I found a PVS-30 with a 1807 FOM. If I get this unit, what’s the best way to mount it in front of a day scope? I’ve got a couple of options. I have a XLR Chassis that I have a 6mm Creedmoor in a Stiller Tac 30 Action with a 20 moa integrated rail, and I have the NV adapter mount for the chassis. That particular rifle has a Zeiss 3-18x50 on top but I can swap out the scope with a NF ATACR. Another option is a Desert Tech SRS 6.5 Creedmoor with a Khales 624i and a qd 20 moa mount. The Desert Tech obviously has a full top rail. My biggest question is that both of these have scopes in 20 moa mounts and the rails that the NV Clip On attaches to is 0 moa. Will that 20 moa difference affect the image or do I need to find a 20 moa riser to mount the Clip On to?
Night Vision Eurooptic has KAC PVS30 Army Buyback Grade A, $4700.
- Thread starter Strykervet
- Start date
Clipons are pretty much unusable as anything but a clip on. The image is not even really usefully visible if you just look through it. You need an optic behind it.
However, most any optic will do. Aside from the precision rifle, I also use mine on a .300 carbine with a 3x Eotech magnifier behind an RDS. Works great.
And I have an adapter I made with a chunk of rail so I can clamp on a Vortex 8x monocular. It's heavy, but doable for general looking around. Big binocular size.
I also have an adapter I made that lets me use it in front of my spotting scope. This is where you can tell the tube in this unit is amazing. Mine is sharp to about 28x! I can read streetsigns (the small street names, not like "Stop") over 400 yds away. I can't quite read when the sign was put up, but you can see the sticker on the back of the opposite stopsign and tell that it's got writing and holes in it.
I am sure there are better night optics, but it's hard to imagine what they would be like.
By “spottin” you mean finding targets/critters? If so the 14 is better because of the added FOV. I don’t see many people using them nowadays but the 3x magnifier is great for spotting with a 14. I always carry one on my waist in the little carry case. If I think I see something I throw it on the 14 and see for sure then put it back in the case.
Jay
A 1807 FOM unit would almost certainly be a 64 res & 28 SNR spec'd tube (1807/64). In theory the resolution could be higher or lower but 64 is almost certainly it IMO. 28 SNR is pretty respectable and should give you good service. Your day scopes are fine. I was specifically speaking about instances I've run into with people putting clip ons in front of $200 scopes and wondering why their $3K toy looks like garbage.
If you end up getting it I'm looking forward to your review.
Well I choked and bought one. Came exactly as reported. The fom is around 1600. Is that ok? It is in excellent finish and condition. I do have a question. How much light does it take to damage it? I got tired of trying to use a atn on my lr308.
Don’t put too much thought into the FOM, I’ve had several come through and the one that seemed to have a better image was actually a lower 1600 FOM unit. It’s so hard to tell any difference it’s regardless though.
Exactly how much light, who knows, what I can tell you is that light damages them. Don’t turn them on if it’s not dark... if it’s not dark there’s no reason to be using it in the first place. Keep it away from idiot friends with flashlights too and it will last your lifetime and probably your kids too.
The performance will blow away what you were used to from your ATN.
A 1600 FOM would be, assuming a 64 res (almost certainly it is), a 25 SNR tube. There are lots of awesome 25 SNR tubes out there and I think you will be happy.
There is a much more technical answer, but any/all light exposure damages a tube to some extent. You are best off only using it in darkness. I don't know if these are autogated or not but hopefully someone smarter than me will chime in.
There is a much more technical answer, but any/all light exposure damages a tube to some extent. You are best off only using it in darkness. I don't know if these are autogated or not but hopefully someone smarter than me will chime in.
you wont have any issue running a clip on on a unbiased rail in front of a 20moa rail.
My PVS-30 is a FOM 1609 ... I don't know whether it is a good image or a bad one ... it can't see as much through the trees as the UTC-x can .... but with some moon overhead thru one tree line into another at 500yds across afalfa patch on 7x through NF 7-35x T3, I could see the branches on the trees at 500yds. No illumination (which would've bounced off the near tree line). The image was equivalent in clarity to the UTC-x in that scenario.
That ^^ is 7x on the NF 7-35x at 500yds looking at 2/3 IPSC with full moon behind me (white paint on steel target reflecting)
==
And that is 9x on the xtr2 3-15x scr-mil heated 2/3 IPSC 500yds ^^.
