Minelabs new GO FIND 20,40 and 60 Metal Detectors

[dirtscratcher]

so you are claiming scannerguy1968 has made a fake video ,in which he claims theres a pile of non ferous targets at 6"- 10" and in reality theres just a load of nails there that the go-find 60 correctly identifies .genius.
And i guess i,m full of crap that minelab released sample machines to friends of minelab ,who they could trust to say good things . Here in uk i know one guy who gives honest reviews of machines no matter who gets upset by his findings .
The guy has a huge following in uk ,but minelab wouldnt risk sending him a machine even though he states that if a machine is bad he wont cus it ,he just wont post any results (i think thats very fair).
I asked if he had tested one and had it failed his expectations .His reply was "i was not offered a machine ,make your own conclusion why ".he has done some excellent reviews of minelabs in past .no bad blood .so why did minelab choose to not offer this very hyped machine .
we already have the answer in scannerguy1968 video and many other video's now.
We brits will test it on uk soil and report our findings ,just having trouble finding anyone who wants to come forward and admit they sunk £260 into one. They are like sinclair c5 ,unused ones might be worth a mint one day ,and i can see many going into wardrobes and gathering dust .

Here's what I'm saying. I've watched a nail board test from a guy in the UK showing how bad the explorer is. According to that test and all the experts that have never used one will tell you that explorers suck at finding coins in nails. Well I'm glad I tried for myself instead of listen to so called experts who watched the videoes. Instead I listened to the guys actually using them and learned they work very well if you learn how to use them. So call me silly I pay no attention to videos. And of course everyone knows explorers won't find gold and are poor at nickels. All the experts that have never used one will tell you. Problem is I find more than my share of both. If I listen to the so called experts I would have missed out bigtime . I don't expect the go finds to be anything but a capable entry level detector.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Treasure_Hunter]

That is what their GoFinds are, entry level detectors, even Minelab said so..

 

[dirtscratcher]

That is what their GoFinds are, entry level detectors, even Minelab said so..

I think alot of people are missing this point.

 

[Rick K]

Testing, reviewing, it's sometimes confusing.

i wrote this a week ago based on what I think I know about new product decelopment and introductions- in various fields, but mostly metal detectors.

_________________

Based on what I have observed and read on various forums, I believe that there are two completely different kinds of folks who get detectors to test. Let's just call them "Development Testers" and "Marketing Testers"

The "Development Testers" get machines to really "wring out" as the engineering team is making final evaluation/adjustments to pre-production prototypes. One of these testers of a new detector model recently told me that he had received for testing (and returned) a series of five detectors over a short period of time. He obviously worked his butt off. I am sure he was compensated for this work, but I don't know how. During all this process, he was bound by a nondisclosure agreement to divulge none of this. None of the test units are retained by the testers because they are not "production" units and are never released. I expect that they are destroyed after testing.

The "Marketing Testers" seem to get released for production examples - at about the same time as units are first shipped to Distributors. These folks are chosen because they are able to effectively publicize the new model. I assume the detectors are theirs to keep. Needless to say, the public comments made by these folks are uniformly "upbeat". If they think the machine is a dog, I expect that they would simply say nothing. Simce the detectors are "production units", there is no reason that they could not be retained by the testers and I expect that they are.

This is a process which is common in many consumer electronics industries, I know for a fact it works that way with Apple. Trusted enthusiasts are given pre-release hardware to test and provide feedback. At a certain date (but not before) they are allowed to publish reviews and talk about the item. Since these are not "production units" Apple gets all the hardware back.

 

[Rick K]

One other thing.

ML is making a bold shot in a new direction. I suspect it will not pay off, but not beccause they were bold, but because they don't understand how to sell their product to 100,000 kids or dads. They are trying to have it both ways, pushing dealers to take stocks of these while hoping to make it big in mass market retailers with the same product.

Somebody is going to get hurt.

 

[atomicscott]

I think alot of people are missing this point.

True. Also don't expect 'bang for the buck' when looking at Minelab. They are not known for their low priced detectors. If you are looking at performance/features vs price, First Texas has that market cornered.

 

[scannerguy1968]

That is what their GoFinds are, entry level detectors, even Minelab said so..

