If you want a nice thermal at a nice price point, look at the AGM Rattler line.
Awhile back I picked up a brand new Rattler TS25-384 (25mm objective, 384 resolution) 17 micron for $1800ish from shootingsurplus.com. I was very impressed with the clarity/resolution/detail of the picture. I hear the AGMs use the same thermal technology as what Bearing Optics uses in their thermals (which is different from what most/all other thermals use), which makes the AGM and BO work a little better in higher humidity situations. I don't recall what they call the technology, off the top of my head.
I have looked through ATN and Pulsar thermals (these are $4-5K thermals) and my AGM Rattler blows them away, IMO. Not to mention the AGMs are cheaper. I can easily see birds/mice at 80-100 yards with the Rattler.
I was originally looking at the Hogster/Super Hogster from Bearing Optics, but ran across the AGM Rattlers, and thought I'd give one of them a shot (mainly, because I had heard they were coming out with a new version of the Super Hogster later this year that has a LRF (laser range finder) built into it). I was thinking I needed an LRF, because it is hard to judge distances in unfamiliar territory at night. But after having the AGM, I might look at the AGM Varmint line with the LRF for my main gun mounted thermal. But I haven't fully convinced myself I need an LRF on a thermal yet. But when I do decide, I am 99% sure it will be either an AGM or Bearing Optics thermal, LRF or not.
I picked up the Rattler TS-25 to use as a scanner/monocular, but still have the option to use it as a scope. I thought about buying just a quality monocular...but it just works as a monocular and nothing more. Yes, the scope is heavier than a monocular and larger (but as far as thermal scopes go, the Rattlers are actually pretty compact compared to most) but I don't have any issues with the size or weight when using it as a scanner.
My dad picked up a Rattler TS35-640 12 micron. Honestly, I am not sure the extra cost (I think his was $3200ish) is worth the "upgrade" to 35mm and 640 resolution and 12 micron. You can see a little more details in objects with his vs. mine and you can click one zoom level (2x) with his and still have a fairly decent image, where on mine you pretty much lose the image (gets very grainy). When I decide on my gun mounted thermal, I might have to go with the 640 and 12 micron, just to have the ability to zoom at least once and still have a clear enough image to get on target.
Both use the 123 sized batteries (yeah, the little expensive fuckers). I run mine off a external Anker battery pack ($20ish on Amazon) that fits in a shirt/coat pocket. It is about the size of a pack of cigs and I have yet to need to recharge it (probably ran the thermal 10-12 hours so far off of it).
Both AGM thermals have 16GB of built in storage (no memory card). I usually just turn on the recording and let it run the whole time I am scanning. That way if I see something, I don't have to fumble around with starting the recording. In the 3 or 4 hours a night I am out, it hasn't even came close to filling up the 8GB. I usually download/erase the video each night, to clean up the memory. I probably have 8 hours of recording on it now, since I haven't cleared the memory from a couple of nights and it is just starting to show that it starting to fill the card. It does compress the video, so what you record is lesser quality than what you see when looking through the scope.
This is my .02 after hum-hoing around and spending countless hours researching thermals, watching videos, etc., to try to decide which one would work for my use and be the best bang for the buck.
![[486]](https://data.irate4x4.com/avatars/m/0/94.jpg?1700178133){kind=avatar}
