How much better is the 5000 over the 4500

Have used and been impressed by the 4500 for the last 2.5 years. I understand the 5000 has a fine gold setting that sets it apart from the 4500, but having found a number of .1gm pieces with the 4500 is this setting (Fine Gold) significantly better on the 5000 and would you use this setting all the time or only to clean out a patch.

Looking at the recent Minlab News, ie. the write up on the 5000, the machine still includes settings that are on the 4500 are these the same/better.

Am happy with the 45 and do not know what I am missing with the 5000. Would appreciate comments from an experienced 4500 user who owns a 5000.

APOLOGIES for this Thread.........Have Just read "Report on GPX 5000" by Araratgold on the 4800/5000 Sub Section.
Peter

No apology needed - there are lots of people who are interested
and the thread you mentioned has dropped off the hot topics lately.

I have owed a 4500 and now own a 5000.
I agree with what you said about your 4500, it is a fantastic detector
and it will find smaller gold as well.

For the 5000 the Fine Gold setting is in a class by itself.
I am not technically minded so forgive the 'folk' description but
this setting seems to see rough and/or irregularly shaped small bits of gold
with a much improved response over what you might hear in the same
circumstances with a 4500. The response is also sharper to my ear, but again
this is my opinion, I am not stating this as fact.

Beyond the Fine Gold settings the other big advance (for me), with the 5000
lies in it's ability to filter out EMI better than any previous Minelab.
This is probably provable scientifically but I the way I can tell the difference
is by having gone to the same areas I detected with the 4500 and hearing
the difference almost immediately. Now. This is not a magic fix, there is still EMI
that is picked up by the 5000 but generally, (in my opinion), it's effect is less.

The third aspect of the 5000 that I like is that it holds a Ground Balance longer,
i.e. it is not quite a finicky in highly mineralized ground although care must still be taken
to make sure the GB is correct - a huge potential for operator error - and I still check it as often as I did on the 4500.

Hope that helps a bit.

Flak

Hi Peter

used both 4500 and 5000 last few outings on the same spot with different coils, settings and timings. Done depth tests and tested both models for stability and quietness on hot ground. The reason I did this is to convince myself which model was better as I am in the process of buying one. In my opinion ( and opinions will vary from operator to operator, and for different ground conditions, area, weather, etc ) I honestly couldnt tell the difference between the two models. Both handled the conditions extremely well and was confident both would have found exactly the same targets I walked over. If you are happy with your 4500 I would keep it and spend the extra money of the upgrade towards new coils or other accessories.

Hi Peter,

Very recently I upgraded to the GPX5000 from a 4500 and I must say I am enjoying using it. I have not enough hours detecting experience with my new machine as yet in order to give more specific comments. But what I noticed right away is a clearer signal and a much quieter operation and I found colour within one hour of having it out of the box - I also had colour within the first hour with the 4500 though.

Without doubt the 5000 has a more advance technology, but as somebody said once, the 4500 doesn't stop working because there is a 5000. If you can afford to upgrade and you want to, then why not doing it. To justify the change with finding more small pieces, you have to find a lot of 0.1 nuggets to cover the costs. If you have to "top up the mortgage" to cover the costs, I personally would probably stay with the 4500 for the time being until more reports from operators are available.

'Hope this helps a little.

Cheers
Ralph

Flak, All
Re the Fine Gold setting, do you leave the detector in this setting all the time, similar to the most sensitive setting on the 4500, that to me seems to find very small gold and bigger deeper nuggest alike, or only use this setting as mentioned earlier when cleaning out a patch or going over somebody elses old patch recognized by umpteen 100 dig holes, filled in of course. Am talking here of WA not Vic.

Peter

Peter,

Firstly I am in the US (CA), just so that's clear.

I use the F.G. setting when I have to, in other words when Normal
timings or Deep does not work - usually because of high mineralization
(I recently have been working in an extremely mineralized area), then I
switch to F.G.
I have been pleased with the setting because it seems to go fairly deep.
How deep is always a question that cannot be answered in general obviously,
because of all the variables that come into play,
but the setting is certainly not limited to shallow, small gold.
I have been using it a lot because the mineralization
will not allow the hotter settings.

...if that helps any.


