Scorpio Gold Drills 6.95 g/t Gold over 11.98 Metres from 242.99 Metres Within Caldera Volcanics
Original announcement by yahoo_press on
- Company
- Scorpio Gold
- Ticker
- SGN
- Exchange
- TSXV
- Region
- Unavailable
- Primary commodity
- Gold
- Secondary commodities
- None reported
- Document categories
- Drill results
- Extracted
- 2026-09-19 12:13:55 UTC
Analysis by Minestarters Atlas
Minestarters Atlas analysis
Summary
Scorpio Gold reported a high-grade gold intercept of 6.95 g/t Au over 11.98 m at the Goldwedge target. The drill hole also included a bonanza-style interval of 65.99 g/t Au over 1.16 m, providing proof of concept for Round Mountain style mineralization within the Manhattan Caldera.
Reasoning: Strong gold intercept of 6.95 g/t over ~12m with a high-grade bonanza sub-interval confirms mineralization style in a previously discounted zone.
Positive factors
- High-grade gold intercept
- Bonanza-style sub-interval
- Proof of concept for mineralization style
- Opens new exploration area
Facts used in scoring: 2
Classification and evidence
Bonanza Interceptpositive
Exceptionally high-grade zone, well above the deposit-type norm.
Why it applies: 65.99 g/t gold over 1.16 m is exceptionally high grade for the context.
Evidence · text
“65.99 g/t gold over 1.16 m”
Step-Out Extensionpositive
Mineralization extended beyond the previously known limit.
Why it applies: Opens approximately 5 sq. km of previously discounted caldera volcanics.
Evidence · text
“Opens approximately 5 sq. km of previously discounted caldera volcanics”
Extracted facts
Stored fact records: 2. Some facts used in scoring do not have a stored record.
Drill Results (2)
26MN-091Goldwedge · goldGrade: 6.95Grade Unit: g/tIntercept: 11.98 mView all detailsHide details
Identity
- Hole ID
- 26MN-091
- Project
- Goldwedge
- Commodity
- gold
- Ticker
- SGN
Geometry
- Grade
- 6.95
- Grade Unit
- g/t
- Intercept
- 11.98 m
- From
- 242.99 m
- To
- 254.97 m
- Intercept Depth
- 242.99 m
Classification
- Sample Type
- drill
- Group ID
- 26MN-091:242.99-254.97
Review
- Needs Review
- No
- Interp. Status
- scored
- Historical
- No
Dates
- Event date
- 2026-06-09T00:00:00.000Z
Reasoning: High grade intercept confirming mineralization style.
Positive factors
- Strong grade and width
Evidence · text
“6.95 g/t gold over 11.98 metres ("m") from 242.99 m”
Tags used in scoring
No QA/QC Disclosurenegative
Release does not disclose QA/QC — lab certification, CP/QP sign-off and assay protocols cannot be checked from this document.
Why it applies: qaqc_disclosed is not true
Cut-off Undisclosednegative
High-grade interval reported without stating the cut-off grade used for compositing.
Why it applies: no cutoff_grade was stated
26MN-091Goldwedge · goldGrade: 65.99Grade Unit: g/tIntercept: 1.16 mView all detailsHide details
Identity
- Hole ID
- 26MN-091
- Project
- Goldwedge
- Commodity
- gold
- Ticker
- SGN
Geometry
- Grade
- 65.99
- Grade Unit
- g/t
- Intercept
- 1.16 m
- From
- 250.76 m
- To
- 251.92 m
- Intercept Depth
- 242.99 m
Classification
- Sample Type
- drill
- Group ID
- 26MN-091:250.76-251.92
Review
- Needs Review
- No
- Interp. Status
- scored
- Historical
- No
Dates
- Event date
- 2026-06-09T00:00:00.000Z
Reasoning: Very high grade sub-interval.
Positive factors
- Bonanza grade
Evidence · text
“65.99 g/t gold over 1.16 m from 250.76 m”
Tags used in scoring
No QA/QC Disclosurenegative
Release does not disclose QA/QC — lab certification, CP/QP sign-off and assay protocols cannot be checked from this document.
Why it applies: qaqc_disclosed is not true
Cut-off Undisclosednegative
High-grade interval reported without stating the cut-off grade used for compositing.
Why it applies: no cutoff_grade was stated
How Atlas produces this analysis
Minestarters Atlas uses automated extraction to summarize mining announcements, identify reported measurements, and classify supporting evidence. Sentiment reflects the extracted narrative and classification rules; it is an interpretation, not a reported measurement. Evidence quotes and context are provided where available. Missing data, low-confidence results, and review flags indicate limitations. Check the original publisher announcement before relying on an interpretation.