==
Of course these are with handheld phone cam, with rifle on tripod ... so much fuzzier than real life. In real life, the reticles are crisp.
==
But both of these cllipons hit dead on out to 900yds matching with the day POI ... as far out as I've tested them ... and no adjustments are needed or possible. With the .300WM(24) the NV mount is 0 MOA matched against the scope mount of 20 MOA ... on the 7.62(22) the NV mount and scope mount are both 20 MOA ... but it matters not ... both are dead on.
.300WN(24) ^^
==
7.62(22) ^^
==
All the previous clipons I'd tested, the under $10k MSRP civilian required "adjustments" to match the day optic ... the PVS-30 and the UtC-x have no adjustments nor do they require adjustments, mount and shoot and dead on. That is as long as your rings are not too much higher or lower than the tolerance. I run my rings between 1.3 and 1.4 center and that works perfectly for both clipons. The UTC-x being 1.31 and the PVS-30 being 1.5.
That ^^ is 7x on the NF 7-35x at 500yds looking at 2/3 IPSC with full moon behind me (white paint on steel target reflecting)
==
And that is 9x on the xtr2 3-15x scr-mil heated 2/3 IPSC 500yds ^^.
==
Of course these are with handheld phone cam, with rifle on tripod ... so much fuzzier than real life. In real life, the reticles are crisp.
==
But both of these cllipons hit dead on out to 900yds matching with the day POI ... as far out as I've tested them ... and no adjustments are needed or possible. With the .300WM(24) the NV mount is 0 MOA matched against the scope mount of 20 MOA ... on the 7.62(22) the NV mount and scope mount are both 20 MOA ... but it matters not ... both are dead on.
.300WN(24) ^^
==
7.62(22) ^^
==
All the previous clipons I'd tested, the under $10k MSRP civilian required "adjustments" to match the day optic ... the PVS-30 and the UtC-x have no adjustments nor do they require adjustments, mount and shoot and dead on. That is as long as your rings are not too much higher or lower than the tolerance. I run my rings between 1.3 and 1.4 center and that works perfectly for both clipons. The UTC-x being 1.31 and the PVS-30 being 1.5.
Last edited:
Wig,
Looks like you need to take the "s" out of the https in your image URL (at least from my end, all the pictures are not coming through).
Looks like you need to take the "s" out of the https in your image URL (at least from my end, all the pictures are not coming through).
I have a 1939 fom and my buddy has a unit in the 1700+ fom. I can't tell the difference between the two. I also have a Armasight co mr with a nice 28.3 snr, 1811 fom, f9810slg tube in her. We had all three side by side a few outings under full moon and they all looked great, naturally the co mr was at a disadvantage at the further distances due to its objective size and probable less glass quality. On the darker nights, even at closer ranges per 100yds, his lower fom 30 still pooped all over the image of the co mr. Side to side with my 30..still could'nt tell a darn difference.
Guessing from what I've seen personally is as far as fom difference on these units performance wise, as far as I could tell there isn't one, or my eyes and my buddies are just getting that bad, I dunno, we are getting up there.
Guessing from what I've seen personally is as far as fom difference on these units performance wise, as far as I could tell there isn't one, or my eyes and my buddies are just getting that bad, I dunno, we are getting up there.
like i said...you just cant generally tell by eye sans looking at some specific target capable of producing a fixed set of resolution parameters.
Yeah, FOM is a product of resolution and signal to noise, generally considered to be the two most important and variable figures. It's a quick way to sort 'em according to quality. According to EuroOptic, 1600-1800 is what the bulk of the Grade A's will be. You can request they pick the highest 1800FOM available and send that.
So I got my loan. It'll get me something I'd never be able to get otherwise and it'll raise my credit for a house. I'll pay it off much faster than the 36mos. they gave me, I need it paid off in 8 so when I go for a house it's not showing I owe anything.
I called EuroOptic, got a discount. Didn't bother calling KAC, I figure they've already been distributed. Euro was gonna let me have it for $4600 shipped and it would have been 1800FOM at least. He said no more 1900's were available.
Surgeon Shooter, a fellow 'Hide member of long standing, offered me one with FOM 1971, same unit, same distributor. Same 1 year warranty. I did the numbers for 1971 and it's almost a unicorn it turns out, high resolution and high signal to noise no matter how you work the numbers. Promised all else was the same, ships from distributor and when I get it, we'll see how it looks. I should have pictures up in a week or so I'd imagine. His prices are inline with the norm --all these Grade A's seem to go for the same price and with a narrow profit margin. But he had access to units with higher FOM and that's the only way to measure 'em, unfortunately.
