Celestron VX mount

I sent an email to Celestron Tech Support on Monday requesting clarification on the VX Mount Dec Axis "bearings or no bearings" question but have not received a response. Seems like a simple question to answer....are they perhaps dragging their feet because.... "oops, we should have put bearings in the Dec Axis" ?

Well, the CG5 has bearings OF A SORT on the dec axis, just not bearings of the sort used on the RA axis. Which is what we want.

It's probably because the way the mount connects to the tripod is slightly different.

If the Orion pier extension is for the CG5 then the main difference is that the post that the Azimuth adjuster push against is further out. It should be fairly easy for the manufacturer to drill and tap a new hole for the adjuster.

Chris

That would be fine. I can tap a new hole myself. My concern was that it was mentioned that the entire mount head itself would not attach correctly to the collar base. The current collar base has a inch or so cylinder that extends up from the base and the CG5 settles down on top of it then the retaining screw underneath fits into that.

If the new head doesn't have that same cylinder coupling then it would not work without a redesign of the collar base...

Does anyone know if this is the case?

Thanks again!

All I can say is that I tried it on my AS-GT tripod and it seemed to fit but that the Azimuth adjusting bolts didn't meet the post.

Try emailing Celestron.

Chris

6" p-p with PEC only is a very good figure, if correct.

Not quite, I measured RMS of +-2.6", not peak to peak.
Assuming a normal distribution 68% of the samples will be within 2.6" of the mean and 95% within 5.2".

Chris

ohh that's RMS. Still a very creditable showing.

if the motors become available for the CGEM then I'm holding on to it forever (in spite of owning a Mach1)

Cheers Chris. I have been on the phone to Celestron relating to some issues I am having with my C11 and did actually ask them. They haven't actually seen the mount yet (at least the head Tech Support guy I spoke to and met in person) so they can't comment.

The post issue is an easy fix with a new hole tapped. Not fitting on the mounting part would be a problem! As it would require custom fabrication of a new base collar.

if the motors become available for the CGEM then I'm holding on to it forever (in spite of owning a Mach1)

I hear that's in the pipeline but an email to Celestron will help to keep them aware of the demand for this.

Chris

If I may... I am curious why someone stated that the Orion pier extension won't work with the new mount...? Looking at the photos I can find on the web don't show to me how the knobs would get in the way or for that matter how the mounting is different on the head... Could someone please explain why it won't work?

I am the one who said that. The pieces do fit together but the interface between the mount head and the the tripod has both an inner cylinder and an outer bearing surface. The inner cylinder fits together fine the outer surface is larger in diameter than the Orion pier diameter so it just hangs off in space with nothing to support it. I ran that way for a while with a Megrez 110 which is around 12 pounds all up and I did not notice any issues. Then I tried it one night with a C6R. Mine is just about 30 pounds all up. Things started out fine. Then I did a polar alignment and as soon as I loosened one of the azimuth adjustment screws I got a HUGE shift in both AZ and EL. Ok, no problem I just readjusted everything to center the polar star and everything was good. Then I started taking some pointing accuracy data and after half a dozen stars or so it started missing everything by degrees. Nothing else seemed wrong and I have never had this issue again after removing the Orion pier so I can only assume that while I was running the test the poorly supported mount head shifted again and blew my alignment. The mount head is quite "floppy" with that much weight on it and that outer bearing surface left unsupported so I cannot recommend its use even at lower payloads because just because I did not see an issue with the Megrez it doesn't mean it can't crop up.

Here's a picture of how the mount head fits the upper pier adapter in the upper left corner and you can see the issue:



The outer edge of the mount head is unsupported and the location where you need to drill a new hole to mount the azimuth adjust lug is likewise air. It will be very easy to drill and tap! The next photo clockwise shows the pier adapter removed from the mount head and you can see how I solved the missing azimuth lug problem. The next photo clockwise shows the mount head set to zero degrees and the CW shaft straight down. The small CW is the one shipped with the AVX and it easily clears the pier. The large one is actually a CGEM Pro CW shimmed to fit the CW shaft and even it clears by about 6 mm. So there is incentive to use the pier extension near the equator but a new or modified top adapter is needed. Even at 42 degrees the extension will keep the C6R from crashing into tripod legs during slews which it will do with the mount head directly mounted to the tripod.

