A mount and tripod for my new TEC 180FL
Posted 02 January 2013 - 08:52 AM
In my case with Tri36M carrying an AP1200 with C11 EdgeHD 8mm EP, damping times were very good...slap on the tripod damped under a second and on the tube a little more...perhaps 1.5sec. I now have a very solid permanant pier and I dont see any improvement in dampening times over the Tri36M. The tripod is just incredibly stable and solid. [/quote]
That's impressive that the Miller offers the same stability as a permanent pier. Can you tell if you get any movement when using the focuser and if so how long that would take to settle down? The wrapping test is on the extreme side.
Posted 02 January 2013 - 12:31 PM
I believe the Miller tripod is deliberately engineered to be a quick-damped support. All this with so little weight - its really one of a kind design.
Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:44 PM
I dont wish to hijack the thread but I have similar questions
I will be getting a DM6 Mount soon. I want to use it with my 12" LX200R OTA ( about 45- 50 pounds, depending on the particular setup). Do you recommend the Miller Tri36H, Tri36M or the Tri36L with it ?
(I may also use a couple of Miller extensions on the tripod for use with a ES 127ED refdractor, so moment may be larger but OTA mass may be much smaller.
P.S. I can easily cary the Tri36H and I may also need to mount a much heavier mount on it at one time or another for doing AP.
Posted 11 January 2013 - 07:31 PM
Posted 12 January 2013 - 06:46 AM
TEC 180FL being fairly large scope (not just size, possible susceptibility to wind gusts, etc.) I think you'll be better off with 900GTO; no need to think two mounts, one for home one for remote. With 180mm scope you are already setting yourself up for bigger stuff; no need to scrimp on the mount. Goodluck
No argument that the AP900 is more stable but will the extra weight cause me to make the trip out less often? Maybe I will need a Mach1 for outings with lower stability expectations and have a heavy weight setup in my backyard that I can leave setup under a cover. I would be better served doing the majority of my serious planetary observing from home and saving the dark site for lower power DSO observing which will be less critical of mount jitters. Am I making any sense with this line of logic?
Posted 12 January 2013 - 08:17 AM
Yes, the beefier the support, the better the view. The 10" ATS, Monolith or TRI36H will give a better base to start with, and the AP1200 will provide a very solid and massive mount. Unfortunately, this also means that you will have big heavy equipment to move around. Grab and go it isn't. Even the AP900 means that there is more stuff and heavier stuff to move and it all adds up. My APMach1GTO lives in a Pelican case quite nicely. It weights about 52 pounds with almost everything mount related inside - mount, CW shaft, keypad, GTOCP3, cables, assorted fasteners, dovetail saddle, hex key set; everything except counterweights. It has wheels and an extensible handle for ease of transport. The counterweights and tripod go into a hard shell golf case with, you guessed it, wheels and a handle. I think you mentioned using the scope on a beach but unless you are operating from a hard solid surface, I think you will find that the TEC180FL is going to be "difficult" to handle. It and all the various other parts are unwieldy. The easiest portion to handle will be the TRI36M tripod should you choose to go that way.
As to the height, as far as I can tell, the eyepiece is never at the correct height. An adjustable height chair is really handy. Varying the eyepiece position via rotating the diagonal works well too. If I am planning on just going into "sky tourist" mode with quick views of objects, then bending and contorting myself works too. If I am going to sit for extended periods of time viewing Jupiter, Mars or Saturn, then being as comfortable as possible makes all the difference.
Your description of viewing habits sounds right in line with what I would be doing. When I said I view at the beach I don't actually go onto the sand with the equipment. I'm set up next to my car on the concrete in the parking lot. I would go down there every nice night to view with my Meade and be set up in under 5 minutes. I'd like to see myself going as often with the TEC. You're neat travel packs with your equipment seems to make that a lot easier.
Odd as it might seem there are quite a few people using the 180 with the Mach 1 successfully. I don't know what they use to qualify success. Even Yuri said he has viewed through the 180 on the Mach 1 at a star party he attended and it was fine. George at AP said that stability is all relative. It depends on what you are coming from. If you are used to a much more rigid setup then you probably wouldn't be happy. But if you are coming from a lighter weight setup like my Meade, I might think that the Mach 1 is the cat's meow and be blown away by how much more stable it is. No argument that the AP900 is more stable but will the extra weight cause me to make the trip out less often? Maybe I will need a mach 1 for outings with lower stability expectations and have a heavy weight setup in my backyard that I can leave setup under a cover. I would be better served doing the majority of my serious planetary observing from home and saving the dark site for lower power DSO observing which will be less critical of mount jitters. Am I making any sense with this line of logic?
As George said, stability is relative. I have a 175 EDF and both a Mach1GTO and a 900 GTO. The Mach1 easily carries my 155 EDFS or 10" Mak-Cass, but I much prefer the 900 for the 175. The weight isn't the issue, it's the amount of weight at the ends of the moment arm. IIRC your scope is lighter in weight than mine. Your choice depends on how much observing you will do in less than perfect conditions (how well protected from the wind) and your tolerance for vibration.
Weight of the mount shouldn't affect your setup time as neither axis of the 900 weighs more than the Mach1, just one more step putting it together, takes about 15 seconds extra.
Posted 12 January 2013 - 08:50 AM
Asteron, I recommend you get in touch with Rob with your specific requirements and he will be able to tell you exactly what you would need, cost, adapters and future proofing the tripod. He is very knowledgeable and great to deal with although slow in responding to email.
I already e-mailed him with my questions. I hope his e-mail has not changed as the e-mail I used was from an add posted on AM on 2011 ( I used firstname.lastname@example.org)
With such beautiful products I really don't understand why he has no website (I tried the catamount website, but there is only archived stuff there and no clue abount the new tripods.
I guess when you are a one man show you don't have time for building and maintaining a website) .
Posted 13 January 2013 - 08:34 PM
I would love a setup like that with the ATS pier but I am hearing that the Rob Miller tripod is more stable and much lighter. I'm also wondering why no one mentions the Paramount MX as an option instead of the AP900. The Paramount MX is a little lighter (50 lbs vs 54 lbs.), has a higher payload capacity (90 lbs. vs 70 lbs) and is about the same price as the 900 ($9000 vs $8750). So what's the deal there?
EDIT: Nevermind. I found the answer in another thread. That the requirement for a computer all the time is a put off.
Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:25 AM