Jump to content


Photo

Would a Celestron AVX be ok with a TEC 140?

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 BarrySimon615

BarrySimon615

    Pa Bear

  • *****
  • Posts: 2825
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2004
  • Loc: New Orleans, LA

Posted 22 November 2013 - 09:35 AM

I did an archive search and found nothing, so here is the question? Would a Celestron AVX mount be sufficient for most visual applications with a TEC 140? A friend really likes the AVX that I just got. I got it because it is manageable size wise and should be perfect with most (but maybe not all of the scopes that I have). My friend has a TEC 140 that has always been used with his Losmandy G11 and that is a great match, however no GoTo function and no "fast slew". He does no astrophotography.

I am looking for "real" answers based upon impressions using the AVX with either the TEC 140 or with something with very similar length and weight. I know we would need to add more counterweight as it is unlikely that the one supplied 11 lb. weight would be enough. I may try my AP Star 12 on the AVX as the length and weight (with attached guidescope and rings) is similar to the TEC 140.

Barry Simon

#2 mpgxsvcd

mpgxsvcd

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1951
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2011
  • Loc: Raleigh, North Carolina

Posted 22 November 2013 - 09:59 AM

I have not used the TEC 140 with that mount. However, I use an Astro Tech AT8IN which weighs about 25 pounds with everything on it and it is much bigger than the refractor. It works great on my CG-5 for AP if you get the balance right.

Just curious what are you expecting to go wrong with the mount and visual observing? Are you thinking the mount will collapse under the weight? This class of mount is rated up to at-least 30 lbs of equipment and I am sure it could do more than that for just visual.

Really the whole "Use WAY MORE mount than you need thing is getting out of hand". You will need an extra weight but the mount is designed to handle it.

#3 BarrySimon615

BarrySimon615

    Pa Bear

  • *****
  • Posts: 2825
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2004
  • Loc: New Orleans, LA

Posted 22 November 2013 - 10:39 AM

Just curious what are you expecting to go wrong with the mount and visual observing? Are you thinking the mount will collapse under the weight? This class of mount is rated up to at-least 30 lbs of equipment and I am sure it could do more than that for just visual.

Really the whole "Use WAY MORE mount than you need thing is getting out of hand". You will need an extra weight but the mount is designed to handle it.


Basically my expectations are cautiously optimistic. The whole "max suggested for visual thing and max suggested for astrophotography thing" is very subjective to say the least. That is the reason why I am interested in objective data based upon real life experience. That being said, the old axiom "your mileage may vary" certainly applies here.

In addition, other variables come into play - are tripod legs completely collapsed or are they extended or are they extended part way? Is the tripod accessory plate/stiffener tightened all the way, are the extension locks tightened, is the telescope well connected, is the ground hard or soft, is the wind too high and the list goes on and on and on.

All of the above being said there are practical limits and guides which should be remembered in properly combining a telescope with a mount. It would be foolish to put a TEC 140 or a TAK FS 128 on a CG-4, and both would do well on a Losmandy G8, an Orion Atlas, or a Celestron CGEM, but what about a mount somewhere between these limits when the need for portability and convenience is most important? Hence my question.

Barry Simon

#4 David Pavlich

David Pavlich

    Transmographied

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 27932
  • Joined: 18 May 2005
  • Loc: Mandeville, LA USA

Posted 22 November 2013 - 10:45 AM

Visually, you'd be fine, Barry. I'd probably look for a good used CG5-GT. I used one with a C6R and it was very good for visual use.

David

#5 t.r.

t.r.

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4516
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2008
  • Loc: 1123,6536,5321

Posted 22 November 2013 - 10:51 AM

I used a TEC 140 on a CG5-GT for three years as my primary visual setup. It worked perfectly! Everything from nebulas, galaxies and clusters, to high power planetary and doubles. The Go-To slewed without issue and I logged a lot of objects in those three years due to the convenience of a light weight setup. If the AVX is in the same capacity range...you will be fine and the lines in which you are thinking are spot on...a larger/heavier mount will be setup less often than a light-weight one will be. Fact. But, of course everyone else will tell you to overmount it... :smirk: I only used it for three years, what would I know? :p

#6 BarrySimon615

BarrySimon615

    Pa Bear

  • *****
  • Posts: 2825
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2004
  • Loc: New Orleans, LA

Posted 22 November 2013 - 11:11 AM

Visually, you'd be fine, Barry. I'd probably look for a good used CG5-GT. I used one with a C6R and it was very good for visual use.

David


The original question was prompted by a question from a friend who is considering the AVX for his TEC 140 as a more portable alternative to his G11 retrofitted with Gemini. I already have the AVX (and the GM-8 and the Vixen Super Polaris, Celestron CG-4, LightSpeed Wagon and a Unitron 142). Primarily I will be using mine with lighter payloads than a TEC 140. I may or may not ever get around to trying my AP Star 12 ED on the AVX. I will primarily use it with the Orion ST120 and the Antares 105/1500 mm fl. I will likely try with my Jaegers 6" f/5 which has a total weight with rings and 2" diagonal and large 2" eyepiece of about 26 lbs. The relatively short tube should help, but I won't really know til I try. As it did well for visual and "light photography" with a Super Polaris DX, the AVX should be ok. As I test different things I will report my results.

Once again, I am interested in objective reports from others who have used the AVX with various payloads. Answers with the words "can" or "does" are more important to me than answers with the word "should". "Can" and "Does" are objective, "should" is speculative. :o :o :o

Barry Simon

#7 BarrySimon615

BarrySimon615

    Pa Bear

  • *****
  • Posts: 2825
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2004
  • Loc: New Orleans, LA

Posted 22 November 2013 - 11:24 AM

The information from David and from T.R. is helpful as they have reported "real world" experiences with scopes on the CG5-GT, the mount that the AVX evolved from. Given their experiences and my assessment of the AVX vs the CG5-GT, I have more confidence in the AVX handling payloads approaching or even exceeding the 30 lb. limit specified by Celestron. As I said, testing will tell.

Barry Simon






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics