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

Is a TEC 140 (or 160) a good upgrade from an FC100DL for visual planetary use?

refractor
  • Please log in to reply
95 replies to this topic

#26 SimonIRE

SimonIRE

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 737
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2018
  • Loc: South East England

Posted 11 October 2020 - 11:40 AM

I was looking at that one earlier today. Can't decide if I should get it or wait for a 140. Does the 160 cool down as fast as the 140 and is the 160 that much better than the 140 for planetary?


Better move fast....;)
  • Ihtegla Sar likes this

#27 Mr.Jim

Mr.Jim

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 34
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2019

Posted 11 October 2020 - 12:20 PM

In a  Dec. 2003 S&T article Dennis di Cicco compared the TEC140, 160 and his own  6" Mak-Newt.  In the end he felt the Mak was just slightly inferior to the refractors. Regarding the TECs, he thought both showed the same amount of planetary detail,  although the one that revealed the sublest first was the 140. Yuri Petrunin was not suprised to hear that and stated "The difference will be on deep-sky objects.... and on the invoice."


  • Neptune, gozer and Ihtegla Sar like this

#28 michael1959

michael1959

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2011

Posted 11 October 2020 - 12:23 PM

On the theme of "the TEC 160ED is really a bulky scope," I offer this (poor-quality) photo of my AP 130GT riding on top of my TEC 160ED (on a Mach1 mount). Dew shields extended on both scopes. What the picture doesn't convey is the awkwardness of mounting a long tube that has most of its weight at one end. The 140ED is somewhat bigger than the 130GT and although it's noticeable, it's still easy to set up. 

 

Btw, I'm not trying to discourage you from purchasing the 160ED (though it sure does sound like it!). But its bulk has been on my mind lately as I prepare to move to another home. So do be aware of what you're getting yourself into if you get a 6+ inch refractor.

 

Another piece of information: I'm not a small man (6ft, 200 lbs) but I am in my early 60s, so hefting a scope is not as easy as it used to be. If you're a young whippersnapper in your 40s or even early 50s, then the heft of the 160ED may be trivial for you.  

 

160ED + 130.JPG


  • Scott99, AZStarGuy, Paul Morow and 2 others like this

#29 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 663
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 11 October 2020 - 12:46 PM

Thanks everyone for the responses.  I remain somewhat torn between the 140 and the 160.  The smaller size of the 140 remains somewhat tempting since I could take it for occasional trips to a dark site and it could probably get by on a smaller mount than the 160, especially for trips to a dark site where it would be mostly low power viewing of DSOs.  On the other hand I have a nice big dob at a dark site already and my Tak travels easily for a smaller companion.
 
I am planning a small 10 by 10 exploradome observatory at the far end of the yard in a spot that has about a 270 degree view of the sky (views directly to the NE are mostly obstructed by a tree, but due East to SE to SW around to due North is mostly unobstructed and there are not too many lights in the immediate vicinity.  So I would have a place to leave the 160 set up and ready to go.  
 
 

If you're a young whippersnapper in your 40s or even early 50s, then the heft of the 160ED may be trivial for you.

I'm on the cusp between early and mid fifties, so I won't be able to hold onto my whipper snapper status much longer.  Nice photo of the stacked scopes!  I will probably want to put my Tak on top of whatever scope I get. -- it will look downright  tiny on a 160.
 
 

Of course the 160 takes a little while longer to reach a cooled state than the 140 as the volume of glass is larger, but just use a 140mm aperture mask during cooling as lenses cool and distort their figures from the outer rim going inward.  After about 1/2 hour (if not sooner), depending on the temperature delta, simply remove the mask.  Done.
 
I've done side-by-sides between the two and, for me, the differences are not that subtle when the seeing permits it.  Solar system stuff at the margins of visibility in the 140ED are readily seen in the 160.   Stuff at the margins in the 160 are just not there in the 140.
 
Now the 140ED is no slouch by any means and what it really has going for it is its size and weight.  And excellent package.
 
However, don't over think it, get-the-160 ED!  They are rare, the price is good, optics great and you will never, ever, have trouble selling it if you feel, for some crazy reason, it's not a good fit for you (just resell it to me).  I'm surprised it's still available.
 
Jeff

Thanks for the info on the direct comparison between the 140 and 160 -- It's very helpful to hear from someone who owns both.  I sent the seller a PM expressing interest this morning and it's been about an hour and I have not heard back yet so we will see where it goes.


Edited by Ihtegla Sar, 11 October 2020 - 12:51 PM.


#30 Neptune

Neptune

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,403
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2007
  • Loc: Georgia

Posted 11 October 2020 - 01:16 PM

I’ve had a TEC140-non-FL and 3 100DL’s over the years. Get the TEC. It can do everything the TAK can and more. There’s 2 for sale now as I recall. Buy that FL and be happy 4 ever with it. 

"Happy 4 ever with it".... is a myth like the Abominable Snow Man, Loch Ness Monster or Yeti.



