Jump to content


Photo

HUGE GOLD NUGGET FOUND IN AUSTRALIA


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Rob Allison

Rob Allison

    Forum Owner & Admin

  • Admin
  • 9,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Behind the MINELAB GPX5000!!

Posted 19 December 2006 - 09:01 PM

Prospector digs up a big nugget
By 7News

A prospector has given himself the ideal Christmas present after trying his new metal detector out for the first time, just outside Maryborough.
He has found a giant gold nugget.

John Gladdis has spent a life on the hunt and was left speechless when his old friend produced a 21cm, 3.5kg nugget at his store.

"He walked out the back and he was shaking and handed me the tea towel and I unwrapped it and I think I shook as much as what he did," Mr Gladdis said.

The Ballarat prospector, who wants to remain anonymous, was testing out his new metal detector when he made the lucky strike.

"He got a signal and just kept digging down and got down to about the three feet mark and saw the gold sticking up and thought this is going to be a nice little piece of gold and it got bigger the further he dug," Mr Gladdis added.

The nugget is valued at up to $200,000 but surprisingly that's not expected tp be enough to make the retired train driver part with his find.
Rob's Detector Sales
Online Gold Prospecting Outfitter
website - www.nuggethunting.com
online store - www.robsdetectors.com
623.362.1459 (office)
602.909.9008 (cell)

#2 Guest_goldstudmuffin_*

Guest_goldstudmuffin_*
  • Guests

Posted 19 December 2006 - 09:35 PM

Hi Rob,

Wow any pictures? What detector, what coil, what kind of pick :blink: is the detector he used going to remain anonymous also? :o ;) :rolleyes:

#3 Qld Sandy

Qld Sandy
  • Members
  • 67 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia
  • Interests:Hotrods
    Gold detecting
    Beer

Posted 19 December 2006 - 11:23 PM

Check here guys for some pics. I see around the place that the knockers are in force. :D :P :P :P

MSN thread

#4 Reno Chris

Reno Chris
  • Members
  • 1,086 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Reno, Nevada
  • Interests:Gold Prospecting

Posted 19 December 2006 - 11:42 PM

Thats one amazing piece of gold!

Chris

#5 arahi666

arahi666
  • Members
  • 30 posts
  • Location:Wedderburn - Golden Triangle Victoria.
  • Interests:Gold panning - Gold specking - Gold dredging - Gold sluicing -Gold detecting - Not that I have gold fever.....

Posted 20 December 2006 - 01:21 AM

Lots of big nuggets coming out of the ground here in oz. Wedderburn 90oz found whilst digging a farm dam, you know the maryborough one , 40 oz found at kingower, 30 oz at dunolly, another 30 oz at newbridge. and so on and so on and so on... thats why I wanted to know approx how much of this yellow stuff is found per year, I recall a figure of $300,000,000 here in oz but question if its right, this is only amateur gold prospectors not mining companys.......
arahi

#6 prospectinginoz

prospectinginoz
  • Members
  • 47 posts

Posted 20 December 2006 - 05:32 AM

Check here guys for some pics. I see around the place that the knockers are in force. :D :P :P :P

MSN thread


Can you explain Qld Sandy why a stock standard SD 2000 was the ONLY ML detector (and this included a GPX 4000) that could detect a 17 oz nugget at 36” at the Dunolly test site this week? All the ML detectors used the SAME 30” mono coil and were tested under identical conditions. Or what about the 121 oz nugget found at Dunolly this year at a measured 1m to the top of the nugget found with an 18”mono coil on a GP 3000 (run in sensitive/deep/ tracking/mono and level adjust at 9 oclock). This nugget before it was dug up still gave a clearly recognizable signal with a 14” mono on another GP3000. So do you honestly believe that the 4000 goes deeper on ALL sizes of gold than earlier models?
Doug

#7 Rob Allison

Rob Allison

    Forum Owner & Admin

  • Admin
  • 9,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Behind the MINELAB GPX5000!!

Posted 20 December 2006 - 06:27 AM

Hello Guys,

I pretty much heard the same thing, but didn't want to announce anything before I knew the facts. The detector was found by a Coiltek customer that recently purchased a Minelab GPX-4000. I heard the coil was a Coiltek, but first heard it was a round 24-round. I guess it was a Coiltek 12x24 Elliptical Mono UFO! :D

Minelab and Coiltek do it again. ;)

Hoping to get some more information from John Gladdis or Doc here soon.

One hell of a find.

Rob Allison
Rob's Detector Sales
Online Gold Prospecting Outfitter
website - www.nuggethunting.com
online store - www.robsdetectors.com
623.362.1459 (office)
602.909.9008 (cell)

#8 ~LARGO~

~LARGO~
  • Members
  • 452 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boise, Idaho
  • Interests:Metal detecting of all kinds, meeting new friends

Posted 20 December 2006 - 12:35 PM

Hi all,

That is one very impressive find!

HOWEVER, I DO find it odd that it supposedly could not be heard by a 3000.
And only slightly with a 4000.

I did find a 3/4" cast pipe elbow at 3 feet, using my 3000, and a nuggetfinder 10x17 elliptical coil.
It only put off a whisper at the surface, but sure sounded good all the way down, till I could see what it was!

Of course, ground mineralization, coils sizes, operator experience, and hearing capabilities, and more enter into the whys and why nots of how this nugget was detected!

Great find, never the less!

~LARGO~

#9 Brian

Brian
  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 20 December 2006 - 02:37 PM

Can you explain Qld Sandy why a stock standard SD 2000 was the ONLY ML detector (and this included a GPX 4000) that could detect a 17 oz nugget at 36” at the Dunolly test site this week? All the ML detectors used the SAME 30” mono coil and were tested under identical conditions. Or what about the 121 oz nugget found at Dunolly this year at a measured 1m to the top of the nugget found with an 18”mono coil on a GP 3000 (run in sensitive/deep/ tracking/mono and level adjust at 9 oclock). This nugget before it was dug up still gave a clearly recognizable signal with a 14” mono on another GP3000. So do you honestly believe that the 4000 goes deeper on ALL sizes of gold than earlier models?
Doug



Yes Doug I am waiting for his explaination also.

Brian.

#10 prospectinginoz

prospectinginoz
  • Members
  • 47 posts

Posted 20 December 2006 - 03:09 PM

Yes Doug I am waiting for his explaination also.

Brian.


By the way Brian the person that found this 120 oz nugget has found more than 300ozs of gold with his 3000 this year alone! He has had a 4000 in the field and also spent some days out with other folk with 4000's in the field and been able to compare his 3000 with a variety of 4000's. For his kind of detecting which is looking for larger,deeper nuggets he can see no advantage of the 4000. A number of other semi professional prospectors here in Vic who do the same kind of detecting have come to the same conclusion.

However for the mass consumer market ie the people that are happy to find gold of any size then the 4000 has proved a winner. For Shallow ground and for gold in the sub gram to gram size it is clearly superior to previous platforms. And it will pull small gold out of previously thrashes patches. I think it has been designed to do this particularly in the US . But for some of us here in Victoria which has produced more large lumps of gold than any other place on earth the 4000 does not appear to offer any more than previous models.We want a platform that will give us more depth on big nuggets.
Doug

#11 ~LARGO~

~LARGO~
  • Members
  • 452 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boise, Idaho
  • Interests:Metal detecting of all kinds, meeting new friends

Posted 20 December 2006 - 04:39 PM

Hi all:

Re: GPX4000

For Shallow ground and for gold in the sub gram to gram size it is clearly superior to previous platforms. And it will pull small gold out of previously thrashes patches. I think it has been designed to do this particularly in the US .


Hah! Just as I maintained/suspected!

........I still want one, though, but I think I will still hang onto my 3000....


~LARGO~

#12 prospectinginoz

prospectinginoz
  • Members
  • 47 posts

Posted 20 December 2006 - 08:15 PM

[quote name='~LARGO~' date='Dec 21 2006, 06:35 AM' post='23163']
Hi all,

That is one very impressive find!

HOWEVER, I DO find it odd that it supposedly could not be heard by a 3000.
And only slightly with a 4000.

Is it possible that it was the other way around,I wonder?
Doug

#13 Iggy

Iggy
  • Members
  • 192 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Surprise Arizona

Posted 20 December 2006 - 08:42 PM

Near is what I found from the local OZ NEWS ...

Tuesday December 19, 06:28 PM
Prospector digs up a big nugget
By 7News

A prospector has given himself the ideal Christmas present after trying his new metal detector out for the first time, just outside Maryborough.
He has found a giant gold nugget.

John Gladdis has spent a life on the hunt and was left speechless when his old friend produced a 21cm, 3.5kg ( 7.7 lbs) nugget at his store.

"He walked out the back and he was shaking and handed me the tea towel and I unwrapped it and I think I shook as much as what he did," Mr Gladdis said.

The Ballarat prospector, who wants to remain anonymous, was testing out his new metal detector when he made the lucky strike.

"He got a signal and just kept digging down and got down to about the three feet mark and saw the gold sticking up and thought this is going to be a nice little piece of gold and it got bigger the further he dug," Mr Gladdis added.

The nugget is valued at up to $200,000 AU but surprisingly that's not expected tp be enough to make the retired train driver part with his find.

********************************************************************************
Nugget find pure gold
December 20, 2006 12:00am
Article

A GOLD nugget found south of Maryborough has been described as one of the biggest unearthed in 100 years.

The stunned unnamed prospector walked into Maryborough's Coiltech Gold Centre on Monday and plonked the 3.5kg ( 7.7 lbs) nugget on the counter.

Shop owner John Gladdis could hardly believe his eyes when he saw the nugget – 22cm long, 11cm wide and 8cm thick – in the prospector's hands.

"It was just the most magnificent piece of gold," he said.

"Every now and then you get one that is just something special and this was one of those."

#14 Qld Sandy

Qld Sandy
  • Members
  • 67 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia
  • Interests:Hotrods
    Gold detecting
    Beer

Posted 21 December 2006 - 12:07 AM

Can you explain Qld Sandy why a stock standard SD 2000 was the ONLY ML detector (and this included a GPX 4000) that could detect a 17 oz nugget at 36” at the Dunolly test site this week? All the ML detectors used the SAME 30” mono coil and were tested under identical conditions. Or what about the 121 oz nugget found at Dunolly this year at a measured 1m to the top of the nugget found with an 18”mono coil on a GP 3000 (run in sensitive/deep/ tracking/mono and level adjust at 9 oclock). This nugget before it was dug up still gave a clearly recognizable signal with a 14” mono on another GP3000. So do you honestly believe that the 4000 goes deeper on ALL sizes of gold than earlier models?
Doug



Perhaps a link to the post by a well know identity says it better than I can. I refer you to;

CHECK MESSAGE 15 OUT

As most of us know, detectors respond differently according to a number of variables including soil type and mineralisation, machine familiarity, presence of EM etc. etc. Just because a GP2000 got the goods there doesn't mean it will everywhere. The GP2000 is still a magnificent detector for those that wish to put up with its characteristics, but I would suggest than Minelab have produced other very fine machines that will suit almost all prospectors.

I don't recall me saying that the 4000 goes deeper on "all sizes of gold" I am still in the process of testing for my own understanding of my machines capabilities.

I apologise to the Thread starter for allowing myself to be lead away from the topic that THIS thread is about. Merry Christmas to All and Cheers.

Yes Doug I am waiting for his explaination also.

Brian.


Apologies Brian,
I was NOT aware that I owed either of you an explanation. Merry Christmas.

#15 prospectinginoz

prospectinginoz
  • Members
  • 47 posts

Posted 21 December 2006 - 02:21 AM

Perhaps a link to the post by a well know identity says it better than I can. I refer you to;

CHECK MESSAGE 15 OUT

As most of us know, detectors respond differently according to a number of variables including soil type and mineralisation, machine familiarity, presence of EM etc. etc. Just because a GP2000 got the goods there doesn't mean it will everywhere. The GP2000 is still a magnificent detector for those that wish to put up with its characteristics, but I would suggest than Minelab have produced other very fine machines that will suit almost all prospectors.

I don't recall me saying that the 4000 goes deeper on "all sizes of gold" I am still in the process of testing for my own understanding of my machines capabilities.

I apologise to the Thread starter for allowing myself to be lead away from the topic that THIS thread is about. Merry Christmas to All and Cheers.
Apologies Brian,
I was NOT aware that I owed either of you an explanation. Merry Christmas.


Sorry your reply is a cop out. Links to posts on MSN do not provide any credible evidence to answer the question I have posed. I repeat the question.Do you believe that the 4000 goes deeper on ALL sizes of gold compared to previous ML Pi platforms? A simple yes or no will suffice. If the answer is yes then please could you or someone else provide the evidence from credible testing. If you don't know the answer then be honest enough to admit it. And I still await your explanation for the sd2000 vs gp results. Have you compared an sd2000 with a 4000 on bigger gold? Have you done any comparative testing of Sd's vs Gp's? No you did not say that the gp 4000 goes deeper on ALL gold but someone from the Gold and Coin forum did.Let me quote:"The 4000 has what has never been in our hands before, a choice and a big one at that. Matching setting with the ground and coil you can go to depths and nugget size unheard of before"
Are you not a member of this forum? Do you agree with this statement?
Merry xmas
Doug

#16 AzNuggetBob

AzNuggetBob
  • Members
  • 1,270 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where am I today? on a new adventure.
  • Interests:Prospecting, Mining, Nuggetology.

Posted 21 December 2006 - 07:30 PM

Somtimes you just have to be in the right place but your your not goin to find it if your not out there.? :P AzNuggetBob

"Finding Gold Never Gets Old"

 

   

index_zps1666c554.jpg

AzNuggetBob

 

 
 
 
 


 

 

The author reserves All rights and no unauthorized re-posting, publishing or to otherwise make available any written or photographic material other than on Nuggethunting.com, and is not permitted without expressed written consent of AzNuggetBob


#17 Qld Sandy

Qld Sandy
  • Members
  • 67 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia
  • Interests:Hotrods
    Gold detecting
    Beer

Posted 22 December 2006 - 12:22 AM

Sorry your reply is a cop out. Links to posts on MSN do not provide any credible evidence to answer the question I have posed. I repeat the question.Do you believe that the 4000 goes deeper on ALL sizes of gold compared to previous ML Pi platforms? A simple yes or no will suffice. If the answer is yes then please could you or someone else provide the evidence from credible testing. If you don't know the answer then be honest enough to admit it. And I still await your explanation for the sd2000 vs gp results. Have you compared an sd2000 with a 4000 on bigger gold? Have you done any comparative testing of Sd's vs Gp's? No you did not say that the gp 4000 goes deeper on ALL gold but someone from the Gold and Coin forum did.Let me quote:"The 4000 has what has never been in our hands before, a choice and a big one at that. Matching setting with the ground and coil you can go to depths and nugget size unheard of before"
Are you not a member of this forum? Do you agree with this statement?
Merry xmas
Doug


It appears to me that you believe I am under some sort of obligation to come up with answers as you interrogate me. I am not under the impression that I am indebted to you, or that I need to help you in whatever sort of tirade you appear to be carrying on. I have done some testing, today in fact, and the results are on the Australian Gold and Coin Forum. The results that WE got (yes, confirmed by all 3 of us present) show a different story. You are free to draw whatever conclusions you wish to from this, but I would like to make it perfectly clear that I am, in no way, attacking you. I have never suggested the 4000 goes deeper on all targets and as far as I am concerned, the 4000 that I PURCHASED suits me. The continual bickering is growing tiresome. I would think that the public in general is more than savy enough to make up their own minds about what make/model of detector they wish to use. I would also like to congratulate the finder of the 3.5kg nugget and say that, if it happened to be the one with my name on it, I would gladly accept it warts and all, regardless of what I was swinging at the time.

#18 prospectinginoz

prospectinginoz
  • Members
  • 47 posts

Posted 22 December 2006 - 05:08 AM

It appears to me that you believe I am under some sort of obligation to come up with answers as you interrogate me. I am not under the impression that I am indebted to you, or that I need to help you in whatever sort of tirade you appear to be carrying on. I have done some testing, today in fact, and the results are on the Australian Gold and Coin Forum. The results that WE got (yes, confirmed by all 3 of us present) show a different story. You are free to draw whatever conclusions you wish to from this, but I would like to make it perfectly clear that I am, in no way, attacking you. I have never suggested the 4000 goes deeper on all targets and as far as I am concerned, the 4000 that I PURCHASED suits me. The continual bickering is growing tiresome. I would think that the public in general is more than savy enough to make up their own minds about what make/model of detector they wish to use. I would also like to congratulate the finder of the 3.5kg nugget and say that, if it happened to be the one with my name on it, I would gladly accept it warts and all, regardless of what I was swinging at the time.


Sandy you are just avoiding the tough questions or being honest enough to express your own opinions in case you offend the ”status quo” of the forum and suffer the dreaded penalty of the red ink! And as for the gold and coin forum have a look at: http://www.thunting....ead.php?t=12334 to see what some of your own members are saying and then ask yourself some hard questions. I would be interested in your test results but I will have to rely on a forum member emailing them to me.
Doug

#19 gr8goldonly

gr8goldonly
  • Members
  • 13 posts

Posted 22 December 2006 - 06:10 AM

HOLLY!! Merry Christmas, Batman!! :huh: What a nugget!

#20 Qld Sandy

Qld Sandy
  • Members
  • 67 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia
  • Interests:Hotrods
    Gold detecting
    Beer

Posted 22 December 2006 - 01:08 PM

Sandy you are just avoiding the tough questions or being honest enough to express your own opinions in case you offend the ”status quo” of the forum and suffer the dreaded penalty of the red ink! And as for the gold and coin forum have a look at: http://www.thunting....ead.php?t=12334 to see what some of your own members are saying and then ask yourself some hard questions. I would be interested in your test results but I will have to rely on a forum member emailing them to me.
Doug


HOHOHO.
I am not avoiding anything. The results I got are posted on OUR forum. We have "red inked" the spammers and those that only wish to be a disruptive influence posting negative garbege. You know the sort I believe.

You expect me to take notice of a link, when you in a post above would not. Your link is from an Unregistered user, one who does NOT have the fortitude to put his name to it, and you expect me to put faith in it.
HOHOHO.
Merry Christmas and goodbye.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users