Meade Vibration Supression Pads

[John]

I've been aware of these for years (Celestron and Orion (USA) do something very similar) but, for one reason or another, I've shied away from forking out the £45 or so they cost new. A Meade set came up on the Scope's N Skies Astro Boot section priced very attractvely so I took a punt.

Basically you get 3 pads around 4" in diameter, each of which appears to be made in 3 sections - a hard plastic outer shell, a layer of soft absorbant rubber-type material and a central cup of hard plastic for the tripod tip to sit on. I've attached a photo at the end of this post.

The instructions (do you really need them ???) advise a certain orientation of the pads with the Meade logo pointing away from the tripod centre.

I've tried them out with both my 6" F/8 refractor on the CG5 tripod / pillar extension / alt-az mount setup which weighs in around 40lbs all up and my 4" F/6.5 Vixen ED on the AZ-3 mount which is around 16lbs in total. I used the scopes at high powers (up to 343x with the 6" and 190x with the 4") on lawn and paving stones and, bingo, the pads really do work

They don't so much eliminate vibrations but rather ensure that the ones you inevitably get when adjusting focus and making manual slow motion movements, die away quickly, really quickly. I didn't put a stopwatch on this but I'd say the damping time was reduced by at least 2/3rds, ie: 3 seconds becomes 1 second, and this has a marked and very welcome positive effect on the ease of using the scopes at high powers and the quality of observing

Both scopes benefitted however I reckon the heavier outfit benefited more - the Meade pads are rated for up to a 12" SCT so that probably means they are OK for 50lbs - 60lbs of total weight. Certainly my 40llb 6" setup seemed very secure on both grass and paving slabs. I found little difference in damping effectiveness on both terrain types. Without the pads I find the lawn more forgiving than the patio.

The only downsides I could see were i) they were slightly fiddly to setup as you need to grovel around the base of your tripod legs to put them in place and ii) I could see that they would be very easy to leave behind if observing in the field or at a star party.

Overall theough I'm really pleasantly suprised by the results these pads deliver and, having now actually used them, I'd say that even the normal purchase price would be money well spent

Here they are - rather dull to look at but effective :

[Darren B]

For me they are essential for quality viewing at high power. I paid full price for them and consider it money well spent.

[Psychobilly]

I have left them behind before now... and goen back for them...

Perhaps drilling a small angled hole through the corner and attaching them to the tripod legs with a length of nylon cord would be an idea...thats what i am goint to try anyway...

Peter...

[robhal9000]

Hi,

Swear by these on my 6se.

[John]

Thanks for the comments folks. I'm slightly annoyed with myself that I've not tried these things before now - I can see that they are going to help me get much more from my high power observing sessions from now on.

[Psychobilly]

I also add extra weight to the accessory tray on the tripod when using the AV pads..

[russ]

hmm, i think i may invest in a set of these if they come up secondhand. Thanks John. Like yourself i have always bypassed them thinking they were a gimmick but not now.

[Earl]

I saw them on SnS and had them in my basket several times until someone bought them....

Thanks for the review, even more gutted now LOL

[SteveL]

Despite being made of the same substances, I found the Celestron pads slightly better design, in the way that the very bottom of the "cup" in the center is much smaller, and is less likely to allow the tripod foot to move or slip. I have had both, but only use the Celestron set now.

[vincentnm]

I used the Meade ones for a year and a half. They've always been left under the tripod, never moved them. Recently after a hot week all three of them just caved in

[Psychobilly]

I used the Meade ones for a year and a half. They've always been left under the tripod, never moved them. Recently after a hot week all three of them just caved in

Although not having the same damping characteristics as "sorbothane" which is probably whats used in them when new.... you might be able to bring them back to some sort of "useful" life by using Silicone sealant instead...

Some people have made their own using Silicone Sealant...

You would want to make sure the inner cup doesnt sink to the bottom when your making them so it could be held up with tape...

Silicone can take a while to cure in volume some types are better than others depending on which cure chemistry they use... Typical DIY silicone will skin and then cure at 2-3mm a day

Peter...

[John]

hmm, i think i may invest in a set of these if they come up secondhand. Thanks John. Like yourself i have always bypassed them thinking they were a gimmick but not now.

Keep an eye on the "Astro Boot" Russ (I know that will be a chore ). Mine were £16.50 inc P&P

[russ]

Thanks John, will do.

[Ogri]

High modular silicone is a bit hard and springy, and for outdoor use (e.g. repairing slate roofs), I used to supply and recommend low modular neutral cure solvent free silicone. It would experience real extremes of temperature in that environment too.

This does take longer to cure (no solvent). but I think it should give far better damping characteristics than the high mod (which tends to be the 'run of the mill' stuffs specification).

It was also stated to have in excess of a 30 year life, and I found it was so efficient, that you would break the slates once it was cured, if you tried to pull them apart rather than slicing through with a slate rip.

Might be worth a try. It's really cheap if you shop around too - I used to retail it at £1 a tube and was far from unhappy with the margin at that, and sold tons of the stuff.