GPX vs AQ1B for depth?

[Gunslinger44]

I recall reading somewhere that the Aquapulse Aq1B out-performed the GPX 5000 in depth on gold objects, as I am in gold country now and I want to go hunting, I've been looking to build a machine suitable for that. Is anyone familiar with AQ1B, and is there a buildable machine similar to it? The box just looks like a simple PI, and the machine itself is hailed by serious treasure hunters across the globe, with many amazing find accredited to it.

[kt315]

[kt315]

you see yourself those people only promises but does nothing. they just STEAL a hope from all geotechers.

[nelson]

KT315

Please send me an email to [email protected]

[Ferric Toes]

I recall reading somewhere that the Aquapulse Aq1B out-performed the GPX 5000 in depth on gold objects, as I am in gold country now and I want to go hunting, I've been looking to build a machine suitable for that. Is anyone familiar with AQ1B, and is there a buildable machine similar to it? The box just looks like a simple PI, and the machine itself is hailed by serious treasure hunters across the globe, with many amazing find accredited to it.

There is little point in even starting to compare the AQ1B with the GPX5000. They are two totally different detectors with totally different applications. The AQ1B is a diver held detector which is submersible to 100m water depth. In deep salt water it is almost impossible to use sample delays shorter than 30uS, so sub gram gold that can be found with the GPX5000 will not give any signal on the Aquapulse. Where the AQ1B shines is in finding gold coins, chains, bars, and silver objects on ancient shipwrecks and in this it has been hugely successful over many years.

Eric.

[Gunslinger44]

Eric, thank you for your reply. Yes, I understand about the sample delay being different because of being used primarily in salt-water conditions vs dry ground, but the comparison was I believe on dry land for both machines, or perhaps in shallow creek-water. As an aside, sub-gram gold doesn't concern me.

[Ferric Toes]

Eric, thank you for your reply. Yes, I understand about the sample delay being different because of being used primarily in salt-water conditions vs dry ground, but the comparison was I believe on dry land for both machines, or perhaps in shallow creek-water. As an aside, sub-gram gold doesn't concern me.

One possible problem is that the AQ1B has a manual threshold adjustment. If there is any ground signal at all, adjustment will be needed; but the amount will depend on the height of the coil above the ground. This could be tricky when searching creek beds if the terrain is rough.

Eric.