Trijicon IR Hunter MK3 vs Bering Optics Hogster-r

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Rookie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Sep 22, 2008
    18,155
    113
    Kokomo
    I got a new thermal scope the other day, and I figured I'd give a comparison of the two that I own. Trijicon is a great scope, but, at $9,000, they are priced out of a lot of people's budget. Bering Optics is $2,675, which is more reasonable for more people. The biggest problem is that there aren't a lot of thermal scopes "in the wild", so it's a little nerve wracking to buy something sight unseen.

    I got my hogster-r in today, and I figured I'd give a little side by side comparison with my Trijicon IR Hunter MK3. If I don't hit on anything you might be curious about, feel free to ask. A few disclaimers...

    1. These observations are based on initial assessment of the hogster-r. I don't have any field time yet.
    2. These opinions are strictly mine and they may change.

    Onto the comparison...

    Weight.

    The hogster-r blows the Trijicon out of the water. There is a VERY noticeable difference.

    View finder.

    The Trijicon wins this. The eye relief on the hogster-r sucks in comparison to the Trijicon. If I set the hogster-r the same way on my rifle, it looks like I'm looking through a tube.

    Clarity.

    This actually surprised and impressed me. While the Trijicon is better, it's not $5,000 better. The Trijicon has a sharper image, but I feel like the hogster-r has a clearer image. I know that sounds confusing, but it's hard to explain. I'm sure some of it has to do with contrast adjustment, but, for now, hogster-r has the edge in clarity, but not sharpness.

    Controls.

    Hands down, the IR Hunter beats everything out there. In my opinion, there's nothing better. The hogster-r has usable controls, but they are what they are.

    Focus.

    Once again, Trijicon wins without trying. Of course, Trijicon has "auto focus" so it will always beat manual focus.

    Reticle.

    Trijicon edges out simply because it's "intelligent enough" to change reticle color. Honestly, I don't really like the reticle on either scopes, but either ones are usable.

    Zoom.

    Trijicon wins. To be fair, Trijicon has a 640 core, so it better win. Hogster-r has usable zoom, but it's not as good. The PIP is a nice feature I wish the Trijicon had.


    Price.

    This is kind of tough. Obviously, the hogster-r is almost 4 times cheaper, but I'm comparing 2x magnification to 4.5x magnification. So, for my hunting needs, the Trijicon is better.

    Final thoughts...

    If Bering optics came out with a 3.5-4.5x magnification for $3,000-4,000, they wouldn't be able to keep up with demand. The Trijicon is a better thermal, but it's not $5,000 better. If Bering Optics came out with more native magnification, Trijicon would have some serious competition.
     

    Rookie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Sep 22, 2008
    18,155
    113
    Kokomo
    Another thing, both use cr123 batteries, but Bering Optics has the edge because you can use rechargeable batteries. The biggest downside to Pulsar is their proprietary batteries which drain fast and are crazy expensive.
     
    Top Bottom