A grumble for Easter

[DRT]

Sorry for the moan, but I think this thread highlights a general problem with astro gear that I find incredibly frustrating. Almost all of the scopes I have owned have had components that range from excellent (optics, general construction of OTA, mounts, tripods, etc) to extremely cheap and nasty (focusers, , eyepiece holders, electronic components). I for one would happily pay a few quid more for these devices to ensure all components were of similar quality. What we currently get is akin to putting the brakes from a Model T Ford on a BMW.

The case in point in the thread linked to above is the quality of the handsets and cables - they seem to be universally suspect and prone to faults. Why can't they supply connectors that fit tightly and handsets that don't look and feel like they were accessories to a 1970s gaming console?

Is this Synta's fault for making them or our fault for buying them and then spending a fortune on upgrades and replacements?

Grumble, grumble.

[Stu]

Hi Derek,

I suspect the problem is that 'we' don't like paying for the high quality fittings initially and for reasons of price competitiveness the manufacturers build to a price point.

I'm sure we end up paying more in the long run by upgrading, but I guess that's just the general buying mentality and manufacturers go where the volume is

[DRT]

I get that Stu, but it seems to me that the astro industry is out of step with other product lines.

If I buy an Apple computer I don't get a cheap and nasty mouse and keyboard. I get nothing and have the option of buying the manufacturers devices or something cheaper. That makes it my choice. Many other manufacturers sell products that have accessories that are of the same quality as the main device. What seems to be happening with astro kit is that you are forced to buy the rubbish bits (which add to the cost of the core product) and then have to pay the full cost to replace them with upgraded kit. It would be good if there was an option to not take the rubbish in the first place and only pay the price of the better stuff.

I suspect the problem is partly to do with the supply chain and the manner in which this stuff is shipped. Perhaps it is just too costly for companies like FLO (just used as an example) to receive the core product separate from the accessories and provide options for the consumer to pimp-up their scope without bearing the cost of second rate focusers, eyepieces, etc.

I'm not sure what is making me so grumpy today - perhaps I should eat some Easter eggs

[ronin]

Unless we stop buying them then Synta do not really give a damn.

Your handset goes pop after 15 months and the only option is a new handset, so more pennies for Synta.

The standard of items is questionable, I for one will never bother to upgrade either the HEQ5 or the EQ5 to goto.

However if I mention Meade it gets shot down with comments that were of faults 10 to 15 years ago. So people get told buy Synta. Rarely do I see any post mentioning the iOptron mounts so in an indirect way we support/push Synta items to new people. Hell we recommend them to people that cannot actually purchase them.

Trouble is cheap components are cheap for a reason, they used to supply plossl eyepieces, now it is MA's, Huygens and Ramsdens. Was 2 eyepieces now it seems one is more common. I prefer to say buy 2 or 3 eyepieces almost at the time you get the scope and bin the supplied items.

If you work in a place making consumer electronics it is pitiful the approach taken and the short sighted views adopted. Sorry to say making 100,000 units and getting one component 1p less because it is garbage means £1000 more profit, and the profit appears on the spreadsheet the quality does not. Even worse is the drive for the cheaper item when there are 5 of those items on the board, that means £5000 more in profit.

[Stu]

I guess once you get up to the higher end products there is less or no bundling of cheaper components, a bit like audio kit, separates vs complete systems?

I agree regarding Apple, although I get tired of buying new power cables because the insulation breaks so regularly on the old ones!! Apple have ongoing revenue streams too from music and cloud storage etc. Scope manufacturers have to make their hardware profit at the point of sale.

Ultimately until people stop buying the kit, or complain enough, nothing will change

[Tinker1947]

I pay a bit more for tools in my workshop and tend to with astro gear, but some times there's no second choice so i (we) have to take what appears to be shoddy bits of kit from time to time, shame really 10% extra even on a mount would be well worth it...

[DRT]

I might stand for election as Prime Minister on a ticket of improving the quality of Astro accessories - it's about as good a campaign as any I have seen so far

[Roy Challen]

This is partly why I always try to buy second hand.

[DRT]

I pay a bit more for tools in my workshop and tend to with astro gear, but some times there's no second choice so i (we) have to take what appears to be shoddy bits of kit from time to time, shame really 10% extra even on a mount would be well worth it...

Exactly right - how much would it cost to supply mounts with bolts that don't bend in the middle? A couple of quid?

[ronin]

I might stand for election as Prime Minister on a ticket of improving the quality of Astro accessories - it's about as good a campaign as any I have seen so far

Just do not take part in any televised debate.

Are you going to guarantee clear skies 3 times a week ? :grin:

[DRT]

Just do not take part in any televised debate.

Are you going to guarantee clear skies 3 times a week ? :grin:

Yes - FLO and I are teaming up with their new technology

[Starlight 1]

Exactly right - how much would it cost to supply mounts with bolts that don't bend in the middle? A couple of quid?

I  think you are missing the point.  If you upgrade the bolts to something stiffer you will be putting more pressure on the lug which they push against inside the mount which might break.

So you have to put a thicker casting on the casing to counteract for the stiffer bolts, so you keep upgrading everything.  You then start putting mounts in the same category as a 10 micron mount which will come up as spending lots of money.  Perfection comes at a price.

[Tinker1947]

I  think you are missing the point.  If you upgrade the bolts to something stiffer you will be putting more pressure on the lug which they push against inside the mount which might break.

So you have to put a thicker casting on the casing to counteract for the stiffer bolts, so you keep upgrading everything.  You then start putting mounts in the same category as a 10 micron mount which will come up as spending lots of money.  Perfection comes at a price.

All it needed was a external lug something like the AZ-EQ6-GT, just a better design to start with....

[Cath]

The price you pay for consumerism !

[Alien 13]

I  think you are missing the point.  If you upgrade the bolts to something stiffer you will be putting more pressure on the lug which they push against inside the mount which might break.

So you have to put a thicker casting on the casing to counteract for the stiffer bolts, so you keep upgrading everything.  You then start putting mounts in the same category as a 10 micron mount which will come up as spending lots of money.  Perfection comes at a price.

I think this is exactly right Synta engineer the whole package to a price point everything is designed to fufil a specific purpose including the bendy bolts and sticky grease from my experience it also means that a mod or upgrade to these items is never as straightforward as first suspected and often requires complete replacement/redesign of the items in question

Alan

[DRT]

I  think you are missing the point.  If you upgrade the bolts to something stiffer you will be putting more pressure on the lug which they push against inside the mount which might break.

So you have to put a thicker casting on the casing to counteract for the stiffer bolts, so you keep upgrading everything.  You then start putting mounts in the same category as a 10 micron mount which will come up as spending lots of money.  Perfection comes at a price.

I don't think I agree with this. I am not suggesting putting inappropriately strong bolts in a mount that can't handle them, I am suggesting that they shouldn't be putting in bolts that bend under normal use. I completely agree that you get what you pay for in this life, but you should never be expected to pay money for components that render an otherwise good quality product unfit for purpose.

I think this is exactly right Synta engineer the whole package to a price point everything is designed to fufil a specific purpose including the bendy bolts and sticky grease from my experience it also means that a mod or upgrade to these items is never as straightforward as first suspected and often requires complete replacement/redesign of the items in question

Alan

...and that is part of my grumble. Creating a product whilst knowingly incorporating sub-standard components to drive further revenue from upgrades and replacements isn't a good way of doing business. All that happens is that your products end up with a reputation for poor quality control and design, which results in some of your consumers grumbling about them on internet forums.

[John]

I get a little frustrated by some of the simple issues that should have been sorted out long ago. The "bendy bolts" thing is one and another is putting suitably robust collimation springs on GSO made newtonians.  The latter issue was identified when the Meade Lightbridge came out and has been widely know about since then but GSO have done nothing about it. Whats the point of a decent aperture newtonian which won't hold it's collimation ?

Dovetail clamps on the Skytee II mount is another issue that should have been addressed.

Ok thats my little grumbles out the way too !

[ollypenrice]

I think that the OP makes a perfectly sound point. Lunt, William Optics and Skywatcher - from personal experience - have pumped out instuments parts of which were simply not fit for purpose. The worst offenders have been Crayford focusers but the electronics are sometimes marginal as well. Credit to WO for ditching the Crayfords in favour of R and P.

A product should indeed be internally consistent in quality, in my view. Sell it with a simple but workable single speed focuser and offer a version with better dual speed for the imaging market, for instance.

