You're welcome. I'm trying to help people that don't have the experience to know what they need to avoid mistakes. I hate it when people waste money through inexperience. Equipment manufacturers rarely take the time to tell a customer when their equipment is less than optimal.

@@hardrockuniversity7283 That's MUCH appreciated!

Sabes si desprende metal al impacto?

...........

Don't know how well it would work at the slower RPM. Putting a secondary shaft and a belt drive with the proper pulley ratio would get it back to speed if needed. Keith

There was a detectable, but minor imbalance. At speed it seems to run at an anti-harmonic frequency and it smooths out. I'm sure if you got a scale you could eliminate it. I just cut them all to the same length and then added a similar amount of hard facing- focusing on the tips. A also welded and hard faced little tabs to protest the heads of the mounting bolts from wear. Rounded bolt heads are no fun. I am glad I can talk with someone with experience on his tables. The M-7 is rated at 1 TPH correct? We took a sample of our ore the Oregon years ago and had him test it. Then my other half purchased one of his crushers used for $1K and a cheap knock off table for $1.5K. The problem I had with that table was we could get excellent recoveries at 100 Lbs/Hr, but higher than that we would lose fluidization in the pulp above the removable dams. Watching Gold Rush, I am sure that is what happened to them also. What would you say is the REAL throughput on your table? I also have an RP-4 from global mining solutions (Deister Table). It legitimately runs 400+ Lbs/ Hr, but does not give a clean concentrate. I finally had to invent something that does what I need. Working on the patent application now. Keith

Actually I seldom use the M-7 it just sits under cover lately. When I was running it I was working placer cons at about 100 lb per hour (5 gal). Those were very heavy with black sands. I did quickly figure out that everything HAS to be classified the same. I could have pushed it harder but didn't. I have a ton or so left to pick cat turds out of, I'll send you an update. I despise classifying below 30- so they may sit a bit longer. Those stainless rails under the M-7 will rust in a humid environment. Thin coat of lithium grease to avoid that. That guy on Gold Rush was running unclassified cons on the table. Looked like 3/4-. It's not a sluice lol. It was uncool of the crew not to help him figure it out. I have seen others run their M-7's professionally with stellar results. Both were lode miners. High through puts but in lighter ore, not limonite. I wasn't there for the con runs. You could always set yours up and rent table time. A couple things I'd like to see would be a dryer for cons/ore 5-15 gal cap. Cons have to be dry to classify, hard to achieve in the Pac NW. The other thing would be a small classifier capable of splitting 5-6 grades below 12 mesh. Dump 5 gal in and it vibrates and splits off. Goldfield makes a big one but way out of reach. You should build those, I'm certain there's a market. Love the wheel kit and handles you made! I'll have to do that. Those are a pain to move around with two people. If hard facing will fix an old Peter Wright Anvil it should work fine on those hammers. It'd be nice to know your procedure and rod type. Seems like it'd be prone to crack if done wrong. Oregon will be panning only soon if the State gets their way. I have some of the few dredge claims remaining. They are more lax with the load miners in my district, for now. Thanks for the class I'm taking notes. At the very least you may save some lives. I hope you realize that.

That was pretty much my experience too. It seemed to lose fluidization easier if there were clays also. My table is much less labor intensive and is pretty much 'set and forget'. I build for myself FIRST. :-) Keith

It would tend to grind up the sand and gravel too, but it would tear up caliche.

No I do not. Have you ever used one? What is the method of operation and how well does it work? Keith

+Hard Rock University I have used one. They are an airswept impact mill in simple terms. Basically it is an 3 blade impeller that spins at high speeds that creates turbulant airflows which grind rock down to a fine mesh for gold or other means

Where could I get more information?

Here is the ad from the Prospecting and Mining Journal. - Maximum size reduction of rocks and ores. Collider mill reduces rocks to powder in seconds. Portable trailer mounted or stationary units. Quarter ton to mega tons per hr. Financing available. Check us out at rotarycollidermill.com or call (817)845-9519.

.......

It definitely has it's shortcomings. The drive and bearings have been fine, but the impactor wear was very high and the output varied a lot in particle size. I made some modifications that corrected these issues IMO kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jJl5eMWBzdHMYmg.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mJx-psSW1cqXg4E.html I'm also working on my own design right now.

I built my own from lessons learned. There are videos of it.

I would agree. I got it at a fraction of retail used and learned a lot from it.

Just checked them out. You are correct, it is much less expensive. I just tried one out last month and was quite impressed with the throughput and portability. It is not a production machine though unless you keep changing the casing etc. Probably a reasonable method. The Action mining unit is way too heavy, too slow, and too expensive. We got it used cheap though and it did what was needed at the time although poorly.

@@hardrockuniversity7283 With higher metals prices, I suspect that mom and pop scaled mining equipment will be a growth business. MBMM is likely the leader right now, but plenty of room for innovation. The thing with the K and M crusher is that at that price point and size, it can be used as a portable truck mounted unit for larger scale sampling in the field.

@@aphilippinesadventure9184 The one I saw had been back packed in. My design is heavier than K&K but lighter than Action Mining with higher throughput and cheap wear parts.

@@hardrockuniversity7283 Are yours ready to go? For sale?

@@aphilippinesadventure9184 Not just yet, Soon.

We got it used for much less than retail. With my modifications it works OK to pulverize about 200 lbs per hour at a low cost. A agree that the original design was a bit pricey on the operational side :-) . Someone also claimed (not sure who) that it could crush 1000 lbs per hour, which was delusionally optimistic for my ore at least. I have some ideas for an inexpensive crusher I'm planning to build this fall. We'll see how that goes...