GPX6000 Coils, Opinions Sought

[Dave's Office]

I've recently purchased a 6000 that came with minelab 11 and 14 inch coils and a Coilteck 9 inch round coil. I would be interested to hear from experienced 6000 users on thier opinions of the Coilteck 14x9 inch coil and the Nuggetfinder 12x7 coil. I'm thinking of getting one of the above coils mainly because of the extra ground coverage, what are your thoughts?

 

[user 4485]

I had the NF 12x7 & Coiltek 9". Both good coils but sold the Coiltek as I preferred the coverage & elliptical shape of the 12x7. Also found some deeper multi gram pieces with it so that factored into my preference too.
From anything I've seen it will likely come down to your own preferences as from all reports they are all good coils in their own way.

 

[Pro-oz]

I have the Coilteck 14x9 for extra ground coverage and it will find very small gold the same as the 11". So no complaints there.
Can't comment NF 12x7 as I have never used one.

 

[Moneybox]

I briefly tried both the NF 12x7 and the Coiltek 14x9. I'm not a fan of NF coils in the way that in my opinion they are like a small coil in a large housing. You have to get right over the target before detecting it so that one was out to start with. I like the performance of the Coiltek coils but I found the 14x9 too heavy for the balance of the 6000. As much as I dislike the NF I ordered the 16x10 spoked coil because I wanted to sweep large areas and this coil was going to be extremely light for it's size and it's lateral detection would be less important on open ground. My brother Merv turned up this year with the little Coiltek 10x5 and loved it. It didn't quite reach to the same depth as the standard 11" round but made up for it in other areas.

 

[Hawkear]

Was out just a few days ago with both the Coiltek Gold Hawk 9” round and a NF Exceed 12” x 7”. In two days dug 154 targets using the two coils, with 17 bits of gold and most of the rest being shotgun pellets.
There were few deeper targets encountered to gauge depth performance, but there were a couple of other things that I noted.
Firstly, the Gold Hawk was better at maneuvering among the clumps of grass and stones in the area I was working due to its round shape. Whist the Exceed has a narrow transverse section which is good for poking type movements, its longer axis made it harder for normal side to side swinging in uneven or grassy terrain. Also its lighter weight also meant that grass clumps seemed to retard its movement more easily, with the result I often had to push with more pressure to keep it moving in those places.
The second reason is that the target signal on the round coil seemed more distinctive (mellower rise and fall) of a true target. The elliptical seemed to have a narrower target sound that was harder to pick from random noise or EMI events and I seemed to have to check the signal with more time and care to determine whether it was a true target signal or not.
BTW I was running the 6 in auto one.
Of those two, my vote would go to the 9" but that is a personal preference based largely on practical matters not on absolute performance measurements. Given that the number of targets I found with each was roughly proportional to the amount of time I used each, I don't think there can be much between the two.

 

[Mountaineer]

Same as Pro-oz: I have never used a NF coil so I can't comment, but I own a Coiltek GoldHawk 14x9 and up until recently it was my preferred coil. The eliptical shape is a real advantage in the QLD forests, and even though it's not a small coil it can still detect tiny subgrammers, some as tiny as 0.08 or less. I have taken it off only because I'm now using a Minelab 17" in hope to punch a bit deeper. But otherwise I'd strongly recommend the 14x9 as a reliable and well-performing coil.

 

[Dean Mortimer]

The 12x7 NF tends to be abit noisy in most mineralised soils and if raising the coil ever so slightly and down again even after ground balancing it still produces some wow noise from the ground. If knocking it against a rock it sounds off too. It has no problems finding gold and targets even 0.01g gold and those that don't weigh on scales.

 

[Deano]

I've recently purchased a 6000 that came with minelab 11 and 14 inch coils and a Coilteck 9 inch round coil. I would be interested to hear from experienced 6000 users on thier opinions of the Coilteck 14x9 inch coil and the Nuggetfinder 12x7 coil. I'm thinking of getting one of the above coils mainly because of the extra ground coverage, what are your thoughts?

Also look at the Minelab 17x13 Mono for gold about 0.3 grams and bigger. This video from Miners Den tells about this coil starting at 2:45 .


.

 

[Sundog]

Coiltek 9x5 GH owner here. Love it to bits, light, easy to pin spot in holes and great for smaller nuggs. It does tend to scream at anything over 0.2g on high setttings which makes it harder to avoid rust nuggets. I search on auto-1 then drop down to 3 once I've confirmed the target and use the coil in the hole. I've pulled >1g nuggets from 30cm down in hard yellow clay with it.

 

[Dave's Office]

Thanks to all the people who posted thier views, thoughts and experiences on the 6000 coils, it's great food for thought, fortunately I've got plenty of time to decide which way to go before my next detecting trip. Cheers from Dave

 

[Dave's Office]

And it's just been pointed out to me that I spellt "Sought" wrong. Thanks Miss Kay, bloody schoolteachers

 

[Jigalong]

The 12x7 NF tends to be abit noisy in most mineralised soils and if raising the coil ever so slightly and down again even after ground balancing it still produces some wow noise from the ground. If knocking it against a rock it sounds off too. It has no problems finding gold and targets even 0.01g gold and those that don't weigh on scales.