Watch Fedex take forever this time.
I'm excited, I don't get excited about much. I've needed one of these forever. This should be a nice one. And even if I do have to change the tube in a few years, I'll still have less in it than a new one. I just hope it's a good one with no dots or artifacts, I like a clear image. I was told by Euro FOM included the dots in the image but I don't see how, I know how FOM is calculated and artifacts and dots don't factor in. Maybe he meant snow, which would be signal/noise. Either way. Fingers crossed. So far everyone who has one of these Grade A's has said nothing but wonderful things about them. Many were amazed how clear they are.
Speaking from experience, unless deployed and sometimes not even then, these units don't see a lot of use. And if it never leaves the US, it may go on a few training missions and be used to look at some stuff for a little while and put away. May do some night firing and it gets used for a handful of rounds. Unless deployed, it won't see much use. If deployed, it's a toss up and those may not be Grade A anymore. FWIW, 1600FOM is also Grade A, so if you are interested, I'd get while the getting is good. Hoping these were shelf queens.
When I get it, I'll get some pictures up of it and pictures through the optic if I can.
So I got my loan. It'll get me something I'd never be able to get otherwise and it'll raise my credit for a house. I'll pay it off much faster than the 36mos. they gave me, I need it paid off in 8 so when I go for a house it's not showing I owe anything.
I called EuroOptic, got a discount. Didn't bother calling KAC, I figure they've already been distributed. Euro was gonna let me have it for $4600 shipped and it would have been 1800FOM at least. He said no more 1900's were available.
Surgeon Shooter, a fellow 'Hide member of long standing, offered me one with FOM 1971, same unit, same distributor. Same 1 year warranty. I did the numbers for 1971 and it's almost a unicorn it turns out, high resolution and high signal to noise no matter how you work the numbers. Promised all else was the same, ships from distributor and when I get it, we'll see how it looks. I should have pictures up in a week or so I'd imagine. His prices are inline with the norm --all these Grade A's seem to go for the same price and with a narrow profit margin. But he had access to units with higher FOM and that's the only way to measure 'em, unfortunately.
Watch Fedex take forever this time.
I'm excited, I don't get excited about much. I've needed one of these forever. This should be a nice one. And even if I do have to change the tube in a few years, I'll still have less in it than a new one. I just hope it's a good one with no dots or artifacts, I like a clear image. I was told by Euro FOM included the dots in the image but I don't see how, I know how FOM is calculated and artifacts and dots don't factor in. Maybe he meant snow, which would be signal/noise. Either way. Fingers crossed. So far everyone who has one of these Grade A's has said nothing but wonderful things about them. Many were amazed how clear they are.
Speaking from experience, unless deployed and sometimes not even then, these units don't see a lot of use. And if it never leaves the US, it may go on a few training missions and be used to look at some stuff for a little while and put away. May do some night firing and it gets used for a handful of rounds. Unless deployed, it won't see much use. If deployed, it's a toss up and those may not be Grade A anymore. FWIW, 1600FOM is also Grade A, so if you are interested, I'd get while the getting is good. Hoping these were shelf queens.
When I get it, I'll get some pictures up of it and pictures through the optic if I can.
Last edited:
Yes, you want long range illumination. There are some good civvie units out there. The Surefire Vampire lights are GREAT for SBR's and clearing rooms, lighting up a yard, etc., but they don't go far. On a longer range rifle you need a focused light or a PEQ. The PEQ is a laser illuminator that can spot or flood a good distance out and it works very well for illuminating.
Basically, if you have need for illumination for PVS14's at times, you're gonna need it for longer range too. All they do is amplify light, and when no light is available you supply it. I swear, it's a night and day difference.
Don't think tubes in the PVS-30 are able to be changed by user. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure you would have to send it back to KAC.
TNVC can't even do it? I understand there's probably some special KAC wrench needed, but the tube itself should be a standard item, right? I know it's different than the tube in a PVS14 but they come in a few different sizes. And I know KAC doesn't make their own tubes, those come from two places IIRC and they're practically neighbors in CA.
I'll call TNVC and see what they say about it. It'd be nice to not have to send it back to KAC years down the road (I hope years to never) and pay them to do it, which I'm sure would be costly even with a discount. I'd like to have low cost option if possible. Reliable source that can get a good tube and do the work. Hell, it may be Surgeon Shooter by then!
I'll call TNVC and see what they say about it. It'd be nice to not have to send it back to KAC years down the road (I hope years to never) and pay them to do it, which I'm sure would be costly even with a discount. I'd like to have low cost option if possible. Reliable source that can get a good tube and do the work. Hell, it may be Surgeon Shooter by then!
Clip ons aren't so simple to swap tubes in, I bet with enough mechanical know how and ability to make some tools an individual can get one apart and back together. The issue is collimating it. Tube replacement is something that it should be sent back to the manufacturer for, I wouldn't use TNVC for that personally.
You're putting too much thought into it regardless, these are extremely tough units and so long as you don't do anything really stupid you aren't going to need to replace the tube. It's really not that difficult to make sure there are no lights on when using them.
You're putting too much thought into it regardless, these are extremely tough units and so long as you don't do anything really stupid you aren't going to need to replace the tube. It's really not that difficult to make sure there are no lights on when using them.
I bet we can count the number of collimating tables deployed in this country .. outside the major manufacturers ... on the figures of one hand.
This was an expensive thread for me.
Leads on 1900+ FOM PVS-30 please. I’m gonna pick one up... even though I don’t need it.
Leads on 1900+ FOM PVS-30 please. I’m gonna pick one up... even though I don’t need it.
Well, hopefully I won't need to take it apart.
Surgeon Shooter may be able to get another, he mentioned four but I don't know what the numbers are on the other three. The one I ordered from him is 1971 FOM. Euro had 1600-1800's only.
Surgeon Shooter may be able to get another, he mentioned four but I don't know what the numbers are on the other three. The one I ordered from him is 1971 FOM. Euro had 1600-1800's only.
The last 5 I got in we’re 1971, 1894, 1804, 1664, and 1606.
The 1971,1894 and the 1804 ar gone now. I’ll see what I can do about getting my hands on another 5. I hope they are high FOM but who knows what they will be.
Jay
Also these were told to me by NVD to all be OMNI VII over a year and a half ago when they first hit the market. Well that’s proved to be wrong. The lowest FOM that a omni VII could possibly be would be 1792 (64lp x 28snr). So all of these falling below 1792 are obviously Omni VIII. FOMs of VIII can drop as low as 1600 (64lp x 25snr).
Jay
Jay
In case anyone winds up with a low FOM PVS-30 like I got (1609 for me) ... I haven't used it 100 times yet ... but my impression is that my "clear" magnification range tops out at around 12x ... I can crank it up to 18x and still see the 3/4 dot I sticky on the X of the 100yd NRA target on clear, no moon night, with no illuminator, and I can hit the "X" greater than zero times in a 5 rd group, standing off the tripod at 100yds ... but the image is fuzzy.
WIthout moon light, the image is fuzzy, especially over 12x.
I can crank down the gain to around 70% to 80% and that clears up the image a bit, especially on no moon or even overcast (no stars) nights.
At 500yds, at 12x with full moon behind me, I can clearly see the 2/3 IPSC steel ... the ELIR-3 helps as well, if I turn that on.
But I am seeing nothing like the
So, I think mostly, if you roll the dice on one of these and roll "snakes eyes" like I did ... just lower your expectations ... you have a 12x unit ... that can squeeze up a little higher ... and hit out to 600yds or so with a full power illuminator ... or further out if the target is otherwise illuminated ... be prepared to reduce the gain to clear up the image ...
I was told going in ... that I could not ask for a higher FOM tube ... so I rolled the dice ... I tooks my chances ... and I rolled 1609 ... that's the way the dice fell ... so if you step up and rolls your dice ... just be prepared ! The unit is otherwise fine ... nice and solid ... and still very usable ... just not super clear at 28x!
Good luck !!!
WIthout moon light, the image is fuzzy, especially over 12x.
I can crank down the gain to around 70% to 80% and that clears up the image a bit, especially on no moon or even overcast (no stars) nights.
At 500yds, at 12x with full moon behind me, I can clearly see the 2/3 IPSC steel ... the ELIR-3 helps as well, if I turn that on.
But I am seeing nothing like the
that higher FOM owners are reporting.
So, I think mostly, if you roll the dice on one of these and roll "snakes eyes" like I did ... just lower your expectations ... you have a 12x unit ... that can squeeze up a little higher ... and hit out to 600yds or so with a full power illuminator ... or further out if the target is otherwise illuminated ... be prepared to reduce the gain to clear up the image ...
I was told going in ... that I could not ask for a higher FOM tube ... so I rolled the dice ... I tooks my chances ... and I rolled 1609 ... that's the way the dice fell ... so if you step up and rolls your dice ... just be prepared ! The unit is otherwise fine ... nice and solid ... and still very usable ... just not super clear at 28x!
Good luck !!!
I should say that I rarely shoot at maximum magnification, as real world scenarios are often darker or targets are moving. If you "only" can run to 12x magnification due to the clipon or your day optic then that's plenty of capability. I mostly am in these mid ranges on my rifle scope to keep FOV, etc. anyway.
To fund the PVS30 I sold a CO-MR and was deliriously pleased with it before I had anything to compare to. But it topped out at 7-8x and I rarely was that sad about it.
To fund the PVS30 I sold a CO-MR and was deliriously pleased with it before I had anything to compare to. But it topped out at 7-8x and I rarely was that sad about it.
Of course anyone would rather have a higher FOM unit if given the option, especially if the difference is substantial. That being said, my 1644 FOM unit had a spectacular image and I couldn't really tell a difference between it and another ~1900 FOM unit under similar conditions. On a super dark night (it was not), I may have noticed a significant difference. I sold it anyways because I have gone to SIMRADs. The problem with using FOM as the only metric for comparing several units is the nature of the FOM itself.
As others have said, FOM = signal to noise ratio X resolution. One of the multipliers (resolution) is a value determined by meeting certain thresholds, not necessarily by the ACTUAL exact value. There is a reason we mostly see tube data sheets indicating a resolution of either 64 or 72 lp/mm these days; those are the value thresholds that most tubes meet that make it to the civilian market. If a tube's actual resolution capability is greater than 64 but not quite 72 (could be 64.3, could be 70 for instance), it should meet the 64 threshold but fail to meet 72. It will be recorded as 64 lp/mm, not 64.3, not 70. If a tube's resolution is well over 72 lp/mm (yep, they're out there) but less than the next threshold value (~81 IIRC), it will be recorded as 72. Some of the actual threshold values are decimals, I'm using whole numbers here for simplicity's sake and because that is what is reported on data sheets. Consider the tubes below.
Tube 1: Actual resolution JUST below 72, but recorded as 64 because it failed to meet threshold for 72. Signal to noise is 25, respectable but not spectacular. FOM = 64 X 25 = 1600
Tube 2: Actual resolution is JUST over 72, recorded as 72. Signal to noise ratio is 25, same as tube 1. FOM = 72 X 25 = 1800.
Tube 3: Actual resolution is 64 (for simplicity's sake). Signal to noise ratio is 30. FOM = 1920.
Tube 4: Actual resolution is 72 (for simplicity's sake). Signal to noise ratio is 27. FOM = 1944
Tube 2 has a substantially higher FOM than tube 1 even though the actual performance between the two will be indistinguishable assuming other performance metrics are similar.
Tube 4 has a slightly higher FOM than tube 3, but a higher signal to noise ratio will usually result in a better image in extremely dark conditions. Again, these tubes will be VERY difficult, if not impossible, for the eye to differentiate between assuming other performance metrics are similar. Both tubes 3 and 4 would be excellent by the way.
For units like many PVS-14s that come with full tube data sheets, you have a lot more objective data with which to compare them instead of just FOM which can be influenced by either multiplier. Bottom line, higher FOM is a good thing but does not necessarily indicate a tube that is going to actually be better or with a noticeably sharper image. PVS-30s are awesome, if you want one buy one!
As others have said, FOM = signal to noise ratio X resolution. One of the multipliers (resolution) is a value determined by meeting certain thresholds, not necessarily by the ACTUAL exact value. There is a reason we mostly see tube data sheets indicating a resolution of either 64 or 72 lp/mm these days; those are the value thresholds that most tubes meet that make it to the civilian market. If a tube's actual resolution capability is greater than 64 but not quite 72 (could be 64.3, could be 70 for instance), it should meet the 64 threshold but fail to meet 72. It will be recorded as 64 lp/mm, not 64.3, not 70. If a tube's resolution is well over 72 lp/mm (yep, they're out there) but less than the next threshold value (~81 IIRC), it will be recorded as 72. Some of the actual threshold values are decimals, I'm using whole numbers here for simplicity's sake and because that is what is reported on data sheets. Consider the tubes below.
Tube 1: Actual resolution JUST below 72, but recorded as 64 because it failed to meet threshold for 72. Signal to noise is 25, respectable but not spectacular. FOM = 64 X 25 = 1600
Tube 2: Actual resolution is JUST over 72, recorded as 72. Signal to noise ratio is 25, same as tube 1. FOM = 72 X 25 = 1800.
Tube 3: Actual resolution is 64 (for simplicity's sake). Signal to noise ratio is 30. FOM = 1920.
Tube 4: Actual resolution is 72 (for simplicity's sake). Signal to noise ratio is 27. FOM = 1944
Tube 2 has a substantially higher FOM than tube 1 even though the actual performance between the two will be indistinguishable assuming other performance metrics are similar.
Tube 4 has a slightly higher FOM than tube 3, but a higher signal to noise ratio will usually result in a better image in extremely dark conditions. Again, these tubes will be VERY difficult, if not impossible, for the eye to differentiate between assuming other performance metrics are similar. Both tubes 3 and 4 would be excellent by the way.
For units like many PVS-14s that come with full tube data sheets, you have a lot more objective data with which to compare them instead of just FOM which can be influenced by either multiplier. Bottom line, higher FOM is a good thing but does not necessarily indicate a tube that is going to actually be better or with a noticeably sharper image. PVS-30s are awesome, if you want one buy one!
So it ended up being 1651 FOM and I'll have it Friday. Wasn't Surgeon_Shooter's fault. After talking to KAC about the difference in numbers I was okay with doing it. Since I'll be using an illuminator over 90% of the time, that'll make it practically indistinguishable from what they say. On the other hand, I suppose with that number I have a higher chance of getting a newer Omni8 unit. So it'll be something like 64 res. @ 25 S/N or 72 res @ 23 S/N or somewhere in between. Hoping for higher S/N, I can live with 64 res. 1971 would have been nice though.
As long as it does it's job and is on par with the PVS14's I have, which have very high numbers, S/N is maxed out, it'll be fine. I'll try and take pictures through them and compare them when it gets here. Sort of apples and oranges but best I can do.
Pretty stoked, another member may be making me a custom adapter for PVS 14 to USO spotter which will turn my spotting setup into a total day/night setup since the LRF will be slaved to its PEQ, sharing POA. Along with the PVS 30 it'll make night shooting with a buddy a lot more fun and efficient. Dual PEQ's should absolutely prevent any illum or performance issues.
Stay tuned...
As long as it does it's job and is on par with the PVS14's I have, which have very high numbers, S/N is maxed out, it'll be fine. I'll try and take pictures through them and compare them when it gets here. Sort of apples and oranges but best I can do.
Pretty stoked, another member may be making me a custom adapter for PVS 14 to USO spotter which will turn my spotting setup into a total day/night setup since the LRF will be slaved to its PEQ, sharing POA. Along with the PVS 30 it'll make night shooting with a buddy a lot more fun and efficient. Dual PEQ's should absolutely prevent any illum or performance issues.
Stay tuned...
Where did you find a custom PVS14 to spotter adapter? I would love one for my Swaro STR80?
Last edited:
I've been looking through a couple of PVS-30's with FOMs of roughly 1850 and 1610 and I don't think I can see a difference between the two. I've swapped them back and forth looking for differences and I just can't seem to find very much. On a side note, I recently had an eye exam and both the assistant and doc confirmed that I have 20/10 vision (the assistant couldn't hardly believe when I read the 20/10 line for her so when the doc came in he had me read additional 20/10 lines to confirm lol).
The PVS-14 image is going to look better. It's at 1x and not sitting in front of a magnified optic so the PVS-14 SHOULD look better.
With the limited amount of time with clip-ons so far, we found it best to have the illuminator offset away from the shooter, especially if there's any moisture in the air. Putting the illuminator on the rifle/spotter really fogs up the image because of the light being bounced back from the moisture/fog in the air. Here's a pic of PVS-30's on an AI and in front of a Mk4 spotter. The image seen through the spotter is still usable to a point but was quite a bit more washed out compared to the rifle's view since it's not looking directly through the "cone" of light. Tried it with the illuminator on the rifle but it seriously washes out the image.
From a member it turns out! He cut one from a piece of Delrin, so it should be perfect. I don't want him to get inundated so I can't mention who did it. That's 3 members that have made custom parts to make my field setup possible, not including myself or dealers. When I get the adapter I'll take more pictures and put up on here somewhere, probably under observation devices and/or night vision.
