Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· 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

Equipment Discussions >> Mounts

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | (show all)
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
A letter to Meade about the LX80
      #5786787 - 04/08/13 08:28 PM

For anyone interested, I'm seeing if there is enough interest to put together a general complaint letter to Meade about the LX80. Idmlikemtomget at least 20 individuals involved... The more the better.

Rather than just having individuals that own the mount and are unhappy with one area or another, I thought about having 3 groups represtnted.

1. I own the LX80 and am unhappy with it because xx.
2. I owned an LX80 and returned it for a refund because xx.
3. I was going to buy an LX80 and decided to buy a xx because xx.

If you'd like to get involved, PM me with a paragraph or 2 about your specific situation.

If you have name and contact information on anyone high up in the Meade organization, send it to me via PM.

Thanks,

Mike

PS. I sill like the mount for the most part and am not trying to get into Meade bashing here. If we can show Meade that they have a problem that is costing them business maybe we can get some of the areas where specs and real life don't cross addessed.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JimMo
I'd Rather Do It Myself


Reged: 01/08/07

Loc: Under the SE Michigan lightdom...
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5786818 - 04/08/13 08:47 PM

I'm in.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: JimMo]
      #5786930 - 04/08/13 09:38 PM

Mike...

I'll be sending you a PM in awhile. Got to look some things up. Of course, I would be in Cat #2.

I do have the names and emails for the people you need to address this to.

For the record though, I would only be doing this to help others who still have this mount, or are considering purchasing it. Meade knows my situation, and I have spoken to them at length (both in emails and in person) up to and including last Nov at the Tucson Astro show.

I still like my Meade stuff. No regrets there. Its the new stuff that is in question. And on the 8xx series (now the 850), and the 600's, hopefully the re-engineering and re-mfg is going to work out for everyone. I certainly hope so.

I am not too optimictic about the LX80 being re-engineered, or even its mount. But it would be nice.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ahopp
sage


Reged: 05/24/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: dmdouglass]
      #5786956 - 04/08/13 09:47 PM

How about #4: I bought an LX80 mount and love it.

It would give us a sense of how many have issues, and, the scope of the issue.

Tony


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ahopp]
      #5786990 - 04/08/13 09:59 PM

Quote:

How about #4: I bought an LX80 mount and love it.

It would give us a sense of how many have issues, and, the scope of the issue.

Tony




Tony,

A 4th group does exist! Until my tripod broke I was in that group. I still love the mount but it the tripod Ubreaks again after it is out of warranty (for you or me or any owner) we are out of luck.

I had a thread a few months ago tring to find happy users like myself... Found a few.

As far as the goal of this letter, the 4th group doesn't really fit. Like I said in the original post, I'm not trying to bash Meade just point out the problem(s).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5787164 - 04/08/13 11:40 PM

Mike...

Private Message sent...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
herrointment
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 03/12/11

Loc: North of Hwy. 64
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: dmdouglass]
      #5787325 - 04/09/13 03:30 AM

Well, I'd assume Meade knows what they have. I wouldn't expect them to do another run of the things either unless forced to due to contracts, etc.

I pre-ordered and prepaid for one of these units until someone here finally spooked me into bailing out after a 6 or 9 month wait. Whoever that was......I owe you a beer! One look at a photo of the gear train and I knew I'd made the right decision.

I'd fit into group 3 and would help if need be....but I think you are wasting your time, frankly.


Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: herrointment]
      #5788567 - 04/09/13 03:55 PM

Quote:

Well, I'd assume Meade knows what they have. I wouldn't expect them to do another run of the things either unless forced to due to contracts, etc.

I pre-ordered and prepaid for one of these units until someone here finally spooked me into bailing out after a 6 or 9 month wait. Whoever that was......I owe you a beer! One look at a photo of the gear train and I knew I'd made the right decision.

I'd fit into group 3 and would help if need be....but I think you are wasting your time, frankly.


Jim




Jim,

Yes, it is probably a waste of time!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5791225 - 04/10/13 08:20 PM

Well, the names are not rolling in. I think, to make any kind of impression, I'd like to have 20 individuals mentioned. So far I've got 5 counting myself. I'll give it a week and se what happens. There are certainly a lot of folks that had considered the mount and went another rout because of the bad press. I'll give the yahoo group a try also.

Thanks,

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lorence
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 09/15/08

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5792694 - 04/11/13 04:11 PM

Quote:

Well, the names are not rolling in. I think, to make any kind of impression, I'd like to have 20 individuals mentioned. So far I've got 5 counting myself. I'll give it a week and se what happens. There are certainly a lot of folks that had considered the mount and went another rout because of the bad press. I'll give the yahoo group a try also.




There is no doubt Meade needs a wake up call. You have the right idea but are being a bit restrictive in the scope of your complaint to Meade.

Quote:

1. I own the LX80 and am unhappy with it because xx.
2. I owned an LX80 and returned it for a refund because xx.
3. I was going to buy an LX80 and decided to buy a xx because xx.




Replace the term LX80 with yy. The yy being any Meade product.

I own an 10" LX200 ACF and can easily afford to upgrade to a larger 600 or 850. Because of problems related to my telescope I will not buy another Meade product unless
I see a change in their attitude toward their customers with problems.

Twenty complaints won't even raise an eyelash. Two hundred might. Make the time you spend on this worthwhile.

I am not a Meade basher, just an unsatisfied customer that believes that if enough people make enough noise Meade will do what is necessary. In the long run everyone except for Meade's competitors will benefit.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Lorence]
      #5792785 - 04/11/13 04:39 PM

Lorence,

Thanks. The intent here is to address the LX80 in specific. There are other issues with Meade, or most suppliers for that matter, that I did not plan on addressing.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cliffy54
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 03/14/10

Loc: ma
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5793027 - 04/11/13 06:30 PM

Whatever happened to their weekly deals.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
schenckf
journeyman


Reged: 10/30/07

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5793032 - 04/11/13 06:34 PM

How can I send you a PM (private message)?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: cliffy54]
      #5793033 - 04/11/13 06:35 PM

Cliffy,

I'm new enough I don't even know about the weekly deals.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: schenckf]
      #5793036 - 04/11/13 06:38 PM

Quote:

How can I send you a PM (private message)?




If you click my name link at the top left, then look at the bottom left of that window. Or you can email me at mike@dom2.com.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ScottAz
Fleet Navigator
*****

Reged: 02/06/05

Loc: Kenosha, Wisconsin
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5793105 - 04/11/13 07:14 PM

PM sent. Category 3 ....

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
geminijk
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 04/03/08

Loc: TN
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ScottAz]
      #5793402 - 04/11/13 10:17 PM

I'll announce this on my next episode, Meade users group, twitter, Google+. Give it while longer than a week please.

John


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: geminijk]
      #5793445 - 04/11/13 10:38 PM

Thanks John... I'm in no hurry.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jimb1001
sage
*****

Reged: 11/14/09

Loc: Florida
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Lorence]
      #5793669 - 04/12/13 01:11 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Well, the names are not rolling in. I think, to make any kind of impression, I'd like to have 20 individuals mentioned. So far I've got 5 counting myself. I'll give it a week and se what happens. There are certainly a lot of folks that had considered the mount and went another rout because of the bad press. I'll give the yahoo group a try also.




There is no doubt Meade needs a wake up call. You have the right idea but are being a bit restrictive in the scope of your complaint to Meade.

Quote:

1. I own the LX80 and am unhappy with it because xx.
2. I owned an LX80 and returned it for a refund because xx.
3. I was going to buy an LX80 and decided to buy a xx because xx.




Replace the term LX80 with yy. The yy being any Meade product.

I own an 10" LX200 ACF and can easily afford to upgrade to a larger 600 or 850. Because of problems related to my telescope I will not buy another Meade product unless
I see a change in their attitude toward their customers with problems.

Twenty complaints won't even raise an eyelash. Two hundred might. Make the time you spend on this worthwhile.

I am not a Meade basher, just an unsatisfied customer that believes that if enough people make enough noise Meade will do what is necessary. In the long run everyone except for Meade's competitors will benefit.




I'll make a little noise.

I have an LS8 which, after a few weeks, I found to have a problem. I called Meade customer service and, with no fuss or muss, they provided a shipping label and instruction to get it back to them.

Meade turned it around in 14 days, not counting travel time. I got it back today. Everything was repackaged neatly, the necessary work was done and they even cleaned the corrector for me. Looks like new.

I had called a couple times during the two weeks the scope was with Meade and they were polite, professional and informative.

I hadn't bought a Meade telescope in years, I think the last one was an LX 50 a long time ago but my experience with Meade customer service was excellent.

I'm sure you have your reasons for not wanting to do business with Meade, but people considering a Meade purchase should be aware that others have had a positive experience with Meade service.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5794511 - 04/12/13 01:51 PM

jimb1001,

I do agree with you! I just received my replacement tripod and it took about 10 days start to finish. Not too bad for ground shipping to and from Indiana. They paid fo shipping both ways so I have no complaint with the service that Meade provided for the broken part.

With Meade, as with most companies, there are good and bad experiences.

The intent here is not to imply in anyway that Meade is not to be dealt, but to point out the opinion of a number of users that there are problems with this specific product. There were measurable problems with the LX800 when it was released and Meade stepped up and apparently resolved them. If you look at the specs for the LX80, it fails in a number of important area, specifically the weight capacity in both Polar and AltAz configurations and the tracking ability with respect to doing AP.

These short comings don't effect everyone but the specs are miss misleading. The design and failure of the tripod's top plate is something that could effect any user not just those interested in using 30 to 40 pounds of kit and /or doing AP.

To be sure that no one misunderstands my intent: The goal here is ONLY to address issues with the LX80 and try to "coax" a response of some type from Meade.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5794514 - 04/12/13 01:52 PM

Just an update: After 4 days, I have 15 individuals for the letter.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lorence
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 09/15/08

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5794592 - 04/12/13 02:15 PM

Quote:



I'll make a little noise.

I have an LS8 which, after a few weeks, I found to have a problem. I called Meade customer service and, with no fuss or muss, they provided a shipping label and instruction to get it back to them.

