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

Classifieds why many more Celestron sct then Meade sct for resell.

  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 George Methvin

George Methvin

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1848
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2006
  • Loc: Central Texas

Posted 12 November 2019 - 10:17 AM

Was just looking through CN classified and notice that there are so few Meade sct up for sell compared to so many Celestron sct scope. I mean its like 20 to 1 so what am I to make of the lack of resale of Meade SCT compared to Celestron SCT, just wondering.


Edited by George Methvin, 12 November 2019 - 10:23 AM.


#2 George Methvin

George Methvin

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1848
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2006
  • Loc: Central Texas

Posted 12 November 2019 - 10:27 AM

Are that many more Celestron sct being sold then Meade are folks just happier with there Meade sct and just keep them longer?



#3 petert913

petert913

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3527
  • Joined: 27 May 2013
  • Loc: Portland, OR

Posted 12 November 2019 - 10:33 AM

I believe Celestron outsells Meade by quite a margin.


  • Jon Isaacs, stevew, Neptune and 8 others like this

#4 scngc7317

scngc7317

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 350
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2009
  • Loc: CA

Posted 12 November 2019 - 10:57 AM

The Meade's are hard to resale when nothing on them works elephant.gif


  • Neptune, Jim Waters, jim kuhns and 9 others like this

#5 SDTopensied

SDTopensied

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 803
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2011
  • Loc: Atlanta

Posted 12 November 2019 - 11:02 AM

Celestron has outsold Meade for quite some time.  Meade let their quality slip several years ago and botched a handful of product launches which severely damaged their reputation (the LX-80 debacle, the LX-800 debacle, the StarLock debacle, etc.).

 

Since the Suny acquisition, they're making better products, but it's going to take a while for former Meade customers to forget the sting.

 

As an example, the new ETX-125 is a great telescope, finally with a great mount too.  There's no plastic on the tripod.  The mount is plastic, but much more substantial and without the creaks, quirks, and tracking issues of it's predecessor.  It acts and sounds more like a Celestron 6 SE, which isn't a bad thing.

 

-Steve


Edited by SDTopensied, 12 November 2019 - 11:06 AM.

  • jim kuhns, Nippon and Hugh Peck like this

#6 TOMDEY

TOMDEY

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5105
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014
  • Loc: Springwater, NY

Posted 12 November 2019 - 11:19 AM

Celestron began earlier (1960) than Meade (1972)... so there would be more used ~vintage~ Celestrons out there.

 

"Meade has a long history of litigation with other companies over infringement of their patents, particularly with its once bitter rival Celestron."

 

Both brands are quite competitive, with customer base almost entirely amateur astronomers wanting small, cheap, turn-key Schmidt Cassegrain Telescopes. Other companies produce mid-priced premium amateur catadioptrics (Questar). Professional-grade aerospace high-priced Catadioptrics are produced by custom-build contractors. Those have and/or do include B&L, P&E, Hughes, Kodak, Boeing, ITT, Harris, L3/Harris. Not surprisingly, increased size, performance and reliability rate exponentially higher price. We amateurs demand cheap and good... which is quite the challenge for manufacturers.    Tom


  • jim kuhns likes this

#7 Jim45157

Jim45157

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: 14 May 2008

Posted 12 November 2019 - 11:19 AM

i had a l x 90 was not happy sold in for way less than half of new price things went bad not even using it optics were not good at all


  • jim kuhns likes this

#8 dr.who

dr.who

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 14558
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012

Posted 12 November 2019 - 11:55 AM

I love Meade scopes. Unfortunately they are built like tanks and their weight reflects that. They are overall well built and a good option if one is OK with the extra weight and lack of a good cooling solution. Their mounts did go through a rough patch. I was part of the LX-80 whoopsie. I was there for the LX-800 and Starlock whoopsie. But that isn’t relevant to the question here. I loved my Meade LX-90 8”. I saw so many firsts with it. Including my first galaxies.

But that doesn’t address the OP’s question. I think that it is a case of Celestron outselling Meade over the last several years by a wide margin. There are more Celestron tubes out there than Meade ones. And as people upgrade or change direction there are going to be more Celestron tubes for sale because of this.

Both Celestron and Meade after the SUNY acquisition make very good telescopes for their price point. Meade does have a challenge in the mount department but their OTA’s are on par with the Celestron ones in terms of quality and performance. Save for the EdgeHD. Meade doesn’t really have anything in that product space.

