I’m starting to seriously look at a thermal purchase after using several of my friend’s Trijicons over the last couple of years, and among other things I’m researching the REAP-IR against most likely a Mk II 35mm.  Just looking for some help in the comparison of these two units to see what each one has over the other, shortcomings, etc.  I also would like assurance that the REAP-IR doesn’t have a bad rap.  The reason I say this is that I could have sworn that I read here in this forum awhile back that either the REAP or the SNIPE were actually openly knocked around these parts for some reason, even by TNVC.  I may have my wires crossed on which model it was and certainly can’t recall the reason why, but I do remember for sure people mentioning gripes with one of the Trijicon offerings (perhaps it had something to do with issues since addressed by an update or product revision?).

Intended use for this thermal will be primarily coyote and hog hunting here in Florida.  Our engagements can vary anywhere from 50 to 300 yards or greater (I know, PID and all that but wanted to point out we have some big fields we hunt).  I’ve also been seriously considering the Pulsar Trail XP50 for quite some time for budgetary reasons, and a friend has been very pleased with his.  I’ve got a nice year-end bonus likely showing up which has me thinking about jumping to the Trijicon lineup, although I am still peeved they haven’t upped their offerings given the competition brought about by the likes of Pulsar.  I’m still trying to decide if a slightly better image quality (and no recording, WiFi, less reticles, etc.) is worth several more thousand dollars to me or not.

For now, I thought I’d at least get the differences between the IR Hunter and REAP-IR lines explained to me so I have that knowledge.  The Trijicons that my friend owns that I’ve spent time with are the Mk II 35mm and the Mk III 60mm.  From that experience if I went with a Hunter I think the 35mm is better suited for magnification and field of view reasons.  With no personal experience with a REAP-IR I’m relying on the knowledge here to compare and contrast it to the Hunter series.

Thanks in advance for any input on this thread!

It was/is the Snipe-IR with the not so good reviews.

If you are on a tighter budget or you’re not going to hunt a lot, 1 to 3 nights a week, I’m not sure the extra money for Trijicon is worth it.  I have a Reap and I love it and am glad I bought it.  Is it x dollars better than a Pulsar or zeus?  I think not.   You can get a scanner and scope with the same money.

The difference in the reap/hunter is the operating system.  One has the separate knobs, the other has a single joystick.  Both are easy to use once you get used to it .  I like the knobs of the mk2 better myself .

The reap offers a couple additional reticles, and a useless stadiametric range finder, that you’ll never use

They say the reap has “special glass” that gives you a better image .  I’ve got both, and don’t notice any real differences in image.  And I use them a lot.

Thanks for the input, guys.

The REAP has the ability to store multiple rifle profiles, correct?  I don’t think the Hunter series offers that, while the Pulsar Trail XP50 does.  Is all of this accurate?

Good point on the joystick vs. turret system.  I’ve read that some people have a tough time getting used to the joystick method of adjustments.

I appreciate the dialogue here.  Just trying to talk myself through the decision making process.  The notion of maybe doing a Pulsar and then being able to also buy a Breach or other scanner is interesting, but I at least have to consider the robust package that the Trijicon products offer.  As others have said before, those guys just need to catch up with their competition and offer a bit more than just a nice solid housing and a marginally better picture for an additional $3000 or $4000.

I prefer buttons to the joystick but have gotten used to the REAP joystick
It has two menu options - a full, complex administrative menu with everything the optic can do, and then a short menu which has white hot/black hot, reticule change, NUC and zoom. Zero the rifle with the administrative menu and then switch to the short menu for hunting. It's really easy when you get used to it (but I would still prefer buttons)

The thing I wish the short menu would do is take a photo and be able to change the sensitivity in addition to the polarity. I think this was a bit of a miss for the REAP because sometimes you need to adjust sensitivity when looking at a target but you have to go back to the full menu to do it - kind of clunky IMO. It's not a show stopper but it could be improved

Can't comment on the picture quality of the Hunter, but Tmm120 knows his stuff and I'll take his word for it. You don't be disappointed by the REAP though, and likely not by the Hunter

Z

Sent you a msg. Lots of windshield time today if you want to bs about it.  Easier than typing....

My opinion: Buy the Pulsar XP50 and don't look back. Less money for way, way more useful features.  Picture-in-picture on the Pulsar completely negates any image-quality premium the REAP carries.  Again, in my opinion.

That being said, many happy Reap owners out there. Many happy Mark II and III owners out there.  To each his own. Most important is to buy something and get good at using it.

I have a reap and love it.  The picture quality is amazing.  I picked the reap over the mkII (and other 640 offerings) because of size and weight.  I use it as a scanner and mono a lot.  I remove the weapons mount when I do so, it's not bad at all hanging around my neck on paracord.

I am disappointed there is not internal video recording, and some other features some others have mentioned....but for me the picture quality was just so good it won me over.

I have a Patrol and a Hunter.  The Patrol was fine as a monocular, they should have been ashamed of themselves for calling it more than that.  It had problems with the mount, think this was fixed.  Lack of x,y offset display was utterly inexcusable.  I can only assume they fixed this mistake.  Other than that, the clicks in the dial are more tactile, it is impossible to feel clicks on a joystick and without a x,y offset display a massive pita to sight in.  The Hunter does have multiple memories, but with x,y offset display it is convent not a necessity.

other difference is lense size, but that is easy enough to compare.  1x might be good for scanning, but more optics x is more enjoyable for shooting. I do not recall use as a clip on for the reap, but understand that viewing a magnified digital image does not improve resolution. It will just make the pixels larger-kind of like digital zoom does.
-
looked the other day on trij website. Hunter uses a LaRue style quick release (should be repeatable), Reel looked like thumb screw base

I appreciate that offer very much but I just saw this message now and I’m home with the lady for the night.  Very kind of you to offer the call though and much appreciated.

I now have a lot of time in with the Reap and about three hunts with the Pulsar but no time with the MkII.

I like the features on the Pulsar much more than the Reap for sure. I’m not all that into the video and sound stuff but when you want it it’s there and no wires. The picture in picture is a nice plus too. Things I’m not super excited about thus far is I find myself constantly having to focus the image. Maybe I’m not doing something right but it always seems to need some fine tuning. Other thing is the proprietary batteries. But they do last a long time so that kind of balances out. Coolest feature is probably the wireless capability.

It sounds like you already have some time with the Reap so I won’t go too far into it other than it’s awesome. I did a quick check and the Reap is quite a bit lighter at 21/24 oz (old/new) and 35 oz for the hunter. A lot of savings if you have to hike around. Also I use the Reap a lot as a handheld unit too. Considering head mount but not that speed yet.

Not sure your current situation with thermal but if I only had to have one it would probably be the Trijicon. The Pulsar is nice and I like being able to use it for a lot of things like video and the remote capabilities and ability to loan it to a friend but at the end of the day the image quality is king for this game and where Trijicon wins.

REAP owner here with some time with TMM who owns a bunch of thermals.  I like my REAP; clarity and form factor are amazing.  The 35mm is perfect for my purposes.  I wish the battery life, natively, was longer life.  Recording is an incidental feature for me.

There are a lot of hours of use behind mentioned thermals here.  Tough to go wrong with any Triji, however