Jump to content


Photo

Mount suggestions for C9.25 OTA

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 digitaldave

digitaldave

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2006
  • Loc: Stevenage, UK

Posted 27 April 2009 - 04:08 PM

I've had a C9.25 OTA for a while now, but it sits largely unused because setting it up on the EQ6 Pro mount is a bit time consuming (bought with ideas of imaging, but that's dropped by the way side, so it's visual only). As a result, I've downsized considerably to a grab and go setup consisting of a TV85 on a Vixen Porta mount which I can have set up and ready to go in a matter of minutes. I had thought of selling the C9.25 (and may still do so, I haven't decided yet), but it would be a shame to get rid of it and lose access to the greater light gathering power it offers over the TV85. So, this got me thinking... maybe I should get swap the EQ6 Pro for a mount that is much simpler to set up and use. However, the question is, which mounts would be able to cope with the weight, whilst still being smaller and lighter than the EQ6 and easier to set up? Here's some options I thought up:

1) The Celestron CG5/ASGT. I've seen this advertised with the C9.25, but I suspect it's be on the limit even for visual use. However, I could be wrong...

2) HEQ5 - I tried one of these out a while ago, and although it's lighter than the EQ6 Pro, it didn't seem massively so, andit still seemed to be about the same amount of work to set up.

3) Losmandy GM8. This is very expensive compared to the CG5 and HEQ5, but it looks smaller than the EQ6 Pro, and seems to be considerably lighter as well (about half the weight according the manufacturers specs). I am not too bothered about having GOTO to be honest, but the tracking would be good, and I like the sound of being able to manually push it without having to disengage the drives.

I also had a brief look at maybe mounting it on an undriven alt-az mount, but I'm not sure that's such a good idea, even though there are a couple of mounts that should be able to cope with the weight.

So, does anyone have any comments, or suggestions of other mounts that I might look at as well?

Thanks,

Dave.

#2 Arbacia

Arbacia

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2007
  • Loc: Madrid, Spain

Posted 27 April 2009 - 04:41 PM

What about to keep the EQ6 and get an altazimutal mount like SW Skytee or, better, an William Optics Eztouch?

#3 LarsZ

LarsZ

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 213
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 27 April 2009 - 04:49 PM

I've used the 9,25 with a Cg5, EQ6 Pro and a CGE. For imaging, only the EQ6 and CGE worked.
For visual only, the CG5 did well. It is a little sensitive on balance, but the GoTo:s worked really well and I think you will find it easy to work with. I do prefer the Celestron firmware to the EQ6. Just my 0.02 cents.
Regards
Lars

#4 rob.0919

rob.0919

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Derby , UK

Posted 27 April 2009 - 06:22 PM

Hi Dave

I have the opposite sort of dilemma...i'm looking to trade up to an EQ-6 from my Vixen GP-D2 which is a fine mount but isn't really upto 11Kg of refractor on it although it's fine for visual use. I have a Berlebach tripod which is a great addition to it.
If you're selling your EQ-6 i may be interested :question:

Cheers Rob

#5 brianb11213

brianb11213

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9047
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2009
  • Loc: 55.215N 6.554W

Posted 27 April 2009 - 06:26 PM

get an altazimutal mount like SW Skytee or, better, an William Optics Eztouch?

Well, I have a WO Eztouch - it's fine with a 110 FLT but I think it really would be struggling with a C925 tube. You'd certainly need a sturdier tripod than the fairly light wooden one that WO sell for it, and a counterweight to stop the whole caboodle from toppling the first time a gust of wind struck from the wrong side.

The "best" altaz mount for the C925 tube is undoubtedly the one that comes when you buy the scope as the CPC925.

Sorry but I don't think any of the GEM mounts that could handle the tube would be significantly easier to transport or set up than the EQ6. Would it be possible to fix the EQ6 on a pillar, under a Telegizmo 365 cover, so that even if you don't trust the tube to stay out, at least you wouldn't have to cart the mount out & align it every session?

#6 Jerry Hyman

Jerry Hyman

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Mesa, Arizona

Posted 27 April 2009 - 06:36 PM

I have the 9.25" SCT on an CG5/ASGT. Previously I had it mounted on a Super Polaris DX which did very well with it. I purchased the CG5/ASGT a couple of weeks ago and have used it about 6 times now. I am presently visual only. Even with the legs somewhat extended the dampening times are definitely under 1 second and it handles the scope without any problems at all. That dampening time was measured at 261X by the way. My scope is equiped with a 2" diagonal, Starizona virtual visual back (heavy, but very handy), telrad, and finder. I use 2" and 1.25" eyepieces. You do have to balance the scope carefully and I use anti-vibration pads out of habit.

The gotos and tracking are very accurate for visual since I updated the mount and handcontroller to Celestrons new software (same as on the CGEM). Almost anywhere in the sky the goto will have the object within a half degree field.
I am not sure of the pricing in your area but here in the states you can get the mount and tripod for under $600 new.

Now the cons:

It is very noisy when slewing! I guess it is all what you are used to, but for me it is very loud. Also, since you mention you can live without goto I have had some experience with the GM8 and they are just beautifully crafted and I would consider one if money were no object and I didn't want goto. However, I think that functionally the CG5 is one heck of a deal for the price and performs extremely well.

~jerry

#7 Bill Barlow

Bill Barlow

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2382
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Overland Park KS

Posted 27 April 2009 - 06:57 PM

When I owned a C9.25 recently, I had it mounted on a push-pull atlaz mount made by Universal Astronomics set on a heavy duty surveyors tripod. It is the UniStar Deluxe and it can hold 30-40 lbs. It is very stable and smooth. You just do the work by balancing the scope and set the tension, and off you go. There is no go-to with this mount, but it is easy and fairly fast to set up/take down. The total set up of the mount head and tripod weighs about 23-24 lbs.

I now use this mount with a Meade 10" ACF OTA that weighs about 5 lbs more than the C9.25 and it still handles this scope very easily. Very minimal dampening times when at high power..less than 2 seconds. Hope this helps.

Bill

#8 Greg K.

Greg K.

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 20541
  • Joined: 11 Dec 2003
  • Loc: Clifton Park, NY

Posted 27 April 2009 - 07:29 PM

The "best" altaz mount for the C925 tube is undoubtedly the one that comes when you buy the scope as the CPC925.


Agreed. I would sell the C9.25 OTA and buy a CPC 925.

#9 RAKing

RAKing

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6302
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2007
  • Loc: West of the D.C. Nebula

Posted 28 April 2009 - 07:06 AM

3) Losmandy GM8. This is very expensive compared to the CG5 and HEQ5, but it looks smaller than the EQ6 Pro, and seems to be considerably lighter as well (about half the weight according the manufacturers specs). I am not too bothered about having GOTO to be honest, but the tracking would be good, and I like the sound of being able to manually push it without having to disengage the drives.


Dave,

I went with Option #3 for many of the same reasons. My Atlas (EQ6) worked great, but was a bit heavier than I liked. I went with the GM-8 because the mount is about 15 pounds lighter than the Atlas (21 vs. 36 pounds). I use mine on an A-P Portable Pier, but was happily surprised to discover the GM-8 tripod is quite sturdy and can also be used with this OTA.

The GM-8 is a top quality mount, hence the added cost, but works very well with my C925. Settle times are just over one second and tracking is super.

My .02,

Ron

#10 Lane

Lane

    Soyuz

  • -----
  • Posts: 3593
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Frisco, Texas

Posted 28 April 2009 - 08:03 AM

If you find the EQ-6 and the 9.25 to be a hassle to set up then I don't think going to the CG-5 or a Sirius is really going to solve anything. You would be better to dump the mount and the ota and get the CPC800. The weight on that setup is only about 33 lbs and the 8" scope cools down (or warms up) a lot faster than the 9.25. It isn't what I would call grab and go but it is a much faster setup than any GEM you can buy. I personally just like the GEM's better but I have to admit I could set up my old LX200 8" and be viewing the stars in half the time it now takes me to set up my GEM with any of my OTAs.

#11 groz

groz

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1954
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Campbell River, BC

Posted 28 April 2009 - 10:26 AM

We've got both the EQ6-Pro and the HEQ5-Pro. for visual use, both will carry the 9.25 just fine. We do find a marked difference in setup time, Chris normally has the HEQ5 set up and polar aligned in about half the time it takes me to do the EQ6. The reason boils down to weight. She can carry the whole thing in one trip, it takes me 3 trips to move the mount (if it's disassembled), and another for the scope. I normally end up with one trip for the tripod, one for the mount head, and another for counterweights, then I have to put them all together. When we are observing from home, she leaves hers fully assembled, picks the whole kit up and carries it out fully assembled, sets it down and is ready to go. Even tho I only have to move mine about 6 feet from the patio door out to the deck, I cannot move the fully assembled kit in one go, I have to take the telescopes off (c8 and st8 in side by side configuration), then I can struggle with the assembled mount for that distance. Going any farther than that, i have to break it down. Hers on the other hand, we can easily pick up fully assembled (with the williams 80 attached) and carry a hundred feet out into the yard.

Once the mounts are in place, the process of polar aligning then running a 3 star align is basically identical on both of them, takes the same amount of time.

With that said, we have many times set up at star parties in the vicinity of folks assembling for mount alt/az stuff. They always seem to be set up in about half the time it takes us. The funny part is, once everybody is set up, and we have the computers going to take pictures, they always seem to be more interested in watching whats happening on our computer screens than looking thru thier telescopes, and we are normally over looking thru thier telescopes. I guess it's the novelty factor, for us, looking thru an eyepiece as something we rarely do, and a bit of a novelty, for them, watching the computers take photos is the novelty.

#12 digitaldave

digitaldave

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2006
  • Loc: Stevenage, UK

Posted 28 April 2009 - 02:17 PM

Thanks for the replies everyone :).

I have previously considered the WO EZTouch, but the OTA alone is right on the weight limit. I could put a counterweight on, but I think it'd still be a bit risky. I've also looked at the UA mounts, they might be an option.

I'm surprised by the lack of responses about the GM8 - I was thought it would be more popular, but is that because it's more expensive than other options that would include GOTO for less?

I wonder if it's possible to buy the CPC mount to fit the OTA on to...? I seriously doubt it, but it'd be cool if you could :).

Unfortunately, putting a permanent pier (or better yet observatory) isn't an option in my current garden / yard - it's quite small; there's a large tree where I would put one if it was an option; my neighbour has a security light that rivals the sun in power and seems to be on more often that the sun is out; and finally, I would imagine we'll be moving house in the next couple of years (hopefully), so I can hopefully get something more permanent sorted out then.

Overall, I think I'll keep the OTA and EQ6 Pro. I have a grab and go setup that I can use at a moments notice, and I can think more long term about getting something a bit more permanent set up eventually.

Regards,

Dave.

#13 ottovonrotton

ottovonrotton

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 117
  • Joined: 01 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Where is Port Perry?

Posted 28 April 2009 - 04:20 PM

Hello all, Keep the ota, I also have guitars and every time I have sold one over the years to raise money for something better. I have always regretted it. With scopes its the same and I have learned.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics