Thermal Scope clip ons vs actual thermal

I recently got my hogster clip and I will say it’s pretty dang good for me. If mounted to a 3-9-40 scope it works great and was very accurate. From what I’ve noticed is 3 or 4 power is really good power using a clip. At 9 power no Pixelation but field of view was way to narrow. I have not been able to hunt with it only sight it in.
 
... so perhaps it is appropriate to follow the indications of the Hogster-C clip-on specifications ... which suggest 1-6X as a magnification of the lens riflescope on which it is applied. Maybe, if you need 7X and up ... it is better to switch to the Super Hogster or the Pulsar Trail 2 XQ50 lrf ....
 
Ernest49, I don't know the weight differences between the Pulsars (including the scope your friend would use), but weight is one of the disadvantages of a clip-on. Is it a big deal if you're coyote hunting with a tripod?...maybe not. But if your friend is a mountain hunter and is lugging his firearm up and down hills, I would not want to have my clip-on in addition to my long-range scope. Just my 2 cents!
 
RRyu ... my friend, mountain hunter, seems to have listened to your advice, even though he never read your reply. He sold the Pulsar Trail XP50 and bought the Pulsar Thermion XQ38 (which has a lens of only 32mm in diameter). To get into a silly metaphor, it seems to me that he sold a Porsche to buy a Honda Civic. I advised him to buy at least the Pulsar Thermion XQ50 (which has a 42mm diameter lens). But he evidently had the fire burning his [beeep] and he didn't want to wait ... Happy him .... ?!!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top