Deforking a Maede lx200 12"

[David at Bythel Obs]

Has anyone any experience of doing this and remounting on EQ6?

Thanks

[Peter Drew]

Yes, I did just this.  I got fed up with the eventual unreliability of the electronics on the LX200 mount.  I removed the screws holding the side plates to the OTA, I also loosened the screws holding one of the fork arms so that there was more clearance for sliding the OTA out without marring the paintwork.  There are screws round each end of the main tube which can be utilised for attaching a rail to suit the mount.  Despite the deforking the OTA is still a pretty heavy unit!  The EQ6 handled it ok.     🙂

[David at Bythel Obs]

Peter thanks for your wisdom. How did you fix rail to OTA ? Did you  use maede brackets?

thanks

david

[Laurin Dave]

I used these for my 10" Meade ..   they worked a treat  ADM Losmandy-type Dovetail for Optical Tubes | First Light Optics

Dave

[David at Bythel Obs]

Thanks that’s great

[ollypenrice]

I seem to think my 10 inch didn't have a removable arm so I spread the forks slightly with a scissor jack (recommended on the net but don't go mad!!!) to slide out the tube. Don't try it single handed, though, as I did.   Far better to have two or even three people standing by. Tube and fork were fine.

Olly

[gorann]

There are several youtube videos showing how to defork Meades, and how not to do it and scratching the OTA badly, like this guy🥴

 

Edited November 27, 2021 by gorann

[Merlin66]

I've de-forked many Meades - 8", 10" and 12"

I found the 12" OTA at 17Kg too heavy for my NEQ6 mount.

I sold the 12" Meade and bought a 11" Celestron - works well for me.

 

 

Lx200_defork.doc

[gorann]

9 minutes ago, Merlin66 said:

I've de-forked many Meades - 8", 10" and 12"

I found the 12" OTA at 17Kg too heavy for my NEQ6 mount.

I sold the 12" Meade and bought a 11" Celestron - works well for me.

 

 

Lx200_defork.doc 27.5 kB · 0 downloads

I have both brands and I am curious: why are Celestron SCTs considerably lighter than Meade SCTs? Is it the metal or the optics?

[Merlin66]

Goran,

No.

Basically the Meade's have a great big lump of iron counterweight built into the mirror cell!!!!

The Celestron manages to get through life without the extra weight!

[gorann]

Interesting @Merlin66! I thought the mirror was the heaviest optical component, so why add a weight in that end?

By the way, why did you completely dismantle your Meade (assuming the scope in the images is yours)?

[Merlin66]

No, not my images, they came from CN.

The guy I believe was doing a rebuild to improve the mirror sled and focuser system.

 

[nfotis]

15 hours ago, gorann said:

Interesting @Merlin66! I thought the mirror was the heaviest optical component, so why add a weight in that end?

By the way, why did you completely dismantle your Meade (assuming the scope in the images is yours)?

 

If I remember correctly, this was done in order to use short fork arms on the mount.

On German equatorial mounts, that's not necessary.

So, many people remove the iron lump from their Meade fork-mounted scopes before mounting the tubes on the new mounts.

N.F.