Do you believe the new coil technology increases depth on larger gold.

After using these coil for a while I,m seeing no evidence of greater depth on larger gold say above 5g for example.Obviously there's significant improvements in small gold at depth and specimen gold.
Just wondering about other peoples results as I'm quite sure that any larger pieces I've found would have been found with earlier coils of the same diameter.
Going over old patches hasn't yielded me any larger gold missed with the 11",14" or 18" Elites.They certainly have found a lots of missed smaller gold below 5g and particularly under 4grams.
Many people I work with are using the NF evolutions and I,m seeing similar results.A few nuggets of larger size are turning up but nothing conclusive to say that the older coils couldn't pick them up.

Deutran, I see it quite similar to you, in that the new coils certainly find the smaller and harder to hear gold, within the detectable cone of the coil that the older coils struggled with. I am of the belief that the detectable cone is controlled by the detector and unless you can somehow increase the "power" going to the coil, then the detectable cone really still has remained the same, with the exception that, as the new coils are more sensitive and can pick up that previously unheard gold, they can as a result pick up that larger nugget that's deep and right at the tip of the cone, that was previously just "too faint" to be heard by the older coils.
So my conclusion is that sensitivity within the cone has definitely increased but overall depth hasn't but you now stand a better chance of hearing that very faint deep target.

I agree.
I'm heading to the west in a few weeks' time, and although I'll be taking the three new Evo coils for the 5000, I'll be primarily using my new 45 with old coils.
We'll have 45's, 5's and 7's, and I look forward to much comparative testing on undug targets. I'll report back,

Phil

Hi Costas,I know what you mean by the sweet spot giving greater chance of hearing the deep ones,its also easily missed without careful detecting.
Looking forward to your results lkyphl.

After 2 trips for nothing I pulled a 12.5 gram piece about 20 metres from a main track in inglewood that was down pretty deep,18" or so with a 17x13,It was probably one of the strangest targets I've dug,the original signal was a real dig me signal that tailed off nicely ,then after digging down a bit I had a clay pocket giving a signal in the same hole.if it wasn't for the original signal I would have filled the hole as ground noise.i didn't know I had it till I ran the coil over the dirt pile.then I filled the hole and started again and grabbed a 1 gram piece within 2 feet and thought how goods this and never pulled a thing after except clay pockets the next 2 trips.i sold it and might try the 15 " i reckon the 12 might be a bit sensitive round here

I have three eighteen inch coils being used on several GPX’s 4500 and one 5000. The one giving the best depth on deep targets is the original (very much older) 18 inch (4 spoked) white Nugget Finder coil. I have found the overall depths are similar with the 18 inch Nugget Finder Advantage (3 spoked) and 18 inch Elite (new Camo) coils. I can note however, the new Elite coil tends to give the better signal on any small or specimen gold within its detecting range (when compared to the other similar sized round coils). On the other hand, the ‘round wired coils’ tend to be a bit more stable around EMI or when they are used in variable/heavily mineralized ground. In terms of reliability, I had problems with my first Elite Camo 18 inch coil – it was returned after only a few hours with a fault near the cable to coil connection/junction area. I am happy to report that the faulty coil was exchanged by Coiltek without any problems.

Cheers De

With the new coils the 18inch does not have much advantage over the older 18 inch coils ,they are better on the smaller pieces there is not much advantage on the over all depth on large targets. The optimal size seems to be 15 inch once going any large there seems to be no advantage regards john