Cuddeback vs Moultrie

User avatar
buckhunter21
 
Posts: 2982
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:28 pm

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby buckhunter21 » Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:48 am

I haven't heard bad things like that from Cuddeback yet, but def. something to keep in mind...You'd think they would have great customer service and stand by their product?  Hm.  Thanks for the post.
QDM!

VA Hunter
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:43 am

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby VA Hunter » Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:37 pm

Goose,
 
No problem with the screen going black.  The only thing I can think would cause the moisture is the o-ring on the motion sensor.  If it's not seated right there could be a problem.  It fell off on mine when mounting.  Luckily I caught it.  Other than that as long as you ape arm the closers you should be good. 

User avatar
Goose
 
Posts: 2804
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:36 pm

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby Goose » Fri Oct 09, 2009 4:11 pm

Thanks. Ill take a look at that, maybe mine fell off...
Jake

Genesis 27:3 Take your bow and quiver full of arrows out into the open country, and hunt some wild game.....

GTOHunter
 
Posts: 541
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 4:05 pm

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby GTOHunter » Mon Oct 12, 2009 2:29 pm

I had the Cuddeback Capture IR camera and it was a piece of junk,the 1.3 IR night pictures were awful,the daytime pictures looked like it was taken from out of a fishes eye,I couldn't get the camera to take the updated material/info from the Cuddeback Site and the site itself wasn't very helpful either,the camera acted like it lost its battery connection and was constantly giving me trouble.The ease of working the camera was nice but the quality was very poor so I took it back to where I got the camera and paid the extra cash and got a Moultrie I-60 InfaFed Camera,the enhanced pictures look great and the night IR pictures are very nice.I also put the camera on video and got some really nice video's of Fawns getting milk from their Mom's and some awesome Buck pictures/video's too!I like the screen that shows if you got any good pictures worthy of pulling the SD crd and having it developed...the screen is pretty small but its better than guessing if you got anything on the card!


It seems that many of the Trail Camera's on the market have their advantages and dis-advantages on how they perform and for what different conditions we put them in and all are not without certain problems when using them,the big thing to look for is if the Companies stand behind their product and they have good workmanship in their product?

cooter
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 3:56 pm

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby cooter » Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:00 pm

Well, I just got a call from Cuddeback on my "warranty" camera I sent them.
Guess what, No Warranty. Ants in the camera. Ants are not covered by warranty.
The lady on the phone could not, or would not tell me exactly what was wrong with
the camera. She did not know how many ants were in the camera. Just send $85
and it will be fixed, then you get a 6 month warranty. She sounded like a dang
computer recording, no emotion what so ever. Again, WATCH OUT FOR CUDDEBACK !
 

Bart
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 2:59 pm

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby Bart » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:27 pm

I have a Cuddeback No Flash in its third season and its great.  Had two Cuddeback Excites - took one back and the other washes pictures out.  Haven't tried the newer Cuddebacks.  Have a Moultrie i40 new this season.  So far so good.  The construction of the Moultrie is cheap and I'm concerned about it's durability.  The Cuddebacks are built like a tank. The Moultrie sd card is a real bear to get in and out.  I suspect the Moultrie will have much longer battery life.  I'm using rechargeables with the Moultrie and swap them every two or three weeks.  They have never ran out and usually have 50% or more when I change them.  The Cuddebacks won't work with rechargeables.  I tried.  The Moultrie will take a solar panel and the Cuddebacks won't.  Both manufacturers have their good cameras and both their lemons according to reviews.  It's a toss up.  Buy one of each and let us know which you like best.  Their isn't any clear winner.  Nobody builds a perfect game camera.

User avatar
buckhunter21
 
Posts: 2982
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:28 pm

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby buckhunter21 » Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:40 am

Hey Bart, what kind of rechargeables are you using with your cameras?  I haven'd had much luck with them.  I am using Energizer D 2500 mAh.
QDM!

User avatar
DeerCamp
 
Posts: 1328
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:49 am

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby DeerCamp » Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:52 am

I have really liked my cuddeback.. However I forgot to put my card in it last time.. and it took 11 pics.. and saved them. However I noticed it was making a loud noise afterwords.. Has anyone had this problem?
"If I pull the hammer and shoot this young buck, he's dead. But if I pass on him, the next hunter might not shoot so straight."

Bart
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 2:59 pm

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby Bart » Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:25 pm

I'm using the Energizer rechargeables. I have good luck with them in Leaf River and Moultrie cameras.

User avatar
JBow
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 3:08 am

RE: Cuddeback vs Moultrie

Postby JBow » Sun Dec 20, 2009 3:48 am

I originally had Stealth Cams.  They were junk.  Then the flash Moultrie Game Spy 200.  Set up with a solar charger, they were excellent.  Of course, they did spook Deer and the trigger speed left a lot to be desired.  I used them for about three years.  Then I went to the I-40.  Great all the way around until the first one locked up in the field when I was switching out an SD card.  I could not get it out of set-up mode.  I replaced it with my second camera and it did the same thing after about one month.  That was last Summer.  I switched to the Bushnell Trophy Cam this past season and have had zero problems over the last two months or so.  Same batteries as I started with.  I have a ton of pictures, all head and full body, of the buck I ended up taking this season.  And I paid a lot less than the cheapest Cuddeback, which was shot down in flames by all the reviews I read earlier.  Now, only to be reinforced by what I read here.  Money talks and Bullcrap walks!  I'm tired of listening to Walt Larsen(or whatever his name is)bashing all the other products when their's is obviously no better.  Maybe if they spent less on advertising they might be able to lower their MSRP on their cameras.  I'll never buy a Cudde.  For now it's Bushnell.  Time will tell, but I'm very satisfied so far. 
[:'(][:'(][:'(][:'(]-NEVER PAY RETAIL !!!-[:'(][:'(][:'(][:'(]

Image
IF IT'S WORTH DOING, IT'S WORTH DOING RIGHT!

PreviousNext

Return to Scouting Cameras

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests