Nuggetino - we are in the same boat then. 4500 is a great detector - a very tough detector. I too will watch the SDC debate and performance reporting with some interest. The rumours of a new GPX are along the lines of 'a mate of a mate of a mate', and I just can't get any ideas from the dealers - they are stoom on this or honestly don't know. I also seem to think the ML flooding of the African market and possible over-production plus the run-down of the ADF/US in Afghanistan meaning less MDs required may be a clue but this is all speculation. As for the big money, the traders, publicans and hookers always managed to fleece the poor honest diggers every time - not much has changed. Mind you, we old blokes are bit passed the fancy lady stages of our lives.
SDC versus 5000 - counterproductive ads?
- Thread starter loamer
- Start date
Help Support Prospecting Australia:
To me it sounds like if you have a patch/s the SDC shold clean them up and recover purchase price quickly, so why worrie about the cost vs loamer you said the 5000 did give you a solid dig me, hence still a payday. Whith either option is it's only a finger tip of gold to go either way.
I don't have a patch and don't plan on finding it a with an 8" coil
I don't have a patch and don't plan on finding it a with an 8" coil
Hi taipan - lots of $$ for an unknown amount of tiddlers. we are talking ounces to recover costs. I don't discount the 8" coil on shallow ground for patch hunting though - have a few places in mind. As for the 5000 with the big NF mono - it was clearly far more audible than the 4500. This was on new ground, so in reality, any whisper would have pulled me up. Once the first 12 inches was off, a bloody wall stud finder would have even done the trick.
condor22
Mike
I wonder what the actual difference in capability of the GPX 5000 fitted with the 6" Goldstsalker vs the SDC 2300.
On my last trip I bumped into an old fella detecting mullock heaps near the Welcome Stranger Monument. He was using a 4500 with a 6" coil and found 3 or 4 pieces, that had to be well under 0.1 gr.
I think that $200 for the Goldstalker is a lot better deal than $4,000 for the SDC.
On my last trip I bumped into an old fella detecting mullock heaps near the Welcome Stranger Monument. He was using a 4500 with a 6" coil and found 3 or 4 pieces, that had to be well under 0.1 gr.
I think that $200 for the Goldstalker is a lot better deal than $4,000 for the SDC.
Hi all just my 2 cents thoughts on this topic, I personally use the GPX5000 and have found it to be a good detector in fine gold up here in N.Q. I've managed to ping small gold with it in the .1 , .2 , .3g and up the biggest piece so far for me personally is a 3g piece Im only new to detecting. I've read a couple of posts were the GPX5000 has trouble finding specimens which is strange as a mate of mine who's been detecting for 20+ years manages to with the different timings on his GPX5000, and is quite successful at finding nuggets as well , to me he's a guru and I listen to what he says. Another mate who detects with us also who's new to it as well like me is finding small gold and up with his GPX5000. I guess coil selection has a part to play as well when detecting. Like me mate says you can't find gold sitting at home reading about it you need to be out looking for it and learning your machine in the field. As for the new sdc2300 I won't be out rushing to buy it as their is more to learn with the GPX5000 and getting the best performance out of it with more little twiks here and their.
In the meantime happy and safe detecting everyone.
In the meantime happy and safe detecting everyone.
G
Guest
In my opinion:
How much greater depth does it get over a GPX in:
mild ground - the GPX would get better depth but may still miss the very small sub grammers that the SDC's MPF timing will pick up.
heavily mineralized ground - be interesting to see but after using a SDC I think the clearer signal on it would allow smaller pieces to be more easily detected at similar or better depth. Large, deeper stuff will still be the GPX's prey as the SDC will have a limited depth at some point. Don't think we'll see any 2 foot clunkers with a SDC2300 but they are pretty rare with any machine.
high EMI areas - GPX is all but unusable in high EMI. To use one takes some serious "dumbing" down of it at what would be an obvious trade off of depth.
high EMI +mineralization - see above.
