xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Hi Kon. Yes, it's painful to run the Z in general/normal in most places, and, I do dig a lot of deep phantom holes for nothing. Charcoal, red clay lumps, tree roots, etc. I'm kind of used to used to the cacophony of noise in general/normal as one of my first detectors was a modified Garret Deepseeker in the 1980s. So I've learned to hear through the noise, for the targets. xmas tree.

Good Morning xmas tree and Kon.
I have heard of people persevering with the normal setting here in Vic and no doubt it is the biggest change in settings the Z has to offer, I know finding gold is important but I have found using the normal setting it just does my head in, swinging really really slow and still constantly stopping, scraping etc all for nothing but phantoms
Some people with enough experience can decipher between all the noise apparently, not me though,
Cheers

G'day Steve

This is the problem. Each person has different levels of what one can or cannot persevere with, but one thing I have to make clear here, is that ground (in way of conductive minerals) can change drastically from one place to the next, requiring a change of detector settings or coil, or sometimes both, which are known only to the very few, by way of long time ground coverage experience. Its not a matter of just persevering with ground noise, or believing that one is constantly achieving maximum depth, over a majority of in-ground targets everywhere they go detecting, but more so of knowing/understanding what your settings coupled to your detector coil combo "are" actually achieving the best possible depth or ground penetration over a majority of in ground gold targets, regardless of whether or not one is going insane trying to separate fact from fiction (positive in ground target responses, from that which is false) & very few are the ones that can actually do so.
Sure, I can understand someone persevering by running ones detector in "Normal" & or even with a much higher gain, knowing they have nothing to lose, by digging all in ground positive sounding target signal responses, for maximum gold recovery, as long as one is prepared to dig more holes with false target responses in ones hole, but not when one is covering new gold bearing ground, looking for that first bit of colour, or you'd never gets past the first 50 meters in a day. Then again I state, if one is prepared to dig every in ground signal response, that sounds off like the real McCoy, only to find out upon trying to dig it out is not, is strictly up to the preference of the individual, but in saying that, there's also the price to pay of constantly digging targets that are simply not there, instead of covering as much ground as one possibly can "productively".
This might be hard to believe for many out there, but there are places or ground I've detected over, where the use of using or being in "Difficult" ground setting, were more capable of hearing that faint but distinguishable in-ground positive gold target signal response, that otherwise could no be distinguishable, from the surrounding in ground noise or false signal responses, Normal settings had to offer.  
Something else I should also mention on here is that, all undisturbed in ground gold targets or gold nuggets (depending on their composition, physical shape/type/size & the way they are found to be sitting buried in undisturbed ground (orientation of target as compared to how they are picked up by, or seen from the coils point of view) can have dramatic differences in way of depth performance between say one 5 or 10 grammar to the next.
So I do hope detectorists out there don't actually believe, that they're achieving 15 inches of depth, on a say a past 7 gram gold nugget find all of the time, when in reality the next in ground 7 gram bit of gold found, could not be heard to surpass the better part of 10 inches in depth.
Enough of my waffle, best of luck out there people.

Cheers gents,  Kon.

Righto have the 17" concentric here in NQ, bit wet so be awhile before I get to put it over gold, push me with your posts please and I`ll swim it over gold. Very excited to try it in close deep ground that has produced for every detector/coil combo since the VLF mad 80s.

xmas tree wrote:Hi Kon. Yes, it's painful to run the Z in general/normal in most places, and, I do dig a lot of deep phantom holes for nothing. Charcoal, red clay lumps, tree roots, etc. I'm kind of used to used to the cacophony of noise in general/normal as one of my first detectors was a modified Garret Deepseeker in the 1980s. So I've learned to hear through the noise, for the targets. xmas tree.

In the same boat as the Garret Deepseeker ADS go. I think that is why I don't have problems with ground noise that I can't beat with time spent learning on the Garrets.

