*FIELD TEST* Hunt4gold's upcoming fluid bed sluice.

[shofs]

Went out to the creek today to test out Hunt4gold's upcoming fluid bed sluice prototype. In summary, things are really looking really good. I don't want to divulge too much information prematurely so I apologise if some of my points are vague. My current sluice is the bazooka sniper 30" model. It's my go to I use it regardless of where I'm prospecting and I've become quite familiar with it so that is what my review of Hunt4gold's sluice is in comparison with.

Durability
I really throw my current sluice around quite hard so I was relieved to see the construction of this design followed in par with the bazookas durability as the same materials are used.

Design
Without going into too much detail the design of the sluice was familiar to what I'm used to using which was really a selling point to me. Don't fix what isn't broke right? It looks and feels quite similar to the bazooka but with some obvious changes. Including slope added to the body of the sluice before the fluid bed resulting in the bed lying parallel to the ground while the sluice is set at an angle. The box of the fluid bed does not carry the taper of the rest of the sluice resulting in equal spacing across the grizzlies and the grizzlies seem to be at a smoother angle. Internally the fluidizing chamber is similar but changes have been made with attention to catching fine gold but being a prototype I won't go into to much detail. There is also a built in little row of riffles for spotting the gold which was fun to see. They didn't seem to harm the functionality as they didn't retain material but you could see at least if you are on the gold.

Functionality
Same as the bazooka. No classifying and empties in a pan or bucket. Seems to be able to run at less of an angle or maybe less depth thanks to the slope in the design. The part that sold it to me though was the grizzlies. They were at a smooth angle and as such there was a lot less rock build ups. Additionally the box not tapering at the grizzlies prevented the jams on the sides like I'm used to. No more digging out rocks with your fingers yay! That alone would sell me.

Summary
Once this hits the market those waiting to buy a fluid bed sluice will definitely be satisfied. Those who already have one would appreciate the aided functionality of this design. Thanks to Hunt4gold for letting me test it out.






The inlaid riffles for gold spotting.

Concentrates

Dug for about 40min. Looks good, didn't blow out the small gold and kept the larger pieces. Nice. I'll update with cleanout pics.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[collins6542]

Very nice! That's awesome!!! Great lookin stream too!

 

[KevinInColorado]

Nice review David! I'm excited to see this get into production soon!

 

[Vagadero]

"The box of the fluid bed does not carry the taper of the rest of the sluice resulting in equal spacing across the grizzlies and the grizzlies seem to be at a smoother angle."
The taper was an intentionally built in function of the original bazooka to improve the trap.

 

[SunshineMiner]

Idk... I've always felt that the taper in the trap helps propel smaller stuff out and the taper also makes the grizzly bars trap rocks on the sides, some I've had to leave they're so jammed in there. I have found fines in my tailings sluice after running my 36" after a while. As a "gorilla" miner as well, the wish I would snagged a larger one. Really looking forward to possibly pick up one of these in a larger size And yes, I have ran it flat as possible. She works, but I've always thought she could be improved. I'm so stoked.

 

[shofs]

"The box of the fluid bed does not carry the taper of the rest of the sluice resulting in equal spacing across the grizzlies and the grizzlies seem to be at a smoother angle."
The taper was an intentionally built in function of the original bazooka to improve the trap.

Nothing wrong with that I love my bazooka and it's a bummer they aren't in production anymore. After using it for hundreds of hours and then doing this comparing review the sides not jamming was something I wasn't used to and was a highlight for me.

 

[HardHatMatt]

I would think that any obstructions on the deck prior to the grizzlies/trap entrance (in this case, the inlaid riffles for gold spotting)might slow down the material and keep it from clearing as well as it would otherwise. One of the more appealing aspects of this type of product is the ability to run without classifying, so anything that might slow down the flow of material on the deck may be an issue...but perhaps these riffles are not enough of an obstruction to matter.

As an aside, I've always felt assay mats in sluice boxes are more trouble than they're worth. I think most people are going to be testing the material they decide to run with a gold pan rather than jumping right into shoveling material and relying on a assay mat to tell them whether or not they're on the gold. Besides, with unclassified material such as what you'd be running through this device, I would be surprised if the assay mat provides a very accurate picture of the gold content in the material. I'm sure it catches some gold if there is gold in the material, but there is just too much variation in the size/weight of unclassified material running over such a short span to provide an effective measure of the richness of the ground...which is why that process typically requires a pan or fluid bed that gets rid of big stuff and light stuff, and even then, requires several more steps to get down to gold.

I'm probably wrong - as usual - but if it were me and the assay riffles cause ANY obstruction that might impede the self-classifying functionality of the sluice, I would nix them. Just my humble opinion!

 

[Kenmitch]

Glancing at the ripples seems easier than stopping and panning to see if your still on the gold.

 

[bcfromfl]

... I've always felt assay mats in sluice boxes are more trouble than they're worth. I think most people are going to be testing the material they decide to run with a gold pan rather than jumping right into shoveling material and relying on a assay mat to tell them whether or not they're on the gold. Besides, with unclassified material such as what you'd be running through this device, I would be surprised if the assay mat provides a very accurate picture of the gold content in the material. I'm sure it catches some gold if there is gold in the material, but there is just too much variation in the size/weight of unclassified material running over such a short span to provide an effective measure of the richness of the ground...which is why that process typically requires a pan or fluid bed that gets rid of big stuff and light stuff, and even then, requires several more steps to get down to gold.

As I write this, I am outfitting another sluice (not a Bazooka) with an assay mat, fitting it into the flare and holding down temporarily with a couple of pieces of metal and small C-clamps.

I've timed myself with a full pan of dry material, and it takes me 18 minutes to do it right, with about four rest stops to get the cramps out of my legs and back. Panning dry material hunched over in a creek is no fun!! (I've watched other people pan dry material and they wash the top inch containing fines right over the edge of the pan because they're impatient.) One pan is really not enough of a test -- a decent test is a five-gallon bucket. An assay mat makes this a cinch, but really works best on a sluice with adjustable legs. Decrease the flow slightly by raising the upstream legs, and the mat will catch enough such that you can evaluate the material pretty well. When you're done with that sample, release the mat and clean into the sluice, and either replace for another sample, or remove it entirely and run as normal.

It's such a simple idea I'm surprised no manufacturers have made this a little easier for folks by providing the materials, or at least offering it as an option.

 

[shofs]

@HardHatMatt
"If the riffles cause ANY obstruction that might impede the self-classifying functionality of the sluice I would nix them"

I agree with that 100% actually. I would rather have a sluice that thoroughly does its job over any bells and whistles, I was ready to be pretty critical of the riffles. During the test the riffles didn't seem slow anything down or cause blockages I think in part to being inlaid rather than added to the surface of the top plate.

 

[shofs]

Here's a spread of the gold from my test. I used a -30,-60 and a -100 mesh to classify. After I remove the remaining specs of black sand I'll update with the weight. Nice amount of small gold for the creek I was at

+30,-30,-60,-100

 

[N-Lionberger]

If a sample pan takes 18 minutes you have a problem.

 

[agolddigger]

Nice looking sluice & nice looking gold as well! Thanks for the write up

 

[SunshineMiner]

If a sample pan takes 18 minutes you have a problem.

To be fair, he did mention having to take a couple rest stops to get kinks out of his legs and back, and I dont blame him, sometimes even im sore at 30 and am slow going. He might be an older gent. But I concur, should just be get your material into your classifier sitting over your pan, take to creek, slosh it around, toss classifier, and pan that sucker out quick like. Dont worry about the fines, if its worth digging, it'll be in the pan.

 

[bcfromfl]

If a sample pan takes 18 minutes you have a problem.

I think you'd be surprised...you should time one yourself. Take a classified pan full of dry material (all the way to the top), that probably contains some clay as well, and work it down to the point you can count the colors at the bottom.

Most people I've seen do this slop the first inch or so off the top too quickly, and lose all the fines. If you want an accurate count, you have to go S - L - O - W.

 

[HardHatMatt]

I think you'd be surprised...you should time one yourself. Take a classified pan full of dry material (all the way to the top), that probably contains some clay as well, and work it down to the point you can count the colors at the bottom.

Most people I've seen do this slop the first inch or so off the top too quickly, and lose all the fines. If you want an accurate count, you have to go S - L - O - W.

Respectfully, I have to disagree. If you completely submerge the material and allow it to properly stratify by shaking the pan back and forth, the heavies should get down to the bottom in relatively short order. After taking a quick glance to ensure you haven't happened upon a chance nugget, it's pretty safe to scrape off the +1/2" light stuff that has made its way to the top of the pan. From there, it shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to get down to your black sand and gold. The guys in the gold-panning competitions probably do it in under a minute! You have to make sure you're occasionally bringing the material back into the base of the pan and liquefying it to allow the heavies to settle to the bottom, but that should only take a couple seconds each time. Likewise, the process of dipping the pan and letting the water carry out the light stuff should only take a matter of seconds for each round between liquefying and stratifying the material.

Gold is heavy...it will make its way to the bottom quickly and stay in the pan if you're using the proper technique. If I was taking 15-20 minutes to take a sample pan or running an entire 5 gallon bucket of material through a sluice box in order to determine where to dig, I'd never produce enough gold to make it worth my time. For me, to make this enjoyable and come home with enough gold to make it worth the effort, I focus on production, production, production. I take a few minutes to pan around the area to see where I'm getting the most colors, then run the heck out of material. Every once in awhile I'll stop to take another sample pan to make sure I'm still on the gold, but with all due respect, I think you are mistaken if you're relying on an assay mat in a sluice box instead of a pan to guide where you dig. I would suggest watching one of the panning tutorials you can find on YouTube and see if you can't get your panning time down to a couple minutes - videos from Doc of Gold Hog and Freddy Dodge of Gold Rush fame might be a good place to start.

 

[bcfromfl]

I have 30 years of experience panning. I think my post was misunderstood. I'm not talking about working a pan of streambed material, or a competition where you're recovering nuggets or lead shot. That's easy -- I can do a "quick pan" in a couple of minutes. I'm talking about a SAMPLE pan FULL of classified dry material. In this situation, you are testing bank material to see if it qualifies for production. You want an ACCURATE count of colors, to compare with other locations. A full pan means it's loaded to the rim. The first few minutes require agitating with your fingers only, getting the material wet, and floating off the mud -- not washing it off. Material needs to be pulled with your fingers AWAY from the edge to the center of the pan, until most of the clay is gone. (Fine gold stuck to clay will float away in a blink of an eye, and if there is a thick layer of clay in a pan, gold won't settle through it.) You will lose the colors in the first inch if you shake and wash over the edge. This takes more time than most folks realize. Many times, I see folks working their pans in a linear manner, the same way from top to bottom. You can get away with this if you have streambed material, but not dry bank material.

In my experience, if you're only doing a single pan for a test in any one location, you run the risk of the pan being pulled from an unrealistic hot spot. Everyone's definition of "production" is different. You described what works in your situation, but I need a bit more accuracy before I commit to eight hours of digging. If there's a layer that I can't see after loading a single pan, then there is benefit to digging deeper and filling a five gallon bucket.

I don't mean to sidetrack this thread. My reason in posting was to interject a suggestion in support of the possibility of an assay mat...at least a removable one. If I understand correctly what the project being undertaken in this thread looks like, you can't see your concentrates unless you clean out. Sampling takes too much time in the field, and anything that can be done to hasten the process, and get down to the business of production, is a huge benefit. Assay mats aren't perfect either, especially if you're testing dry bank material. But in my humble opinion, anything that can get the miner away from doing test pans hunched over a creek while his legs and back are screaming, is a win in my book!

 

[KevinInColorado]

This new sluice does have an assay mat of a sort built into the skid plate. Always fun to see gold as you feed the sluice. Sometimes it's even important...as you say

 

[shofs]

I appreciate how you guys disagree but the conservation remained civil while both explaining your points, good form!

So I've only been heavy into prospecting for maybe 2 years now but heres what I do, I'm not saying it's right or wrong it's just what works for me. If I am prospecting a new creek or testing a lot of ground I pack a very light kit that fits in a medium backpack. Just a folding shovel, pans ect. There are LOTS of creeks around my area and some have gold and some don't. Also the creeks might have a ton of gold in spots and 50 yards downstream almost none. So when I'm exploring I use my pan to mark where the gold is hot. If I find a promising area with some color like a gravel bar or some nice bend I can bring my bazooka to I'll go set it up and use the top plate to watch for gold as I dig around. While nowhere near as exact as a pan it's still really apparent when I hit the gold line. Once I'm digging gold I keep an eye on the colors going down the sluice to help aim the direction I dig my hole at. But while doing that I might very well see some interesting formation 20' up from where I am and will take my pan over for a quick little test. I guess my point is that I view either method as different tools at my disposal and I just use whatever's convenient.

In relation to the sluice in my review the riffles aided in a more accurate viewing of the amount of gold entering the trap.

 

[Goldwasher]

There's no real reason to heap your sample if it actually causes an "issue" Put enough in to get it wet right away mix under water level start slow settle panning then scalping.

Doing two workable pans is quicker than babysitting one that is too full right? A sample pan should only take a few minutes if your looking to see if there is gold.

If your actually trying to fully calculate there are about 181 pans to a yard so do ten from different layers and segments and do some math. But, you have to consider cobble boulders etc.

Most people don't sample that way anymore. Having an inspection matt on a sluice can be very helpfull. If you see a new color every shovel your doing pretty good.
No color for twenty shovels and you may want to do another test pan.

Having drops milled into the main deck is a great idea and keeps any gold that may not drop out low in the flow vs. what a riffle does or any even small obstruction.

It's amazing how even the smallest color will drop into the Angus mark on my drop riffle or even in the small drop created when i use my folding sluice where the first segment drops to the next ..just the thickness of the aluminum I get color hung up there every time.

I used a bare sluice to feed one day that still had the deep v just after the flare. The main recovery was in that v-matt I was surprised how much it held especially the fines.

Once gold drops out it tends to stay put if its fairly protected.

just some observations