But I CAN give you the dimensions that I gave him to make my adapter. It's not that difficult, if you can find a piece of tubing with an ID of 1.445 or so and a thickness that'll support up to a 1.495 bore and still be thick enough to thread and is 2" long, you have the foundation. I'd recommend aluminum, UHMW or Delrin, which is one I hadn't thought of but ideal and what I'm getting. ABS plastic may also work if it's thick enough, so possibly a pipe fitting from the hardware store. Or two fitted together, whatever works.
The OD of the PVS14 is 1.445 and the OD of the USO is 1.495, so you'll wanna bore it .005 over and then hone with sandpaper for the perfect fit. The depth of the PVS14 side is .85 and the depth of the USO side is 1.2. There is no space between the two, the PVS should butt up to the USO in the mount, more or less. There is a space .2 between the battery cap and the 14's obj. You'll need to cut a channel at that point about .7 or so long, depth depending on thickness of your material. One to three set screws can be installed, my idea is to use one and over bore the hole and thread it for a helicoil and then use a 1/4-20 or larger nylon screw in the right place on each side. A larger nylon screw will apply more force while reducing the risk of damaging the 14's focus ring vs. steel, and I'd rather risk it falling off than breaking in the mount. To be safe, I'll probably still tether the 14 to the mount. Habit. But that's it, the dimensions couldn't make it more simple. You can probably get any shop around you to make this for little of nothing, it's that simple.
The other option I was considering was figuring out a way to install a section of rail near the eyepiece (how I'd get it from the mount to there I wasn't sure). Then I could've used a QD Larue PVS14 rail mount. So there's more than one way to do this. The tube is easier, or was given the geometry of my mount. Had I made it longer I could have installed the rail easily.
IF you don't wanna make it and don't mind spending money on it, I started a thread asking for a part like this and one guy got back to me and told me about Monoloc. You can look at that thread or look it up, but Monoloc makes some universal PVS14 couplers and one is for a spotter. They're all about $200 but they're pretty nice looking and have lever locks and probably a band inside that clamps it 360 degrees. Up to you.
Another thing little trick I'll mention, and it's besides the point, is that I use a Butler Creek flip cap on the PVS14's obj. The one with the button, the one made for a scope's eyepiece (I paint the button black). I orient it so it flips up but doesn't obscure the IR lamp and I drill a hole the exact same size as the one in the OEM rubber cap it comes with. Viola! Nothing to lose, tie off or have hanging. They ought to come like that.
So here's the update. Fedex ran, came kinda early actually a few hours ago! Even came up the driveway and up to the porch and waited for me to get to the door AND waited to get the signature! Wow Fedex! Dare I say you've unfucked yourselves on this route?
Still waiting for it to get dark though. Read the book, looked through all the stuff it came with. It couldn't be simpler, it's simpler than a PVS14. It's also much heavier and longer than I imagined it to be. Looks like you can hammer nails with it. Between it and the USO optic, it's a fairly bulletproof yet hefty solution. I wonder how it'll work on some of the other rifles. Things may need to be shuffled around a bit. For instance, on the SR25 you have to move the front flip up sight a few inches down the rail. NOW I understand why the URX2 has the built in flip up sights with rails on the back!
Still waiting for it to get dark though. Read the book, looked through all the stuff it came with. It couldn't be simpler, it's simpler than a PVS14. It's also much heavier and longer than I imagined it to be. Looks like you can hammer nails with it. Between it and the USO optic, it's a fairly bulletproof yet hefty solution. I wonder how it'll work on some of the other rifles. Things may need to be shuffled around a bit. For instance, on the SR25 you have to move the front flip up sight a few inches down the rail. NOW I understand why the URX2 has the built in flip up sights with rails on the back!
Finally took mine out of the safe, looked at the top plate. Says it is only 1625. FWIW, as I have also heard before this thread that FOM is a guide, and you may find a better image from a lower FOM number. This seems reasonable as everything else I've encountered where you get a metric of several other measures bolted together to make it simple is also a tiny bit of a lie.
Anyone have any idea where to get replacement objective covers? Mine is a tiny bit chewed up, and also: kinda dumb. I'd love it if Aadland would actually answer messages, and we could get some of those sized for this optic. He says he can make any size, and I for one would pay for them.
Anyone have any idea where to get replacement objective covers? Mine is a tiny bit chewed up, and also: kinda dumb. I'd love it if Aadland would actually answer messages, and we could get some of those sized for this optic. He says he can make any size, and I for one would pay for them.