Patients fellas. One more days testing between coils, in over 3 different gold bearing localities so far & I should have enough conclusive information, as to the operating characteristics of the new 17 inch round Concentric Coil & how it compares to the original 14X13 inch Minelab GPZ coil, before putting up some form of conclusive report.

Cheers gents, Kon.

Hi everyone
Norvic will have more chance than us Vics running in normal
Did a couple of weeks at Dells Hole in 2019 and got away with it a bit up there, it was a good experience found 7 grams in first week and nothing in second, but i was able to run normal in some of the creeks which I think made the difference
Different type of ground than here though, plenty of structure and interesting ground types, one in particular was a yellow looking claypan only it was on the lower end of the slope but still had fall, got a few signals on the edges, looks as soft as butter but when you hit it with your pick your pick bounces straight back at you, hard as a goats head, persevered with a couple but in the finish put it down to ground noise and being in normal
Once I got home and looked into it apparently this stuff is like porridge during the wet and concrete in the dry, also nuggets drop into this when wet
Like you say Kon different grounds mean different settings and coils plus Knowing your area is a huge plus
Good luck up there Norvic with the new coil
Cheers

With all the new testing that's going to happen shortly with the concentric's,it would be interesting to know if these coils knock out concentrated carbon deposits?
Apart from hot rocks these jet black deposits [old burnt trees roots/stumps? ] cause a lot of false signals and a waste of my time & energy digging.


cheers   moredeep

Stevevic, Dells hole is 300plus km away from me and has some certainly relatively quiet ground but also noisy, many changes in ground mineralization in QLD as in OZ wide thus I have not struck a QLD gold field that hasn`t got noisy ground, nor for that matter any OZ State as that is the nature of mineral deposits. Most fields I`ve worked on including Victorian have a few lovely sandy creeks that one can detect in using normal and manual GB to sniff out the deep stuff if the user is prepared go slow and constantly rebalance the Z, but having started on the original manual VLFs and used the hearings ability to differentiate signals, that is a relatively "easy" statement for me to make.

From my experience I treat the statement that one state or even OZ has the most difficult ground to detect as just a fable, whilst I have not detected overseas that could be viewed as a know all statement but I doubt it as again that is the nature of mineral geology. A most important trend to adapt in our game or any game eg. fishing is not to wear blinkers, believe in yourself not others, always look outside the square with positive thoughts, you will be wrong with this approach the majority of time but when your right you can hit it big time. Enough of my dribble..............

Hi Norvic, not dribble mate can see where you are coming from, yes Dells Hole was noisy ground by far most of the time
Just got to my spot at daybreak and get a hour or two in before detector got too noisy for normal and like you said it was only couple spots i could do this
Have you come across these yellow looking claypans before. like I mentioned previously apparently good gold drops into them, always wondered If I left something behind on the basis thinking it was just ground noise Was'nt that the signals were constant just poking along as you would normally along the edges
On another note Kon will be out testing that 17 inch coil today he has perfect weather so hopefully we see a post later on
Cheers

Yeah, those yellow claypans are well worth checking out especially if they have some quartz wash but not a rule. I suspect being clay they have held up the heavy stuff thus their holding gold and hot rocks ability as is so for any clay or change you come across in the field, always worth slowing down for.
Looking forward to Kons review, as be awhile before I get out there with the concentric, I`ll be disappointed if it doesn`t add another level to the Z as the other X coils have.

Righto guys,

Just did a quick, simple test of the 17 spiral and 17 concentric, mainly curious to see how the concentric would run.
Nothing scientific, just the 2 coils running over the same ground to show differences.

Settings were not changed, other than between normal and difficult.
Bear in mind I was on the edge of Kambalda, near Red Hill lookout which has several towers and electrical infrastructure on it, and we have just had 3 inches of rain so ground is very damp !

Sensitivity 16, threshold level 21 and tone 37, semi auto, high yield only, audio smoothing OFF.
Concentric was much sharper on the small 0.3g ball of gold, really noticeable in difficult.

Concentric will need much closer overlap of swings when cleaning up a patch, but I have no doubt it will punch deeper and have better sensitivity to small stuff than the 17 spiral ( which is pretty good anyway ) . IMHO, it will be no good for patch hunting, but great for cleaning up a patch.

Neither coil suffered from EMI. Concentric balanced over the ferrite, although as stated numerous times before, I don't use the damn thing !

Overall impressions ? Top rate finish on the coil and new coil cable is spot on.
No heavier than the standard GPZ14. No emi problems. Runs beautifully, no bump sensitivity and more sensitive to small gold than the 17 spiral.

Elnur, you have outdone yourself comrade !

G'day fellow prospectors

Firstly I'd like to thank the manufacturer of X-Coils & Davsgold (Australian Distributor of X-Coils) for sending me a out one of their new line-up of Concentric coils & even though nothing more were asked of me in return, I feel obliged to both the manufacturer of X-coils as well as all/any member on here, who is interested in an unbiased, unprejudiced opinion on the working characteristics of this new line up of Concentric coils, designed for the GPZ 7000 & how they compare to the original Minelab 14X13 DOD coil.
BTW, thanks Rick for a short but accurate, honest write up, on the working performance/characteristics of the new 17 inch (Concentric in design) X-Coil, as well as the video.
Now after several hrs testing the new 17 inch round Concentric Coil & in/on over 3 different past gold bearing localities that have yielded several an ounce, I have come to the conclusion, that I have enough information on its working characteristics & how it compares to the standard GPZ 14X13  to put together some form of write up.

Right & here I go. This new line-up of Concentric coils, I can honestly say, perform as good as the current 14X13 in/over mineralized ground, with an edge (depth wise) on the multi-gram, gram, as well as sub gram gold, over that of the standard 14X13.
When tested over a 6.3oz slug of gold under an undisturbed, mineralized side wall bank, the results (depth wise) as compared to the 14X13 had a clear distinct advantage over that of the 14X13. As a matter of fact the new 17 inch CC had a distinct clear depth advantage on all 4 gold nuggets tested under mineralized soil, with the depth advantage becoming greater (percentage wise) as nugget sizes got smaller & smaller (gram/sub gram)
One thing I must not forget to state here, is that all my testing with the GPZ 7000, were in Factory Pre-set, or Default Settings (High Yield/Difficult, Gain on 9, smoothing Off, with other variables to suit the individual). All signal responses at various depths were more than conservative, allowing further enhancements to ones settings, giving even greater depth on all/any of my on/in-ground targets.
Another thing to note here is that on or over mineralized soils, necessitates the need of "Difficult Ground Mode"  The High Yield Normal or General/Normal unfortunately fellas remains unattainable to us Victorians or should I say on or over most Australian mineralized soils. Lucky are the few who the ground allows them to use High Yield/Normal or General Normal, for they will be taken to other heights (in way of depth) unachievable when in Difficult Ground Mode. Sorry fellas, for I too were anxiously living in hope, but that's just the way the cookie crumbles (Less one is prepared to forfeit ones sanity and dig every ground signal given off by mineralized soils) . But even in saying that, the 17 inch CC still surpasses the 14X13 in just about all targets I tested over, whilst running in Difficult.
Like Rick stated above, if you're after finding that first nugget by covering as much ground possible within a detecting session, then this coil, would not be my first preference of choice, Nor is it a coil with outer edge sensitivity for pinpointing purposes, for the greatest or loudest signal response comes from the target being close to the centre of coil, which is not to say is a flaw in the coil, but more so, of how concentric coils define or see, on or in-ground targets.
Where this coil  benefits its use most is right near or under power lines where its EMI shielding characteristics as compared to the signal response of in ground targets within such areas of EMI have left me gob smacked, dumb founded. Never in my detecting career, have I seen or heard of a coil of this size, to run as quite & as smooth beside or under power lines, clearly differentiating in ground signal responses from the surrounding EMI which hardly existed. Even with the 14X13 inch DOD coil, set in Difficult ground mode, I had to move 60 or so meters further away from the power lines, in order to get it running quiet & free from the effects of EMI. It was an eye opener.
Do I see a place in my arsenal for this coil? One can bet their sweet boots I do.
Bellow are some facts/figures attained by each coil.    