I detect on the ground and have found the opposite regarding noise from contact with rocks.

 

[NedK]

Same as Pro-oz: I have never used a NF coil so I can't comment, but I own a Coiltek GoldHawk 14x9 and up until recently it was my preferred coil. The eliptical shape is a real advantage in the QLD forests, and even though it's not a small coil it can still detect tiny subgrammers, some as tiny as 0.08 or less. I have taken it off only because I'm now using a Minelab 17" in hope to punch a bit deeper. But otherwise I'd strongly recommend the 14x9 as a reliable and well-performing coil.

Hi Mountaineer. I am also looking to get a bit more depth out of my GPX6000. How have you found the Minelab 17" mono? Is it punching lower without too many drawbacks?

 

[Mountaineer]

Hi Mountaineer. I am also looking to get a bit more depth out of my GPX6000. How have you found the Minelab 17" mono? Is it punching lower without too many drawbacks?

Hi NedK, look, in my experience the 17" Minelab does punch a little deeper than the 14x9" Coiltek, if anything just because of its size, but in reality I can't say that it makes an obvious difference... what I mean is that the GPX6000 was not intended to be the best machine when it comes to deep gold, and therefore no coil, no matter the size, can really change that. In my humble opinion it really depends on what the operator is after: if tiny shallow gold, the 6000 is the best, but if one wants those elusive, bigger and deeper nuggets, then there are better machines for the job! Myself, I have just done the opposite of what most prospectors do: I sold my GPX6000 and bought a GPZ7000!

 

[NedK]

Thanks for your reply. I have been considering a GPZ 7000 but enjoy how easy the GPX 6000 is to use. The size difference between the 11" and 17" GPX coils I hoped would make some noticeable difference with depth.
Do you feel the need to wear the supplied harness using the GPZ 7000 in it's standard configuration. The extra weight of the 7000 is an important factor in upgrading for this old guy.

 

[lurchwa]

I have a 6000 and teamed it with a Coiltek 12x7 exceed and have been quite disappointed with it to be honest.
Heavy, in comparison to the ML coils that came with the machine have found SFA with it. I havent found a heap but all that I have found has been with the ML 11 that came with the machine. Not discounting it yet but initial results are not promising
I havent tried the NF on the 6000 so not qualified to comment at this stage

 

[NedK]

I also have a Coiltek 10×5 Gold Hawk that I use with my GPX6000. Found a few small nuggets with it but I find it annoying that it takes multiple swipes across the coil with the scoop to identify a target. I am always wondering that I may have thrown a nugget to the side. The 11" ML is my coil of choice but depth is an issue. An upgrade to a GPZ 7000 maybe the best solution as Mountaineer has done.

 

[XLOOX]

I use the ML 11" wherever I can as it goes pretty deep, sees damn small and has a fair sized hotspot. The large hotspot is nice for finding a target but sometimes gets me in trouble with pinpointing.

If there is shallow tiny tiny gold (<0.15g) around or difficult access ( spinifex/ rocks) or if I really need accurate pinpointing ( shale rockbars) then I put on the 10x5 Coiltek. No complaints as it is a nice stable coil, pinpoints like a knife and just screams at anything over 0.1g.

Agree that need to get scoop really close to top centre of 10x5 coil for it to see the really tiny ones but that is life. Like you I also do multiple passes.
If you only half fill the scoop and shake it like a dry blower or pan to fluidise the soil then the target will settle to the bottom of the scoop, be closer to the coil so easier to see, but shaking takes longer than just doing multiple passes.

I really want to see a 15" round with same ultralightweight construction as the ML 11" become available but alas nothing in sight.

 

[NedK]

Agree a 15" round based on the 11" would be a winner.

 

[Mountaineer]

Thanks for your reply. I have been considering a GPZ 7000 but enjoy how easy the GPX 6000 is to use. The size difference between the 11" and 17" GPX coils I hoped would make some noticeable difference with depth.
Do you feel the need to wear the supplied harness using the GPZ 7000 in it's standard configuration. The extra weight of the 7000 is an important factor in upgrading for this old guy.

Yes the 6000 is an "easier" machine compared to the 7000, and it is a joy to use! Ready from the start, light to swing around, very accurate in pin-pointing etc... but it won't punch as deep as the GPZ7000.
As for myself, luckily I don't need to use the harness, bungee cord, hipstick and all that to swing the 7000, so weight is not really a factor for me, but I am aware that it is a factor for many people and I can confirm that it is much easier to detect all day with a GPX6000 than with a GPZ7000. That said, though, the deep nuggets I already found with the GPZ in just two months can also confirm that the 7000 is a better machine when it comes to deep gold! I hope my experience can be of help to you!