Admin nuggethunting Posted June 14, 2015 Admin Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Hello All, Was able to escape early this morning and set foot on the Arizona Goldfields at 5am. Hunted for about 6 hours on several old patches with the Minelab GPZ 7000. One patch I scored 5 small ones, the second patch was 9 coarse nuggets (actually 10 as one is a iron specimen not shown). Ended up totaling just over 7 Grams for all 14 nuggets shown in the pictures below. The Minelab GPZ 7000 amazes me every time out on these old patches. Anyone have an old patch I can check out? It's out there ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIAMONDBACKDAVE Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 U never cease to amaze me Mr nugget master Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOC Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Way to go Rob, you make those little Gold Basin nuggets pale by comparison.The GPZ7000 machine is a totally different animal. You just can't explain it sufficiently to someone who has not used it.Doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin nuggethunting Posted June 15, 2015 Author Admin Report Share Posted June 15, 2015 Hey Guys, Thanks for the comments, which seems to be lean these days .... LOLDave - It might seem easy, but I bust my butt when I'm out there. The GPZ 7000 helps in finding more gold, but the majority of it is locating the areas, understanding where the gold might be and then digging it up. There are a bunch of guys out there with GPZ's not finding much gold. It's only a "Magic Wand" if the end user really does everything to make the "Magic" work. Doc - I know there are some lumps up there with your name on it. The GPZ loves the small deep ones, but we both know from experience now if a larger one is there, it's going to find it. P.S. Doc, we shouldn't have to explain, tell them to let us hunt their old patches and the GPZ will explain itself! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortuga Posted June 15, 2015 Report Share Posted June 15, 2015 That's some good looking coarse gold. Almost 1/4 ounce in 6 hours is good work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridge Runner Posted June 15, 2015 Report Share Posted June 15, 2015 Guys Why is it that we hear about all this small gold being found and lots of it by the 7000 ? Yet before the 5000 when by the wayside ( not Really ) we heard about lots of big gold being found. I'm sure part of it is the 5000 can't detect the small gold like the 7000. But I'm wondering if the 7000 can detect big gold. Ha Ha I know this couldn't be true. Just maybe all the big gold has been found with the 5000. It would be good if we could take off about two feet of dirt off the top. So us that have to travel a long ways could get down to some gold again. Chuck Anders Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortuga Posted June 15, 2015 Report Share Posted June 15, 2015 A lot of it has been found by 5000's and other PI's over the years.Big nuggets are also extremely rare too. Those two factors combined make it VERY difficult to find 1/4 oz+ nuggets while out detecting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOC Posted June 15, 2015 Report Share Posted June 15, 2015 Dear Chuck,It's a good question regarding the GPX5000 vs the GPZ7000 but there is a very simple answer.Guys have been using GPX5000's with 20 inch and 24 inch coils. They have found the deep gold, but they have missed all of this small gold.You are trying to compare apples to oranges.You are expecting a GPZ7000 to go deeper than a GPX5000 with a 20, 22, 24 inch coil. The fact is, the GPZ7000 is probably going not quite as deep, using the stock 14 X 13 coil.You are not going to see that 40% deeper kick in, and those bigger nuggets until Minelab releases the LARGE COIL for the GPZ7000. Then we are going to be comparing apples to apples.We already know the amazing capabilities of this machine to find deep small gold. What we have not seen yet is a coil which is similar in size to the large coils that have been used with the GPX5000.Just be patient, the lunkers will start to roll in when guys go back to their old patches with the LARGE GPZ7000 coil.I just had a customer who unearthed a 24 pound piece of quartz, at 2 feet, that had 2.5 ounces of gold in it. He had been over this area before with a GPX4000. The gold was widely disseminated. He said it was a lot of fun trying to do a specific gravity test on the piece. My customer has found over 6 ounces so far with his GPX7000. He has put his GPX5000 up for sale.I have 1000% faith in this GPZ7000. There is no machine currently made that comes anywhere close to the capabilities of this machine.Doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridge Runner Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Hi Doc I guess looking at the 7000 on how well it detected small gold at depth. Then why be the need to change coils on something 10 to 20 times larger ! ?. Just maybe the larger coil may not be made the same as the one on the 7000 now. It will be good to see just what Minelab has to offer on other coils for the 7000. Hope the price on new coils for it isn't as high .Time will tell. The Best to you Doc Chuck Anders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin nuggethunting Posted June 16, 2015 Author Admin Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Hey Guys, Here are my thoughts, for what they are worth. First, the large gold is much more scarce overall than smaller gold nuggets. Years ago I ran a spreadsheet for one season of all my finds around Arizona just to collect data for my own personal use. What I found after about 1,000 nuggets is that the percentage of larger gold over 1/4 was like 5%. I would find like one 1/4 ounce nugget for every 100 nuggets from a few grains to a few Grams in size. Figuring most of the old goldfield have been worked for 20-30 with modern