Meade turned it around in 14 days, not counting travel time. I got it back today. Everything was repackaged neatly, the necessary work was done and they even cleaned the corrector for me. Looks like new.

I had called a couple times during the two weeks the scope was with Meade and they were polite, professional and informative.

I hadn't bought a Meade telescope in years, I think the last one was an LX 50 a long time ago but my experience with Meade customer service was excellent.

I'm sure you have your reasons for not wanting to do business with Meade, but people considering a Meade purchase should be aware that others have had a positive experience with Meade service.




What puzzles me about posts like yours is that you obviously realize some people have issues with Meade. You don't so you jump in to defend Meade.

Do you feel as though you have done your good deed for the day? Has it occurred to you that one day you may be on the other side of the fence. There is a good chance that everyone with a problem with Meade was on your side at one time. Don't be saying it will never happen to me.

Post like yours make me think of someone walking up to a lifeguard and saying "Excuse me sir, I am an expert swimmer and the noise being made by that drowning man is very annoying. Would you please tell him to drown somewhere else". I can see someone from Meade saying "Can't you see all the people out there enjoying themselves. Pay no mind to that man out there. You will spoil everyone's day."


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrcrillyAdministrator
Refractor wienie no more
*****

Reged: 04/30/03

Loc: NE Ohio
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Lorence]
      #5794654 - 04/12/13 02:32 PM

Quote:

What puzzles me about posts like yours is that you obviously realize some people have issues with Meade. You don't so you jump in to defend Meade.




What puzzles me is that some folks think that publishing only one point of view serves the public well. Of course we need to hear about the problems. We need to hear about the non-problems as well - otherwise how can people gauge reliability?

A quick note to the original poster:
Your letter is one letter and will carry the weight of, at most, one letter. When you claim to also speak for others, the recipient is very likely to either (a) doubt that you do speak for others, or (b) decide that since the others didn't feel strongly enough to write for themselves they don't really care and can be discounted. Your message would have more credibility and greater effect if your individual experiences are described.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jrcrilly]
      #5794804 - 04/12/13 03:58 PM

Quote:

Quote:

What puzzles me about posts like yours is that you obviously realize some people have issues with Meade. You don't so you jump in to defend Meade.




What puzzles me is that some folks think that publishing only one point of view serves the public well. Of course we need to hear about the problems. We need to hear about the non-problems as well - otherwise how can people gauge reliability?

A quick note to the original poster:
Your letter is one letter and will carry the weight of, at most, one letter. When you claim to also speak for others, the recipient is very likely to either (a) doubt that you do speak for others, or (b) decide that since the others didn't feel strongly enough to write for themselves they don't really care and can be discounted. Your message would have more credibility and greater effect if your individual experiences are described.




John,

Both sides need to be heard and until recently I've been on the pro-LX80 side of the fence... still am for the most part. The biggest worry I have is a repeat failure of the top plate of the tripod after it is out of warranty. But, there are other issues with the mount that don't currently effect my use. It is unfortunate that problems are reported more than good point on just about everything. I write software for dental offices and get very few calls or emails about how nice a new feature is, it is problems that get noticed and reported.

Hope you are wrong about the impact of a single letter. Each individual involved will have a paragraph or 2 about their problem or concern and each person will be identified in some way. So it will really be a single document from X number of individuals.

And, a non-related note: Love the looks of your new LX850! Hope you get it set up soon and can report how you are doing.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daud
sage


Reged: 08/05/06

Loc: AZ, Scottsdale
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5795007 - 04/12/13 05:34 PM

If I would put my AP130GT on LX80, the top plate breaks and I have $$$$ loss, what can I take from Meade ?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jimb1001
sage
*****

Reged: 11/14/09

Loc: Florida
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Lorence]
      #5795460 - 04/12/13 09:54 PM

Quote:

Quote:



I'll make a little noise.

I have an LS8 which, after a few weeks, I found to have a problem. I called Meade customer service and, with no fuss or muss, they provided a shipping label and instruction to get it back to them.

Meade turned it around in 14 days, not counting travel time. I got it back today. Everything was repackaged neatly, the necessary work was done and they even cleaned the corrector for me. Looks like new.

I had called a couple times during the two weeks the scope was with Meade and they were polite, professional and informative.

I hadn't bought a Meade telescope in years, I think the last one was an LX 50 a long time ago but my experience with Meade customer service was excellent.

I'm sure you have your reasons for not wanting to do business with Meade, but people considering a Meade purchase should be aware that others have had a positive experience with Meade service.




What puzzles me about posts like yours is that you obviously realize some people have issues with Meade. You don't so you jump in to defend Meade.

Do you feel as though you have done your good deed for the day? Has it occurred to you that one day you may be on the other side of the fence. There is a good chance that everyone with a problem with Meade was on your side at one time. Don't be saying it will never happen to me.

Post like yours make me think of someone walking up to a lifeguard and saying "Excuse me sir, I am an expert swimmer and the noise being made by that drowning man is very annoying. Would you please tell him to drown somewhere else". I can see someone from Meade saying "Can't you see all the people out there enjoying themselves. Pay no mind to that man out there. You will spoil everyone's day."




I'm sure you think you have a good reason for your hatred of Meade. I don't care what it is.

But you seem to think you're the only one entitled to express an opinion. Get over yourself.

Perhaps you should read the post above by the poor guy with the $9,000 Paramount that doesn't work and what he's going through.

Sounds like the company selling the $900 mount is providing better service than the one with the $9,000 mount.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5795505 - 04/12/13 10:25 PM

Quote:

I'm sure you think you have a good reason for your hatred of Meade. I don't care what it is.

But you seem to think you're the only one entitled to express an opinion. Get over yourself.

Perhaps you should read the post above by the poor guy with the $9,000 Paramount that doesn't work and what he's going through.

Sounds like the company selling the $900 mount is providing better service than the one with the $9,000 mount.




Clam Down a bit... I don't think Lorence's post indicated that he hated Meade. I don't hate Meade... There are 2 sides to the story. All this post is about is finding individuals that have a reason to be unhappy with a single Meade product. That's all! I've been a supporter of Meade in general and of the LX80 in specific but there seem to be some valid concerns about the mount.

Please feel free to start a thread to discuss the plus side of Meade and/or the LX80. I'll post there also.

And yes, there are problems with kit in all price ranges.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
R L Harris
member


Reged: 01/31/13

Loc: Independence,MO
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5795658 - 04/12/13 11:49 PM

There are always few who take a post and turn it into a fight!
When were trying help to let company know what
peoples concerns are with product to help that company
so those that having issues and those that would buy
if issues were fixed.
Bottom line these issue can hurt this company when no one wants to buy the product!

Edited by R L Harris (04/12/13 11:53 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jimb1001
sage
*****

Reged: 11/14/09

Loc: Florida
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5797059 - 04/13/13 04:37 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I'm sure you think you have a good reason for your hatred of Meade. I don't care what it is.

But you seem to think you're the only one entitled to express an opinion. Get over yourself.

Perhaps you should read the post above by the poor guy with the $9,000 Paramount that doesn't work and what he's going through.

Sounds like the company selling the $900 mount is providing better service than the one with the $9,000 mount.




Clam Down a bit... I don't think Lorence's post indicated that he hated Meade. I don't hate Meade... There are 2 sides to the story. All this post is about is finding individuals that have a reason to be unhappy with a single Meade product. That's all! I've been a supporter of Meade in general and of the LX80 in specific but there seem to be some valid concerns about the mount.

Please feel free to start a thread to discuss the plus side of Meade and/or the LX80. I'll post there also.

And yes, there are problems with kit in all price ranges.




Another one anxious to hammer Meade but doesn't want others to express an opinion.

I understand you dragged your mount on the ground and the plate broke. I understand Meade is sending you a new one under warranty.

I don't understand this anxiousness to bash Meade. To round up others to bash Meade.

I'm sure that each person needing a warranty repair to an LX80 has contacted Meade and they are aware of their issues.

For you to take up the pitchfork and rouse the villagers to go after the monster a bit heavy handed.

I also understand that you don't like the fact that I posted a positive comment about Meade and interrupted your bash fest.

Sadly, as fewer young people get involved in astronomy we end up with disproportionate number of angry old guys.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5797177 - 04/13/13 05:10 PM

Quote:

Another one anxious to hammer Meade but doesn't want others to express an opinion.

I understand you dragged your mount on the ground and the plate broke. I understand Meade is sending you a new one under warranty.

I don't understand this anxiousness to bash Meade. To round up others to bash Meade.

I'm sure that each person needing a warranty repair to an LX80 has contacted Meade and they are aware of their issues.

For you to take up the pitchfork and rouse the villagers to go after the monster a bit heavy handed.

I also understand that you don't like the fact that I posted a positive comment about Meade and interrupted your bash fest.

Sadly, as fewer young people get involved in astronomy we end up with disproportionate number of angry old guys.




I really don't see where there is any Meade bashing going no here. If you read other LX80 threads, i have been a supporter of both Meade and the LX80. I've had 2 support issues and Meade took care of the fast and free of charge. Can't fault them at all for what they have done for me.

That said, again, the only intent here is to get a group of individuals to,point out our concerns about the mount. My kit is very light compared to the published specs for the mount but maybe in a year or 2 when the mount is out of warranty I will want to use a heavier OTA. Or maybe I want to gt into AP. the specs for the mount vastly overstate what individuals using the mount have found. There are lots of happy users that don't push the published limits of the mount and that's great form them.

I'd love to see a revised LX80 that is better than the current mount. That would be good for me and great for Meade. Ioptron and SkyView both sell a combo AltAz/Plar mount now that are more than 2 times the price of the LX80. How many of those would sell if the LX80 performed as well as the spec sheet implies? How many LX80s would sell if the initial reports had been 80% favorable rather than 80% negative? I don't expect Meade to read whatever we send and say "Holy s*** we need to recall all the LX80s and send 85s out to all the current owners". Whatever we send will probably do no good at all except to make a few of us feel a bit better.

There is one issue that dosent relate to the specs and that is the design of the tripod's top plate. There have been 3 fail the same way. If I owned a $2,000 (or more) refractor I wouldn't put it on this mount. This is a problem that could effect ANY user somewhere down the line regardless of how happy they are with the current performance. This IS somthing that could and should be addresses by Meade.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
R L Harris
member


Reged: 01/31/13

Loc: Independence,MO
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5797184 - 04/13/13 05:14 PM

jimb1001 he and the rest of us not bashing meade but
stating our concerns in order to try and help us
the users of the product and company maker of product!
But you apparently are blind to this fact lol!

Edited by R L Harris (04/13/13 05:15 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cn register 5
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 12/26/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: R L Harris]
      #5797243 - 04/13/13 05:54 PM

The dismissing of criticism as "Meade bashing" is IMO part of the problem. It tends to mean that perfectly legitimate criticism and feedback about problems is ignored instead of finding its way back to the people who can fix it.

Chris


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lorence
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 09/15/08

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5797263 - 04/13/13 06:05 PM

Quote:

I am not a Meade basher, just an unsatisfied customer that believes that if enough people make enough noise Meade will do what is necessary. In the long run everyone except for Meade's competitors will benefit.




That was a comment I made a few posts back. Are those the words of a Meade hater? Seem to me those are the words of someone who is concerned about Meade, it's problems and it's customers.



Quote:

I'm sure you think you have a good reason for your hatred of Meade. I don't care what it is.

But you seem to think you're the only one entitled to express an opinion. Get over yourself.

Perhaps you should read the post above by the poor guy with the $9,000 Paramount that doesn't work and what he's going through.

Sounds like the company selling the $900 mount is providing better service than the one with the $9,000 mount.




Thank you for your choice of an example of the sort of problems people are having.

You have just made it perfectly clear that you have no idea why some of us are unhappy with Meade.

That poor guy that you so are so willing to throw your support to is upset because Bisque wants him to fix his mount by himself.

That is exactly what Meade will not do. Do your best to understand what I just said. Meade will not lift a finger to help someone repair his own mount.

I had a faulty Main board in my LX200. I would gladly have paid Meade $300.00 for a replacement board. Meade refuses to sell anyone replacement parts. My only choice was to ship the entire telescope back and they would fix it for $400.00 plus parts plus shipping.

I eventually bought a used part. It took me less than an hour to fix the telescope and put it back on the mount. Had Meade sold me that part this conversation would not be happening.

As long as Meade refuses to sell parts these conversations will keep happening. Whether you like it or not.

By the way take another look at the Bisque thread. Tell us all how many Paramount owner jumped into the thread with a comment like

"I love my Paramount and have never a problem with it. Why do you Paramount haters keep posting here. I don't care what your problems are."

Why do Meade owners do that?

I have a problem with Meade that was created by Meade. I will continue to express my opinion and I'll do it every time someone like you tries to protect Meade's image. I will at least give you the credit for reporting a positive repair experience. Most simply respond with nothing more than blind faith.

As for who seems to think they are the only ones entitled to express an opinion it might be a good idea for you to reread your own posts.

I will get over myself when Meade changes it's policy.

By the way, just who has been telling who to shut up? Is it possible my comments struck a nerve. I guess it's true, the truth hurts the most.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ahopp
sage


Reged: 05/24/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Lorence]
      #5797652 - 04/13/13 11:09 PM

Lorence, You statement that Meade will not help a customer do a field repair is not really accurate. Meade helped me adjust the mirror lock on my 14". It required taking the mirror lock knob off and adjust the position of the housing. Do not want to get mixed up in the rest of this thread, just wanted to clear the record on one point you made...

Tony


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bilgebayModerator
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 11/06/08

Loc: Turkiye - Istanbul and Marmari...
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ahopp]
      #5797955 - 04/14/13 08:36 AM

Gentlemen, please be nice to each other and keep the discussions limited to the topic.

Thank you all.

Mounts forum moderator


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JimMo
I'd Rather Do It Myself


Reged: 01/08/07

Loc: Under the SE Michigan lightdom...
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: bilgebay]
      #5797977 - 04/14/13 09:00 AM

I have an LX80. I bought it to use as an alt/az mount for different OTA, but also wanted to dabble in some wide field photography. Meade's advertised specs for the mount made it very promising that I would be able to do this with the mount. Why make it with a polar mode if it can't hold the weight that THEY advertised or track correctly with auto guiding. I don't know if the firmware fix helped the latter but the lie about how much it would carry is a big thing.

Mike and I have not been bashers of Meade in the least. We just want Meade to at least acknowledge a design flaw and maybe do something for us with a future update of the mount. They did it with the high end users of the LX800 now LX850. I just feel like a schmuck for believing the specs would be as advertised. They should know many of us, who are vocal here on CN, are unhappy and will probably not consider another Meade product again do to their misrepresentation of the advertising and the actual specs of the mount.

I've said the mount works good in alt/az when not overloaded(20 lbs. max) and I resigned to keep the mount and make the best of it. If they don't hear from us as a group of active CN users they might have no idea there are so many disgruntled customers of the mount. I doubt it, though. But, I don't think a well composed letter with every signer personally detailing their misgivings with the mount is a bad idea at all. The more who sign on the merrier.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Paul G
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 05/08/03

Loc: Freedonia
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Lorence]
      #5798137 - 04/14/13 11:34 AM

Quote:

By the way take another look at the Bisque thread. Tell us all how many Paramount owner jumped into the thread with a comment like

"I love my Paramount and have never a problem with it. Why do you Paramount haters keep posting here. I don't care what your problems are."

Why do Meade owners do that?




Not pointing to any person in particular, just a general comment. The behavior you describe is due to cognitive dissonance. Basically, we all want to think we are wise individuals and we make good decisions. And we will bend over backward to convince ourselves of that. We all do it, it's part of how we get through life. A corollary of cognitive dissonance is that the less comfortable I feel that I have made the correct decision, the more aggressively I will deride those whose information threatens my view of the wisdom of my purchase. If I am comfortable with my purchase, naysayers will have no effect on me. That's why the SB owners didn't call the guy with trouble a hater. That's why when Tak owners were catching a bunch of flak on old S.A.A. instead of attacking those who were dissing their scopes, they had t-shirts made with Tak Yakuza, skull and crossed refractors and all. That's why AP owners don't get aggressive when people diss AP. For more info, Elliott Aronson wrote an excellent book called The Social Animal, well worth the read.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DuiA1
super member


Reged: 05/07/12

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Paul G]
      #5798331 - 04/14/13 01:42 PM

Jim, well said. +1. I'm in the exact same situation. I purchased the mount to eventually get into AP. Visual was my primary purchase for my AR6 At 23 lbs. The mount/scope damping time was terrible at 11 seconds. Sent the mount back and they repaired the slop issue. Unfortunately, the plastic gears failed once I got it back and was testing it indoors. Meade has been pretty good in repairing this mount again but to be honest, I'm losing confidence in this mount design and worry about failure once our warranty is up. I thank Mike and the rest of you who signed up to document the issues we have had for being on the bleeding edge. I believe we should be asking for some assurance that if metal gears or a change to a non spring loaded worm gear are implemented, we would get them installed at no charge. Thoughts on this approach?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: DuiA1]
      #5798399 - 04/14/13 02:01 PM

Quote:

Jim, well said. +1. I'm in the exact same situation. I purchased the mount to eventually get into AP. Visual was my primary purchase for my AR6 At 23 lbs. The mount/scope damping time was terrible at 11 seconds. Sent the mount back and they repaired the slop issue. Unfortunately, the plastic gears failed once I got it back and was testing it indoors. Meade has been pretty good in repairing this mount again but to be honest, I'm losing confidence in this mount design and worry about failure once our warranty is up. I thank Mike and the rest of you who signed up to document the issues we have had for being on the bleeding edge. I believe we should be asking for some assurance that if metal gears or a change to a non spring loaded worm gear are implemented, we would get them installed at no charge. Thoughts on this approach?




I think the approach would be a solution I'd be very happy with.

The way I see it is the problems are in 2 catagories; Performance and reliability. The tripod top plate should be redesigned and a more reliable one supplied to all users. I'd be willing to pay a reasonable amount for a gear upgrade if that were to become available. The tracking performance may be improved with new firmware but I haven't even been able to check that out with the latest release.

As with most all the individuals I've heard about that had problems, Meade has worked to fix problems as they arrive. I'd like to see an extension of the warranty period.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ur7x
professor emeritus


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Paul G]
      #5798412 - 04/14/13 02:04 PM

Quote:


Not pointing to any person in particular, just a general comment. The behavior you describe is due to cognitive dissonance. Basically, we all want to think we are wise individuals and we make good decisions. And we will bend over backward to convince ourselves of that. We all do it, it's part of how we get through life. A corollary of cognitive dissonance is that the less comfortable I feel that I have made the correct decision, the more aggressively I will deride those whose information threatens my view of the wisdom of my purchase. If I am comfortable with my purchase, naysayers will have no effect on me. That's why the SB owners didn't call the guy with trouble a hater. That's why when Tak owners were catching a bunch of flak on old S.A.A. instead of attacking those who were dissing their scopes, they had t-shirts made with Tak Yakuza, skull and crossed refractors and all. That's why AP owners don't get aggressive when people diss AP. For more info, Elliott Aronson wrote an excellent book called The Social Animal, well worth the read.




Great post, great observation. Only thing that can be added is that the "Oh no you didn't"...crowd don't get is that sometimes "thou does protest too much". The over compensation is obvious.

One of my first posts to this forum was a simple question asking for an update on LX80 delivery, if anyone had one, had used one, if we had any details as to why it was so late, and why was my local Meade dealer trying to sell me a floor model CGEM instead. "Defenders" came down on me like... well...



One of those very members here, was so off putting that at least in part because of his personal attacks I decided to buy the competitor's mount, loved it so much that I bought a second one for travel. The Meade defender who posted "This isn't the mount for you" and then a bunch of personal nastiness cost his favorite company at least two sales worth almost $3,000.