14X13 in HY/D Gain 9                           14X13 in General/Difficult
0.17gm nugget  =  2" deep                    0.17gm nugget       = 2" deep
0.61gm  "      "  =  4" deep                     4gm nugget           = 8" deep
4.0gm gold       =  9"  deep                    6.3oz nugget         = 17" deep
6.3oz  gold       =  14.5" deep  
                                                         
17 inch CC in H/Y/D                             17 inch CC in Genera//Difficult
0.17gm         =  3.5 inches                    4gm       = 9" deep
0.61gm         =  6.5 inches                    6.3oz     = 17" deep
4gm              =  11 inches
6.3oz             = 15 inches                                            
BTW & although some might find it hard to believe, the depths attained on/over the 6.3 oz slug of gold, are not a mistake, but actual depths encountered by both coils, over this particular size/shape slug of gold.
That's it for tonight folks. Pictures of targets & grounds for testing are to follow soon.
PS, the 4 rocks you see on the coil, the 2 on the left consist of haematite (very slightly magnetic in structure) & the 2 on the right consist of magnetite (highly magnetic).  No worries ground balancing the haematite rocks out which give a slight but positive response to the coil, but only the smaller magnetite rock on the top RHS could be ground balanced out with the 17 inch Concentric. The other larger rock bellow the smaller magnetic rock (sitting on the right of coil) can be ground balanced out, but only to within an inch or so above rock.
Where the first tests were performed, I were 40 or so meters away from power lines, of which only the Concentric Coil could be used successfully upon the testing of all 4 gold nuggets.
The standard Minelab 14X13 inch DOD could not be used over this section of ground close to the power lines, for It suffered from the servere effects of EMI & I couldn't differentiate the 6 oz nugget, sitting at 11 inches deep under the bank, from the surrounding noises produced from EMI.    












Cheers Kon.

Kon I enjoyed your indepth review of the new CC X coil, it seems to really target depth increases on the gram size gold, yet has good depth increases from tiny to large gold as well. Right where we need the depth increases to hunt the old patches again with a 2.5" advantage in some cases. I am looking forward to seeing reviews on the gpx X CC coils since I run a 4500.

There you go being a large coil I too am surprised it would not be susceptible to EMI. Rick & Kon you`ve got me chanting at the bit now, have some deep noisy ground close in that has produced at depth for just about every large coil/detector combo since the VLF days, keen as.

They were both good reports, interesting figures and performance comparisons
Obviously the x coils lot more comfortable to be using in regards to EMI, knocks etc
Good advantage on the small stuff, but interesting how the gap closed in regards once the gold got bigger and deeper, I wonder how the minelab 19 inch would have performed on the larger, deeper targets
Cheers

Thanks for the comprehensive report Kon.

Unfortunately I no longer have access to an in ground test site, short of digging holes to bury nuggets, which will disturb the mineralisation.
Suffice to say, the new coil impressed the hell out of me for a variety of reasons, and no doubt will be another winner for Elnur and myself !

You have to wonder why Minelab, with it's vast R&D resources, have not come up with similar coils with exceptional performance ?? Their standard GPZ14 is quite good, but still nowhere near the capabilities of these X Coils !  

Rick

So buying an X coil, what exactly has to be done with the coil lead? will I still have the use of the standard coil if need be?

Cheers.

peterinaust wrote:So buying an X coil, what exactly has to be done with the coil lead? will I still have the use of the standard coil if need be?

Cheers.

The original coil be it the 14 or 19 needs cut to get the chipped end off, then a new plug end is put back on the original coil so it can still be used. Then an adapter is made using that chipped end by putting a plug end on it.  From there both the X-coil and the stock coil that had it's end cut off can be used on the new adapter.  Inside the clear end of the plug is the chip.

