EQ8: Dec binding or total failure?

[libraryman]

What would really help us is good documentation of how the mount is supposed to perform, how to check that all is well, how to measure exactly for any backlash etc.

the handbook is woeful and if as you point out; it's impractical to expect maintenance then lets have some decent how to check what idiot guides.

I was fortunate that i was able to get the backlash adjustment .PDF, it helped me some but there must be other documents in existence, why are they not published?

as usual it will be up to owners to strip them and enlighten the rest by experience.

one thing about Astronomy groups is that we are very very good at that and put owners and dealers to shame!

Ray 

Its not really feasible though, is it? Car manufacturers are MASSIVE in comparison to astro-kit manufacturers. They have dealers in just about every town in the land. Plus there are literally thousands of small independent garages all over the country. Getting a car serviced is no problem*. Try doing the same with an astro mount. Is anyone really going to accept dismantling it, packaging it, arranging a courier (at your expense), having no mount for a period of time (and if you are in the UK you can guarantee that the sky will be crystal clear during this period), and then having to trot back and forth to the courier depot when the inevitable red card appears through the letterbox?

I do agree though, that there should be some sort of maintenance schedule, though that would have to be based on hours of use.

*Though I should explain that to Peugeot- they've had my 13 month old 508 back 3 times to do a software upgrade. Their excuse? Their Internet connection is too slow and if it fails the car becomes undriveable!

[libraryman]

Oop's correction...that should read Manufacturers and Dealers

Ray

[ollypenrice]

I think that it would be perfectly possible for a manufacturer to provide basic training to a technician working for the importer. At least having someone technically competent to talk to would be good.

Olly

PS, To their credit, Meade had Telescope House who would dismantle, repair and service their products. I think it normal that main agents should be competent and willing to provide this service. However, it has ceased to be at all normal in reality and I believe this is reprehensible. 

[Davey-T]

*Though I should explain that to Peugeot- they've had my 13 month old 508 back 3 times to do a software upgrade. Their excuse? Their Internet connection is too slow and if it fails the car becomes undriveable!

The ignition key for my wifes car fell apart, cost nearly £100.00 for a new one and had to be programmed  by a computer in France over tinternet  but not on Saturday 'cause the computer in France didn't work on a Saturday.

Those French and their holidays, even their computers get a day off  

Dave

[Davey-T]

I was fortunate that i was able to get the backlash adjustment .PDF, it helped me some but there must be other documents in existence, why are they not published?

Ray 

I obtained a PDF giving instructions on adjusting the Polar scope on iEQ45 issued by iOptron and they'd printed on it "not for publication" bit weird.

Dave

[Alien 13]

I think it would be reasonably easy for anyone to fit some continuous current monitoring to there own mount setup it would show up any problems with uneven meshing etc and balance issues and a noticible change over time will give an indication to get it looked at.

Alan

[ollypenrice]

The ignition key for my wifes car fell apart, cost nearly £100.00 for a new one and had to be programmed  by a computer in France over tinternet  but not on Saturday 'cause the computer in France didn't work on a Saturday.

Those French and their holidays, even their computers get a day off  

Dave

One day off? You'll be lucky! There's Monday, then an assortment of saints. And don't forget the long lunch!

Olly

[stephen_usher]

What have I started?! :-)

Anyway, responding to the above comments, I think that expecting a manufacturer/dealers to follow car maintenance lines is unreasonable, as is even comparing astronomy equipment to that industry, it's just not the same at all. I'd be more inclined to equate it to the camera industry, specifically the professional/"prosumer" end.

Now, if we look at this industry the manufacturers either have a dedicated repair and maintenance workshop of their own or contract a high quality company to be their agent in a country. These facilities are able to take in equipment, usually via a dealer but not exclusively, and essentially rebuild the unit completely, returning it to the owner in a timely manner. (I've read stories of Nikon taking a highly damaged lens unit and replacing all but a few parts for a "reasonable" fee.)

This is the level of service I would like and expect from the astronomical equipment manufacturers if they're going to play in the +£1000 market for mounts. They should expect to be selling to people who may be using the equipment for commercial purposes, be it selling images or for education, and treat the customers as such. i.e. time without equipment or with faulty equipment is potentially loss making.

My experience of Meade's repair facilities, via Telescope House's parent company, is the closest I've seen to this but if your dealer has gone they won't support you for repair. This means that second hand equipment is unmaintainable too.

Now, what I would not like to see translated from the camera industry is the often paranoia about grey imports. Nikon, for example, bars any of its agents from servicing or supplying parts for any camera or lens if there isn't documentary proof that it was either purchased in the country in which the owner currently lives or that they personally bought it in another country (i.e. not posted to them). This means that if the documentation is lost and someone moves from one country to another they can't get their camera fixed however much money they want to pay.

[pete_l]

This is the level of service I would like and expect from the astronomical equipment manufacturers if they're going to play in the +£1000 market for mounts. They should expect to be selling to people who may be using the equipment for commercial purposes, be it selling images or for education, and treat the customers as such. i.e. time without equipment or with faulty equipment is potentially loss making.

The question is: how much would you be prepared to pay for this service?

Let's take a fictitious example.

Say you purchased a mount for your scope. Say it was a low-end one, costing £1k. Say the importer had managed to ship a large number of those mounts - maybe even 1,000 of them! to users in one particular country.

Now, to provide a service centre you'd need 2 technicians as a minimum: one might be off sick, on holiday, on maternity leave (you're not allowed to discriminate against the possibility), receiving training or contracted out to a major client for a period of time. So the other could deal with users and provide them with a service. You'd also need a (semi) clean room environment, the equipment and tools necessary for repairs and diagnosis and a stock of spare parts and service manuals written in your language. What would that all cost? At a guess, including wages+staff overheads, I doubt you'd get away with less than £100k per year - even if the operation received no equipment to mend, diagnose, upgrade or service. If there were parts and materials consumed, the cost would go up.

So. Given a (more-or-less) fixed cost operation, the next question is: how many mounts, from the 1,000 in the hands of users would you expect to work on during a year? I'd suggest that if the product was of the sort of quality we see in low-cost mounts, the number would be very small - maybe 5%, or 50 mounts per year

That's a cost of £2,000 per mount.

Now, obviously, if a supplier had a wide range of astro equipment that they sell then they can diversify and for not much more money, their service dept. could handle all of their ranges. But the question still remains: how many items would they get to fix, each year? Even if the total of all their products was 10 times the figure above, that would still add £200 to the cost of each piece of equipment they sold. In the sub £1,000 bracket, that's a huge chuck of money - much higher than the profit on a single sale. And further, why would the 95% of people who don't use or need that backup have to pay a service "tax"?

Now, while those numbers are completely made-up, the principle applies: few users would need the service, so you can't ask all of them to pay for it. Further, as quality improvements are made the rate of returns will go down, so the per-unit cost rises. And for the smaller manufacturers, with specialised products selling in the "prime" markets of £1,000+ the numbers of sold units is so small that the cost of in-country servicing, for every major country, is prohibitive.

[FLO]

Now, while those numbers are completely made-up, the principle applies: few users would need the service, so you can't ask all of them to pay for it. Further, as quality improvements are made the rate of returns will go down, so the per-unit cost rises. And for the smaller manufacturers, with specialised products selling in the "prime" markets of £1,000+ the numbers of sold units is so small that the cost of in-country servicing, for every major country, is prohibitive.

That is a very well reasoned argument 

And yes, of course, we cannot compare mount manufacturers with car manufacturers. Over two million cars were sold in the UK last year and a company like Ford or Toyota probably spends more per month on coffee than our total annual sales! But let's not talk as though help is not at hand because the original poster 'is' receiving help as we speak... 

EQ8 will be stripped down this week by a TASCO service technician in Sydney to see what this 'binding or 'jamming' is in the RA and Dec axis.

I know there's a God and he loves EQ8 owners!      I'll post the findings here, so stay tuned....!

Steve

[stephen_usher]

Pete_l, that's a nice analysis for the case of a dedicated workshop arrangement.

There is, however, another way that manufacturers could off the low volume service at a far lower cost, especially as it is such a low volume.

There are a number of high quality scientific and high precision workshop companies, at least in the UK, which could be contracted by the manufacturer to fulfil the repair and maintenance of mounts and scopes. The  cost per year would probably be a retainer fee, the fee to hold stocks of spares and the costs involved in training manuals for the staff to use. The warranty repairs would then be charged back on a per-case basis. In this way the contractor would have to employ a fraction of an employee, unless there were a great number of returns or repairs. The manufacturer or owner, if it were an out of warranty repair, would foot the bill for this anyway. This would also give an incentive to build a better product so as to minimise warranty repairs.

As I mentioned before, Meade *almost* has this but the problem is that the company who do the work won't talk to end users, which leaves them in the lurch somewhat if the item is second hand or the original dealer has gone out of business.

[Naemeth]

Pete_l, that's a nice analysis for the case of a dedicated workshop arrangement.

There is, however, another way that manufacturers could off the low volume service at a far lower cost, especially as it is such a low volume.

There are a number of high quality scientific and high precision workshop companies, at least in the UK, which could be contracted by the manufacturer to fulfil the repair and maintenance of mounts and scopes. The  cost per year would probably be a retainer fee, the fee to hold stocks of spares and the costs involved in training manuals for the staff to use. The warranty repairs would then be charged back on a per-case basis. In this way the contractor would have to employ a fraction of an employee, unless there were a great number of returns or repairs. The manufacturer or owner, if it were an out of warranty repair, would foot the bill for this anyway. This would also give an incentive to build a better product so as to minimise warranty repairs.

As I mentioned before, Meade *almost* has this but the problem is that the company who do the work won't talk to end users, which leaves them in the lurch somewhat if the item is second hand or the original dealer has gone out of business.

With contractors, whilst cheaper, you are probably looking at a fee of between £100 to £150 per mount (specialist training + tools and spares etc. + labour). It just adds too much to the cost of a mount, while £100-£150 isn't that much for a, say, £20k mount, it's a huge amount for a £1k mount.

[stephen_usher]

Surely it still costs less than a bad reputation?

Anyway, given that something such as the EQ8 is half the price of the competition, adding even a couple of hundred pounds to the purchase prices would still make it a bargain. The positive feed back of a good response to a fault is a valuable marketing tool too. It's cheap relative to any other marketing, as FLO has probably discovered by being good at their job and extremely helpful. A good reputation is priceless.

[Peter Drew]

If you were offered a "run of the mill" EQ8 or a guaranteed fault free upgrade for an extra £200, which would you choose? 

[pete_l]

If you were offered a "run of the mill" EQ8 or a guaranteed fault free upgrade for an extra £200, which would you choose? 

In the UK (dunno what applies to overseas buyers, buying from a UK source) the distance selling regulations give you the right to return faulty goods at the suppliers expense. So the two options: RotM and fault-free, turn out to be the same thing - less a little hassle and a wait for the replacement.

[stephen_usher]

In the UK (dunno what applies to overseas buyers, buying from a UK source) the distance selling regulations give you the right to return faulty goods at the suppliers expense. So the two options: RotM and fault-free, turn out to be the same thing - less a little hassle and a wait for the replacement.

Not quite the same as long-term hardware support though.

[ollypenrice]

I think that it would be perfectly feasible for manufacturers to use existing specialist technical companies as Stephen suggests. Technicians used to dealing with electrical and mechanical work would have no difficulty in understanding equatoprial mounts. They would be child's play.

There is another possible model. A dealer takes up the challenge and finds a technician willing to invest a little time in understanding the product so as to be able to deal with servicing and repair effectively and efficiently. This might be a good sideline for a retired engineer wanting a boost to their pension, for instance. That dealer would then put themselves in a uniquely strong selling position with regard to that mount. Buy from us and we have backup. Indeed there is one dealer in France who does this already. He prechecks mounts and has commissioned improved parts for them. He'll supply the mount checked, possibly upgraded and guranteed to perform within a set specification. He doesn't do discounts, not surprizingly, but he seems to be doing OK.

We seem to have come a long way into a poor commercial culture if three and a half thousand pound machines are being sold into a servicing and repair void. Do Optical Vision have a workshop? Do they offer any kind of service and repair facility as importers? I'm going to insist that these are reasonable questions. 

Olly

[FLO]

Are you sure you aren't just a teeensy bit anti Skywatcher Olly….?

[ollypenrice]

Are you sure you aren't just a teeensy bit anti Skywatcher Olly….?

I don't know why you say this, Steve. I have two EQ sixes and four skywatcher telescopes. I constantly recommend the ED80 and both the HEQ5 and NEQ6 on here and only yesterday recommended an ALT-EQ6 by PM. I never stop recommending both the SW Dobs and the ST80 for guiding, either. And I ordered an EQ8 based on positive reviews elsewhere. If I were anti Skywatcher I wouldn't invest £3.5 on their latest mount. OK, I got a bad one but I didn't go to all that trouble and expense because I thought it wouldn't work. I thought it probably would.

I don't think much of Skywatcher QC. Does anybody? And I don't think much of any commercial plan involving the sale of expensive machines into a service and repair void. But in a different post I said the same of all mount manufacturers and stressed that I meant all of them quite insistently.

I also dislike the anonimity of OVL as an importer. I think they should be more 'present' and I think they should at least have a policy on repair and maintenance, not just one of replacement under warranty.

So am I anti-Skywatcher? No, they have a QC problem but they make good affordable astronomy gear which I offer to my guests constantly and also recommend constantly, often directly over competting manufacturers.

Olly

Edit; And another thing! You know what an apo headbanger I am? But I often admit on here that a well fettled MN190 will out resolve our TEC140. Now that is a serious admission, eh?? 

[FLO]

I don't think much of Skywatcher QC. Does anybody? 

I do 

No other manufacturer can mass produce quality optics at such an affordable price. If not for Skywatcher many of us would not be practicing astronomy. Yes, if they charged more they would have a more sophisticated fit and finish but their quality control is nowhere near as bad as you make out and it is a myth that more expensive brands are trouble-free. I know you know this… 

And I don't think much of any commercial plan involving the sale of expensive machines into a service and repair void.

Service and repair void? Oh Olly! You purchased your EQ8 from us. We bust a gut to get an EQ8 delivered to you before Christmas at your mountain-top address in France and we arranged an immediate refund and collection when you chose to return it. 

Yours is still the only EQ8 mount sold in the UK that has been returned yet you talk as though there is a queue of EQ8 owners stranded without service - that simply isn't true. 

in a different post I said the same of all mount manufacturers and stressed that I meant all of them quite insistently.

That is good to hear because I have been wondering why you are so aggressive towards the EQ8 and OVL. 

I also dislike the anonimity of OVL as an importer.

OVL are an importer/distributer. They appoint retailers for customer service. You emailed them during their Christmas break, when they reopened they contacted me for an opinion. I advised them you had chosen not to have the mount repaired or replaced so we had arranged a refund and collection. 

In the eyes of many your writing for Astronomy Now and your astro holiday business give your opinions credence. People read them as fact. That is quite a responsibility 

I usually have a thicker skin! 

Steve 

[Luke]

I would of course be very disappointed to buy a mount for £3K+ and for it to have a fault, that must be a real pain...

In terms of SW QC I can only judge by the items I've had, which are 2 SW refractors, 3 SW dobs, a HEQ5 and an NEQ6, and a few other bits and bobs. All arrived in excellent condition with no scratches or sloppy finish, and the optics were a bit better than expected in all of the scopes I can't fault the gear for the price I paid.

[FLO]

PS: My apologies to the original poster for the thread hijack 

Steve 

[astronymonkey]

Over the years the mass production of scopes and accessories has allowed a lot of us to have equipment that we would have only dreamed of 10 or 15 years ago , I for one would never have dreamed of owning a 16inch dob for the price I paid.

Over time though, although things have improved, so have peoples expectations . People now know that precision and quality is possible as they see it in other walks of life, so its frustrating when its not there when we expect it to be.

My lightbridge for instance, as with many other mass produced scopes has a chipboard base which is notoriously prone to damage by getting wet ..... an extra £10 on the price of the scope by using marine plywood would make the world of difference, but this is another quality area that the manaufacturers seem to overlook for the sake of a few pounds -  which Im happy to pay for anyway.

I like mass produced scopes and kit, but at the high end of the market I think these manufacturers begin to leave gaps which become obvious to descerning users, which is a shame as we all seem to agree that a small improvment in QC would make the world of difference......maybe this could be the next big step for Astro gear - the same kit but with all of the simple issues ironed out.

[pete_l]

No other manufacturer can mass produce quality optics at such an affordable price. If not for Skywatcher many of us would not be practicing astronomy. Yes, if they charged more they would have a more sophisticated fit and finish but their quality control is nowhere near as bad as you make out and it is a myth that more expensive brands are trouble-free. I know you know this…

If there was ever a post to end a topic on, this would be it.

Hint Hint!

[martin_h]

If there was ever a post to end a topic on, this would be it.

Hint Hint!

+1