Yeah, have you tried calling KAC? The number for the night vision dept. and the depot that rebuilds these is different than the regular number. If you want that specific number PM me and I'll give it to you. I can't imagine them not having an extra laying around, they've always been good to me. The part and part number is in the book and you can search for that and may turn one up that way. All sorts of stuff ends up on ebay too.
Aadland, they make the new flip caps for USO? And Trijicon? I think I have 'em on MRO's and an ACOG or two and USO said they were switching to something.
I need one for this USO spotting scope and they don't make caps anymore. I don't know what the threads are to see if some other kind will fit and it's bigger than anything Butler Creek makes. Something nicer than that would be better anyway. I also can't be the only one with one of these that needs a cap either.
I'll have to call 'em on Monday. If you get ahold of them let 'em know they can make two, I'd like one for the 30 too. .
Yeah, didn't get the hard case though. Waiting on that. Don't need it right away but I really could use it when I go out.
You called KAC for a book? I can always scan mine if you can't get one I suppose. Scribd may have it too, they have a free trial membership and it's good to go through there and download a bunch of manuals, books, FMs and TMs.
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...rels-and-their-benefits.6896106/#post-7157700
Once you start hauling it around in the dark, I'm betting you will then look for your lightest rifle with the shortest scope you have to balance out the platform. A tripod is almost mandatory for most practical purposes. Except for spying on the neighbors lol.
Yeah, I was just thinking about a tripod when I came in, and was wondering if the PIG will support an HTI with a 4lb. suppressor. I had a small table in the back yard I was able to rest the SR25's bipod on just now to check it out and shouldering it was a bit of a chore with the heavy barrel, suppressor, USO scope and now the PVS30.
The image was really good through the 17x USO, only one tiny speck not in the center and just a bit more noise than my 14's. With the gain down and the PEQ on flood, there was no difference and it really performed. There's a full moon tonight so the only illumination that was needed was in the dark shadows in the trees. I cranked up the mag to 17x and the resolution decreased some and there was some more noise but it was still good. I didn't try it on the .50 with the 25x mag.
What's the best about it is that it works on everything so it's like having NV on each rifle. I will have to rezero everything though because the front sights on most of 'em will have to be moved, which means the damn scope has to come off, etc.. But it won't be off much.
Trying to post a picture I took through the scope, but it's not working right now. The image isn't that great and doesn't do it justice anyway. Oh, and I JUST realized I didn't bother adjusting or focusing the PVS, all I did was set the parallax to infinity and turned it on half gain. So it may look better, I don't know. I'll play with it again tomorrow night.
The image was really good through the 17x USO, only one tiny speck not in the center and just a bit more noise than my 14's. With the gain down and the PEQ on flood, there was no difference and it really performed. There's a full moon tonight so the only illumination that was needed was in the dark shadows in the trees. I cranked up the mag to 17x and the resolution decreased some and there was some more noise but it was still good. I didn't try it on the .50 with the 25x mag.
What's the best about it is that it works on everything so it's like having NV on each rifle. I will have to rezero everything though because the front sights on most of 'em will have to be moved, which means the damn scope has to come off, etc.. But it won't be off much.
Trying to post a picture I took through the scope, but it's not working right now. The image isn't that great and doesn't do it justice anyway. Oh, and I JUST realized I didn't bother adjusting or focusing the PVS, all I did was set the parallax to infinity and turned it on half gain. So it may look better, I don't know. I'll play with it again tomorrow night.
I've had my PVS30 on my M82A1. Didn't shoot it but the visual coolness is off the charts! With that platform you don't notice the additional weight. Thinking about the new Nightforce NX8 with the PVS30 to see If I can get better balance and make it easier to reach the focus ring.
This is a 35lb tripod ... I didn't try it with PIG/Manfrotto ...
==
As to the focus ring, one guy suggested that the observer should handle the focus ring on behalf of the shooter ... unfortunately ... 97% of the time I'm the observer and the shooter ...
Interesting approach. Maybe I can have my chofer do the focusing while he's making my tea.
I have been thinking of making a graduated ring for myself. Mark off where to dial to get various ranges, then no fussing behind the scope, but just like drop: dial in everything and just shoot.
Need the time and a long enough KD range (or targets to bounce laser off at usefully varying ranges) to get it marked up though.
Need the time and a long enough KD range (or targets to bounce laser off at usefully varying ranges) to get it marked up though.
If it’s the tiny spot on the bottom of the objective cover. That is intentional. To clear close fitting rails.
Similar threads
