Whites DFX or Garrett GTI2500?(looking for golddddd}

[JohnnyThunders]

Well i was thinking of getting the Garrett 2500 Pro at $879 but I would like to take the machine when i go away on vacation to Calif and seach for gold in the northern parts of calif.So I am looking for a detector thats good on the beach and looking for coins on the east coast but want it if i want to look for nuggets...
Woman on the phone from KellyCo.com told me that i am better off getting the Whites DFX because its a dual coil and it also has a program in it to seach for Gold where the garrett does not and it also goes a bit deeper as the people from Kellyco says....
So maybe now i am leaning with the whites unless some of yea good folks tell me different...
Thought the whites would be bad taking it to a beach and getting sand in it and mosture because its made out of metal as where the garrett is plastic...JohnnyT

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Willy]

The DFX is dual frequency, not dual coil. The GTI has dual recieve coils. The DFX is supposedly better on salt beaches and "might" have the edge in small gold. The GTI is easier to use, right off the bat, and (with the imaging coil) will give target size which is unique & patented. It also displays more settings & has an actual voice (female) to nag you with. This is actually a bonus insofar as you don't have to look at the display. The DFX, on the other hand, is waayyy more adjustable if tweaking is your cup of tea. The GTI is supposed to have what might be the deepest all-metal mode on the market. ..Willy.

 

[JohnnyThunders]

So whats better the Whites with the Gold progam or
the Garrett when you turn on the all metal?
I just want the best and would be a bonus if ones better then the other at picking up GOLD.....But when I get home i still need it for the beach and parks..........Thought the black sand would hurt these machines looking for gold....Thanks Johnnyt

 

[Monty]

Actually neither are the best for searching for gold. There are several detectors on the market that are designed to hunt for gold specificaly. If you want a dual purpose machine and your trip is coming up soon, the 2500 is the easier machine to just turn on and go. From all I have read the dfx is not for beginners and has a long learning curve, however once mastered it may have a slight edge on the 2500. Monty

 

[bakergeol]

Monty is correct. Neither would be a "good" nugget hunter. They lack high frequency necessary for gold hunting.
Detectors that can do all three nugget/coin/relic are
X-5
Tesoro LST
Tesoro Vaquero
Whites MXT
Minelab's new Terra X-50 with the larger coil.


http://bb.bbboy.net/alaskagoldforum-viewthread?forum=2&thread=349

You would just need to find out which of the above is better at the beach. I would first look at the MXT or the X-50.

To tell you the truth I would find a good coin/beach machine which you like and one you? will be using most of the time. Recommend try before you buy. As Willy pointed out the DFX is a complicated machine which a lot of newbies may not care for. Then I would go to E-Bay and find a good used GoldBug for $200 which you occasionally would use.This is the original Goldbug- in the last 2 weeks one went for $180 and the other $227. The GoldBug of course would be superior to the above machines for small gold.


George

 

[neilo]

what size is the gold you are after if its in big form the garrett and the dfx would be fine but big gold nuggets are like rocking horse poo.You are better off going for the higher frequency machines which are built specificly for gold hunting.fisher gold bug 2 on71klhz or whites gmt on 48klhz or the minelab Eureka gold machine with three changable frequencies either 60 or 20 or 6.4 klhz with automatic ground balance which could be used for coin hunting on the lower frequencies
good luck hope you find plenty seeya Neilo

 

[kermit]

I have a DFX and I love it. It does take some time to get all the adjustments down. You really have to know something about detectors and detecting to be able to make the DFX work for you. I sometimes run my DFX in the 15 Khz mode only and have found small earring backs 8 and 10 iches deep in the sand. I think the DFX is a great machine but if your looking for very small gold you may want to get a unit just for that. Something else you should know that the DFX doesn't give the right depth for very small targets. If the target is smaller then a dime or a pull tab it will say 5 or 6 inches. I have gotten to where I can tell the size of the target now and when it reads a VDI of 8 at six inches most of the time I just touch my bullseye pinpointer to the ground and it will beep on a small lead fishing sinker about the size of a BB just under the surface of the sand. Then when it comes to coin hunting in the park it's hard to beat. The dfx has a great coil that covers ground but isn't so big you can find targets because of Med trash areas.

Hope that helps

Kermit

 

[Willy]

Both the Minelab Eureka Gold or Xt18000 would be a nightmare to use for coinhunting in any area with more than minimal trash. The Gold Bug is a fine detector, but has trouble in areas of extreme mineralization & lots of hot rocks. I've used the MXT for prospecting and found it to be better than the GBug. I used to have a Gold Bug & my friend Jim used on for many years. A Troy X5 would probably be superior to a Gbug & give you the option of disc. ...Willy.

 

[JohnnyThunders]

Thanks for all of your answers,,,,maybe i can find a Cheap Gold Bug on Ebay and then just buy a Garrett2500 or whites DFX for around here....Jt

 

[Willy]

Another couple of detectors that are hot on gold, but rarely mentioned are the Compass Au52 & AU2000. The former runs at 52 Khz while the latter runs at either 13.5 Khz (I think) or 52 Khz. They both have a disc. & some other neat features.

 

[neilo]

willy Eureka Gold machine is excellent for coins and is fitted with a discriminator the 18000 is not .The gold bug machines the best one is the gold bug 2 would not recommend the early gold bug. seeya neilo

 

[Willy]

The Eureka gold only has an iron disc. and from what I've read it does not really work at depth. A limited form of disc. also leaves a person digging up every tiny bit of non-ferrous trash in the ground and, being a nugget detector, it WILL find those tiny bits. The Goldstrike has an iron ID/disc., as does the GMT, as well as the GBII. Pure murder coinhunting with them. I had a Goldstrike that I tried some coin/ring hunting with. That was a short lived experiment. Also had an XT18000 (which DOES have an iron disc.) and found the iron disc. to be very limited. The Eureka Gold is also rather pricey compared to other VLF nugget detectors. Accordig to the review on the AMDS website, it seems to be optimized for the middle frequency & won't compete successfully with the (cheaper) GBII & GMT for the smaller stuff when in the highest freq. I found this to be the case with the XT18000 too. ...Willy.

 

[neilo]

Willy in my write up regarding the discriminators on 18000 and eureka gold machine I missed out putting in one word. The word was VARIABLE. It should of read the Eureka gold ?has a Variable discriminator and the 18000 does not. I owned and used an 18000 myself for a few years and it was great to use in the higher frequencies around the old diggings, I have found hundreds of small pieces of gold down to pin head size up to a couple of grams size. I would also use it down on the beach with the iron discriminate switched on running on the lowest frequency and have found plenty of coins and jewelry
with it. Admittedly it is not as good on the beach as say a sovereign but then again a sovereign is not as good as an 18000 on gold. The Eureka gold is an improvement on the 18000 with its new tracking fast and slow plus the variable discrimination and smoother running. I have used one of these machines myself and they handle mineralisation better on the highest settings than its predecessor. Before the 18000 I used to have a Whites Goldmaster 2 I found next to nothing with that machine, it wasn't until I started using the 18000 going over the same area that I started finding gold.
I have owned a wide variety of detectors including whites ,fisher, garret and minelab. Of all the machines I believe minelab are in front, but thats my choice, seeya neilo

 

[Willy]

According to the Eureka Gold manual (which I downloaded) it has a variable IRON disc., not a conventional disc. Also, some beaches are worse than others, especially freshwater beaches. Here, corrosion is slow & wave action limited, so little bits of aluminum tend to hang around. I also have used a wide variety of detectors and have found (in the places I hunt & what I 'm looking for) that the Minelab units I've tried are nothing special. I do, however, like the tones. ...Willy.

 

[neilo]

Willy if you can get the december2003 edition of the Ausralian Gold Gem and Treasure magazine there is a section of feild testing the Eureka Gold machine if you have a read you will note the tester makes special note of the excellent discrimination of the machine and his final paragraph he talks about using the machine in high junk areas it reads quote . A good VLF discriminator such as the Eureka gold is right at home in these situations and slots in nicely between the junk,being capable of isolating multiple targets that PI machines see as one. Most pros I know use a good VLF along with their PI detectors. So for those after a discriminating, highly sensitive VLF detector that offers versatility for coin, relic and gold detecting I can honestly recommend the Eureka Gold.
Willy I dont think you have found much in the way of gold you will find gold rings and small nuggets read around the same as your small pieces of aluminium.
smile seeya Neilo

 

[Willy]

I suppose, in some respects, you might be correct. In total, I figure that I've found about 2 troy pounds of gold, the largest nugget being about 2oz and the smallest at 1/3 grain. This is from metal detecting only. On top of that there are a few gold rings, bracelets, and only one necklace. Compared to some, that's not much at all. Maybe you should read the manual instead of magazines. It's free to download and states, quite clearly, the limitations of the disc. system. Gold nuggets are all fine and good, but have you ever tried coin hunting on a site with hundreds of .22 long shells buried in the ground. I wonder if your much vaunted Eureka Gold disc. would knock them out and allow coins to be dug? Somehow, I've got this feeling that the manufacturor (Minelab) of the detector would have a pretty good idea re. the capabilities of a detector they designed & produced. Why then would they say that their detector is less capable than you claim? Maybe they just sell too many and felt that it's unfair to the competition. I'm very aware just where gold and gold rings fall on the conductivity scale, just as I'm aware of where coins are on the conductivity scale. For nugget hunting and jewellry, zero disc. is fine. For coin and ring hunting in exceedingly trashy areas (lots of shredded foil, iron, tiny aluminum bits), a simple iron disc. won't cut the mustard.. especially if a person has neither the time or wherewithal to dig up thousands of pieces of junk. That's why people buy such detectors as GTI's, DFX's, Sov's, X5's, instead of the Eureka gold. Maybe you outta get the word out; people should just get rid of what they're swinging now & buy a Eureka Gold. Why waste time using an inferior detector?

 

[neilo]

willy I agree with no discriminator settings for gold anyone using a discriminator is going to miss out on gold around iron stone.Good demonstration a 9 ounce nugget imbedded to iron stone rejected as being iron, in all metal gave good signal. I made mention of the article in the magazine for your benefit,I have actually used one. Remember Minelab are comparing the discrimination on the machine to their other top of the range coin detectors Explorer,Quatro Sov etc. But it is a gold machine primarily with the option of relic or coin usage and discrimination. You say you know where coins are found on the conductivity scale
I have found coins which are from Europe which are steel based any idea where they rate?I have also found a white gold ring with five diamonds which registered lower than alfoil on the scale.
You made mention of hundreds of 22 shells being a nuisance they would register lower on the scale than most silver and copper coins and would easily be discriminated out. But in knocking those out you would also knock out any small nuggets and gold jewelry.Either dig all or miss out simple.

The machines I use at present are mainly Explorer2 for general detecting parks, beach etc,Excalibur for water and SD2200 for gold. I live only a couple of miles from Minelabs head office and am conversant with the detector technicians so any queries are easily answered.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Seeya Neilo ?

 

[Willy]

I live in Canada and are coins ARE steel based, except for pennies. The Minelab detectors I've used here (2 sov's & an Excalibur) do a poor job with our change. If you don't believe me, there are a couple of Canadian forums on which you will find similar reports. Strangely enough, a lot of these coins, with the exception of dimes, tend to read rather high up on the scale; around zinc pennies if not a bit higher. I have hunted Forest Service rec. sites here and many of them DO have hundreds (if not thousands) of .22 long shells buried in the ground. These sites are not ring magnets and the most that can reasonably be expected is a $1 or $2 coin. I'm not looking for nuggets at these sites &, if looking for small gold jewellry, would be better of shovelling & sifting. ...Willy.

 

[neilo]

The Minelab Eureka Gold
written by B.T.

I first heard about this new addition to Minelab's stable of detectors quite a number of months back amidst the usual cacophony of goldfield. Some were saying one thing about it and others saying another and as is usual with rumours, the truth often laying somewhere in between, this is pretty much what I discovered when I was fortunate enough to be given the opportunity to try this new detector out.


The first thing which I noticed in regards to its features was the retaining of the triple frequency selection of 6.4, 20 and 60khz. This is a well tried and proven feature which was first used on the XT 18000 making it a very versatile detector to use giving it a broader than usual operating range in different soil conditions. It makes sense then that this feature has been retained , though improved somewhat with the inclusion of a "Fast, Fixed and Slow track" selector switch, further stretching the detectors ability to cope with a wider range of differing ground conditions thus building on the triple frequency's reputation. The second most notable thing which was strikingly apparent was the new battery system. The new easy access rechargeable NIMH pack is a welcome relief from the old set up which at times had you reaching for the nearest screw driver or pocket knife in which to use to prise open the often stubborn sliding cover of the previous models. The pack itself has a small green LED light which glows brightly during charging but which fades in intensity after full charge is achieved. Its worth noting though that in pitch black darkness this light "just" remains lit enough to still see it so under these conditions do not expect to see it completely diminish. In daylight though it appears to go completely out.

Another new feature is the easy mount system, one push of a button will have the control box firmly mounted to the stem and just as easily it is released from it. There is also supplied a rear mounting bracket with which to position the control box rear of the handgrip and just under the armrest which adds to the better overall balance of the detector as a whole. The only trade off in doing so means that the controls are now out of relatively easy reach of the operating hand. Still, with the machine running auto tracking this is not much of a trade off to worry about.

I made my mind up from the start to test this detector out on a variety of grounds around the goldfields and to try a couple of things out such as how the detection ability was affected by a full, compared to partially discharged battery and to see if any improvements had been made in the discrimination department.

The first port of call was an old gold town site in the local area. Some good coins and relics have come out of here in the past with the result being that the spot has had a fair belting by numerous operators using all types of discriminating detectors. To find something worthwhile here I considered to be quite a challenge due to this previous heavy traffic and a good indication as to whether the Eureka Golds discrimination , which is touted as being improved over previous models, was of any advantage. The ground here consists of a dark brown loamy topsoil covering of about 4 to 6 inches deep and with a gravelly type of wash beneath it. The ground changes in a few areas from positive to negative but generally it is fairly consistent and after a brief "dummy" run on test targets I chose to run the machine in Fixed ground balance on 6.4 khz , the disc on 1/3 of its setting , the sensitivity on 90% and running Boost on the selector.

Getting used to the discrimination was pretty easy. On junk , the constant hum of the threshold would either drop out completely or drop and then ring off slightly to iron and rubbish targets. Good retreivables such as musketballs, spoons , coins etc were solid repeatable target signals with what I would call "a good depth of sound" . Its interesting too , that a feature of the Eurekas discriminator is its ability to self adjust the actual depth level of its discrimination. To best describe this i'll quote an extract from the manual. "Therefore in mild ground the detector will discriminate accurately at greater depth , while in hot ground the discrimination depth is reduced to maintain reliable discrimination. At all times ,however, the depth and sensitivity that the Eureka Gold picks up targets is not reduced."


Its worth noting too that the tracking speed which is selected has a bearing on the disc as well. In Fast track the first sweep or pass over a target is the most reliable , in Slow track the first two passes are so but in Fixed it makes no difference how often you pass over a given target. It is for the last reason mentioned why I chose to hunt at this location in the Fixed mode as the ground here was fairly consistent in its make up and also there were multiple targets close together and by using Fixed mode I felt I was better able to separate them and analyse each more accurately. It wasn't long into the test that I recovered my first good target of a musket ball which gave a strong solid signal and was recovered from 6 to 8 inches deep , below the loam and solidly embedded in the clayish wash. A number of rubbish targets later saw me unearth an 1863 penny from around the same depth followed soon after by another musket ball and then a 1856 threepence which lay at about 6 to 7 inches deep in the same ground type. Other items recovered included old spoons , buttons and pieces of old buckles.

I was pretty impressed at the days end by the Eurekas discriminator and believe it to be much more advanced than those found on earlier models such as the FTs or XTs. I did try out the difference of full to partially discharged battery on a target that I left for that purpose and could not tell the difference. To me it is something I would not worry about.

The next place of trial was around an old reef working. Another hammered spot which has been gone over countless times in the past but yielded much gold. Unfortunately though my previous three trips there had yielded naught so I was again keen to see whether the Eureka Gold could turn anything up.



Here, with the gold being predominantly small from detectable specks up to 7 or so grams, I decided to choose the 60khz setting. I chose Normal on the signal switch, Boost was just a little too chattery, 100% on the sensitivity and Slow track for the quiet areas and Fast for the more mineralized spots consisting of reddish clay and country rock. I also ran Fixed for the almost neutral quartz piles where I scanned for specimens.



There were a lot of small metal fragments in this ground left by the old timers picks and hammers and after digging up too many for my liking I turned the disc on to see how it performed on 60khz. Now whilst it did not sound exactly like it did at the old town site, I can say that it was useable and eventually understandable. In this area on the chosen settings the Eureka performed really well. In tracking there were a few rolling piping sounds as the tracking adjusted but return sweeps saw these to be just that and after a while understanding what was going on became second nature and no problem at all. And yes, I did find some gold. Just when all was starting to look a little glum I spied, lying between two larger rocks, a piece of quartz with some unusual looking small black crystals in its cavity. I picked it up to look at it and realizing it was really nothing great was about to throw it away when I decided to scan it. Yep, there was a signal and by looking carefully at it saw gold, about ? to 1 grams worth of fine gold poking out from under some green slate which was attached to it.

Test area three saw me in the bush just off a country road in a little known area where I can only guess a small village used to be. The ground here is best described as "savage" with much ironstone and mineralized clays wreaking havoc with any type of machine whether it be PI or VLF. This soon saw me choosing 6.4 khz and turning the sensitivity down to just ? of its ability with the signal switch on Normal. Tracking was set to Fast. I have to admit that this ground was a struggle to work at times as many false signals were generated by its rapidly changing ground make up. Positive, negative, neutral, positive patches all within inches of each other soon had me wanting to walk away. But, having said that let me add that this ground would and has tested to the limits any machine built as well as its operators patience and really it did not surprise me. Backing the sensitivity down even a touch more saw a workable formula arise and a degree of stability eventuate but generally I would not choose this sort of ground in which to run a VLF detector. I chose it for one reason only, to see if it could. The answer was "yes" but to 1/5 of its capability , which I might add is better than not at all and assuring to know that you can at least have a go "anywhere". Did I find anything here? Yes , a 1945 Florin.



My final trial saw me on some pipeclay heaps which again had seen much action in the past with everything from Goldbugs to Goldstingers to Goldmasters go over it and now the Eureka Gold. I wasn't sure what to expect here with the ground being dead quiet and easy to work with all those machines used to scour out the last bits of gold that the old timers had left behind but reckoned it should prove a decent trial. It was not long before I realized that the Eureka was a real little screamer being able to be run absolutely flat out. 60 KHZ , Boost and 100% sensitivity soon saw small targets pop up everywhere. There may have been no big ones but I can tell you this , the place was alive. No 4 shotgun pellets were detecting quite audibly from 1 to 3 inches deep and with nothing to cause confusion it was not long before you would hear a target and be able to , with 90% accuracy, call it for what it was. I recovered 4 small bits of gold in no time and I mean small. The 4 together added up to just 1/10 of a gram. I lost count of the shotgun pellets and 22 slugs I unearthed and there's one thing for sure, there's still plenty more gold in those heaps. I tried 20 khz out here too as I had not done much with it previously and found it to be just as stated. A perfect compromise between the stable 6.4 and hotter 60 khz settings. Discrimination was reasonably good on 20 and depth just a bit better than 60.

So , my final thoughts and verdict on this detector. Well, I can say that as far as VLFs go the Eureka Gold is right up there with the best of them and in many instances surpasses what is on offer by other manufacturers. Its versatility and ability to be used in varying ground types is unsurpassed and its discriminator in my opinion is far superior to its predecessors of the XT range. Its sensitivity and target response at the top end of the scale is exceptional with just a sniff of gold required to set it off. Those out there who like high grading quartz refuse heaps will find the Eureka Gold right at home performing this task as it absolutely howled on all the specimens which I used in testing this machine for that purpose. Some may say " what's the use?" My reply is this, that over the years I have paid many a bill from gold which I have extracted from specimens containing fine gold concentrations. Many of which a PI will not register on. Another purpose where such high sensitivity comes into play is that of grading mullock heaps on the diggings. Many leads were extremely rich in fine gold only and although PI machines are the Rolls Royce for nuggets they are "blind" to many rich fine gold deposits.

I know of people who use high frequency VLFs to sample mullock dumps for fine or very small gold and when they find one which fits the bill they set about to washing the mullock from which the gold is found and often recover much fine payable gold in the process. Like they say "there is more than one way to skin a cat". The other place a good VLF is right at home is in highly junked areas. Everyone who has used a PI will know that highly junked spots drive you insane as they not only pick up targets below the coil from great distances but also from every other direction as well. Slotting in amongst it all becomes nigh impossible at times leaving the operator with the only option of walking away. A good VLF discriminator such as the Eureka Gold is right at home in these situations and slots in nicely between the junk being capable of isolating multiple targets which PI machines see as one. Most pros I know of use a good VLF along with their PI detector for this very purpose.

So for those after a good VLF with discrimination ability which offers versatility for coin, relic and gold detecting and high sensitivity I can honestly recommend the Minelab Eureka Gold.
?
Thought you might be interested willy merry xmas seeya neilo ?

 

[Willy]

If you read the field test for the Eureka Gold ( http://www.losttreasure.com/fieldtests/xindex.cfm ) near the end it's stated that the discriminator is for differentiating between ferrous & non-ferrous trash. There will always be small non-ferrous trash that will read as ferrous, regardless of the disc. system used, but there's a whole lot that doesn't; and THAT is what the Eureka Gold will signal as a good target, regardless of the disc. setting. That's also why it would make for a poor choice coin hunting through modern trash unles, that is, a person is willing to dig virtually everything. I'm not talking gold nuggets, since I've dug up plenty that read as iron. ...Willy. BTW, Notice that, near the end, he states that the disc. won't knock out lead (which is low on the conductivity scale).. so how is it supposed to disc. out aluminum; and not just small bits of foil?