Alan64

The Orion(of California) 114mm f/4 Newtonian on an EQ-1 mount, and nearly identical to your Tasco(Tanzutsu) kit... Manual... Orion 114mm f4 EQ.pdf Videos... Set-up... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuJYoah4QU8 How-to-use... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3DbAz_QKvA The Orion kit is identical to the Sky-Watcher "Skyhawk" 1145P... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-skyhawk-1145p.html The telescope is configured for low-power, wide-field views. With the aid of 2x and 3x barlows, you can reach the higher magnifications associated with lunar, planetary and double-star observations. However, the focusser of the Tasco telescope, the visual-back specifically, is of the .965" format. Current, standard, extra eyepieces are of the larger, 1.25" format. You may find it difficult if not very in integrating the newer, 1.25" eyepieces with the telescope. The drawtube of the focusser appears to be able to support the use of the 1.25" format... ...but the opening of the visual-back, where the eyepieces fit and are secured with thumbscrews, is .965" in diameter. It can be removed, but finding a 1.25" visual-back to fit the drawtube may prove more trouble than it's worth. There are extra .965" eyepieces available online, yet are few and far between. The .965" format has been abandoned for a few decades now. Incidentally, I do not recommend f/4 Newtonian kits, whether a Dobson or tripod-mounted, to those first starting out.

The uniqueness of the "Heritage" 130P precludes whether the mount provided is suitable or not. I have a Zhumell Z100; same as the "Heritage" 100P, and I've already abandoned its Dobson mount, which I regard as an item included merely to display the telescope. It is eminently expendable, yea, even to be sacrificed upon the altar of the astronomy gods. From this... ...to this... ...instead. Very little of the purchase-price goes towards the table-top mounts of these kits. The real prize, and the lion's share of the expenditure, is the telescope itself. The mount will serve, in the beginning. I do take into account that there may very well be those who prefer the included mount, albeit unfathomable.

The telescope mounted upon my Maksutov's "Twilight Nano" alt-azimuth, and upon which it will spend considerable time outdoors... It will also point straight-up towards the zenith, then a wee bit beyond and without colliding with the mount...

A view down the 60mm aperture-stop... What an obstruction. It's interesting to note that the aperture, at f/6.7, will be at or nigh to the actual focal-ratio of the doublet of this 60mm "VariPower" achromat... I never did get round to cutting that tube down and installing a conventional focusser.

I still haven't collimated it yet, but no matter. Tantalising glamour-shots of the innards... Dead-black inside; that's the ticket. I had never taken a non-flash shot of the interior, after it had first arrived; only a flash-shot. Hence, flash-shots, before and after...

The 102mm aperture of the Maksutov-Cassegrain is going to limit considerably your choices for the dimmer, deep-sky objects. To get the brightest, widest view of the sky, I would suggest getting a 1.25", 32mm Plossl(41x). As you go up in magnification, the objects will appear closer, but also dimmer. Your telescope will serve best for the Moon, the planets, and the brighter and brightest of deep-sky objects. Personally, I would've chosen this one among the go-to Maksutov kits, and at a similar price-point... https://www.amazon.co.uk/Celestron-22097-NexStar-Computerised-Telescope/dp/B0038LX8XE For deep-sky observations, the more aperture the better.

Oh, I forgot about this one... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/omni-xlt-series/celestron-omni-xlt-102-az.html That's the ticket, if you want a refractor.

In so far as used kits, beware. There are several types; that is, the variables of the listings. Some know nothing about telescopes and simply want to get rid of them. Those are generally the best offers, the best deals. Others know all about the telescopes, and still want to get rid of them; a bit of caution should be exercised there.

Yes, I caught that, and corrected it. Thank you.

