Do Bazookas really catch fine gold?

utah mason

Hero Member
Jul 10, 2015
545
935
utah
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
bakergeol -

You and KevinInC are both right - Yes you are going to lose a certain percentage of fine gold based on the water speed and size of classification (which also includes just shoveling in). Faster water or steeper angle will suspend finer gold particles and will not allow some of them to drop into the capture device regardless of type (riffle, drop, fluid bed, etc). KInC's theory of the small mesh gold you are losing will easily be outweighed by the total amount of gold you are getting because you are processing more material more quickly is also valid.

It depends on if your goal is: maximum extraction of all gold sizes or just processing more material. As stated in other threads I am a proponent of matching classification and water speed to the material because I am trying to maximize the percentage of recovery. KInC is more material, more gold guy. Neither is right or wrong. Bottom line: do whatever floats your boat. Choose what is important to you, buy the machine that can do the job and tailor your techniques to make it happen.
Thanks for pictures and advice. I'm currently running a Keene a51. I have been playing with a few different set ups to catch the fine gold, well because that's all that's in my area. I have been thinking of getting the mini for hiking, it looks really light. My sons is 7, so I end up packing most everything. I really liked the last pics. I'm going to pick one up and give it a try. Thanks again for the great advice. This site has been a invaluable source for me getting started
 

AMP_kbell

Jr. Member
Aug 5, 2015
47
38
Galt, CA
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Utah -

1. Buy the Mini so you don't have to pack the 12lb. A51 - saves your back, lets you dig more.

2. You can actually make your Keene A51 into a better mousetrap and it can be used when water levels/speeds aren't good enough for the Bazooka - You need to chuck the original matting and use some really high end nitrile rubber conveyer belting. It is like the matting in high end machines like the gold cube. I bought some back in the day (Before I invented the AMP sluice) from globalindustrial.com for about $10/ft. (Item #: WCB325326 Now $14/ft ) You can find it in several places now so shop for the best price. Put this matting under your expanded metal. Don't look Shovel Guys... Classify to 1/2" or even 1/4" and run the water just barely above the riffles and just fast enough to move the material. You will be surprised at the material you can recover.

Best thing is it gives you two options and you already own the A51.
 

Last edited:

AMP_kbell

Jr. Member
Aug 5, 2015
47
38
Galt, CA
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
At the risk of getting blasted by Bazooka owners I am going to make an observation - this is not because I invented the AMP Sluice. I am a tester and a verifier. When some company says my machine will get gold down to minus xxx or think less, shovel more or whatever the company claim, I want to verify that I am getting what I expect.

BTW I love the fluid bed concept - It is in my opinion this absolute best gold recovery mechanism. period. That is why I designed my machine around that concept.

bakergeol has a valid question. Does the Bazooka actually recover fine gold? not just a small percentage but actually recovers a significant percentage. As stated before I have run dozens and dozens of tests on my sluice with different classifications and water speeds. I know exactly what my machine recovers.

When asked the question Bazooka owners have two responses: "My machine gets everything including xxx minus! I've tested my tailings and found nothing" or "I don't care about the little stuff, I make it up on volume!" I have not found any evidence of people actually scientifically testing their Bazookas with weighted measures of 12 mesh -100 minus gold.

Prospector70, Guilded or any other Bazooka owner - I propose a test. It would be great to have several different size machines tested.

Take a weighted measure of dry gold (3-4 grains is what I normally use) that is comprised of 12-100 minus gold. Set your machine up and dump in 5 gallons of classified 1/2" material that has been screened to have no gold. Then dump in another 1/2" classified material 5 gallon bucket that has been salted with your gold. Finally dump in one more 5 gallon 1/2" classified screened to have no gold. Let the machine clear for a few minutes then remove it and clean into a bucket. Pan that material, take the gold, dry it and re-weigh it. That will give you actual recovery percentage.

Best to repeat the test at least three times and average the recovery percentages.

Then we all would know the actual recovery based on scientific experiments. It would be a very interesting test.
 

Last edited:

arizau

Bronze Member
May 2, 2014
2,479
3,854
AZ
Detector(s) used
Beach High Banker, Sweep Jig, Whippet Dry Washer, Lobo ST, 1/2 width 2 tray Gold Cube, numerous pans, rocker box, and home made fluid bed and stream sluices.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Utah -

1. Buy the Mini so you don't have to pack the 12lb. A51 - saves your back, lets you dig more.

2. You can actually make your Keene A51 into a better mousetrap and it can be used when water levels/speeds aren't good enough for the Bazooka - You need to chuck the original matting and use some really high end nitrile rubber conveyer belting. It is like the matting in high end machines like the gold cube. I bought some back in the day (Before I invented the AMP sluice) from globalindustrial.com for about $10/ft. (Item #: WCB325326 Now $14/ft ) You can find it in several places now so shop for the best price. Put this matting under your expanded metal. Don't look Shovel Guys... Classify to 1/2" or even 1/4" and run the water just barely above the riffles and just fast enough to move the material. You will be surprised at the material you can recover.

Best thing is it gives you two options and you already own the A51.

Doc at Goldhog lists these options for Gold Cube like matting. Same source but includes several different sizes and one type uses different type of rubber that is less expensive. Click this link: Vortex Mat
 

Duckwalk

Hero Member
Mar 21, 2014
966
1,312
Lincolnton North Carolina
Detector(s) used
30" Bazooka Sniper, Drop Riffle sluice box.
Various Gold Pans
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Thanks for pictures and advice. I'm currently running a Keene a51. I have been playing with a few different set ups to catch the fine gold, well because that's all that's in my area. I have been thinking of getting the mini for hiking, it looks really light. My sons is 7, so I end up packing most everything. I really liked the last pics. I'm going to pick one up and give it a try. Thanks again for the great advice. This site has been a invaluable source for me getting started

i would recommend the 30" sniper. the super mini is nice but can not really keep up with the 30" sniper. Sniper is super lightweight (compared to the 12lb A51) and can be shoveled directly into without classifying. I have heard of people doing this with the super mini but not with an actual shovel, more like a garden trowel. Just my two cents.
 

triple d

Sr. Member
Nov 17, 2013
488
414
Central N.H
Detector(s) used
36" BGT Prospector, 30" BGT Sniper, And related gold prospecting equipment
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Fine gold I haven" field tested the bazooka. But I saw a video made by Doc at gold hog. He used an Electrical Box. That conduit can be run into it. I made a similar one. With a few changes. It acts like a Bazooka. Its a fluid bed. I run all my cons thought it. To classify down to a few spoons full. To run thought a blue bowl. Ive used it about five times. And tested all the tailings and have not loss any gold.Using my recirulating sluice with gold hog Mats. If anyone knows N.H gold most of it is super fine. I have to believe the B.G.T with catch it. I have used it on a clean up of over 100 pieces of very fine gold. And didn"t lose any. Ive tested under controlled conditions. But i have to believe the bazooka. Will have the same results. In the field.If your losing gold I can"t believe you would catch that much fine gold. And ive had similar clean ups. With close to the same results. A lot of fine gold.
 

Bronze

Full Member
Jun 21, 2013
217
557
Everett WA
Detector(s) used
Garrett AT pro, Keene "3 dredge, Jobe yellow jacket, "36 Prospector Bazooka, a shovel, a pan and a worn out back.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
I didn't read all the responses, so this may have already been covered. I had a chance to use a "36 sniper yesterday in Western Wa gold country. If you are familiar with the gold here, its flood gold and flour gold. It takes a lot of work to get an amount worth while unless you are in a known hot spot.

The area I was in had some pretty fast water and big volume where I had the Bazooka placed. What I tried doing was taking my Jobe yellow Jacket and ran a bunch of material through it. this thing will catch micro fine gold but for some reason likes to spit bigger stuff out. After running 3 buckets of classified material through the Jobe, I took the cons and ran them through the Sniper.

Not only did the Sniper reduce my cons down to only having to pan 1 time vs. 10 times, it held all the micro fine stuff. and when I mean small, I mean small enough that when pictured next to a penny, its pieces that would fit between the vertical posts of the Lincoln memorial on the back of the penny.

I think water flow has a lot to do with it. If you don't have enough movement, it wont exchange the material. So if you are on a slow moving creek, with little to no elevation change you aren't going to have very good exchange. We ran into this problem with the Sniper not but 20ft. up stream from the spot where I reduced the cons from the Jobe. The water wasn't moving fast enough and the Bazooka backed up like a toilet in a third world country.

I guess the short answer to the question is "yes it will catch super fine gold BUT you have to have enough flow and angle". I think this is true with any type of sluice/fluid bed
 

GoldpannerDave

Bronze Member
Apr 17, 2014
1,076
1,279
Colorado Springs, CO
Detector(s) used
Bazooka 48" Miner and 30" Sniper, Le Trap, Wolf Trap, A52, 2" dredge, Miller tables, Blue Bowl, wheel, Falcon MD20, old White's detector
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
At the risk of getting blasted by Bazooka owners I am going to make an observation - this is not because I invented the AMP Sluice. I am a tester and a verifier. When some company says my machine will get gold down to minus xxx or think less, shovel more or whatever the company claim, I want to verify that I am getting what I expect.

BTW I love the fluid bed concept - It is in my opinion this absolute best gold recovery mechanism. period. That is why I designed my machine around that concept.

bakergeol has a valid question. Does the Bazooka actually recover fine gold? not just a small percentage but actually recovers a significant percentage. As stated before I have run dozens and dozens of tests on my sluice with different classifications and water speeds. I know exactly what my machine recovers.

When asked the question Bazooka owners have two responses: "My machine gets everything including xxx minus! I've tested my tailings and found nothing" or "I don't care about the little stuff, I make it up on volume!" I have not found any evidence of people actually scientifically testing their Bazookas with weighted measures of 12 mesh -100 minus gold.

Prospector70, Guilded or any other Bazooka owner - I propose a test. It would be great to have several different size machines tested.

Take a weighted measure of dry gold (3-4 grains is what I normally use) that is comprised of 12-100 minus gold. Set your machine up and dump in 5 gallons of classified 1/2" material that has been screened to have no gold. Then dump in another 1/2" classified material 5 gallon bucket that has been salted with your gold. Finally dump in one more 5 gallon 1/2" classified screened to have no gold. Let the machine clear for a few minutes then remove it and clean into a bucket. Pan that material, take the gold, dry it and re-weigh it. That will give you actual recovery percentage.

Best to repeat the test at least three times and average the recovery percentages.

Then we all would know the actual recovery based on scientific experiments. It would be a very interesting test.

It would perhaps be even more interesting if the 5 gal bucket was NOT classified. Better yet, do both and see how the recovery is for say a Bazooka vs the AMP in both cases. And TIME it. So if it takes 5.0 minutes to run the 5 gal bucket of unclassified material through the AMP and only 1.5 minutes in the Bazooka, assuming both recover the same percentage of gold--who is the winner? Now do the classification, but while the AMP material is being classified to 1/2", have the Bazooka start processing immediately (no classification). Then compare the time, the amount of material run, and the % recovery. NOW, YOU ARE GETTING USEFUL INFORMATION.

You contention is that classified material run through the AMP will allow you to catch essentially 100% of the 12 to -100 gold. Fine, we would see how long it takes. If the Bazooka catches 95 % of that same total gold (not just the -100 part), but runs it 3 times faster, you get at the end of one testing period 4 grains for the AMP, but 4 x 3 times 95% or 11.4 grains for the Bazooka. I would rather take the 11.4 grains home. Even if the Bazooka unclassified is only twice as fast you get 4 x 2 times 95% or 7.6 grains; still way more. Even at 90% recovery for the -100 gold, the Bazooka is taking home in one test period 4 x 3 time 90% or 10.8 grains. At only twice as fast it will be 4 x 2 times 90% or 7.2 grains.

With no classifying, the Bazooka is going to be at least twice as fast processing material. If it recovers only 2/3 of the TOTAL gold, not just the -100 fraction, it still takes home 4 x 2 times 67% or 5.36 grains. That is still 34% more gold. And the Bazooka is not going to recover just 2/3 of the total gold, though perhaps just 2/3 of the -100 gold--even so it is way head of anything else out there.

Again, Kevin and I think you do not need to run the AMP with classified material. Then water conditions, how far to carry the sluice, size of the gold will all be more important in choosing which to use, the AMP or the Bazooka. The A52 and other traditional sluices aren't even in the race. I have used the Le Trap and know it works in slow water extremely well, even in clay, if I hand feed it and I don't need to really classify and it will perform. Yet without the clay and slow water, I currently use my Bazooka. Why--I get more gold at the end of the day.

