Jump to content

Recommended Posts


Yes, Ive been saying it for 2 years now, the performance needs to match the price. If it is indeed the Z8K next in line, the ability to sense far deeper (I think Steve's suggestion of 20% is spot on) is THE ONLY thing that will justify the insane price suggested. Nothing else will 'do it' for me or any other professional operators. If you can hear the gold, and all others can't, its worth the $$ and it will pay for itself in a short time-frame. My 6000 paid for itself very quickly and to this day, I wish I still had it.

  • Like 3
4 hours ago, phrunt said:

I still think it's not a GPZ replacement we are going to see though, my bets are on the lower priced PI and the VLF GM2000. 

I agree Simon,

IMHO The need to replace the 7000 is probably not necessary for Minelab as there is no comparable competition for it to worry about. Another thought or problem is no one wants to pack it around anymore and X-coils are not readily accessible to many regions. If Minelab did make a new 20% improved version it would be a good selling detector through out the world wide market place.

If we did get a ultra pulse and a vlf instead of the 8000 for the two new releases then the low end PI market would fall back to Minelab, but I do not see a place for a true gold vlf detector anymore since the Goldmonster 1000 already exists and is simply a standard detector for new users, so no need to add much to it. The market for a decent gold VLF’s is saturated especially now Fisher has a fully tracking VLF and the more experienced players use a Manticore which is everything I could ever want in a VLF for just a little more cost when it’s on sale than the GM1000. Secondly, most nugget hunters need a dectector that can handle the mineralization that nuggets frequently our associated within.

True Leap frog technology to me would mean a two box detector VLF/PI if they could make this happen, find really small gold and discriminate it in low mineralized environments and switch to PI in hot environments.

I’m just dreaming out loud.

Ron

  • Like 5

The late Dave Johnson Engineer from Fisher Labs did some experiments with this concept in 1985, here’s his comment:

Dave: "About 1985 I built a real sweetheart of a discriminating PI unit, not very hot in air test, but it was simple, lightweight, powered by one 9 volt “transistor battery”, ran quiet in bad ground, had no bad habits, and you didn’t have to dig any trash. It morphed into a fully static TID machine which Fisher came close to releasing about 1989, but its reliance on fully static operation which was supposed to be an advantage, was in fact a fatal flaw for a TID machine. Stripped back down, it became the Impulse which was strictly all-metals.

Hershbach’s comments,

I always wondered why Fisher did not see the obvious, that a non-motion PI discrimination methos could be used as a pinpoint mode, where non-motion is the norm. That is exactly what is going on here with Algoforce and is a defining difference between what Minelab and Garrett are doing. Their methods require the coil is in motion. The Algoforce method requires the coil stop moving, just like Dave described many years ago. Has Algoforce rediscovered and employed the same method Dave discovered?

Here’s a link that goes into some more details on the PI discrimination:

 

  • Like 4

Non motion target ID seems more logical to me, you zero in on the target, centre it under the coil and get an accurate ID, with motion you run the risk of nearby targets bring up or down your ID or just making it bouncy.

The Algoforce for me has the more accurate ID of any detector, if it also had iron discrimination even the GPX style it would be great and probably what Nokta has done.

  • Like 6

A lighter GPZ with coil selection and a 20% boost in overall performance seems entirely achievable. Consider how much gold the 6000 uncovered—gold that had remained hidden even in well-worked areas, suddenly bringing old patches back to life. A next-generation GPZ could do the same, but this time targeting bigger gold at greater depths. I don’t believe ML will settle for a budget-focused competition; instead, they’ll likely innovate in a way that sets them apart, as they always have. Like them or not.

GC

  • Like 7

Follow the money - is there more gross margin dollars in a GPZ8000 selling for $15,000 AUD or a SDC PI replacement selling for say $5000 AUD tops. Minelab would have done the math already based on their forecasted sales for each prospective new model - the decision on what to manufacture then becomes easy. Minelab are the only ones who know their  profit margins and sales forecasted sales volume for each model - so we can only guess what the second gold machine will be.

  • Like 3

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...