Secondary mirror damage on new scope

[Jonny_H]

Hi all,

I hope everyone is well.

Some advice needed if I may.

I took delivery of my new scope yesterday (SW 150P-DS) and upon setting-up the scope in the evening I noticed that the secondary mirror has a small chip at the top rear edge.  I have attached some photos.

I have emailed the company who I purchased the scope from and they have been brilliant throughout the entire pre, during and post purchasing process who suggested that they can contact SW to see if they could send a replacement mirror but likelihood is that they wont and it will have to be a complete scope replacement.

I haven't had a chance to use the scope yet so do not know if the chip will impact the view etc... however what would you guys do?

Any views appreciated.

 

Best regards,

Jon

 

 

[Stu]

I would definitely get the whole scope replaced. If nothing else, the resale value will be heavily affected and you don’t know what caused the damage.

I know getting it replaced will be a bit more effort but worth it in my book. The chip should not affect the views, but glass can be funny stuff and it may induce stresses that do affect the flatness of the secondary. Probably not, but best to replace it I reckon.

[Cornelius Varley]

If the chip is on the rear of the secondary and the reflective side is unblemished then it shouldn't affect the viewing. 

[DaveL59]

inclined to agree with Stu, where it is its likely the view will be fine, though if those chips induce any diffraction on bright targets like the moon it could give some interesting effects. Thing is in changing temperatures (esp at extremes) if the chip develops into a crack then you're in trouble and will need a new mirror. Not knowing if it was like that on assembly or if it happened in transit adds the question of shards in the scope, did they hit the primary etc.

[Jonny_H]

Thanks for your comments so far.

I have emailed the company requesting for a replacement scope as I think it is definitely the best route to go down - especially after reading your shared concerns also.

I will keep you posted on progress etc...

 

Thanks,

Jon

[John]

It will not affect performance but will affect re-sale value and you paid for a scope that should not have that defect and that's what you should get.

So you have done the right thing and I hope your supplier reacts positively.

 

[barkis]

What a shame,  not something that occurs often, but a bit of
a downer on a brand new telescope.
Did you find any glass particles in the packaging when you became aware of the damage?
It is likely it occurred in transit, as unlikely the supplier would release a damaged scope for sale.  Reputation is everything to them,
and a pre-delivery inspection would most likely have been done.
Hard to visualise what would have caused that damage, without other obvious clues apparent.
It's an odd one, it would require a Sherlock Holmes Analyses I suppose.
Hope you get a satisfactory outcome.
Ron.

[Louis D]

I would think this had to have occurred in the factory prior to mounting the mirror to the holder.  It's speaks volumes to Chinese quality control that the mirror wasn't rejected during inspection.

[Jonny_H]

Hi all,

Thanks for everyone's comments so far.

I didn't notice any debris in the tube or the packaging and as this appears to be a localised chip I cant imagine this would have been caused by something in transit so I can only assume it occurred at the factory.....but who knows.  It is just a little disheartening on a brand new scope as you mention.

On a brighter note - I should be getting the scope collected and a new one re-distributed in due course so hopefully I will be back on-track soon.  I just hope the next one is all ok 🙄 

For now I can just stare at my HEQ5

 

Regards,

Jon

[barkis]

16 minutes ago, Jonny_H said:

Hi all,

Thanks for everyone's comments so far.

I didn't notice any debris in the tube or the packaging and as this appears to be a localised chip I cant imagine this would have been caused by something in transit so I can only assume it occurred at the factory.....but who knows.  It is just a little disheartening on a brand new scope as you mention.

On a brighter note - I should be getting the scope collected and a new one re-distributed in due course so hopefully I will be back on-track soon.  I just hope the next one is all ok 🙄 

For now I can just stare at my HEQ5

 

Regards,

Jon

Best Wishes Jon.
The wait will like waiting for a kettle to boil,
it seems as though  it will never happen.
But it always does 😀.

 

[Guest]

I too think you have made the right choice. Just as windscreen chips can lead to cracks in winter with the cold, I suspect the constant change of temperature between viewing sessions might lead to a similar situation.

Best of luck with the swap over and I hope you will be viewing the night's sky with unblemished mirrors as soon as possible!

[Sky-searcher]

Right decision to return for exchange. My 1st scope ( heritage 130p ) had a dint in the tube. Outer box ok, inner box had damage. Contacted the supplier ( well known here ) & they sent another ASAP with no quibbles. I was gutted at the time & the 3 day wait felt like an eternity. Clear skies for 3 days then the clouds rolled in when the replacement arrived 😂. 