For years I knew I did not recover everything in my dredge or A52. But if I could use either, I used the dredge because I got more gold. Now I cannot use the dredge in most places, but I can increase my gold recovery tremendously over the A52 and somewhat over the dredge and get almost as must throughput with my Bazooka as the dredge, sometimes more with the Bazooka (though Russau is right, I _do_have to shovel and don't with my small dredge).

So, as they say on Beat Bobby Flay, "let the games begin."
 

utah mason

Hero Member
Jul 10, 2015
545
935
utah
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Amp kbell
I did chuck the mat and put in gold hog miner moss. It seemed to help in the fine gold recovery heres a pic of the size of gold its holding. This is from 1/4 table spoon from cons that fell thru my - 100 screen. My son and had couple of hours to kill on a sunday. We classifed about 5 3/4 full buckets. Gold in every size i classifed but more pcs the smaller material . 0901151751-1.jpg
 

utah mason

Hero Member
Jul 10, 2015
545
935
utah
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
As i said in my earlier post im a newbie this is my first summer prospecting for gold . I have had a fun time running our a51, and hog pan. But when i read the bazooka customer reviews. I sure i want to try bazooka. Anytime anyone says 1 bad thing about bazooka and its time to throw down for a fight. A product with that kinda of loyalty is doing somthing right.
 

AMP_kbell

Jr. Member
Aug 5, 2015
47
38
Galt, CA
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
GoldPannerDave - I'm not saying test the AMP vs the Bazooka. I'm saying test the Bazooka Mini, Prospector and Miner for percentage of gold recovery.

The best way to verify percentage of gold recovery is to use weighed measures of gold (3-4 grains is what I use in my tests). Setup the bazooka model of your choice then put a five gallon bucket of material screened to have no gold through it. if you want to add some larger rocks into the mix to simulate shoveling into the machine then go for it. You would have to use 2 or 3 five gallon buckets if you do the "shovel test" to get the concentration of smaller material in a 1/2 classified 5 gal bucket. Then do 3 buckets with the gold evenly dispersed between them (or 1 bucket classified). Finally finish with 3 buckets of screened for no gold material with rocks added or 1 bucket classified. Then clean, dry and weigh the gold. That will tell you the recovery percentage. repeat at least three times to get a good average.

This is the test I propose for Bazookas only - no other machines involved.
 

AMP_kbell

Jr. Member
Aug 5, 2015
47
38
Galt, CA
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Utah - Nice you made the mat change - really helps the A51 play better.

You're right about the fight - Bazooka is a good machine and has a loyal following which I appreciate - You certainly can't go wrong with buying any of the models. But if we get back to the original reason for this thread bakergeol asked about recovery of fine gold and specifically how the bazooka fares.

Yes you'll get a fight but you won't get a test.

GPD - I can run a classified two Gal bucket in the Expedition Model in 42 seconds (see video on my website) - Unclassified would be even faster since material actually going into the machine would be less. That means a 5 gal bucket runs in the AMP in 1 minute 45 seconds or less (42 secs x 2.5 = 105 / 60 = 1.75). But for the argument that's 15 seconds difference (you stated 1.5 minutes) or about 6 buckets more per time period.

First, You are assuming a percentage of recovery for the bazooka of 90-95% which has not been tested or verified, which was the reason for my request above.

But using your figures 90 seconds vs. 105 seconds means the AMP runs 85% of the material of a bazooka.
If the Bazooka is 90% efficient and you get 4 grams in 40 buckets, the AMP runs 34 buckets @ 98% efficiency or 3.67 gr

here's the math:
4 grams / 40 buckets = .1 grams recovered per bucket @ 90% which means there was .11 grams in the bucket to begin with (.1 / .90 = .11)
The AMP sluice being 98% efficient (tested using the methods as I stated above) would recover 3.67 grams in the 34 buckets. (.11 x .98 = .1078 x 34 = 3.67grains )

So a difference of .34 grains isn't much. Certainly not the major differences you stated.

All I am asking is for Bazooka owners to do a scientific test using a weighed measure of gold, run it through your machines and let everyone know the results.
 

Last edited:

GoldpannerDave

Bronze Member
Apr 17, 2014
1,076
1,279
Colorado Springs, CO
Detector(s) used
Bazooka 48" Miner and 30" Sniper, Le Trap, Wolf Trap, A52, 2" dredge, Miller tables, Blue Bowl, wheel, Falcon MD20, old White's detector
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
GoldPannerDave - I'm not saying test the AMP vs the Bazooka. I'm saying test the Bazooka Mini, Prospector and Miner for percentage of gold recovery.

The best way to verify percentage of gold recovery is to use weighed measures of gold (3-4 grains is what I use in my tests). Setup the bazooka model of your choice then put a five gallon bucket of material screened to have no gold through it. if you want to add some larger rocks into the mix to simulate shoveling into the machine then go for it. You would have to use 2 or 3 five gallon buckets if you do the "shovel test" to get the concentration of smaller material in a 1/2 classified 5 gal bucket. Then do 3 buckets with the gold evenly dispersed between them (or 1 bucket classified). Finally finish with 3 buckets of screened for no gold material with rocks added or 1 bucket classified. Then clean, dry and weigh the gold. That will tell you the recovery percentage. repeat at least three times to get a good average.

This is the test I propose for Bazookas only - no other machines involved.

This is good, too. Why not test a Bazooka that way? You might end with different recovery percentages depending on the flow of the stream and the particular Bazooka you are using. I think that is great information to have. Also time it to check for throughput. :)

But other than allowing me to decide which Bazooka to use in which situation (a very good thing to know if I have more than one Bazooka with me), unless I have similar data for other sluices I am not sure what it further provides me. If I am trying to get the best sluice--and sometimes, I think it might be the AMP, not the Bazooka--I don't think right now I need to look at the others (drop riffles) except for slow/low water situations; I would need that data for other sluices, too, to convince me to change anything.

I personally feel while the test shows the % gold I get in that mix, all I think it shows it what % of very fine gold I am missing. But if I don't know a better sluice to use because I don't have the data for any other sluice--what am I going to do differently? Yes, I would like to know the number, but until I do throughput tests (both classified and unclassified) I am not likely to change anything.

Of course, it is late, I have been teaching all day, so I could be missing something.

Still, I do like the idea of the tests; thanks for suggesting them.
 

GoldpannerDave

Bronze Member
Apr 17, 2014
1,076
1,279
Colorado Springs, CO
Detector(s) used
Bazooka 48" Miner and 30" Sniper, Le Trap, Wolf Trap, A52, 2" dredge, Miller tables, Blue Bowl, wheel, Falcon MD20, old White's detector
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
But you left out the classification time and the rest I will check tomorrow. Classification vs shovel right into the Bazooka is a huge time difference, not just 15 seconds.
 

Reed Lukens

Silver Member
Jan 1, 2013
2,653
5,417
Congres, AZ/ former California Outlawed Gold Miner
Detector(s) used
Tesoro Vaquero, Whites MXT, Vsat, GMT, 5900Di Pro, Minelab GPX 5000, GPXtreme, 2200SD, Excalibur 1000!
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
You're right Amp, you won't get a test because Bazooka is a proven product that has been tested many times in the field and in the lab. And this is the difference. Bazooka has already proven itself years ago. If you really want to do your test so bad then do it yourself, it's just that simple. Is it because we don't feel the Bazooka will stand up? No, it's because it is already proven, time and time again. Why should I waste my time doing this test when there are people in Texas or wherever there is no gold that do these tests for fun because that's all they can do being they can't go find gold in the field. You're blowing smoke into a can that no Bazooka owner cares about. If I had to choose between the Amp or a Bazooka, I would chose the Bazooka because of its reputation alone. Doing tests are for people who have a reason to prove something right or something wrong. It's best to test your own sluice if you don't trust it. My sluices get tested in the field and if they don't work for me, people hear about them.
 

nh.nugget

Hero Member
Sep 3, 2013
861
1,401
e.rochester nh.
🥇 Banner finds
1
Detector(s) used
whites, KEENE A52 sluice, 3" dredge
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
The amount of fines he's showing in the pan I catch between the flair and the ribbed mat in my sluice I'll take a pic this weekend.
 

Goldwasher

Gold Member
May 26, 2009
6,077
13,222
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
Utah - Nice you made the mat change - really helps the A51 play better.

