Jump to content


Photo

Celestron CGE lockup

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#26 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 22 July 2010 - 10:59 AM

Hi Guys-------thanks for all the info---I have run into the same problem again last saturday night. I did a full six star alignment and then started taking photos of the moon and m-4. After about 2 hours, I decided to stop phographing and visually look at m-22--------the HC would not work again as it has done numerous times over the past year and a half and I lost the Alignment. I sent a message to Celestron and they still are telling me that there is nothing wrong with the unit since they could not find the problem. Basically dumping me. I found the Civ.Code numbers that specifically cover this type of thing at my lawyers office and sent Celestron a copy of the law. If they do not respond positively to that, I will take it to Small claims court.

#27 ShawnPreston

ShawnPreston

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 187
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 22 July 2010 - 11:27 PM

I might have missed it in the thread, but have you tried NexRemote to see if you still have control of the mount once the HC locks up? That might help narrow things down a bit.

Incidentally, I have the Gary Bennett cable mod installed, and love it. Although I've never had a problem with my scope, I made the upgrade anyway to ensure nothing cropped up. I am able to use my scope fir hours in sub-zero temperatures, and everything works perfectly.

#28 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 23 July 2010 - 12:07 PM

Shawn ---yes, Nex remote would not clear the problem either. Thanks for the Gary Bennett tip-------I might have to go that direction----

#29 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19846
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 24 July 2010 - 04:21 PM

The lawyer will cost you far more than the mount. Trust me on this one. :grin:

I suggest you video your mount and show when it locks up. I would send the video to Celestron tech support by e-mail and also post it to Youtube with a cut and paste in the caption about Celestron telling you that they've done everything they're supposed to do. Also give us the link to your video so we can comment. I'd say that's a far more effective way to "goose" these laggarts into doing what they should.

It's a pity too. Celestron quality and service was much better even five years ago than it is now. They are slipping in QC (newer mounts in particular are spotty) and in service. It's a double whammy. When and if my CGE craps out, I'll just move on to a Mach 1 GTO or A-P 900 and call it a day.

Regards,

Jim

#30 Chris Rowland

Chris Rowland

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 586
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2005

Posted 25 July 2010 - 05:26 AM

This looks like a typical power supply glitch problem. The power is interrupted, possibly just for a few milliseconds, and this corrupts the processors and you get some sort of lockup. It can also corrupt the EEPROM, making a factory reset necessary.

If this is the case Celestron won't see your problem because they aren't using your power supply, what they see is a mount continually coming back and find no fault with it.

Chris

#31 Asimov

Asimov

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4126
  • Joined: 11 May 2010

Posted 25 July 2010 - 10:09 PM

As Chris suggests, to emulate an intermittent problem, Celestron needs everything that the owner is using.

#32 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 28 July 2010 - 11:23 AM

Jim--------thats a pretty good idea. I should have done that a long time ago. As far as the power supply goes, I replaced the one I was using with a new Celestron 2.5 amp unit and the same problem still occurred. 2 days ago, Celestron e-mailed me asking how much $$ I wsnted if they were to buy me out. I told them I would rather have a fully functioning CGE unit. But asked for the price that I paid for it less shipping. Calif law calls for a buyout price equal to the price paid, less the usage that occurred from the date of purchase to the date of the first report of malfunction. That was less than 2 months. Which is the time it took me to get it mounted in the Observatory and acquiring the proper wires etc for connection to the computer etc.

#33 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 28 July 2010 - 04:02 PM

Celestron just offered to refund the same amount that I paid for the CGE less the $110 of shipping that I paid from Anacortes Telescope to Susanville. And they want me to also pay for the return shipping.!! Whadda ya think??

#34 Donnie D

Donnie D

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 502
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Madison, Mississippi

Posted 28 July 2010 - 04:33 PM

Do you think it would be too much trouble for you to make a video of you operating the unit when it does this. It really irritates me when companies that are large enough to help will not help. Now, what loss is it to them if they have to give you a new unit - probably nothing, since they can claim that on the IRS as a loss on their end. It is a shame to them. I bought a new 9.25 HD and it came with a scratched corrector plate. I had to get the vendor involved heavily before they "understood". I simply do not understand todays times. You would think that people would be knocking them selves out to do a good job with the job situation like it is. But it seems just the opposite. I agree, I think that they owe you a mount that should work. If they can not fix it - then Celestron - give the guy another one - it is no loss to you. You GET a customer - now KEEP the customer -

#35 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19846
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 28 July 2010 - 04:46 PM

Sounds VERY fair to me.

I didn't think California even had a Lemon Law for anything but automobiles. :lol:

I'll bet they part-out your mount to support warranty claims.

Regards,

Jim

#36 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 28 July 2010 - 06:24 PM

Do you think it would be too much trouble for you to make a video of you operating the unit when it does this. It really irritates me when companies that are large enough to help will not help. Now, what loss is it to them if they have to give you a new unit - probably nothing, since they can claim that on the IRS as a loss on their end. It is a shame to them. I bought a new 9.25 HD and it came with a scratched corrector plate. I had to get the vendor involved heavily before they "understood". I simply do not understand todays times. You would think that people would be knocking them selves out to do a good job with the job situation like it is. But it seems just the opposite. I agree, I think that they owe you a mount that should work. If they can not fix it - then Celestron - give the guy another one - it is no loss to you. You GET a customer - now KEEP the customer -

Boy, do I agree with that . Although they did replace the electronics (they said that), I don't know why they didn't just send me a whole new unit. Something is definitely wrong with the motors or electronics or whatever. I just want a mount that works like its supposed to.