One thing with the detector industry that puzzles me a little bit is when a new entry model is engineered. Why not incorporate the technology into the product to make sure it will read an item 7 inches deep accurately. Maybe there's way more involved in doing so and that is why certain models price is up there. I don't know if this is the filtering part of the detector or what but I know from hands on this one pulls a solid 10 inch deep target but just will not accurately identify it or the 7 inch. Same with ground balance. If a manual balance was added along with filtering better This would eventually sell like hot cakes once the word was out of its capabilities. Or it is very possible but is known it will hurt the high end detector sales. I'm just going to leave it at it would of drove the cost too high for this model. But is hard to believe it would of took that much more investment. Need less to say. It performs quite well as an entry-level detector.

 

[nigel]

One other thing.

ML is making a bold shot in a new direction. I suspect it will not pay off, but not beccause they were bold, but because they don't understand how to sell their product to 100,000 kids or dads. They are trying to have it both ways, pushing dealers to take stocks of these while hoping to make it big in mass market retailers with the same product.

Somebody is going to get hurt.

Look at this another way..... Maybe they wont be a epic fail ,and maybe they will sell by the container load regardless of how good they are at hitting targets correctly.I dont think my hostility to this machine is so much based on low performance to price .
The thing i dont like is how Minelab are targeting the mobile phone generation by adding a app to the machine .Millions of kids live and breath their mobile phone . And some would rather you shoot the pet dog than give up thier mobile .
If they make these machines look super cool in adverts will we see another 100,000 novices join the hobby who otherwise would have had no interest in what lies under our feet? i hope not,theres enough deep holes been dug in parks without permission ,without loads more ,where novices get a beep and think i,ve got to dig it ,it could be a deep dime just to find another lump of iron.
any machine aimed at absolute begginers should be 100% accurate at id .then depth should be next priority .
looks like they have tried to screw more depth out of machine at loss of id accuracy.This to me is irrisponsible of Minelab knowing they are aimed at novices.It just deeply worries me that novices will have to decide ,dig /dont dig .
Guess after few hundred pieces of iron and not pieces of eight, they will learn some way of telling other than dodgey icons.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

In my opinion I don't think the technology is available to do so, even ground penetrating radar can't identify small items like coins and nuggets.

If it was already financially feasible one of the manufacturers would have done so already and patented it to have a leg up on the others.. Best your going to get on detector right now is computer generated half educated guess by a computer chip, the rest is up to the user.

 

[scannerguy1968]

In my opinion I don't think the technology is available to do so, even ground penetrating radar can't identify small items like coins and nuggets.

If it was already financially feasible one of the manufacturers would have done so already and patented it to have a leg up on the others.. Best your going to get on detector right now is computer generated half educated guess by a computer chip, the rest is up to the user.

You are correct. Guess I was comparing this to say other detectors that pretty much all but dig the 7 inch quarter in my bed. The feel I get with this machine is just a tiny bit more depth I.d. and it would of surprised me to where I would of stepped back and said "What the .... this is real good" But it didnt. So, Entry level with cool options.

 

[dirtscratcher]

One thing with the detector industry that puzzles me a little bit is when a new entry model is engineered. Why not incorporate the technology into the product to make sure it will read an item 7 inches deep accurately. Maybe there's way more involved in doing so and that is why certain models price is up there. I don't know if this is the filtering part of the detector or what but I know from hands on this one pulls a solid 10 inch deep target but just will not accurately identify it or the 7 inch. Same with ground balance. If a manual balance was added along with filtering better This would eventually sell like hot cakes once the word was out of its capabilities. Or it is very possible but is known it will hurt the high end detector sales. I'm just going to leave it at it would of drove the cost too high for this model. But is hard to believe it would of took that much more investment. Need less to say. It performs quite well as an entry-level detector.

What entry level detector is accurate at 7 inches? I've used or hunted with a slew of them and not seen that kind of performance from that price range. As far as that goes I've hunted with guys with detectors costing twice as much that have trouble iding at a true 7 inches. It's like being a minelab Noone can except it for what it is competition for the aces and f2s which I've witnessed stuggle with coins at 5 and 6 inches.

 

[scannerguy1968]

What entry level detector is accurate at 7 inches? I've used or hunted with a slew of them and not seen that kind of performance from that price range. As far as that goes I've hunted with guys with detectors costing twice as much that have trouble iding at a true 7 inches. It's like being a minelab Noone can except it for what it is competition for the aces and f2s which I've witnessed stuggle with coins at 5 and 6 inches.

Agree but People are missing what I'm asking. Or I'm not wording it right. Meaning all companies. Everyone of them possess the tech to hit a quarter at 7 inches and identify it. It just makes me wonder what does it take to be able to do this when developing a basic detector. Maybe it takes too much and the profit margin is gone. But anyways like I said all along. It's great for what minelab states its intentions are for.

 

[atomicscott]

Agree but People are missing what I'm asking. Or I'm not wording it right. Meaning all companies. Everyone of them possess the tech to hit a quarter at 7 inches and identify it. It just makes me wonder what does it take to be able to do this when developing a basic detector. Maybe it takes too much and the profit margin is gone. But anyways like I said all along. It's great for what minelab states its intentions are for.

I believe that it is impossible to expect the same performance from detectors at different price points. That is the reason there are some detectors that cost $160 & some that cost $3000. Although, I have found many more coins with my $200 F2 than I ever did using my $446 dollar rusty iron finder.

 

[scannerguy1968]

I believe that it is impossible to expect the same performance from detectors at different price points. That is the reason there are some detectors that cost $160 & some that cost $3000. Although, I have found many more coins with my $200 F2 than I ever did using my $446 dollar rusty iron finder.

I have to get a f2 and try it in my test bed that I use for youtube vids of comparisons. Been hearing good things of it. Just ran the F19 in it and am very very impressed with separation. If the f2 is anywhere near the f19. It's good. Should be posting the f19 vid within a couple days.

 

[atomicscott]

I have to get a f2 and try it in my test bed that I use for youtube vids of comparisons. Been hearing good things of it. Just ran the F19 in it and am very very impressed with separation. If the f2 is anywhere near the f19. It's good. Should be posting the f19 vid within a couple days.

In good ground the F2 can be shocking, bad ground it can suck bad! In moist, good ground, I have dug more than a few clad dimes @ 9" or so & some dimes & quarters at 10", burying the Lesche to the handle. I have also seen a .22 slug visibly sitting on highly mineralized ground, & the F2 did not even peep! Ground balance is such a huge factor. Deepest coin I found with my $446 machine was an 8" quarter at the very same school at which I found the deep clad with my F2.

 

[kyskinner]

F2 must be like the AT PRO can beat a $2500 minelab L.OL

 

[Mekatataku]

What i have experienced when using the go-find is that it can read deep targets both accurately and inaccurately. I dug up 2 .22 rounds at about 7" and it gave a good signal. Also dug up a reichspfennig (which are really small) in about 5-6" inbetween rocks. It reads both coin and iron on some signals that for the most part turn out to be iron. When i had dug a few of those i started to ignore them, which was probably a mistake. It suprises me yet leaves me frustrated.

 

[Scanman]

The collapsible shaft/small foot print of the Minelab Go-Find is one of the recommendations I made for Nathan (TesoroMD) when he asked for Customer Feedback for new Detector's 2 years ago on another form. The Go-Find 60 is tempting, but I was hoping for a little more advanced detector with a numeral ID.

Minelab, if you read these forms, please consider releasing a Go-Find 80 with numeric target identification.

Scanman

 

[atomicscott]

The collapsible shaft/small foot print of the Minelab Go-Find is one of the recommendations I made for Nathan (TesoroMD) when he asked for Customer Feedback for new Detector's 2 years ago on another form. The Go-Find 60 is tempting, but I was hoping for a little more advanced detector with a numeral ID.

Minelab, if you read these forms, please consider releasing a Go-Find 80 with numeric target identification.

Scanman

You were hoping for an advanced detector with numeric ID? I hope you weren't expecting the same from Tesoro when you mentioned the collapsible shaft idea. It will never happen. Also that collapsible shaft does look fun when it gets full of sand or dirt. I bet it makes a cool 'crunching' sound when closing it!

 

[dirtscratcher]

You were hoping for an advanced detector with numeric ID? I hope you weren't expecting the same from Tesoro when you mentioned the collapsible shaft idea. It will never happen. Also that collapsible shaft does look fun when it gets full of sand or dirt. I bet it makes a cool 'crunching' sound when closing it!

My 14 year old explorer has collapsible shafts the works perfectly it's not a new feature.