Looking for a thermal with a few questions.

K

kb2112

New member
Im just starting to do my homework on getting a thermal scope. Due to the game laws in my state, during deer seasons we can only use rimfire - no center fire rifles for coyotes (bow/handgun/shotgun/muzzleloader only for deer), and after we can use centerfire.

This scope would go from a rimfire to my .223, in a pretty well wooded area - 200 yards max for the centerfire.

I dont want to overspend, but I know quality costs. Id like best bang for my buck.

What models would best suit my needs?

What qualities should I be looking for, and what should I beware of?

TYIA
 
That sounds similar to many areas I hunt. I have a pulsar trail 2 scope. 384 sensor and 3.5 base magnification, and a pulsar axion xq38 scanner with 3.5 base magnification.

In a wooded area with 200 yd max, you don't need 640 resolution. Better resolution is always nicer to look at, but you'd be pretty much just as effective with a 384 for coyotes at that range.

If you are hunting over bait, or down a logging road, or some place where you have limited shooting lanes, a scanner probably isn't necessary. If you are hunting wider areas, a scanner is a really nice thing to have. Scanners are also great for just viewing wildlife at night, even when not hunting--rats, deer, coyotes, beaver, bear, cats, owls, rabbits, etc.

I'd go with a 384 resolution scope with 3-4x base zoom. Less zoom if you are using your scope for scanning. Higher zoom if you are mostly just using the scope to take a shot.

If you want a scanner, Pulsar axion 2 XQ35 pro scanner is similar ( a little better I think) than what I have (currently $1500). I would like to upgrade to a 640 scanner for wider FOV, crisper picture, and better clarity at longer ranges, but the 384 that I have works just fine for 0-200 yds.

AGM adder 384 35mm or 50mm scope. Pulsar thermion 2 XQ 35 or 50mm scope. Iray 384 scopes.

When you are shopping, remember to pay attention to both the base zoom and sensor detail.

A 640 sensor with 1.5x base zoom, when zoomed in to 3.0x (doubled), the resolution is cut in half. So at 3.0x zoom it is effectively a 320 sensor (less than a 384). So at 3.0 zoom, a 384 sensor with 3.0 base zoom will give a better picture than a 640 sensor with 1.5x base zoom. (And a 384 device will be much cheaper than a 640 device) I recommend buying a device that has a base zoom that matches what you plan to use it at, that way you get the best picture for your money.
 
The problem your going to run into is the proper mount to bounce between guns for proper cheek weld.

If both rifles are conventional you can run a nice traditional style thermal like the Pulsar Thermion with a nice set of low or medium rings and switch between rifles if they have picatinny rails and have decent RTZ.

If one is an AR and the other a conventional, that is when it gets tricky unless its in a chassis or has adjustable cheek piece.

Tell us exactly what rifles you have and we can get some better recommendations.
 
So I would recommend an ADM Recon or Bobro (Burris if your looking at budjet) one piece mount, Pulsar Thermion XG50 from Europtic unless one of our site sponsors can match or get really close to the price. You didn't mention a budjet but that scope is 3k and its not much more money than a good 384 and IMO very much worth the extra money. 3x base mag with adjustable PIP and European made so your not supporting China. Several guys on here have them so I'm sure some will chime in.

Then your left with the challenge of cheek weld for the 1022. For the cheap you can add an adjustable cheek piece like a Carsten or you could buy a chassis with an adjustable cheek piece. I'd buy the chassis if you could swing it or get one down the road when you can.
 
Back
Top