Jump to content


Nexstar SLT vs Meade DS 2000

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 midnightcaller



  • -----
  • Posts: 32
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2009

Posted 01 October 2012 - 09:15 AM


I wanna make my 4.5 newton reflector a goto scope.

Which of these mounts would you guys out there recommend?

Thanks // David

#2 Mkofski


    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1562
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2011
  • Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA

Posted 01 October 2012 - 09:34 AM

I have an SLT that I use with a 80mm refractor and like it for visual. Celestron sells it with a Newt about the same size as yours but that seems a little long of an OTA. Great for a small grab and go setup but the tripod legs a bit thin for my liking. No experience with the small Meade mount.

#3 MikeBOKC



  • *****
  • Posts: 4803
  • Joined: 10 May 2010
  • Loc: Oklahoma City, OK

Posted 01 October 2012 - 04:18 PM

I got my grandaughter a used 114mm newt and gave her my SLT and it seems to work fine. I once tried the Meade mount for a solar scope and returned it. Not so hot.

#4 *skyguy*



  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Western New York

Posted 01 October 2012 - 06:25 PM

Absolutely buy the Nexstar SLT. The Meade DS 2000 is ... well, pretty bad! And I'm a big fan of Meade products ... I own 3 of their goto scopes.I also own a Celestron SLT mount and it runs great with accurate goto performance..

#5 JoseBorrero



  • *****
  • Posts: 3275
  • Joined: 04 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Puerto Rico Island

Posted 01 October 2012 - 06:37 PM

I got a dsm2000 for my coronado PST and isnt bad at all

#6 Geo.



  • *****
  • Posts: 3132
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 02 October 2012 - 04:49 PM

I have about 15 DS2Ks in a 3 bushel bin that have failed in any number of ways. The design is a POS. The latest redesign has improved the Alt axle clutch design to acceptable (about half my collection has this failure) But the Az drive design is still unacceptable and subject to early failure. Lastly the tripod is simply inadequate. This can be fixed with some short sturdy wood legs, but stock is a joke. Overall way too much reliance on plastic and cheap alloy castings.

The SLT has a slip clutch on the Alt and a steel bolt for the axle, simple and effective. The Az and Alt spur gears are aluminum, driven by bronze pinions. The drives are mostly metal although the gearhead uses plastic gears. The main failure mode is breakage of the fork arm or base castings if dropped. I have replaced only two motors that had brush/commutator failures, but on the whole the Celestron mount is far superior.

In looking over the design of the Meade LT and LS mounts it's clear they took a few lessons from the DS2K failures or Celestron's Nexstar line. Unfortunately, they failed to fit them with dovetail saddles.

#7 midnightcaller



  • -----
  • Posts: 32
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2009

Posted 03 October 2012 - 05:19 AM

Ok. Thanks a lot! I think I'll choose the slt-mount.

#8 graffias79


    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Madison, WI

Posted 03 October 2012 - 04:43 PM

I've never used the Meade mount, but I have to say the SLT does have accurate tracking and gotos. Just make sure you do a good alignment and you're good to go. Having said that, I have had to replace the altitude motor in mine, but it was not expensive or difficult. This is coming from someone who is squeamish about messing with telescope parts!

Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics