Pulsar Trial XQ or XP 50?

C

CooperVT20

New member
Guys getting ready to pull the trigger on one of these this week. Will be used for coyote and fox out to 200 yards. Is the XP noticeably better? I see I will need to use more digital zoom on the XP than I would for the XQ as the later comes with a higher optical power. So wanted to see if anyone has experience with these units. Thanks,
 
In my opinion if you're going for coyotes I would use the XQ,

If you got the cash and you want a top those go with the Trijicon Mark 3 60 mm
 
Last edited:

The XQ has a 384 core and the XP has a 640 core. The XP will give you more detail and better resolution.

The 640 core at 2x will give you almost the same resolution as the 384 core at native resolution. (actual 320 vs 384)

The 384 core with the same lens will give you more magnification and less FOV than the 640 core. Keep in mind you are still looking at a bigger 384 resolution image vs a 640 resolution so bigger is not necessarily better because you can zoom the 640 if needed and still have a good image. (With any given lens size the unit will have to fill the screen so you have less pixels in the same screen so they look bigger with a lower resolution core and that equates to a higher optical zoom rating)

FOV is a critical spec to look at when buying a thermal unit. The 50mm XQ has a 7.5 degree FOV and the 50mm XP has 12.4 degree FOV.
7.5 is very tight at close range.

You just have to decide if the more detailed image is worth the difference in cost. If your budget allows go with the 640 core.

If you want the best image available right now you would need to go with the Trijcon 640 core units. The image is better because Trijicon uses 12 micron BAE cores and the others use 17 micron cores. The finer pixel pitch equals more detail and better resolution.

FLIR should have Boson 640 cores with a 12 micron pitch sometime next year as far as I can tell.

I field tested a Pulsar XP38 and it is a nice unit. They have had some POI shift issues in extreme temperatures that was supposedly fixed with a firmware update. I personally own Trijicon units and nothing out there right now can beat the image in the 640 core units. I shoot a lot of moving targets hunting hogs and Trijicon also has the best reticles IMO.

Is that clear as mud now????

 
Last edited:
My buddies and I just went through this. I ordered an XQ38 first and it is a very nice scope, I was impressed with it and the image is very good but I was really curious about the XP50 so I ordered one and gave the XQ38 to my buddy. The XP is noticeably clearer and has about 25% more FOV. The XQ has .5x more base magnification but I don't really notice it personally and I shoot with the picture in picture anyway. I could be wrong, but side by side the PIP image seemed clearer in the XP even when they were both set to 4.2x. I find the extra resolution makes positive ID much easier on animals the size of a coon/possum/cat. The XP was about 50% more money but I don't regret buying it because I plan to use it a lot and I have no immediate plans to buy a hand held scanner.

Make no mistake though, the XQ38 is no slouch and I don't think anyone would regret buying one, especially if you are buying a hand held also. Personally I wouldn't buy the XQ50 because the FOV is so narrow unless you have a hand held. The XP won't do anything the XQ won't do most of the time, but the XP just does it better. It's like regular TV vs HD TV.
 
Back
Top