Beware SkyTee 2 Mount

[John]

5 minutes ago, iPeace said:

....It also seems to me that the SkyTee is expected to have more capacity than it actually does - and it's not entirely clear to me what that's based on....

Possibly fueled by this sort of report ?:

https://astronomynow.com/2015/03/29/istar-wxt-204-6lt-refractor-review/

[iPeace]

3 minutes ago, John said:

Possibly fueled by this sort of report ?:

https://astronomynow.com/2015/03/29/istar-wxt-204-6lt-refractor-review/

Uh-huh. "Just" 12 kilograms on a SkyTee.  

[johninderby]

This is what happened to my old Skytee II (since replaced) a while after using a 17kg OTA on it. Eeek. ?

Those old Meade SNTs were a bit heavy.

[GavStar]

49 minutes ago, iPeace said:

It's good to realize that the T-Rex and the AZ8 are not the same class of product. Nothing currently available really compares with a T-Rex - and that itself is not available, either.

It seems to me that the AZ8 is expected to have more capacity than it actually does - based on its price. This is understandable. You pay more, so you want more. As for myself, I'm satisfied that the build quality is worth the price differential - and happy to resort to a different solution for any scope I may care to use that's beyond its capacity. It does what it does, and will not fall apart.

It also seems to me that the SkyTee is expected to have more capacity than it actually does - and it's not entirely clear to me what that's based on. It does what it does, and...it seems prudent not to expect more.

A few years back (pre my T-Rex) I bought a skytee 2 but was not impressed by the build quality so sent it straight back for a refund. 

Having blown the trumpet of the T-Rex I guess i should mention that currently I don’t use it very often - the Panther TTS-160 is my alt az mount of choice for my refractors bigger than 100cm but it’s goto not manual.

I read a thread on cloudynights recently where an experienced poster said in his opinion, for visual observing, the most cash should be spent on the mount rather than the scope. Having had a range of mounts and refractors, I can see a lot of merit with that statement.

[FLO]

2 hours ago, iPeace said:

It's good to realize that the T-Rex and the AZ8 are not the same class of product. 

Also they, and the Panther, cost several times more than the SkyTee. 

2 hours ago, iPeace said:

It also seems to me that the SkyTee is expected to have more capacity than it actually does - and it's not entirely clear to me what that's based on. It does what it does, and...it seems prudent not to expect more.

If some SkyTee owners consider OVL’s recommended max payload optimistic, it would help us if they suggest what they think is a more sensible max payload. Please ?

We will then update our website’s SkyTee-II product description page. 

[johninderby]

I’m going with a max 10Kg on the side and 4Kg on the top to be on the safe side.

[jock1958]

2 hours ago, johninderby said:

This is what happened to my old Skytee II (since replaced) a while after using a 13kg OTA on it. Eeek. ?

Those old Meade SNTs were a bit heavy.

John was there any warning signs before it let go?

With the defects I found in mine it’s worrying especially with my Tak attached!

[johninderby]

Fortunately I was standing at the side of it when I noticed the scope was tilting slowly sideways. Thought it was the saddle that was giving way at first. No warning so if it had been unattended it would have hit the ground.

BTW just corrected my post as I noticed I had put 13Kg when it was actually 17Kg.  ☹️

[John]

35 minutes ago, johninderby said:

I’m going with a max 10Kg on the side and 4Kg on the top to be on the safe side.

I'd go with those figures from my experiences with Skytee II's - provided that the stock dovetail clamp on the side mounting point has been upgraded to an APM or similar.

There does seem to be a huge jump in cost from the Skytee II / Giro Ercole level of alt-az mount to the next level up. Surely a niche there for a small enterprising company ?

A ~£500 alt-azimuth mount, decently engineered, with a reliable 20kg load capacity would be popular I would think

 

[johninderby]

Yes we need a T-Rex junior mount.  ?

Would that make it a Velociraptor ????

????

[FLO]

10kg & 4kg. Done ?

Thank-you chaps. 

[FLO]

5 hours ago, edgehduser said:

(In the business    )

So am I ?

You referred to drop-shipping. There is a place for that (i.e. large heavy items) but over reliance on drop-shipping makes a retailer weak. 

Please see this post from back in 2013. 

HTH, 

Steve 

[DRT]

On 15/06/2018 at 17:07, John said:

Same tripod - Berlebach Uni 28. Same surfaces (patio then lawn). Directly compared on several occasions. Maybe my expectations were too high ?

Neither were absolutely "rock solid" with the 130 F/9.25 but vibration control was definitely better with the Skytee II.

The Ercole is a lovely thing though and I really would have rather hung onto it than the Skytee II but I had to be practical.

I find that a little surprising, John. My Ercole easily carries my Evo 150 F8 with the Altair 152 F5.9 on the other side, both loaded with heavy diagonals and eyepieces and on a Uni28 tripod and I have never noticed any significant vibration. I use large ADM Losmandy clamps and dovetails so perhaps that is adding a bit more stability?

As for the SkyTee II - I bought it and the Ercole at the same time a couple of years ago and sold the SkyTee II a month or so later as I just wasn't happy with the quality of the materials used and construction of the mount head under such a heavy load.

[John]

23 minutes ago, DRT said:

I find that a little surprising, John. My Ercole easily carries my Evo 150 F8 with the Altair 152 F5.9 on the other side, both loaded with heavy diagonals and eyepieces and on a Uni28 tripod and I have never noticed any significant vibration. I use large ADM Losmandy clamps and dovetails so perhaps that is adding a bit more stability?