[Peter Drew]

And then there's the dilemma.  A mass produced telescope for which the optical quality ranges from ok to outstanding.  Which end of the scale is this one?.  I think if I was in this position I would want to try it out first to see.    🙂

[DaveL59]

I'd certainly be tempted to try it out, use the time before collection to get a little familiar and then box it up ready to go. After all if it gets re-sold it'll be as a customer return and maybe mention the chipped secondary so nothing to lose really. Just don't scratch it or add other damage, but I'm sure you'd likely mounted it on the EQ5 and then discovered the chip, so it'll already have a mark in the dovetail 😉 

[CraigT82]

Right decision to send it back. No idea how that chip would behave in sudden temp changes. Also cant believe how shiny the drawtube is! 

[Louis D]

3 hours ago, DaveL59 said:

After all if it gets re-sold it'll be as a customer return and maybe mention the chipped secondary so nothing to lose really.

Depends on the retailer.  There was a thread about a damaged eyepiece or lens in the distant past being returned to a NYC retailer with a handwritten note describing the damage tucked in the bottom of the box.  Someone else on the same forum got that same item shipped to them as new with the other member's note still tucked in the box.  The retailer just treated it as an ordinary return, not a damaged goods return.

[Davey-T]

3 hours ago, Louis D said:

Depends on the retailer.  There was a thread about a damaged eyepiece or lens in the distant past being returned to a NYC retailer with a handwritten note describing the damage tucked in the bottom of the box.  Someone else on the same forum got that same item shipped to them as new with the other member's note still tucked in the box.  The retailer just treated it as an ordinary return, not a damaged goods return.

Similar thread on CN about a returned scope resent out to another CN member as being new and immediately identified by the previous owner when a post about the faults was made.

The retailer was aware of the faults and had made no effort to correct them.

Dave

[Brunty12345]

I wouldn't risk not having it replaced, it is not worth it. You paid for the product, and the entire product, even that missing tiny bit of the secondary mirror

Edited May 6, 2020 by Brunty12345

[Jonny_H]

Hi all,

Just a quick update. The scope is going to be replaced, however it is currently out of stock - expected back in stock mid-May.

So I have to sit tight and play the waiting game. It will be worth it in the end though.

 

Regards,

Jon

[Sky-searcher]

32 minutes ago, Jonny_H said:

Hi all,

Just a quick update. The scope is going to be replaced, however it is currently out of stock - expected back in stock mid-May.

So I have to sit tight and play the waiting game. It will be worth it in the end though.

 

Regards,

Jon

Best option, will work out for the best in the end. Annoying no replacement for few week though, longest 2 weeks of your life 😂. I have the 150P & it’s a great scope. Easy size to move & store. Punches well above it’s size. Good choice!

[Jonny_H]

Hi all,

I hope everyone is keeping well.

After what felt like an absolute age - I have just taken delivery of my replacement 150pds. I haven't set it up yet but at first appearance it looks fine and more importantly the secondary mirror isnt chipped :)

Anyhow, just an observation - the primary mirror end of the OTA on the new scope is a mirrored reflective surface whereas the old scope had a frosted finish (this probably isnt the technical term but the best way to describe it). Could I ask what the difference is? I assume not a lot as it's the inside of the OTA that's important but curiosity is getting the better of me! 🤓

Thanks all,

Jon

[Guest]

I think once you've had an item that's less than pristine when new, it causes you to look at the replacement with a more critical eye.🙄

[Jonny_H]

10 minutes ago, merlin100 said:

I think once you've had an item that's less than pristine when new, it causes you to look at the replacement with a more critical eye.🙄

Yes i fear that i have fallen victim to this   However whilst I have only given the replacement a quick once over - this difference starred at me in the face...literally (only it was my face starring right back at me)  I guess i am checking to see if it is typical to have a mirrored back of if indeed it should be frosted like the original scope. 

Edited June 9, 2020 by Jonny_H

[Oldfort]

My guess is that the wrong side was aluminised during manufacture, and when picked up on quality control, it was probably just sent back to have the correct side aluminised.  It should affect performance.  [EDIT  shouldn't affect performance]

Edited June 9, 2020 by Oldfort

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Oldfort said:

My guess is that the wrong side was aluminised during manufacture, and when picked up on quality control, it was probably just sent back to have the correct side aluminised.  It should affect performance.

Should or shouldn't?🤔