Vixen Advanced Polaris mount - why / why not?

[pystab]

Given how much attention Vixen products (including mounts) get on this and other forums, it is perhaps surprising that so little is said either way about their Advanced Polaris mount. According to specs, it looks really neat - a light weight, convenient to use, well engineered equatorial mount that can take a 6 kg load. Of course it is expensive - GBP 1149 for one with an RA tracking motor at FLO, plus another 500 or so for the dec motor and a tripod. But (especially if we're advised that the mount should cost as much as the scope) it would seem to be a good match to something like a Takahashi FC-100DC (which I have my eye on!) for a visual-only non-goto EQ setup, where ease of use / grab-and-go is a priority. Especially if there is only room in your life (and your house) for one scope and mount, so you want them to be good ones that you will actually use, both in your light-polluted home location and travelling to dark skies.

So, has anyone here got / used a Vixen Advanced Polaris mount? What did you make of it? Does it deliver on the impression its specs give? Is it worth the money for the use case I've outlined? And, if not, what alternative mount would you suggest in its place?

Thanks, Tim.

[pystab]

What - no replies at all? Really??

OP.

[Stu]

46 minutes ago, pystab said:

What - no replies at all? Really??

OP.

I'm not totally surprised Tim, I don't recall seeing anyone discussing this mount in the forum before. It looks very nice but very expensive vs other alternatives out there.

[Grotemobile]

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-az-eq6-mount.html

If your spending that type of money , I would go with something like this.

[Stu]

Some info here:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/513897-vixen-advanced-polaris-anyone-have-one-yet/

 

[Mr Spock]

Extremely poor value for money. You can get a better mount plus a scope for that money!

[Chris]

10 minutes ago, Stu said:

Some info here:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/513897-vixen-advanced-polaris-anyone-have-one-yet/

 

It should say "AND SO IT SHOULD FOR THIS KIND OF MONEY" at the end of each slide  

Seriously, my EQ3 with dual axis drives does the same job, and you can buy this new for less than £300. 

How much is the above Vixen again, I'm sure I read £1000+ but I surely must have imagined it, right? 

If you are rich and can't move for money, then maybe get the Vixen to make room in your wallet, other wise get an EQ3, EQ5 or AZ4.

It looks lovely but still!

 

[triton1]

It looks nice but the price mmm I've found my Cg5 to be portable either using ra drive or slo mo and it probably cost the bit over the £1000 their asking for it but hey it's your money.I will say it again though it looks nice.

[Alien_Photons]

I like vixens products. They make quality at a price. But that's the problem and certainly for a four inch refractor used for visual a much more cost effectively solution can be had. A skywatcher EQ5 with drives on a Bearlbach tripod is more stable just as robust and better looking.

Price's in Japan seem much more competitive which really is a shame for us in the UK, but there is no doubt that like for like they are better quality.

I wouldnt put you off buying one, you will get a great mount and I would wish I had one if you posted a picture of your new mount.

Edited April 29, 2017 by Alien_Photons

[pete_l]

On 4/23/2017 at 11:30, pystab said:

 a light weight, convenient to use, well engineered equatorial mount that can take a 6 kg load. Of course it is expensive - GBP 1149 for one with an RA tracking motor at FLO, plus another 500 or so for the dec motor and a tripod.

The thing is, that while Vixen have been making essentially the same product in different guises for the past 30 years, all the "cheap" chinese manufacturers have been upping their game. It has now reached the point where a mass-produced mount has the same abilities, functions and features for a fraction of the price that the old "quality" products are offering.

It is the same situations with cars. Maybe 40 years ago, if you wanted reliability and performance there were just a few top-end manufacturers with something suitable. Now even a family runabout is more reliable and has more features than a Roller from the 1970s.

Since you are talking about visual use, you don't need the low PE of a high end mount. Plus, a 6kg payload is just about an ED80 with a guider and DSLR - so that also makes the Vixen an unsuitable imagers' mount. It is really just for imaging that the old advice about spending more on the mount than the scope comes into play.

[pystab]

As Stu suggests, I shouldn't be surprised that no actual owners of the mount have appeared to relate their experiences, there'll be so few around. (There are plenty of scope and eyepiece perfectionists around, willing to pay a pretty premium for that last 5% of the experience; where are the mount perfectionists?) But I was also hoping to hear from non-owners, especially with suggestions for alternatives, so many thanks for your replies. I will be in a position to afford an Advanced Polaris, but would far rather spend a lot less on a mount and maybe buy some nice glass with the difference.

Chris' suggestion of an EQ3 does make me a little nervous about stability. Is it up to the job? I realise I'm sensitised to this problem: my only functioning scope is a 1970's f/16 3" achromat that has been with me since childhood, and at high powers its rather-inadequate equatorial mount and tripod might as well be made out of knicker elastic. I've read that long-focus refractors are planet-killers, but this one makes planets look pretty lively to me...