Quote:

I pre-ordered and prepaid for one of these units until someone here finally spooked me into bailing out after a 6 or 9 month wait. Whoever that was......I owe you a beer! One look at a photo of the gear train and I knew I'd made the right decision.

I'd fit into group 3 and would help if need be....but I think you are wasting your time, frankly.





My story closely matches this. I'm in group three too. I own several Meade products, mostly eyepieces, a 80mm guide scope and some imaging items. I like them all, and all have had zero issues. But I'm done with Meade. I just bought a $2,000ish SCT OTA for my "Orange" mounts, I didn't even cross shop anything "blue".

Mike, I appreciate your effort here, but lets be realistic, we know that Senior Meade Staff regularly read these threads. (We know this since they post here from time to time) Your letter will tell them nothing that they don't already know. If Meade was going to change their customer service polices and resolve the engineering issues with the LX80, they would have done so by now.

Either way, good luck


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lorence
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 09/15/08

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ahopp]
      #5798597 - 04/14/13 03:25 PM

Quote:

Lorence, You statement that Meade will not help a customer do a field repair is not really accurate. Meade helped me adjust the mirror lock on my 14". It required taking the mirror lock knob off and adjust the position of the housing. Do not want to get mixed up in the rest of this thread, just wanted to clear the record on one point you made...

Tony




Thank you for pointing that out. That was an error on my part. I want to point out a problem that exists. I have no desire to make things appear worse than they are. I simply forgot to take into account things can be repaired without needing replacement parts and I apologize to Meade and any one else who may have take offense to that part of my post.

Lorence


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JimMo
I'd Rather Do It Myself


Reged: 01/08/07

Loc: Under the SE Michigan lightdom...
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5798993 - 04/14/13 05:49 PM

Quote:



Mike, I appreciate your effort here, but lets be realistic, we know that Senior Meade Staff regularly read these threads. (We know this since they post here from time to time) Your letter will tell them nothing that they don't already know. If Meade was going to change their customer service polices and resolve the engineering issues with the LX80, they would have done so by now.





Really think so? I think they've been too busy saving their butt redesigning the LX800 to care about us pions who were early purchasers, especially if we paid $799 for the mount.

A redesign of the gears would satisfy me if my mount would be upgradable. If there was a slight cost involved I could live with that, too. Second party suppliers have been hypertuning other mounts for years but I don't know if Meade sold enough of them to make that undertaking profitable. Meade should do it. If the sales of the LX80 have slowed because of all the negatives and Meade hasn't sold too many it'd be great PR and a boon to future sales to redesign the gears and get the firmware right. I could live with not mounting more than 20lbs. for photography.

Hear that Meade? You listening? Can you hear me now?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Spacetravelerx
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5799031 - 04/14/13 06:12 PM

Lorence,

To be honest the last thing I want to do on my telescope is replace the board myself. And just for reference, I develop avionics and software for comercial aviation and satellites and systems that fly in space. After plinking down my hard earned money (and lots of it) the last thing I want to do is tinker with electronics at home.

Now I do understand there are those in this hobby who love to tinker with the guts of their telescope, and that is perfectly fine. I am not one of them. Judging from the guy's situation with the Paramount I find the customer service 100% unacceptable.

Now in the case of Meade I have seen variability regarding shipping of parts vs. shipping the entire telescope. They certainly do not have a heavy parts inventory and that is highly understandable due to cost, equipment age and warranty issues. If a product is under warranty, unless it is something minor and easy, it is far easier for Meade to just have the customer ship the entire product and cover the shipping. items under warranty being extensively serviced by customers is a recipe for disaster. Almost all major companies do not allow it.

Anyways, back to the LX80 near as I can tell from all the reading on the boards and some inferring:
-- The concept of the LX80 is 110% wonderful!
-- It does not 100% meet the specs
-- Those who do not push the limits are very happy with it.
-- Some tinkerers are happy with it.
-- Those pushing the specs on it are very unhappy with it.
-- Meade is likely seeing all these posts
-- Meade is likely stomping on the subcontractor for some of the *BLEEP* manufacturing issues and the designer for some design flaws and themselves for not vetting this out a tad better and being realistic on its capabilities.
-- Instead of doing the LX800->LX850 route they are likely very quietly improving/fixing the LX80 with new revs.
-- Whoever can aftermarket the gears will make some dough.

I have an LX850 coming in very soon. I wonder though if I will also get the LX80 for more portable moments. For example I have a full up beast 10" LX200 with super wedge, but also have an ETX125. (Both have worked fine for many years, fyi). Yes, the LX850 can take smaller OTAs, but I still like the concept of the LX80.

Who knows.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lorence
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 09/15/08

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #5799218 - 04/14/13 07:41 PM

Quote:

Lorence, To be honest the last thing I want to do on my telescope is replace the board myself. And just for reference, I develop avionics and software for comercial aviation and satellites and systems that fly in space. After plinking down my hard earned money (and lots of it) the last thing I want to do is tinker with electronics at home.




The readers of this forum all owe you a debt of gratitude. You have demonstrated the only way to shut me up.

You responded to the subject of replacement parts with your opinion about replacement parts. That seldom happens in these discussions.


Quote:

Judging from the guy's situation with the Paramount I find the customer service 100% unacceptable.

Now in the case of Meade I have seen variability regarding shipping of parts vs. shipping the entire telescope. They certainly do not have a heavy parts inventory and that is highly understandable due to cost, equipment age and warranty issues. If a product is under warranty, unless it is something minor and easy, it is far easier for Meade to just have the customer ship the entire product and cover the shipping. items under warranty being extensively serviced by customers is a recipe for disaster. Almost all major companies do not allow it.




Paramount is 100% wrong. Warranty is warranty. Send it back for repair at Paramount's (or Meade's) expense. However, it is also totally acceptable for the customer to do the repair himself, if he want's to do it. I hope this is an issue caused by by some less than competent weekend staff and when everyone shows up on Monday morning the problem will be resolved.


Quote:


-- Whoever can aftermarket the gears will make some dough.





The original LX200 GPS mounts used plastic spur gears. Peterson Engineering made replacement metal gears that were later adopted by Meade. Those who fail to learn from their mistakes are destined to repeat them.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jimb1001
sage
*****

Reged: 11/14/09

Loc: Florida
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Lorence]
      #5799220 - 04/14/13 07:42 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I am not a Meade basher, just an unsatisfied customer that believes that if enough people make enough noise Meade will do what is necessary. In the long run everyone except for Meade's competitors will benefit.





That was a comment I made a few posts back. Are those the words of a Meade hater? Seem to me those are the words of someone who is concerned about Meade, it's problems and it's customers.



Quote:

I'm sure you think you have a good reason for your hatred of Meade. I don't care what it is.

But you seem to think you're the only one entitled to express an opinion. Get over yourself.

Perhaps you should read the post above by the poor guy with the $9,000 Paramount that doesn't work and what he's going through.

Sounds like the company selling the $900 mount is providing better service than the one with the $9,000 mount.




Thank you for your choice of an example of the sort of problems people are having.

You have just made it perfectly clear that you have no idea why some of us are unhappy with Meade.

That poor guy that you so are so willing to throw your support to is upset because Bisque wants him to fix his mount by himself.

That is exactly what Meade will not do. Do your best to understand what I just said. Meade will not lift a finger to help someone repair his own mount.

I had a faulty Main board in my LX200. I would gladly have paid Meade $300.00 for a replacement board. Meade refuses to sell anyone replacement parts. My only choice was to ship the entire telescope back and they would fix it for $400.00 plus parts plus shipping.

I eventually bought a used part. It took me less than an hour to fix the telescope and put it back on the mount. Had Meade sold me that part this conversation would not be happening.

As long as Meade refuses to sell parts these conversations will keep happening. Whether you like it or not.

By the way take another look at the Bisque thread. Tell us all how many Paramount owner jumped into the thread with a comment like

"I love my Paramount and have never a problem with it. Why do you Paramount haters keep posting here. I don't care what your problems are."

Why do Meade owners do that?

I have a problem with Meade that was created by Meade. I will continue to express my opinion and I'll do it every time someone like you tries to protect Meade's image. I will at least give you the credit for reporting a positive repair experience. Most simply respond with nothing more than blind faith.

As for who seems to think they are the only ones entitled to express an opinion it might be a good idea for you to reread your own posts.

I will get over myself when Meade changes it's policy.

By the way, just who has been telling who to shut up? Is it possible my comments struck a nerve. I guess it's true, the truth hurts the most.




OK, now I understand why you hate Meade. You bought one of their products and they wouldn't sell you a part to fix it.

I guess you didn't know that when you bought it. Meade let you think you could buy any part of their product whenever you wanted it.

That's certainly a good reason for repeatedly posting you would never buy from them, again. Of course, it would simply be repetitive explaining in each post why their customer service is awful.

Let me explain something about this hobby that may be useful to you and others. New products from Meade and Celestron often have teething issues and they don't make it easy to buy parts to build your scopes and mounts.

I completely agree that you should never buy from Meade because of their spare parts retailing policy.

I'm glad you cleared up your reasoning for me.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Stew57
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5799561 - 04/14/13 10:20 PM

How about a lowly tripod spreader. I lost the spreader for my 884 and they said sorry buy another tripod. I use the one off my CGEM for the 884 tripod.

The cheapest tools I buy in my trade come with a parts list. I may find it cheaper and easier to replace them but I can buy the parts. I still don't know why the astro biz is so different.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
herrointment
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 03/12/11

Loc: North of Hwy. 64
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Stew57]
      #5799677 - 04/14/13 11:55 PM

Ah, so how's the letter comin' along, Mike?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
EFT
Vendor - Deep Space Products
*****

Reged: 05/07/07

Loc: Phoenix, AZ
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: JimMo]
      #5800250 - 04/15/13 11:09 AM

Quote:

Second party suppliers have been hypertuning other mounts for years but I don't know if Meade sold enough of them to make that undertaking profitable.




