CTX 3030 vs. GPX 5000

[dgamwell]

I'm a rank newbie here. My interest is virgin gold nuggets in a remote area in Central America. ...so no pulltabs, etc. What is the best detector for this? I'm looking at the ctx3030 and the gpx5000. My questions are: 1) should I be looking elsewhere? 2) does the gpx pass a point of diminishing returns because of it's significant price 3) basically, how do these deterctors compare for this task, or should I look elsewhere.
Thanks to all of you for your valuable information.

 

[Larry (IL)]

Since your main interest is in prospecting, I will move your question over to the forum better suited to answer it.

 

[dgamwell]

-- moved topic --

 

[steve herschbach]

1) should I be looking elsewhere? No, this is the place.

2) does the gpx pass a point of diminishing returns because of it's significant price. If you find less gold then you invest in the GPX 5000 then I suppose you have passed the point of diminishing returns, not counting other expenses.

3) basically, how do these deterctors compare for this task The CTX 3030 is not a prospecting detector. The GPX 5000 is perhaps the best available.

Steve Herschbach

 

[dgamwell]

That is very helpful. Thanks.
To just clarify a bit more...
You're saying that the GPX 5000 would find more gold than a CTX 3030?
If the strength of the GPX is finding gold, what is the strength of the CTX?
Thanks again.

 

[steve herschbach]

The GPX 5000 is designed specifically for prospecting. The CTX 3030 is designed as a general purpose detector for coins, relics, and jewelry. Like any general purpose detector it can find gold nuggets but not near as well as machines designed specifically for that task. You may note I own both because they serve different purposes.

Steve Herschbach

 

[Erik in NJ]

Steve, How is the 5000 on finding deep coins?

 

[steve herschbach]

Hi Erik,

The Minelab PI detectors are knock your socks off awesome for depth on anything. See my story here.

The problem of course is junk. So you need one of three things:

1. Targets you want so much you do not mind digging junk. Nugget hunters dig tons of junk to find a nugget. Same might apply to a spot you were convinced had one more gold coin.

2. A place where digging is relatively easy so you do not mind digging the junk as much. Like my sandy beach in the story. Jewelry hunters combine reasons one and two.

3. A place where there is not much junk!

The GPX 5000 is overkill for most but since I own one anyway why not? For someone who really is a coin hunter an older model used Minelab or a less expensive alternative like the White's TDI or Garrett Infinium would be easier to justify. See this other story. When I wrote the story it was a rare thing but lots of people are going PI these days as good VLFs run out of targets. A PI makes you think a place was never detected there are so many targets. If it was just not for the junk!

Steve Herschbach

 

[Erik in NJ]

Thank-you Steve! I was recently in the UK on some land I got permission on and dig two Roman
coins in an area that didn't really have any Roman activity. There should have been hammered coins there...my theory is that most of the really good stuff was too deep! I did dig several nice targets, but most were quite deep. This might be just the ticket for a return trip! On a coin sized target (say a US quarter) how deep will this unit go in clean ground? I will check out your links and thanks for the info!

Best, Erik

 

[steve herschbach]

Hi Eric,

Going to depend on ground mineralization and coil. I have not tried a quarter specifically nor pushed for max depths. A the particular location I tried I took a half dozen of the best VLF units and ran them over an area. The place gets hunted almost daily, and so there is usually nothing but recent drops. The sand has lots of magnetite, a magnet on my pick brings up gobs of it. The part I will swear to is the PI clearly brings up targets that the VLFs miss, but it is not by a huge margin. Just an inch or two, but enough to make totally missed targets light up. Do not go around quoting me on it but a quarter at this location I might be able to get with a PI at 10-12 inches max. Whereas VLFs are hitting more like 8-10 inches max. Does not seem like much but what is important is relative depth, not absolute depth. Anyway, when I get time I will try and get more specific figures.

In low mineral ground a PI sometimes has little or no depth advantage compared to a VLF. I run a Fisher F75 a lot in all metal boost mode with the sensitivity maxed out and get PI like depths in mild ground. The worse the ground mineralization, the more distinct the PI advantage. So it may help you not at all, or a little, or a lot. I do like the internet for ideas but one thing I know for sure. I never really know until I try it myself.

Steve Herschbach

 

[Erik in NJ]

n/t

 

[dgamwell]

Steve,
You seem to really "know your stuff", so may I take advantage of your experience. I expect to use whatever detector I finally buy, to look specifically for gold in a remote area of Central America. There is no chance of finding junk there. I don't want to buy more "detector" than I need. I don't want to spend $2000 to get a 2% improvement over another detector. That considered, which one would you recommend, and why (if I could impose)?
By the way, I have a Fisher Impulse that I bought, and have never used. When I became scuba certified, I expected to do some underwater searching. Is it good for anything?
Thanks tons,
Dan

 

[steve herschbach]

I can only tell you how I look at things. I plan and go on expensive trips to remote locations. Sometimes they may be my one and only shot at a place. Given the cost in dollars, and more importantly, the cost in my time, I do not think about using anything but the best I can afford. If I am going to detect gold then that means I am usually going to use the GPX 5000 unless the gold is all under 1/4 gram or unless there is tons of ferrous trash, in which case I may use other detectors.

Steve Herschbach