Celestron Ed100R and a Vixen Porta mount

[Telescope40]

Hi All. Can I ask if anyone uses this set up or something similar in size and weight.

Will the Porta mount cope with the weight of this OTA.

Hopin for an easy grab and go.

John

[MjrTom]

Hello I cant comment directly on the AZ4 mount but a few people on this forum use this combo with success.

I use a similar mount called a Giro III which is just a simple Alt/Az mount similar in a way to the AZ4 mount.

I would say go for it

[Telescope40]

I have seen a Porta mount on ABS website. It is not the "Mark 2" version so was a little worried about weight. Think the ED100 OTA comes in about 4 kg's so it cud be near it's limit. ??

I have looked at the Giro mounts as well, as I have a spare tripod to hand, so could add the Giro to this.

Am erring toward a Giro TBH after a few more Google search's now.

This will be purely for Moon, Solar and Planet observations.

Any more opinions welcomed,

John

[MjrTom]

If you do decide to go for a Giro III mount make sure its a decent tripod.

I use an aluminium Photo tripod which is designed for medium format cameras and video with a load capacity of 20kg but it is still a little wobbly and not as stable as it could be.

I am currently sourcing a standard HEQ5 tripod to replace it.

[Stu]

I have a Porta mount (which I've tried to sell on ABS ) and also own a Giro II which is the one I use now.

I would definitely say the Giro II is much more stable than the Porta, obviously assuming a stable tripod. I use it with an Astrotech 106mm triplet which is around 6kg and even at high powers for planetary work it is very good. The Porta seemed to struggle with longer tubes, or heavier weights and actually the Giro is easier to use I find. I'm sure you wouldn't regret the Giro II or III.

Stu

[John]

It's the tube length rather than the weight that sets the challenge for the mount. I used an F/6.5 Vixen 102 refractor successfully on the Porta Mk I mount. The extra tube length of an F/9 might just prove too much though - the Porta's have aluminum tripod legs as standard which tend to twist under the forces exerted by long tubed scopes.

[Stu]

I agree about tube length John. Not sure how much the vixen weighs but I certainly felt that I was at or over the limit at 6 kg plus ep's etc. I think the limit for the porta was 5.5 kg, and would have benefited from a sturdier tripod.

At 4 kg I would think it would be ok, just think overall the giro is a more solid and stable mount. The load capacity is much higher.

Stu

[MjrTom]

My Vixen tops the scales at 6.5kg with the moonlite focuser.

Too much for a Vixen Porta.

[Telescope40]

Thanks guys. Appreciate your views. Think I'll look further into a Giro, seeing as I have a tripod to use to attach it to.

Regards as always. John

[andrew63]

i think thats a sensible option. I have a porta mount and use to have it on a celestron 100ed - while ok, it was the tube length not weight as already indicated that was mine main problem, not to mention the sitting on the ground to view overhead! Now i have a 4" F7 it is much more compact than an F9 - they are very well matched!

andrew