The final, lower left, photo shows the CW shaft end of the DEC axis with the CW shaft and "locknut" removed. It doesn't really tell you anything about the bearings on the DEC axis other than it does look a whole lot like the same view of the ASGT mount. I can't disassemble this mount any further because I need to be able to pull valid quantitative data from it.

Ken

Wow, that view of the DEC locknut reminds me of the CG5 and the endless hours fine-tuning that nut.

I sure do hope there are at least thrust bearings behind that locknut. I think tapered rollers are too much to ask at this price range.

The castings look better than the old mount though.

Ken/Chris, any chance you could upload a video to youtube showing the mount at max slew? I think people would be interested in hearing and seeing the mount in action.

the Vixen GP has that exact same DEC lock nut..

I am the one who said that. The pieces do fit together but the interface between the mount head and the the tripod has both an inner cylinder and an outer bearing surface. The inner cylinder fits together fine the outer surface is larger in diameter than the Orion pier diameter so it just hangs off in space with nothing to support it. I ran that way for a while with a Megrez 110 which is around 12 pounds all up and I did not notice any issues. Then I tried it one night with a C6R. Mine is just about 30 pounds a

Thank you Ken! That is *EXACTLY* what I was confused about! I see from the photos what you mean! *THAT* dog is not gonna hunt for sure! Looks like I keep the CG5 for visual with the ES 127mm and get the AVX for AP with the 80mm until someone comes up with a replacement for the pier...

May have to design it and have it fab'ed it myself since the pier is a nice way to view but a bit too tall as it is... Something to do in all my spare time!

Thanks for posting that Ken, I was assuming that the pier head was about the same size as the tripod head. Sorry to mislead people, it shows how easy it is to speculate out of one's experience.

Chris

Thanks for posting that Ken, I was assuming that the pier head was about the same size as the tripod head. Sorry to mislead people, it shows how easy it is to speculate out of one's experience.

And as you have said, people should look at your guiding numbers rather than making judgements based on assumptions about what type of bearings are in this mount or what plain bearings are capable of doing. In my experience Celestron is a company that does listen to customers and that does implement their suggestions to the limit of what they can do within the budget set by what those same customers are willing to pay. If dissatisfaction with the DEC bearings on the ASGT has been made known to Celestron then it is likely that they have done something to address it in the AVX and we should judge that something by whether it is successful or not, rather than preemptively declaring anything except our personal favorite solution to be unacceptable.

Ken

until someone comes up with a replacement for the pier...

May have to design it and have it fab'ed it myself since the pier is a nice way to view but a bit too tall as it is... Something to do in all my spare time!

I've been noodling some ways to add a support plate to the pier adapter I have because I honestly can't see using the ASGT any more now that I have the AVX! In fact for what I do I don't need a CGEM any more either since the AVX can do much of what I might use the CGEM for and my CGE can do the rest but better and garage space is at a premium. But that is me and my personal situation, I am NOT trying to claim that the AVX obsoletes the CGEM!

I think that I can come up with something to do with my existing Orion pier adapter that will make it compatible. I've put a bug in the ear of Celestron about offering a compatible version. For all I know Synta makes the Orion piece and they have all the information in house to make a compatible version. It could help the cause if others were to do likewise. Failing that there are any number of astronomy machine shop businesses that could be petitioned to offer a replacement adapter either as a product or as a one-time/occasional group buy. I agree that the Orion pier is too long or at least longer than it needs to be by about 4 inches.

Ken

I agree Ken, but until someone at Celestron speaks up and states what "that something" is or isn't, we're left in the dark. With statements like "Engineered from the ground up with astroimaging in mind", and "The new Advanced VX mount was specifically designed to provide optimum imaging performance for smaller telescopes" , I would hope that they have done something to the Dec axis which would allow for consistently good guiding performance in the Dec axis.....something the ASGT apparently lacked. I, for one, am not willing to place a preorder for a VX until clarification is forthcoming. If changes have been made and spelled out then I would very likely preorder this mount. If no changes have been made to the Dec axis then I will have to go into "wait and see" mode....possibly never buying this mount. Again, seems like a simple question to answer....is no one at Celestron reading this Thread?

If dissatisfaction with the DEC bearings on the ASGT has been made known to Celestron then it is likely that they have done something to address it in the AVX and we should judge that something by whether it is successful or not, rather than preemptively declaring anything except our personal favorite solution to be unacceptable. Ken

I'll have mine today. I'll post YouTube videos hopefully by early Saturday.

I've been noodling some ways to add a support plate to the pier adapter I have because I honestly can't see using the ASGT any more now that I have the AVX! In fact for what I do I don't need a CGEM any more either since the AVX can do much of what I might use the CGEM for and my CGE can do the rest but better and garage space is at a premium. But that is me and my personal situation, I am NOT trying to claim that the AVX obsoletes the CGEM!

Funny you mention that...! Last night I had my C11 up on my CGEM. I realized last night that I just wasn't having fun with either of them. It was more frustration and anger than enjoyment. Frustration because it takes me up to 5 trips to setup the CGEM whereas with the CG5 it takes 2. Frustration because cooling the C11 means I have to sit out in front of my house doing nothing for an hour+ (can't leave it alone) and even then I am dealing with cooling issues through the night. Anger because it had been a really *BLEEP* week on top of a really *BLEEP* month and I kept having problems with the finderscope keeping alignment with the OTA for some reason.

So I am killing time right now until the freeway's calm down enough that I can drive over to my local shoppe. I will be trading in my C11 and CGEM for something else.

A big part of the reason was what I see here with the VX. My AP loadout is well within the spec of the VX and the improvements in it mean that the CGEM becomes something that is not needed for the AP work I am capable of at this point and for the near to mid term future so the added weight and hassle of setting it up doesn't warrant keeping it for AP.

Since I realized that this should be FUN and not FRUSTRATING and a big part of the frustration was the C11 I realized it too has to go. I may end up with a 8" Edge since I want something that will punch a bit deeper and be good for planetary AP but I am not sure yet.

In terms needing to fabricate something up it shouldn't be too hard or too costly to rejigger a mount plate for it, no? I haven't seen it yet so can't say for sure and (unfortunately) I don't have my own metal working tools so I would have to design it then farm it out but again shouldn't be too much. Or for that matter to fab up something to replace it with something that isn't quite as tall... It's going to be a 1/8" steel tube with collar for the base and a detachable one for the top. Or am I smoking crack?

I agree Ken, but until someone at Celestron speaks up and states what "that something" is or isn't, we're left in the dark. With statements like "Engineered from the ground up with astroimaging in mind", and "The new Advanced VX mount was specifically designed to provide optimum imaging performance for smaller telescopes" , I would hope that they have done something to the Dec axis which would allow for consistently good guiding performance in the Dec axis.....something the ASGT apparently lacked. I, for one, am not willing to place a preorder for a VX until clarification is forthcoming. If changes have been made and spelled out then I would very likely preorder this mount. If no changes have been made to the Dec axis then I will have to go into "wait and see" mode....possibly never buying this mount. Again, seems like a simple question to answer....is no one at Celestron reading this Thread?

If dissatisfaction with the DEC bearings on the ASGT has been made known to Celestron then it is likely that they have done something to address it in the AVX and we should judge that something by whether it is successful or not, rather than preemptively declaring anything except our personal favorite solution to be unacceptable. Ken

Celestron's specification is totally correct. They have addressed the problems with Dec and Ra guiding that were evident on the earlier mounts. They say how - by upgrading the motors and gearboxes, updating the driver software and adding PEC.

It may, or may not, have ball bearings, I don't know. But it doesn't matter. They have solved the guiding issues and that's what is important.

I see this sort of thing at work where people come up with a really complex and difficult solution to what they perceive the problem is. I often find that by drilling down and finding out what the problem really is there's a much simpler way to solve it that's better for the user.

As I've shown this one guides very well. I can't speak for how typical it is but there's no rational reason I can see that Celestron would do anything other that pull some off the production line for the beta testers.

I'm almost certain it's not a Mach1 painted black

Chris

Ok all set up and ready to go for tonight. I did an unboxing video and a video with it slewing around. Two parts, each 15 minutes long, It'll take me quite a while to upload them to youtube and for the processing to take place. I'll post links asap. Also I'll get in touch with Ed on Monday and talk about taking this thing apart so I can show what it looks like inside.

P.S. So far I love this mount.

Update: Currently uploading to youtube part 1 of 2. Both broken down into 15 minute pieces. Here is the link for

part 1. http://youtu.be/-L8r7yHmKeU

part 2. on its way... http://youtu.be/5lYRIWdBzSo Give it 50 minutes from this post.

If no changes have been made to the Dec axis then I will have to go into "wait and see" mode....possibly never buying this mount. Again, seems like a simple question to answer....is no one at Celestron reading this Thread?

