I see no point why the torch test schould be failing on both, co and aperture, so I completely trust in it.
Maybe I did some mistake when assessing the real cc's focal length. First, repeatedly readings of true magnification with eyepieces of certain focal length yielded somewhat between 2 and 2.1 m.
In the last weeks I read true fov angles through the same eyepieces after measuring their proper fov angles. The real angles were given by known star distances (by angle) for instances pleiades offer a goot variety of star distances to fit a certain eyepiece. Did the same on the moon, when the exact distance was known, and it perfectly fitted into the 15mm 66° eyepiece yielding a focal length of 1.8 m thus much more consistant to the data provided by supplier. Haven't got a clue yet, why this discrepancy because the same eyepieces were involved.
And did a third approach by measuring star passing times thru a 4 mm 60° eyepiece compared to the Bresser 102/460 short refractor. Result: supposed the Bresser 460 mm are correct, the CC yields 1.80 m, the Mak 2.0 m.
Last weeks and days provided Neowise and Saturn and Jupiter and warm nights. That's my time. But I watch again and stll through Bresser 127 mm Mak and skip the CC. I'm even using the original (but mechanically improved) Bresser plastic diagonal. Why? Because this combination weighs just half of the CC + 2 inch 1/10 lambda 99% reflective diagonal and provides more detail, resolution and contrast than the latter. At least at the state when I stopped collimation procedure because I could not improve any more.
Saw structures and Moon shadow on Jupiter Friday night like never before. Also M13 and similar are more brilliant thru the Bresser. When watching doubles two airy spots are easily to tell apart surrounded by little side maxima. Thru CC the side maxima are way brighter than the star itself, if I can find it at all. My CC is able to do nothing which the Mak isn't doing better except the now fixed mirror flop. And CC takes longer acclimatisation time, well not now at nights warmer than 20 °C.
Light catching area Mak: 108 cm², CC: 122 cm², not worth to go there for this 13% plus of light. When the light doesn't appear where it belongs.
Well I'm completly visual, taking pics might change a lot.