As for the SkyTee II - I bought it and the Ercole at the same time a couple of years ago and sold the SkyTee II a month or so later as I just wasn't happy with the quality of the materials used and construction of the mount head under such a heavy load.

My experience comparing the two with my TMB/LZOS 130 F/9.25 tripet was that the Skytee II was a little better at controlling the vibrations and the general motions of the scope - similar to your own findings below. I accept that maybe further experience may have changed your mind again, perhaps ?:

 

 

[Stu]

I suspect the clutches on the SkyTee do contribute to keeping things in control a little better when things are out of balance. 

I do find that when I use the counterweight slung under the front of my scope it keeps things much better balanced and allows the Ercole clutches to be kept lightly tightened and everything moves much more easily.

[DRT]

6 minutes ago, John said:

My experience comparing the two with my TMB/LZOS 130 F/9.25 tripet was that the Skytee II was a little better at controlling the vibrations and the general motions of the scope - similar to your own findings below. I accept that maybe further experience may have changed your mind again, perhaps ?:

 

 

 

Now, now, John - that's a bit naughty  - that post is referring to balance when changing eyepieces, not vibration  

 

[John]

38 minutes ago, DRT said:

 

Now, now, John - that's a bit naughty  - that post is referring to balance when changing eyepieces, not vibration  

 

Sorry Derek - I interpreted "handles" a lttle more generously than that. My mistake

But my personal findings between these two mounts remain that my big refractor was slighty steadier and had less vibration on the Skytee II than the Ercole. Maybe the example of the Ercole that I had was not A1 in some way 

I fully accept that the Skytee II has a number of drawbacks though and if the construction is flawed then that is a concern as well. I was genuinely sad to part with the Ercole because it was obviously made to a high standard and just looked so elegant. I may well acquire another to use with my ED120, Vixen and Tak refractors and use the big TMB/LZOS on the Vixen GP DX. 

The only reason that I dredged up your post above was that it, together with my experiences, did help me have some confidence that the Skytee had some ability in handling large scopes reasonaly well. I valued that. Maybe mistakenly, with hindsight 

No mischief intended

[Stu]

@John how are you finding the GP-DX with the 130?

[DRT]

12 minutes ago, John said:

No mischief intended

Of that I'm sure, John - it just made me laugh  

Did you have anything on the other side of the Ercole when you used it with your LZOS? 

That said, I often use mine with the Evo 150 on one side and the Lunt 50 Ha on the other side and still don't notice any material vibration.

[John]

12 minutes ago, Stu said:

@John how are you finding the GP-DX with the 130?

I've just used it the once with the 130 Stu and it did well. Not 100% rock steady but better than the HEQ5 that preceeded it, and quite a bit lighter than that too. At high powers vibrations damped out in 2-3 seconds which I find acceptable. With the drives installed there is less need to touch the scope so that helps too.

To get a 100% "rock solid" mounting with the 130 I reckon I'd need to go for something like a Losmandy G11 on a Berlebach Planet tripod or maybe an AZEQ6 on a BB Planet ?.

In exchange for some portability, I'm prepared to accept a small amount of vibration at high power provided that it dampens out quite quickly. I don't want to repeat the situation I had with my big Istar 6" F/12 where I eventually managed to put together a mount that could handle the scope but found the whole thing totally immobile once setup (120 lbs plus in total !). It really needed to be permanently mounted in an observatory, that one

It's all about trade offs I think, at least when you have to have scopes that can be moved around, like I do.

 

 

[John]

22 minutes ago, DRT said:

Did you have anything on the other side of the Ercole when you used it with your LZOS? 

That said, I often use mine with the Evo 150 on one side and the Lunt 50 Ha on the other side and still don't notice any material vibration.

I did use counterweights Derek. Around 5kg:

 

[Stu]

9 minutes ago, John said:

I've just used it the once with the 130 Stu and it did well. Not 100% rock steady but better than the HEQ5 that preceeded it, and quite a bit lighter than that too. At high powers vibrations damped out in 2-3 seconds which I find acceptable. With the drives installed there is less need to touch the scope so that helps too.

To get a 100% "rock solid" mounting with the 130 I reckon I'd need to go for something like a Losmandy G11 on a Berlebach Planet tripod or maybe an AZEQ6 on a BB Planet ?.

In exchange for some portability, I'm prepared to accept a small amount of vibration at high power provided that it dampens out quite quickly. I don't want to repeat the situation I had with my big Istar 6" F/12 where I eventually managed to put together a mount that could handle the scope but found the whole thing totally immobile once setup (120 lbs plus in total !). It really needed to be permanently mounted in an observatory, that one

It's all about trade offs I think, at least when you have to have scopes that can be moved around, like I do.

 

 

Thanks John. I do still reckon the AZEQ6 would be an excellent option for you. Not having to nudge the scope makes a big difference to reducing vibrations, you could even consider a powered focuser so you don’t have to touch it at all. The ‘6’ handled  the Vixen Atlux pretty well and that was significantly longer and heavier.

[JeremyS]

Talking of Vixen GP-DX's (well @John and @Stu mentioned them!), I see one has just come up on ABS complete with SS2K comtroller. That was a lovely combo with my FS102 for a while.

[John]

3 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

Talking of Vixen GP-DX's (well @John and @Stu mentioned them!), I see one has just come up on ABS complete with SS2K comtroller. That was a lovely combo with my FS102 for a while.

Thats interesting.

 

[garryblueboy]

AYO -AOK holds a very substantial OTA with ease and really well made