Locating deep Nuggets

[dowser]

I was wondering what type of detector or deep locating device on the market, could image, or sound off, on a target 3ft. deep in mineralized ground? What could the targets minimun size for detection at that depth be? And has anybody tried to find tongue nuggets over in the Stanton, Arizona area with such a device?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[EasyMoney]

A Nexus, the deepest detecting, hand-held VLF detector on the market with it's largest coil can barely find a car body in HIGHLY mineralized ground at 3 feet. It can find a car body at around 5 feet in LIGHTLY mineralized soil. After that the car body looks just like a big area of high iron ground to the Nexus, or to any other detector too.

Pulse Induction detectors can find car bodies a bit deeper, but not by much. Magnetic Spectrometers can find them as deep as 10 feet, and something the size of a garbage can lid at around 7-8 feet. Nothing has ever been found and documented the size of an 8" can lid any deeper than 3 feet. It's because the soil masks the target and the matrix is no longer in effect. In other words, it's impossible..

Some of those stories that people tell about their Minelabs (and others too) doing otherwise are nothing more than hype/hope. Many Minelab owners lay claim to some very entertaining and wild tales, but in real life I can tell you that most of it is a bunch of BS because I've painted them into a corner on it.

If there are zero minerals in the ground, or if somebody is hunting in air, then almost any decent detector will find things a whole lot deeper than otherwise.

I would advise you to check this site for Nexus and their deep target tests. You will find it At: http://www.garysdetecting.co.uk/hoard_test.htm

Several different detectors were tested on a buried small cache and so was a small coin about the size of a dime. If I remember correctly even the coin could not be located by any detector past 10", including those whose owners claim to be able to, with their so-called "superior" Minelabs. A small hoard could not be located even at 25". The results are actually quite funny. Even the MIghty Nexus couldn't find them. The truth is, that there is probably less than 10% difference between one good detector and another, regardless of which company makes it, and not because of the same reason either.

Remember too, that the soil in Great Britain where the tests were done is a lot more gentle and less ironized that the soil here in most of the USA.

Enjoy.

And don't laugh so hard that you get choked on your own spit.

 

[Ocean7]

there is no such machine!

 

[dowser]

Thanks for the info.. Dowser

 

[Jeffro]

Just use your dowsing rods?

 

[dowser]

I do, and that's what gets me to the spots that are two to three feet down. I don't want to dig deep for just some great Gold ore, which I've done. I would like to be somewhat certain it's nugget.

 

[Jeffro]

Welll, I guess you could spend a few thou on a GPR unit, or you could dig a three foot hole. I know which one I'd choose....

 

[dowser]

Well, since their isn't any device to help me, I'll just have to dig them all.. Maybee one this weekend..

 

[lamar]

Dear group;
I noticed that the test which was posted on this topic did not include any Minelab Pulse Induction (PI) detectors. I happen to own two different Minelab PI detectors, the GP3000 and the SD2100v2 and I can pretty much guarantee that if someone were to bury a kilo of coins at 2 feet depth and gave me a crack at finding them, I'd slap on an a 24X12" Coiltek UFO mono or a 25" Nugget Finder mono coil and I'd walk away with a kilo of coins, especially if the test was conducted in ground with very mild mineralization.

This is pretty much a no-brainer when it comes to the Minelab PIs. They are so much better at pure depth than the VLF detectors that it's not even fair to attempt to compare the two types of detectors. The biggest single limiting depth factor to the Minelab PI detector is not the detector, nor the ground mineralization, it's the size and shape of the coil that's has the biggest determining factor concerning depth.

Ground mineralization can play a decisive role in a detectors' ability to detect nuggets at great depths, even the PI detectors. The problem is that looking for gold nuggets requires the detectorist to venture into areas with high to extremely high mineralization in order to stand a good chance at uncovering gold nuggets. The old saying that "Iron is the mother of gold" is very true and a detectorist stands his best chance of locating nuggets in areas with the highest ground mineralization. Salt is also a big factor in determining a detectors' depth and gold likes to form in zones where there is a high salt content in the surrounding matrix.

High concentrations of halides (salt) affect a Minelab PI detectors' depth much more than ferrous mineralization does. Even buried, damp charcoal from an old campfire can be detected with the Minelab PI detector, this is how sensitive it is to changes in ground mineralization. You can pretty much disregard using a VLF detector to search for gold nuggets, as the areas in which they can be used are limited to areas with very mild mineralization and as such, these zones are much more rare than highly mineralized gold bearing zones.

Before you conside me to be biased towards PI detectors, I also own a VLF detector and it's a White's GMT-E series and it does one thing VERY well. It finds ground mineralization better than any other detector I've ever used. When detecting a brand new area, I like to start out with the GMT and locate all of the highly mineralized patches of ground. Once they've been located I put the GMT away and go to work with my SD2100v2, or in rare cases, with my GP3000. It's been a very good system for me.

To answer your original question, 3 feet of pure depth is pushing the extreme outermost fringes of even a PI detectors' depth range and I seriously doubt that there is a PI detector built which can penetrate the ground matrix much more than 2 feet. I've personally dug up old tin cans at 20 inches and they sounded sooooooo good from the surface! OK, I didn't actually gig them up myself, as I live in Bolivia, the poorest country in South America and in order to do my part to help the local economy, I always hire a young man or two for a few dollars a day to take charge of all of the excavation portions of my nugget hunting ventures, which then leaves me free to pursue other more important activities, such as pondering what will be the patch to detect in. I also place these youngsters in charge of all of the heavy transportation requirements. All in all, it's a pretty system, my friend.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Willy]

Sometimes, I just can't hold it in..WHAT A PILE OF BS!!! This Lamar guy is either a shill, or doesn't know squat about operating a VLF detector. I've found thousands of $'s of gold in extremely mineralized areas (I can even pull up the official gov. geo-surveys) and, while a VLF won't get the pure depth of a ground balancing PI, it can sure find nuggets. I even found gold, with a VLF, in an area that (due to the type of mineralization) a PI was pretty much useless. I don't know how many thousands of prospectors, hunting bad ground with VLF's, have found plenty of gold. What, before the advent of ML PI's, these guys just sat around, thumbs up butts, and moaned about not being able to detect for nuggets? I outta post a link to this guy's post on the other gold forums.. they might just get a laugh out of it. ..Willy.

 

[lamar]

Dear Willy;
Relax, my overly excited friend. Take a deep breath and just relax. Calm down a bit. There's nothing to get excited about, it's just an opinion is all. No sense in getting a heart attack, now is there
There, now doesn't that feel better?
Go ahead and post links to other forums if that makes you better, my friend. The truth of the matter is that PI detectors find gold nuggets. Period. I've had success with the PI detector and no success with a VLF detector.I've spoken the truth about PI detectors and my post was in no way meant to slam VLF detectors. There's absolutely no need to attack someone personally for their view, now is there? Oh, and if you wish to post links about the other forums which I visit, let me save you the trouble and post them for you:
http://www.nuggethunting.com/forums/index.php

This link is to Rob Allisons' forum and he lives in Arizona and is a Minelab dealer. You won't find a more knowledgeable nugget hunter than Rob. He really knows his business and he will never lie to you or steer you in the wrong direction. Please, feel free to visit to this outstanding forum and learn more about the Minelab line of detectors. He's a good friend of mine and I post the bulk of my posts on his forum. Also, please feel free to post about PI vs. VLF detectors on his forum. Rob Allison and all the other members will give you straight up opinions about the benefits and disadvantages between the two types and you don't need to worry about falling under a personal attack. I purchase all of my products from Rob and there's never been a more honest businessman in this business, IMVHO.

http://www.nuggetshooter.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=8

This is Bill Southerns' forum, another fine Arizona gentleman. I don't post much on his forum any more but he's still a fine gentleman and and very knowledgeable about metal detecting for nuggets. Again, asking questions on his forum won't get someone into hot water, I promise. Bill doesn't put up with such nonsense, believe me.

http://www.arizonaoutback.ipbhost.com/

This is the Arizonaoutback forum and it's owned by Chris Gholson, who is a cousin of Rob Allison and he also a very knowledgeable and a highly successful detectorist. I stopped posting,on Chris' forum a year or so back but he knows his business very well and is associated with one of the worlds' foremost authorities on metal detecting for gold nuggets, Johnathon Porter. JP knows pretty much everything there is to know about using PI and VLF detectors to find nuggets with, and while his style may be a tad harsh at times for my tastes, at heart he's a wonderful person and a very fine detectorist.

http://www.arizonagoldprospectors.com/invision/index.php

This site is owned by Rod Fitzhugh and while not a metal detector dealer, he is extremely dedicated to the sport and because he is not affliated with any manufacturers, his opinion, especially on new products, is extremely unbiased. I don't post on his forum any more because of lack of time but he is also one of the best in the business and he and his happy go lucky group of pirates will be happy to share any knowledge of metal detecting for gold with the novice. ARRRRRRRR!
I strongly feel that not a single of these outstanding detectorists will lead anyone astray about metal detecting for gold nuggets and as such it would behoove anyone who wishes to learn more about this exciting hobby to visit these 4 sites.

I posted on Finders Forum and MSN Gold forums or something like that once upon a time, but I stopped several years ago, as they just a bunch of cronies griping and moaning about the government of Australia. I hope that anyone who reads this post seriously considers metal detecting for gold nuggets as a hobby. It can be one of the most rewarding experiences a person can have.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Willy]

And, if a person were to read the posts on these forums, it would be seen that many of the prospectors there have BOTH VLF and PI detectors and use them in the same highly mineralized ground. There are conditions wherein a VLF won't be usable, but that's not common. I don't have a beef with you, personally, but with a blanket statement that is basically disinformation. "You can pretty much disregard using a VLF detector to search for gold nuggets, as the areas in which they can be used are limited to areas with very mild mineralization and as such" is one such statement. As a personal opinion and, possibly your experiences with VLF's, it could be true enough. Thing is, there was no disclaimer (such and such in my ground) and the gist of the post is that, except in lightly mineralized ground, VLF's are ineffective. Sorry, but that just isn't true. Many of the same people posting on the forums you list (I visit them too) talk about using a PI for the larger/deeper nuggets and the VLF for the small/shallow stuff. I probably came on too strong, for that I apologize, but I stand by my views regarding VLF's and PI's. ..Willy.

 

[lamar]

Willy;
if you'll re-read my original post, you may see where I listed that I also own a Whites' GMT-E and it's pretty much worthless for chasing nuggets where I am living, which is in Bolivia. A great deal of a detectors' success depends wholly on the area which it is used in. This is true with all detectors and especially in areas which are undeveloped, such as in nature. Searching the hills and wilds for nuggets is much different than looking for coins in the park, and each type of detector excels in one place and not in another. One place where VLF detectors really excel when searching for gold nuggets is Moore Creek, Alalska. The mineral conditions there are very favorable for VLFs and they are evry bit as successful and popular as the more expensive PI detector. I must add that this is the exception rather than the rule, however. Again, I don't expect anyone to take my word for anything, rather, visit the websites which I so thoughtfully provided and read for yourselfes the success rates of the PI detectors vs. the VLF detector, especially when searching for gold nuggeta. BTW Willy, did I miss any forums
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[bakergeol]

I sure wish you guys (Willy and Lamar) would bury the hacket here. I enjoy both of your posts on various forums. By the way Lamar I believe you meant Ganes Creek not Moore Creek in Alaska which favors the useage of VLFs.

