Minelab 1000 vs Minelab 2000

[Ridge Runner]

It’s going to be a hard show to prove this video wrong.😑  

 Chuck 

[phrunt]

The 1000 was reacting to the soil quiet badly in that video, I'm not sure how comfortable it would be to use in those high settings in that soil, yes it hits harder in those high manual settings but if he switches to benign on the 2000 which also reacts badly to the ground it hits just as hard, I think.

The difficult and normal modes are much weaker than benign when it comes to depth and target signal strength for me  HOWEVER they are much more pleasant to use in tougher ground.  It's the same with everything when it comes to metal detecting, there is always a trade-off, with him running his GM 1000 in manual high sensitivity is really pushing it for that soil I think, in Auto 2 it didn't seem to react to the ground as much but still hit on the targets better than the GM2000 in normal and difficult by the look of it.  

As I've said before in mild soil there is no need for someone to buy a 2000, those in difficult soil seem to be the ones that benefit with the nicer running machine although it makes you wonder at what point just running the GM1000 tamed down a bit would be more stable and possibly still do well as it wasn't uncommon for Aussies to dislike the noisy 1000, most people over-drive machines running them too hot hoping for the best results.  This guy's soil seemed too hot to be running in the high manual settings on the 1000 even though it hit the targets better, he would probably be better off using these high settings to verify weak signals he finds in lower sensitivity and keep his sanity much like hotter soil people with the 2000 switching to benign or even normal to check targets.

I think if I was in hotter soils I'd prefer the 2000 over the 1000, even in my mild soils I'd rather use the 2000 than 1000.

[Jeff McClendon]

On 10/31/2025 at 6:49 PM, Erik Oostra said:

If I was just going by that video alone I'd stick with the GM1000.. That's a very poor showing for the GM2000.. I know there's many variables with air-tests vs in-ground tests etc but what surprised me is how much better the GM1000 performed compared to the GM2000 with the same sensitivity settings on mineralized ground.. Even in the 'difficult ground' setting the GM2000 came no where close, it couldn't 'see' the target that the GM1000 easily picked up .. 

I have to firmly disagree with your assessment Erik.

“No Where Close”.

If the video maker had the 2000 in Benign and could not pick up the smaller and larger targets at the same distance and depth as the 1000, then I would firmly agree with your assessment.

The 2000 and 1000 have very different audio. 2000 has a  threshold tone that will react to hot ground and small targets and in general it has pulse induction type audio. The 1000 has VLF VCO audio and no threshold. The 1000 is very easy to hear. The 2000’s being much more like an PI has softer audio which contains way more information.

The video maker is swinging the 2000 like he swings the 1000 which for me anyway is just too fast so most of the 2000’s audio information is being lost.

Several times in the video he says he can’t hear a response. Well, I can hear responses that he isn’t considering as responses and those responses would get my attention especially with headphones on.

I know that JP recommended a faster swing with the 2000 but there is a point where it’s too fast. If you want to hear the audio nuances of the 2000, a more normal VLF type swing will achieve that just fine.

This video was the 2nd or 3rd that the user made for the 2000. So really early/discovery days with the 2000 which he barely knows how to operate. He obviously is not convinced yet about the effectiveness of the 2000 in the above video.

After 2 months of use, judging from his later videos, he is now convinced about using the 2000. By his own assessment, he is finding gold on sites that he himself has pounded with the 6000, 5000 and 1000. From my rough math he has over 5 grams with all of the many pieces being 0.1 grams and under in weight. He is now exclusively using the Echo Wave “cricket” as he calls it audio and depends on it. He is finding lots of lead shot too. Maybe he will learn what Lunk has learned and will be able to discriminate between lead and gold by what the 2000 is telling him in the future.

 

[Jeff McClendon]

10 hours ago, Ridge Runner said:

It’s going to be a hard show to prove this video wrong.😑  

 Chuck 

He proved it and himself wrong, very, very wrong in his later videos Chuck.

[Jeff McClendon]

On 10/31/2025 at 5:45 PM, mn90403 said:

In depth gold Monster comparison #australia #gold #victoria #metaldetecting #prospecting

An “in depth” comparison by a brand new user that does not yet know how to operate his 2000. So not very in depth in my opinion.

He is swinging too fast, he can’t hear obvious 2000 audio responses and he isn’t using Echo Wave most of the time which can really help sometimes.

Watch the 1.6 gram buried target comparison carefully. When he puts the 2000 in A1 and A2 the sensitivity level chosen by the 2000 is 4 of 10 using Benign. There is no way he could effectively run the 2000 in Benign on that ground in real life and I bet the 1000 would be going off on absolutely every bit of that hot ground making small and deep target discrimination from ground noise really hard. The constant ground balancing needed to run the 1000 on that ground would drive me crazy both from the noise and from the loss of actual detecting time.

People using the 2000 on hot ground or on ground full of hot rocks really need to think about finding a way to use Normal ground type (the video maker calls it general) as the best case scenario and go from there. Use Benign for target interrogation on that type of ground and use Difficult if there is no other choice due to sensitivity levels being lowered too much in Benign or Normal.

[mn90403]

It seems that he has learned a few things after use and has now made a comparison to the 6000!

 

[mn90403]

13 hours ago, Ridge Runner said:

It’s going to be a hard show to prove this video wrong.😑  

 Chuck 

It seems he has done it himself!

[Ridge Runner]

3 hours ago, Jeff McClendon said:

He proved it and himself wrong, very, very wrong in his later videos Chuck.

We both stand corrected and that’s a good thing.

Well that’s the first time I’ve been wrong this year .

 Chuck 

[Ridge Runner]

1 hour ago, mn90403 said:

It seems he has done it himself!

I told Jeff and now I’m telling you and that’s the first time I’ve been wrong this year.haha  

 I shot my limit of mistakes in less than two weeks of a new year.

 Chuck