#37 GeneT

GeneT

    Ely Kid

  • *****
  • Posts: 12632
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008
  • Loc: South Texas

Posted 28 July 2010 - 08:29 PM

Celestron just offered to refund the same amount that I paid for the CGE less the $110 of shipping that I paid from Anacortes Telescope to Susanville. And they want me to also pay for the return shipping.!! Whadda ya think??

Grab this deal. This is like a fumbling football, that just keeps being dropped, and fumbling. After reading all these posts, I will never buy a Celestron mount. There obviously are problems in the construction, but worse is the long time they kept your mount, and the later brush off. Celestron should have made this offer months ago. Grab it--take your money, and mount your optics on another vendor's.

#38 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 28 July 2010 - 10:16 PM

I will most likely do just that------thanks

#39 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 29 July 2010 - 07:56 PM

Celestron just offered to pay the return shipping on the CGE---------so I packed it up and sent it. At least the Tripod and the Mount have been sent, they had some glitch sending the prepaid shipping label for the counterweight, but that arrived by e- mail tonight, so it will be shipped back tomorrow. Now all I have to do is wait for their check!!----thanks to everyone for their ideas and input. ---Now I have to decide what to replace it with. Losmandy--or something that costs 5000 more--------- :question:

#40 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 33735
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003
  • Loc: NE Ohio

Posted 29 July 2010 - 08:10 PM

---Now I have to decide what to replace it with. Losmandy--or something that costs 5000 more--------- :question:


You did the prudent thing. They were never going to find a problem so intermittent; they should have given up and exchanged it long ago.

I don't remember what load you were using. If you were willing to go to used gear (at least you can have some confidence that used gear has already been checked out) you could get out of that class altogether for not too much. An EM-200 for maybe $3500 would carry 40 pounds or a little more (certainly anything I'd try to image with on a CGE) and it's a whole different category of gear. If you need more capacity, a used NJP or Titan could be found for maybe $5000 and you'd then be in both a higher performance and a higher capacity tier compared to a CGE or G-11. Or you could be a good sport and pick up a new CGE Pro for about that. At this point that would surprise me (not that you haven't been a good sport so far!). :lol:

#41 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 30 July 2010 - 12:36 PM


You did the prudent thing. They were never going to find a problem so intermittent; they should have given up and exchanged it long ago.

John, I definitely agree with that. Just because they couldn't find the problem does not mean that it doesn't exist. I should have videotaped the problem to prove it, but it is gone now and out of my hair. In the long run, Celestron finally did the right thing.---Anyway thank you for your sage advice as always!! :bow:

#42 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19846
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 31 July 2010 - 12:49 AM

Mach 1 GTO. :grin:

- Jim

#43 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 31 July 2010 - 09:14 AM

Mach 1 GTO. :grin:

- Jim

Thanks Jim----I need to find out the weight allowance for that one. I use a Tak 152 with a TV-85 piggybacked, small orion autoguider camera attached to a meade 50mm finderscope and nagler eyepieces and a Nikon D-90. Will the Mach 1 hold all that? :question:

#44 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19846
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 01 August 2010 - 11:48 AM

Not sure. CNer Jared was imaging using the Mach 1 GTO and the APM-LZOS 152/1200. That's a very heavy OTA for a 6-incher. He was successful, but "at the limit" for the mount. He has since moved to an A-P 130.

You might PM him and ask about the mount versus your load.

It is a beautifully made mount and performs perfectly. I'm tempted to consolidate to either an AP-900 or the Mach 1 GTO, and go with a single mount.

Regards,

Jim

#45 CounterWeight

CounterWeight

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8103
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Palo alto, CA.

Posted 01 August 2010 - 02:12 PM

I'd Pm'd Jared before buying mine, his (and other I spoke with) response was very affirmative.

So I bought one.

Handles my 160 triplett far better than my CGE ever did (w/Onyx 80 piggybacked). Haven't tried it with the 160/128 combo yet. The shaft drive gears are far more substancial on the Mach-1, at least in thickness, larger relative contact area for the worm. Your 152 is a few pounds lighter (I think about 3 lbs. ?) than my 160, and scopes are of near equal length deployed. I think weight distrubution may be different, the Tak more tube weight and the TEC more lense cell weight, but that is just supposition on my part. Good news is yes the Mach-1 will haul the frieght, getting one?, may be a bit of a wait - they do come up on AMart now & then.

I don't have direct experience with the Tak mounts but folks have great things to say about them here and elsewhere.

#46 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 01 August 2010 - 06:05 PM

OK, I will keep my eyes open for one. What do they go for used????

#47 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19846
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 01 August 2010 - 11:17 PM

You shouldn't have too long of a wait if you order from Astro-Physics. 12 months or less (could be a lot less, in fact). With standard accessories (saddle, counterweight shaft and counterweights, pier, etc.) figure about $7k.

Regards,

Jim

#48 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 02 August 2010 - 11:19 AM

I hope to find something much sooner than that!! :p






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics