Some ZED Testing showing 100% and better improvement on the 5000

So I was out in the goldfields of California today with Steve Herschbach and another friend who is a detector dealer. We did some quick tests comparing the 5000 and the GPZ on mossy, wiry gold we had found previously. These were pieces from Nevada and California here in the states. I will try to get some pictures posted up for you in the coming days, but in the mean time you can see two of the nuggets on my Treasure talk post on the Minelab website.
See: http://www.minelab.com/usa/treasure-talk/testing-the-gpz-7000-in-nevada-and-california
The smaller of the two nuggets shown in my post above weighs 3 grams and with an 11 inch mono set on maximum gain of 20, it was totally invisible to the 5000 - even when it was touching the coil. The detector made no response whatsoever. The GPZ on the other hand could see it at about 10 inches, and it was dug from a pounded patch at about 6 inches. The GPZ was set for difficult soil at only 12 sensitivity. So what is the performance improvement over the 5000 when one detector is blind to the piece and the other sees it at 10 inches? Mathematically speaking, it is an infinite improvement - a whole lot more than 40%.
The larger of the two pieces pictured in the post weighs 18 grams and the 5000 could see it to a maximum of about 10 inches. The GPZ could see it at 20 inches, and it was dug with the GPZ at about 18 inches. Going from 10 inches to 20 inches is a 100% improvement - double the depth of detection and also a lot more than 40%.
We also tested some specimen gold Steve had with similar results - the 5000 could not see the smaller specimens of a few grams size.  
Of course we know that the 5000 performs very well with more solid nuggets and specimens. I have found lots of gold with my 5000, it is an excellent detector.
However, the GPZ is a gigantic improvement over the 5000 when it comes to mossy, wiry, prickly, specimen and other similar forms of gold.
Some dyed in the wool naysayers will no doubt claim Australia does not have much if any of this type of gold.
I would say in response, if you are all using detectors that perform poorly on that type of gold, how does the fact that you don't find it prove that it doesn't exist? Truth is that Australia has loads of specimen gold and I think the GPZ will be finding a lot of it in the coming weeks and months.
Geologically, many of the places where the nugget gold is truly deep are locations where the patch is sitting as a residual over a reef, and having a detector optimized for specimen gold would make very good sense.
For me, I have been doing research to find places which throw this type of gold and I intend to be using the coming months to leverage this performance increase to the highest extent.

Thanks Chris, your making a lot of sense, and we will be using our Zed in WA where we have gotten specimen gold previously that was hard to hear, in that the signal response was a lot less that you would expect for amount of gold in the species.

cheers dave

Interesting and exciting information

Thanks for the report Chris. we have had the same result on a patch with very fine gold in a narrow quartz vane and poor results on 2 other patches where the gold was in nugget form and the ground was a lot shallower.

Thanks once again Chris, for a great report from over your way.  Yes we do have this same type of gold over here in Aus, my son and I have found some of this type of gold here over the past years that we have been detecting, which has been over 30+ years for me.  My son did a test with his piece which weighs 1.7 grams the 5000 could just get this at 2" and the 7000 could hear it at 10" which is as you said much more than the 40% that Minelab have Advertised.
Congrats for your nice finds.

Regards.

Mike.

Thankyou Chris
For a great post..

Yep it's what we call hard to hear gold!
The older machines can't hear/see it. 

There is a lot of this type of gold about.  

The easy gold, well the sd2000 sniffed most of that gold up.
yet there's is still both types of gold left in the ground, for those that want to work for it,
 and not run around like headless chicken's listening for all the easy targets that go BANG!

And your right In saying do some research for places that may contain this type of gold.
Thankyou again
Hope you find your fortune

Hi Chris,

You are right, there is a lot of this type of gold in WA. Not everyone is aware of this as it responds poorly, if at all, to GPX detectors. Even a small coil may not sound off on it. I've been very lucky the last few years finding several good pockets of this type of gold. Up until now I've managed to clean up reasonably well using a GB2. Most of the pockets were in decomposed quartz, so hot rocks and ground noise weren't much of a problem. I guess you can also say that the GB2 had 100% improvement in depth over a GPX. I will admit however that in some cases an SDC 2300 or a GPZ might have helped for a thorough cleanup.

One obvious problem I encounted with the GB2 was it's inability to handle hot ground. You  probably already know how hot the ground can get here and any gold that had moved away from a reef can be very difficult to find with a gold bug. Some of it might end up as floaters and generally the GB2 will pick them up easy enough but if they end up buried somewhere further down hill then you will need something else like a SDC or GPZ. I've tried the SDC around some of the leaders and not found much, the real bounty was at the source. In my opinion to make a GPZ pay off someone will need to concentrate on larger patches and reefs where there would be a better chance of finding something deeper and bigger.

Best of luck and congrats on your most usual find.

Hi Chris, were you running any audio smoothing. Nearly all of the places I hunt require it. Be interested to know. If you were not running it, did you try it to see what difference was made?

Can't agree more with what you'v said Chris.Here in Aus we have many a different type of gold,still awaiting to be found by hand held metal detectors. Gold that was difficult to pick up by all previous type PI technology.I do believe,this is where the new GPZ 7000 falls into a league of its own. As for decomposed gold reefs found on top and side of hills,still containing shed gold (gold close to,but away from the main lode) of some sort,are a dime a dozen. Only a matter of time before reports of some interesting type gold finds,come flooding in.

Cheers Kon.

I usually use a small amount of smoothing on the 5000, but I doubt it would have made much difference. I used my normal settings for quiet ground but bumped the gain to the max.

Just as a point, I am also not tying to say the 5000 has difficulties with all specimen gold. Some specimens have big chunks of solid gold within and are no problem for the 5000. However others where the gold is poorly interconnected and of the mossy or wiry variety in the photo referenced in the original post, that kind of stuff has long been difficult to see with any pulse induction detector.

Great report Chris, thanks for that. Some good points made, especially re: decomposed reefs which as Kon has pointed out we have many here in Victoria, time will tell. As a Victorian though, we have next to no wire, denritic, moss or for that matter even true crystalline leaf gold (the only Aussie example I have is from Charters Towers, Queensland), yeah some unusual gold habits may show up now, but I doubt it will be much. Neither documented history nor our museums show any evidence, unlike the many well known hard-rock sources in the States going back many, many decades. What crystalline gold Victoria has is almost without exception solid distorted hoppered octahedral.

As a Victorian, to pay nearly twice the price of the previous best unit available (GPX) for what would essentially be here in my State a mere addition to my toolkit for such specialised hunting simply makes no sense.

I read with alarm that ML is asking what size additional coils GPZ owners would prefer. What is going on with this GPZ release?. For us GPX big coil users, the GPZ offers no more depth with the 14", and we're being asked what size coils we want?

If this is the direction ML is taking with new technology (ie justifying outrageously priced new technology with what is essentially a specialised tool kit addition) then financially viable detecting in Victoria is DEAD.

As a very disappointed GPZ owner who has been holding on in hope of a bigger game changing coil, after reading this, I'm swaying towards looking for a second hand 2200 and small dozer.

Sorry Chris, I meant smoothing on the 7000.
I wonder though how or to what extent the performance you guys are experiencing in the USA can be replicated here?
A number of years back some manufacturer wanted to see the difference between USA ground and Aussie ground. A machine was sent here to measure it. The results were gobsmacking. I cannot recall the exact figure, I once knew them but can recall these days as it was several years ago. Here is a decent example though. The mineralisation figures for the USA were in the hundreds, the Aussie, Central Victoria, figures in the tens of thousands.
I don't doubt there will be some places that may give similar results as you have experienced but with our ground mineralisation figures so high in comparison I think that will only happen in particular places and not overall. Worth looking for though.

Cal wrote:Great report Chris, thanks for that. Some good points made, especially re: decomposed reefs which as Kon has pointed out we have many here in Victoria, time will tell. As a Victorian though, we have next to no wire, denritic, moss or for that matter even true crystalline leaf gold (the only Aussie example I have is from Charters Towers, Queensland), yeah some unusual gold habits may show up now, but I doubt it will be much. Neither documented history nor our museums show any evidence, unlike the many well known hard-rock sources in the States going back many, many decades. What crystalline gold Victoria has is almost without exception solid distorted hoppered octahedral.

As a Victorian, to pay nearly twice the price of the previous best unit available (GPX) for what would essentially be here in my State a mere addition to my toolkit for such specialised hunting simply makes no sense.

I read with alarm that ML is asking what size additional coils GPZ owners would prefer. What is going on with this GPZ release?. For us GPX big coil users, the GPZ offers no more depth with the 14", and we're being asked what size coils we want?

If this is the direction ML is taking with new technology (ie justifying outrageously priced new technology with what is essentially a specialised tool kit addition) then financially viable detecting in Victoria is DEAD.

As a very disappointed GPZ owner who has been holding on in hope of a bigger game changing coil, after reading this, I'm swaying towards looking for a second hand 2200 and small dozer.

Cal, I understand your frustration with your belief the the GPZ has not lived up to all the Minelab hype, and hence we (admin) have no objection to you expressing those views in the topic re the refund and some other topics too, so that you and others can voice yours and their concerns.

In this particular topic though, Chris has come on here and given us an account of an example where the GPZ shines and he has shared that info with all the members of the forum. There are others here that have opposing views than yours concerning the GPZ and it is quite insulting to Chris and the time he has taken to write this post, for you to write opposing views. I am not saying don't question his findings or ask any questions concerning the material he has written, but stick to that material and don't introduce other points about coil sizes, cost of the GPZ in relation to the GPX etc cause really, that's got pretty much nothing to do with Chris after all, he's just a tester (no insult meant Chris).

This topic is purely about the GPZ on mossy, wirey gold so let's contain our questions to this and leave the quality of the GPZ and our frustrations to the topics where it's already being discussed.

You are absolutely correct Costas, it was inappropriate of me to divert Chris’s post into one of dissatisfaction with Minelab’s strategic and tactical processes. I greatly appreciate your input Chris, and meant no insult to you personally, I apologise unreservedly if you took it as such.

Re-reading the wording of your post Chris, I see you have used the words ‘mossy’ and ‘wiry’. As part of robust discussion, I thought it worthwhile to point out to members that ‘moss’ and ‘wire’ gold are and always have been extremely rare in Victoria in terms of both our mining history and more recently our metal detecting history. To mineral collectors, moss and wire gold are two of many forms of crystalline gold, and attract high premiums as such. A prominent Victorian gold-buyer is publicly known to have purchased a specimen of local crystalline wire gold for approximately ten times the spot price of gold at the time– this person is likely the most knowledgeable authority on Victorian crystalline gold.

I bring this to attention due to quote: “Some dyed in the wool naysayers will no doubt claim Australia does not have much if any of this type of gold.”
I would just like to point out that I agree with you there is likely ‘mossy’ and ‘wiry gold’ in Australia the GPZ may zoom in on, but as for ‘moss’ and ‘wire’ gold, I think members should be fully aware of the distinction, as I easily mis-read this first time around. I suspect the ‘dyed in the wool naysayers’ could be referring to true crystalline types, with which I agree.

Thanks Chris, I look forward to further posts from you on this forum. I hope there are no hard feelings.

Cheers Cal

Cal wrote:A prominent Victorian gold-buyer is publicly known to have purchased a specimen of local crystalline wire gold for approximately ten times the spot price of gold at the time

Careful Cal, you'll start another rush for people wanting to buy the GPZ and going out looking for that stuff cause with those figures you just have to find less than an ounce to pay off the Zed - wow, I'm starting to get tempted to buy one myself

Yes I've let the cat out of the bag now

I do not use the audio smoothing on my 7000. However, I can tell you that JP has posted a number of times that he is running his GPZ in Australia with the audio smoothing turned off as well. All forms of smoothing, be it the stabilizer on the 5000 or the audio smoothing on the GPZ are basically a dumb down of the detector. If you run a little bit worbly, you have slightly higher sensitivity - although not a lot. In many ways it's a choice of the user as to what you want your threshold to sound like.
While I agree with you that as an average the mineralization in Australia is generally higher, I saw places in Australia that were no problem using a high sensitivity VLF, and there are places in the US where it is almost impossible to use a GPX because the mineralization is so bad. That said, I'm not sure what your point is and how it relates to the performance of either of these detectors on wiry or mossy gold. The GPZ is getting excellent performance in both highly and moderately mineralized soils, and if the 5000 doesn't even respond to a specimen when it is rubbed on the coil surface, the soil isn't going to make much difference. I have gotten reports from Australians who have experienced very similar results to what I am reporting on gold patches where the a good portion of the gold is specimen material where the gold is poorly interconnected, small bits of gold scattered through the quartz and not connected into a single chunk. For that type of gold, the detector sees it like a few little bits and the extra sensitivity of the GPZ makes all the difference in the world in detecting them. For specimens with large blobs of gold and where the gold is well interconnected across the specimen, the 5000 performs just fine. Not all specimens are the same.

Reno Chris wrote: That said, I'm not sure what your point is and how it relates to the performance of either of these detectors on wiry or mossy gold.

I'm not sure if this was meant for me but I think it might. I was in a bit of a rush when i posted further up and agree I could have made it clearer. My post didn't really have a point, I was just sharing my experiences when working with fine gold specimens in a small reef, which we call here a leader. Now I'm not talking about lumpy specimens that a GPX will sound off but the fine stringy pin type gold that does not sound. As mentioned before, it is not as uncommon as people might believe. I've dug up a few of these leaders and sometimes from areas that have been walked over hundreds of times. If you're lucky a GPX owner might pick up a specimen or two but if they are inexperienced they soon get bored and move away looking for more productive ground. I don't really want to say how I go about finding them - that's the million dollar question. What I was trying to get at is how to work them and IMHO the best way is by using a VLF detector. As I mentioned earlier most of the gold will not sound off on a PI but screams at a VLF. It may be old technology but it works and works well. I did not believe it when I first heard it but after seeing it for myself I am converted.

I am sure a zed will also sound off on this type of pin gold but I don't think I would want to be swinging a heavy large coil in a confined space, which would only get harder the deeper one went. I'm sure this is not what Bruce meant by "opening up the goldfields". An SDC with it's smaller coil would be a better option and I know many do use one just for this. I've used both and I still think the Gold Bug 2 has the upper hand. You don't need to travel around the world to count the cats in Zanzibar. In other words 20th Century technology may still be the best way to work a small reef in many instances.

Now on the other hand if you are detecting further down from a reef hoping to snag some bigger deeper specimens then a zed might be the deal.

Correcto mondo Nebuchadnezzar "King" of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon.
I tried a small 10mm quartz speci with fine flake/slither gold running through it,that even the GPZ 7000 in High Yield could not pick up even on touch.Guess what,it was picked up on the surface,with a Gold Bug 2 giving the slightest,but clear of signals.
When Minelab decided to put on,or shall we say make,a 14 inch in size coil,to better suit the GPZs electronics,they most likely took into consideration an efficient size coil,as a top all rounder. The sensitivity of the SDC 2300 8 inch coil,with the depth capability surpassing even that of an 18 inch Commander/Nugget Finder mono,over certain size/type gold.  Minelab will in future be making other size coils to better suit other types of ground terrain/gold type conditions.Coils that will add possibly another 20/30% to the equation,in a more concentrated form of sensitivity,(such that seen on say an 8 inch coil in a similar configuration type winding,as seen on the 7000s 14 inch) and of course a larger 18 or say 20 inch size coil,keeping in mind & taking into account not only greater depth,but weight,and manoeuvrability as well. We all know that no one coil,can or is capable of do in it all in comfort and I'm one of those who don't mind being asked by Minelab,what type/size coil would I prefer to see them make,because eg,what might suit the bare bumbed rocky/sandy gold bearing flats of WA,is pretty much useless to a fully laced forest,up to its neck in plant/tree/undergrowth,here in Vic.
For the exorbitant price of $10,700, I would have liked to see this new GPZ 7000 come out with at least a couple of interchangeable,different size coils with it,incorporated within the same initial buying price and not have us skinned/peeled back like a shot rabbit,ready for the stew pot.

Cheers guys  Kon.

Actually no, my comment was toward the other gent who was asking about audio smoothing.

Never mind. Maybe someone looking to upgrade their zed to a GB2 can use the advice. Or if anyone is interested, I might be persuaded to do a straight swap ... but first let me think about that for a bit before deciding.

Hi Chris. Simply what I was saying is that in areas like I hunt the ground is far from tame and requires either a drastic drop in sensitivity or the use of Audio Smoothing. Being the case, one would not expect to see the same depth results as those in areas where this is not a requirement. I did not imply or apply it to wire or sponge gold types, just gold in general whether it be sponge gold, wire, crystal or nugget form.
I did state and do agree that there will be areas where the same performance could be expected, but not overall. In Central Victoria, the Golden Triangle, a huge amount of those areas turn a High Frequency VLF into a screaming banshee, unless the gain is dropped to super low levels. Even then decent bits can go unheard at shallow depths due to the high mineralisation and extreme mineral changes, from positive to negative within just feet, sometimes inches. There are places in Aus I know that the ground does not change that much even though it is classed as highly mineralised, it is more uniform in its mineralisation even though it is regarded as high. Many nugget bearing areas of the Triangle are not only high but also highly variable.
I wasn't making a "point" as such, just offering an observation and offering some info in regards to our ground here so that others who may not know wont expect the same results in ground that is vastly different.
I wasn't referring either to gold that would or would not make a sound on one detector compared to another, simply the difference in ground. I think Jp is running in ground in QLD, ive been detecting there and its no where near as bad as Vic.
Did you take my post as combative? It was not intended that way.

I totally agree Kon61 that for the price we paid for the Zed one would have thought that we got at least 2 different size coils. Maybe they are going to send them out later to us free of charge. Anyway still love the new detector.

Basada wrote:I totally agree Kon61 that for the price we paid for the Zed one would have thought that we got at least 2 different size coils. Maybe they are going to send them out later to us free of charge.  Anyway still love the new detector.

Dream on Steve LOL

Marty