What About someone becoming a Tester

Skiddum

Sr. Member
Jan 29, 2015
264
128
Utah
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
I was thinking about this for awhile today. you always find people trying to figure out how well things work. I've been there myself a few different times.

The testing would be done in special channel's. each piece of equipment would be set up spacifically to the inventers instructions. and there would be multiple test ran. fast water slow, water, water changing from fast to slow and vise versa. and those pieces of equipment that have things that can be moved, pulled out or changed would be to test the equipment with and without the spacific pieces. Like a keene a51. you can remove the corrugated steel without having to glue the may down. any altering the equipment would be off limits. pretty much the test would be as the equipment is sold. each test would also be tested on course gold Quarter inch to 50 mesh and fine gold 50 to 150. and even 150 to 300. each piece of equipment would be tested with the same amount of material, the same weight, the results wouldn't be based on good or poor they'd be based on weight captured and lost. everything from centrafuge systems to pans.
the people testing them would be unbiased to each piece. because that would be there job. I've seen allot of people who use 1 piece of equipment for so long that they refuse to even use another piece of equipment. witch may or may not be a bad thing.
All findings would be put up for everyone to see for themselves and then they could decide based on truths not what each company says is true. I know allot of people wouldn't pay no attention to these but many more would. and they'd be backed by each company. There's allot of equipment out there. and no piece has perfect recovery but the testing would allow everyone to see how well each does and it would give each company good data that they could use to upgrade.
I don't know I think it would be a great idea. but I think not many companies would want to do it either just because they have there own testing but they don't post there findings.
 

Upvote 0

Goldwasher

Gold Member
May 26, 2009
6,077
13,225
Sailor Flat, Ca.
🥇 Banner finds
1
Detector(s) used
SDC2300, Gold Bug 2 Burlap, fish oil, .35 gallons of water per minute.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Aren't these forums pretty much evidence of the tests you describe? In the field vs. in the "Lab" is about as accurate and honest as you can get.
 

fowledup

Silver Member
Jul 21, 2013
2,757
5,162
Northern California
Detector(s) used
Whites GMT V/SAT
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Maybe you could approach the ICMJ and see if there is an interest to start a consumer reports type head to head equipment comparison column. Heck you might be starting a new job! If you do can I be a beta tester or lab rat? You won't have to pay me just let me keep what I test, that would be fine. It would mean an awful lot to my poor wife who keeps asking why it is we need this or that each time I bring home a new piece of equipment. And I'm running out of answers to boot.
 

OP
OP
S

Skiddum

Sr. Member
Jan 29, 2015
264
128
Utah
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
lol id be all for it. might be av good profession. the reason id want to do it is it would eliminate allot of factors. the big 1 being. it doesn't matter if you run the same equipment side buy side say 2 keene a51 and dig tl from the same hole they're wool always be different outcomes. 1 sluice will always catch more than the other. but running the same weight of gold through each piece course fine and micro testy reach 1 individualy. then do different water speeds floor each 1 to it would give the best Answers. and it would tell each company what each piece of there equipment would be best at what setup in each.

and Gold washer yes that's what this technically is.but it's also super biased. cause everyone has there own preferences. so if I gave someone 2 pieces of equipment to try then they'd always favor 1 or the other. buy testin each 1 individually and postin the findings of each then it eliminates that to sheer fact. I think it would be harder then I'm making it sound but it would also be fun to do to. and im sure it would eliminate allot of this is best that's best. I'm sure each piece is great at what is was designed for. But it would show that and other things. I'm sure it would take at least 1 week if nonstop testing for 1 piece to get the best outcomes. But it would be an awesome job. I'll definitely be sending a message to the ICMJ See what they think
 

OP
OP
S

Skiddum

Sr. Member
Jan 29, 2015
264
128
Utah
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Hell we could make it a TV show lol. I garrenty ever prospector out there would be watching the latest testing
 

fowledup

Silver Member
Jul 21, 2013
2,757
5,162
Northern California
Detector(s) used
Whites GMT V/SAT
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Airs right after Goldrush. Forget the sluice boxes and pans- it's big boy toy time. Side by side tests of washplants, excavators, dozers, and cleanup shacks. Season finale head to head of conventional ground washplant op vs floating dredge op. Just joking in all seriousness I would watch a show like that for sure.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Top