Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums
mariposagoldbag

The 2 Smallest Pieces of Gold I’ve Ever Found With A Detector

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I kid you not!  These two pieces don’t even tip the scale.  I mean both together are exactly 0.00 grams!  Found on bedrock in a small crack with the Minelab Gold Monster 1000.  

 

Hey Bill, I remember watching a video of yours where you said you found the smallest piece you ever seen with a detector.  I think I got you beat with these!

96FC4453-84F7-4AF3-B948-5F8FB1D2B3BB.jpeg

Edited by mariposagoldbag
  • Like 9
  • well done 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep , that GM1K sure can sniff out the micro pieces ...Nice beepin !

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure in time you will find even smaller pieces... Probably half that size. I've found them many times before just have to listen for that crackle in the detector.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You must be using a digital scale set on grams. Most digital stuff is only sensitive in 2/10 gram intervals (.2).

Many digital scales will change to grains. This is Troy weight. The system that gold is generally weighed. Just like bullets, powder and such. A digital scale displaying weight in grains is a lot more accurate. But digital scales are not very sensitive.

A cheap beam balance powder scale is probably the most logical device you can use for tiny gold particles. It will accurately weigh a particle at .05 grains. One grain is .0648 grams, so a powder scale will weigh a particle down to .00324 grams. Compare this to a digital scale with an accuracy of .2 grams.

You can find an old Lee or Herter's reloading scale for $10 at a swap meet or gun show. Then you can weigh those little fly specks. Your units of measurement will be in grains (Troy) rather than grams (Metric). When you convert back to grams your decimals will run way out showing how much more sensitive the powder scale is.

I have always said we should have a formal contest to see who can find the smallest particle. We should all put up our tiniest piece found and send them to the guy that finds the tiniest.

Edited by Bedrock Bob
Grains, Pennyweights and Troy ounces are how us old timers weigh gold. If you use the Metric system use milligrams instead of grams. It just makes more sense that way.
  • Like 1
  • well done 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

digital scales are pretty accurate and will even weigh in carets and points which are even "smaller" than grains which of course are smaller than grams which are smaller than troy Oz...and so on

more or less for you picky engineers....

I have two d-scales one for the small stuff and one for the multi-oz stuff that I have never found. It is good for meteorite weights....

fred

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, fredmason said:

digital scales are pretty accurate and will even weigh in carets and points which are even "smaller" than grains which of course are smaller than grams which are smaller than troy Oz...and so on

more or less for you picky engineers....

I have two d-scales one for the small stuff and one for the multi-oz stuff that I have never found. It is good for meteorite weights....

fred

Hey Fred!

I have a couple digital scales. One is an Ohaus YA302 with a listed sensitivity of .05g. It is not an expensive scale but is more sensitive than most little digital pocket scales. I have another RCBS digital reloading scale that has a sensitivity of 1/10 gn. So yeah, some digital scales can be a lot more sensitive than others.

There is a big difference between sensitivity and accuracy. Accuracy is a function of the number (system of measurement) and sensitivity is a function of the equipment. You can switch to a system of measurement that gives you more accuracy but you can't make the machine more sensitive. 

My point was that if his scales did not weigh those sub grain size pieces that he probably needed to use a different instrument. Any old reloading scale will weigh pieces like that and only the best digital equipment will do it. I'm not knocking digital scales or saying they are not sensitive enough. I'm just trying to get this guy a cheap set of scales so we can have a tiny nugget contest!

:ya:

Edited by Bedrock Bob
Added an obnoxious little emoji to impart a frivolous finish to an otherwise dry post.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries and no disagreement, Bob...the trouble with being a little/lot bored is I have to stir the pot-even when I am - nope-I can't use that nasty word...

I just gave my old balance beam powder scale to the SA...I doubt they will have a clue what it is for...

they are very accurate scales and I found Gold Bug 2 bits that would not weigh even a 1/10 grain...

I could not see a speck that small now...only the big ones for me!

fred

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, fredmason said:

 

they are very accurate scales and I found Gold Bug 2 bits that would not weigh even a 1/10 grain...

I could not see a speck that small now...only the big ones for me!

fred

I've found pieces so small with the Gold Bug 2, ten of them wouldn't have budged any scale except a super sensitive one. Regular powder scales or digital scales wouldn't register squat.

You couldn't even feel them when you rolled them between your fingers.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, my scale does have the option to weigh in grains...  The "bigger" piece is .3 grains and the smaller one .1 grain. 

Also, for the record, the bigger piece I think is what initially set off the detector.  After breaking the bedrock up and finding the bigger piece I swung the coil over the rest of the dirt that came out of the crack in the bedrock and barely heard a signal which ended up being the small piece.  There was not any lead or any other metal in the crack.

Bedrock Bob, I'm up for the contest!

  • well done 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is going to be a small nugget contest I want in, I've found some really small stuff this year with the GM!  It is an amazingly sensitive detector.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let' do it!

Here are a few suggestions. Just my opinions on how to proceed and some experience with contests here on Nuggetshooter Forums.

We tried to have a small nugget contest a few years back and it got weird with a few guys who did not want to participate. Kinda like my little treasure hunt I tried to do in the "Contests" forum recently. So my suggestion is to just have an informal "contest" where we all post our photos. It won't make any difference if guys derail the thread with crap. All a prospector needs to do to enter will be post a photo and keep the weight secret. At the end of the contest we all reveal the weight/size of the nugget.

The first hurdle we encountered was guys wanting to argue that small particles were not "nuggets" and it was not a nugget contest. So to avoid that whole can of worms we should call it a tiniest gold target found with a detector contest. Otherwise we will have two or three philosophers taking the thread down that rabbit hole. 

My suggestion before was that everyone puts up their smallest nugget  target and the winner gets them all. Guys went silent when I suggested they put their precious 1/2 cent nugget target in an envelope with a 35 cent stamp and send it to the winner. That was too much risk for them and those specks were too precious. So I will put up a little nugget target for a prize equal to the total of all entries and send it to the winner. That way nobody risks losing a tiny flyspeck and a postage stamp to enter the contest. 

The weights are going to be difficult because of the instrument it takes to accurately weigh them. Calipers or a small micrometer work dandy. Super tiny nuggets targets are easier to measure than weigh. So my suggestion is to determine the smallest nugget target by size. Lets wait until the end to reveal the weight/size though. That way guys will participate. If they know theirs is a little bigger than another entry they won't submit theirs. 

I think we should let the contestants decide by vote whose nuggets targets are tiniest. We can do a "poll" and everyone who submitted a nugget target gets a vote based on photos, weights and measurements after all the data is revealed.

We need to have a duration. When will the contest end? After the fall outing?

The guys that want to participate should offer an opinion on how we do this. If three or four guys get involved enough to give the contest some structure then guys will participate! 

Bedrock Bob

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like your ideas Bob, and wouldn't mind keeping my little precious piece of fly poop...lol.  Though, I kind of feel we should all have to send our smallest piece to someone, maybe you so that everything can be weighed up accurately.  Just a thought, either way I'm in!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mariposagoldbag said:

I like your ideas Bob, and wouldn't mind keeping my little precious piece of fly poop...lol.  Though, I kind of feel we should all have to send our smallest piece to someone, maybe you so that everything can be weighed up accurately.  Just a thought, either way I'm in!

I cant be involved as a central point of contact. If I am a whole bunch of guys won't participate that would otherwise. A whole platoon of cranks will start posting BS and try to derail the contest because I am involved. Ill just provide a little nugget for a prize and stay far off to the side. If we can get a few more guys on board with the basic ground rules we can give it a try.

Ill match the total of all the gold posted in the contest but we need to set a maximum limit of .3 grains as the largest nugget target that can enter the contest. If yours is over .3 grains then keep looking until you find one that qualifies. Otherwise some crank will post a 1/2 oz. nugget and expect me to match that in the total and call me a crook if I refuse. So let's set a fair maximum size so we can sidestep that insanity before it happens. And if we have 100 swinging bratwursts all competing for the prize I might have to put a limit on the size of nugget I will pony up. I don't mind sponsoring a nugget for a prize but if the contest totals more than a half pennyweight or so I will need to put on the brakes. 

It would be cool to connect it with the fall outing somehow. Lots of guys will be there and many will be using the new GM machine. It would be neat to see the results and do some comparisons to other machines. I hear amazing things about the GM but I will believe it outperforms the GB2 when I see the proof. This might just be the platform to do it. It may create an incentive for guys to attend the outing as well as incentive for those who can't make it. But Bill is the guy that handles the outing so he will need to approve of that before we make any big plans in that direction.

Just more ideas. Lets hear from a few other prospectors and see if there is an interest. If there is I will start a thread over on the "CONTESTS" forum and we will do it!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bedrock Bob said:

I hear amazing things about the GM but I will believe it outperforms the GB2 when I see the proof.

After watching my son with his GB2 this season I don't think you're going to see it 'outperformed'.  I can tell you from many hours of side by side use this year they are both excellent at finding small gold.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean well, Bob!

 I don’t usually enter, contests, give aways, or free meals for listening.

so, for those reasons I am out....

anyway, trusting is a good thing....why not a picture on a grain scale...

save the postage and the drama

fred

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good, who else is in?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fredmason said:

You mean well, Bob!

 I don’t usually enter, contests, give aways, or free meals for listening.

so, for those reasons I am out....

anyway, trusting is a good thing....why not a picture on a grain scale...

save the postage and the drama

fred

Party pooper. :rasberry:

You are a real stick in the mud Fred. You need to get out and kick up your heels more often. Slam a few beers, eat some tacos, smoke a good cigar. It's not like it would hurt you to have some fun once in a while.

:)

 

 

I think we just post our tiniest nugget. No weights or measurements. If time goes by and we find a smaller one then that is cool, just post another photo. If we set them next to the date on a penny in the photo it would give us some visual reference.  We can probably tell who has the tiniest just by looking at it. If not we will figure out how to measure them.

At the end of the contest we reveal the weights or sizes as best as we can. The winners will probably be too small to weigh. My tiny ones will move a powder scale, but only a hair. I am thinking about a quarter of a 1/10 grain increment. .025 grains maybe? That is going to be tough to take a photo of so why bother.

If it is too close to call we can measure. Or vote. Or just pick two winners. No big deal. The point is to have some fun, see some gold and give a format for guys to show some small stuff.

In order to deal with the little ones you need to develop really good detector skills. The big ones are just stupid easy to find once you are standing over them. The tiny ones are what separates the muckers from the miners! It will be cool to see how low we can go with the Gold Bug limbo.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, ask any of my children...

in my defense

cigars of any kind turn me green....of 7 kids, two parents and lots of guests...I never smoked.

love beer- and tequila and really love tacos!

 I am sorry but I am what....

and if I kicked up my heals...you would be picking me up!

anyway, my first Oz of gold had more than 500 bits and the biggest was over half Oz... I think we would both be in the race.

xoxo

fred

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my smallest bit circled I got with the Monster...…..

Inkedsat. & sun. - Copy_LI.jpg

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oneguy said:

Here's my smallest bit circled I got with the Monster...…..

 

That's mighty small.

How do you recover the small ones? Do you use a scoop or some other tool?

I move the target with my foot first. Then I scrub the coil across the pile and locate the target again. Then I grab a little dirt in my right hand until I get it in my hand. Then I trickle the dirt over the coil until I hear it hit. Sometimes I blow the material across the coil with a puff of air. But I always try to put the particle in direct contact with the coil surface and drop it there from my hand. I got to where I could recover one in just a few seconds and hardly ever fumble one or lose a signal.

I use a little short home made PVC pole on the GB2 and put the control box in a camera bag. That way I can throw the detector down and position it easily for recovery. It keeps the box protected up near my waist and it's really handy underground and in tight workings.

I liked the idea so much I did my old Minelab the same way. It really lightens it up when the electronics are not hanging off of the pole and protects all that equipment from damage. I don't have to worry about how I set it down either. I just throw the whole shooting match to the ground and the box is high and dry and slung across my shoulder. Most of the time I am down on my knees grabbing the shaft up near the coil and it handles a lot easier without that heavy box at the other end. I find I am exponentially faster at recovery when the box is not on the pole. It just makes more sense to me than the way a detector is generally rigged.

I know lots of guys use a scoop or a pan and are really efficient. Guys that can really find the little ones and recover them quickly all have a different spin on it. What's yours?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have found some smaller lol, so small I had to wet my finger to pick them up... The GM 1000 is an amazing beeper for sniffing out nuggets to specks....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried weighing some of my smaller stuff on my cheapy digital scale a while back, it would not weigh them.  If I get time tonight I get out my reloading scale and see what I can find out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bedrock Bob said:

That's mighty small.

How do you recover the small ones? Do you use a scoop or some other tool?

I know lots of guys use a scoop or a pan and are really efficient. Guys that can really find the little ones and recover them quickly all have a different spin on it. What's yours?

Fortunately this was in an area where I could use a rake and spread dirt out, then use a scoop and the "divide and conquer" method......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've recovered bits that match the original bits shown at the top of this thread,

with the 5000 and with the 7000 I now own.

It is always a study in patience to be able to recover them.

I use a scoop.

I simply must find a better area haha.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FlakMagnet said:

I've recovered bits that match the original bits shown at the top of this thread,

with the 5000 and with the 7000 I now own.

It is always a study in patience to be able to recover them.

I use a scoop.

I simply must find a better area haha.

Indeed. I have hit them that small with the old SD2100. I got in the habit of raking down hotspots and sliding the coil around on the dirt. Even pushing it through the dirt when I could. I could recover them that small but it was not easy. The PI used an open coil so I could not recover by the "split and trickle" method on the coil surface. The PI was just harder to pinpoint but I got used to using the upper right edge of the coil when it was laid in its side.

I know I hear a lot of tiny stuff with the PI but just cant re-locate it. Sometimes I chase one for several minutes. I know it is right on the edge of detectability and I waste a lot of time fiddling with it. Kinda like trying to fish in a hole with a bunch of little ones in it. They are always striking, hard to hook and when you do finally bring one in they are too small to fool with.

I have tried to train myself to SWITCH DETECTORS as soon as I start wasting my time with little targets. I whip the GB2 out and put the PI down. Either that or I quit being so picky and pass over anything that disappears when I move a half inch of dirt around. The ones on the fringes are the ones that waste my time. I try to maximize my time by shifting machines as I move from area to area as conditions change.

Shifting gears keeps you moving faster and covering more ground per day. That is where I see the GM as potentially better. Even if it was no more sensitive than the GB2, if it was a little faster covering large areas and went deeper it would be a whole lot more versatile. 

I honestly don't need the sensitivity of the GB2. I will get a lot more tiny gold faster with a drywasher. I honestly don't need the depth of an SD2100 on iron targets. I wind up digging three foot holes and finding a horse shoe. I think there is a sweet spot somewhere in the middle. In my experience and in my area it really isn't a matter of what machine you are using. It is a matter of being in a spot that produces gold large enough to detect with any degree of success. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Guest
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...