You're right about the fight - Bazooka is a good machine and has a loyal following which I appreciate - You certainly can't go wrong with buying any of the models. But if we get back to the original reason for this thread bakergeol asked about recovery of fine gold and specifically how the bazooka fares.

Yes you'll get a fight but you won't get a test.

GPD - I can run a classified two Gal bucket in the Expedition Model in 42 seconds (see video on my website) - Unclassified would be even faster since material actually going into the machine would be less. That means a 5 gal bucket runs in the AMP in 1 minute 45 seconds or less (42 secs x 2.5 = 105 / 60 = 1.75). But for the argument that's 15 seconds difference (you stated 1.5 minutes) or about 6 buckets more per time period.

First, You are assuming a percentage of recovery for the bazooka of 90-95% which has not been tested or verified, which was the reason for my request above.

But using your figures 90 seconds vs. 105 seconds means the AMP runs 85% of the material of a bazooka.
If the Bazooka is 90% efficient and you get 4 grams in 40 buckets, the AMP runs 34 buckets @ 98% efficiency or 3.67 gr

here's the math:
4 grams / 40 buckets = .1 grams recovered per bucket @ 90% which means there was .11 grams in the bucket to begin with (.1 / .90 = .11)
The AMP sluice being 98% efficient (tested using the methods as I stated above) would recover 3.67 grams in the 34 buckets. (.11 x .98 = .1078 x 34 = 3.67grains )

So a difference of .34 grains isn't much. Certainly not the major differences you stated.

All I am asking is for Bazooka owners to do a scientific test using a weighed measure of gold, run it through your machines and let everyone know the results.

Careful when you say it hasn't been tested or proven!!!!that's not true....Doing measured tests of clean gold with any form of material that IS NOT bank run will NOT give you accurate results.
Bazookas Classify you seem to be missing that even though your not... Taking dirt cleaning it..adding graded gold and more material is not the same as running in the field therefore wholly pointless as an indicator of a sluices worth. The stratification on the top deck also helps the bigger the model the more forgiving the feed rate.
People don't buy sluices to do recovery tests people buy sluices to catch gold...most people who see how much material you can run and the INCREASE in gold recovered quickly ditch older style stream sluices...drop riffles being the exception because of their weight and versatility in low flow.
Any increase in recovery by size mini....sniper ..prospector up will be based on material run. A prospector is going to have better fine gold recovery because it has a longer deck for stratification and a longer trap from front to back so more room for gold do drop into the low pressure area. Another feature to note is the strip on the underside of the top deck. It creates a pressure curtain that forces suspended gold down. There is gold of a certain size that will not settle out the strip helps. Any gold that a bazooka doesn't catch most likely didn't settle. Pre classification will actually increase the chance of this. Vs. introducing bulk material directly to the deck the gold has to go up into suspension...bazookas don't help it like the motorcycle ramp riffles in a traditional sluice.
Interesting observation on punchplate as a classifier...There are high speed videos of gold using u.v. light showing fine gold ride the surface tension right around the holes and past the punch plate. Also a certain percentage of holes are ALWAYS going to be blocked by material some with pebbles literally in them. That never happens with a bazooka the grizzly bars do not disturb or lift the stratified material and creates no turbulence.
All of those factors affect recovery...saying an amp can catch 98% considering those built in problems and a bazooka will only get 90% when it is specifically tuned to avoid those issue is a slippery slope I would hold of on the math problems there are too many variables!

Careful saying these things aren't proven!!
 

Last edited:

KevinInColorado

Gold Member
Jan 9, 2012
7,037
11,369
Summit County, Colorado
Detector(s) used
Grizzly Goldtrap Explorer & Motherlode, Gold Cube with trommel or Banker on top, Angus Mackirk Expedition, Gold-n-Sand Xtream Hand pump
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Great summary Goldwasher, thanks for putting it all together for us like that!
 

Goldwasher

Gold Member
May 26, 2009
6,077
13,222
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
Do bazookas really catch fine gold? Yes... yes they do
 

Attachments

  • 1441204091119.jpg
    1441204091119.jpg
    106.5 KB · Views: 102
  • 1441204107524.jpg
    1441204107524.jpg
    102.8 KB · Views: 107

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Top