If I thought there was anything that I could do with this mount I would be all over it. It's not the numbers, it's the possibility of improvement.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JimMo
I'd Rather Do It Myself


Reged: 01/08/07

Loc: Under the SE Michigan lightdom...
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: EFT]
      #5800384 - 04/15/13 12:10 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Second party suppliers have been hypertuning other mounts for years but I don't know if Meade sold enough of them to make that undertaking profitable.




If I thought there was anything that I could do with this mount I would be all over it. It's not the numbers, it's the possibility of improvement.




Hi Ed,

That's too bad. Do you have any idea how many LX80 mounts are out there? Although my mount does what I want in alt/az I am very disappointed I won't be trying any astro photography with it. I guess Meade's been screwing the little guy for years with their dept. store telescopes, I just feel plunking down your money for something that doesn't work is not very beneficial to future business. Unless something remarkable happens I'll never consider a Meade purchase again.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bilgebayModerator
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 11/06/08

Loc: Turkiye - Istanbul and Marmari...
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: JimMo]
      #5800404 - 04/15/13 12:18 PM

Gentlemen, this thread has gone off the track and turned into vendor bashing. We are locking it for the time being.

When we unlock, please keep your discussions limited to the subject line.

Thank you for your understanding.

Mounts forum moderator


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Skylook123
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/30/05

Loc: Tucson, AZ
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: bilgebay]
      #5801785 - 04/15/13 11:39 PM

Regarding a letter to Meade, staying on topic. I have had several Meade instruments over the last 18 years, not the best, not the worst, and on the two occasions I needed some help, they were highly satisfactory and helpful. But there seems to be an assumption that Meade are a group of cave dwellers with not a whit of idea about the real world performance of their product, nor their reputation. Shortly after the product is out in the world, they are aware. And they choose to continue in their processes. Occasionally the result has a catastrophic effect on the bottom line, but generally it becomes a bit ahead of break even.

If it helps the psyche to vent alone, or in a group, go right ahead but they know and accept the environment. And now and again, totally misjudge reality of the product's performance potential. They certainly are not unaware of the performance of their product after its release, nor are they unaware of the reputation and opinion. It's a business model that is walking a tightrope and has the enterprise on the brink.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Skylook123]
      #5801825 - 04/16/13 12:21 AM

Quote:

If it helps the psyche to vent alone, or in a group, go right ahead...




Jim,

Thanks for that!

Mike

Edited by Mkofski (04/16/13 12:22 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rockman67
newbie
*****

Reged: 05/14/09

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5802457 - 04/16/13 12:16 PM

Thank you for the very informational post...

I have been looking to upgrade my mount for the past few months.

I have seen the LX80 advertise and looking forward forward to own a LX80 for the capabilities for the price range. But now looking at the issues posted in different forums then I will stay away from the LX80 and shop somewhere else.

I was thinking of putting my C8 on the LX80 and my guiding scope and DSLR camera but due to the review on the weight/gear issue I better not.

I do own few Meade products and I've been very happy with them... but I just don't want to spend the money and get a lemon... I'll rather wait.

Thank you


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: rockman67]
      #5802492 - 04/16/13 12:30 PM

Quote:

Thank you for the very informational post...

I have been looking to upgrade my mount for the past few months.

I have seen the LX80 advertise and looking forward forward to own a LX80 for the capabilities for the price range. But now looking at the issues posted in different forums then I will stay away from the LX80 and shop somewhere else.

I was thinking of putting my C8 on the LX80 and my guiding scope and DSLR camera but due to the review on the weight/gear issue I better not.

I do own few Meade products and I've been very happy with them... but I just don't want to spend the money and get a lemon... I'll rather wait.

Thank you




Rockman67,

I have used a C8 with a finder and 80mm refractor in Polar mode and not had problems with the mount. Have not had time to try out AP with that setup yet. I hope to give it a try with the newest firmware soon.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
highertheflyer
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 07/08/05

Loc: Aledo, Texas
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5804679 - 04/17/13 02:36 PM

I am reluctant to read the previous posts, yet I received a ETX80 Lemon but worry of Meades survival.
I purchased the LX80 mount for Xmas Eve, arriving on Dec 17, 2012.
Opened on Xmas day Dec 25th, 2012.
Since then, this LX80 has never-to-ever venture outside in temp/dewpoint elements, Ever.
Feb, it failed and yes, after the 30 day return policy!
Returned to Meade for repair, to Mexico in March.
April came to me as renewed, a mount to me repaired.
The second time the LX80 was given it's 12 volt battery power, it failed!!!!
This time a gear motor became unloosed and an axis motor ran wildly.
Meade said to return the repaired defect.
I sent the total package: The Meade LX80 and it's tripod, Two boxes, the following day.
Meade received two packages for the total purchased assemblies with the original December 17th order.
And now Meade says that the "New Scope" will take 2 to 3 months to send !!!
I do hurt for Meade.
I purchased the mount to use at star parties and the star parties and money I sent to them is in limbo.
Had a friend say to me that Meade needs to go to China to fix this problem.
So tell me Meade that you will send to me a workable LX80, or tell me to go to China now!?
And simply tell me it's a thousand dollars down the drain?
Again, my hopes for Meades future is
my joy,
Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
highertheflyer
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 07/08/05

Loc: Aledo, Texas
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: highertheflyer]
      #5805422 - 04/17/13 08:36 PM

As I've newly posted my troubles with Meade, and towards this thread, I've found Meade to have been hopefully very reliable and available.
Meade is alert towards telephone calls for discussions with just two or three rings!
This I like.
My thoughts are that Meade is ready to receive and to rectify the troubles given to them in the past.
And for this I stay with them..!!!
I've had the 1990's with an ETX 60 and wish to stay with them today,
And as an old USA airline pilot, I constantly tell Meade to hang in there for our USA sake, be it from Mexico or our nation.
I applaud them for their efforts and an old airline pilot free from the strife of a bankrupt airline,I hope for Meades remedy and there success today.
Please no slings and arrows.
Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ky_Kat_Eyes
newbie


Reged: 10/23/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5808242 - 04/19/13 07:36 AM

You can put me into catagory#3. I own a 10" Schdmit Newtonian LXD75 OTA.....I had looked at this mount for almost a yr, but decided to go with a Celestron CG-5 Advanced, mainly because of all the horror stories I have heard about this mount, the price seemed Ok, and all would have matched up brand-wise, but being a Celestron Fan I chose the mount I have now....and glad I did. If I can figure out how to pm you here, will gladly send my email addy, you can add me to the list as well.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Ky_Kat_Eyes]
      #5808620 - 04/19/13 12:55 PM

After 11 days I have 18 responses. I'm going to wait another week and send in whatever I have. For those that contacted me to participate, I'll send out what I have to you first so you can edit your comments if necessary.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JimMo
I'd Rather Do It Myself


Reged: 01/08/07

Loc: Under the SE Michigan lightdom...
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5808789 - 04/19/13 02:22 PM

Thanks for doing this Mike. No matter what Meade's response is I appreciate your work here. If they ever really fix the mount (LX85?) it would be nice if there could be some way to give an upgrade us duped LX80 buyers. Meade could either ignore us and probably lose any future business from us or they could try to make our bad situation a little better, their choice.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
kdill2160
journeyman
*****

Reged: 04/02/13

Loc: McHenry County IL
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5811521 - 04/20/13 06:43 PM

I looked at the lx80, I've been a Meade'only owner since the 80s and my 2045, I read as many reviews as possible, decided against it due to bad reviews, bending, breaking parts etc...

In the end I'm no longer a Meade only owner and have a new mount...

JMO... Ken


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: kdill2160]
      #5811628 - 04/20/13 07:39 PM

Thanks Ken! I've got 19 individuals for the letter to Meade now.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daud
sage


Reged: 08/05/06

Loc: AZ, Scottsdale
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5813789 - 04/21/13 06:39 PM

Quote:

Thanks Ken! I've got 19 individuals for the letter to Meade now.

Mike




There is a convert #20:
wild slewing


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
thesubwaypusher
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 07/08/04

Loc: New York City
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jrcrilly]
      #5813827 - 04/21/13 06:52 PM

Quote:

A quick note to the original poster:
Your letter is one letter and will carry the weight of, at most, one letter. When you claim to also speak for others, the recipient is very likely to either (a) doubt that you do speak for others, or (b) decide that since the others didn't feel strongly enough to write for themselves they don't really care and can be discounted. Your message would have more credibility and greater effect if your individual experiences are described.




I am passionate about my LX200s. I love them. There, got that out of the way!

John is right on with this. Once you mention others, it just sounds like sour grapes. I don't have the patience to read this entire thread, so I'm sorry if you already settled on this, but why don't you (OP) just tell (ask) everyone to write individual letters?

Good luck, Chris


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: thesubwaypusher]
      #5813864 - 04/21/13 07:10 PM

Quote:

Quote:

A quick note to the original poster:
Your letter is one letter and will carry the weight of, at most, one letter. When you claim to also speak for others, the recipient is very likely to either (a) doubt that you do speak for others, or (b) decide that since the others didn't feel strongly enough to write for themselves they don't really care and can be discounted. Your message would have more credibility and greater effect if your individual experiences are described.




I am passionate about my LX200s. I love them. There, got that out of the way!

John is right on with this. Once you mention others, it just sounds like sour grapes. I don't have the patience to read this entire thread, so I'm sorry if you already settled on this, but why don't you (OP) just tell (ask) everyone to write individual letters?

Good luck, Chris




Thanks Chris. I don't think I agree with your opinion of a single letter from multiple individuals. I also don't expect a single letter or 20 individual letters to make any real difference. More a way to vent than anything. If it dose any good, all the better.

Mike (OP)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Daud]
      #5813869 - 04/21/13 07:11 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Thanks Ken! I've got 19 individuals for the letter to Meade now.

Mike




There is a convert #20:
wild slewing




Thanks David. I'll PM him to see if h wants in.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ur7x
professor emeritus


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5814130 - 04/21/13 09:39 PM

I hope you post a version of your letter (with all of the names removed perhaps) here for us all to see/learn from.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5814183 - 04/21/13 09:51 PM

Late next week I'll get the preliminary letter out to all the individuals involved. After I get everyone's Ok, I'll send it to 2 different contact in Meade. I didn't think about posting it here, but that wouldn't be a problem with me.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
R L Harris
member


Reged: 01/31/13

Loc: Independence,MO
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5814423 - 04/21/13 11:46 PM

Sounds great can't wait to read it!
If they have positive response to issues then
I will be leaning back to getting one with 10" sct!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cn register 5
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 12/26/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: R L Harris]
      #5814623 - 04/22/13 04:06 AM

I did something similar many years ago when the NS11GPS scopes had an altaz tracking problem. We sent an email, with multiple named people, to a Celestron VP.

We had a response within the week, with a fix and they provided everyone who asked with a free programming cable.

The CGEM people seem to have had a similar response to the dec cogging issue, and it looks as if a fix will be out fairly soon.

So it's worth doing and I wish you luck.

Chris


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: cn register 5]
      #5815362 - 04/22/13 02:09 PM

Chris,

Thanks for the info. It is good to hear that something like this has worked before. At worse, it can't hurt.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
R L Harris
member


Reged: 01/31/13

Loc: Independence,MO
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5829721 - 04/29/13 09:15 AM

So whats up with the post going cold! LOL

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ur7x
professor emeritus


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: R L Harris]
      #5829763 - 04/29/13 09:46 AM

Its not cold, we are just waiting to see the letter.

You know what it really interesting... Mike put out a post before he bough this mount trying to find 10 people who liked this mount and who were using it for AP... He never did get to 10... It was more like AP -> 0... Like the mount -> 6....

But put up a thread saying lets find 20 people frustrated by this mount and he had his quota in less than 2 weeks. That alone should be loud and clear to Meade that they need to change their business practices.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jimb1001
sage
*****

Reged: 11/14/09

Loc: Florida
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5830175 - 04/29/13 01:12 PM

Quote:

Its not cold, we are just waiting to see the letter.

You know what it really interesting... Mike put out a post before he bough this mount trying to find 10 people who liked this mount and who were using it for AP... He never did get to 10... It was more like AP -> 0... Like the mount -> 6....

But put up a thread saying lets find 20 people frustrated by this mount and he had his quota in less than 2 weeks. That alone should be loud and clear to Meade that they need to change their business practices.




Is it news that unhappy people are always willing to share their complaints on the internet while satisfied customers generally don't say much?

If you want to bash Meade with statistics at least use ones that make sense.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ur7x
professor emeritus


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5830336 - 04/29/13 02:15 PM

Not bashing Meade at all. The proposed letter is about trying to help Meade see that they need to rethink their business practices and the approach on this mount. Only Meade has the detailed statistics about mount failures and warranty returns and they aren't sharing. So speculating that this mount is the cats whiskers based on a lack of data is just as bad as chucking it under the bus with equally thin data.

But you have to admit that at a certain point it is easy to see a trend in what is going on. How many people discovered that this mount initially has serious tracking problems in EQ mode? All who tried. How many people have discovered that this mount struggles to work at even half the advertised weight capacity... All who tried. How many people have successfully used the mount to perform even basic AP. Based on the number of photos published, even by Meade themselves... Very few, if any. How many people have had the Tripod mound top snap off a leg? at least 4 that we know of... or in other words 4 too many.

Sure, we have only a couple of data points when it comes to this mount. But even Eratosthenes managed to figure out the diameter of the earth with only two data points.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
herrointment
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 03/12/11

Loc: North of Hwy. 64
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5830602 - 04/29/13 04:00 PM

I remember that after the delays and about a month or so prior to beginning actual shipping a vendor held a special event, let's call it food related, and this mount was there. But they wouldn't power it up. Salesman for Meade (I felt sorry for him) talked up the mount for the video that was posted on the net.

I thought it was pretty clear what was going on but as a business and as a consumer decisions have to be made and you try to live with the results. "For better or for worse" come to mind.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jimb1001
sage
*****

Reged: 11/14/09

Loc: Florida
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5831168 - 04/29/13 09:41 PM

Quote:

Not bashing Meade at all. The proposed letter is about trying to help Meade see that they need to rethink their business practices and the approach on this mount. Only Meade has the detailed statistics about mount failures and warranty returns and they aren't sharing. So speculating that this mount is the cats whiskers based on a lack of data is just as bad as chucking it under the bus with equally thin data.

But you have to admit that at a certain point it is easy to see a trend in what is going on. How many people discovered that this mount initially has serious tracking problems in EQ mode? All who tried. How many people have discovered that this mount struggles to work at even half the advertised weight capacity... All who tried. How many people have successfully used the mount to perform even basic AP. Based on the number of photos published, even by Meade themselves... Very few, if any. How many people have had the Tripod mound top snap off a leg? at least 4 that we know of... or in other words 4 too many.

Sure, we have only a couple of data points when it comes to this mount. But even Eratosthenes managed to figure out the diameter of the earth with only two data points.




Maybe, but you're not him.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5831349 - 04/29/13 11:30 PM

Well, tonight I was going to get PMs put to all the individuals that are going to be in the letter/email to Meade... but it is clear and not too cold so I think I'm going out and use the LX80 rather than talk about it! It has been a LONG time since I just enjoyed being out, I'm taking advantage of it.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5831354 - 04/29/13 11:34 PM

Quote:

Its not cold, we are just waiting to see the letter.

You know what it really interesting... Mike put out a post before he bough this mount trying to find 10 people who liked this mount and who were using it for AP... He never did get to 10... It was more like AP -> 0... Like the mount -> 6....

But put up a thread saying lets find 20 people frustrated by this mount and he had his quota in less than 2 weeks. That alone should be loud and clear to Meade that they need to change their business practices.




My search for 10 happy users was after I took delivery but while I was deciding if I should send it back or not. I think I only got 6 or 7 responses vs. 19 on the "I'm not a happy camper" list. But then again unhappy people are more apt to voice opinions than happy ones so this is about what I expected.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DuiA1
super member


Reged: 05/07/12

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5831370 - 04/29/13 11:46 PM

Enjoy the clear night Mike. They are few and far between. This hobby is frustrating at times when things don't work as they are supposed to...a clear night under the stars usually makes things right.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5831413 - 04/30/13 12:28 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Not bashing Meade at all. The proposed letter is about trying to help Meade see that they need to rethink their business practices and the approach on this mount. Only Meade has the detailed statistics about mount failures and warranty returns and they aren't sharing. So speculating that this mount is the cats whiskers based on a lack of data is just as bad as chucking it under the bus with equally thin data.

But you have to admit that at a certain point it is easy to see a trend in what is going on. How many people discovered that this mount initially has serious tracking problems in EQ mode? All who tried. How many people have discovered that this mount struggles to work at even half the advertised weight capacity... All who tried. How many people have successfully used the mount to perform even basic AP. Based on the number of photos published, even by Meade themselves... Very few, if any. How many people have had the Tripod mound top snap off a leg? at least 4 that we know of... or in other words 4 too many.

Sure, we have only a couple of data points when it comes to this mount. But even Eratosthenes managed to figure out the diameter of the earth with only two data points.




Maybe, but you're not him.




I don't really think we need a statistically valid sample to see a problem with the tripod if 4 or 5 have failed in the same way. The tracking problems that have been reported worry me but it is the tripod reliability that is my biggest concern. That is something that could effect any user at anytime. If your tripod fails after the warranty period how much will the replacement cost?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jimb1001
sage
*****

Reged: 11/14/09

Loc: Florida
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5831486 - 04/30/13 01:52 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Not bashing Meade at all. The proposed letter is about trying to help Meade see that they need to rethink their business practices and the approach on this mount. Only Meade has the detailed statistics about mount failures and warranty returns and they aren't sharing. So speculating that this mount is the cats whiskers based on a lack of data is just as bad as chucking it under the bus with equally thin data.

But you have to admit that at a certain point it is easy to see a trend in what is going on. How many people discovered that this mount initially has serious tracking problems in EQ mode? All who tried. How many people have discovered that this mount struggles to work at even half the advertised weight capacity... All who tried. How many people have successfully used the mount to perform even basic AP. Based on the number of photos published, even by Meade themselves... Very few, if any. How many people have had the Tripod mound top snap off a leg? at least 4 that we know of... or in other words 4 too many.

Sure, we have only a couple of data points when it comes to this mount. But even Eratosthenes managed to figure out the diameter of the earth with only two data points.




Maybe, but you're not him.






I don't really think we need a statistically valid sample to see a problem with the tripod if 4 or 5 have failed in the same way. The tracking problems that have been reported worry me but it is the tripod reliability that is my biggest concern. That is something that could effect any user at anytime. If your tripod fails after the warranty period how much will the replacement cost?




So what you really want is for Meade to warranty the tripod for some indefinite period of time in case a problem occurs more than a year from when you bought the mount.

And you think this is only fair because 4 or 5 people have had tripods fail during the warranty period this might be caused by a design flaw. Or it might be caused by some other reason, like dragging the mount across the lawn by one leg or something else entirely.

If you can get that concession out of Meade on a $900 mount I'll take my hat off to you.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RogerRZ
Whatta you lookin' at?
*****

Reged: 01/09/06

Loc: West Collette, NB, Canada
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5831600 - 04/30/13 05:40 AM

Might be a design flaw? How many reports of EQ6/CGEM/CGE/Sirius breaking tripods have we had over all the years they were produced?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5831742 - 04/30/13 08:13 AM

Quote:



Maybe, but you're not him.




He's not. But another thing that is obvious is that the poor LX80 did not live up to its advance press. Not even close.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ur7x
professor emeritus


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5832157 - 04/30/13 12:22 PM

As far as I can tell, that's not what he is asking. What I think he is attempting to do is to bring to Meade's attention that there seems to be a design flaw with their LX80 tripod. And he is looking for Meade to resolve this issue.

You and I can both agree that this effort on a $800 mount is probably futile, but still hats off to him for attempting to not only bring this to Meade's attention, but to try and convince them that this is significant enough to warrant a redesign/fix.

And if legs snapping off of tripods is common to all telescope mount manufactures... What is it about Meade customers that make them so vocal about this issue?

