Telescope Reviews: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm?

· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt

· Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

You are not logged in. [Login]

Entrance · Main Index · Search · New user · Who's Online
FAQ · Calendar

Equipment Discussions >> Refractors

Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)

Stellarfire
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 07/10/11

Loc: Switzerland

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Astrojensen]
#5236087 - 05/23/12 05:06 PM

Thomas,

Are those big Aries APO refractor tubes made from aluminium? I am asking this, because aluminium, being a poor isolator, tracks with the outdoor ambient temperature much quicker than tubes made from phenolic resin / Kruppax 50. Therefore, thermal equilibrium of a closed OTA is reached faster with an aluminium tube. I think this is particularly important on big and voluminous refractor OTA's.

TAK uses aluminium for its massive refractor tubes.

Stephan

Post Extras:

Astrojensen
Post Laureate

Reged: 10/05/08

Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Stellarfire]
#5236109 - 05/23/12 05:20 PM

Hmm. I think it was aluminum, yes, but I can't remember for sure. Ask Markus Ludes, he's the retailer of these scopes.

And you're right on the money about the cooling issues.

Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark

Post Extras:

Stellarfire
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 07/10/11

Loc: Switzerland

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Astrojensen]
#5236152 - 05/23/12 05:55 PM

Quote:

Hmm. I think it was aluminum, yes, but I can't remember for sure. Ask Markus Ludes, he's the retailer of these scopes.

I guess we will see his post on here soon.

Stephan

Post Extras:

brianb11213
Postmaster

Reged: 02/25/09

Loc: 55.215N 6.554W

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Stellarfire]
#5236229 - 05/23/12 06:45 PM

Quote:

Therefore, thermal equilibrium of a closed OTA is reached faster with an aluminium tube.

The other part of the equation is that whichever part of the tube is sky facing will, on a clear night, be colder than the part of the tube which is ground facing. If the tube material is a good conductor this will cause tube currents. The best thing to do, without any doubt at all, is to have an insulating tube, with adequate vents for cooling, which can be closed when in use.

Wooden tubes are excellent in many respects. Carbon fibre is a reasonable insulator & works well. If you're unfortunate enough to have a conductive metal tube, paint it white or have it polished metal finish and line it with cork or sytrofoam.

Post Extras:

gnowellsct
Postmaster

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: Future TAK TOA: What would you like to see? new

[Re: tmbuser6]
#5236511 - 05/23/12 10:56 PM

Quote:

They make 'em now, Greg--- it's called a NEWTONIAN!

Except for the increase in quality.

I don't know. Newts are pretty cumbersome and long. I don't know how the weight would pan out between a ten inch Newt and a ten inch apo. Of course, much would depend on the design choices. But I do have a very nice 10" Newt.

Greg N

Post Extras:

PGW Steve
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 10/03/06

Loc: Winnipeg, Canada

Re: Future TAK TOA: What would you like to see? new

[Re: gnowellsct]
#5237433 - 05/24/12 02:26 PM

FSQ175EDX that works with the current .76 reducer. Make the tube from a thermally stable material and ventilate it to control the wild focus change of the 106.

Post Extras:

Stellarfire
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 07/10/11

Loc: Switzerland

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Ennis]
#5243630 - 05/28/12 11:06 AM

Quote:

The TOA line is getting a bit old, too. Maybe the TSA line will supersede it.

Yes, maybe. According the homepage of Takahashi Japan, the TOA-130 was introduced in January 2003, and the TOA-150 in July 2005.
But, frankly, I think there is no such thing as "getting old" for a fantastic product line as the TOA. It is a timeless monument of industrial art.

Stephan

Post Extras:

Ennis
scholastic sledgehammer

Reged: 09/11/06

Loc: The Outer Limits

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Stellarfire]
#5243683 - 05/28/12 11:32 AM

"I think there is no such thing as "getting old" for a fantastic product line as the TOA."

I agree.

E.

Edited by Ennis (05/28/12 11:28 PM)

Post Extras:

daveCollins
member

Reged: 05/06/11

Loc: Washington DC

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Ennis]
#5244509 - 05/28/12 07:12 PM

I haven't found its weight to be too much of a problem. I removed the tube weight, rings, and and diagonal and the scope weighed in at 31 pounds.

Post Extras:

aa6ww
sage

Reged: 10/23/11

Loc: Sacramento, Calif.

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: daveCollins]
#5244619 - 05/28/12 08:23 PM

Quote:

I haven't found its weight to be too much of a problem. I removed the tube weight, rings, and and diagonal and the scope weighed in at 31 pounds.

My TOA-130 weights 35 pounds with the clamshell, D-type dove tail and accessory ring and its a featherweight to put on my G11. Funny how many read spec sheets only instead of talking to users on how much their scopes really weight. The 150 is awesome!!

...Ralph

Post Extras:

daveCollins
member

Reged: 05/06/11

Loc: Washington DC

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: aa6ww]
#5244640 - 05/28/12 08:41 PM

I just got in from viewing the moon. I have the TOA 150B mounted on a Universal Astronomics Unistar Delux Alt-Az manual mount and I was using 297 power to identify the Apollo 15 landing site. This mount is rated for 30 pounds and it worked just fine. In broad daylight (7pm to 8:30pm) I could easily see Rimea Fresnel and Mons Hadley and use them to then jump over to Apollo 15 site. I don't think this scope is the monster that it is made out to be.

Post Extras:

Ennis
scholastic sledgehammer

Reged: 09/11/06

Loc: The Outer Limits

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: aa6ww]
#5244889 - 05/28/12 11:20 PM

The folks at Texas Nautical Repair, the Takahashi distributor in Houston, have warned me that the TOA-150 was too heavy for a G-11 mount even just for visual work, and I won't bother with a mount bigger than a G-11. The TOA-130, on the other hand, is not too heavy for a G-11.

If I could look through a TOA-150, I might be convinced to buy one -- but I have never seen any TOA refractor at any star party that I have attended.

E.

Edited by Ennis (05/29/12 09:28 AM)

Post Extras:

brianb11213
Postmaster

Reged: 02/25/09

Loc: 55.215N 6.554W

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Ennis]
#5245048 - 05/29/12 02:05 AM

Quote:

I have never seen any TOA refractor at any star party that I have attended.

As one who has had equipment damaged by rough usage at public events, if I had something as good as a TOA frac, I wouldn't take it either. I'm happy to take cheap & easily replacable scopes to public events, if they do get damaged it's no biggie to repair or replace them.

Post Extras:

MAURITS
professor emeritus

Reged: 09/22/09

Loc: Diksmuide (Belgium)

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: brianb11213]
#5245079 - 05/29/12 03:12 AM

The TOA-150B is "extraordinarily"

YES, it's made for a "lifetime"!

NO, it's not a "monsterscope"!

Post Extras:

Stellarfire
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 07/10/11

Loc: Switzerland

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: saemark30]
#5249018 - 05/31/12 02:48 PM

Quote:

I wonder if fluorite is still made larger than 175mm?

Apparently yes. The Observatory FET-200 200mm f/10 Triplet Fluorite/ED Telescope is still available from TAK. There is also offered a FET-250 and FET-300 model, with Fluorite element, too.

The Observatory FET-200 being the next step up from the TOA-150, results in a big gap between both refractor models.

Stephan

Post Extras:

chboss
professor emeritus

Reged: 03/24/08

Loc: Tokyo Japan

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Stellarfire]
#5249700 - 05/31/12 10:53 PM

Stephan

If I understand correctly those scopes you mention are made to order so certainly not available from stock?
And the price point of these models is extreme...

The question is really at what price a 170mm or 175mm lens could be "mass" produced.

regards
Chris

Post Extras:

Stellarfire
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 07/10/11

Loc: Switzerland

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: chboss]
#5249934 - 06/01/12 02:34 AM

Quote:

Stephan

If I understand correctly those scopes you mention are made to order so certainly not available from stock?

Chris,

That is correct. But it is impressive that TAK offers them with Fluorite lenses that large.

Quote:

The question is really at what price a 170mm or 175mm lens could be "mass" produced.

regards
Chris

The Dealer Minimum Advertised Pricing (MAP) lists the TOA-150B at USD $ 10,895.00 (Texas Nautical / TAK America), respectively EUR 11,952.00 (Optique Unterlinden / TAK Europe.

In the high-end APO refractor market, prices definitely go through the roof for anything larger than a 6 incher. This is still a small market segment. In view of high labour cost and small production numbers, I would expect a price tag of at least USD $ 20'000.00 for a 175-180mm TOA.

Stephan

Post Extras:

Stellarfire
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 07/10/11

Loc: Switzerland

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: daveCollins]
#5255606 - 06/05/12 01:59 AM

Quote:

I don't think this scope is the monster that it is made out to be.

In particular the intelligently placed and solid carry-handle helps a LOT to control the expensive TOA-150B OTA during set-up and break-down.

Stephan

Post Extras:

Alvin Huey
Carpal Tunnel

Reged: 10/18/05

Loc: NorCal

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Ennis]
#5284795 - 06/23/12 03:33 AM

Quote:

The folks at Texas Nautical Repair, the Takahashi distributor in Houston, have warned me that the TOA-150 was too heavy for a G-11 mount even just for visual work, and I won't bother with a mount bigger than a G-11. The TOA-130, on the other hand, is not too heavy for a G-11.

If I could look through a TOA-150, I might be convinced to buy one -- but I have never seen any TOA refractor at any star party that I have attended.

E.

Really? I've mounted my TOA-150 on my friend's G-11 and it was fine for visual use...but for imaging - forget about it. That thing weighs 45 pounds!

Post Extras:

Ennis
scholastic sledgehammer

Reged: 09/11/06

Loc: The Outer Limits

Re: Poll: TAK TOA 170, 175 or 180mm? new

[Re: Alvin Huey]
#5285207 - 06/23/12 12:23 PM

Thank you! That is good to know!

E.

Post Extras:

Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)

Extra information

11 registered and 28 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator: Scott in NC, Bowmoreman, KWB

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Thread views: 2843

Jump to

CN Forums

Home

Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics