GPZ7000 air test using 50 cent coin

Hi everyone
I started a new thread.. Sorry Davsgold
This was a 50cent coin test the same that Davesgold had put up..


Without using a booster
Auto tuned between each setting they tried.
Over quiet ground

Davesgold setting
General + difficult
Sensitivity   12
Threshold.   25
Tone            38
Volume.       12
Auto tracking

Mike received same result with Daves settings 

Then mike put it back to his settings
General + difficult
Sensitivity.     14
Threshold.     25
Tone.             48
Volume.         14
Volume limit. 14
Auto tracking 

Same result again As Dave.

Then Mike upped the sensitivity to the MAX 20
Retuned the machine
Easy picked the 50 piece at 55cm
Still hear the 50cent coin just at 65cm

Mick jr did the same 
Same results...

Then he put it back to his own settings he likes to use
General + difficulty 
Sensitivity       13
Threshold.       23
Volume            16
Tone.               42
Volume limit    12
Auto tracking
Retune machine
Same result.

He then MAX the sensitivity to 20
He also just heard the 50 coin at 65cm 

They believe if they had a booster it may have brought the target sound up a little better. 
They Not sure, they haven't got one.
They were only using the WM 12 wireless module

Mbasko
They did it with the 
audio smoothing off
Volume 12
Volume limit 12
Retuned machine
Both Machines ran erratic, lost depth. 

There doesn't seem to any difference between machines.
Only difference is the operators with there different hearing!
So threshold pitch set differently to level of hearing!

***********************
Then they tried the gpx5000 
Mike used his with a 14 inch nugget finder mono coil 

In his normal settings he likes to use. 
Find gold, and deep.
Same test.
He found that it was much louder until the 50cm to 55cm mark
But was still only just a sound at the 60cm mark.
Using External speaker 
Again no booster! 

******************
Another gpx5000 ....Calvin's
Using a detech 18x12 mono coil
Set in high mineral ...fine gold 
Outcome was pretty much the same. 

Again we don't believe in air tests, only true test is an un-dug target in the ground.
This test was just to compare machines only.

Don't shoot the messenger 

What year was the 50c coin?
This can have a big effect on results

goldchaser wrote: What year was the 50c coin?
 This can have a big effect on results

 Minted in  2006 

Jen58 wrote:Mbasko
They did it with the 
audio smoothing off
Volume 12
Volume limit 12
Retuned machine
Both Machines ran erratic, lost depth

Thanks Jen, Mike & Mick jr.

Thanks Jen for posting the results, all much the same result, but as Goldchaser pointed out the year date on the coin may make a difference.

Jen like you said, air tests are just that and the real test is on undug targets.

I find it quite interesting though about the audio smoothing result, with it turned off machine a bit unstable and loose distance to target, (can't say depth caus it's not in the ground).  Oddly enough when I go from audio high back to audio low to audio off I am seeing something very similar to what you describe.

By what I read and what a few of the testers have reported it should be the opposite, unless I am reading it wrong.

cheers dave

PS: the booster most likely is not causing any better depth as such, it is only still responding to what the detector already know is there, I just like the control it gives to volume +/- and the sound, because I have used it for years on all the detectors I've had it makes the target sound much the same.

davsgold wrote:I find it quite interesting though about the audio smoothing result, with it turned off machine a bit unstable and loose distance to target, (can't say depth caus it's not in the ground).  Oddly enough when I go from audio high back to audio low to audio off I am seeing something very similar to what you describe.

By what I read and what a few of the testers have reported it should be the opposite, unless I am reading it wrong.

I am reading it the same & why I was interested in seeing some sort of test on this. I guess its an individual thing but I was thinking that running with greater stability would be better for faint/deep (longer distance ) targets?
It may be that I'm not reading it correctly too - maybe it was to mean that running in off was beneficial where conditions I.e low sperics, external interference etc. allows the Gpz to run relatively stable with greater feedback in off than in low/high? If it runs too unstable due to conditions then go to low/high which follows what you would have normally of done anyway?