There were some tubes on exmod earlier cheap for someone who know what to do with them
We all know your views on Clive Ward though hornady though don't we! It wouldn't matter if he sold the best gen 3 in the world for less than the price of a pint you would still manage to slag him off for it hence you being removed from other forums.
Clives WT1-75 3 is a cracking unit! Would I buy one after using one, probably not as I will go back to a drone pro to compliment my XQ50 spotter as I like to confirm my target 110% but that doesn't mean Clive's thermal scope isn't excellent because it is and before you ask, yes I have had pinnacle grade pvs-14s etc but would still go drone.
Last edited by RPA 6MM BR; 20-03-2017 at 23:11.
Look at how bright the light is in the gen 3 which washes out all the contrast in the image. It's practically daylight in comparison to a naturally lit rural scene. Plus the thermal is man sized and not rabbit or fox size. You cannot mistake a man at that distance but you can think a dog is a fox at 100 easily. You can think a cat is a fox easily at even less. A sheep head is also problematic in thermal from distance.
Add in the fact that's American thermal which trounces the pulsar stuff and euro made cores you get a much better image than pulsar etc.
The poor magnification ranges of thermal units is the real issue with current thermal devices. Gen 3 doesn't have this problem. It also lacks background details especially in field conditions in cold wind or wet.
Thermal has its place but its a complimentary technology and not a replacement for gen 3. You can use it on its own but you will miss shots miss opportunities and end up in unsafe situations more often than gen 3. If you have both then you will rarely have to pass on a kill shot.
Also remember I don't need a video I have both and use both and when I don't have one or the other I feel limited.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Get back to the topic.
They say that the quality of video, is far poorer than what you see through the sight itself, so in reality, the thermal would actually give a clearer, more detailed picture than that video, which was clearly more detaild than the NV !
We also need to have a reality check, and base things on the average user. So, what you personally need, and use to achieve this, isn't necessarily what the majority need. You're into long range night shooting, I think you've posted somewhere out around 550m, way further than most will shoot. And then we have cost, I think I saw a post where you said your equipment cost £9,000.00 ? considerably more than most, and hardly comparable, with even the most expensive Pulsar thermal !
Unsafe situations, why ? Anything unsafe, is down to the shooter, not the type of sight, and like any shooting scenario, if you don't know the back stop, you don't take the shot !
I think the real point, is making sure opinions, and comments are relative, and cost is comparable.