Defork LX200

[yuklop]

Defork or not?

It is a tough one. It seems like a travesty to break up a perfectly good system, specifically this system: 

 

But I have moved to a GEM setup. So whilst it is great having the LX200 in alt-az for visual in theory, in practice it doesn't get used. And I would really like the chunk of garage space it uses up back. So options are to defork it, or sell it and replace it with a c9.25 ota or similar, which would fit on the GEM better. 

Would the aperture decrease make a practical difference? Would a C9.25 be noticeably sharper? If you had the choice between an lx200 12'' or a C9.25, which would you chose and why?

Dan

ps. I know this is a really nice problem to have . I have picked up the allen key to start the deforking, but I am just not sure I can bring myself to do it. Seems almost like vandalism!

 

 

[Catanonia]

Seems a shame after all that work to get it right. Sell it and use the money to get something you want to do the job.

Edited January 27, 2022 by Catanonia

[Someblokius]

I deforked my 12" Lx200 GPS about a decade ago when the mount died. I put a  losmandy dovetail on it and ran it on a NEQ6 for many years. Undermounted, but it worked well for visual. I've never regretted it, not even now that the now worn out NEQ6 has followed the Meade fork to telescope valhalla. The LX200 tube is thus about to get its third mount.

I can see that you might have a dilemma with your mount being operational, but I think that in your position I'd still go with the defork, assuming that your mount will take the tube. The current Celestron SCTs seem to be well thought of, but I think for most uses 12" is going to be better than a 9.25". The 12" has about 60% more area than a 9.25", big enough to notice I'd think. Quite the downgrade. EDGEHD optics might be nice to have if you're doing imaging, but for visual I'm not sure it matters too much. I guess the big questions are how much you'd get for the Meade as it is, and whether your GEM will take the weight of a deforked 12" tube. Portability would be different too, although deforking obviously makes the LX200 a lot lighter. And quieter.

If you do defork, one hint I might offer is to avoid putting the little bolts back in to fill the holes. They will stick out into the tube and you don't want to wind your primary mirror against them when focusing as I almost did.

 

EDIT: just looked how extensively you've modded /restored the scope. It does seem a bit of a waste to throw that away. Although I guess you could always keep the fork mount in case you change your mind later. That wouldn't make much room in your garage though.

Edited January 27, 2022 by Someblokius

[Louis D]

About a decade ago, someone local here was selling a complete Meade LX200 10" with field tripod for $400 on Craigslist, and no one would bite.  Maybe in today's used market environment you could get a decent price for it.  Big SCTs, like big Dobs, don't have good resale value compared to APOs and smaller scopes.

[yuklop]

Thanks for your comments. I think deforking is pretty much a one way operation. Very hard to put back on well aligned, from what I understand. And yes, I can't justify the scope just sitting there doing nothing. Not sure whether the mount would take a 17kg OTA. Probably be OK for visual. It isn't a standard mount, but it is rather heavy and large, so it'd be interesting to see!

Thanks for the tip on the screws! I also learnt that a while back, but may well have relearned it this time too! 

And yes, it might be a hard sell to move on such a heavily modded item. I think its all to the good, Meade lx200 12'' with modern electronics, but people tend to prefer original examples I think. I do think it'd sell for enough for me to be able to replace it with a C9.25 OTA though. Not an Edge HD one mind! 

Today I am leaning towards the defork. It would be hard to get another 12'' SCT sorted if it turned out I missed it!

Appreciate the inputs,

Dan