Gold Hog stream sluice - low flow
Welcome guest, is this your first visit?
Member
Discoveries
 
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 33
Like Tree56Likes

Thread: Gold Hog stream sluice - low flow

« Prev Thread | Next Thread »
  1. #1
    us
    Oct 2016
    Colorado, Littleton
    215
    579 times
    Prospecting

    Reviewing Gold Hog stream sluice - low flow and Bazooka

    Just received a Gold Hog stream sluice - added to my prospecting arsenal that includes my 36" Bazooka sniper, which really works well.

    Question is for all you folks out there with GH stream sluices - using the low flow mat, how little of water flow has worked for you? Photos and/or videos of low flow operating would be great. I am assuming that if the flow is good enough to run my 36" sniper, then it should be enough to run the GH stream sluice.
    Last edited by Hunt4gold; Feb 08, 2017 at 11:08 AM.

  2. #2
    us
    Jan 2016
    California
    Whites MXT-300, Tesoro Sand Shark 10.5", Bazooka Sniper, Bazooka Prospector
    490
    795 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Honorable Mentions (1)
    Doc has a vid on the site about the mats running high and low flow.
    Frank D. likes this.

  3. #3
    us
    Oct 2016
    Colorado, Littleton
    215
    579 times
    Prospecting
    Have watched Docs videos - guessing the answer to my question is to test min flows myself and determine when the material no longer exchanges - its too slow. Will be testing tomorrow...

  4. #4
    us
    Gold Prospector

    Oct 2016
    California
    80
    116 times
    Prospecting
    Quote Originally Posted by Hunt4gold View Post
    Have watched Docs videos - guessing the answer to my question is to test min flows myself and determine when the material no longer exchanges - its too slow. Will be testing tomorrow...
    Let us know what you found, I'm looking into getting one of these as well.

  5. #5
    us
    Oct 2016
    Colorado, Littleton
    215
    579 times
    Prospecting
    Digger, will be running the GH stream sluice against my 36" Bazooka sniper for about four hours. will post results and opinions.

  6. #6
    us
    Jan 2016
    California
    Whites MXT-300, Tesoro Sand Shark 10.5", Bazooka Sniper, Bazooka Prospector
    490
    795 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Honorable Mentions (1)
    You should eliminate large gold from your comparison, since pickers are often just luck. Maybe compare mesh sized since the concentration of fines is fairly consistent. To be a real test you would need substantial yardage to eliminate pockets of gold from skewing your data. Or "seed" gold or lead into similar number of buckets and compare final capture rate.

    Good luck with the test, looking forward to the comparison. I know Sluice Goose did something similar between the Hog Mats and the Bazooka on YouTube but he never showed the gold the Hog Mats recovered. Only that he said it was higher than his recovery and that the other guys must have found a pocket.

  7. #7
    kcm
    kcm is offline
    us
    Feb 2016
    NW Minnesota
    Tesoro Silver uMax
    5,789
    7098 times
    Quote Originally Posted by Hunt4gold View Post
    Have watched Docs videos - guessing the answer to my question is to test min flows myself and determine when the material no longer exchanges - its too slow. Will be testing tomorrow...
    Flow would be WAY too slow here - it's 4 now! Course last week we were at -20, so this is an improvement.
    Vance in AK likes this.
    "...I've got silver in the stars and gold in the morning sun" - Don Williams

  8. #8
    us
    Oct 2016
    Colorado, Littleton
    215
    579 times
    Prospecting
    My "field testing" was not to see which sluice catches more gold. I was more curious to evaluate the GH stream sluice, with low-flow mat, on the creek I have been working this past month. The stream does not have great flow - that said, there is enough flow to get a good run with my Bazooka 36" sniper. Also wanted to compare ease of setup, clean outs, time to clear deck area (Bazooka) and mats in GH, amounts of black sands captured, how small rocks (1"-3" sizes) cleared deck or mats, and fine gold sizes.
    So I did get out today and ran both sluices (alternating in same setup spot). Will be posting my observations within a few days. Need to process cons from each and review videos, still photos, and then write up my observations.
    Over the course of the next month will be running 2-3 more comparisons.