Chris, triton1 and Alien_Photon's EQ5 suggestion (from what I've read a CG5 is a noisy EQ5, right? looks more comfortable. I guess I really should be thinking of getting one, with an upgraded tripod as suggested. And if I'm not happy with it I suppose I could always put the old achromat on it!

But -

I confess to being fascinated by the Advanced Polaris. It sounds like the ideal (other than in cost), designed and constructed with real attention to detail and quality, and an emphasis on ease of use and especially portability. Reports from actual users, though rare (eg the link and video in Stu's post), are very positive. I imagine myself in 5 years' time, the pain of paying for one having faded, with a scope-and-mount-for-life that remains a genuine pleasure to use.

There are no owners around to say how much the mount does (or does not) live up to this expectation. Instead, you've convinced me that an EQ5 or similar would be a competent mount; can you also convince me it would be a pleasure to use?

[Chris]

2 hours ago, pystab said:

Chris' suggestion of an EQ3 does make me a little nervous about stability. Is it up to the job? I realise I'm sensitised to this problem: my only functioning scope is a 1970's f/16 3" achromat that has been with me since childhood, and at high powers its rather-inadequate equatorial mount and tripod might as well be made out of knicker elastic. I've read that long-focus refractors are planet-killers, but this one makes planets look pretty lively to me...

Hi Pystab, I think the EQ5 would be better for high mag work due to its steel tripod, the EQ3's standard ali tripod does introduce vibrations at high mags. Another factor is tube length, the classic 70's achro you have has a very long tube with a focal length of 1250mm, so if the wind catches it or it gets knocked the end of the tube is going to move a lot more than your Takahashi's shorter 740mm focal length tube.

I've had a 1200mm focal lengh Bresser on the EQ3 and it vibrates a lot, my new Vixen A80Mf seems a bit better at 910mm focal length but I suspect over 100x the vibrations will be there. Your Tak will be another increment better on an EQ3, I'm guessing it would be ok for 120x and would work above that if you allow the vibrations to die down for a few seconds.

However I think the EQ5 would just work full stop. 

Here is my EQ3 with some long tube achros:

[pystab]

Well that clinches it Chris, it won't be the EQ3! I'm not keen on a few seconds for the vibrations to die down. And an EQ5 would be useful for my old achro too, in the meantime before the money for the Tak materialises. Still pondering the Vixen mount though...

Nice scopes btw - sorry that I was looking more at the mount and tripod!

[Stu]

13 minutes ago, pystab said:

Well that clinches it Chris, it won't be the EQ3! I'm not keen on a few seconds for the vibrations to die down. And an EQ5 would be useful for my old achro too, in the meantime before the money for the Tak materialises. Still pondering the Vixen mount though...

Nice scopes btw - sorry that I was looking more at the mount and tripod!

Have you considered an old Vixen GP or GP-DX mount? They have beautiful engineering and can be found used for anywhere upwards of £150. Basically the GP is what Synta copied for the EQ5 and the GP-DX is a higher capacity version, 10kg ish I think.

[Alien_Photons]

If you go looking for a second hand GPDX get to the back of the queue!

[Stu]

9 minutes ago, Alien_Photons said:

If you go looking for a second hand GPDX get to the back of the queue!

Funny . I was looking for one for a while but gave up after a few failed attempts. My GP actually suits me fine, enough load capacity (7kg) but nice, light and easy to setup. It has dual drives, no Goto but that's fine by me.

[pystab]

7 kg payload should be enough for me - you have the GPDX if I can have the straight GP

Like EQ5 with beautiful engineering sounds good to me. (Presumably the altitude bolts aren't made of butter-metal then.) But they don't make the GP any more, right? Would new EQ components (like motor drives) be compatible with an old GP, should a GP come up for sale with the wrong or missing bits?

[Alien_Photons]

that's the problem with my skywatcher EQ5 when you adjust or tighten bolts you can almost feel the metal give or bend. I have learnt to judge this (not the hard way) and having stripped it a couple of times now it could be engineered much better but its more than twelve years old and works. I don't know because I never owned a vixen mount but I assume the quality of materials and engineering is typical Japanese so that the mount gives a sence of confidence.

Whilst the skywatcher is great value, when you own and use something for ten years the extra costs of better quality seems to make more sence. I have managed to make my skywatcher last that long without breaking it that's about five pounds a month in cost. On reflection I could have bought the vixen and it cost me ten pounds a month. 

