Ok first off, mil guys and maybe some leo’s will know what we are mimicking by doing this and Im not going into thermal trouble shooting. Ive operated airborne cooled sensors for a while and so have the ppl involved in this. We’ve all spent 5-10k on thermals and we start debating which is better. The nerd of the group came up with a test.

Needed
1) 5 gallon bucket filled with water 40-60* above ambient
2) top for bucket
3) towel
4) 6ft+ aluminum stock we used 1.5”x1”x6.5’ (must be solid, pipe will cause a stove pipe effect)

Let the bar stock cool and become cold soaked on a cold/cool night DO NOT touch it with bare hands. Cut a small hole into the bucket top which it will fit through. Fill the bucket, 40* night use 80* water. Stick stock in bucket so it stands vertically. Wrap the towel around the base of stock to seal it. We dont want warm air from the water inside the bucket escape. You need level ground with preferrable sky in background. Background needs to be a uniform temp is all. The bar will be close to if not invisible to the thermal. We let it cool on saw horses to keep it off the ground. Thermals must be of same objective size to be apples to apples. Back off 50m and watch the heat rise up the stock. The scope that sees the heat the highest on the stock is the most sensitive.

Yeah, you brainiacs are already thinking with distance and stock size you could get effective resolution.

Im not saying which did what but between 4 of us we had about everyone represented. Im not posting results but I was humbled and I have the highest budget. Plus this kinda thing starts A LOT of poop tossing on the web. Looking at pics of pigs doesn’t do a lot for true comparison. Oh no beer during test or yeager to keep warm (you forget why your there)

I did something like this using milk jug full of 100 degree  water to see how far away I could see it with various thermal devices I have in my fleet.

I was surprised how far away I could actually detect a 1 gallon jug.

Why not post the results? A lot of people here are buying pricy thermals out of pocket and I think this information is relevant to this forums intended purpose.

I agree, posting the results, along with the test-method and caveat that it is not a comprehensive test for all thermal specs should be adequate to keep the poo slinging to a minimum. It's not like you're trying to trash a specific brand (are you?).

That 1 magic glowing pixel.

I know I would love to hear the results... I am saving my pennies to buy one with my own money. Even though by the time I am probably ready to buy, models will probably change. Over the last 10 years, these things are getting better and better. But I would really love to know the results of that test. It sounds like a good test. Thanks for sharing.

Biggest reason is too many get their feelings hurt and start turd tossing. Im simply not getting in the middle of that, probably one reason I stay out of social media.

I will comment on my own equipment. I have three FLIR TAU2 640 60hz cores and one BAE... The BAE core is less than a year old and didn't do as well as Id liked especialy for the money. I have a TAU2 in a 60mm clip on that just simply dominates. Ive known this though because Ive hunted bottoms in VERY high humidity when others thermals were Tango Uniform. It wasn't perfect it still showed targets. All of the TAU2 did very slightly different my BAE fell right in the middle of them. (trying to just mention the core rather than scope mfg)

Plus as one above stated lots of ppl buying thermals so its pretty easy for everyone to get together and compare. Its a simple test a buddy came up with because we all had thermals and they all do really well to the point we couldn't judge them on opinion and needed something else. Unlike night vision where you can get a test set or simply say "read that chart over there".

Put it this way, they are all so good that you can't judge them by saying "hey Frank look at that pig over yonder".  You literally have to get something and measure them by. Watching the heat slowly rise up a piece of aluminum bar stock that was ambient temperature through a selection scopes was pretty telling. Simple thermal sensitivity that anyone can do.

I'll go ahead and name drop simply from what I've read somewhere else. Based on the algorithms the thermals use depends on what "shows up better". If I remember correctly, IRD/Trijicon was more focused on environmental detail, whereas Armasight/Flir wanted the heat source (animal) to glow and focused on that moreso than the environmental detail. I assume your BAE core is a Trijicon unit and your test doesn't really surprise me. But like was mentioned above, they're all pretty damn good and it is hard to tell the thermal sensitivity difference without a standardized test. Thank you for doing it.

You're right on everything above.

UPDATE

Hey just an update and we will post this on youtube. We are figuring out how to build an MRTD/NETD field test unit or discreetly (very discreetly) borrow one.

Its kind of cool to compare a 1500 scope to a 3000, 6000 and 9000. Last time we found that there is a huge difference from 1500-3000 and not so afterwards..  Most all of us have flight privileges at major airlines so we may have to travel to do this and may take a little bit to get done if we can find a legit tester ie Honeywell, FLIR, Hieco etc etc.