Blue Clay / Sandy Gravel Assay Results

racingjoe66

Greenie
Joined
Nov 15, 2021
Messages
16
Reaction score
21
Golden Thread
0
Okay Guys and Gals, I had 2 samples of material tested and came back with the following results:

Sample 1----gold 0.142 oz per ton
------------silver 0.275 oz per ton
------------platinum 0.021 oz per ton
------------palladium 0.014 oz per ton
------------osmium 0.028 oz per ton
------------ruthenium 0.020 oz per ton
------------iridium 0.007 oz per ton
------------rhodium 0.004 oz per ton

Sample 2----gold 0.133 oz per ton
------------silver 0.199 oz per ton
------------platinum 0.017 oz per ton
------------palladium 0.016 oz per ton
------------osmium 0.023 oz per ton
------------ruthenium 0.021 oz per ton
------------iridium 0.007 oz per ton
------------rhodium 0.005 oz per ton

I am new to all this and wondering if the gold / silver is even worth mining with these results? I assume the other material results are so minor they aren't worth going after? The material sent off to be tested was a mixture of sandy gravel that is sitting on top of a blue clay layer and mixed in with these 2 samples was some of the blue clay that was right there at the sandy gravel layer. Would it be worth it to go deeper into the clay to have it tested further for gold and silver only? Going lets say 6 inches deep and then again at like 24 inches deep into the clay or what do people suggest?

Thanks for any and all input!!!
 

Upvote 4
Racingjoe66 will likely not respond.
Now that at least two agree that Racingjoe66 may not ever respond here again.

Both of us have expanded and asked some questions. That is what the forum is for. Unless I'm missing something here?
 

There is likely no way to get back to the topic as Racingjoe66 may never be back on the forum at all at any topic. Sounds familiar right?

The question about if his clay samples really have enough values in them thus can not be answered.

Even a bot can't fix that.

Back to a different topic.
 

By the way the likely hood that this thread topic was started by a "Bot" is looking high and has lead everyone on for a few reasons.

The fact that two or more here have come to the realization that the OP will likely never show up again yet to be seen. Indicates there is a pattern of background activities taking place.

You all have likely been "played". Just saying.
 

By the way the likely hood that this thread topic was started by a "Bot" is looking high and has lead everyone on for a few reasons.

The fact that two or more here have come to the realization that the OP will likely never show up again yet to be seen. Indicates there is a pattern of background activities taking place.

You all have likely been "played". Just saying.
Not “We all have likely been "played".“? ……
 

Not “We all have likely been "played".“? ……
Then tally up all of the "Racingjoe66" posts of the past to never be seen or heard from again to start with.

85 percent is a good number.
 

Sure got quite here now. Maybe it is now in an "Ignore mode" with no questions being answered.

Sounds familiar does it not?
 

By the way the "Bots and associates" do not count.
Assembler, back off attacking racingjoe, if this thread bothers you then don't enter it.
 

You need a sample that represents the average grade for the deposit as a whole - however you define the L x W x H. Any coarse pieces will skew your sample - this is known as the nugget effect. Also - the richest layers and streaks will make the other layers look better than they are. Placer sampling is a tricky proposition. The more materal you use for your samples from a variety of horizontal locations, and vertical layers, the better.
 

Almost 5 grams per ton in placer material you have to dig up anyway? That’s definitely worth stockpiling and running! Have fun and “find your gold!”
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom