Re: GM8 Question...
- From: "Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 08:37:19 -0800
The problem with the G11 is the weight. I agree that the G11 is much more
stable than the Gm8, however in my case, if I had purchased the G11 I would
probably use it maybe once per year because of the excessive weight. If you
are eat your Wheaties or are Arnold Schwartnegger it will not be a problem,
but for most folks it is a "back breaker". Always remember that the best
telescope and mount is the one that you will use the most.
-mij
"Mark D" <mmd49@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:11348-4386987A-149@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Doink,
> Others have brought up some good points, particularly mentioning the
> qualties of a larger mount, and the greater degree of difficulty putting
> it into operation.
>
> However that being said, I can't recall what FL 6" refractors you have,
> and what they weigh?
>
> While the GM-8 may have better qualities/machining/etc from the mounts
> you mention you have, I myself would be hesitant placing even a 5"
> refractor on a GM-8, as this really isn't all that heavy duty of a
> mount.
>
> While a C-8", and even a C-9.25" are doable on a GM-8, consider too,
> that these scopes have a shorter length, and less torque arm movement
> than a 5"-6" refractor, thus placing a bit less demand on a mount.
>
> 5" Apo Refractors such as the TEC 140, and AP-130, while very compact,
> and relatively short, are two pretty solid instruments.
>
> While a GM-8 would no doubt work for the two refractor scopes I mention
> above, I'd personally prefer myself either a G-11, or AP-600 to mount
> these scopes. Factors like wind, high magnification viewing, and
> imaging will place great demands on a GM-8.
>
> As you know, there's two basic parts to a GEM Mount, the Head, and then
> the Tripod/Pier.
>
> When you mention the "shakes" most of this problem is probably
> attributed to the Tripods you have your present EQ mounts sitting on.
>
> An alternative if you have found that the present EQ heads do work for
> the present scopes you have, have adequate counterweights to balance
> them, then a more solid Tripod may be a less expensive option than
> another mount?
>
> But if you have any future thoughts about one day owning something
> larger, let's say a C-11 SCT, a Meade 10" SCT, a 10" Reflector, a 6", or
> 7" MN, or the like, the GM-8 will be surely inadequate for any of these.
>
> There's about a $500-$600 or so difference between the GM-8, to the
> G-11.
>
> About 5 years ago, my best friend contemplated a GM-8 for a Intes MN-61
> MN Reflector, handed me the $1300 to pass on to a friend of mine, who
> was a Losmandy Dealer at the time, and I secretly supplemented the $1300
> with an additional $500, to see that he got himself a G-11 instead!
> (They're about $2K now for the basic G-11) Boy, was he surprised when
> the UPS Man came! (That was the good ole days, when I had lots of
> disposable income in my pockets! lol)
>
> This sure wound up being a very sweet combo for him, and he's been very
> happy with both.
>
> One way you could possibly ease the hassles of set-up with a G-11, is if
> you can somehow leave the 3 Tripod Legs (Collapsed), and Semi-Pier
> intact-together. The whole assembly, while not feather-light is not too
> hard to lift, and carry by an average person out from say a
> garage/storage shed to the yard. Then the EQ head set on top, bolted
> down, Cables, and power source, and you're ready to roll. Mark
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: GM8 Question...
- From: Doink
- Re: GM8 Question...
- References:
- GM8 Question...
- From: Doink
- Re: GM8 Question...
- From: Mark D
- GM8 Question...
- Prev by Date: Re: Single Axis vs. Dual Axis drives
- Next by Date: Re: Collimation?
- Previous by thread: Re: GM8 Question...
- Next by thread: Re: GM8 Question...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
