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

C11 on Evolution mount

  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#26 beachamd

beachamd

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Eugene, Oregon

Posted 15 May 2018 - 05:32 PM

..pics or it didn't happen!

 

Last note, 2 inch optics, of course.

 

You can all point and laugh, but seasoned professionals in my local astro club all agree- the views are steady and excellent.

 

Clear Skies, DB

Attached Thumbnails

  • 3.jpg
  • 4.jpg
  • 5.jpg
  • 6.jpg

  • Castor, eros312 and treadmarks like this

#27 Jim4321

Jim4321

    Skylab

  • -----
  • Posts: 4,324
  • Joined: 19 Sep 2014
  • Loc: Asheville

Posted 15 May 2018 - 05:54 PM

Beachamd, Bravo, dude! 

 

But what's that...you _aren't_ using the stock red dot finder?  shocked.gif  After all, it's such an excellent piece of gear....  (jk)grin.gif

 

Looks like your mount might be a candidate for a 'rear handle delete' conversion once the warranty is up.  It'll probably improve your balance, or your ability to go to zenith, maybe both.   Just pop up the rubber EP holder, take out 4 Allen head screws, and spend a minimal amount of time with a hacksaw or Dremel.   Or tape up _all_ seams and openings to keep swarf out, and cut it in place.

 

Jim H.


  • beachamd likes this

#28 beachamd

beachamd

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Eugene, Oregon

Posted 15 May 2018 - 07:19 PM

...way ahead of you! I achieved Zenith with the help of a rasp and black magic marker 😂 but was within a few degrees even without the mod.

 

Seriously, I love the Evolution platform and my 9.25 but I got this OTA new in the box for a great deal and there was just no way I wasn’t going to give it a try. To be honest, I’m not terribly surprised at how well it works for observing- Well worth the “risk” in my book.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 542EF392-9724-40F2-89E8-9C1A38E7AB97.jpeg


#29 tonyt

tonyt

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,222
  • Joined: 01 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Australia

Posted 15 May 2018 - 07:37 PM

You can all point and laugh, but seasoned professionals in my local astro club all agree- the views are steady and excellent.

 

 

If you can entertain the troops while pushing the limits all the better smile.gif

Perhaps I can return the favour with this pic:

IMG_9519.JPG


  • eros312, Thundermoon1994 and beachamd like this

#30 beachamd

beachamd

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Eugene, Oregon

Posted 15 May 2018 - 08:38 PM

Now you’re talking!



#31 tonyt

tonyt

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,222
  • Joined: 01 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Australia

Posted 15 May 2018 - 09:44 PM

Dan, I notice you're using the visual back reduction piece with a SCT clicklock. You might gain a bit more clearance using the clicklock which threads directly to the larger rear cell thread?

 

Also I'd like to see the saddle arrangement if you have a pic of that? 



#32 chuckscap

chuckscap

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,198
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2009
  • Loc: Colorado Springs, CO USA

Posted 15 May 2018 - 10:12 PM

Nice!



#33 Chris Johnson

Chris Johnson

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Stockholm, NJ

Posted 17 May 2018 - 02:24 PM

beachamd, did you have modify the evolution mount to accept the CGE dovetail?



#34 Exnihilo

Exnihilo

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,351
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 17 May 2018 - 03:12 PM

I know that the general consensus is going to be a big NO-NO. But bear with me, please...

 

I own a 9.25 Evolution. I seem to enjoy good skies and would like to get a bit more resolution for planets and a bit more light gathering for DSO and to compensate for Binoviewer light loss. I am just not keen on GEM’s at all.

 

I love my Evolution mount. I think it’s a fantastic package. I have consistently driven my mount with my C925 OTA AND the following add-ons:

 

- Starsense auto-align kit

- 9x50 RACI 

- Binoviewer with widefield eyepieces

- Baader dovetail 1kg counterweight clamp (for compensating and balancing)

 

All the above accounts for nearly 3kg, and not only are my gotos still very accurate, the system appears to function well and without stress. Indeed, vibrations are a bit more noticeable, but all in all the system works like a charm.

 

The C11 is (if I’m not mistaken) only 3 or 4 cm longer than the C9.25, and 3 kilos heavier, so that leads me to believe that, at least in theory, it should be possible to drive a C11 with 1.25 diagonal and eyepieces on the Evolution mount.

 

I wonder if anybody has tried this combination and what would be your thoughts on this, even if just for fun...

You never know, you might be able to find a used deal on a C11 CPC for not that much more than for a C11 OTA.  Peruse the used ads often.



#35 Exnihilo

Exnihilo

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,351
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 17 May 2018 - 03:14 PM

..pics or it didn't happen!

 

Last note, 2 inch optics, of course.

 

You can all point and laugh, but seasoned professionals in my local astro club all agree- the views are steady and excellent.

 

Clear Skies, DB

The Baader clicklock back is a little shorter than the standard Celestron back, I believe.  May be worth checking into.



#36 beachamd

beachamd

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Eugene, Oregon

Posted 22 May 2018 - 09:44 AM

beachamd, did you have modify the evolution mount to accept the CGE dovetail?

Heresy number two: it’s on a CG5 dovetail


  • eros312 likes this

#37 beachamd

beachamd

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Eugene, Oregon

Posted 22 May 2018 - 09:46 AM

The Baader clicklock back is a little shorter than the standard Celestron back, I believe.  May be worth checking into.

