Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_celestial_motion.thumb.jpg.a9e9349c45f96ed7928eb32f1baf76ed.jpg

Sign in to follow this  
Patbloke

Mount loading

Recommended Posts

Here's a thing, I have a beautiful condition AVX and have been looking at the amount of weight she will take.... 30lbs 13.6kg (although there was a view 35lbs from somewhere I read)

I just weighed my 150 Frac and without EP, Diagonal and Telrad it's coming up 9.8kg ... that leaves me 3.8kg for counterweight mmm

I take it the load of the mount is scope plus counterweights?

 

I think I might need a bigger boat????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The published load does not include the counterweights. From the Celestron site

 

  • Holds a maximum instrument capacity of 30 lb

Peter

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to use one of those 6" F/8 fracs for visual on a Celestron CG5 and it was OK. I'd have thought that the AVX would be just a bit better than that. It's close if not equal to the capacity of the HEQ5 from what I can see of the specs and plenty of folks run 6" F/8 fracs on those for visual.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.jpeg

"I think I might need a bigger boat????"

I got a bigger boat and it's shark driven !

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's your weights and dimensions for the AVX mount:

  • Carrying capacity 14kg (30lbs) (not including counterweights)
  • Tripod Weight 8kg (18lbs)
  • Mount Weight 7.7kg (17lbs)
  • Counterweight 5.5kg (12lbs) x 1
  • Total Weight: 20.7kg (46lbs)
  • Mount Height: 40.6cm (16")
  • Tripod Height: 74-127cm (29-50")
  • Tripod Legs Outside Diameter 50mm (2") and 38mm (1.5")

Hth :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, brantuk said:

Here's your weights and dimensions for the AVX mount:

  • Carrying capacity 14kg (30lbs) (not including counterweights)
  • Tripod Weight 8kg (18lbs)
  • Mount Weight 7.7kg (17lbs)
  • Counterweight 5.5kg (12lbs) x 1
  • Total Weight: 20.7kg (46lbs)
  • Mount Height: 40.6cm (16")
  • Tripod Height: 74-127cm (29-50")
  • Tripod Legs Outside Diameter 50mm (2") and 38mm (1.5")

Hth :)

Great work thanks very much for taking the time everyone...

I have not been getting out much lately due to poor weather and the usual problem of not having a garden, but when I do; I default to my lovely 102 on the AVX which seems a perfect mate... 

However, inspired by Nick (the guy with the small boat above) I want to use my refurbished 150 to do some serious binary splitting :-)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'll be trying my TMB LZOS 130 F/9.2 on an AVX quite soon so we can compare notes on how we get on :icon_biggrin:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I love my AVX with my 100ED, it's just not coping with my 12kg 6" frac. As hard as I tighten the clutches it still slips and I lose goto alignment. A shame as up until now it's been a fantastic mount and I hate to post a negative comment.

Do post and let us know how you get on.

Regards,

Tom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The weight business is (to persue the fish theme :D)  largely a load of codswallop. It is really about  things like damping time (imagers can't wait for it but visual observers can) and tracking accuracy (imagers need it and observers don't.)  I think the best thing for anyone in doubt to ask is, 'Anyone out there using this scope on that mount to do this job?'

Olly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was Olly that mentioned the analogy of trying to write with a short pen then with the pen on the end of a foot long stick, the maximum load tells you little the moment of inertia of a long tube is far more critical than its weight.

Alan 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23 August 2016 at 20:12, ollypenrice said:

The weight business is (to persue the fish theme :D)  largely a load of codswallop. It is really about  things like damping time (imagers can't wait for it but visual observers can) and tracking accuracy (imagers need it and observers don't.)  I think the best thing for anyone in doubt to ask is, 'Anyone out there using this scope on that mount to do this job?'

Olly

Absolutely. Indeed, I've found that the dampening times are acceptable when using the 6" refractor on the AVX. 

I was simply making the point that I've found that the mount won't track reliably with this load - the goto's start off okay but worsen significantly as the evening goes on, no matter how carefully balanced the scope is and how accurately the mount is initially aligned. I don't experience this issue with a lighter load. Unless I'm doing something wrong, which is always a possibility :).

We could argue that accurate goto's are not really essential, but they are one if the reasons why I bought the mount in the first place.

Regards,

Tom

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to see why the extra weight would induce drift in the system over time, though I take your word for it that it does. It couldn't be something as simple as the tripod sinking into the ground or the legs slipping a little? Or the clutches not gripping perfectly?

I like GoTo systems which can be painlessly 'updated' simply by going to a star near the target and re-synching. This can be more or less straightforward depending on the system. And, yes, GoTo should go to. That's why it's there!

Olly

Edit: Just anther thought. If your heavier rig has a longer focal length then GoTo will need to be better in accordance with the reduced field of view.

 

 

Edited by ollypenrice
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

It's hard to see why the extra weight would induce drift in the system over time, though I take your word for it that it does. It couldn't be something as simple as the tripod sinking into the ground or the legs slipping a little? Or the clutches not gripping perfectly?

I like GoTo systems which can be painlessly 'updated' simply by going to a star near the target and re-synching. This can be more or less straightforward depending on the system. And, yes, GoTo should go to. That's why it's there!

Olly

Edit: Just anther thought. If your heavier rig has a longer focal length then GoTo will need to be better in accordance with the reduced field of view.

 

 

Thanks Olly. I think it's that the weight is too much for the clutches. No matter how hard they are tightened there is slippage and I can't see any obvious way to fix this.

Regards,

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, orley said:

Thanks Olly. I think it's that the weight is too much for the clutches. No matter how hard they are tightened there is slippage and I can't see any obvious way to fix this.

Regards,

Tom

Would it help if you took off the clutch levers and repositioned them?

Ololy

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the suggestion. I had a go this afternoon - managed a small improvement but there is still slippage. Time permitting I'll have another go tomorrow.

Regards,

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Michael Hogan
      I have decided to sell my Cem-120 mount as i got a second hand AP 1100 GTO from my friend who got a new AP 1600 with encoders
      its just under a year old bought from Altair Astro so still under two year warranty is in mint cont i couldn't miss the opportunity to get
      AP 1100 GTO and let it go still waiting for pier plate for mount.
      So theirs no point in keeping two large mounts after i got my dream final mount buyer will pay shipping price is 2350 pounds.
      Altair Astro price without Ipolar Camera is 3250 pounds without Ipolar Camera which is 200 pounds total 3450 pounds
       

    • By muddy
      SOLD
      Skywatcher HEQ5PRO Tripod and Extension pillar.
      There are a few marks on the tripod legs but not really noticable, the eyepioece/spreader tray has paint flaking off
      But could be cleaned and repainted, it didnt bother me, but I am lazy.
      I am selling as its not getting used as it should be and I find I use the excuse that it takes to long to carry it out 
      and setup, but in reality I think I am just losing interest.
      As it is a heavy object collection from TS25 (Hartlepool) is preferred.
      But if a courier collection service is available buyer pays the costs and arranges pickup I am happy as long as money has been transfered. Also I am prepared to travel a reasonable distance to meet for exchange.
      Price £400 ONO I will not split
       
      SALE COMPLETED







    • By GiovanniF
      Hi to everyone, I used to do some astrophotography in the past with a Celestron AVX and DSLR but after few month had to give up for several reasons, including light pollution (I'm living in zone 3 east London), and also working shifts. Now I want to start again, and this time more serious. I've been searching around for a couple of months to choose all the gear and I'm quite happy with the list so far although it's a bit over the price I planned at first.
       I will get an William optics Z73 with his 50mm guide scope, a flattener/reducer 0.8, light pollution filter IDAS D2 and as camera I will use a Canon 600D modded and I will buy a ZWO 183MC Pro, after so much research, I'm very happy with the scale and framing I will get with this combo, but I'm starting to get confused with the mount.
      My first idea was to go for an HEQ5 Pro, as my previous experience with the AVX has been awful, then I realized that the FLO, sells that mount with belt modification and also some cleaning and tuning if required, I heard that it's a big improvement over the stock one and the price it's ok, but another important factor for me it's portability. Unfortunately, my garden doesn't allow me to do much so I will need to carry around on trolley, for a km walk, I'm a strong person and been doing plenty of time with the AVX, so my confusion came recently when the iOptron mounts entered my radar. I start comparing the heq5 pro with belt, with the iOptron cem25EC and the CEM40 without encoders, and I'm so unsure of which to buy, the cem25 seem to be the equivalent of heq5 at least speaking of payload, but in some threads I read people saying it's a bit fragile so kind of remove it from the equation although the weight it's interesting for my situation, then the cem40, seem to be quite similar on weight to the heq5 but with higher payload and that's interesting too as I will buy a C11 at some point.
      Now it will all come down to the accuracy of tracking I guess, how the heq5 and cem40 would compare on tracking and guiding? If the cem40 it's better, I would probably go with that since it holds more and would last longer as I don't plan to get anything bigger than a C11, but if the skywatcher it's better, I could decide to go for that, and when I move to a place with better garden then get a second mount with higher payload.
      Apologise for the long post and my english.
      Kind Regards,
      Giovanni. 
    • By MakeItSo
      Hi Folks, 
      Thanks for reading. 
      I am upgrading my mount for my observatory. I will be doing AP primarily but to be honest,  I also enjoy some visual.  I need about 30-40kg capacity. I had my heart set on the ridiculously expensive 10 Micron 2000 (coming in a about 12k when you figure all the extras needed). Something seemed wrong about that price....!
      I now have an opportunity to get a Mesu 200 Mark II. The mounts engineering looks unquestionable and I have yet to hear anything bad said about these mounts. The price is also very attractive compared to the 10 Micron. My issue is the control. I’m going to be honest - the controller looks rudimentary (and with no screen, controlling from the computer for visual may be annoying). I have no knowledge of Sidereal technology at all. I am very close to purchasing this mount but I would like some feedback on user experience regarding the software and control of the mount. I note the new version will have the Scitech I controller but I thought (perhaps incorrectly that the older version has the II controller). I am not sure if this is significant or not. 
      Opinions and feedback greatly appreciated. 
      Simon
    • By starcorral
      My club's Atlas is stuck on the date 11/13/2099.   Last night was 6/28/2019.  Every time I reset the date and started the 3 star alignment the scope chose Vega and then pointed to the western sky - sorta wonky.  When I tried a second star it aimed at a totally wrong part of the sky.  I went back to date and it had reset to the11/13/2099 date.  The mount has a working GPS module.   I went through all the menus and there was no place other than the " sub menu to attempt to replace the errant date.  After five tries I gave up.   Apparently the GPS was accurate to withing a stride or two.  What should I try next?   I know my club; they'd rather stuff it in a corner than take the time or money to fix it.  So it will be m time and my money.  I used the mount several times this year and had no problem.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.