Funny how CG5 customer never seem to complain about legs snapping off, but they are sure quick to complain about loose wire connectors and/or cheap on/off switches... CGEM customers also never seem to complain about legs snapping off, but they are sure worked up about some Dec "cogging" thing or some 8/3 error...

Again it does not take a rocket scientist to see obvious patterns here. The truth here is that anyone who is paying even the slightest amount of attention knows pretty quick what the likely strong and weak points are for any and every mount on the market.

Its for each of us as customers to decide what is important to us... On my CGEM for example, I knew before I bought it that it is a heavy beast, that is a bear to set up and take down. And out of the box they are likely to have widely variable RA tacking errors and don't expect them to guide in the Dec axis at all.

You can compare that list of issues with the LX80's list: good luck having the mount hold up half of its rated capacity, EQ guiding seems to still be an issue, and the legs can (and have) snap off if the mount is bumped, or twisted during set up...

On the continuum of
Annoyance -> Disappointment -> Deal Breaker...
I would bet for most customers "Legs breaking off" is a bit of a deal breaker. IMO it would be in Meades best interest to figure out why and work fast to resolve this.

Or not.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gmartin02
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 04/11/05

Loc: Santa Clarita, CA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5832283 - 04/30/13 01:03 PM

Quote:

... CGEM customers also never seem to complain about legs snapping off, but they are sure worked up about some Dec "cogging" thing or some 8/3 error...

Its for each of us as customers to decide what is important to us... On my CGEM for example, I knew before I bought it that it is a heavy beast, that is a bear to set up and take down. And out of the box they are likely to have widely variable RA tacking errors and don't expect them to guide in the Dec axis at all.




Note: The Dec "cogging" issue for the CGEM has been fixed (the motor control firmware upgrade is still in beta). I did another 90 minute guided imaging run last night with the latest beta firmware release. Perfectly round stars in images, Dec RMS guiding error of 0.61 arc seconds over the 90 minutes.

You can join TeamCelestron as a public beta tester and use the beta firmware to guide your CGEM mount with similar results.

As for "widely variable RA tacking errors" on the CGEM - that is what guiding is for - to minimize tracking errors. The RA tracking errors on the CGEM are smooth enough that they can be easily guided out - from multiple logs from multiple mounts posted on TeamCelestron the average RA RMS guiding error is about 0.70 arc seconds - plenty good enough for imaging on a mount in that price class.

Greg


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ur7x
professor emeritus


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: gmartin02]
      #5832461 - 04/30/13 02:24 PM

True, and for me, both of those (now looking to be resolved) issues were way over on the "meh" side of the "scale of concern"

I agree that I can guide out any RA error and if the Polar alignment is bang on you can minimize Dec problems too. Of course with V31.15 getting close it looks like the cog problem is history...(yes I'm a member on the Beta test group and I have the new code)

But given the option, I think just anyone would rather have a mount that is in need of minor software patch vs one that has legs snap off.

Back to the Meade letter, I still don't think it will change anything, but I still support the effort and I wish the OP the best of luck and a tip of my hat.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gmartin02
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 04/11/05

Loc: Santa Clarita, CA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5832498 - 04/30/13 02:40 PM

Quote:

But given the option, I think just anyone would rather have a mount that is in need of minor software patch vs on that has legs snap off.



+1


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gmartin02
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 04/11/05

Loc: Santa Clarita, CA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: ur7x]
      #5832528 - 04/30/13 02:54 PM

Quote:

Back to the Meade letter, I still don't think it will change anything, but I still support the effort and I wish the OP the best of luck and a tip of my hat.




I also wish the OP and the other LX80 owners that have had problems the best of luck. I almost pre-ordered the LX80 early last year but decided to get the CGEM instead when it was on sale.

Perhaps the Meade letter will help. Several of us beta testers on TeamCelestron (maybe yourself included) were getting very impatient after several months of waiting for the firmware fix, so we wrote our own (e)letters to Celestron management in mid March, and about 2 weeks after we started sending them we got the long awaited beta firmware update (and 3 more beta updates since then).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
WadeH237
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 02/24/07

Loc: Snohomish, WA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: gmartin02]
      #5832872 - 04/30/13 05:50 PM

I don't have an LX80 and don't see any mount of that size and type in my future, so the tripod issue doesn't affect me.

But if there really is a design defect that causes the legs to fail such that the system collapses, this is not an inconvenience or a nuisance. A fully loaded LX80 collapsing without warning is a dangerous situation and someone could get hurt.

Instead of "telescope", try saying it with other types of products. The storage shelf had a defect that could cause it to collapse without warning in typical usage scenarios. The TV wall mount had a defect that could cause it to collapse without warning in typical usage scenarios. The folding chair had a design defect that could cause it to collapse without warning in typical usage scenarios.

If there was data to indicated a serious design defect (and I don't think that the anecdotal evidence here is necessarily sufficient, but it is suspicious), I would expect a product safety recall.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Orboos
member


Reged: 12/18/10

Loc: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: WadeH237]
      #5841391 - 05/05/13 10:18 AM

Long story short : I bought LX80 with 10" OTA back in September '12, the mount died on the very 1st alignment. Sent it back to Meade, after 3 months got replacment. Total weight of the 10" is about 35 lbs (with all accessories) To balance it I added third counter weigt, and I don't see any problems with the mount handling it. I use it mostly in alt/az setup, tried it few times in eq. mode, again did not see any problems. Provided it is well balanced.
But... and there is a big "but". I know my load on the mount is big, and according to many owners it is way overloaded. The slightest possibility that one day (or night) the tripod might fail and what's on it crushing down on ground or even worse on my head simply scares daylights out of me. Personally I'm very skeptical about Meade doing anything about it. IMO (after warranty is out) we are stuck with it the way it is.
So I decided to cut the loss, bite the bullet and sell it, it's sold.
Hats off to the OP for the effort his making, however I don't think it will help or change anything.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
khill444444
newbie


Reged: 03/06/13

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Paul G]
      #5853583 - 05/11/13 11:12 AM

Actually, I tend to see all the knee-jerk defenses of Meade as Stockholm Syndrome more than cognitive dissonance (especially for the Meade stuff costing several thousand dollars), but I get your point.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: khill444444]
      #5853964 - 05/11/13 02:55 PM

The most important point here is this letter is an expression of good faith.

No class action lawsuits or character assassination campaigns have been proposed; just rounding up what the problems are and asking them to be addressed however Meade sees fit. A different tripod top casting, maybe a mod kit for the mount, and all would be well. Again, the people doing this have spent the better part of a year working on these mounts and learning everything they could about their behaviors then enlisting a global talent base to work on possible solutions before determining user actions with the existing mount simply are unable to resolve built-in deficiencies which prevent the mount from meeting its advertized performance, prevent it from carrying its rated load, and cause structural failures.

It is quit peculiar how even with this state of affairs as well documented as anything gets in this world, anyone would argue the authors should not try. They're doing he right thing. Meade reciprocated in the case of the LX800.

Expecting people to eiher reject the LX80 wholesale or accept a flawed product rather than engaging the manufacturer doesn't make sense when they haven't had a chance to try. If, and only if, Meade decides to ignore the issues and continue issuing a product when it is known by all involved to be flawed would it make sense not to try.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5854028 - 05/11/13 03:42 PM

Quote:

The most important point here is this letter is an expression of good faith.

No class action lawsuits or character assassination campaigns have been proposed; just rounding up what the problems are and asking them to be addressed however Meade sees fit. A different tripod top casting, maybe a mod kit for the mount, and all would be well. Again, the people doing this have spent the better part of a year working on these mounts and learning everything they could about their behaviors then enlisting a global talent base to work on possible solutions before determining user actions with the existing mount simply are unable to resolve built-in deficiencies which prevent the mount from meeting its advertized performance, prevent it from carrying its rated load, and cause structural failures.

It is quit peculiar how even with this state of affairs as well documented as anything gets in this world, anyone would argue the authors should not try. They're doing he right thing. Meade reciprocated in the case of the LX800.

Expecting people to eiher reject the LX80 wholesale or accept a flawed product rather than engaging the manufacturer doesn't make sense when they haven't had a chance to try. If, and only if, Meade decides to ignore the issues and continue issuing a product when it is known by all involved to be flawed would it make sense not to try.

-Rich




Rich,

Very well stated, thanks! I want everyone to know that, even though I'm running at least 2 weeks longer than I had planned, I have not dropped the ball completely. Life just got in the way! Hopefully I'll get everything finished up this weekend.

By the way, I had to ship my mount back to Meade early this week. It is not moving properly in RA. Looks like it will be mid June before I get the mount back for any additional work with it. I think I need to buy another mount to fill in. Maybe one hat has had success with wide field AP.


Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cn register 5
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 12/26/12

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5854067 - 05/11/13 04:11 PM

Must resist temptation to suggest getting an AVX to fill in while the LX80 is fixed

Chris


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: cn register 5]
      #5854191 - 05/11/13 05:48 PM

Quote:

Must resist temptation to suggest getting an AVX to fill in while the LX80 is fixed

Chris




Chris,

I don't have any trouble with Celestron or the AVX except there have been a lot of HC problems reported so far. I'm not a "Meade for Meade's sake" user. That is one of the mounts I've been thinking about. The AVX and the IOptron EQZ25 or a used CG5. The AVX and EQZ25 are in the same price range - which unfortunately is more than I need to spend right now. I guess it's time to sell a few items I'm not using.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DuiA1
super member


Reged: 05/07/12

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5854243 - 05/11/13 06:30 PM

Mike, sorry to hear that but I'm in the same boat. Got my mount back last week and same thing...just kept on spinning in az. Very frustrating. Meade has been good and are shipping me a new one Monday. I've barely got to use this mount since last July. I'm just wanting to try some basic ap with my tv85 and basic visual with my ar6. Agree with other posts. Would be great if Meade offered a fix for the tripod head and better gears (metal) for us beta testers when and if they change the design. Maybe also fix the spring loaded worm. Or a discount on parts. Thoughts?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gregk
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 11/19/06

Loc: San Tan Valley, Az,
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5854285 - 05/11/13 07:16 PM

Well Maybe this an an opportunity for me to get an LX80 for my pier that will be finished in a few weeks.