What to do about it? Send 'em back when they don't work.

What is really annoying about the handsets is that, as they leave the factory gates in China, they cost a close approximation of nothing at all. It can't be more than a few pounds. I did meet someone who had found a way, in principle, to buy them directly and the price was trivial. By the time they get to the UK spares market they're £150 or so. Now if they were sold at £25.00 we wouldn't be so annoyed at their quality. On Friday I bought a two tonne hydraulic bottle jack with three year gurantee for £13.00. Ahem, yes, £13.00.

Olly

[ronin]

In the beginners equip section there has just appered a "Help".

Reads that a HEQ5 Pro has gone pop, sounds as if it is a reverse polarity problem.

A simple diode would take care of that yet I suspect the OP now needs a new drive board.

It is this aspect that gets people, one diode at say 5p and a couple of extra holes in the pcb.

It is good business practise.

If anyone wants to read the post in case I am wrong then please do.

[Starlight 1]

So where do we place the blame, the engineer for not getting his maths right, the companies for penny-pinching or the consumer for buying them?

[Kropster]

But cheap kit means so many more people now have quite sophisticated gear within reach.

Unthinkable a few years ago.

Do we want a select few using high quality gear or lots of us getting a great deal of pleasure from marginal quality stuff?

Swings and roundabouts.

[ollypenrice]

So where do we place the blame, the engineer for not getting his maths right, the companies for penny-pinching or the consumer for buying them?

I blame the consumer last. When you offer a product or service you are bound by the law to describe it accurately and make it serviceable. If you choose to go ahead and do so it must be on that basis. However, I do think that as consumers we should not feed a mentality saying, 'cut costs at all cost' and, when sold a dud, we should not put up with it.

Here's a ludicrous example: I am finding it impossible, where I live, to find decent toilet seats! (OK, it's funny - but EVERY make I've tried has had monkey metal hinges with chrome that flakes off and allows the underlying material to corrode into powder. I'm fed up with buying the ruddy things. Ran rant...)

Olly

[DRT]

But cheap kit means so many more people now have quite sophisticated gear within reach.

Unthinkable a few years ago.

Do we want a select few using high quality gear or lots of us getting a great deal of pleasure from marginal quality stuff?

Swings and roundabouts.

I am certainly not suggesting that astronomy becomes and exclusive pastime for the wealthy. What I am suggesting is that adding a very modest percentage to the cost would result in much more useable and reliable products. A case in point is the focuser on Skywatcher Dobs. From the 150P at around £200 up to the 400P at eight times the price they have the same focuser. Another £50 on the 150P is a big deal for the purchaser but far less so for those prepared and able to buy the 400P.

The manufacturers should give us choice, not force everyone to buy the same basic or sub-standard level of kit regardless of how much we are spending.

To turn your question around, what is the point of spending £2000 on sophisticated Goto set-up only to find that the power socket doesn't provide a tight fit for the supplied power lead causing intermittent problems with the electronics. Another £2 spent on the socket would have solved the problem.

[Starlight 1]

I am certainly not suggesting that astronomy becomes and exclusive pastime for the wealthy. What I am suggesting is that adding a very modest percentage to the cost would result in much more useable and reliable products. A case in point is the focuser on Skywatcher Dobs. From the 150P at around £200 up to the 400P at eight times the price they have the same focuser. Another £50 on the 150P is a big deal for the purchaser but far less so for those prepared and able to buy the 400P.

The manufacturers should give us choice, not force everyone to buy the same basic or sub-standard level of kit regardless of how much we are spending.

To turn your question around, what is the point of spending £2000 on sophisticated Goto set-up only to find that the power socket doesn't provide a tight fit for the supplied power lead causing intermittent problems with the electronics. Another £2 spent on the socket would have solved the problem.

Last part ? turn your question around. If you made a plug that can not move round as the mount move the wire will brake down inside and blow the mount board ,may be put a fuse on the board to stop it , £2 up to £4  and so on.

[Baffa]

With astronomy gear there is "always" some tinkering involved, it doesn't matter if it's a $1 or $10000 item.

And "all" astronomy retailers seems to have a problem mentioning what's you gonna get when you buy for example a refractor, tube rings? A refractor for the astrophotographer where you don't even mention the image circle?