Coyote_Thumper-2023

C

coyote_thumper

Active member
Alright, starting my own topic for posting my hunting activities now that baiting has its own forum.

Coyotes have kept their distance from my place for a while.

I did hunt a local farm this weekend that has had coyotes kill 4 goats in the past month. I did about 2 hours of calling and scanning but didn't see anything. I'll try again when time permits.

I finally entered the thermal arena with an AGM TM10 thermal monocular. $600 delivered to my door from amazon. A better model would be nice, but this is what I can afford for now and I think it will be a valuable asset for night hunting.

Here's a video I put together while testing it out.



My plan is to use it for scanning for coyotes, raccoons, or rats. Then use digital night vision to confirm target and shoot.
 

CT, I recently purchased the same monocular. Like you, I think it will suit my needs. I basically just need to know something is out there. I don’t need to see or count whiskers. A 384 resolution would be nice, but at $800 more than i paid for the TM10, it isn’t worth it for my needs. I wouldn’t want less than 256, however.

Good job on the comparison of monocular vs. rifle scope.
 
06: Thanks.

That was my reasoning too. My digital NV works well enough for me to ID targets and take shots about as far as I'd be willing to shoot at night anyways. But my rifle with NV and illuminator weighs 10+ lbs and has a narrow field of view. Scanning with that gets old real quick. I wanted something with a wide field of view that can locate potential targets and let me know when to turn on the NV and which direction to point it.

I did have an idea, it might work for rat hunting with an air rifle at least....The monocular has a camera tripod screw mount on the bottom. I found an adapter on amazon for $10 to go from gun rail to camera screw. So I could mount the monocular to an air rifle.

I can then live stream the video from the monocular to my phone. If I put the air rifle in a vise and shoot at a target, and then put a small dot (sticker or similar) on my phone screen at the location of impact. Then that sticker becomes my "crosshair" and I now have an improvised thermal scope. Zoom on the monocular would change the POI.

I might give this a try sometime.
 
06:

My 2 initial "complaints" with the TM10 are:
1. The viewing screen looks small to me. I was expecting it to look bigger through the eyepiece. I see now on the specs that this model has a .2" screen, but the 384 models have a .4" screen.

2. The refresh rate is 25hz. I see that the 384 models are 50hz. When panning, a faster/smoother refresh rate would be nice.

The advantage gain going from no thermal, to having a TM10 was huge. I'm not sure the gain would be quite as big going from a TM10 to a TM15 or similar.
 

My main purpose for the TM10 is for hog hunting corn feeders from elevated blinds. For that purpose the TM10 should work fine, from my experimenting around home and the farm. I have a hog hunt planned for June so that will be a defining moment. Though I don’t call coyotes as much as I used to do, it will also work for that at the close ranges I hunt here in the mountains. And another good use of the monocular is for security purposes at home. When the dogs go to barking I use it to scan the yard and perimeter.

I got my monocular for less than $500 shipped, so considering the price point and adequate view of the 256 resolution, I am not complaining.
 
WF: Yeah, I suspect so. I'm definitely enjoying it so far as I'm doing some testing with it.

If you try out that crossbow mount, I'd enjoy seeing photos of the setup and a review of how it works for you.

06: That's a great deal you found to get get it for $500. I got mine through amazon for $549. $600 shipped.

Last night I took the TM10 out and scanned around my chicken coop to look for rats....it appears that the rats have been successfully eliminated from my property for now, which is good, but it means I can't test the thermal on rats yet... I'm sure more rats will show up eventually.
 

Actually the TM10 was $466, free shipping but I paid tax which brought the cost up to $491. The price has since gone back to $549.

I have used mine on dogs at home at a distance of around 75 yards, and deer at 100 yards plus. For closer ranges like that it’s not bad.
 
Nice, you scored a great deal!

I'm going coyote hunting tonight at a small goat farm where coyotes have been killing goats. I'm taking a new hunting partner who has some very nice thermal scopes and scanners. Fingers crossed I don't get spoiled.....that could be expensive for me. haha.
 
Originally Posted By: 6mm06
Best not look through his expensive thermal. Ha ha.

Too late...I guess I didn't read your advice in time. Haha.

Expensive thermal.....WOW, it was impressive. I took my NV rig. He used a Nvision HALO XRF and we both used 640 scanning monoculars. We got 2 coyotes. He got them both. First one came in close but went beside us and I won't risk shooting sideways towards my partner in the dark. Second one was about 220 yds out. I lit up eyes in my NV scope but couldn't get enough illumination to make out the body. He could see it clearly through the HALO XRF and took the shot and nailed it.

I was using my ODEPRO KL52 IR illuminator. It does great from about 50-120 yds. But it just couldn't do the job at 220yds. I should have taken my coyote cannon with IR diode. I think that one could have lit it up enough for me to take the shot.

I expect to have some video footage to share soon.
 
Sounds like a good night out. That HALO XRF is top end. What model were the 640 scanners that you were running?

Lights...NV...thermal...thermal upgrades It's a slippery slope but a fun ride.
 
Yeah it was a great night out. I was mistaken, the scanner I was using was a 388, not a 640. It was a Pulsar Axion XQ38 LRF.

The scanner my buddy was using was a Pulsar Helion (XP50 I think). I'm pretty sure that one was 640.

I think i'll be upgrading soon. My wife was much more supportive than I was expecting =) Reasoning that I spend so much time hunting at night, it will be worth it to have the right equipment. Budget of ~$5k (which includes the $600 I paid for the TM10). I'm considering options of returning my TM 10 and getting a 640 scope and upgraded scanner, or keep the TM10 and just get an upgraded scope.
 
Footage from the other night.

Number 1:


Number 2:


I was struggling with my rig. The field/marsh in front of us was full of deep grass and brush. As the coyotes came in I could see their heads bobbing up and down in and out of view. I just couldn't locate them in the scope of my rifle. It was frustrating. When the first coyote got close, I finally found it in my scope at a range that would have been perfect for me, but it promptly ran downwind of us and got on the other side of my buddy. So I had to give up pursuit of that one and just observed through the thermal scanner I had.

The second coyote was on the edge of the forrest about 250 yds out. I found that one in my scope but my Odepro KL52 IR illuminator couldn't light it up well enough to see. So I told my buddy to shoot if he had a clear shot, and with the HALO XRF, he did. I was observing through the Pulsar XQ38 LRF scanner. I could see the coyote, but probably wouldn't have taken a shot if that was my view through a scope due to lack of clarity.

My buddy was shooting a 6mm ARC. The second coyote gave a very loud THWACK report from the bullet impacting.
 
Thermal.....I finally joined the dark side.

I returned the AGM TM10 Scanner.

I bought a Pulsar Axion XQ38 LRF scanner and Pulsar Trail 2 XQ50A LRF scope from my buddy. I also have a Kopfjager Reaper Tripod on the way. It's amazing how much and how well I can see at night.

Last night my parent's dog was barking at something in the thick brush behind the horse pasture. I took the thermal scanner over there and did a quick pan of the treeline. I quickly identified 2 deer by their heads and the tops of their backs in the brush. They were about 80 yds away in thick brush, and it was starting to get dark. I couldn't see them at all with my naked eyes. It was pretty cool.

My buddy and I went back to the goat farm again, this time we got skunked during an hour and a half of calling. We did have an owl perch near the e-caller and watch it for about an hour. That was cool.

I have some relatives who are having issues with coyotes and rats. They live a couple hours away from me. I plan to visit them Memorial Day weekend. Hopefully I'll get some footage to share of successful shots.

I mounted the thermal scope on a Savage 11 in .20 Practical and got it boresighted. I'm hoping to shoot it and get it zero'd tonight.
 
I really like this info shared on thermal monoculars. I am wanting one just for detection purposes as well, but haven't heard too many people talk about the 256s. Everyone is talking about 384 and up. That's great if you can afford it, but is it necessary just to get heat signatures up to say 500 yards? I can live with identifying with the optic on the rifle. Will be interesting to hear the test results.
 
jwebster:

what kind of optic do you have on your rifle? Thermal? IR nightvision? gun mount light and regular scope?

I got the 256 monocular having never owned or looked through a thermal scope or monocular. I was really excited about it and I was very impressed with what I could see in the dark. As I noted before, my 2 complaints with the AGM TM-10 right away were the small picture size of the viewing screen, and the refresh rate of 25hz. Instead of constantly panning, I would have to pan, stop and focus, pan, stop and focus, etc. Due to the 25hz refresh rate not being fast enough for a smooth picture when panning back and forth.

I went coyote hunting with a buddy after having the AGM TM10 for about a week. I used his Pulsar Axion XQ38LRF scanner (now mine). I was amazed by how much better it was. The viewing screen was much larger, the refresh rate of 50hz provides a much smoother picture when panning, the higher resolution helps too, and the LRF is a nice feature. Unfortunately the XQ38 doesn't have an internal recording feature. Pulsar since discontinued that model and replaced it with the Axion XQ35, available with and without LRF. The XQ35 has a wider field of view, has built in recording, and has a few other improvements I think.

With the XQ38LRF, I was able to spot and identify a coyote at about 250 yds along a treeline, partially blocked by light brush. I couldn't make it out clearly, but I could identify it and range it. In decent conditions i'm sure you'd be able to spot and possibly identify coyotes out to 500 yds with this monocular. In the heat of the moment I was just focused on the XQ38 and my rifle scope (Digital Nightvision at the time) and I didn't try looking through the AGM TM10. In hindsight I wish I had looked through (and recorded) through the TM10 for comparison.

Overall for me comparing the two:
AGM TM10--Gave me a huge advantage improvement over having no thermal devices. It was awkward/cumbersome for panning large areas, but it worked.
Pulsar Axion XQ-- huge improvement in clarity and usability, now I feel like I own the dark. It greatly boosted my confidence in what I can see. I enjoy looking through it, it's like exploring a whole new world.

I returned my AGM TM-10 to help pay for the pulsar, so I can't make and share any more comparison videos. 06 still has a TM-10 and I'm looking forward to seeing what he captures and shares from that.

Right now, before tax/shipping: AGM TM10 is $550, and Pulsar Axion XQ35 is $2000 ($2500 for LRF model)
 
Originally Posted By: coyote_thumperjwebster:

what kind of optic do you have on your rifle? Thermal? IR nightvision? gun mount light and regular scope?

I got the 256 monocular having never owned or looked through a thermal scope or monocular. I was really excited about it and I was very impressed with what I could see in the dark. As I noted before, my 2 complaints with the AGM TM-10 right away were the small picture size of the viewing screen, and the refresh rate of 25hz. Instead of constantly panning, I would have to pan, stop and focus, pan, stop and focus, etc. Due to the 25hz refresh rate not being fast enough for a smooth picture when panning back and forth.

I went coyote hunting with a buddy after having the AGM TM10 for about a week. I used his Pulsar Axion XQ38LRF scanner (now mine). I was amazed by how much better it was. The viewing screen was much larger, the refresh rate of 50hz provides a much smoother picture when panning, the higher resolution helps too, and the LRF is a nice feature. Unfortunately the XQ38 doesn't have an internal recording feature. Pulsar since discontinued that model and replaced it with the Axion XQ35, available with and without LRF. The XQ35 has a wider field of view, has built in recording, and has a few other improvements I think.

With the XQ38LRF, I was able to spot and identify a coyote at about 250 yds along a treeline, partially blocked by light brush. I couldn't make it out clearly, but I could identify it and range it. In decent conditions i'm sure you'd be able to spot and possibly identify coyotes out to 500 yds with this monocular. In the heat of the moment I was just focused on the XQ38 and my rifle scope (Digital Nightvision at the time) and I didn't try looking through the AGM TM10. In hindsight I wish I had looked through (and recorded) through the TM10 for comparison.

Overall for me comparing the two:
AGM TM10--Gave me a huge advantage improvement over having no thermal devices. It was awkward/cumbersome for panning large areas, but it worked.
Pulsar Axion XQ-- huge improvement in clarity and usability, now I feel like I own the dark. It greatly boosted my confidence in what I can see. I enjoy looking through it, it's like exploring a whole new world.

I returned my AGM TM-10 to help pay for the pulsar, so I can't make and share any more comparison videos. 06 still has a TM-10 and I'm looking forward to seeing what he captures and shares from that.

Right now, before tax/shipping: AGM TM10 is $550, and Pulsar Axion XQ35 is $2000 ($2500 for LRF model)

Currently running a Sig Sauer scope with coyote light, but wanting to upgrade to good nightvision or a decent thermal eventually. First I want a thermal monocular. I feel like that would be biggest bang for the buck. I have AGM and Pulsar on my radar. Funds will dictate what I get, but I just wanted to know that some of the entry level units still get the job done. I will probably wait until I can get one that has good enough features like the Pulsar you describe.
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top