиях, я бы вообще ничего не нашёл, но я бы предпочёл искать золото в таких местах, как Австралия, где сложные условия — это норма.

silver also has a halo, the lower the sample, the larger the halo.

[phrunt]

1 minute ago, Alexnov said:

silver also has a halo, the lower the sample, the larger the halo.

Far less than metals that really leech into the soil, pure silver not so much I think, the coins that are less silver I notice some difference.  Iron and copper completely stain the soils around them as an example.

[TE Gold]

I wish I could flick into normal, but it's just to hard, get false targets every few steps. 

I run in difficult, but I don't mind, I'm still finding good gold.

[Tony]

33 minutes ago, Prickly Prospector said:

I'm sure those more knowledgeable will correct me. But drilling a verticle hole and taking any soil/mineralisation between the target and the detector out of the equation is generally considered far from ideal?!

AKA..Air test?

(no offence Tony)

 

Not ideal maybe but better than most tests I see. If you want to go the next level then drill a deep hole at a perfect 30 or 45 degrees and then place the target at a set distance in the hole from the surface......I'd have to revise my Year 12 maths to work out the real measurement surface depth of "A" when "B" and "C" are known values....was it using cosine to work out the hypotenuse 🤪 Now my head hurts !!

Some dude called Pythagaros methinks.

 

[Tony]

26 minutes ago, Prickly Prospector said:

AKA..Air test?

I'd say it's 95% not an air-test considering the overall ground effect relative to the diameter of the hole. My question was more about the 5/20 sensitivity which from what I've read is essentially a hobbled 7000.

[Jonathan Porter]

On 2/27/2025 at 5:28 PM, phrunt said:

thats if my GPZ plays nice, it has a bug that switching between normal and difficult can make the audio drop out and I have to turn it off and on again to get it to work, contacted Minelab for warranty, known fault, no resolution, not going to fix it, move along.

There is a possible solution, it could be what is being done that is the problem. Try turning the sensitivity down before changing the timings.