Minelab SD series vs. GPX series on outright depth?
#1
Posted 02 February 2009 - 08:21 PM
Since the recent price reduction on the Minelab SD's, there has been a lot of talk about the mods and overall performance of them. Over the years, whether you're in Australia or the US, people have stated the SD's still get more outright depth on larger gold nuggets than the GP or GPX series.
I've done some testing over the years and found there is no doubt the GP or GPX series can find small gold and smaller gold at depth over the SD's series. I've missed hundreds of gold nuggets in old patches with the SD's, but keep in mind I didn't have the Pocket Rocket or any type of mods back then (early-mid 90's).
Would like to hear what others have seen, concluded or believe about these two different metal detectors (SD vs. GPX) & technologies.
Very curious myself .....
Rob Allison
Online Gold Prospecting Outfitter
website - www.nuggethunting.com
online store - www.robsdetectors.com
623.362.1459 (office)
602.909.9008 (cell)
#2
Posted 02 February 2009 - 08:52 PM
#3
Posted 02 February 2009 - 09:39 PM
There are other mods you can do to the other 2 units that will make them compete with the GPX's on small gold, but you will have to deal with the EMI.
The size and type of gold also has a lot to do with it.
The SD unit have probably pulled more Oz's of the yellow stuff outa the ground than all the latter model combined.
For the price you cant beet the SD units.
#4
Posted 03 February 2009 - 05:26 PM
From what I've seen and found so far (and I hate to say this) my ancient SD2100 is kicking my 4000's butt on deep gold. The average depth I've been scoring nice sized nuggets is in the 12"-18" depth range with my SD2100 and with my 4000 they're usually right on the surface to 4" deep using an 11" mono coil most of the time on both models. I'd say for sensitivity to small gold the 4000 wins hands down, but for the big deep stuff I go to the SD2100. The 4000 also handles EMI a lot better than the SD2100.
Don't know what it is, maybe it's my confidence level with my SD2100 or maybe I haven't figured out the right settings for deep gold on my 4000. I've spent more time behind my 4000 than the SD2100 and my SD has produced way more gold for me in the short time I've had it (3+ ozt's since August). There has been a few times where the 4000 impressed me (found 8+ oz chunks of Galena 2+ feet deep), but I still have yet to pluck a nice size nugget over 1' deep with it. So as of right now I have yet to see my 4000 outperform my SD2100 on deep nuggets.
Not trying to ruffle any feathers here or anything, just reporting what I've seen and found with both models so far in my short time in the field.
Del
WSPA Member #040
#5
Posted 03 February 2009 - 07:20 PM
Attached Files
#6
Posted 04 February 2009 - 06:32 AM
In the creek side test the 2000 won by about 1/2," in that ground.
I tested over a quite a few of deep in ground targets down in Victoria, and never found one deep target that both detectors never got. (mostly junk)
On gold in the ground, I believe they will all get about the same depth on a big nugget.
Too much B/S goes on with these detectors! When the 2000 came out there was a lot of big deep nuggets found, because there was a lot of big deep nuggets still in the ground. The 2100/2200 didn't do a bad job of cleaning up most of the rest, so the GP's were made more sensitive to detect the smaller deeper stuff, but there has been heaps of larger deep nuggets found with the Extreme/3000/3500.
Anyone who believes that the 4000/4500 won't go at least as deep on larger nuggets, needs to spend more time with it
All views expressed in the above post. are only my own thoughts on the matter of course!
#7
Posted 04 February 2009 - 07:03 AM
#8
Posted 04 February 2009 - 10:48 AM
“Money still talks these days! Trouble is, you have to increase the volume alot!”
"How come we choose from just two people for President, and fifty for Miss America?"
#9
Posted 04 February 2009 - 05:15 PM
Well, I sure found lots of gold with my SD2200 and continued to do so up until this last year. But now that I have the GPX I finally sold the 2200 just a couple months ago. I just really did not see myself ever using again now that I have the GPX-4500.
That said, with the price just lowered on the SD units they have the bang for the buck. With a brand new full warranty SD2200v2 going for under $1800 I can't in good faith tell your average Joe they just have to have a GPX-4500 for five grand. You have to be into your detecting for the GPX to be worth the difference or just have the money to spend.
There is depth and then there is depth. My SD would get a faint hit on hot rocks the GPX will ignore. So I'd just ignore those faint hits, not wanting to dig hundreds of rocks. But of course some were nuggets. The SD saw them but could not separate them from the rock. The GPX can and so while it may not get more actual depth I feel it is getting gold I missed with the SD. And at the end of the day that is what it is about. So it is GPX for me.
Steve Herschbach
Steve's Mining Journal - - Gold Prospecting & Metal Detecting "How To" Guides - - Equipment Information & Reviews - - Public Gold Prospecting & Metal Detecting Sites - - Gold Mining Claims For Sale or Lease - - Steve's Guide to Gold Nugget Detectors
#10
Posted 04 February 2009 - 08:28 PM
Attached Files
#11
Posted 04 February 2009 - 10:10 PM
#12
Posted 05 February 2009 - 06:41 AM
#13
Posted 05 February 2009 - 09:19 AM
That is an outstanding find
“Money still talks these days! Trouble is, you have to increase the volume alot!”
"How come we choose from just two people for President, and fifty for Miss America?"
#14
Posted 05 February 2009 - 04:27 PM
I guess you guys are in prime time hunting mode, while us poor blokes up north just sit and wait out the winter. Thanks for showing.
Steve H
Steve's Mining Journal - - Gold Prospecting & Metal Detecting "How To" Guides - - Equipment Information & Reviews - - Public Gold Prospecting & Metal Detecting Sites - - Gold Mining Claims For Sale or Lease - - Steve's Guide to Gold Nugget Detectors
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users











