Thermal scope recommendations
- Thread starter packgoatguy
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Field of View and base magnification are important factors to consider.
Something like the Bering Optics Super Hogster or Super Yoter will be great on a rifle at a couple hundred yards but, up close won't work too well.
The "base" Hogsters have an advantage for some with a much better Field of View and less native magnification.
I'm one that opted for the higher native magnification and smaller Field of View because most of my shots are 100 yards or further away. This generally worked out well except for one night with a bunch of dogs chasing cattle and newborn calves. When I started banging away, they started running towards me, and between the small FOV and magnification I had some pass probably 10 yards to my left and while I swung to pick them up on the run, my backstop didn't allow any further shots. That night, a 19mm Thermal would have served me much better because I would have seen more than some hair or some grass as I tried to track them close to me.
Ultimately, there really isn't just one answer and rarely is there a perfect answer. The money/expense involved means compromises are made and, those compromises will vary from person to person and their specific situations.
Something like the Bering Optics Super Hogster or Super Yoter will be great on a rifle at a couple hundred yards but, up close won't work too well.
The "base" Hogsters have an advantage for some with a much better Field of View and less native magnification.
I'm one that opted for the higher native magnification and smaller Field of View because most of my shots are 100 yards or further away. This generally worked out well except for one night with a bunch of dogs chasing cattle and newborn calves. When I started banging away, they started running towards me, and between the small FOV and magnification I had some pass probably 10 yards to my left and while I swung to pick them up on the run, my backstop didn't allow any further shots. That night, a 19mm Thermal would have served me much better because I would have seen more than some hair or some grass as I tried to track them close to me.
Ultimately, there really isn't just one answer and rarely is there a perfect answer. The money/expense involved means compromises are made and, those compromises will vary from person to person and their specific situations.
You mention that you are not interested in the bells and whistles like wifi. I was in the same boat. Now I am not. The reason is that those bells and whistles in some cases will allow you to live stream to your phone. The advantage is that if you are setup in a blind, you can have your thermal pointing in the direction you are expecting to see the game and watch it on your cell phone. Its makes scanning allot easier.
Litehiker
Well-Known Member
I'd like to get a thermal scope and "clip-on" scopes seem to be the most practical and, having no reticle with their attendant adjustment turrets, they are less expensive for a given resolution/pixel number.
Last edited:
I am in the minority. I prefer a clip on.
For most people, a clip-on is not a good choice.
I considered a PVS-30 in front of my ACOG but, ultimately found a NV scope on a QD mount was a much better solution. Good mounts hold your zero and you end up with less weight and length.
When shooting from a fixed position, a clip-on is more useful but, walking around and shooting from improvised positions, I find the extra weight that far forward to be bad for "my shooting" and physical conditioning. Add a suppressor and QD mount, and the weight out front becomes significant which plain and simple sucks big time! The center of gravity between my hands lets me track moving targets much better yielding much better results in the field in my case.
That being said, something like a PVS-30 fits much better on my heavy bolt actions (9+ lbs) and lets me use day optics at night. On my auto-loaders, it just destroys the handling qualities IMHO.
In terms of using them as a scanner, eye relief and field of view can be problems so, consider your use case carefully against the specific tech specs of any potential clip-on acquisition.
I considered a PVS-30 in front of my ACOG but, ultimately found a NV scope on a QD mount was a much better solution. Good mounts hold your zero and you end up with less weight and length.
When shooting from a fixed position, a clip-on is more useful but, walking around and shooting from improvised positions, I find the extra weight that far forward to be bad for "my shooting" and physical conditioning. Add a suppressor and QD mount, and the weight out front becomes significant which plain and simple sucks big time! The center of gravity between my hands lets me track moving targets much better yielding much better results in the field in my case.
That being said, something like a PVS-30 fits much better on my heavy bolt actions (9+ lbs) and lets me use day optics at night. On my auto-loaders, it just destroys the handling qualities IMHO.
In terms of using them as a scanner, eye relief and field of view can be problems so, consider your use case carefully against the specific tech specs of any potential clip-on acquisition.