I need this mount for AP and my payload with be no more than 20lbs


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Gregk]
      #5854303 - 05/11/13 07:42 PM

Mike....

OPT has the CG5-GT on sale (close out ??) for $549.
I believe i heard that they have maybe about 100 available.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Gregk]
      #5854391 - 05/11/13 09:03 PM

Quote:

Well Maybe this an an opportunity for me to get an LX80 for my pier that will be finished in a few weeks.

I need this mount for AP and my payload with be no more than 20lbs




Greg,

The pier will solve the possible tripodroblem but I don't believe anyone has posted any good pictures yet. Very sorry to the photographer if I'm wrong. From what I've seen, a CG5 would be a better choice for about $400 less or the AVX for $200 less.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: dmdouglass]
      #5854402 - 05/11/13 09:11 PM

Quote:

Mike....

OPT has the CG5-GT on sale (close out ??) for $549.
I believe i heard that they have maybe about 100 available.




David,

Thanks... I've been thinking seriously about the IOptron EQZ25 because of the total weight. I'd like to be able to carry the tripod, mount and scopes out of my shop to the yard (50 to 100 yards). Even if everything worked great on the LX80, at about 80 pounds, I can't do that. I'm just getting too old! I could almost do it with a CG5 I had last year so that is an option and used ones are going for about $400.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gregk
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 11/19/06

Loc: San Tan Valley, Az,
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5857398 - 05/13/13 12:32 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Well Maybe this an an opportunity for me to get an LX80 for my pier that will be finished in a few weeks.

I need this mount for AP and my payload with be no more than 20lbs




Greg,

The pier will solve the possible tripodroblem but I don't believe anyone has posted any good pictures yet. Very sorry to the photographer if I'm wrong. From what I've seen, a CG5 would be a better choice for about $400 less or the AVX for $200 less.

Mike





I guess I'll stick with my current Sirius Mount from Orion. Although was entertaining the G-11 but will see how well
the Pier/Sirius combo will do

Thanks

Greg


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5858489 - 05/13/13 08:27 PM Attachment (39 downloads)

Here is my LX80 stand-in while Meade has my mount for repairs...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rdandrea
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 06/13/10

Loc: Colorado, USA DM59ra
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5858673 - 05/13/13 09:47 PM

I don't own an LX-80. And I'm not a Meade fanboy even though I own a few Meade telescopes. And I'm not anti-Meade either even though I own scopes sold by others. I hope I have stated my "neutral" bona-fides effectively.

That said, to the OP, go for it. If there's something not right with a product, the manufacturer/importer needs to know about it.

I don't regard this as vendor-bashing. I regard it as owner feedback in a form that's difficult to ignore.

This is a real service, both to Meade and to the public.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
UND_astrophysics
sage


Reged: 01/19/13

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: rdandrea]
      #5859112 - 05/14/13 03:01 AM

I gave up on Meade when my brand new DSI III died after 2 weeks and they refused to warranty it because they discontinued it. I didn't bother writing letters, I just stopped buying their products. That's not bashing, that is problem solving.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: UND_astrophysics]
      #5872199 - 05/19/13 06:46 PM

I'm not sure what effect the Meade buyout has on the letter I want to send. What do you all think? Send it ASAP or wait for the dust to settle after the ownership change?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5872232 - 05/19/13 07:02 PM

My personal 2 cents...
I think under the circumstances, the letter should be scraped.

After the merger settles (and that could be awhile....) then try and start a verbal dialogue, referencing this thread. You could then see where the winds blow.

With the merger "in proces".... no major decisions (such as a policy decision on the LX-80) are going to be made. At least, I don't think so...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mdowns
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 06/12/10

Loc: Englewood,FL
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5872251 - 05/19/13 07:16 PM

Hi Mike,
I've lost touch for awhile and yikes! Looks like your spending alot of time and frustration in telescope never never land.As I've caught up on your issues with the lx80 I keep shaking my head. I know you had high hopes to be imaging now. I might suggest that you send your letter now and again after the takeover is complete.As for weight my friend,do as I did. Get an astrogizmo 365 and leave the mount outside permantly. My cg11 has been outside now for almost 8 months with zero problems. Its been a real life saver as far as my back is concerned.Good luck with your concern. I'll keep checking in to read of your progress.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: dmdouglass]
      #5872266 - 05/19/13 07:27 PM

Quote:

My personal 2 cents...
I think under the circumstances, the letter should be scraped.

After the merger settles (and that could be awhile....) then try and start a verbal dialogue, referencing this thread. You could then see where the winds blow.

With the merger "in proces".... no major decisions (such as a policy decision on the LX-80) are going to be made. At least, I don't think so...




David,

I think I agree with you. new management will be the ones that offer any type of resolution to the LX80 problems. I do wish life issues hadn't prevented sending it earlier but with the merger in the offing it would probably not have gotten any attention anyway.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: mdowns]
      #5872285 - 05/19/13 07:36 PM

Quote:

Hi Mike,
I've lost touch for awhile and yikes! Looks like your spending alot of time and frustration in telescope never never land.As I've caught up on your issues with the lx80 I keep shaking my head. I know you had high hopes to be imaging now. I might suggest that you send your letter now and again after the takeover is complete.As for weight my friend,do as I did. Get an astrogizmo 365 and leave the mount outside permantly. My cg11 has been outside now for almost 8 months with zero problems. Its been a real life saver as far as my back is concerned.Good luck with your concern. I'll keep checking in to read of your progress.




Michael,

With my LX80 off for repairs, I decided to "fix" the weight and AP issues by buying a second mount. I'm selling a few things to fund the purchase of an iOptron ZEQ25. Even an old man like me should be able to schlep that around without trouble. I've though about a cover and still may give that a try.

I do still like the LX80. Other than AP issues, the 2 problems I've had with the mount were, at least in part, user error. Meade has been good about resolving problems. That said, I still don't have a mount to use for 4 to 6 weeks so I need something anyway.

Sounds like your setup is working out well for you. That's great!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JimMo
I'd Rather Do It Myself


Reged: 01/08/07

Loc: Under the SE Michigan lightdom...
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5872292 - 05/19/13 07:37 PM

I don't know, Mike. I say send it twice, now and after the dust settles. Maybe the new owners will want to get some good PR for Meade for a change and help us out. I've got my couple of paragraph's composed, let me know if you still want them.

Edited by JimMo (05/19/13 07:46 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: JimMo]
      #5872344 - 05/19/13 08:01 PM

JimMo,

I guess it won't hurt the cause to send the letter twice. Go ahead and send me your paragraphs via PM or email at mike@dom2.com. Anyone else want to jump in at this time can sent their comments also. I'll try to get the request out to the other participants in the next day or 2 and go from there.

I was glad to hear about the merger/buyout. Maybe the new owners will want to make the most out of the LX80.

Edited by Mkofski (05/19/13 08:02 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5872462 - 05/19/13 08:54 PM Attachment (21 downloads)

One plus for the LX80 that has been overlooked... The packing for the tripod will hold 3 bottles of Corona securely. This may work with other brands but I can't verify that at this point.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
greju
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 10/13/05

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5872736 - 05/19/13 10:45 PM

About all the whole shabang is good for. As for the letter, if you have not sent it by now forgetaboutit.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
SkipW
sage


Reged: 02/03/11

Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5874554 - 05/20/13 08:07 PM

Quote:

One plus for the LX80 that has been overlooked... The packing for the tripod will hold 3 bottles of Corona securely. This may work with other brands but I can't verify that at this point.



This sounds like a great subject for a research project!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: SkipW]
      #5874600 - 05/20/13 08:29 PM

Quote:

Quote:

One plus for the LX80 that has been overlooked... The packing for the tripod will hold 3 bottles of Corona securely. This may work with other brands but I can't verify that at this point.



This sounds like a great subject for a research project!




I'll be trying other brands as soon as I get the mount back from Meade.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
UND_astrophysics
sage


Reged: 01/19/13

Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5875567 - 05/21/13 11:12 AM

Quote:

One plus for the LX80 that has been overlooked... The packing for the tripod will hold 3 bottles of Corona securely. This may work with other brands but I can't verify that at this point.






Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
highertheflyer
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 07/08/05

Loc: Aledo, Texas
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: UND_astrophysics]
      #5878097 - 05/22/13 01:50 PM

Quote:

Quote:

One plus for the LX80 that has been overlooked... The packing for the tripod will hold 3 bottles of Corona securely. This may work with other brands but I can't verify that at this point.









Hardy Har Haaaaaar.
My NEW XL80 works perfectly now.
Not trying to hang 40 pounds for EQ photos or over tightening tripod legs.
So, with no complaints, thank you Meade,
Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Whichwayisnorth
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/04/11

Loc: Southern California
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: highertheflyer]
      #5878865 - 05/22/13 06:57 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

One plus for the LX80 that has been overlooked... The packing for the tripod will hold 3 bottles of Corona securely. This may work with other brands but I can't verify that at this point.









Hardy Har Haaaaaar.
My NEW XL80 works perfectly now.
Not trying to hang 40 pounds for EQ photos or over tightening tripod legs.
So, with no complaints, thank you Meade,
Jim




What was changed/fixed? I really love the idea of the LX80 and would buy one in the future if they really did get it squared away.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: Whichwayisnorth]
      #5879522 - 05/23/13 02:13 AM

Why not buy the EQ6 Alt Az which is similar and by all accounts works as it should.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Whichwayisnorth
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/04/11

Loc: Southern California
Re: A letter to Meade about the LX80 new [Re: astro_baby]
      #5880142 - 05/23/13 12:26 PM

I like audiostar for outreach. I'll buy an lx80 next year once they have the fixes rolling and bugs worked out. I'll hang on to my avx for grab and go photography

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | (show all)


Extra information
14 registered and 31 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Dave M, richard7, bilgebay 

Print Thread

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


Thread views: 7346

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics