rmollise
Postmaster
Reged: 07/06/07
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: jason_milani]
#4406596 - 02/23/11 05:40 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
OK lets put it this way then: Take a standard CGEM, install a Losmandy saddle and stick it on a concrete pier. That's basically a CGEM-DX (in fact probably sturdier). Now stick a C-14 on it. See how it wobbles. Oh, i forgot about the thicker counterweight shaft....ooh, THAT's gonna make a big difference in carrying capacity. My mistake. 
IOW: "I haven't used one or even fully read the product specs."
|
rmollise
Postmaster
Reged: 07/06/07
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: t.r.]
#4406601 - 02/23/11 05:42 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
The "new" non-edge C14's reportedly 53#...how is it gonna ride on a mount rated for 50# with accessories added?!?! Perhaps an older 45# C14 maybe, but not one with the heavier rear cell IMO. Linky...
"Reportedly" by Celestron? I don't think so.
|
t.r.
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/14/08
Loc: Upstate NY
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: rmollise]
#4406985 - 02/23/11 08:24 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
No, I didn't state by Celestron...if you follow the link I provided another CN member weighed his new C14, bare ota, at 52#, no finderscope, no plate, I was being conservative calling it 53# rigged for observing.YMMV.
Edited by t.r. (02/23/11 08:25 PM)
|
jason_milani
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 09/03/04
Loc: Northeast Ohio
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: rmollise]
#4407020 - 02/23/11 08:43 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Well, Celestron "reports" the CGEM-DX at 86 lbs. total with the tripod and they also "report" that the CGEM-DX with Edge HD 14" OTA at 185 lbs.
I guess the Edge HD 14" IS a lot heavier than any of us thought, right around 99 lbs if my math is correct.
|
RTLR 12
Post Laureate
Reged: 12/04/08
Loc: Capistrano Beach, Ca
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: jason_milani]
#4407143 - 02/23/11 09:48 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Maybe the 2 22lb counter weights have something to do with that 99lbs!
Stan
|
Starhawk
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/16/08
Loc: Tucson, Arizona
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: RTLR 12]
#4407796 - 02/24/11 08:34 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Sorry, OP. Wild conjecture and little else, here. For what it's worth, it would seem this is similar in concept to having the Vixen GP and the Vixen GP-D2 uprated mount, though it has a lot of commonality with the smaller one. In practical terms, most movement for a C-14 will either be in the tripod or the mirror.
For what it I'd worth, the 53# number would seem to be suspect since it is 8# higher than the weight for an Edge 14, and was produced by putting the edge back bucket on the current C14, with simple mirror locks.
-Rich
|
jason_milani
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 09/03/04
Loc: Northeast Ohio
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: Starhawk]
#4407883 - 02/24/11 09:29 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Actually it's not wild conjecture at all, just edjucated guesses based upon prior experience with similar astronomy equipment. Also, the mirror on the C-14 may cause image shift but it's not going to affect the stability of the mount.
The 99 lb. comment was a joke. All one has to do is a little research. The Celestron site lists the 14" EdgeHD at 46 lbs. and the standard C-14 at 45 lbs.
|
akua
member
Reged: 03/01/06
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: jason_milani]
#4407955 - 02/24/11 10:11 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
My C11 Edge weights 31.5lb with only the front cap and the included dovetail. This compared with 27.5lb specification from Celestron. BTW the corrector cap weights around 14oz.
|
jason_milani
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 09/03/04
Loc: Northeast Ohio
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: akua]
#4408058 - 02/24/11 10:54 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Then maybe the post about the 53 lb. weight for the 14" is correct. I wouldn't doubt it.
|
nemo129
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 01/03/10
Loc: WMass
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: jason_milani]
#4409107 - 02/24/11 07:35 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I do not think Celestron includes the weight of the dovetail bar or scope caps in the listed specs. It might look a bit misleading at first glance, but they do say OTA weight...so technically.... 
|
Jay Wise
sage
Reged: 11/21/08
Loc: Near Williamsburg VA
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: nemo129]
#4411171 - 02/25/11 04:56 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
High Point just called and said they would be shipping DX's next week. What the heck, I'm going to give it a rip. 
JayW
|
nemo129
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 01/03/10
Loc: WMass
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: Jay Wise]
#4411235 - 02/25/11 05:36 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Excellent, looking forward to your thoughts on the mount when you get it!
|
EFT
Vendor - Deep Space Products
Reged: 05/07/07
Loc: Phoenix, AZ
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: Jay Wise]
#4411252 - 02/25/11 05:44 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
High Point just called and said they would be shipping DX's next week. What the heck, I'm going to give it a rip.
JayW
That's great. Please join the Yahoo CGEM DX group when you get a chance and let us know what you think over there as well.
|
nofxrx
Vendor (HyperCams & Mods)
Reged: 07/12/05
Loc: Palm Bay,Florida
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: Jay Wise]
#4411256 - 02/25/11 05:47 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I will be very interested to see/hear your reports, Jay!
RE: "conjecture,etc" being in this thread, get over it..
They literally slapped a FEW upgrades to the CGEM, and it magically can hold a C14? I dont think so.
Have I used the DX, no. I shouldnt have to to voice my opinion, and for anyone to say "have you used one?" is complete ignorance as the post/entire thread IS HYPOTHETICAL at this point...
Get over yourselves...sheesh.
(in case you do not understand what that word means:
"Hypothetical: involving ideas or possibilities: existing as or involving something that exists as an unproven idea, theory, or posssibility..
- assumed for sake of argument: assumed or proposed for further investigation")
I agree with Jason.It is a $600 marketing ploy. They would have done MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCH better if they had just kept the CGE. THAT IS the answer to "thier issue of not having a mid level mount"..as the product manager for "C" so elegantly put it in that video!
And IMHO, the CGE is not a "mid level mount" IF the CGEM DX is going to be considered a mid level mount. In that case, my CGE on my concrete pier is a freakin CGE-PRO...come on guys..
Edited by nofxrx (02/25/11 05:48 PM)
|
rmollise
Postmaster
Reged: 07/06/07
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: nofxrx]
#4411387 - 02/25/11 06:38 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
II agree with Jason.It is a $600 marketing ploy. They would have done MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCH better if they had just kept the CGE. THAT IS the answer to "thier issue of not having a mid level mount"..as the product manager for "C" so elegantly put it in that video!
And IMHO, the CGE is not a "mid level mount" IF the CGEM DX is going to be considered a mid level mount. In that case, my CGE on my concrete pier is a freakin CGE-PRO...come on guys..
The CGE is a NIIIIIIICE mount. 
But hardly perfect and not without its share of problems. I also doubt people would be willing to pay what Celestron would have to charge to continue production.
|
nofxrx
Vendor (HyperCams & Mods)
Reged: 07/12/05
Loc: Palm Bay,Florida
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: rmollise]
#4411590 - 02/25/11 08:34 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Completely agreed on that(and not just the CGE, but the CGEM and PRO(especially), and other mounts from other manufacturers!)!!I was just trying to stress the point that everything about this mount is purely theoretical until someone actually has one and tests it out..and if we followed that logic that "C" has wth the DX, I should be able to sell my pier mounted CGE as at least a CGE-DX!!LOL
But wait, first I need to have a new CW shaft made that is 6-8" longer so that it can handle 75#!!
|
jason_milani
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 09/03/04
Loc: Northeast Ohio
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: nofxrx]
#4411814 - 02/25/11 11:07 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I would not have had an issue with Celestron coming out with the DX as an upgraded CGEM (as Vixen has done with their mounts) if they didn't tout it carrying a C-14. That's the ONLY issue i have with it since it's NOT a replacement for the CGE. If they would've said something on the order of "For the imager with our C-11 and smaller cats the CGEM-DX features upgraded features such as....."
|
rmollise
Postmaster
Reged: 07/06/07
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: nofxrx]
#4411852 - 02/25/11 11:36 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
first I need to have a new CW shaft made that is 6-8" longer so that it can handle 75#!!
You have read Celestron's specs on the mount, right?
|
rmollise
Postmaster
Reged: 07/06/07
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: jason_milani]
#4411856 - 02/25/11 11:38 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
I would not have had an issue with Celestron coming out with the DX as an upgraded CGEM (as Vixen has done with their mounts) if they didn't tout it carrying a C-14. That's the ONLY issue i have with it since it's NOT a replacement for the CGE. If they would've said something on the order of "For the imager with our C-11 and smaller cats the CGEM-DX features upgraded features such as....."
OK...it can't carry a C14 because? The CGEM head is actually larger than that of the CGE.
|
BlueGrass
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/25/09
Loc: Wasatch Front, UT
|
Re: CGEM-DX... any thoughts?
[Re: rmollise]
#4411885 - 02/25/11 11:54 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Don't the mounts bearings and motors have a bigger role to play than just size alone? 
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
