You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
sekypaleo said:I have an Omega and I owned a Gamma. My Gamma seemed to run "hotter" than my Omega. In places where I could run the Omega at sensitivity around 95, I could only run the Gamma in the 70's to low 80's...but it seemed to get better depth at the lower setting. The only thing I really did not like about the Gamma is that dirt can get in ,around, and behind the push switches and cause them to stick. Other than those things...very similar machines. Oh, and Gamma is a little lighter...the lightest detector I have EVER swung. Bill
Thanos said:I consider to get the G2 in a couple of month with the higher frequency for gold prospecting. At the moment I am looking for a more general
Fixed above.Monte said:"Sensitivity Level Settings:
The Gamma has a start-up Sensitivity level of '5' and can be increased a 5-increment step each time (to '10' then'15' then '20' and so on) until '90'. Then, from '90,' it will increase one digit at a time from '91' to '99.' From '0' to '90' the Gain is changing, but above '90' the Threshold level changes. In All Metal mode it can be a little noisy above a setting of '94."
Yes, you found one that I missed. I started of stating the 'turn-on' sensitivity level and then decided to change the range of sensitivity to list minimum-to-maximum, just like adjusting the Omega. Problem was I didn't proof read it to correct the "turn-on" to say "minimum."capt. said:With all due respect Monte...
capt.