Dave has a guy making them in OZ that's made many for people and this is the best way to do it and it doesn't cost all that much to get it done, people who take it on themselves if they don't have a lot of experience can stuff it up.   People that regularly do soldering work can take it on as it's soldering 5 wires to pins on a plug end, but it is a fiddly job and does require some soldering skills so it's better to get someone who does it often to do it.

Here is one of my adapters.



That fancy background is just my computers mouse mat the adapter is sitting on, it's not my gold, it's the NZ ML dealers gold He gives out the mouse mats with some orders.

phrunt wrote:

peterinaust wrote:So buying an X coil, what exactly has to be done with the coil lead? will I still have the use of the standard coil if need be?

Cheers.

The original coil be it the 14 or 19 needs cut to get the chipped end off, then a new plug end is put back on the original coil so it can still be used. Then an adapter is made using that chipped end by putting a plug end on it.  From there both the X-coil and the stock coil that had it's end cut off can be used on the new adapter.  Inside the clear end of the plug is the chip.

Dave has a guy making them in OZ that's made many for people and this is the best way to do it and it doesn't cost all that much to get it done, people who take it on themselves if they don't have a lot of experience can stuff it up.   People that regularly do soldering work can take it on as it's soldering 5 wires to pins on a plug end, but it is a fiddly job and does require some soldering skills so it's better to get someone who does it often to do it.

Here is one of my adapters.



That fancy background is just my computers mouse mat the adapter is sitting on, it's not my gold, it's the NZ ML dealers gold  He gives out the mouse mats with some orders.

Thanks phrunt, now I understand so a little pig tail lead is made up. Thank you

Thanks Dave, will contact you when the times comes. Been sitting on the fence for a while, but just don't get out enough.

Cheers

G'day gents

stevevic, when tested over the same 6.3 oz gold nugget, placed under/in mineralized ground at 21 inches deep, the Minelab GPZ 19 inch coil, in H/Y/Difficult, gain 9, smoothing Off, showed a depth of 16 inches, followed by 18 inches when in General/Difficult & 19 inches when in Extra Deep. Similar results were to be had with both the 17 inch round X-Coil spiral & 18 inch round X-Coil DD.
Of course & as Rick stated, we must keep in mind that large gold nuggets found sitting deep in their natural state, within undisturbed ground, do have the possibility of giving us different depth results, as compared to a gold nugget being freshly placed under undisturbed soil, for the purpose of testing in-ground depth.
Norvic, from what I saw during my tests, I'm not quite sure if these new line-up of Concentric Coils (by X-Coils) designed to work on the GPZ 7000, are the coils best suited for locating larger gold, sitting deep within ground that is high in mineralisation. But then again my tests were not over large undisturbed in ground nuggets. Its just that my gut instinct's on how Concentric coils best work, over what & where, are telling me elsewise.
The greatest benefit you will find on this new lineup of CC's, is how close you can get to powerlines, whilst still maintaining superb target separation at maximum depth, from a very low disturbance or insignificant issues had with EMI.

Cheers Kon.

Thanks for the vid + reports Rick & Kon.

Interesting Kon, your thoughts on the benefits of the Concentric Coils.
I've had a GPX Detech Concentric 18" coil for awhile now but haven't put it through any comparisons like you have done with the GPZ CC. My observations are more based on outright detecting & I haven't done any side by side testing.

In my opinion the GPX CC's are best used for those areas high in EMI too or where normal/sensitive extra can be used. In saying that there haven't been too many areas where I've been able to run in normal/DD where you don't still get ground noise. They run better than a mono would in normal over the same area but they are no magic bullet in mostly eliminating the ground noise we deal with using normal in Australia.

Like you I believe the GPX CC does have it's place in my kit. The EMI handling for one, those areas I have been able to run in normal/sensitive extra reasonably well, it's much lighter weight in comparison to using a DD coil (not sure if the GPZ CC has the same lighter weight benefits?), runs better in normal than a mono so could be used as an alternative coil as a final slow clean up over a smaller area etc.
I don't think it will replace my mono coils for most circumstances though.

Your overall experiences running the concentric coils are quite spot on mbasko. Concentric coils because of the field the tend to put out, serve little purpose over ground strewn with uneven surfaces or rocky terrain, necessitating the constant lifting or tilting of ones coil at various angles, in order to squeeze in some tight spot or pinpoint a target out, (for their outer edge sensitivity to targets is quite poor) but over ground that is mostly flat/even in contour, will bring out the best depth advantage capabilities of a concentric coil.
Now one can try running a CC coil on a GPX in (as you say sensitive extra/normal) trying to achieve or achieving maximum depth results over targets, but only where the ground allows, or if one is prepared to tolerate the odd bit of ground falsing, whilst at the same time trying to separate, the good positive targets from the bad false ones. It all depends on the operator & how much one is prepared to tolerate ground noise, for that extra depth advantage over in-ground targets.
Here in & around the Golden Triangle Of Victoria, our quiet or lowly mineralized ground, is considered to mineralized to run any detector in normal, (not alone in areas of higher ground mineralization) less it is dumbed down to the point of no return, defeating the purpose of maximum depth gains over targets.
Where this new line of Concentric X-Coils shine (and as some here will soon find out) is their incredible ability, to work near/beside or directly under power lines, maintaining maximum depth over all/any in ground targets, with very little interference if any, coming from EMI. For this I've got to congratulate the X-Coil manufacturer.
BTW, bare with me people, I recently bought a new camera & updated my computer & am still learning how to best download my pictures from one to the other, in order to have them added on here.(but only a matter of time)  

Cheers Kon.  

I don't know if you saw this but when I first took the 15" Concentric out I did a video right near some high voltage transmission lines



It's not the best video as the screen is damn hard to see in the sun but gives a basic idea.

Kon, re. Concentric depth, back in the VLF A2B days a Co calling themselves Dtek (or Dtex) made a few detectors but they also made concentric coils, I found their depth on the A2B was superior to any other coil of those times, I`m hoping this feature will pass over to the X Concentrics and have just the spot to test, last deep nuggets of size got from this patch was with the ML19". Your & Ricks observation indicate they will not be ideal patch hunters rather careful clean up coils, not having a wide max depth coverage is consistent with the VLF Concentrics I`d used. But as you say on undisturbed nuggets only field use can test if they have superior depth.

I too am hoping just as much as you are norvic. My tests are not the do all know all, but the equivalent of mere air testing for the purpose of getting some sort of fair Idea.
Ideal patch hunter no, a clean up coil on past or newly discovered patches, definitely. My concern is not on either, but whether or not it can penetrate through the higher in content mineralized soils, at greater depths than all else before it. Mind you, If this were to be the case, I'd not only be happy for you, but for the manufacturer of such coils & over the moon for all us GPZ 7000 Concentric Coil users.
Over the next few weeks, I myself will go over some old gold patch producing ground, to better get an understanding of what this coil is capable, or not capable of. So far it has shown, on a majority of cases, its working in-ground capabilities, to be very promising. You are right norvic, for only time spent on the ground will tell.
When you do get the chance to go out, give it your best shot & let us know how you go. Best of luck out there norvic.
BTW fellas, I've now uploaded some pictures on my original thread.

Cheers Kon.  

Not only did I see it on more than one occasion phrunt, but had trouble in believing what I were seeing/hearing, being one of the larger in size coils. Now I know for myself & I'v got a smile from ear to ear.

Cheers Kon.  

Gold bug snipper, this new line of Concentric Coils by (X-Coils) are very well made & perform excellently on the GPZ 7000. Leaves me with little doubt to say, they won't perform just as good, when made for the GPX's.
BTW, I have updated my initial post write up on the 17 inch Concentric, with pictures.

Cheers Kon.