VLF and now PI technology, the easy pickings from the surface to like 6 inches are gone. We are talking about the larger nuggets. The larger nuggets sound louder, even at 6 inches vs. a smaller nugget, so these targets have been plucked away for the most part. Doc mentioned a good point also that many known nugget patches that produced nuggets of size have been ran over very slowly with PI's from the SD, GP and GPX series with coils as large as 25-inch Round. These PI's with large coils no doubt would hit large nuggets at 1-2 foot range, I found many myself. Overall, there is much more smaller gold in reality to larger gold. The smaller gold is fainter at depth. The new technologies are getting better with faster timings and allowing the smaller, more porous gold to be found at depth. I think once a larger coil for the GPZ is released, there could be some larger nuggets come from some old patches. The depth is amazing with the 14x13 now, so I could only imagine what a 20-inch Round would do. I'm not sure I want to dig those faint whispers with a 20-inch round on a GPZ. The hole might be 2-3 foot deep and take hours to extract (hopefully not iron rubbish). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alchemist Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Hi Rob,Very interesting post. I did the same as you keeping a spreadsheet and comparing the data from over 1000 nuggets. The areas I hunt, generally schist with minor greenschist facies (metamorphosed sedimentary with minor basic intrusions) gave an average of 0.67 grams and only about 2% over 1/4oz. So your haunts have slightly larger gold, or perhaps they have been eroding for much longer than mine, <10 million years.A number of these deposits have gold nuggets directly in the schist rock, almost as if an ancient alluvial or eluvial deposit was deeply buried and then metamorphosed in situ, (paleoplacer) and then exhumed during subsequent mountain building. The nuggets are flatish in shape and show relief from the surrounding rock layers. Chris mentions a similar deposit in "Fists Full of Gold". Anyway, I have a theory that these ancient paleoplacers will have left the real heavies in near source areas, now possibly quite remote from any key topology or visible indicators.The old fellas in many cases will have found recycled components of these paleoplacers, but most of the heavies associated with them are likely still sitting out there in the most obscure of places or is that placers. It's probable that these heavies will be caught up on low angle plateaus, ridge tops, folds and faults, so there will be a greater accumulation of soils over them. I've got a feeling the GPZ is going to be great for hunting these, given its liking for flatish stuff down deep.I'm interested to hear yours and Doc's thoughts regarding use of the ferrite in quieter soils, if it gives any improvement or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin nuggethunting Posted June 18, 2015 Author Admin Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 Hey Alchemist, Sounds like the same general geology that I hunt a lot. The main host rock is Schist, some Slate and Shales. My spreadsheet results were a bit less than 5%, but just rounded it off. I think the actual number was like 3.9%, so not far from what you found out. I think this is the cause in most placers. The GPZ is an amazing detector. My partner asked me if I was going to "really" tell the truth on what I'm finding in some guys old placered washes where they said it was DEAD. Like some guys say on other forums, I don't show all my gold ..... HahaI have requested a Ferrite Tube from Minelab, but not sure when I will get one. I have one spot with tons of ironstones, but the GPZ still struggles on it. I would like to try the Ferrite Tube Ground Balance Method here to see if it would help eliminate some of them. P.S. Would love to hear more about your stories/finds (general information, no specifics) if you ever get any free time on the forums. Take care, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredm Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 Rob;I asked for a ferrite ring from Nadia at Minelab. She said they are available from "your authorized Minelab dealer"...so, who is authorized if you have go begging???Minelab needs to get their #%$@ together.fred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin nuggethunting Posted June 19, 2015 Author Admin Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 Hey Fred, Well I consider myself one of the biggest, small dealers in the US and I don't have any. The last I heard, they didn't have them. I talked with several people at Minelab about it. I don't know anyone that has one to be honest. I will check again with Nadia, but if shipping don't know about them, they never received them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alchemist Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 Hi Guys, Maybe because most of the people having serious issues seem to be mainly in Aus, Minelab will be concentrating on them first? I'm only having GB difficulty on a limited areas of hot clay type material, will be the salts. The GPX struggled to, so its no surprise the GPZ dislikes it even more. The way it has turned some exhausted areas into producers again makes up for it by miles.Depths of winter here Rob at the moment so will not be getting out much until spring now. I'm itching to get out there with the Z I just love using this detector. When I do I'll share some of my finds, may even do a video. CheersKev. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredm Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 Thanks Rob;that is exactly my point..you are definitely an AUTHORIZED dealer, yet you have none. When you ask no one knows what or where they are, yet, I am referred to the dealer...it is a big circle #$@%.fred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.