Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Precious and Base Metal Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hank2010 who wrote (5627)	12/2/2002 11:29:07 AM
From: Little Joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

According to an analysis that I have seen, they have drilled down dip as you allege. Much of the additional holes just measures what was measured by the first hole. Little joe

To: hank2010 who wrote (5627)	12/2/2002 8:01:04 PM
From: jpthoma1	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 39344

Re the CZZ drill hole you mentioned. "60 metres of $500 rock". When I plot the drill holes it looks to me like they may have drilled down dip as the deposit appears to dip in that direction. I wish they would publish apparent true widths. In a recent seminar in Quebec City, I had discussions with numerous geologists who have worked or analyzed the «Ungava type» mineralization occurrences. These high grade, but relatively small «pods» of mineralization seem to occur at the bottom of ultramafic flows or intrusives, in very large cavities in the footwall( or the paleosurface)and having steep slopes. And to had to the complexity, folding is very apparent in the Mesamax area. This is a setting quite different from the flat lying «text book» deposits. So, we cannot say with certainty that Mesamax was drilled «down dip». But I agree that a modelization of the deposit would be welcome on CZZ web site. JP