If the learning-curve of an occasional and regular collimation procedure for a Newtonian is acceptable... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-150p-dobsonian.html That one would be easier to collimate, to maintain. This one would be a bit more difficult, but it's very popular, and quite capable in its own right... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/heritage/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html However, I don't know how corrosive, salty, the environs are there in Clacton. Salt will eventually damage the coatings of a Newtonian's mirrors. A refractor would withstand such best, but at the cost of a smaller aperture; for example... https://www.amazon.co.uk/Meade-Instruments-Infinity-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B00LY8JWB0/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?keywords=Meade+Starpro+90+mm&qid=1575249323&s=electronics&sr=1-2-fkmr0 The AZ-3 mount that comes with that one is a bit wonky, upon arrival, but there are DIY adjustments and mods to improve its performance. There is a short-compact 102mm, the next size up in aperture; for example... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/startravel/skywatcher-startravel-102-az3.html But at f/5, and with its short focal-length, it doesn't play well with the general 4mm-to-40mm range of eyepieces. You would need a 3x-barlow to reach the higher powers of which a 102mm aperture is capable. It comes with the same mount as the Meade. It would suffer from considerable false-colour when viewing brighter objects, like the major planets and brighter stars. It is configured primarily if not exclusively for low-power, wide-field views of dim and dimmer-still deep-sky objects instead. 102mm and larger refractor kits, with longer focal-lengths, are ideal for the brighter objects; for example... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-102-eq3-2.html ...but they also require larger mounts to support them. The Meade "Infinity" 90mm is only 10mm less in aperture; albeit in refractorland that is a considerable demotion, but at f/6.7 the false-colour would be considerably less than that of the 102mm f/5 "Startravel" when viewing brighter objects. With most any entry-level refractor kit, a proper star-diagonal would be required for use at night. As they come, they are generally provided with an Amici, erect-image diagonal, and best for daytime-terrestrial use.

The high-point acorn-nuts and their screws; glamour shot... I had to deepen the recesses for the screws' heads... The screws were cut down to 10mm to 11mm in length. The tube-rings are completed... Now to wait on the knob for the dust-cap's plug...

The telescope itself is completed, save for its collimation, dust-cap and tube-rings...

I ordered two of these, and from China... https://www.ebay.com/itm/Black-plastic-M4-M5-M6-M8-M10-M12-thread-ball-shaped-head-clamping-nuts-knob-ah/392308035882?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&var=661295015533&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649 ...the 16mm, M5. They've already landed here in the U.S. It's only a matter of time. One will make for a rather complementary knob for the aperture-stop's plug. In turning towards the tube-rings, I shortened the bolts by about 2mm. These are the tips that had scratched up the tube... The tips of the bolts are now flush with the tops of the nuts... ...and now clear the tube. I then found that the factory-felt of the rings was too thin, and for a secure clamping... The adhesive left behind at random was removed with charcoal-lighter fluid, the kind used for grilling food outdoors. It worked a charm, and is also excellent for removing factory glue-grease from mounts. The new, thicker felt in place... ...much better now. I removed the camera-piggyback adaptor from the one ring. Both will have, instead, pointed acorn-nuts attached, which will serve, when called upon, as a finder.

I have the Meade version, just like your own... The eyepieces and barlow that came with it are terrible, but I have other eyepieces. The telescope is quite capable, the EQ-1 mount not so much as the telescope is rather large and long. You can switch to an alt-azimuth mode, for perhaps greater stability and ease-of-use, and simply by throwing the RA-axis all the way back to 90°... That's the CG-2(EQ-1) mount from my Celestron "PowerSeeker" 127EQ kit. The legs should not be extended, and for improved stability. Given the ample focal-length of the telescope, at 900mm, you may want to consider a 32mm Plossl, for your lowest power and widest view of the sky, for the hunt. For example... https://www.365astronomy.com/32mm-GSO-Plossl-Eyepiece.html (28x)

I do not read nor suggest those reviews in trying to make an item appear pretty as a picture. One has to wade through them, analyse them. The most critical reviews are the most helpful, of course, then to filter those out and read the positive, carefully. For example, when I purchased this off of Amazon... ...and on purpose, it was only afterwards that I read the reviews. I learned quite a bit as a result, and now I have a performance-driven example of the type. My "favourite" reviews of that one were "I can't see anything!", and "All I see is black!" Indeed, quite a few returned the kits. I also learned that I should never suggest it for those first starting out, as it required far too much work to get it to where I wanted it... https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/340294-celestron-powerseeker-127eq/ ...but I expected, even knew, that, and before it had arrived. My own arrived mis-collimated; no surprise. In so far as the 90mm "Infinity" achromat, its bundled mount is dated, and eventually requires a bit of DIY to sustain it, to keep it propped up. Then, Meade has released a new series, the "StarPro" line; the same telescopes, but perhaps with a superior alt-azimuth. Yet look at this... https://www.amazon.co.uk/Meade-Starpro-Refracting-Telescope-234003/dp/B07J5Q8NLR The listing is dead, but then the series has not been out for very long. Still, I can't find the kit anywhere else in the UK; hopefully soon, although not by Christmas I expect. I have the 90mm "Polaris"; the doublet is quite good, excellent even, and the focusser is entirely of metal(very important)... These entry-level refractor kits do require a separate purchase of a proper, star diagonal, as the one included, an Amici, is for daytime-terrestrial observations. In addition, the included eyepieces, and the barlow if provided, are less than stellar, but will serve in the beginning.

Mirrored telescopes, even advanced ones like the modified-Cassegrains, are not what I think of for advanced solar-observations. Still, I'm thinking that you're wanting the ability to use the telescopes you have on hand, and perhaps for their ease in reaching the higher magnifications. The prices are utterly out of reach for myself, else I would have a specialised refractor, like one from the Meade Coronado series.

I use Super Lube for all of my mounts. It's not particularly light, nor heavy. It's PTFE, or Teflon, based, and what might be better than that. The old grease must be removed completely, utterly. I use charcoal-lighter fluid for that, the kind for grilling food outdoors, which works a charm.

In that..."neither of us have any experience in setting up or calibrating viewing equipment"...I would think that a refractor, an achromat, would suit you best. Unfortunately, in so far as compactness combined with performance and versatility, the Sky-Watcher "Startravel" offerings are too short, and those of the "Evostar" line are a bit too long. Meade offers this 90mm f/6.7 achromat on an AZ-3 alt-azimuth mount... https://www.picstop.co.uk/meade/meade-infinity-90mm-altazimuth-refractor-telescope.html?wgu=217_109047_1574904376426_d25af2eaa8&wgexpiry=1577496376&source=webgains&siteid=109047 Here are over 600 user-reviews of the Meade "Infinity" line in general... https://www.amazon.com/Meade-Instruments-Infinity-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B00LY8JWB0 Refractors require virtually no maintenance, and are ready to use once taken outdoors.

It appears that I will be able to retain the aperture-stop after all. The dust-plug for the dust-cap... The plug is not of hard-plastic as the cap, but rubbery, yet stiff in its own right. Aluminum bonds to rubber quite well, with epoxy...

The cap now fits to where I want it. It's neither snug nor loose. Part of the flange will be flocked, and to serve as cushioning as the cap is removed and replaced... A section of the flange was cut out to accommodate the secondary-stalk and the thicker aluminum used to bolster it. The center-plug, for the 60mm aperture-stop, cannot be used, as it's too thick and will not fit due to the secondary-hub's adjustment screws sticking out too far; and no, I am not going to revert back to the set-screws, absolutely not. Instead, I will fill the hole with aluminum sheet backed with black-plastic sheet or other, and add a knob. Oh dear, if I do that, I won't be able to use, per the diameter of the secondary-mirror, the 60mm f/1 or f/2 aperture... It looks like I'll just have to do without that grossly-obstructed aperture; and a dim, 60mm one at that.

Presently, I'm working on the dust-cap for the telescope's front opening... It snap-fitted originally, but with the addition of the aluminum veneer to the inside rim of the cowling, I'm having to reduce the diameter of the cap's flange.

I'll need to matte-blacken the heads of the screws next. The acorn-nuts lend a bit of panache and style, eh?

One down, two to go...

Nonetheless you did forecast the solution for the cowling. Had you not made merry mention of that, I probably would've gone ahead and used those jack-nuts and lock-washers on the inside. Thank you again. I now have to remove 4mm from the ends of each screw. I may grind down the heads a bit, for an even lower profile, but only as long as I'm able to retain enough depth for a hex-key to grab still.