Jump to content


Photo

What are the chances of updated Losmandy mounts?

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#26 mish

mish

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 315
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2009
  • Loc: West of Astronomics

Posted 13 February 2010 - 12:13 PM

Jim:

...is it better to have the guts on the outside where you can access them easily or on the inside where they are out of the way? The answer to that may depend on the observer and his or her usage.


Exactly. And that's why the "better" in "better integration" is a misnomer. It presumes that "more" equals "better", and as you point out so well, whether more is indeed better depends on the context.

As for the mechanical excellence of Losmandy mounts, I would say there are some weak areas.


The same can be said of any engineered system: compromises are a necessary part of every design. I chose the Losmandy because, at its price point, the practical effect of those compromises is minimized. As an engineer, I do prefer to invest in those systems that are found right at the point of diminishing returns!

Losmandy appears to be incrementally improving their mounts. For example, I'd read that the polar alignment scope's illuminator was poorly-designed, but my G11 was delivered with a new and better design. There's currently some indications that the worm supports are being redesigned, and if so, it will be interesting to see if those improvements make it into new stock mounts, or are available as an upgrade.

The mechanical aspects of these mounts are better-served by incremental improvements than by any radical redesigns. Integration as others have described it might likely require more use of cast components, and unless those were very carefully designed and constructed, such "improvements" would compromise other, more desirable, features of these mounts.

So I suspect we'll continue to see more evolutionary improvements in the mechanical components of Losmandy products, and if revolutionary upgrades are in the works, they would likely be found in the drive electronics.

#27 chupacabra

chupacabra

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 196
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Land O'Lakes, FL

Posted 13 February 2010 - 01:38 PM

You are always free to choose whatever "issues" you prefer. You've expressed concern about a mounting scheme that has proven to be robust and reliable. As others have pointed out already, that same "issue" also permits easy field repairs, simple drive system upgrades, and it virtually eliminates the need to ship the mount someplace far away if repairs are required.

I guess that one person's issues are another person's features.


Mish, I think you're being defensive and you don't need to be. There are some good points being made in here and the criticism has been constructive. There are ways to indicate that you don't share someone's concerns without suggesting it's silly or ignorant to have that concern. Whether or not this mounting scheme has "proven to be robust and reliable" is certainly debatable.

Mounts I've seen with rubber bands holding motors in place: Losmandy 2 - All others 0. I've heard and read far more Losmandy owners express concern over the motors than any other brand. Are the Losmandy mounts better overall than many of the competitors? I believe they are. But I think the motors/mounts are the weakness of the Losmandy mounts.

As far as feature vs issue . . . preferring the Losmandy method of integrating parts has nothing to do with the weak mounting of the motors. The concept can be great (AP mounts are really pretty similar) and the implementation poor at the same time.

#28 Phil Cowell

Phil Cowell

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1566
  • Joined: 24 May 2007
  • Loc: Southern Tier NY

Posted 13 February 2010 - 02:01 PM

I'm going to sit back and wait for Cardinal Fang and the Inquisition to arrive.

#29 mish

mish

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 315
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2009
  • Loc: West of Astronomics

Posted 13 February 2010 - 02:29 PM

Mish, I think you're being defensive and you don't need to be.


Well, on that first point, I'm not being defensive, but no offense is taken by me for that assumption. And I will agree that there's no need to be defensive about any of this (it's a piece of metal, for heaven's sake!), so on the latter part, I agree with you. No harm, no foul.

As I wrote before, you are entitled to your opinions, i.e., one person's issue is another person's feature. To me, it's a feature I enjoy. To you, it's an issue of concern. Sounds like a healthy diversity of opinions to me!

#30 mish

mish

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 315
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2009
  • Loc: West of Astronomics

Posted 13 February 2010 - 02:37 PM

I'm going to sit back and wait for Cardinal Fang and the Inquisition to arrive.


Cardinal Fang is out of the office today. He's busy replacing an EPROM in his Gemini GoTo system! :grin:

#31 bseltzer

bseltzer

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1028
  • Joined: 28 Oct 2007
  • Loc: East S.F.Bay, CA

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:00 PM

I'm going to sit back and wait for Cardinal Fang and the Inquisition to arrive.


Seems Biggles arrived early...

#32 CounterWeight

CounterWeight

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8160
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Palo alto, CA.

Posted 13 February 2010 - 10:02 PM

Rainer,


I thought it was the finance department that said that... :) Usually also while deciding that much of design criteria was unnecessary :)

#33 zoran

zoran

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 643
  • Joined: 09 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Zagreb, Croatia

Posted 15 February 2010 - 01:00 PM

Hello all!
Since I don't live in the U.S. for me big plus for Losmandy mounts is that I can maintain and repair them myself. With "more integrated mounts" if something goes wrong you usually have to send them back to the factory for repairs.
Regards,
Zoran






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics