Find's Treasure Forums
Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!
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.
Click here to register!
Need Support Help?
Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you
Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.
Whats the most stable VLF in red hi min dirt
- Thread starter calibil
- Start date
Whats the most stable VLF in red highly mineralized dirt you ask?
I would have to say from alot of reading, the MXT, Lobo ST, F75 & T2(now newer editions), Musketeer Advantage, and of course the Sovereign GT(but not good for gold smaller than about 1 gram or so). The new Garrett AT Pro is yet to be seen.
I would have to say from alot of reading, the MXT, Lobo ST, F75 & T2(now newer editions), Musketeer Advantage, and of course the Sovereign GT(but not good for gold smaller than about 1 gram or so). The new Garrett AT Pro is yet to be seen.
I saw a Garrett AT PRO YouTube that showed how well it does on shooting through strong mineralization.
The tester was impressed at how well it did this one thing and it sounded like not many could do as well. News to me, but a neat test -I think he was hitting it at 12-16 inches...
He used an old hand made red clay fired brick, saying it was like the red clays of the S.E.
He put a nickel next to it and later under it. This test simulates field results. The tester is a well known and quoted rocket scientist.
SJ
The tester was impressed at how well it did this one thing and it sounded like not many could do as well. News to me, but a neat test -I think he was hitting it at 12-16 inches...
He used an old hand made red clay fired brick, saying it was like the red clays of the S.E.
He put a nickel next to it and later under it. This test simulates field results. The tester is a well known and quoted rocket scientist.
SJ
Hi calibil
The ground that we tested in is heavy with black sands that is enriched with cons. Since then we've tested the GB Pro and the Whites GMZ. The GB pro can ground balance to this extreme ground but just lacks depth, the GMZ would false chirp and groan.
Keep in mind this test patch is nasty x2.
Posted 17 May 2009 - 10:45 PM on nuggethunting forums
Hi All,
"I recently tested several VLF's on some very hot ground in AZ.
Gold Bug. Gold Bug 2, Tesoro Lobo, Garret Scorpion, Whites GMT, MXT, Minelab Eureka and Xterra 70.
The Gold Bugs, Lobo and Scorpion would not GB and were useless.
The Whites were chatty and had really no depth.
The Eureka and Xterra had no problem GB'ing to the test bed of ironstones altho the Xterra would overload on 1 large ironstone.
The test nugget was a solid round flat nugget @ 1/4 gram.
The Eureka Had the best depth @ 3'' followed by the Xterra and GMT at 2" If you didn't know the target was there you would have dismissed it as ground noise with the Whites.
My choice Minelab, unmatched in it's ability to GB and track hot ironstone rich ground.
nvchris
detectoraid.com"
The ground that we tested in is heavy with black sands that is enriched with cons. Since then we've tested the GB Pro and the Whites GMZ. The GB pro can ground balance to this extreme ground but just lacks depth, the GMZ would false chirp and groan.
Keep in mind this test patch is nasty x2.
Posted 17 May 2009 - 10:45 PM on nuggethunting forums
Hi All,
"I recently tested several VLF's on some very hot ground in AZ.
Gold Bug. Gold Bug 2, Tesoro Lobo, Garret Scorpion, Whites GMT, MXT, Minelab Eureka and Xterra 70.
The Gold Bugs, Lobo and Scorpion would not GB and were useless.
The Whites were chatty and had really no depth.
The Eureka and Xterra had no problem GB'ing to the test bed of ironstones altho the Xterra would overload on 1 large ironstone.
The test nugget was a solid round flat nugget @ 1/4 gram.
The Eureka Had the best depth @ 3'' followed by the Xterra and GMT at 2" If you didn't know the target was there you would have dismissed it as ground noise with the Whites.
My choice Minelab, unmatched in it's ability to GB and track hot ironstone rich ground.
nvchris
detectoraid.com"
WOW! I think I am going to let my hair catch on fire and get a ML before they are all gone.
Wonder why ML dealers are in a pinch to push the products? If sales are down then the pressure is on.
On the dealers that is. Hows come nobody in the Sudan has Eurekas or XT's? Are the nuggets too big?
SJ
Wonder why ML dealers are in a pinch to push the products? If sales are down then the pressure is on.
On the dealers that is. Hows come nobody in the Sudan has Eurekas or XT's? Are the nuggets too big?
SJ
Used most here in Oz in the Triangle region. The MXT with the 10" elliptical is probably the most stable in the bad ground, the GMT as well. The MXT because its lower freq doesn't get as bugged by high mineralisation. If you want super sensitivity on the MXT throw the 5.3 eclipse on it, it works really good on small gold and species. The GMT has the edge on that stuff though with its higher freq. The Vsat control used properly will shut most mineralisation up.
Used the Eureka Gold and its tracking is a bit too slow and without Vsat is left behind by the 2 Whites. Its ok but the Whites with Vsat are ahead.
The Terra's are ok but without Vsat control your at the mercy of the ground, in bad ground and you have to creep along really really slow for the tracking and sat recovery to keep up. They work good though as far as gold finding goes and cant be knocked, just that you don't get the same level of control as the two Whites have over bad ground.
The Bugs get blown away though here in a lot of areas with the Bug 2 being absolutely blown out of the water and rendered useless in our bad ground. Probably why the Bug 2 never really gained any following over here in Vic. Rarely see one being used, more chance of spotting a Big Foot (yetti) than seeing a Bug 2 user on the goldfields here.
In good to medium ground the Eureka, Terra, MXT and GMT all pretty much do a similar thing but as it gets worse the gap widens leaving the MXT and GMT out front.
My opinion only but from what Ive seen is how it is here.
Used the Eureka Gold and its tracking is a bit too slow and without Vsat is left behind by the 2 Whites. Its ok but the Whites with Vsat are ahead.
The Terra's are ok but without Vsat control your at the mercy of the ground, in bad ground and you have to creep along really really slow for the tracking and sat recovery to keep up. They work good though as far as gold finding goes and cant be knocked, just that you don't get the same level of control as the two Whites have over bad ground.
The Bugs get blown away though here in a lot of areas with the Bug 2 being absolutely blown out of the water and rendered useless in our bad ground. Probably why the Bug 2 never really gained any following over here in Vic. Rarely see one being used, more chance of spotting a Big Foot (yetti) than seeing a Bug 2 user on the goldfields here.
In good to medium ground the Eureka, Terra, MXT and GMT all pretty much do a similar thing but as it gets worse the gap widens leaving the MXT and GMT out front.
My opinion only but from what Ive seen is how it is here.
Mike Hillis
Well-known member
NVChris,
Were you balancing to ironstones or to black sands concentrates? Some Iron stones may look like a ferrous target to a metal detector, not a mineral and most metal detectors will not balance to an actual metal target. It has been my experience that the Xterra's have a limited gb range and when you hit that top limit, that was all you got. Kind of like a DFX that when you got into HOT ground and balanced it, it really wasn't balancing, it couldn't because it didn't have the range necessary. Instead it would revert back to a preset.
I guess that also brings into question...whats the difference bewteen a iron target and a magnetic mineral like black sand?
By the way, I'd like to introduce the Fisher F5 into the mix. It will balance to anything mineral and has the heat for small nuggets even at low gain settings.
HH
Mike
Were you balancing to ironstones or to black sands concentrates? Some Iron stones may look like a ferrous target to a metal detector, not a mineral and most metal detectors will not balance to an actual metal target. It has been my experience that the Xterra's have a limited gb range and when you hit that top limit, that was all you got. Kind of like a DFX that when you got into HOT ground and balanced it, it really wasn't balancing, it couldn't because it didn't have the range necessary. Instead it would revert back to a preset.
I guess that also brings into question...whats the difference bewteen a iron target and a magnetic mineral like black sand?
By the way, I'd like to introduce the Fisher F5 into the mix. It will balance to anything mineral and has the heat for small nuggets even at low gain settings.
HH
Mike
Mike ,
The test patch is a wash on private property near Humbug creek in AZ. It's darn near pure black sand (magnetite, hematite) that has been enriched with cons from dredging/high-banking etc. County rock is a schist. Most of the targets have been in the ground over ten years.
This is meant to be representative of hunting a highly mineralized dry wash bottom.
The point is to gage the detectors ability to balance to a mineralized matrix and find targets. In as close to "real world as we can recreate".
The best method that I've found from decades of using detectors is to leverage the strengths of A PI and a VLF ........ of corse a backhoe helps too
The test patch is a wash on private property near Humbug creek in AZ. It's darn near pure black sand (magnetite, hematite) that has been enriched with cons from dredging/high-banking etc. County rock is a schist. Most of the targets have been in the ground over ten years.
This is meant to be representative of hunting a highly mineralized dry wash bottom.
The point is to gage the detectors ability to balance to a mineralized matrix and find targets. In as close to "real world as we can recreate".
The best method that I've found from decades of using detectors is to leverage the strengths of A PI and a VLF ........ of corse a backhoe helps too
Thanks for the input on the Fisher F-5, any one else use this machine for gold ?
NVchris, what do you mean by " leverage strengths" , target depth, size, iron trash ect
I have quite a lot of machines, do you just narrow what type of gold you may be interested in finding and choose the approximate machine to use.?
NVchris, what do you mean by " leverage strengths" , target depth, size, iron trash ect
I have quite a lot of machines, do you just narrow what type of gold you may be interested in finding and choose the approximate machine to use.?
I think you answered your own questions!
When hunting for gold nuggets it pays to understand the size and depth of the targets, the amount of rubbish and the average mineralization. The combo that is most popular is a Minelab PI and a Gold Bug 2.
As for the F-5 I spoke to some users, and have been told that it's a great choice for gram sized gold in mild ground thats littered with trash, fast recovery and great target separation along with decent depth.
When hunting for gold nuggets it pays to understand the size and depth of the targets, the amount of rubbish and the average mineralization. The combo that is most popular is a Minelab PI and a Gold Bug 2.
As for the F-5 I spoke to some users, and have been told that it's a great choice for gram sized gold in mild ground thats littered with trash, fast recovery and great target separation along with decent depth.