Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Charts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Gold Prospecting
Metal Detecting for Gold
If we could detect gold at twice the depth how much gold would we find
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support Prospecting Australia:
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="loamer" data-source="post: 73425" data-attributes="member: 981"><p>I don't know why Victoria is considered shallow? If you mean by digging alluvial shafts, then yes places were shallow - if you mean to detectors - then shallow is a very subjective term. A quick study of the list of the biggest nuggets found shows very few were shallow and most were several feet down and out of the range of any commercial gear. </p><p></p><p>There are a few blokes trying a few new things around the triangle with detectors and various types of set-ups, and a lot of bigger and better hand-made coils are starting to be made and used - a few small experienced prospecting groups with electronics/fibreglassing skills are coming together to design and make gear with some good results both in testing and in the field at far deeper levels than seen before. There are of course the very big commercial coils getting about as well. </p><p></p><p>As technology has and is changing, what were once considered 'cleaned -out' areas are now producing the goods again. Its why a lot of us will not give up details of cleaned out old patch sites because its simply a matter of waiting for the technology to improve. We have seen the progression from - VLF to SD to GP to GPX and all were a marked improvement. </p><p></p><p>The bad news is that things are only going to get more expensive and to get any depth, more complex and heavier I would imagine. </p><p></p><p>As for people not filling in holes - well, the list of don'ts I see all the time is endless - rubbish, cigarette butts, driving off tracks, fires on fireban days, digging into creek banks, dropping turds at random, picking wild flowers, taking firewood, etc etc.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="loamer, post: 73425, member: 981"] I don't know why Victoria is considered shallow? If you mean by digging alluvial shafts, then yes places were shallow - if you mean to detectors - then shallow is a very subjective term. A quick study of the list of the biggest nuggets found shows very few were shallow and most were several feet down and out of the range of any commercial gear. There are a few blokes trying a few new things around the triangle with detectors and various types of set-ups, and a lot of bigger and better hand-made coils are starting to be made and used - a few small experienced prospecting groups with electronics/fibreglassing skills are coming together to design and make gear with some good results both in testing and in the field at far deeper levels than seen before. There are of course the very big commercial coils getting about as well. As technology has and is changing, what were once considered 'cleaned -out' areas are now producing the goods again. Its why a lot of us will not give up details of cleaned out old patch sites because its simply a matter of waiting for the technology to improve. We have seen the progression from - VLF to SD to GP to GPX and all were a marked improvement. The bad news is that things are only going to get more expensive and to get any depth, more complex and heavier I would imagine. As for people not filling in holes - well, the list of don'ts I see all the time is endless - rubbish, cigarette butts, driving off tracks, fires on fireban days, digging into creek banks, dropping turds at random, picking wild flowers, taking firewood, etc etc. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Gold Prospecting
Metal Detecting for Gold
If we could detect gold at twice the depth how much gold would we find
Top