AR15.Com Archives
 TAM 14 and ACOG
BarbarianPhilosopher  [Member]
11/2/2009 1:18:02 PM
Would a TAM 14 work behind an ACOG? Seems like it should.
Paid Advertisement
--
fordkicksass  [Team Member]
11/2/2009 2:58:11 PM
Nope, glass does not transmit the longwave IR radiation that thermal devices detect and turn into an image. This is why thermal cannot see through windows and such.
BarbarianPhilosopher  [Member]
11/2/2009 3:17:20 PM
huh, I didn't think of that but it makes sense
BarbarianPhilosopher  [Member]
11/2/2009 3:34:45 PM
new question:

How much recoil can the TAM 14 take?
last_lancer  [Member]
11/2/2009 5:11:02 PM
Why would you need to use the TAM with the ACOG? Doesn't it have its own reticle?
TNVC  [Industry Partner]
11/2/2009 5:13:14 PM
Originally Posted By last_lancer:
Why would you need to use the TAM with the ACOG? Doesn't it have its own reticle?


4 of them to be exact....Recoil up to 300 win mag with no issues I have found. Hope this helps.

Vic
CTM1  [Member]
11/26/2009 10:58:58 AM
I read this on the net while doing a search for more user info on the TAM14


Spent a good deal of time working yesterday with the TAM-14 thermal imagining sight on an AR-15 and I have to say I'm disappointed in this unit. I hope the Border Patrol is having better luck than I am (they just bought 200 of the same unit) because I'm having a hell of time getting the unit zeroed. Essentially, this particular unit is actually a weapons-mounted thermal camera with a reticle added to it. You move the small (and I do mean small) cross-hair reticle to the appropriate point on the screen to co-ordinate point-of-aim with point-of-impact. It is NOT centered in the field of view when you are finished. Additionally, you move the point-of-aim reticle cross-hair by moving pixels on the screen. It is not an easy process, nor precise and straight forward like say zeroing in your typical Leupold scope.

Truth be told, I'm not happy with this unit. It is a 160x120 resolution unit and with the trouble I'm having in getting it zeroed I feel I could have made a better choice with my money. Maybe part of this is because I worked just a couple of weeks ago with the best unit I've ever seen , the Jager Pro 320x240 resolution scope, that keeps the cross-hair reticle centered in its viewing area. I doubt if any of you are going to be buying any thermal imagining equipment soon, but if you are I would advise against the TAM-14 unit as I've found it has difficulties, if not problems.

All The Best,
Frank W. James
karma  [Team Member]
11/26/2009 11:28:40 AM
Originally Posted By CTM1:
I read this on the net while doing a search for more user info on the TAM14


Spent a good deal of time working yesterday with the TAM-14 thermal imagining sight on an AR-15 and I have to say I'm disappointed in this unit. I hope the Border Patrol is having better luck than I am (they just bought 200 of the same unit) because I'm having a hell of time getting the unit zeroed. Essentially, this particular unit is actually a weapons-mounted thermal camera with a reticle added to it. You move the small (and I do mean small) cross-hair reticle to the appropriate point on the screen to co-ordinate point-of-aim with point-of-impact. It is NOT centered in the field of view when you are finished. Additionally, you move the point-of-aim reticle cross-hair by moving pixels on the screen. It is not an easy process, nor precise and straight forward like say zeroing in your typical Leupold scope.

Truth be told, I'm not happy with this unit. It is a 160x120 resolution unit and with the trouble I'm having in getting it zeroed I feel I could have made a better choice with my money. Maybe part of this is because I worked just a couple of weeks ago with the best unit I've ever seen , the Jager Pro 320x240 resolution scope, that keeps the cross-hair reticle centered in its viewing area. I doubt if any of you are going to be buying any thermal imagining equipment soon, but if you are I would advise against the TAM-14 unit as I've found it has difficulties, if not problems.

All The Best,
Frank W. James


Interesting...

RustedAce  [Team Member]
11/28/2009 5:44:20 PM
Originally Posted By CTM1:
I read this on the net while doing a search for more user info on the TAM14


Spent a good deal of time working yesterday with the TAM-14 thermal imagining sight on an AR-15 and I have to say I'm disappointed in this unit. I hope the Border Patrol is having better luck than I am (they just bought 200 of the same unit) because I'm having a hell of time getting the unit zeroed. Essentially, this particular unit is actually a weapons-mounted thermal camera with a reticle added to it. You move the small (and I do mean small) cross-hair reticle to the appropriate point on the screen to co-ordinate point-of-aim with point-of-impact. It is NOT centered in the field of view when you are finished. Additionally, you move the point-of-aim reticle cross-hair by moving pixels on the screen. It is not an easy process, nor precise and straight forward like say zeroing in your typical Leupold scope.

Truth be told, I'm not happy with this unit. It is a 160x120 resolution unit and with the trouble I'm having in getting it zeroed I feel I could have made a better choice with my money. Maybe part of this is because I worked just a couple of weeks ago with the best unit I've ever seen , the Jager Pro 320x240 resolution scope, that keeps the cross-hair reticle centered in its viewing area. I doubt if any of you are going to be buying any thermal imagining equipment soon, but if you are I would advise against the TAM-14 unit as I've found it has difficulties, if not problems.

All The Best,
Frank W. James


I am not that happy with mine as well. I got mine for 8k and wish I would have paid more and gotten something better, resolution is fairly poor.

Not only that, but mine will not keep a zero, I have taken it to the range 4 times and every time it is completely different, off by as much as 4 FEET at 100 yards. I think this has to do with the 3x on it, but not sure testing it without that out at range tomorrow.

It will also shut off temporarily sometimes when shooting for a second and when it comes back takes a further second to have the cross hair come back.


I emailed the company about my problems, waiting for a response.
CTM1  [Member]
11/28/2009 8:57:58 PM
I am not that happy with mine as well. I got mine for 8k and wish I would have paid more and gotten something better, resolution is fairly poor.

Not only that, but mine will not keep a zero, I have taken it to the range 4 times and every time it is completely different, off by as much as 4 FEET at 100 yards. I think this has to do with the 3x on it, but not sure testing it without that out at range tomorrow.

It will also shut off temporarily sometimes when shooting for a second and when it comes back takes a further second to have the cross hair come back.


I emailed the company about my problems, waiting for a response.[/quote]

This is exactly the kind of feed back I have been searching for on the TAM and that this site needs.
RustedAce-was there another unit that you were considering instead of the TAM14?
I am wondering if the Skeet IR Micro for a few thousand more is the better option when I am ready. I liked the idea that the TAM14 could be head mounted as well as a stand alone scope but if it is not up to the task it does not matter if it the best priced unit in its class.

Vic any thoughts?

Thanks
TNVC  [Industry Partner]
11/29/2009 11:38:03 AM
Hmm...First, not sure what the issues are with the unit turning off and on, that is concerning. As for zero's with our units we've tested, did not loose zero except when we used the 2x zoom IN combination with the 3x magnifier. It was more in the realm of 2-3 MOA. Indeed contact Nivisys to see what they have to say on the matter. As for resolution, for its price range I think the unit does well. Indeed, when I compare the unit to let's say a PAS-13 (SMALL) 320 res which Rod at Jager is using for 18K+ along with the Medium and Heavy units at the 640 res for 25K+, resolution is VERY good. BAE unfortunately restricts these units for commercial sales. Also, another very good unit for it's price range of 11K was the Specter IR from Elcan. I think Rod uses these on his hunts as well, as I think he got his from us. Unfortunately Elcan discontinued this line approx 8 moths ago. Hope this helps and sorry for the delay in responding as I just got back in town and had spotty email while away along with my laptop crashing!

Vic

Edited: Rusted Ace if you need any assistance with a contact there, email me.
RustedAce  [Team Member]
11/29/2009 12:30:02 PM
Originally Posted By TNVC:
Hmm...First, not sure what the issues are with the unit turning off and on, that is concerning. As for zero's with our units we've tested, did not loose zero except when we used the 2x zoom IN combination with the 3x magnifier. It was more in the realm of 2-3 MOA. Indeed contact Nivisys to see what they have to say on the matter. As for resolution, for its price range I think the unit does well. Indeed, when I compare the unit to let's say a PAS-13 (SMALL) 320 res which Rod at Jager is using for 18K+ along with the Medium and Heavy units at the 640 res for 25K+, resolution is VERY good. BAE unfortunately restricts these units for commercial sales. Also, another very good unit for it's price range of 11K was the Specter IR from Elcan. I think Rod uses these on his hunts as well, as I think he got his from us. Unfortunately Elcan discontinued this line approx 8 moths ago. Hope this helps and sorry for the delay in responding as I just got back in town and had spotty email while away along with my laptop crashing!

Vic

Edited: Rusted Ace if you need any assistance with a contact there, email me.


So with the 3x on, but the unit not on 2x it maintains zero? I only shoot with it on 2x setting because the manual said to zero it on 2x.

I re-zeroed without the 3x today and it did hold its zero, even with taking it on and off and turning it on and off. It also didnt have the on/off problem without 3x.

I put the 3x back on and wasnt on paper at 50 yards, and it was having the momentary on/off again.

The focus piece has alot of play with the weight of the 3x on it, I think that may be causing my problem.

I am happier with it today, but still a bit upset with the 3x problem, as it was the only way I could see steel plates at 100 yards.

I was actually very happy with the unit just messing around before with the 3x on because it made the resolution seem much better to me, but the fact that it isnt maintaining zero with the 3x is my main complaint.



Thanks for the help, I will see what response I get from the company.
TNVC  [Industry Partner]
11/29/2009 12:37:24 PM
Definitely sounds like the 3x is at issue with the unit. Give them a call as I know emails get lost at times or if you need us to break down any doors.
JC_  [Life Member]
12/31/2009 8:04:03 PM
Anything new with this?
RustedAce  [Team Member]
12/31/2009 8:29:34 PM
I got the unit to hold a zero fine without the 3x, they wanted me to send it in with the 3x to check it out, but the problem is how it attaches, it screws into the focus knob/lense, so any weight it adds moves that. I didnt send it in, I dont think it would be fixed, maybe lessened if they tightened up the focus knob, but honestly I am just gonna stop using the 3x.
JC_  [Life Member]
12/31/2009 9:23:24 PM
Thanks for the quick update - I recently ordered this unit as well as the 3x. I guess the 3X will be for handheld use only... to bad.
JC_  [Life Member]
1/16/2010 7:02:58 PM
Does your unit have a lot of "snow" going on? Although a dog in the distance was very easy to see - there is a heck of a "ring" of snow around the field of view. Almost like "wash out".

ETA - it was rather foggy outside (real fog) so perhaps thats the issue?
pick713  [Team Member]
1/17/2010 7:55:58 AM
If I were going to be getting a rifle mounted Thermal system, I would be looking at this

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270449803972&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

It is just a few thousand more, and has good resolution, Crosshairs, and different detection ranges depending on the lens used.
Paid Advertisement
--