Ordered! Great tip. It’s on the 2” Baader clicklock now, but I found the one you mean, threaded for integrated 3” visual back. 

Thanks! Dan B



#38 Daniele

Daniele

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 202
  • Joined: 14 May 2020
  • Loc: Tuscany, Italy.

Posted 14 May 2020 - 08:53 AM

..pics or it didn't happen!

 

Last note, 2 inch optics, of course.

 

You can all point and laugh, but seasoned professionals in my local astro club all agree- the views are steady and excellent.

 

Clear Skies, DB

Hello! Is this a C11 on the Nexstar Evo Mount? How is it? Can this mount do that? 



#39 Don W

Don W

    Founding Member

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,785
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • Loc: Wisconsin, USA

Posted 14 May 2020 - 10:01 AM

Yes, you can do it! Is it a good idea? Time will tell.



#40 Neptune

Neptune

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,543
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2007
  • Loc: Georgia, USA

Posted 22 July 2021 - 08:02 PM

Are there any updates on this 11" riding an Evolution mount?



#41 rmollise

rmollise

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 23,512
  • Joined: 06 Jul 2007
  • Loc: US

Posted 23 July 2021 - 03:58 PM

I know that the general consensus is going to be a big NO-NO. But bear with me, please...

 

I own a 9.25 Evolution. I seem to enjoy good skies and would like to get a bit more resolution for planets and a bit more light gathering for DSO and to compensate for Binoviewer light loss. I am just not keen on GEM’s at all.

 

I love my Evolution mount. I think it’s a fantastic package. I have consistently driven my mount with my C925 OTA AND the following add-ons:

 

- Starsense auto-align kit

- 9x50 RACI 

- Binoviewer with widefield eyepieces

- Baader dovetail 1kg counterweight clamp (for compensating and balancing)

 

All the above accounts for nearly 3kg, and not only are my gotos still very accurate, the system appears to function well and without stress. Indeed, vibrations are a bit more noticeable, but all in all the system works like a charm.

 

The C11 is (if I’m not mistaken) only 3 or 4 cm longer than the C9.25, and 3 kilos heavier, so that leads me to believe that, at least in theory, it should be possible to drive a C11 with 1.25 diagonal and eyepieces on the Evolution mount.

 

I wonder if anybody has tried this combination and what would be your thoughts on this, even if just for fun...

 

 

In my opinion (and you know what they say about that), big uh-uh. Not so much because of the length (though the 9.25 is really at the edge of being too long for the mount when it is properly balanced), but because of the weight and focal length.  A considerably heftier tripod could help, but I don't think enough. The 9.25 is undeniably shaky on the mount. Not unusable, but not as steady as I'd like.


  • Gregg Carter likes this

#42 maroubra_boy

maroubra_boy

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,283
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 24 July 2021 - 04:48 PM

I have also done the single arm mod to a CPC1100. I use a 9" Santel Mak with it which is as heavy if not just a tick heavier than a C11. Whether it is or not, the Santel weighs 13kg naked. You can add up to another couple of kilos when decked out for a session. An Evo mount cannot take Maks 7" or larger as the arm is not long enough - the COG of Maks is closer to the geometric centre of the OTA, so requires a longer arm for the diagonal to clear the mount when pointed at zenith. I had looked very carefully at Evo mounts to see if it would take the 7" Intes Mak I had at the time. Not enough clearance, and this was without a dewshield hanging off the front. Only a modified CPC 1100 has the necessary arm length. The CPC925 makes use of the exact same fork as that of the 1100 - it just makes use of a spacer on the alt bearing to accommodate the smaller diameter OTA.

A friend of mine has a 10" Mak which surprisingly is 1kg lighter than my 9". He uses it on an AZEQ6. I've hence been able to compare the performance of both mounts very often with the AZEQ6 in AZ mode.

So, guess which mount is more stable, less shaky? It is the single arm modded CPC1100!

Both scopes have very good focusers that require the slightest of a touch to move the fine focus knob, but the 10" shakes a lot more when touching the focuser, both shakes more & the dampening time is considerably longer than the modified CPC.

The AZEQ6 is much quieter, that's the only advantage it has in AZ mode...  No, not really.  The AZEQ6 is lovely mount, and I am only splitting hairs here comparing the two mounts.  The vibration and dampening is good in both, though the CPC does have the edge.

 

Would I use the single arm CPC on a wedge with such heavy OTA?  Not a chance.  It is not designed to work this way, and it would blow out the dampening time.

 

Remember, the best thing for any of these mounts (Evo, CPC, AZEQ6, etc) is to have a balanced OTA hanging off the alt bearing.

The modified CPC1100 is very easy to set up & take down, just like the Evo, though considerably heavier - I have also used an Evo mount. It had a C8 on it & the lighter tripod that comes with the smaller OTAs. The shakes it showed were so much more. So much more sensitive to the touch. Disappointingly so. Just look at the thing & it shook. All because of a pissy tripod

Alex.


Edited by maroubra_boy, 24 July 2021 - 07:00 PM.


#43 maroubra_boy

maroubra_boy

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,283
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 24 July 2021 - 06:49 PM

Here's a pic of my 9" Santel on the single arm CPC 1100 beside my friend's 10" on the AZEQ6.  And yes, there is a 6" Intes Mak piggybacked on to that 10"! bounce.gif

Attached Thumbnails

  • 20200911_202843_resized.jpg

  • Castor likes this


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