Overall depth
19 years 8 months ago #74
by Nuggethunting
Overall depth was created by Nuggethunting
Hello Ismael,
I have used the Minelab PI's since day one when the SD2000 was introduced into the United States @ $3,895.
Over the years I have seen the PI machines increase in performance (stablity, depth and sensitivity). I never seen much problem with their mineral immunity, as the Minelab PI's do well in most areas.
Question:
If you were looking for outright true depth, and could care less about smaller nuggets at depth (under 3-4 Grams), do you think the SD2000 mod beats the GP3000 on larger lumps say over 7-8 Grams and larger?
Ismael, this can cause a lot of stink, but was curious about your testing, which I'm almost positive you have done.
We all would agree the GP3000 is great for smaller pieces at depth, but sometimes the increased sensitivity can work against you in highly mineralized conditions. Here in Arizona, we don't experience too much of these condtions as the DD Pro's seem to really handle the bad ground well.
If someone was looking for outright maximum depth on larger nuggets (7 Grams and up), in highly mineralized soil conditions, what would be your suggestion?
I think I know your answer, but was curious if there was more to it.
P.S. The flip side of the coin is that fact the GP series can find smaller gold near the surface and at depth, and there are a lot more of the little bits than bigger pieces.
Rob Allison
Rob's Detector Sales
Arizona, USA
www.nuggethunting.com
I have used the Minelab PI's since day one when the SD2000 was introduced into the United States @ $3,895.
Over the years I have seen the PI machines increase in performance (stablity, depth and sensitivity). I never seen much problem with their mineral immunity, as the Minelab PI's do well in most areas.
Question:
If you were looking for outright true depth, and could care less about smaller nuggets at depth (under 3-4 Grams), do you think the SD2000 mod beats the GP3000 on larger lumps say over 7-8 Grams and larger?
Ismael, this can cause a lot of stink, but was curious about your testing, which I'm almost positive you have done.
We all would agree the GP3000 is great for smaller pieces at depth, but sometimes the increased sensitivity can work against you in highly mineralized conditions. Here in Arizona, we don't experience too much of these condtions as the DD Pro's seem to really handle the bad ground well.
If someone was looking for outright maximum depth on larger nuggets (7 Grams and up), in highly mineralized soil conditions, what would be your suggestion?
I think I know your answer, but was curious if there was more to it.
P.S. The flip side of the coin is that fact the GP series can find smaller gold near the surface and at depth, and there are a lot more of the little bits than bigger pieces.
Rob Allison
Rob's Detector Sales
Arizona, USA
www.nuggethunting.com
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
19 years 8 months ago #75
by Ismael
Regards Ismael
Replied by Ismael on topic Overall depth
Hi Rob,
Well this is a sticky one! I can only really go on reports back and from friends findings. Over the years all of ML PI detectors have improved slightly over the previous models especially in the detection of smaller pieces. Overall depth has never really increased but due to the quieter machines finding at depth became easier although the GP series definately went deeper despite what has been said on forums. As an example I have been told by almost 100% of prospectors that when the 2100 came on the market it was found to have far better sensitivity than the 2000 but for big pieces deep the 2000 still had an edge.
Today with the GPM we know it can rival the GPX and even better it, that has been prooved and tested a lot. Against the 3000 I have reports from owners of both and they have told me that they have yet to find anything with either machine (2000GPM or 3000) that the other couldn't find. TJ from Geraldton who also performs my mod has gone against a 3000 which was fitted with a 16\" NF coil and beat it hands down. The 2000GPM was running a Coiltek 14\" Saltcoil running in Mono via a switch.
Most detectors once you up the Frequency become a lot better on small pieces but the down side to this is that you lose depth. That is why with the GPM we overcome that by boosting the receive frequency and applying greater voltage at the coil. Something you cannot do to the same extent with the GP's. I wonder if this was the reasoning behind the DVT system on those detectors to prevent regulator mods increasing there depth capability leaving the way open for the next series of detectors?
I know I haven't really answered which machine (2000GPM/3000) goes deeper mainly because there will always be situations where one detector will out do the other because of machine, coil, ground and operators. Another important point or issue is to make any detector perform at its best needs for the coil to be built to match the detector. This is why you always read reports that 2 of the same machines with exactly the same coils one performed better than the other. The internal set up of the detector also comes into it. I come across this alot when doing mods. I have one coil I use in testing the detectors after the modding and some amaze me at there performance! Pennyweights machine has performed better than most for example.
So I hope that this helps answer your question a little.
Well this is a sticky one! I can only really go on reports back and from friends findings. Over the years all of ML PI detectors have improved slightly over the previous models especially in the detection of smaller pieces. Overall depth has never really increased but due to the quieter machines finding at depth became easier although the GP series definately went deeper despite what has been said on forums. As an example I have been told by almost 100% of prospectors that when the 2100 came on the market it was found to have far better sensitivity than the 2000 but for big pieces deep the 2000 still had an edge.
Today with the GPM we know it can rival the GPX and even better it, that has been prooved and tested a lot. Against the 3000 I have reports from owners of both and they have told me that they have yet to find anything with either machine (2000GPM or 3000) that the other couldn't find. TJ from Geraldton who also performs my mod has gone against a 3000 which was fitted with a 16\" NF coil and beat it hands down. The 2000GPM was running a Coiltek 14\" Saltcoil running in Mono via a switch.
Most detectors once you up the Frequency become a lot better on small pieces but the down side to this is that you lose depth. That is why with the GPM we overcome that by boosting the receive frequency and applying greater voltage at the coil. Something you cannot do to the same extent with the GP's. I wonder if this was the reasoning behind the DVT system on those detectors to prevent regulator mods increasing there depth capability leaving the way open for the next series of detectors?
I know I haven't really answered which machine (2000GPM/3000) goes deeper mainly because there will always be situations where one detector will out do the other because of machine, coil, ground and operators. Another important point or issue is to make any detector perform at its best needs for the coil to be built to match the detector. This is why you always read reports that 2 of the same machines with exactly the same coils one performed better than the other. The internal set up of the detector also comes into it. I come across this alot when doing mods. I have one coil I use in testing the detectors after the modding and some amaze me at there performance! Pennyweights machine has performed better than most for example.
So I hope that this helps answer your question a little.
Regards Ismael
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.207 seconds