I think people need to realise that the SDC2300 is not a replacement or for that matter a more capable machine than the GPX series.It is however worth plenty of thought as a complimentary machine to not only the GPX series but the SD/GP series in my opinion. There are circumstances where it will perform better than the GPX's though & it will, as Minelab state, detect finer gold than you will with a GPX especially in trying conditions.
It will suit some as a stand alone machine too with its simplicity of use & by now quite obvious gold detecting ability. Others wanting more versatility & built in program options will still run with the GPX. Serious prospectors wanting to clean up everything will & have already been opting for both.
How much greater depth does it get over a GPX in:
mild ground - the GPX would get better depth but may still miss the very small sub grammers that the SDC's MPF timing will pick up.
heavily mineralized ground - be interesting to see but after using a SDC I think the clearer signal on it would allow smaller pieces to be more easily detected at similar or better depth. Large, deeper stuff will still be the GPX's prey as the SDC will have a limited depth at some point. Don't think we'll see any 2 foot clunkers with a SDC2300 but they are pretty rare with any machine.
high EMI areas - GPX is all but unusable in high EMI. To use one takes some serious "dumbing" down of it at what would be an obvious trade off of depth.
high EMI +mineralization - see above.
I think people need to realise that the SDC2300 is not a replacement or for that matter a more capable machine than the GPX series.It is however worth plenty of thought as a complimentary machine to not only the GPX series but the SD/GP series in my opinion. There are circumstances where it will perform better than the GPX's though & it will, as Minelab state, detect finer gold than you will with a GPX especially in trying conditions.
It will suit some as a stand alone machine too with its simplicity of use & by now quite obvious gold detecting ability. Others wanting more versatility & built in program options will still run with the GPX. Serious prospectors wanting to clean up everything will & have already been opting for both.
condor22
Mike
I was looking at getting the SDC to compliment the 5000, I think I'll wait and get the 6" Goldstalker for my next trip to try out.
At least I save $3,800, for now.
At least I save $3,800, for now.
Goldpick
Chris Johnson
I think the SDC fills a bit of a niche market, vs being a direct competitor or eat into the 5000 market, the 5000 was always intended for the more "hardcore" or professional prospector in mind.
Looking at the retiree/traveller/newbie market, no need to carry around a seperate PI detector, battery packs, harnesses, whipsticks and multiple coils, and a high frequency VLF to mop up. It has aways been a tradition to carry a high frequency VLF to get the tiddlers, specimens and more porous gold, so I think Minelab had seen an opening to take market share from the goldbugs and gmt's to do the clean up work, whilst still retaining decent depth to qualifiy as a stand alone multitasking gold detector. Sure it won't have the depth or flexibilty of the 5000, but if can cover half or third of the ability of the 5000, and not have to worry about a VLF as well, plus added advantage of less weight, portability, ease of operation and setup, then it should suit those people down to a tea.
Some people will find the 5000 simply too overwhelming to use, both technically and physically, plus not everyone is keen, or physically able to dig to china looking for gold.
If anything, aside from cost, it is probably making the Eureka more redundant as a choice of detector to use on the goldfields.
Looking at the retiree/traveller/newbie market, no need to carry around a seperate PI detector, battery packs, harnesses, whipsticks and multiple coils, and a high frequency VLF to mop up. It has aways been a tradition to carry a high frequency VLF to get the tiddlers, specimens and more porous gold, so I think Minelab had seen an opening to take market share from the goldbugs and gmt's to do the clean up work, whilst still retaining decent depth to qualifiy as a stand alone multitasking gold detector. Sure it won't have the depth or flexibilty of the 5000, but if can cover half or third of the ability of the 5000, and not have to worry about a VLF as well, plus added advantage of less weight, portability, ease of operation and setup, then it should suit those people down to a tea.
Some people will find the 5000 simply too overwhelming to use, both technically and physically, plus not everyone is keen, or physically able to dig to china looking for gold.
If anything, aside from cost, it is probably making the Eureka more redundant as a choice of detector to use on the goldfields.