    One note on all of this. I am confident that both sluices/brands are awesome products. I do believe, however, that there are situations where one sluice may better suited for prospecting on different stream/rivers with different flows and setup situations - at least that is my hypothesis at this time.

  9. #9
    us
    Aug 2014
    SoCal
    SDC2300, Whippet, 151, GH, shovel, brain
    255
    404 times
    Prospecting
    Quote Originally Posted by Hunt4gold View Post
    One note on all of this. I am confident that both sluices/brands are awesome products. I do believe, however, that there are situations where one sluice may better suited for prospecting on different stream/rivers with different flows and setup situations - at least that is my hypothesis at this time.
    There definitely are situations where one works better than the other. For example, a Bazooka is useless when there is a lot of sediment and/or debris suspended in the stream. The compartment under the deck will fill with debris, clogging the tubes, which depressurizes the fluid bed and allows gold to pass right through the sluice.

    I don't have a GH stream sluice, but I have adapted my Piglet extension for use as a stream sluice and it works surprisingly well for low flow, high sediment situations when I can't use a Bazooka.
    Frank D. likes this.

  10. #10
    us
    Gbonus Uralias

    Dec 2014
    Ventura Ca
    Gold Bug Pro w/ NEL coil. Minelab Xterra 705, Bazooka Snipers (24" and 30"). Royal Folding Sluice with Gold hog mats. Thompson 12V Puffer Drywasher.
    495
    942 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Pretty much have the same thing in the Royal Folding sluice.
    I replaced the expanded metal and carpet with GH mats and it really does well.

    After it's all said and done, cost wise it's all about the same.
    The only real benefit over the GH model is being able to fold it up and place it in my pack.

    The Mat's are the heaviest part of the system to be sure.
    The GH stream Sluice gives you two versions of Mat's - low flow or high flow.
    So if you take both set-ups with you, it's gonna be heavy!!
    But if your not carrying far, then maybe no big deal.

    Here's my set-up....
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	royalfolder w_gold hog mats.jpg 
Views:	231 
Size:	416.3 KB 
ID:	1411504

    And remember to Classify for the Standard sluice vs the Bazooka.
    That might need to be included in the comparison?
    Last edited by G-bone; Feb 06, 2017 at 06:37 PM.
    Oregon Viking likes this.

  11. #11
    us
    Oct 2016
    Colorado, Littleton
    215
    579 times
    Prospecting
    Good points Hamfist - I can imagine a variety of situation where one sluice style or the other would function better or be more efficient.

  12. #12
    us
    Oct 2016
    Colorado, Littleton
    215
    579 times
    Prospecting
    G-bone, I like the Royal setup you have there. You're correct about the mats - definitely don't want to be carrying around both sets of mats. Good thing is that I can likely anticipate which mat I'll need for a given water. I did not classify the material on Sunday, just picked out the larger rocks (+3") and dumped the rest onto the GH. Doc had suggested that I classify to 1/2" for really low flow, but for the setup I had, most rocks (-3") rolled right through the GH - except for the flatter ones.
    G-bone likes this.

  13. #13
    us
    Author of a book about finding gold in Colorado

    Jan 2012
    Summit County, Colorado
    Grizzly Goldtrap Explorer & Motherlode, Gold Cube with Banker on top, Bazooka Goldtrap sluices, Angus Mackirk Expedition, Gold-n-Sand Xtream Hand pump
    6,965
    11130 times
    Prospecting
    For any comparison, avoid running the same amount of material thru each. Instead, run each for the same amount of time/effort. More gold in the same time wins!

  14. #14
    us
    Oct 2016
    Colorado, Littleton
    215
    579 times
    Prospecting
    Gold Hog Low Flow Mat Test
    The creek where I ran this test was running fairly low this week – so it provided a good situation to test low flow mat in the Gold Hog stream sluice. The photo below and video will show the creek’s flow and how I set up the Gold Hog. Note: this was the first time using the stream sluice (just got in last week).
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	GH_stream_sluice.jpg 
Views:	217 
Size:	343.9 KB 
ID:	1412095

    After setting and tuning it, the water depth in the sluice was approximately 1 inch – pretty even from top to bottom of sluice.


    Ran the GH for about 1 hours, emptying it twice to examine what the mat was holding.

    As seen in video, the material was unclassified gravel/sands with ” to 3” rocks. Larger rocks were pulled out of shovel before dumping onto flare. Considering how low the water flow was, I was able to load material onto the GH at a reasonable rate. Each shovel (or portion of shovel) of material cleared the riffles within 4-5 seconds, which I thought was pretty good for the low flow mat. The lighter material (blond sands) exchanged out really well. After 6-7 shovels, I started seeing gold in the UR mat at top just below the flare and in the downdraft mat below it. After 45 minutes (around 37 shovels of material), I pulled the mat and washed it out in a bucket – reverse rolling it twice. Time required to pull and wash out mat was just over 3 minutes. It then took me another 3 minutes to put the mat back into the sluice and reset in stream. Since this was my first time using the GH, I will likely complete these steps more quickly with practice.
    Gold in Mat:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	GH_Au_top-UR_mat-CU3.jpg 
Views:	282 
Size:	211.0 KB 
ID:	1412092

    Gold Hog sands from 1st clean out:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	GH_cons-cleanout-1.jpg 
Views:	179 
Size:	228.4 KB 
ID:	1412093

    Gold Hog Captured Material and Cons: I was surprised at how much super fine black sands were captured in the mat. It captured finer black sand than the Bazooka at this same location. I believe this may translate into catching finer gold (-100 and smaller) than the Bazooka.
    View of gold from first GH clean out:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	GH_Au_cleanout_1.jpg 
Views:	206 
Size:	241.3 KB 
ID:	1412094

    So how did the Gold Hog do? It’s not logical to base an opinion on just one outing, but I felt that the GH stream sluice performed great. I actually did not know if I could set up and run the sluice and mat combination with the creek’s slow flow – but it worked and captured good gold from a few +20 flakes to -100 size. Since I did not classify, I was able to run about the same amount of material as I did with the Bazooka 36” sniper (which was about 40 shovels in 45 min).

    Next post will cover the Bazooka running at same spot, same day, same flow… And gold found that day from GH and Bazooka.
    Last edited by Hunt4gold; Feb 08, 2017 at 01:01 AM.
    Goldfleks, kcm, G-bone and 2 others like this.

  15. #15
    us
    May 2009
    Sailor Flat, Ca.
    SDC2300, Gold Bug 2 Burlap, fish oil, ACME handbook for TRUE prospectors (unread)
    5,929
    12908 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Banner Finds (1)
    Quote Originally Posted by G-bone View Post
    Pretty much have the same thing in the Royal Folding sluice.
    I replaced the expanded metal and carpet with GH mats and it really does well.

    After it's all said and done, cost wise it's all about the same.
    The only real benefit over the GH model is being able to fold it up and place it in my pack.

    The Mat's are the heaviest part of the system to be sure.
    The GH stream Sluice gives you two versions of Mat's - low flow or high flow.
    So if you take both set-ups with you, it's gonna be heavy!!
    But if your not carrying far, then maybe no big deal.

    Here's my set-up....
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	royalfolder w_gold hog mats.jpg 
Views:	231 
Size:	416.3 KB 
ID:	1411504

    And remember to Classify for the Standard sluice vs the Bazooka.
    That might need to be included in the comparison?
    .I promise you don't Have to classify. Sluices are classifiers. The only time I classify is if I can't get the material through the sluice because of flow. If you have to do this you wouldn't be able to run a prospector. probably not even a Sniper.

    I know your gonna think I'm full of it. I double dog dare you to try it.

    With low profile recovery. Proportional force moves material much easier. Drop riffle, gold hog or expanded over moss or carpet. Will get you excellent recovery and throughput.
    run flat and fast shovel right in

 

 
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Home | Forum | Active Topics | What's New

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Thoughts on the gold hog stream sluice
    By Dain8404 in forum Sluicing
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: May 31, 2016, 04:39 PM
  2. Gold Hog Stream Sluice
    By UrbanProspector in forum Sluicing
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: Apr 30, 2016, 09:39 PM
  3. Replies: 37
    Last Post: Feb 07, 2016, 05:04 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: Sep 24, 2012, 10:25 AM
  5. New California Sluice Stream Highbanker gets some gold
    By hunter_46356 in forum Dredging & Hi Banking
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Jul 04, 2012, 12:09 PM
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.3.0