I imagine many here have spent way more on mounts and broke them in the last ten years. Its tuff to justify spending more on something when something similar can be had for less and this is really vixens problem. But in the long term (ten years in my case) the extra cost is not so unresonable. My hobby, passion..... in these terms costs me very little, less than my mobile phone. I thing I have noticed is electronics seem to be the big issue with modern mounts and its the reason I still prefer the idea of a simple EQ and ALTZ Mount so maybe my next mount will be a vixen they still represent small light weight quailty mounts.

[Stu]

10 hours ago, pystab said:

7 kg payload should be enough for me - you have the GPDX if I can have the straight GP

Like EQ5 with beautiful engineering sounds good to me. (Presumably the altitude bolts aren't made of butter-metal then.) But they don't make the GP any more, right? Would new EQ components (like motor drives) be compatible with an old GP, should a GP come up for sale with the wrong or missing bits?

I've not had any problems with bendy bolts, I don't believe the GP suffers in the same way. They are not made any more, but the motors and upgrade kits from EQ5s fit the Vixen GP so there is a fair amount of upgardeability if needed. There is a GP2 version in white which is very similar I think, not totally sure if it is upgraded or not. 

I fitted an iOptron GotoNova to my GP which worked very well, but I realized that I only use this mount for planetary and lunar observing so reverted to simple MT1 motors which give me tracking plus the ability to pan around the lunar or solar surface which is all I need.

They are not made any more, but decent ones do come up for sale used on AstroBuySell every now and then.

[Alien_Photons]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

MT1 motors which give me tracking plus the ability to pan around the lunar or solar surface which is all I need.

They are not made any more, but decent ones do come up for sale used on AstroBuySell every now and then.

I have the MT1 motors on my EQ5 for the same purpose. I don't think I would buy another EQ5 even at the great price they sell for. If the new vixen mounts were compatible with the old drives I would have bought one a while ago.

[pete_l]

15 hours ago, Stu said:

Have you considered an old Vixen GP or GP-DX mount? They have beautiful engineering and can be found used for anywhere upwards of £150.

I think "upwards" is the important word there . In 2003 I paid £900 for my GPDX + SS2k (the goto system) and it is still in use today.

[Stu]

34 minutes ago, pete_l said:

I think "upwards" is the important word there . In 2003 I paid £900 for my GPDX + SS2k (the goto system) and it is still in use today.

I bet that's a great setup to use. I had an SS2k PC for a while and thought it was as good if not better than any of the modern controllers I have used.

[Chris]

5 hours ago, Alien_Photons said:

Whilst the skywatcher is great value, when you own and use something for ten years the extra costs of better quality seems to make more sence. I have managed to make my skywatcher last that long without breaking it that's about five pounds a month in cost. On reflection I could have bought the vixen and it cost me ten pounds a month. 

Hi, if the Vixen mount was only twice the cost of an EQ5 I would also consider one for the extra build quality etc, but isn't it many many times the cost of an EQ5? not just twice the cost?

A new EQ5 costs £250, and with enhanced dual axis drives comes to £385, plus the alt bolts can be upgraded for very little so call it £400 max.

How much does the Vixen cost by the time you've added a steel tripod and drives? If it was say £700- £800 I wouldn't rule one out entirely myself for the future, but I think it's probably double this? 

[nightfisher]

The poor old EQ5 seems to be getting a bit of bad press here..........but look at the workhorse you get for your money, i think i might be on my 3rd one due to changing kit from time to time, i have never had a bolt bend or cause any other problem, when polar aligned i can get more than 90sec subs, not that i need that long for what i used it for

[pystab]

OK, so a used GP is sounding better and better, if "clone" add-ons are compatible. Though a pair of Vixen's own MT-1 motors, slo mo clutches and a controller come to EUR 427 new according to the teleskop-express website. Alien_Photons' comments on the EQ5 are rather telling - I can't see myself falling in love with that mount. I take nightfisher's point and I'm aware that all my impressions are second hand, but for me the joy of owning and using something excellent (any Tak or Ethos owners here?  ) tips the balance against the joy of having bagged a bargain. Anyway it is just as well I have plenty of time to wait for a GP to become available, if I do decide to go that way. (I won't need goto or other fancy electronics, just basic tracking and panning.)

Chris - that's right, the Advanced Polaris with RA drive is GBP 1149, plus another 500 or so for the dec drive and Vixen's tripod, at FLO. So double your plausible amount as you thought. Vixen UK have a review of the mount on their website, apparently from Sky at Night magazine though I have failed to find it on the magazine's own website. Perhaps it's subscribers only:

https://www.vixenoptics.co.uk/PDFs/Product Reviews/Sky_at_Night_AP-SM_Mount_Nov15.pdf

The conclusion (my precis) is that it beautifully designed but expensive; a solid choice if portability is a priority.