It is your money and you have performance criteria that are important to you so I certainly will not criticize you for being cautious. As Chris said Celestron has spelled out some improvements they made to this mount and Chris is certainly getting good number off his. I'm trying to get some numbers too but being a visual observer I am not exactly familiar with the procedures. One thing is certain, if I can get good numbers it is the mount, not me, that produces the results. Looks like there is at least one more AVX online here already so it shouldn't be too long before those who are interested in performance have the data they need to decide.

I suspect that no one at Celestron is reading this thread and that the advertising copy for the AVX contains all the improvements that have been made to it. But if I ever do get an answer about the bearings I will certainly report it here.

Ken

Ok all set up and ready to go for tonight. I did an unboxing video and a video with it slewing around. Two parts, each 15 minutes long, It'll take me quite a while to upload them to youtube and for the processing to take place. I'll post links asap. Also I'll get in touch with Ed on Monday and talk about taking this thing apart so I can show what it looks like inside.

P.S. So far I love this mount.

Update: Currently uploading to youtube part 1 of 2. Both broken down into 15 minute pieces. Here is the link for

part 1. http://youtu.be/-L8r7yHmKeU

part 2. on its way... http://youtu.be/5lYRIWdBzSo Give it 50 minutes from this post.

Just watched both videos. found them good. I am in market for a new mount and keeping my fingers crossed. Thanks for posting it.

thanks for the videos, looking forward to hearing more! -Tim

Ok all set up and ready to go for tonight. I did an unboxing video and a video with it slewing around. Two parts, each 15 minutes long, It'll take me quite a while to upload them to youtube and for the processing to take place. I'll post links asap. Also I'll get in touch with Ed on Monday and talk about taking this thing apart so I can show what it looks like inside.

Ok all set up and ready to go for tonight. I did an unboxing video and a video with it slewing around. Two parts, each 15 minutes long, It'll take me quite a while to upload them to youtube and for the processing to take place. I'll post links asap. Also I'll get in touch with Ed on Monday and talk about taking this thing apart so I can show what it looks like inside.

P.S. So far I love this mount.

Update: Currently uploading to youtube part 1 of 2. Both broken down into 15 minute pieces. Here is the link for

part 1. http://youtu.be/-L8r7yHmKeU

part 2. on its way... http://youtu.be/5lYRIWdBzSo Give it 50 minutes from this post.

WAIT WAIT WAIT

So you bought a whole new mount, it arrived today, and you expect to test it tonight as if it will be CLEAR?

I DON'T BELIEVE YOU!!!

Hey! I bought one today too and put it together and got to use the new OTA! It was just down right WIERD! Perhaps it's the Mayan Calendar ending or something!

Here are some images of it:

Side detail view of the Celestron AVX mount. Note the attention to detail with the dec connector being on top and the extra AUX ports and most importantly a REAL on/off switch! Celestron does listen it seems...


This is a *BLEEP* shot of the latitude adjustment scale. What you can't see is that unlike the CG5 you can actually tell where you are on the scale like on the CGEM. Another nice feature that Celestron listened to users on.


Rear view. Note that the knobs holding the OTA on the mount are now much more robust. And... Note that the Index marks are actually visible!


Final detail shot. And an important one. No more loss of alignment due to cord pull! It's a threaded plug just like the CGEM!


And here is the front on the VX...

Ok all set up and ready to go for tonight. I did an unboxing video and a video with it slewing around. Two parts, each 15 minutes long, It'll take me quite a while to upload them to youtube and for the processing to take place. I'll post links asap. Also I'll get in touch with Ed on Monday and talk about taking this thing apart so I can show what it looks like inside.

P.S. So far I love this mount.

Update: Currently uploading to youtube part 1 of 2. Both broken down into 15 minute pieces. Here is the link for

part 1. http://youtu.be/-L8r7yHmKeU

part 2. on its way... http://youtu.be/5lYRIWdBzSo Give it 50 minutes from this post.

WAIT WAIT WAIT

So you bought a whole new mount, it arrived today, and you expect to test it tonight as if it will be CLEAR?

I DON'T BELIEVE YOU!!!

Well, there is this moon up and the wind is still sticking around. Oh and the seeing is still kinda bad regardless of what my clear sky chart says below.

But I am happy to report that after 2+4 the go-to's were reasonable. I am simply too tired tonight to press on with drift alignments and PEMPro charts. Maybe tomorrow night. I'll take a nap tomorrow.