I just wish that Meade would put the darn OTA’s on a diet to get them down to the Celestron weight’s. And add vents so that a third party like Deep Space Products who make the TEMPest fans for the EdgeHD OTA’s could produce a active cooling system for the Meade’s. If they did that I would buy a 12” Meade f/8 SCT in a heartbeat. And I would seriously consider a 16” for a permanent mounting in an observatory.
  • gfstallin likes this

#9 George Methvin

George Methvin

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1848
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2006
  • Loc: Central Texas

Posted 12 November 2019 - 01:15 PM

I hope Meade does not go belly up because of lack of sells in the past I owned a Meade 10 sct LX200 it was a great scope good optics and a great goto system, only sold it because of the weight.



#10 Eddgie

Eddgie

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 25011
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 12 November 2019 - 02:02 PM

There is a reason not mentioned here and that is Meade primarily sells SCTs either as polar fork or optical tube, and my guess is that most of the SCTs they sell are polar fork, and that means when you sell it, you have to sell the whole thing.

 

Celstron has for decades offered bare OTAs, GEM mounted OTAs, and fork mounted OTAs.

 

This means that if you probably have a lot of Celestron SCT OTAs on the market than Meade OTAs.

 

If you went back and tallied the number of fork mounted Celestron vs fork mounted Meade, my guess is that the numbers will not be as different as if you compared the total number of Celestrons vs the total number of Meades because in time a lot of the Celstron SCTs that were bought with mounts get separated from their mounts (or fork mounted Celstron scopes get de-forked).

 

I think Celestron also outsells Meade because Meade scopes tend to weigh a lot more than the Celestrons (or they have in the past) and again, Celstron has had configuration options.

 

Anyway, I am guessing that this is part of the reason why you see what you do, but compare forked to forked and I bet the gap is smaller

 

(Ask yourself how many pictures of Meade blue OTAs you have seen mounted on a GEM...)


Edited by Eddgie, 12 November 2019 - 02:04 PM.

  • schmeah, Hugh Peck, TOMDEY and 4 others like this

#11 George Methvin

George Methvin

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1848
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2006
  • Loc: Central Texas

Posted 12 November 2019 - 02:08 PM

Eddgie that something I had not thought about and I think you are so right, even now I am thinking about buying a new Celestron ota because I don't want a fork mounted sct I want to put it on a evo mount so I can switch out ota when I want to.



#12 dustyc

dustyc

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 273
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2014
  • Loc: Phoenix,AZ

Posted 12 November 2019 - 03:23 PM

I think Eddgie is right.

But, before I was even interested in astronomy it seemed like Meade scopes were available in a lot of different types of retailers, not just astronomy stores and I think Meade outsold Celestron for awhile. Maybe all those Meade scopes that were sold to "impulse buy" customers are sitting in closets waiting to be passed down to any relative that may show interest and may never see the classifieds on this site or astromart because they (the seller) only knows Craig's list.



#13 bbqediguana

bbqediguana

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1027
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2015
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 12 November 2019 - 04:06 PM

(Ask yourself how many pictures of Meade blue OTAs you have seen mounted on a GEM...)

Blue OTAs? Just one...

Meade 2080 GEM

 

White OTAs? Several...

Meade 203SC/300 / 203SC/500

Meade LXD600/700

Meade LXD55/75

Meade LX85

 

Having said that, deforking a blue Meade SCT is a 5-minute process assuming you have some Allen keys kicking around.



#14 photoracer18

photoracer18

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2966
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Martinsburg, WV

Posted 12 November 2019 - 04:18 PM

Actually the EVO is just a one arm fork, but I get your meaning. I bought my first SCT, a C8 when there were no dealers, just reps, in my case Bob Little. I worked for a dealer for both and repaired both. While I have never owned a Meade SCT I don't consider them that different. During that time we sold slightly more Celestron than Meade scopes. We considered Celestron easier to deal with than Meade. These days I think they are more alike than ever. I have a preference for Celestrons simply because I know more about them and how to keep them running, not because I worked on them more (except maybe due to them selling more scopes).



#15 Eddgie

Eddgie

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 25011
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 12 November 2019 - 05:07 PM

Blue OTAs? Just one...

Meade 2080 GEM

 

White OTAs? Several...

Meade 203SC/300 / 203SC/500

Meade LXD600/700

Meade LXD55/75

Meade LX85

 

Having said that, deforking a blue Meade SCT is a 5-minute process assuming you have some Allen keys kicking around.

The OPs post was specific for SCTs and while you are correct in that there have been some Meade scopes offered on GEMs and there are absolutely people that have bought Meade OTAs, it just seems like Celestron has sold a lot more OTA only scopes and scopes on GEMS, where the scope and GEM got separated at some time, so the OTA is fluidly moving through the matrix from owner to owner.

 

I think Celestron sells more scope though and the more you sell, the more used scopes there are. 

 

(Remember, Meade was close to bankruptcy 10 years ago. I am guessing that was because they were not selling a lot of telescopes.  I don't think Celestron was doing much better, and both in time wound up basically changing hands.) 


Edited by Eddgie, 12 November 2019 - 05:22 PM.

  • bbqediguana likes this

#16 dr.who

dr.who

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 14558
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012

Posted 12 November 2019 - 05:23 PM

Good point on the monolithic setup Meade offers Ed. I didn’t consider that. It is very true.

#17 jgraham

jgraham

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 20384
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Miami Valley Astronomical Society

Posted 12 November 2019 - 06:25 PM

I have been buying stuff off of the CN classifieds for many years. These things go in cycles; the classifieds will be full of Meades for a while, things will thin out, and then the Celestrons will show up. Personally, I'm filling some holes in my Celestron collection right now, so all is good.

#18 TOMDEY

TOMDEY

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5105
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014
  • Loc: Springwater, NY

Posted 12 November 2019 - 08:03 PM

Remember this thing?! >>>    Tom

Attached Thumbnails

  • 009 Celestron 22.jpg

  • George N, payner, PXR-5 and 9 others like this

#19 Eddgie

Eddgie

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 25011
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 12 November 2019 - 08:19 PM

Great blast from the past.

 

And check that eyepiece! Probably a .965 Kellner!  It seems like a lot of scope to be checking for cracks in the asbestos tiles on the ceiling! lol.gif

 

Seriously, very cool image!


  • Don W and PXR-5 like this

#20 Mike McShan

Mike McShan

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 65
  • Joined: 02 May 2006
  • Loc: Oklahoma City

Posted 12 November 2019 - 08:25 PM

Remember this thing?! >>>    Tom

shocked.gif



#21 Arcticpaddler

Arcticpaddler

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 311
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2016
  • Loc: Northern Minnesota, USA

Posted 14 November 2019 - 10:55 AM

I wonder where that scope is now...



#22 Traveler

Traveler

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3267
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2007
  • Loc: The Netherlands

Posted 14 November 2019 - 11:26 AM

btw I have never observed the heavens wearing a tie or bow tie...


  • Sarkikos, Nippon, mdowns and 2 others like this

#23 Dwight J

Dwight J

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3356
  • Joined: 14 May 2009
  • Loc: Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada

Posted 14 November 2019 - 11:26 AM

My Celestron to Meade ratio is 3 to 5 over the years.  That is counting OTA’s.  Our club has a Meade 10” SCT LX5 that has the best optics I have seen in a SCT.  We also had dropped $25,000 on a Meade 16” SCT that had the worst optics I have ever seen.  My ETX90 RA also has very good optics.  Meade has been hit and miss.  I describe them as great concepts and ideas but spotty execution.  I haven’t seen a bad Celestron optically but I am sure they are out there.  Nowadays both companies are more consistent with optical quality but I would not buy a mount from either.



#24 bob midiri

bob midiri

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4029
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2004
  • Loc: pa 19320

Posted 14 November 2019 - 05:51 PM

I can't attest to Meades newer lines but I have a Mak7 LX200GPS and 8"LX200GPS "R", both scopes still perform wonderfully. I once tried out a 12"LX600 and didnt care for that line. OTH, Any model Celestron I have used or owned always spewed quality!!


  • Bean614 likes this

#25 WebFoot

WebFoot

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1585
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2005
  • Loc: Redmond, WA, USA

Posted 14 November 2019 - 10:00 PM

A snapshot doesn't have any statistical relevance; keep track over a few months, and then see if the imbalance is the same.

To the extent that it is real, I suspect that Celestron sells far more scopes these days than Meade, especially since Celestron seems to sell a lot of OTA-only scops, while Meade seems to do a lot less of that.

 

As has been pointed out, Meade made too many "mistakes"--poorly/cheaply designed systems that died (or worked poorly out of the box), and then abandoned them.  My 10" LX200 died a premature death with a shot capacitor on the main board, and my 12" RCX400 died a very, very premature death with the focus motors going haywire.  In both cases, Meade washed its hands of the results, and I had a couple of expensive boat anchors.

 

And it really is a pity, since, when they worked, they were just spectacular performers, with good optics and dead-on goto (that was simplicity itself to  perform a 2-star alignment for).

But I'll never again buy a Meade product that has electronics in it, and I suspect that I'm not alone in that determination.


  • Jon Isaacs, Hugh Peck and gfstallin like 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