Recommended Posts

Hi Chuck,

The Goldsnoop is not made by ML but is a detector made in China under the Gold Century label. Somebody in OZ gave it the Goldsnoop name.

Somebody on one of the OZ forums first indicated it was a First Texas clone, but that was later retracted. Here is a link to most of what has been written about it so far.

http://groups.msn.com/GoldDetecting/genera...859&CDir=-1

Basically, the detector is a low priced VLF that is being used in the discriminate mode in bad ground. The disc mode will ignore ground signal changes as well as most hotrocks, so the detector runs silent until metal is present and then sounds off. Apparently, some people have found it will work when the more expensive PI's will not work or not work well and the gold is very small or of a specimen nature.

Reg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Reg

I seen that Jack Lance in OZ. had them for sale for 297.dollars are some where around that.So many things are made in other country's so will be all our detectors next.

I did see one good thing on TV this morning and that being Made In America at Charles Garrett detector MFG.

Chuck Anders

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Chuck,

The Goldsnoop is actually the GC 1023, which sells here for around $70 or so when they are in stock. For that price, they are a throwaway and really shouldn't be compared to the more expensive units.

My guess is many of the USA made VLF's people have now will work about the same. I know I used a Tesoro to do the same thing in a couple of isolated areas where the basalt was so bad using a PI was about impossible and another area where the trash was terrible also.

Now, on a different note, the new Whites PI will be made in the USA from what I understand. If they are made in the USA, then the expansion of Whites to include a PI will help assure their employees have a job and may add a few if all goes well.

It is something to think about.

Reg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reg

I printed out the owner's manual on the GC1023 and I could read between the lines this is not what I want to spend my money on.You can find one of this company's detectors on ebay call GC1005 with a starting bid of 15 dollars.I seen the same thing for sale at Rat Shack and the GC1023 looks like a model that Kellyco sales.

Reg I've got to know what powers that be you know so much about Whites new PI detector?The first of this year I talk to a distributor of one part of US and he then said that Whites had a new gold detector they will be coming out with.He tells me to hang in there and like a monkey out on a vine I'm doing just that.

In my dead end emailing Whites about it I said I'd buy the first one out.

I do hope that Whites puts their heart into this detector what ever the price.These old boys are doing so good with the GPX I feel it will take alot for them to put it down to use Whites.

Let The Force Be With You Friend and keep the info flowing.

Chuck Anders

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Chuck,

I have said on multiple times I do not know just what the Whites PI will be like. What I have said on multiple occassions is I am very familiar with all aspects of the GS 5, including the technical aspect. In fact, I now own one and I just received it today.

Simply stated, I know how the GS 5 works electronically. We also know Whites is using the GS 5 as the foundation for their new PI.

I also know the complexities of making major modifications to an existing design because I have been doing that myself. So, I really do not expect the Whites PI to have dramatic differences than its foundation.

There could be significant differences between the GS 5 and the new Whites, but I really do not expect that. One has to remember, the GS 5 has gone through some rather advanced modifications since it first came out, so it really isn't the same detector either.

I have heard the GS 5 has been very successful in OZ. I am hoping to receive information to verify some of the claims I have heard. We may hear something at the upcoming demonstration mentioned on one of the OZ forums.

One final note, I have no communications with Whites on this new detector, so they could fool me.

BTW, I always have suggestions I am willing to share if they are reading this.

Reg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Rob,

No, the Goldsnoop is not another "hyped metal detector" as you call it. In fact, below in quotes is what is said about the detector's capabilities after it is modified.

BTW, the one with the most information on at least one of the OZ forums about the Goldsnoop is Woody Frankston who is a guy that does a lot of technical experimenting. Some of his coil designs are really unique. So, I expect he knows what he is doing when it comes to modifying this unit.

Here is the first series of quotes;

"This detector (as previously stated) is for small shallow Gold. This detector should excel at finding grammers and specimen Gold in heavy mineralisation. ...it is not a deep detecting P.I it is a shallow Gold machine."

They do go on and say the discrimination works well but it is not the greatest either.

Here is another set of quotes about the detector;

"I was told that when a few experienced prospectors tested the unit at Beggary Hill it would pick up targets that the ML machine would not as it could not handle the ground mineralisation. Not bad for a Chinese detector! I also noticed that on another forum the Gold Snoop is being put down by one particular fellow that has never ever owned or operated one."

Since we don't have ground that is as bad mineralization wise as that found in OZ, we will have to settle for trashy areas to compare it to other detectors. I personally suspect this unit will also excel in trashy areas much like it does in the really bad ground. Now, I plan on getting one once they are available again and see just what can be done with it. Now, if you really want to go head to head with it with your GPX then lets give both of them a go on the Roadrunner claims at Octave. That should be trashy enough to see which detector is the easiest to use.

What do you think?

The point I think Woody was trying to get across is there is no one detector that does it all and sometimes it pays to use a different detector. I for one will be the first to say that PI's suck when trying to hunt ghost town sites such as Octave in the areas where the old cans are the common trash found every few feet.

Personally, I would think that any decent coin hunting detector with a good discrimination feature that can eliminate or minimize the can problem would work better than a typical PI in such trashy places. One should make sure they set their discrimination level very low on the VLF to assure they can detect the small gold, though. If you set the VLF to reject foil, you will reject small gold also. Many 1/4 oz nuggets will TID at about the nickel range. One grammers and smaller will be in the foil range.

This is just a little info to keep in mind about using any detector with discrimination.

Hopefully, once the PD and the Goldsweeper are available, then maybe one can hunt can infested areas with a PI, but until then, the VLF is still the best.

Reg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is hard to read of a 70 dollar detector that will outperform a Minelab without

having serious misgivings about the credibility of the information.

I am not normally skeptical with new equipment or ideas, but this seems alittle too

blue sky for me.

I will however, keep on reading and remain open to being wrong.

Flak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flak,

The answer is simple, use the VLF where the PI doesn't work or work well. That is just what Woody is or was trying to say. Actually, he could have used any decent VLF that has a wider range of discrimination and it would work better than a PI also.

Now, this isn't to say the PI won't detect the gold. Although, that can happen on specimen type or what John B finds down by Greaterville, the issue is more of can a person tolerate hunting an area because of other signals.

BTW, there is some gold that the ML PI simply will not detect no matter what the operator does. In fact, John Blennert has had a lot of fun betting people as to whether they could detect some of the larger pieces he has. To the best of my knowledge, he hasn't lost yet. Now, I have a couple of his "invisible" nuggets and so far, no ML has been able to detect them, including Rob's and Montana's new 4000's.

Now, ignoring the "invisible" gold problem, a good location where a PI is not practical is where the trash is so thick that using a PI becomes more of a headache than it is worth. If the detector sounds like a machine gun going off all the time, then trying to pick the 'gold" signals out of between the junk ones becomes quite a challenge. A really good example is the RR claims at Octave where it is not that uncommon to run into a tin can or parts of one every few feet. Now, this doesn't count all the wire, nails or other metal trash. So, it doesn't take long before the signals from the trash just totally frustrate a person. I know I have tried it.

Now, if a discrimination mode works well enough on any VLF so one can ignore almost all of the tin can junk, nails, etc, then hunting becomes more tolerable. That is the key to the issue.

The second area I can think of here in the US that I have run into is one where it was a basalt cobble field. If the basalt is such that there is a wide variation of iron content, then there is no way for the ground balance no matter how well it works will eliminate the problem of a bunch of signals.

Again, I have run into that situation also. Since there is such a variation in the basalt then one or more of the rocks is sounding off almost on a continuous basis. The same thing happens on a VLF in the all metal mode, making it impossible to use. However, in the disc mode, the basalt is ignored.

Finally, I have samples of some of the strange rock that apparently is quite common in OZ and the response from it is very strong, making it impossible to ignore. Now, if such rock is scattered quite heavily over an area, I wouldn't try to hunt it with a PI. I would give it a shot with a VLF using the discrimination mode.

So, the key is to pick the location. As for the VLF detector, it doesn't matter the cost as long as the disc mode works reasonably well. Having had a personal line of communication with Woody, I would believe what he says. He is very sharp on detectors from a technical standpoint.

Reg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Reg,

I understand all the above and appreciate the time taken to elaborate on it.

That wasn't really what I was commenting on.

All I was saying was that having a (relatively) cheap detector

getting reviews about how it will out-do a minelab etc.

just seems kind of silly until there is hard evidence to back it up.

And, I'm sure you understand that I'm not looking to get contentious,

just commenting on the obvious.

I look forward to hearing more concrete details.

All the best,

Flak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flak,

I plan on getting one of the cheap detectors just to see how it performs. Once I do, I will happy to update this thread as to the results.

In the long run, I would personally use an American made VLF coin detector provided it had a disc level low enough to do what I want it to do. Many of the detectors do, but a few do not.

Although John B uses a Whites Goldmaster to find the "invisible" nuggets and his detector will sound off very loud on the ones that are invisible to most PI's, I am sure many of the VLF coin detectors we normal use will also detect the nuggets. Obviously, the coin detectors will not be as sensitive as the Goldmaster but will do better than most PI's. The key is to realize the disc level has to be set very low to the point even foil is detected.

As an example, I just tried a cheap Radio Shack VLF I picked up for practically nothing when they were closing them out and that detector while operating in the disc mode will easily detect the "invisible" nuggets I have that the PI's aren't able to detect . This detector will also ignore basalt in the disc mode so in areas having a lot of basalt, it should work fine.

Now, I am sure my old Tesoro Bandido will detect the invisible nuggets also in the disc mode. I have already used this detector where the basalt was terrible.

Obviously, my VLF gold detectors will detect the invisible nuggets, but most of those detectors do not have the ability to ignore the basalt, which the Radio Shack and the Bandido will do.

So, in areas where there is "invisible" gold, I will most likely use a detector that will readily sound off on that type of gold. In areas of a lot of trash, I will change again to a detector that will allow me to ignore most of it and still sound off on gold. In areas where the Basalt is so bad that a PI sounds off regularly, I will probably switch to one of a wider range of VLF motion detectors that can ignore the basalt but still sound off on small gold.

Once again, I will pick the right detector for the location, but that is me.

Reg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reg,

Yup, good ideas and solid thinking to back them up.

As of right now, I am unable to get out on the kind of basis

that would justify my having more then one detector, and

because of that, will use the 4000 exclusively, knowing

that for the most part, it will do the job.

But like all of us dedicated gold hounds,

my eyes and ears (and mind), are always open for

the next best thing.

All the best,

Flak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi All,

Well, as promised I would follow up once I received my Gold Snoop clone. Keep in mind that I have only had the detector about a half hour so the evaluation is quite brief at this time.

For starters, it doesn't seem like that bad of a detector. It will discriminate out wire type iron junk quite well. On larger pieces of cans, it responds with an obvious double blip type response that makes it easy to distinguish. However, the small pieces of tin cans do sound off like a good object.

Now it will detect the invisible nuggets even in the discriminate mode, and ignore basalt at the same time, so that is a plus.

So, at this time I have figured out it will detect the invisible nuggets the GPX can't see, so it can detect smaller gold than ML's best PI. I can also detect gold and ignore basalt at the same time. That by itself is a real plus.

I suspect it will do a good job of ignoring very small pieces of iron such as shavings off a dozer blade, but I do need to test this theory. I have to look to see if I have some the small shavings I picked up when hunting one of the pushes at RH.

To be honest, I won't give up my GM4, my GB 2, my LST, or one of my other VLF detectors designed for gold hunting for this detector, but it could work when nothing else is available.

Reg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share