Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

12.5" f/6.5 Teeter Dob with Lockwood glass..

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
59 replies to this topic

#51 Cotts

Cotts

    Just Wondering

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 9,991
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2005

Posted 09 December 2015 - 10:11 PM

Mike, you're correct.  I pulled the 35% figure out of my, er, um, imagination.  The difference, most of the time, would be buried in the seeing noise.

 

Dave



#52 Victor Martinez

Victor Martinez

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 560
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2007

Posted 12 December 2015 - 06:11 AM

Mark, I don't know the total assembled weight.  Maybe Rob T. knows???  The mirror/rocker combo with mirror in is too heavy to be easily lifted by me and my bad back.   I ordered the wheelbarrow handles and roll it up and down the ramps into the van...

 

 

Dave

 

Dave, 

Beautiful Teeter's telescope. I have a question,

So if you look like you forced to use traditional wheel system truck for transporting the primary box because it remains too heavy, what have you won respect your previous 16" Dobson telescope?

 

Víctor



#53 Cotts

Cotts

    Just Wondering

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 9,991
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2005

Posted 12 December 2015 - 11:13 AM

 

Mark, I don't know the total assembled weight.  Maybe Rob T. knows???  The mirror/rocker combo with mirror in is too heavy to be easily lifted by me and my bad back.   I ordered the wheelbarrow handles and roll it up and down the ramps into the van...

 

 

Dave

 

Dave, 

Beautiful Teeter's telescope. I have a question,

So if you look like you forced to use traditional wheel system truck for transporting the primary box because it remains too heavy, what have you won respect your previous 16" Dobson telescope?

 

Víctor

 

Hi, victor.  I think you are asking why I got rid of the 16" I had a few years ago in favour of the 12.5" today... 

 

I found the 16" just barely fit through my doorways and was very heavy to push up and down a ramp into the van. (I have severe issues with my vertebral discs in my back.  Others would find the telescope no problem to handle, I suspect....)  I sold it to free the $ for other projects rather than to go directly to the 12.5".  There is 2 1/2 years between the sale of the 16" and the purchase of the 12.5"...

 

The 12.5" is significantly lighter than the 16"and I can wheelbarrow it up and down the ramp quite easily.

 

Also, the 12.5" is going to be my main double star measuring instrument - an upgrade from the 8" TEC Maksutov I had for a few years...   I have some issues to iron out with the 12.5" for this purpose, especially field rotation and camera orientation.   I'll work them out soon.

 

I am saving $ for a TEC 160 refractor, by the way, which I will try to purchase on the used market in late 2017.   

 

Dave



#54 Allan Wade

Allan Wade

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,227
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2013

Posted 12 December 2015 - 11:44 AM

Dave, what are your thoughts about the TEC Mak you had, also considering now you have the 12.5" dob up and going?

 

I was fortunate to use a TEC160 this year on several occasions, and I can say it is easily the best refractor I have ever used. The contrast we saw on high power views of Eta Carina was unbelievable. It was one of those moments I could see an APO working better than my 12" Zambuto.



#55 Victor Martinez

Victor Martinez

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 560
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2007

Posted 12 December 2015 - 11:54 AM

I understand Dave, thank you. That expensive TEC 160 refractor, would be the perfect complement to my 16" Dobson telescope. What mount have you think use with it?



#56 Cotts

Cotts

    Just Wondering

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 9,991
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2005

Posted 12 December 2015 - 01:31 PM

The TEC Mak was as perfect as an 8" scope could be, optically speaking.  It rode nicely on my Mach 1 for visual and video lucky imaging.  

 

The 12.5" should out-resolve and go deeper than the 8" did while still having  perfect optics.

 

If I get the 160 it will sit on the Mach 1 for visual observing and video imaging.  Probably in a roll-off observatory.

 

Plans sketchy at this time...

 

Dave



#57 Victor Martinez

Victor Martinez

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 560
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2007

Posted 13 December 2015 - 06:40 AM

Ok



#58 JMW

JMW

    Soyuz

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,785
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2007

Posted 13 December 2015 - 10:37 PM

Good luck on finding a used TEC 160FL.  I bought my TEC 140ED used. Those come up for sales on the used market much more often than the TEC 160. I just search Astromart and there was one TEC 160 FL scope listed since 2010. There were about 4 TEC 160 ED listed during that time. If I ever decide to buy a TEC 160 I think I will have to put my money down and wait for a new one.



#59 Allan Wade

Allan Wade

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,227
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2013

Posted 14 December 2015 - 07:39 AM

Why is that, are there few 160FL scopes made, or are they so good no one sells them?



#60 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 44,177
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003

Posted 14 December 2015 - 09:51 AM

Sales are inversely related to price.

For every 160mm refractor sold, there are 50 140mm refractors sold, and 500 100mm refractors sold.

It's the nature of sales in the market.

None of these products are essential to life, and they are all bought with discretionary income.

 

So the number of used products are also related to the numbers of new sales.




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics