GPZ7000 coil

If the 7000 coil is an overlapping design, why can't CT and NF make them to suite the GPX detectors.  Surely it can be done without the so called chip imbeded in the coil so only ML own the design.  Ok, ML have the patent on the new detector and coil.  I can't see why the others are sitting back saying it can't be done.
There's always more than one way to skin a cat, so they say.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

personally i don't think it will take too long for a modded coiltech or NF coil to come out with a similar design as the 7k coil and that will shield the 5k coils from emi better. its the next move forward for the 5k and it will be interesting to see results compared to a 7k if and when one comes along.

Thats my thinking and maybe it is already in the pipeline. time will tell.

I think the coil is wound as such looking at the photos above. Could be wrong but the receive coils only have one common wire that is bent meaning it is in fact one coil just reversed in winding. Pretty easy to make providing you can set up the null of the 2 DD coils. Might be a lot of trial and error doing it though.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

IsmaelJ wrote:I think the coil is wound as such looking at the photos above. Could be wrong but the receive coils only have one common wire that is bent meaning it is in fact one coil just reversed in winding. Pretty easy to make providing you can set up the null of the 2 DD coils. Might be a lot of trial and error doing it though.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Hi Ismael,

oh well, I can't see the wires and trace them. It is supposed (speculation only), that there is an ID chip in the coil, which prevents making 3'rd party/DIY coils.
This is part of the big greedy game ML is playing/controlling the detection depth performance here (drip-feed definitely). They won't allow you to use much better coils, which can extents its detection depth and improve the pin-pointing with ease. And to the disfavour of all, they won't allow you DIY coils to get extreme detection depth, when there is a chip in the coil.
The DoD coil (I like to call it the DuD coil) isn't the best and it limits the capability of the 7k. It is further more confusing the operators during pin-pointing.
Cheers,
4212 aka Aziz

IsmaelJ wrote:I think the coil is wound as such looking at the photos above. Could be wrong but the receive coils only have one common wire that is bent meaning it is in fact one coil just reversed in winding. Pretty easy to make providing you can set up the null of the 2 DD coils. Might be a lot of trial and error doing it though.

Wouldn't that throw a cat amongst the pigeons... if they could get a Super-D to work on GPX models.
If a spare Super D costs $1200 from ML, whoever starts making those coils will become a rich man if they can get around any patents.

IsmaelJ wrote:I think the coil is wound as such looking at the photos above. Could be wrong but the receive coils only have one common wire that is bent meaning it is in fact one coil just reversed in winding. Pretty easy to make providing you can set up the null of the 2 DD coils. Might be a lot of trial and error doing it though.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I think you could be right Ismael, it does appear to have one common RX winding shared between the two loops.
I certainly wouldn't like the job of Nulling that coil, and the shielding would be a whole ball game alone.
I have heard they are a heavy coil, can anyone tell me if they are resin set or just shielded and bonded shut.

The ID chip is visible.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I think from memory "could be wrong as im burnt out     "  Trev at CT was licenced or something
to use the ML ID chips in his X-Terra range of coils, so just maybe CT can strike up a deal and use the DoD chip also.

 Imagine a DoD drag coil on a 7ooo  real depth.

Pete

PS - Trev is a member of DWAG, maybe he has something he'd like to ad, knowing Trev personally my bet is he's already on the job.

If the rumours are true about the price of extra coils for the 7000, then I see one of two things.
People paying top dollar for after market ML coils or CT and NF finding a way around it.
It's going to get very interesting with this new machine.
Anyway that's just my opinion and what would I know.

From what information I have the chip is not so much an ID chip but each of the D coils have their own preamp to the main detector this is what gives the advantage on the detectors depth ability. The picture I posted is for using on a SD/GP or GPX so experimentation would be required for it to work. The setting up or nulling the 2 coils would be easy what would be experimental is would it be efficient and would you wire them in parallel or series? Also setting up the dampening resistor would also be a little difficult. One mate of mine has made what he calls a butterfly designed coil which is similar to the Coiltek AI coils which he said works okay. The GPZ design would be okay on small nuggets but without the pre-amps depth on big targets might not be there. This of course is all speculation. I imagine that because Minelab have a large stake in Coiltek nowadays will will see coils for the GPZ from them pretty soon.

I have had quite a lot of reports that the GPZ unfortunately isn't living up to the hype, especially in WA. Almost without exception the comments made from very competent prospectors is that on the mildest salt encrusted ground (which a lot of WA is) the detector is worse than an SD2000 on trying to use it. It is okay to a point on mineralised ground but not really any great improvement as far as quietness goes and seems to definitely go deeper thanks to the preamps. Minelab have a lot of work to do to correct this and the talk is going towards legal proceedings. Hopefully ML will come out with a upgrade or recall path if they can fix the issues. The salt issue was the main reason I never bought one (among other considerations). I hope to do some experiments with other coils on the SDC2300 shortly and hope that I can find if it will work better or deeper with bigger coils. I know that Woody has mentioned he got it to work with a 12" coil design I hope he was right for a change. Whether we can use existing ML coils I have my doubts but we never know until I have a look at the circuit. I do know from a rudimentary inspection from another that it also has a preamp from the coil but this is inside the detector, again I don't know until I look for myself. Most of the "fiddlers" haven't done any proper tests or inspections of the SDC so I can't wait to get mine (hopefully this weekend). I think that has possibilities even if it is based on the SD design (SDC SD Compact).

Anyway that's my take or "twopence" on things at the present.

Ismael, thanks for that info. I look forward to your comments on possible coil options for the SDC.

Your comments on the performance of the GPZ would be a little unsettling for those people that have just bought one and I would also make the following comparison.
The SDC 2300 was promoted as a machine that could detect small gold in mineralised ground. That is exactly what it did and reports of finds were being posted very shortly after its release. On the other hand, the GPZ was (is) being promoted as a machine that can find big nuggets at depth. Ominously, there are very few reports, as yet, of that happening! Sure, there are reports of 4 to 7 grammers being found, but even they don’t seem to be at any startling depth. Moreover, from the videos that I have seen, the initial signals of the targets were not that brilliant and were arguably found as the result of some good detecting!

As you say, the Zed doesn’t seem to be living up to the hype. Hopefully, as people become more competent with the machine and our season gets into full swing, that will change and the GPZ will be machine that we all want it to be.

Col