Lead vs Gold
- Thread starter Havinago
- Start date
Help Support Prospecting Australia:
Havinago said:Heatho said:Havinago said:So you think it is comparable to say my detector picks up lead shot so therefore it will pick up gold at same size and depth? I should mention that I am mainly talking about VLF's and that it is only food for thought as i noticed this gets tossed around a bit
You bet it will. Though only in mildly mineralised ground for the small stuff.
Do you think there would be a point where you would pick up one deeper than the other if they were actually the same volume and shape? and if the ground was mildly mineralised?
Its just that my way of thinking is that if you would pick up one and not the other at a certain depth or mineralisation then the two metals shouldn't be compared
Edit: I sort of see some yes and no's for is it comparable
Yeah that is a good question, I'd have to say yes they would cut off around the same depth in the same mineralisation. One place I go gold detecting has similar sized nugs to the lead shot that's there, only difference is the nugs are flat, they can be detected at a similar comparable depth with the SDC.
I reckon with the 705 it would pick up lead and gold at similar depths.
Would be good if someone made some same sized gold shot as small bird shot and tested the depth comparisons.
I still think the halo effect on lead will give an advantage in a n atural situation.
But in a test environment the difference may not be noticeable. Same might go for all metals ?
But in a test environment the difference may not be noticeable. Same might go for all metals ?
But the point im making is.. for example.
If u left a 3mm ball of lead and gold in the ground for 50 years the lead will more than likely give a better signal. If u put them in for a day the difference may not even be noticeable . So hence the test would be best done while all target's are fresh to see what metals are the easiest to pick up.
If u left a 3mm ball of lead and gold in the ground for 50 years the lead will more than likely give a better signal. If u put them in for a day the difference may not even be noticeable . So hence the test would be best done while all target's are fresh to see what metals are the easiest to pick up.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2014
- Messages
- 8,938
- Reaction score
- 6,786
When looking for Gold with a VLF it is best just to set it in Two Tone because multi-tone will drive you nuts, a lot of people keep passing the coil over the target trying to improve the signal response but that is a waste of time and using the numbers don't work either because they can be higher depending on the size of the target, So 2 tone is low for Iron and High for Non ferrous metal and that is all you need, and any High tone should be Dug.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2015
- Messages
- 591
- Reaction score
- 700
Bjay said:
It would be very interesting to see the results of a test where the targets gold and lead are identical and to see if one drops of before another, I personally believe that lead will be detectable after gold drops off and I admit that I don't know and it might not be the case, but it comes down to are they really comparable considering one is a lot more conductive than another and how does this factor in if at all, and considering a few have responded with lead giving stronger signals this lends itself to my belief. It is just a question whether or not the two metals can really be compared, not about digging every target, because if you want to find gold you have to dig just about every target anyway :lol:
Ok.. i couldnt let this topic die without doing a bit of myth busting research.
I got some lead and some gold and flattened them so they were as close as possible thickness to each other, which ended up at 0.4mm .I then used a wad punch to make two 4mm diameter pieces. I used my gold bug 2 and air tested the 2 samples.
RESULTS = 95mm on each via the speaker only and the same settings.
I got some lead and some gold and flattened them so they were as close as possible thickness to each other, which ended up at 0.4mm .I then used a wad punch to make two 4mm diameter pieces. I used my gold bug 2 and air tested the 2 samples.
RESULTS = 95mm on each via the speaker only and the same settings.
They did sound identical as well , so its fair to say as far as detecting the 2 its hard to tell the difference by depth or sound.
The gold weighed a bit more as well but the percentage difference didnt relate to a depth difference.
The gold weighed a bit more as well but the percentage difference didnt relate to a depth difference.
Im interested in trying some steel next but need a better punch to make a sample . Ill post up when ever that happens. I will also put them both in a vial of most ionized soil and retest after a few months.
Not sure this is going to help me or anyone find more gold lol , but i find it interesting just the same
Not sure this is going to help me or anyone find more gold lol , but i find it interesting just the same
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2016
- Messages
- 2,121
- Reaction score
- 6,261
Cheers thanks GaryO .
When i was into coin and jewelry detecting you had to dig every thing if you wanted to get the gold rings, gold rings could come up on any TID number. The size, weight, purity, shape all effect TDI numbers. The same applies when going nugget hunting with a PI detector, you don't know what it really is until you have it in your hand.
I read an interesting article in Gold, Gem and treasure where a guy was getting nuggets out at Tibboburra. He said that the nuggets he was getting were all shallow and the lead projectiles were all deep. I can't remember the author of that article, but it goes to show the strange things when detecting for gold.
I read an interesting article in Gold, Gem and treasure where a guy was getting nuggets out at Tibboburra. He said that the nuggets he was getting were all shallow and the lead projectiles were all deep. I can't remember the author of that article, but it goes to show the strange things when detecting for gold.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2014
- Messages
- 8,938
- Reaction score
- 6,786
GaryO said:
Gary why is only seeing it at 95mm, what settings did you use ?
thanks mate,, John.
Similar threads
