Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Giro mounts - the wonderful babies!!

emadmoussa

Recommended Posts

emadmoussa

emadmoussa

Posted
Posted

Review of the Explore Scientific Twilight II Giro Mount

After a lot of hassle, and I mean loads and loads of hassle and procrastination with Explore Scientific in Germany, my mount was finally fixed and sent back. Ironically, they issued me a refund and sent  the mount back the same week even though I asked for the order to be cancelled. Anyways, having tested the mount last night I ‘’refunded their refund’’.

So, Why Alt-Azimuth Mount?

All these years I’ve been exclusively using equatorial mounts and actually took them for granted as the best  in the astronomy world. I remember 7 or 8 years ago my first telescope came with a fork mount, and even though it was a low end item I thought the mount was pretty good and very usable. Now, looking back  all look like a child’s toy. After that I had 4 equatorial mounts since, the NEQ6 was the last. Well, I got it basically for astro-photography and  recently for reasons amongst them portability and spending so much on alignment as well as putting off imaging until I have built an observatory, I decided to go ahead and go back to simplicity. Alt-azimuth mount was the obvious answer.

To cut the long story short, I came across the Explore Scientific Twilight II giro at a half price discount, so went ahead...sold the EQ3 (my portable mount) and got the Twilight. It came faulty, picked up, fixed and was sent back yesterday. Luckily, against all the odds, the sky turned clear which allowed me to have a test drive.

Explore Scientific Twilight II – Build and Payload.

The tripod is noticeably large and very sturdy and when fully extended it reaches a reasonable height allowing a  long-ish refractor to be used comfortably. I invested in a pier extension designed specifically for the Twilight II which added extra 8” of height, allowing  even longer refractor to be usable when pointed at the zenith. I tried that with my 6” refractor and the eyepiece position was easily accessible without having to lie down on the ground.

The mount head is very solid and has two vixen style saddles on both ends. You will need a vixen counterweight shaft if you want to use one of the saddles to hold counterweight. John recommended the Teleskop Service version, and it’s really worth every penny. Thanks, John!

In theory the mount is capable of supporting up to 18Kg of weight. My first impression it could actually support at least 3-4Kg extra over the stated limit.

I first tested it with my 102ED with all the accessories attached. Once balanced, the mount was impressively smooth. Having said that, I noticed whenever I added the 5Kg counterweight, the movement became even smoother to the extent of rendering the ‘’non-existent” slow motion’ knobs  unnecessary. It seems I will have to get a lighter counter weight for this telescope. By the way, the Twilight II doesn’t have slow motion, and I think I know why now J I am sure it’ll be a nice feature, but necessary.

After that I mounted the 11Kg (12.5Kg with accessories) refractor. Without counterweights, it was smooth enough, but looked suspiciously fragile. I’m quite sure, mechanically, the mount could handle it just fine. But logic dictates that this heavy refractor did need some counterweight just to abide by the laws of physics. So again, I added the 5Kg counterweight and that seemed to make a lot of difference in terms of stability and smooth motion.

Interstellar Test

Like I mentioned, the tripod is big and with the mount head attached it is still light enough, but I wouldn’t recommend carrying everything including the telescope mounted all together. It’s not mainly about the weight as much as it is about the awkward position of tripod legs and all the manoeuvring you’ll have to do especially through doors.

So, the sky was clear outside, I took the mount out and then attached the 102ED. The whole process took about 2 minutes and I was instantaneously  ready to observe. Well, it’s a massive plus not having to align...just shove the mount anywhere on the patio floor and off you go.

Having scanned the sky for few minutes, I was thinking ...God, why didn’t I get this mount from the start?!!! It’s very very intuitive, no awkward motion, no weird observing positions and above all, just point and shoot – not literally J Let me put it this way, on average with an equatorial mount it takes me about a minute to hit the ring nebula  using the handset, with the Twilight – and I was looking at the time – it literally took me 5 seconds.

Another example, on two occasions I found it easy to follow a bunch of satellites. It would’ve been a nightmare doing that with an equatorial mount using the handset. There are probably some people out there capable of comfortably manoeuvring equatorial mounts, I’m definitely not one of them.

General thoughts

For visual observing, alt-azimuth mounts are the way to go – and giros in particular once balanced properly are the manifestation of the ‘’no hassle do factor”. Wonderful and joyful to use. Why on earth didn’t I have one long time ago?!!! 

post-27451-0-47254400-1380281829_thumb.j

post-27451-0-81828600-1380281867_thumb.j

post-27451-0-82927300-1380281875_thumb.j

post-27451-0-45802100-1380281884_thumb.j

post-27451-0-72192500-1380281891_thumb.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply
AlexB67

AlexB67

Posted
Posted

General thoughts

For visual observing, alt-azimuth mounts are the way to go – and giros in particular once balanced properly are the manifestation of the ‘’no hassle do factor”. Wonderful and joyful to use. Why on earth didn’t I have one long time ago?!!! 

Nice write up, I've never owned an EQ mount and only worked with a little DOB mount myself, however my own inkling would always be if I did mount a Newt on something other than a DOB mount, I would always be thinking az mount for some reason. Not sure why, just think that is what I would get on with, that is for visual observing I should stress seeing I am not into Imaging, but I suppose it is whatever you get used to.  I think a nice AZ mount as an addon for my Heritage at some stage would work a treat. :smiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DirkSteele

DirkSteele

Posted
Posted

As someone who uses a number of the Teleoptic Giro mounts, I cannot recommend highly enough the use of a counterweight (or second scope) on the other side.  If you think the motion is smooth now, you will not believe the movement with a counterweight.  It is like silk.  The only time I do not use one is when travelling with it and want to keep the total weight down.

Enjoy the mount!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

Well I'm really glad to see that the setup has come right for you at last Emad  :smiley:

I agree entirely that the Giro-type mounts are just the simplest things to use and absolutely no hassle to set up. Balance becomes important though as you use larger and longer tubes - especially when you switch from a heavy 2" eyepiece to a 1.25" ortho !

I hope you have many happy hours of alt-azimuth observing  :smiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
emadmoussa

emadmoussa

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Turns out this mount can handle 27kg once balanced properly...in theory, if one telescope is mounted on one side then the payload is recommended to stay under 12kg. However, if two telescopes are mounted on each side ( this applies to counterweight as well) then each of the mount saddles can take up to 13.5kg.

Not bad at all.. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
emadmoussa

emadmoussa

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hmmm, could be a good option to use my 180 mak in AZ mode

I played a bit with both the 6" frac on one side ( total 12.6kg) and the 102ED on the other ( 6.8kg)..and the mount was pretty smooth. In fact, the heavier the load the smoother it got. So the Mak shouldnt be a problem at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stu

Stu

Posted
Posted

Yep. I'm going to try my mak on the Giro II now it is on the EQ6 tripod (thanks Emad!) should be stable enough. My only concern is finding things in a 0.5 degree max field! The mak on one side, with 4" apo on the other would be a fab combination.

Stu

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

My only concern is finding things in a 0.5 degree max field! The mak on one side, with 4" apo on the other would be a fab combination.

Stu

I was using my 4" Vixen as a "finder" for my 6" F/12 refractor when I used them on the Skytee II a while back  :smiley:

I had around 50 lbs on the mount at that point !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stu

Stu

Posted
Posted

Crazy stuff, but sounds like fun :-). I guess as long as you don't bend something it will be alright!!

The Mak is only 8kg ish, and the Astrotech is 5.5 so probably only looking at 15 or 16kg with extra bits and eyepieces, should be no problem. As you say, the 4" would be great for widefield and as a finder for the mak.

I've got the Argo Navis on there now anyway which I really enjoy using. Completely silent (obviously) and there if you need it, or just forget it if you fancy star hopping. Must do a review soon.

Stu

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

Crazy stuff, but sounds like fun :-). I guess as long as you don't bend something it will be alright!!

It actually all moved very smoothly and solidly. The big issue with physically long tubed scopes though is their moment arm force which is much more of an issue than their sheer weight and somewhat harder to address from a mounting point of view  :rolleyes2:

I'm working on that one !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Fiery Jack

Mr Fiery Jack

Posted
Posted

I own a GIRO III, just fantastic. I have owned an AZ4 in the past, very nice too for a budget mount.  For up to 4 inch retractor (ED100) and very small Newtonian scopes such as a 150P I found it to be a very good mount indeed. For anything above 4 inches (including TAL100RS which is far to long and heavy to avoid long damping down times) I highly recommend a GIRO III, wonderful quality and an utter joy to use, the downside is of course it is expensive, I swopped a TeleVue 24mm Panoptic for mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
emadmoussa

emadmoussa

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Crazy stuff, but sounds like fun :-). I guess as long as you don't bend something it will be alright!!The Mak is only 8kg ish, and the Astrotech is 5.5 so probably only looking at 15 or 16kg with extra bits and eyepieces, should be no problem. As you say, the 4" would be great for widefield and as a finder for the mak.I've got the Argo Navis on there now anyway which I really enjoy using. Completely silent (obviously) and there if you need it, or just forget it if you fancy star hopping. Must do a review soon.Stu

Awesome. Look forward to your review, Stu. You've got now a big giro, slightly worried, fan. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.