A quick mooch after a phone call of the farmer !

[philpot 5,098]

I am ready to be corrected but I think I am right in saying that Pulsar made a complaint that Pard were producing an IR that did not meet the European standard hence  the reduced power of the laser.  I didn't know that Pard had simply installed a filter in front of the laser, if that is the case, then an easy job for any owner of the new units.  Must tell my rfd who has just taken delivery of 30 plus 007 and 008 units..  What is needed to remove the filter please, not for me as I do not have one.

One small point, is the laser as strong as the older models once the filter is removed.

Thanks guys

Phil

[Alsone 789]

Easiest way is to look up the specs Phil. The power of the laser should be specified in mw. I'm pretty sure it's a legal requirement to state that and it's "Class". If not then maybe some comparison of the claimed effective distance of old vs new, although there you're much more reliant on the manufacturers claims than specs. 

Only other way is to take a power measurement but for that you'd need a laser power meter sensitive in the IR range at low powers. I'm guessing from what's been said, the EU has safety concerns over the laser power of IR emitters and so has placed a restriction on them. I wouldn't have thought a RFD would have one. Too expensive vs the number of IR issues they'll ever see plus any IR issue is going to be a warrnty return anyway. 

One last route, would be to ask the maufacturer for the laser power specs old vs new.

[David.evans 5,323]

If your on the NV site 

there a lad called Bruce almighty, he’ll have the answer to that question for sure 

atb 

[walshie 2,804]

I doubt they'd be allowed to simply put a filter in front of the laser as the laser would still be the same power.

[vizlauk 1,568]

Taking the filter out will Not ! Make the new units as good as the old versions (fact), very little gain by doing so, also by taking the filter out ir light from 3/4 to spot goes crosshatched , the filter spreads the light correctly. 

When you take it out , the ir light visible through the pard , you would think your looking through diamond shape mesh ! 

I've tried it so i do know in person. 

Hopefully pard will realese a firmware update to up the power to what it should be.

[philpot 5,098]

5 hours ago, Alsone said:

Easiest way is to look up the specs Phil. The power of the laser should be specified in mw. I'm pretty sure it's a legal requirement to state that and it's "Class". If not then maybe some comparison of the claimed effective distance of old vs new, although there you're much more reliant on the manufacturers claims than specs. 

Only other way is to take a power measurement but for that you'd need a laser power meter sensitive in the IR range at low powers. I'm guessing from what's been said, the EU has safety concerns over the laser power of IR emitters and so has placed a restriction on them. I wouldn't have thought a RFD would have one. Too expensive vs the number of IR issues they'll ever see plus any IR issue is going to be a warrnty return anyway. 

One last route, would be to ask the maufacturer for the laser power specs old vs new.

I am not farting about with all that. I simply want to know how to remove the filter and when removed, is the unit able to illuminate to a similar distance as the earlier models. This is for a friend of mine who is going to buy a second 008 and wants to know if this is now a waste of money.

Phil

[villaman 9,982]

Nothing wrong with the old laser . It was Thomas Jack’s which complained and after trading standard got involved, they tested them and said nothing wrong with the laser 

[ianm 2,594]

2 hours ago, David.evans said:

If your on the NV site 

there a lad called Bruce almighty, he’ll have the answer to that question for sure 

atb 

Don't bother asking on there because he won't tell you.

They are deleting any posts about how to increase laser efficiency in case the authorities are reading them and ban the import of pards.

My mate runs a Pard 008 and although the onboard i/r is useful it still benefits from using a Solaris SRX with it. It would be Thomas Jacks that tried (unsuccessfully) to stop the importation of Pards because of the lost sales of Pulsar stuff.

The pards have crept up in price but there is still nothing as good at the price point.

In answer to Walshies statement, yes they would be allowed to put a diffuser in front of a powerful laser. Starlight did just that with the Dragonfly and it was made so that it was easily removed to reveal the most powerful 500mw laser to date. I have one and did it but now prefer the SRX.

I wouldn't get too upset about the pards i/r, just use it in conjunction with an independant modern laser i/r flooded out and adjusted to where you are shooting. It will be a much better picture and you won't be depleting the pards battery unnecessarily.

[villaman 9,982]

11 hours ago, philpot said:

 

21 minutes ago, ianm said:

Don't bother asking on there because he won't tell you.

They are deleting any posts about how to increase laser efficiency in case the authorities are reading them and ban the import of pards.

My mate runs a Pard 008 and although the onboard i/r is useful it still benefits from using a Solaris SRX with it. It would be Thomas Jacks that tried (unsuccessfully) to stop the importation of Pards because of the lost sales of Pulsar stuff.

The pards have crept up in price but there is still nothing as good at the price point.

In answer to Walshies statement, yes they would be allowed to put a diffuser in front of a powerful laser. Starlight did just that with the Dragonfly and it was made so that it was easily removed to reveal the most powerful 500mw laser to date. I have one and did it but now prefer the SRX.

I wouldn't get too upset about the pards i/r, just use it in conjunction with an independant modern laser i/r flooded out and adjusted to where you are shooting. It will be a much better picture and you won't be depleting the pards battery unnecessarily.

The Beauty about pards , no extra ir needed , all in one unit , now your saying add another ir , which makes everything heavy and clumsy 

[ianm 2,594]

20 minutes ago, villaman said:

 

The Beauty about pards , no extra ir needed , all in one unit , now your saying add another ir , which makes everything heavy and clumsy 

It all depends how far you have to shoot. If you are only rabbiting or ratting or shooting over bait at 100yds or so then fine, the onboard i/r is ok for that.

My mate had to shoot a fox at two hundred and eighty yards last week with his pard 008 and no way would the onboard i/r of sufficed.  

He has mounted his SRX forward and to the right of his pard and in no way is it a lot heavier or clumsy.

I am quite sure there will be a work around regarding i/r on pards but don't expect to find it on forums. 

What i am saying is it isn't the end of the world adding an additional i/r, lots of foxing people do so anyway.

If anyone doesn't like it "simples" buy something else. 

 

[Sausagedog 7,381]

I'll err stick to me torch. Switch it on, oh look a fox, switch it off.

I'm selling my spotter. To much fuss.

[Alsone 789]

5 hours ago, philpot said:

I am not farting about with all that. I simply want to know how to remove the filter and when removed, is the unit able to illuminate to a similar distance as the earlier models. This is for a friend of mine who is going to buy a second 008 and wants to know if this is now a waste of money.

Phil

I personally wouldn't remove a diffraction grid without knowing the effects. lasers generally have very tight low divergence beams usually between 2-4mm diameter at the emmitter and I'm guessing the reason for the diffraction grating may be to diffuse the laser and make it more torch like and usable. You may find it very narrow beam at typical shooting distances (100-300m) without the grating in place. I don't know because I haven't seen or tested one, but that's my immediate thought. Little point projecting a laser the diameter of a crayon. Is the grating also coated to filter out some IR? I couldn't comment. Maybe someone has removed this and noted how it affects the divergence and spread at shooting distances. 

Overall, there are a few ways I can think of that the manufacturer could reduce the irradiance:

1. Use a lower rated diode - possible but unlikely as it would increase production costs producing 2 versions

2. Under drive the diode - laser diodes are run by "drivers" that control the amount of current delivered to the diode. By turning the current down, it's like turning the dimmer switch down on a light. Less current = less light output. However again it would mean altering production again to produce 2 versions

3. A Separate IR filter designed to reduce the level of transmitted light by a certain level. Possible, and probably cheaper than the above methods, but the only way to know is internal inspection to see if an additional filter is present.

4. An ir coating on the diffraction grid to do the same as 3, ie grid and filter all in one. Possible as probably would be cheap to simply add a lens coating to the existing grid part and it wouldn't really alter the production process as the grid would just be dropped in as before. 
 

Edited October 1, 2020 by Alsone

[ianm 2,594]

3 hours ago, Sausagedog said:

I'll err stick to me torch. Switch it on, oh look a fox, f*****g off at a fair rate of knots because it has seen some dickhead with a torch before.

I'm selling my spotter. To much fuss.

FIFY.  

[Sausagedog 7,381]

46 minutes ago, ianm said:

FIFY.  

I still get them in the end buddy

[bumpy22 414]

I use both early version and plus version. Don't use on board ir. I use a dragon fly which to be fair you will struggle to see a difference. Would say the new lord plus version is clearer and brighter in day with obvious more colour pixels. Looked and used pretty much everything NV and 008 is about best all-rounder