Junkysavage
Active Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2016
- Messages
- 43
If you get one that will id a rabbit @100, you're going to be able to id coyotes at 300+ and tell difference between deer and pigs at 400+. Detection range of not sure but long way. I've seen pigs and deer in wheat fields at a mile or so. Wasn't sure what they were at that range but detection was good.I have a AGM rattler ts35-384 and it will do all of this for 23-2400
MadCowRacer
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2016
- Messages
- 25
Clip on suck. Way too much fussing about. Factory support is what made me choose pulsar over Flir originally. It paid off I snapped the shutter cover on my Rxq30 and within a week they sent me a new cover free of charge. The horro stories of Flir and ATN ghosting people was enough for me. Imagine if it had been a serious issue like firmware not working. Expensive paperweight.
All of the units we use are budget. I would not get the Burris clip on. Does not come with adapters. The adapters suck and use crappy rubber shims that don't work when stacking for tolerance.
Their stand alone rifle sights are very clear picture wise and the controls are fairly straight forward.
I've grown to love pic in pic so much it's pretty much a must have option. Perfect soon for first shot and open view for follow up/running shots.
Detections is amazing even on low end models. It's the identification that you get what you pay for. Body language will help you tell the difference between species 90% of the time. In the weather conditions that make things fuzzy (lower heat differences, and humidity) the higher end units let you tell the difference.
All of the units we use are budget. I would not get the Burris clip on. Does not come with adapters. The adapters suck and use crappy rubber shims that don't work when stacking for tolerance.
Their stand alone rifle sights are very clear picture wise and the controls are fairly straight forward.
I've grown to love pic in pic so much it's pretty much a must have option. Perfect soon for first shot and open view for follow up/running shots.
Detections is amazing even on low end models. It's the identification that you get what you pay for. Body language will help you tell the difference between species 90% of the time. In the weather conditions that make things fuzzy (lower heat differences, and humidity) the higher end units let you tell the difference.
Last edited:
I have an AGM clip on and love it. I also have a hogster R25. I much prefer the clip on. A friend and I both bought the AGM clip on. We have no complaints. You can swap them between rifles without having to sight each rifle in before using. You can buy a mount for your particular objective diameter if you want or it comes with the shims as well as a quick release mount if you are using an ar platform and have a picatinny rail out in front of the scope. I use the shims since I am using it on a bolt action. The only thing about the shims is the thermal slips on the scope a little with the recoil of the rifle if you are not paying attention. They maybe a deal breaker for some, not for me. They advise against using the shims with AR10's and doing magazine dumps for that reason. As mentioned above, it does add weigh forward to the rifle which you might not like if you are trying to stalk a hogs and may have to do some snap shooting at them. Not an issue where we hunt. Its all blinds and ambush points.
I don't know anything about the burris thermals. I have seen some bad reviews. AGM and Bering have been getting great reviews on all of their thermals.
I don't know anything about the burris thermals. I have seen some bad reviews. AGM and Bering have been getting great reviews on all of their thermals.
packgoatguy
Well-Known Member
Dumb questions time...
Can a regular thermal scope like a super hogster be attached in front of a regular day scope and used like a "clip on"? I like the idea of keeping my day scope attached (non thermal)...
Why are the clip on versions of the super hogster and super yoter so much more expensive than the non clip on versions? Mechanically, what are the differences between them? For example, the super hogster c is a lot lighter weight than the super hogster r... why is that? What is the difference between them?
Does the laser beam from a regular handheld LRF put off enough heat that you can see the beam and where it is aiming with a thermal scope?
Can a regular thermal scope like a super hogster be attached in front of a regular day scope and used like a "clip on"? I like the idea of keeping my day scope attached (non thermal)...
Why are the clip on versions of the super hogster and super yoter so much more expensive than the non clip on versions? Mechanically, what are the differences between them? For example, the super hogster c is a lot lighter weight than the super hogster r... why is that? What is the difference between them?
Does the laser beam from a regular handheld LRF put off enough heat that you can see the beam and where it is aiming with a thermal scope?
Imagine trying to look through your day scope at a little computer screen 2" in front of your objective.
Negative.
packgoatguy
Well-Known Member
Went with the super hogster. Thanks to all for your input.
Litehiker
Well-Known Member
Seems that thermal scope technology, like many other technologies, is getting better yearly and some prices are coming down as competition increases.
Me? i"ll spend maybe $3,000. but no more and I'll have to see the scopes in action first.
Me? i"ll spend maybe $3,000. but no more and I'll have to see the scopes in action first.
