Used Celestron AVX

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

I'm considering buying a used AVX. Overall looking at the mount, it's seen plenty of action with the odd scratch here and there.

Besides the obvious like stripped threads, anything else I should look out for/ask about before handing over the cash?

Also, for mostly visual with a dabble in ap I've been considering a brand new entry level goto EQ mount for a while and with a limited budget narrowed down the list to the EQM35, EQ5 or ES EXOS-2. Either one of these should be more than capable of handling a 102mm f7 refractor and in the future maybe a 120mm (visual only).

However if I can get a used perfectly working AVX for a bit less than the price of say, the EQ5 would that be sensible, or should I stick with purchasing one of the above new?

Your expert advice is greatly appreciated.👍

Edited July 24, 2021 by ScouseSpaceCadet

[Cosmic Geoff]

Personally I would be tempted by the AVX (with Nexstar) as I don't like the Skywatcher Synscan system much.

[Shimrod]

I can't comment on the handsets, but I much prefer working with the Celestron apps for my AVX over the Synscan apps for the AZ-GTI.

If you do go with the AVX don't be tempted to buy the polarscope - the adjustment knobs make it almost impossible to look through!

[PeterCPC]

I would go for an AVX - but I'm biased. 🙂

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

Thanks for the advice. 👍

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

I posted in the 'Postman' thread a few days ago, but today is the first time I've fully set up the mount and telescope and I'm delighted. 😀

This is my first beefy mount and first EQ.The 102ED f7 refractor feels like a toy on top. Balancing took a minute. Everything seems to work fine and it's quieter than the tiny AZGTI!

Solid as a rock and <70% of the current new price. 👍

I was hoping for a solar session today to check out the goto and tracking with the Skymax 102 but the clouds say no. Using the handset to slew there's no obvious backlash. Shimrod it came with a polarscope. If I poke my eye out I was warned!

Thanks again for the advice. Expect a gear sale soon to pay for it! 🙄

[wookie1965]

The only problem with the avx is if you have a long frac you cannot get a extension like you can on the Skywatchers. 

If the 120 will be F8 or bigger it could catch on the tripod legs. 

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

1 hour ago, wookie1965 said:

The only problem with the avx is if you have a long frac you cannot get a extension like you can on the Skywatchers. 

If the 120 will be F8 or bigger it could catch on the tripod legs. 

Yes mate, I realised after I bought it and looked for an extension.🙄

The 102mm f7 is very nice on it though. Perfect even. I suppose if the mount lasts as long as I hope and I fancy increasing aperture then I'd plump for an 8" SCT or CC instead, unless I my numbers come up and I can afford a £1000+ Ioptron or Skywatcher mount as well...

Btw, I plan to power the mount using a proper rcd mains extension and the regulated power cable the seller supplied, however for travel, looking at the very expensive battery options, and bearing in mind it seems plenty of people power their mounts with leisure batteries and jump starters, would the below be suitable with a lighter socket type cable without any sort of modification?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AA-12V-600A-Power-Pack-USB-Battery-Charger-Booster-Jump-Starter-Air-compressor-/293668835228?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&_trksid=p2349624.m46890.l49286&mkrid=710-127635-2958-0

 

Edited July 31, 2021 by ScouseSpaceCadet

[Shimrod]

18 hours ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

I posted in the 'Postman' thread a few days ago, but today is the first time I've fully set up the mount and telescope and I'm delighted. 😀

This is my first beefy mount and first EQ.The 102ED f7 refractor feels like a toy on top. Balancing took a minute. Everything seems to work fine and it's quieter than the tiny AZGTI!

Solid as a rock and <70% of the current new price. 👍

I was hoping for a solar session today to check out the goto and tracking with the Skymax 102 but the clouds say no. Using the handset to slew there's no obvious backlash. Shimrod it came with a polarscope. If I poke my eye out I was warned!

 

Thanks again for the advice. Expect a gear sale soon to pay for it! 🙄

It's not just eyes! It's the knees and the contortions required to try and get in the right position to view through the polarscope. I tried to use mine twice, but replaced it very quickly with an ipolar - I should have paid more attention to the reviews on FLO.

Enjoy your new purchase - it takes a little more setup than an alt-az, but I like my AVX and it's on the limit of what I consider portable when I have to move it to/from the garden for each session.

[wookie1965]

13 hours ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Yes mate, I realised after I bought it and looked for an extension.🙄

The 102mm f7 is very nice on it though. Perfect even. I suppose if the mount lasts as long as I hope and I fancy increasing aperture then I'd plump for an 8" SCT or CC instead, unless I my numbers come up and I can afford a £1000+ Ioptron or Skywatcher mount as well...

Btw, I plan to power the mount using a proper rcd mains extension and the regulated power cable the seller supplied, however for travel, looking at the very expensive battery options, and bearing in mind it seems plenty of people power their mounts with leisure batteries and jump starters, would the below be suitable with a lighter socket type cable without any sort of modification?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AA-12V-600A-Power-Pack-USB-Battery-Charger-Booster-Jump-Starter-Air-compressor-/293668835228?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&_trksid=p2349624.m46890.l49286&mkrid=710-127635-2958-0

 

Plenty of people use these with no problems its making sure polarity is correct on Skywatcher mounts its tip +   not sure on Celestron. Another thing is how many amps does the mount use this will determine how long the pack will work many mounts dont like low amps. I use a marine battery inside a old toolbox fitted out with all connections usb port and a amps and volt indicator, I am sure once you get below 11volts the mount wont work but I could of read that wrong maybe a bit less.