A Mono Coiled Minelab GPX 5000 vs Garrett ATX with its DD - Part 4

[Bearkat]

A Mono Coiled Minelab GPX 5000 vs Garrett ATX with it's DD - Part 4

The goal here again is to see which detector most likely might walk right over gold with 4 buried gold nuggets...check out the results:

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Goldwasher]

Would That AT gold have Hit the two smaller shallower ones? Thank you for showing such informative videos.

 

[Greg in NV.]

I would like to see the ATX with 15"x20" mono coil on big gold at depth.
Great video!

 

[Bearkat]

Yea I'm hoping to get the big coil and give it a test soon!

Bearkat

 

[BugHunter]

How sensitive is ATX to hot rocks in comparison to GPX? Sensitivity to a wide range of nugget sizes is important, no doubt, but it seems that your VLF is no less sensitive than ATX. One of the real advantages of a PI machine is its ability to make hot rocks "disappear". A GPX5000 is really good at this, how about ATX?

 

[Lanny in AB]

Thanks for your time, effort and expense in making your videos Bearkat. I'm finding them very informative.

I'd like to see a test on the ATX in super-hot ground with lots of hotrocks to boot. Do you have a Mono coil to demo with the hotrocks and extreme ground, and then the DD over the same ground?

In some of the areas I hunt, you can't even get a VLF to run. (I saw that your VLF AT would run.)

Having said all I have, I'm very interested in the ATX and its abilities. Moreover, you're doing a good job of showing your settings and of sharing your knowledge and experience. It takes courage, and I applaud you for that.

I'd like to thank you again for being so generous. I know how long it takes to make and to edit videos; furthermore, I know you're not able to drive to the desert to make your videos for free either.

I like your idea of having both machines in the arsenal--that really intrigues me, but I'm very interested to know how well it hunts in extremely bad ground, as I'd like to take my wife to an area where the bedrock is insane (but where nuggets of all sizes abound, and lot of hotrocks accompany them), and I know my GPX will hunt it, but I of course have no idea if the ATX would work for her or not. If it will, I'll probably get one, thanks to your generous efforts of course.

All the best, and I love that big, sassy nugget you've shown us,

Lanny

 

[Jim Hemmingway]

Lanny... a very well stated post above... I admire your views and fully agree with everything said above... bravo. Al has the courage of his convictions and principles IMO.

We enjoyed viewing your latest ATX video Al… you’re doing a great job and I hope you will continue with these videos. Although the GPX5K does not interest me, I’m sure others are understandably very much interested in such comparisons.

I’m not at all surprised at the AT Gold detection depth / sens in that ground. My ground here at home is a brown clay-based loam with plenty of magnetite that covers a kitchen magnet stirred briefly into it. With a 10” elliptical concentric on my F75 it produces a GB readout of 85 and Fe3O4 readout of 0.3% Equivalent Magnetite (EM). Now those readouts tend to vary a bit depending on the type and size of coil tested. I consider my ground to be on the high side of moderate… some might consider it highly mineralized… but in any case it is nothing extreme by any stretch. The point is that my mid-frequency VLF units get the same depth as my PI units with same size coils, maybe a bit more… and are far more sensitive to small nuggets in the testplot.

As to the PI comparison, yes it would have been more instructive to test over higher magnetic susceptible ground, but you have to work with the ground to which you have reasonable access. I do think you’ve clearly demonstrated that ATX is simple and straightforward to operate, and has comparatively better sensitivity to small stuff… an important attribute since most gold is small.

The ATX’s default motion mode is the one that’ll get used by most operators most of the time. A new operator need only ground balance, and adjust the sensitivity control to the ground conditions for stable threshold operation… and begin searching. That simple, and when prospecting, operating simplicity is a good thing.

As to how each of the two PI units tested would compare over tougher ground minerals is a question that you have indicated you intend to pursue. My understanding is that the ATX was designed to deal with the severe ground mineral conditions frequently encountered in Australia. Until we know more in that regard, I think it rather pointless for anyone to suggest or imply otherwise… as has been done elsewhere.

