Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

Recommended Posts

I just bought the 10" & 14" GB2 coils and was wondering which coil is best for looking for lode gold deposits as I am going looking for a lost deposit of specimen gold said to have been found by 2 different parties back in the thirties but wasn't able to find again. I believe I have it narrowed down to a 3 mile stretch of creek. I am looking for the best advantage as that is quite a bit of ground to cover. Thanks for any advice. :Detector::ya::black_knight_standing:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apples and oranges as bigger coils(as a general rule a thumb) go deeper BUT have less sensitivity to smaller gold. The smaller coil is more sensitive and less depth but easier to use around obstacles. I'd go for the smaller coil first as tiny stringers lead to the main deposit both above and below ground as follow the nuggets in a grid pattern to find whence they came. The tiny coil(4" if you have one) just doesn't cover enough ground but leaves nuttn' to chance,except depth loss. Wish ya all the luck in the world as great detector as I sure coveth mine-John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was me, I'd be using a pan in the creek. All the time examining the gold particles under magnification. When you start finding rough gold, be on the lookout.

Remember, if a rock way downstream becomes crushed or broken by natural causes, the gold released will be rough.

I've found lots of lode gold with the GB2 6" coil. Others are too bulky if it's rocky.

Edited by LipCa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple clarifications are necessary in your post, because at present it forces assumptions be made on our part..

Does "...stretch of creek..." = year around running water, or is it a dry bed / dry part of the year..?

And, here in the east at least, nearly all specimen gold is fine to micro; no detector in the world is going to pick 'em up except perhaps an MD 20 from 4" or closer.. Ergo it's therefore known the specimens you're attempting to re-find contain gold chunky enough they're detectable..?

Based on my location alone, at first read what I saw was year around running water and undetectable gold -- which made the initial best tool in the kit = eyes (+ magnification) on likely host rock regardless in or out of creek bed / water..

That's the way the parties from the '30s would have had to do it, along with panning -- which pretty much align's me with LipCa's thoughts..

Assuming you've correctly narrowed location to that three mile stretch, and assuming year around running water, and assuming some gold large enough to trigger a detector, you still wouldn't need a detector until you've located the highest gold concentration based on test pan results.. Start there & work upstream, up the embankments and down to bedrock -- and really, you still wouldn't need a detector.. By that point though, if you are going to use one I'd be using the smallest coil possible..


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...