Flak

Gday


For those of you that have upgraded from the 4500 to the 5000, If you had the chance to trial a 5000 for a few weeks instead of having to buy one, and you had been able to use it in the field to get the feel of it, do you think that you would have still gone out and bought one?, and do you feel that the new timings were a significant enough advantage to warrant buying one?

I am not trying to put the 5000 down or anyones decision to purchase one, I have just been wondering to myself if the excercise has been worthwhile, Its just also that I have not heard the sorts of praises and comments that I heard when the 4500 hit the market, and combined with the fact that the value of the 4500 seemed to drop overnight, and then there was a rather significant difference in what people could get for their 4500 as a trade in as apposed to the purchase price of the 5000.

Just wondered if the upgrade is worth it or would waiting for the next model to come out be the way to go?

cheers

stayyerAU

I personally believe that the crappy weather around aus at the moment(last few months) plus the time of release has hampered all the good reports that are sure to come flooding in once this changes. We all know that the newest is best if you can afford the upgrade, i wont be sending my 5000 back in a hurry.
just my opinions anyway.
cheers
hoolahoopa

i am glad my 5000 comes with a 5 year warranty.

i have had it for a month now, and still dont know if it works.

bloody rain and more rain, i will spend the "wet season" in the shed attaching a grasscutter to it ... kev


EDIT - oops that would null and void my warranty wouldnt it?

kevlorraine2 wrote:bloody rain and more rain,

G'day Kev,

And its looks like theirs more too come for you Blokes..BLAST

Bit drier down here in Vic ---- Finally

Hello kev,

I would not worry with your past history of finding very payable patches both with the extreme and the 4500 When it dries out,and you get into form with your 5000...the odds are in your favour for cracking on to good gold again..

Cheer up Cheers Bill

stayyerAU wrote:
Gday


For those of you that have upgraded from the 4500 to the 5000, If you had the chance to trial a 5000 for a few weeks instead of having to buy one, and you had been able to use it in the field to get the feel of it, do you think that you would have still gone out and bought one?, and do you feel that the new timings were a significant enough advantage to warrant buying one?
cheers
stayyerAU

We have 2 4500 and had the chance to use a 5000 for 4 days with the idea of buying 2 of them. What we found was not enough benifit for us to go from 4500 to 5000 we went over old patches the the 4500 had produced plenty of small gold on and the 5000 struggled to get any more. We just kept going with the 4500's

So all I know is that in 4 days trying the 5000 we got 7 nuggets on old patches for about 4 grams, but the 4500 still could hear these same nuggets that the 5000 could.

I would say fractionaly better than the 4500 perhaps, but heaps better if you were coming from further back like a GP3000 or so

Thats my view.

cheers dave

Having used a 4500 in highly mineralized areas and going back with a 5000,
I have to say the 5000 is a better machine. Just the fact that it is quieter and handles EMI better
makes me happy that I decided to jump and get one.

Best wishes for Happy Holidays to everyone
This is a worthy forum with really helpful and intelligent input, funny too...
Thank you.

Flak

Finding a target with a new tech and then swinging the coil over it with an older detector is not necessarily a good way to test the differences, I've had nuggets missed by the older SD machines that were found with the GPX detectors but when checked with the older machines also make a good response once I knew the target was there. Being subjective when testing is very hard to do and can lead to all sorts of misconceptions that can then skew an operators impressions after the fact especially if one has been exposed to a lot of negative comment.

If someone uses the GPX-4500 in Enhance with a small mono using an elevated Gain and Boost audio filters all the time it will allow them to crumb along in popular noisy areas quite effectively and in most cases score the majority of small nuggets near the surface along with getting a good case of tinnitus along the way. One of the major advantages of the GPX 5000 over the obvious improvements in the timings such as Enhance and new timings such as Fine Gold and Salt Gold is the overall improvement in quiet running of the detector without compromising on signal response and performance. The GPX 5000 will produce a more obvious response over the 4500 compared to background noise and in some cases will produce a response not recognised by the 4500 even on targets known to be present, if you then go into the wild and try to find targets not known to be there the goal posts move even more.

A more obvious response does not necessarily mean a louder response so if a direct comparison is done the previous model detector might actually produce more volume on the target (not by much though) compared to the 5000 but will also correspondingly produce a much louder overall response to ground and Sferics/EMI, sometimes this louder response is not even realised as it is hidden within the threshold but can actually cost performance up into the 10's of percent.

The other thing I should point out is just because the new detector doesn't find more gold on your old patches mean it is any better or worse performance wise it just suggests all the gold is gone. Getting confidence up early is important on any new detector, Minelab have consistently improved their designs on each and every model over the years, it is here you need to look for confidence as you learn your new detector and then start to target areas were it will shine. If you are not confident and are letting others around you who are negative to effect you then you should probably stay home rather than go out and prove them right.

I've had a very positive experience with the GPX 5000 both during testing and also since its release, that would equate to 16+ months of exposure to the technology, in that time I've found in excess of 80 ounces, the majority of which has come off popular areas. I'm not saying the 4500 or even any of the older Minelab machines would never have found any of that gold, what I am saying though is, an awful lot of it was left on my old patches. I like to think I know how to swing a metal detector, seeing how it's my primary source of income I'm unlikely to leave it there for some one else to find now am I?

JP

Gday


My comments were not intended for the purpose of putting the 5000 down, but intended to get more direct answers to questions that I had in my mind as I had only really been hearing mixed responses up until now, I have also been detecting for many years and anybody who knows me will also know that I am my own man and not easily influenced by others, so I am not easily swayed by what people have to say, but having said that I also like to hear all sides of the story so that I can evaluate the information and weigh up all the pro's and con's, so that I can make a decision either way.

As soon as the 4500 was out and about I knew that it was a winner, even with the teething issues and the emi problems it was easy to tell that it was something quite new and that upgrading would be the way to go, it felt right and it has proven itself without a doubt, at the end of the day the gold tally tells the story.

I wont jump onto a product because the bloke in the store tells me its the ducks guts, because for one thing I know that I have spent more time on the ground detecting than a lot of people and to me thats where the real experience lies and thats where the problems and issues of a machine will raise its head, not on a test bench in the shop, also they have a vested interest in you walking out the door with a new detector in your hands because thats how they make a living, theres nothing wrong with that as long as they are giving you the right information and not hiding any issues that they know about and leaving it to you to find out while on the ground.

The amount of gold you will find is directly influenced by the time you spend detecting, couple that with experience, knowledge and a selection of tried and proven gold bearing areas and of course you are going to be able to keep finding gold, there are still a lot of well worked areas that are producing good gold and this is because some detectorist have learned to work smarter not harder, any improvements made to the operation of a detector will also improve your chances, a nugget response that was so subtle with one machine that you missed it last time,even very slightly more enhanced by the newer machine means that you might hear it this time round.

I think the lack of feedback has been due to the late season release of the 5000 and then all the crappy weather on top of it, keeping people from spending time on the ground and finding out whats what with it, there should be a lot more about it being said in the months to come.

The real test for me with the 4500 was that I did get quite a lot of gold of old areas that I worked until not a squeek remained, and I couldnt believe that I had missed pieces that were not even deep, the truth is that the earlier machine simply didnt see them, and the 4500 did, I was not under the impression that the 5000 would do the same thing as the 4500, as it was a big leap from the 3500 that I had before, but I can understand that any changes that it could offer would be a refinement of the features that the 4500 has and hopefully an improvement to its weaknessess like the issues with emi etc.

cheers

stayyerAU

stayyerAU asked the question, would you still buy a 5000 if you had the chance to try it first. I just answered his question from my point of view.

Yes Yes we all hear the good points of all the new models but we never hear the not so good points till after we have got it.

All good sales people point out the good points, I realise this other wise it would be hard to get people to up grade to anything new, wether that is a car, computer or a new detector, the principal is the same.

JP - thanks for the confidence boost. we need a lot of that to balance out all this rainy weather. i note clermont is still copping it, and by the length of your reply, you, along with the rest of us are frustrated, bored, waiting, waiting. its like going on the wagon, withdrawal symptoms.

naturally my learning curve over the years has been going up, but i cant escape the history of my personal efforts.
gp extreme - average get per week over the six years of holiday use - half ounce. (most towards the end of that period)
4000 - four weeks of holiday use - 4 ounces.
4500 - first year of four weeks holiday use - 8 ounces.
4500 - second year of use - holidays - 5 weeks use - 9 ounces.

most all of this was from the clermont area, going back to my known spots, and as this is over the last nine years, its not as if i had time to flog it to death before everybody else had a go at it.

so i have to conclude - the same country keeps giving up more gold (around the edges, deeper, hearable, etc) and i can only give the credit to haveing upgraded to the newer machines. this gave me the confidence to go back to the same spots, and with that confidence, and quieter machine, score again. i will stick with my system
... kev (hope the gold sticks to the system also, with the 5000, if i ever get over the flooded creek to the clermont area)

Hi All
Its a bit much to ask but perhaps its the job of the manufacturer to supply this information so we can make an informed choice.
Cheers Dig

Dig24crt wrote:Hi All
Its a bit much to ask but perhaps its the job of the manufacturer to supply this information so we can make an informed choice.
Cheers Dig

Yes it is good to have comparisons of various machines, but this information needs to be from those who are out there using them. The manufacturer can give information, for example the 5000 will find ‘small gold grains in difficult ground conditions’. And a tester can say how fantastic the machine is, the difference over older machines, etc etc, but they have a financial interest as they are paid by the manufacturer to test the machines.

FoolsGold

FoolsGold wrote:

Dig24crt wrote:Hi All
Its a bit much to ask but perhaps its the job of the manufacturer to supply this information so we can make an informed choice.
Cheers Dig

Yes it is good to have comparisons of various machines, but this information needs to be from those who are out there using them. The manufacturer can give information, for example the 5000 will find ‘small gold grains in difficult ground conditions’. And a tester can say how fantastic the machine is, the difference over older machines, etc etc, but they have a financial interest as they are paid by the manufacturer to test the machines.

FoolsGold

I pride myself on giving honest opinions both to Minelab and also end users. I'm paid by the manufacturer for only one reason, to tell them without fear or favour if the detector is faulty or not and to assist them in making it better!!!

They say a picture speaks a thousand words, this is my last found today "crumbing" gold for 2010.

JP

Hi JP, your camera seems to take really great shots and in detail, what camera do you use ?
Thanks,
uncle bob.

UNCLE BOB wrote:Hi JP, your camera seems to take really great shots and in detail, what camera do you use ?
Thanks,
uncle bob.

Hi Uncle Bob, the camera I used is an Olympus 10.1 Megapixel U1030 SW, the SW meaning Shock and Water proof. Apparently it can handle drops onto hard ground from 2 metres and go into water down to 10 metres. I got sick of the kids killing my other cameras but so far this one has survived really well. It also has an excellent Macro mode.

Regards

Jonathan

Hi JP, I couldn't find that camera of yours and there is a newer model which is the OLUMPUS MJU TOUGH 8010. It has 14megapixels and 5x optical zoom and other good features and the most important one of all for us Prospectors is the Macro shots. Now I don't know much about this feature but this is the improved camera to your one and your's does good shots of gold nuggets.
JP, now is it easy to use the Macro feature on your Olympus camera?
Thanks,
uncle bob.

Very easy to use Uncle Bob, just point and shoot really. :-)

JP

Question 1
Hot ground, hot ground, hot ground, thats all you people talk about on here. What about the benign ground? There are far more areas I detect that are just that. Am I better off with a 4500 or 5000 on quiet ground? Will the 5000 give me more depth in quiet conditions over the 4500? All I ever read about in brochures/forums are the advantages the new (whatever brand) detector will give me in highly mineralized ground.

Question 2
Surely Minelab could make a detector that automatically adjusts the timings to the ground conditions to maximise on depth without you, the operator, having to switch from sharp to smooth or normal to enhance!! Can they build it into the ground balance? I'm no techno head but fair dink, auto ground balance came out on the XT1700.

Not having a go at anyone in this post, just want to get genuine thoughts on the questions posed.
Maxx

I'll have a go at this.
When the 4000 came out I dug the most deep holes out of all previous models in sens/smooth.
In ground I had been over with all models and coils up to 24 DD. I was
on my knees alot for these holes.
The 4500 came and the gold got smaller and holes not as deep but still plenty of holes in enhance.
Only had about 2 months of use on the 5000 and the holes are still plentyfull but gold smaller.In fine gold.
I have dug a couple of deep bits to 1 oz that surprised me but its still too early to tell about that one.

Maybe I should stay in sens/smooth with each model.
The other improvements might be just to hear smaller bits in noisier ground.

Best if you are not sure is just wait and see what your friends are finding if they up-dated.

Alan FWIW