Nevada Nugget Hunters

RexB · Site Admin Joined: 21 Jun 2006 Posts: 599

Looks like Fisher's new Gold Bug that is scheduled to come out in November is the same frequency as the original Gold Bug (19kHz) as opposed to 71 kHz for the Gold Bug II. I assume that means less sensitivity but more capability in the realm of finding bigger gold buried deeper in the ground.

http://detectorstuff.com/index.ph...ease-new-gold-bug-metal-detector/

_________________
If first you don't succeed...

Steve Herschbach · Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:04 pm Post subject:

Hi Rex,

I was hoping to have one by now to test but it appears there has been a delay. The new Gold Bug is not a replacement for the Gold Bug 2 but is a new, lower price unit. Based on the specs it would appear to me to set a new standard for what can be had in a nugget for under $500. There is also speculation that since it has a fully adjustable discrimination circuit that it will have applications beyond nugget detecting.

19 kHz is the same frequency as the original Gold Bug. That means it will not hit gold as small as the Gold Bug 2 but it may very well get better depth on large nuggets.And in case anyone here does not know it, the guy working on it is Dave Johnson, the same guy that worked on the original Gold Bug and Gold Bug 2.

Steve Herschbach

RexB · Site Admin Joined: 21 Jun 2006 Posts: 599

Steve,

I was thinking the new Gold Bug would kind of be Fisher's answer to White's new GMZ. Do you know if Dave Johnson worked on that as well? Just curious. There has been some talk that the GMZ at 50 kHz isn't quite as sensitive as the GMT at 48 kHz, of course I guess you get what you pay for, there are other features on the GMT as well, but the GMZ is probably a good deal for the price. The same will probably prove true of the new updated Gold Bug.
_________________
If first you don't succeed...

Steve Herschbach · Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:27 pm Post subject:

Hi Rex,

The GMZ is a good little unit, but not near as hot as the GMT. The lack of an audio threshold keeps you from hearing those little whispers that indicate a tiny nugget. The GMZ may be 50 kHz but I'd rate it as closer to the MXT on small gold than the GMT.

The main thing lacking in the GMZ is the iron discrimination. If Fisher can offer a machine that is lighter, hits gold about as well, and which has iron discrimination, all for about the same price as the GMZ.... well, I know which I'd buy.

Steve Herschbach

Reno Chris · Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:16 pm Post subject:

I just dont know why the American detector makers simply dont get it when it comes to gold prospecting. I have all the respect in the world for Dave Johnson, but in many ways, he, Fisher labs and Garett are all living in the 1980s. I give Whites somewhat of a pass for producing the TDI.

Its like they have great engineers, fine salesmen and marketers and not one person on staff who knows squat about actually finding gold nuggets. So what do you get when you dont pay any attention to the current technology or what your customers want? You produce junk detectors like the Goldstriker.

You produce products that can only compete because they are cheap - not because they do what they need to do. They are not great nugget detectors, but their main advantage is they are cheap. Loads of guys will buy these because of the "goldbug" name, and because they are cheap, cheap, cheap - but very few will find any gold. Eventually they will toss their detectors in the closet and say nugget detecting is baloney. They will decide the guys who find gold cheat or have some special secret advantage.

Yes, there is very much a place for the VLF in nugget shooting. I own one and I use it sometimes. But to treat the PI like its fine for Australia, but totally unnecessary in the US is just nuts.

To quote Dave Johnson himself:
"Introduced about 1997, the SD’s owed nothing to the earlier commercial products, not even Minelab’s own tracking VLF units. The Minelab SD was based on the pulse induction principle, which is quite different from VLF induction balance. Pulse induction has some very interesting advantages and also some very difficult disadvantages. Minelab saw that despite the disadvantages of pulse induction, its advantages could be developed into a metal detector which would go deeper on larger nuggets than a VLF in the highly mineralized laterite ground typical of Australian goldfields. It created a modern gold rush in Australia, and became popular in the USA as well."

Sorry Dave, in many many US gold districts the disadvantages of a VLF handling mineralized soils are overwhelming. I can show you many, many locations in the US that are essentially unworkable with a VLF. You must turn the gain down so low, you might was well just turn the detector off and save the batteries.

Sorry, I just cant say I'm interested in a detector mostly because its cheap. I could pull a stick off a tree and wave it over the ground and it would be cheaper than the new goldbug - so what?

Quality does matter, technology does matter, and I want a detector that can actually find gold, even in places where there is some iron in the soil. So because Fisher and Garret want to specialize in cheap, low budget stuff that wont cut the mustard, I can choose the TDI or I have to look at Minelab. I wish the US makers offerd more choices than cheap (dont they know China will eventually beat their pants off for cheap?)

Its kind of like a computer maker announcing its coming out with a new 64K computer with monochrome screen that runs DOS - but its cheap. (like I'd be interested in that).

It really is a shame.

Chris

_________________
Stories and Information on Prospecting For Gold:
http://nevada-outback-gems.com/prospect/chris_prospect.htm

Turquoise and Gemstone Jewelry:
http://nevada-outback-gems.com