The following observation about ground minerals might interest you. It is intended only as background information to keep in mind when evaluating soil conditions. In the video you took a ground phase reading of 78 that suggested to you a medium hot ground mineralization, no doubt that evaluation is partly based on your knowledge of the area. In my experience Al, ground phase measurement does sometimes correspond to ground mineral magnetic susceptibility. A good example is higher (more non-conductive) GB readouts over magnetite dominant ground.

But otherwise, I don’t consider ground phase to be either a definitive or reliable indicator unless you are familiar with the ground and have established that there is a meaningful relationship. There are a number of iron minerals individually or in combination that in sufficient amounts dominate a soil. However, the strength of magnetic susceptibility exerted by these iron minerals can and does vary widely… but yet their ground phase readouts frequently overlap.

For a given amount of mineral in the soil, magnetite and maghemite will raise the magnetic susceptibility many times more than a similar amount of goethite, limonite, hematite, or siderite. Therefore if magnetite and / or maghemite is present in appreciable amounts, its properties will dominate over other less magnetic susceptible minerals. Magnetite occupies the upper range of the GB scale, whereas maghemite generally occupies the middle range of the GB scale. That’s quite a departure in GB readouts between these two primary high magnetic susceptible troublemakers for detectorists. But to reiterate, there is much overlapping of the mid-to-upper GB scale by other much more ‘benign’ non-conductive iron minerals.

A good example… for which I have attached a tested sample photo… is hematite whose ground phase maps in a similar range to magnetite, but whose magnetic susceptibility is much, much less by comparison. Below is an example of a hematite sample benchtested to demonstrate these properties.

That’s about it for now. I see that most responders to your threads about the ATX have been very positive with their appreciative remarks. Rob over on Nuggethunting forum has also made some similarly positive comments about his early findings with the ATX as well. Thanks again Al, please keep up the good work, my wife and I enjoy the personal touch your sense of humor brings to these videos.

Jim.

​

 

[tinpan]

Hi, Heres a Couple of pics from the last season gold targets clearly picked up at greater depth on a GPX in some of the most mineralized ground. Note the RX Gain on the small gold 10th of a gram was only on 8 and the deeper almost a gram specie the RX gain was a 10 Vantage 12 inch mono coil used . Once the whisper amongst ground chatter is heard a simple ground shine with the back of the pick and a second pass over gives a even louder signal. Only ever setting the threshold to make the gpx hum like a bee at the start of your hunt.and an increase on the gain by 2 over a possible target. That,s how i find small gold. No coil roll just a simple digging technique. I notice your gpx and coil looks brand new and it would in the your best interest to get a cover for your control box. Gpx is finding gold not making movies . Garret is not yet in the race yet as a GPX is proven by years of use . It concerns me that some tell others to use VLF and lesser PI units for gold .Its a poor sells pitch and will leave a lot of newbies with a bitter taste in their mouths. Cost is the only point which most come up with. Even the best gold mders go home with nothing many times. Knowing something about the gold mining history and those who mined it by which method in the old days is also part of the bigger picture.


tinpan

 

[GarretDiggingAz]

Bearkat
Once again great video. I don't have much to say about the GPX settings. Seems like a lot to play with, when it seems if you're going over gold whether big or small it should sound off. I'm more interested in seeing relation of ATX to ATG. I know I should keep options open as far as detectors go for arsenal, but I'm about 100% certain divorce papers would come with GPX. Lol. I was actually thinking of the GB2 instead of ATX. I like the high frequency for the small gold, especially for here in AZ.
It seems most of the time my ATG gbs out at 82-85 in the areas I hunt and of course lots of hot rocks. Is there a feature on ATX to GB them out like on ATG?
If people want vids of test on heavy min soils. Let me try it here for a couple days. Lol. I'd be happy to try it out. I'm not a rep for Garrett, but I probably should since that's my name. Lol

 

[Hoser John]

HAhahahahah mo'spam for breakfast today. I can make any detector beat any other detector that's being hustled-what a hoot...Yes please dump that lousy 5000 asap---to me please---John

 

[AzViper]

HAhahahahah mo'spam for breakfast today. I can make any detector beat any other detector that's being hustled-what a hoot...Yes please dump that lousy 5000 asap---to me please---John

I don't get John. You are without a doubt the most negative poster in the forums. You make comments and never back up your comments, but you’re more than willing to trash someone’s test results but never offer results of your own.

 

[Steve Herschbach]

You do not get my grumpy Uncle John? He is nice to puppies and small children. Everyone else is fair game!

 

[kazcoro]

You do not get my grumpy Uncle John? He is nice to puppies and small children. Everyone else is fair game!

I would like to see a video of the old salt kissing a puppy.... He is def our resident grumpy old guy. Whoever doesn't listen to his advice is pissing in the wind.

 

[Jim Hemmingway]

I’m left with an impression that those side-by-side tests where the GPX is operated in the Sensitive Extra timing (suitable for relatively milder ground) is a fairly representative indication of what it’ll do in that ground with those freshly buried targets. It did very well, only the 0.1 gram piece was not detected. In the real world, where such nuggets occur naturally in undisturbed ground, I think it much more likely that it would have been detected. Look at Tinpan’s tiny nugget found with his GPX posted above. That piece reflects the GPX5K’s true small nugget capability. We already know that GPX5K will detect deeper than ATX on larger nuggets there. But one must learn to select the correct timing for the ground conditions. If a prospective buyer isn’t comfortable with doing that, then perhaps a different metal detector choice would be more suitable.

That does not subtract from the ATX ability to detect that same nugget under the same test conditions. However, the important question is how will the ATX do over more extreme ground minerals where VLF units do struggle… because that is where you expect a PI unit to perform. It could very possibly mean that the sensitive ATX will be more susceptible to such ground mineral… resulting in the need for gain reductions (or even a slight increase in pulse delay) thereby reducing its apparent depth and sensitivity to all sizes of nuggets. Yes, the difference could be substantive in bad ground… at the moment we haven’t seen enough information to do more than speculate. So what is the point in arguing when what is needed is factual information…

I’ve read the heated posts, the confusion of information and misinformation over on Finds regarding the latest video comparison. Some participants have allowed their emotional reaction to interfere with their good manners and clear-headed thinking. Much would have been avoided if a calm, educationally constructive discussion strictly about ground minerals, GPX timings, and their effects on the test results had prevailed… instead of the provocative and at times venomous mudslinging that took place there.

Jim.

PS: Tinpan... liked your post but I think you undervalue VLFs small gold sensitivity in moderate or less ground mineral.

 

[GarretDiggingAz]

I’m left with an impression that those side-by-side tests where the GPX is operated in the Sensitive Extra timing (suitable for relatively milder ground) is a fairly representative indication of what it’ll do in that ground with those freshly buried targets. It did very well, only the 0.1 gram piece was not detected. In the real world, where such nuggets occur naturally in undisturbed ground, I think it much more likely that it would have been detected. Look at Tinpan’s tiny nugget found with his GPX posted above. That piece reflects the GPX5K’s true small nugget capability. We already know that GPX5K will detect deeper than ATX on larger nuggets there. But one must learn to select the correct timing for the ground conditions. If a prospective buyer isn’t comfortable with doing that, then perhaps a different metal detector choice would be more suitable. That does not subtract from the ATX ability to detect that same nugget under the same test conditions. However, the important question is how will the ATX do over more extreme ground minerals where VLF units do struggle... because that is where you expect a PI unit to perform. It could very possibly mean that the sensitive ATX will be more susceptible to such ground mineral... resulting in the need for gain reductions (or even a slight increase in pulse delay) thereby reducing its apparent depth and sensitivity to all sizes of nuggets. Yes, the difference could be substantive in bad ground... at the moment we haven’t seen enough information to do more than speculate. So what is the point in arguing when what is needed is factual information... I’ve read the heated posts, the confusion of information and misinformation over on Finds regarding the latest video comparison. Some participants have allowed their emotional reaction to interfere with their good manners and clear-headed thinking. Much would have been avoided if a calm, educationally constructive discussion strictly about ground minerals, GPX timings, and their effects on the test results had prevailed... instead of the provocative and at times venomous mudslinging that took place there. Jim. PS: Tinpan... liked your post but I think you undervalue VLFs small gold sensitivity in moderate or less ground mineral.

Nice words Jim.
I always believed, you don't have something nice to say don't say it. Too many people seem to get thrilled by getting people upset, instead of asking for another type of test between units, or possibly come up with ideas for testing. Who knows maybe the manufacturers are reading this. Maybe they never thought of testing a unit in that way to achieve that desired reading.
You have to admit it Jim. Seems less mudslinging in this so far as I've seen in others. It's like a football rivalry game at times. C'mon Garrett.

 

[Steve Herschbach]

Hey, what are you talking about? What good prospector does not like a good barroom brawl now and then!

My advice to all. Pay attention to prospectors in the field who get results. That is the advice I have always used myself as the only person who can teach me about finding gold is somebody that finds more gold than me. Everyone has an opinion but very few get results.

 

[AzViper]

Bearkat, can you please return my gold nuggets I loan you for your videos? You have had them long enough. I need the 5 ozer back this week, the others when you get a chance. Obviously you know how to use your equipment.

 

[Steve Herschbach]

OK, the truth can finally be revealed. Alan and I are involved in a devious conspiracy to create controversy and boost viewership. I get to be bad cop while getting a cut of the ATX sales.

This thread has just over 300 views while the same thread at the Findmall Metal Detecting Forum is near 900 views. The same thread on the formerly dead Prospecting Forum is up to 2700 views and growing fast.

Everyone hates a car wreck but everyone looks.

 

[Bearkat]

Lol, Thats a good one Steve! Got a chuckle out of that one. ""Alan and I are involved in a devious conspiracy to create controversy and boost viewership. I get to be bad cop while getting a cut of the ATX sales." - "Everyone hates a car wreck but everyone looks."" -- Good stuff!

Now lets see if I can respond to some of these, I am a bit late but I should keep up now since I have the new Treasurenet App on my iPhone 5s! Oh Yea, it is quite cool, highly recommend it!!

Ok, way up top...to Lanny (and all else too)...I have hunted in very hot ground that changed rapidly in N. California. I rarely hit a hot rock and when I hit my first I got it on video and it is on my Youtube channel now. I usually ran the sensitivity on 11-13, threshold 7-9. Occationally I would hit rapid changing dirt...it did go off a bit more, but I re-GB and it was fine. It was just different dirt that needed re ground balancing. Other than that...what is my main settings hunting hot ground? 12-13 sensitivity, sometimes I hunted in non-motion mode which way out in middle of nowhere was extremely smooth and surprisingly powerful. I have that on video also as to how smooth it is in that basalt iron infested area on my Youtube channel (bearkat4160). Seems people don't think I did videos in hot dirt but I have a few and they are on Youtube also. Its the Minelab vids getting all the attention.

Jim -- Thank you again for that invaluable information. Clears things up a bit I've known in my head that hematite does not respond has loud or as hard as magnetite on my detector and why it does this. Thanks for the why and how! I have not forgot about your requested test - 8" of snow here now. Yikes.

Tinpan -- Wow; that was one of the best post I've ever seen of yours! Awesome nuggets man! I think that my test are limited in that they are fresh buried nuggets and must be taken as "for ones learning" and do not represent all dirt and all mineral types or all anything for that matter. It's just how my GPX 5000 and ATX perform over at the lake.

Jim again: --- "In the real world, where such nuggets occur naturally in undisturbed ground, I think it much more likely that it would have been detected."
Yep as I said up, I agree with this summation as per reports from the field from many GPX users. But what timing will I need and what size gold is at this particular area... you must ask yourself when hunting with the 5000. Just turn the ATX on...hehe, had to get that one in.

AZviper -- Good one man!

Garretdiggingsaz --- yep the ATX does quite well in hot dirt..I will do more vids of just the ATX showing this but I done a few already...maybe they got missed in all the hoopla.

Heres 2 vids of hot dirt:





Thanks,

Bearkat

 

[AzViper]

In the real world, where such nuggets occur naturally in undisturbed ground, I think it much more likely that it would have been detected.

Jim, so what your saying is the GPX can locate a nugget in tightly packed ground over loosely pack ground?