On the subject of deep buried coins not even a Minelab SD2200 with a 18" coil could find the pure coin cache. However, I felt if the coins were low conductors a good high end PI probably could.
http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/showthread.php?t=11831

George

 

[lamar]

Dear bakergeol;
I've dug up crushed flat steel beer cans (the old style cans) at 14 to 16 inches with my SD2100 and the 18" Coiltek mono (the trash can lid) coil without any problems whatsoever. It won't go much deeper than that however, due to the fact that the coil size is is 18" in diameter. It's the diameter of the coil and it's shape which determines it's depth on a PI detector. An 18" round mono is good for around 14" to 16" and maybe a tad more in very good conditions.
There are more and more releic detectorists in Great Britian who are using the Minelab PI detector to detect relics with and while they are producing some amazing finds, they are quickly learning about a few of the quirks with the Minelab PI series detectors.
1) The iron discrimination sucks rocks! The discrimination feature is totally worthless with mono coils and the detectorist is restricted to using DD coils and even then, the iron discrimination is HORRIBLE. It's so terrible that I don't even attempt to use it with my GP3000 any more.
2) Using a Minelab PI detector for relics means the detectorist is going to be digging some DEEP holes! Without any sort of reliable ID feature, this can quickly become a rather large amount of backbreaking labor while digging trash targets.
3) Using a Minelab PI detector means the detectorist will be pretty much hunting alone as the signal emitted from the PI detector causes VLF detectors in the vicinity to go totally nuts and vice versa. Even other PI detectors can cause lots of unwelcome interference, although it's usually not as bad.
4) The Minelab PI detector is ultra sensitive to stray electro-magnetic interference from power lines and overhead aircraft. These two things can cause a PI detector to go completely bonkers and it's usually best to stay away from overhead airplanes. The altitude of the aircraft doesn't seem to matter much either.

Yes, you're right, it is Ganes creek and not Moore's creek. I haven't lived in Alaska since 1983 and so the memory slips at times.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[dowser]

So the best I can see is 14 to 16 inches with a Minelab PI detector. But what about the guy on that Cash and Treasure in US show on TV. He was pulling a homemade large coil with his ATV. The ground wasn't mineralized, but he could locate meteorites at 20 ft. deep. Is it, the bigger the coil the deeper the signal??

 

[lamar]

Dear dowser;
You can go deeper with a larger mono coil. Nugget Finder makes a 25" round mono that's good to around 20" or just slightly more, but you will pay for it. At $560.00, that coil costs as much, or more than a top of the line VLF coinshooter, my friend.
You can achieve 14" to 16" depth with an 18" round mono coil in ideal conditions.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Willy]

I think that there's a limit to how big a coil can get and not get swamped by external 'noise'. Might be wrong though. Also, with the emitted RF following the inverse square 'law', one would think that while a large antenna could possibly pick up a faint signal at great depth, the soil matrix (and assorted junk buried within) would tend to overwhelm the signal from the target. I dunno sounds good to me, and probably even better after a few beers.
Lamar: I know absolutely nothing about Bolivia and ground conditions therein. Could be that VLF's just don't work there and if you had stated such, without extending that to any ground with more than a slight bit of mineralization, there wouldn't have been any argument from me. On the other hand, I HAVE detected for gold down in Arizona (Rich Hill, Wickenberg (Jackass Flats), Quartzite, Arivaca, Greaterville, Laguna's, any many other locations) with a VLF without any difficulty. I've also detected up in Alaska's Brooks Range (highly mineralized and few detectors can hunt there) and here in 'home sweet home' B.C., which has some of the hottest ground around. Anyway, to continue with this particular aspect of the discussion would be flogging a dead horse, so I , at the very least, intend to drop it.
Back to PI's and such, I played around with a GPX 4000 a bit on the Coquihalla River (S. B.C.) and yup, the iron ID sux. Not only that, but we have a specific hotrock (and literally millions of them from thumbnail sized to that of a car) which reads as a good low conductor (gold) on the GPX and can be picked up at tremendous depths.
As an addendum ('cause I don't want to retype stuff) the White's GMT and such, being higher frequency detectors, are generally considered to be more affected by ground mineralization. Indeed, up in the Brooks Range, the higher frequency White's detectors, as well as an AU 52 (Compass 52 KHz) & Goldbug (19 KHZ) were all but unusable. The MXT as well as my CZ6a (in salt mode), worked quite well. ..Willy.

 

[dowser]

willy.. Did you find anthing nice over by Rich hill, or was the ground to mineralized to get deep ?

 

[Willy]

Man, that was years ago, when I had my first real gold detector.. a Scorpion Gold Stinger. Found some small stuff and a heap of trash. ...Willy.