#31 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 11 October 2020 - 01:20 PM

Thanks everyone for the responses.  I remain somewhat torn between the 140 and the 160.  The smaller size of the 140 remains somewhat tempting since I could take it for occasional trips to a dark site and it could probably get by on a smaller mount than the 160, especially for trips to a dark site where it would be mostly low power viewing of DSOs.  On the other hand I have a nice big dob at a dark site already and my Tak travels easily for a smaller companion.
 
I am planning a small 10 by 10 exploradome observatory at the far end of the yard in a spot that has about a 270 degree view of the sky (views directly to the NE are mostly obstructed by a tree, but due East to SE to SW around to due North is mostly unobstructed and there are not too many lights in the immediate vicinity.  So I would have a place to leave the 160 set up and ready to go.  
 
 

I'm on the cusp between early and mid fifties, so I won't be able to hold onto my whipper snapper status much longer.  Nice photo of the stacked scopes!  I will probably want to put my Tak on top of whatever scope I get. -- it will look downright  tiny on a 160.
 
 

Thanks for the info on the direct comparison between the 140 and 160 -- It's very helpful to hear from someone who owns both.  I sent the seller a PM expressing interest this morning and it's been about an hour and I have not heard back yet so we will see where it goes.

My pleasure.  I'm 67 and hefting my AP178 F9 up to the cradle rings is not a problem.  Forty +/- pounds is my limit though.

 

Now, I've sold plenty of scopes and many have "expressed interest" and I pretty much say "OK" but the ones that say "I'll take it."  always get my attention and my response very quickly.

 

Jeff


  • 3 i Guy, gozer and Ihtegla Sar like this

#32 michael1959

michael1959

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2011

Posted 11 October 2020 - 01:21 PM

 
I am planning a small 10 by 10 exploradome observatory at the far end of the yard in a spot that has about a 270 degree view of the sky (views directly to the NE are mostly obstructed by a tree, but due East to SE to SW around to due North is mostly unobstructed and there are not too many lights in the immediate vicinity.  So I would have a place to leave the 160 set up and ready to go.  
 
 

 

If you will have an observatory, then by all means go for the 160ED. That's what I would do. In my experience, the extra 20mm over the 140ED is worth the extra cost IF set up is not part of the equation.

 

And I don't fully understand why Yuri said what he did in that oft-quoted S&T article about the TEC 140/160. I easily noticed the difference on the planets and deep sky when I compared the two scopes. The 160ED was always better. It may have been just an off-hand comment by someone who routinely looks through 180mm and 200mm+ TEC refractors. For him, the visual differences between 140 and 160 may not be significant compared to the improvements seen in the 180 and 200+ scopes.


  • Neptune, Scott99, gozer and 1 other like this

#33 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 663
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 11 October 2020 - 01:22 PM

This might help give you a benchmark in regards to cooling an oil-spaced triplet.

 

Here is what astronomy Magazine had to say when they reviewed an Astro-Physics 155 F7 oil-spaced triplet…

 

“Optical performance of the 155 was impressive. It produced nary a trace of false color even on Venus. Equally impressive, this scope provided superb images as soon as it was set outside. Even in sub-freezing temperatures, image quality, though not perfect at first, was surprisingly sharp from the start. In cold weather, after a modest settle-down time of 30 minutes, in-focus star images were textbook Airy disks with a well-defined first diffraction ring and a trace of a second outer ring. There was no sign of spherical aberration, lens figure changes, heat plumes, or distorted Airy disks due to tube turbulence."

 

I owned an AP 155 for 17 years and live in PA and the above is pretty close to my experience.

 

I agree with your C8 (I own a C8 and a Tak TSA 120) versus refractor comparison especially from your location. Living in PA I feel your pain with weather and seeing conditions.

 

Either the 160 or 140 will be a nice step-up. Just get the scope that fits your budget and your tolerance for setup and takedown.

 

You might want to consider an alt/az mount like the DM6 or a Rowan AZ100 for a quicker/easier setup.

 

If all you want are the ultimate views and you are willing to “put-up” with “whatever it takes” to get them (the 160 is not a small scope) then get the 160. If you want a good step-up from the Tak but other considerations like weight and portability etc. are a real consideration, then get the 140. Either will be an observing win.

Good luck with your selection.

 

Bob

 

Thanks Bob, that's exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for from someone who has experienced some of the same cooling/seeing issues from a C-8 as I have.  It sounds like I have nothing to fear from an oil spaced refractor.

 

>>I have an old C-8 and on a perfect night it can provide stunning views of the planets but it gives me endless headaches with cooling, dew and doesn't perform that well in mediocre seeing, which is all too common. I've set it up next to my DL several times and the DL almost always beats it by a large margin due to the C-8 having issues with cooling, dew and seeing.

 

Interesting post!  This is like reading a narrative of my own observing experiences, maybe it should be subtitled "tales from the north coast"!  lol.gif lol.gif   Most nights at my club site I've seen my 4-inch Tak refractor give better planetary images than SCT's and dobs of all sizes, right on up to 16".   It's not that the 4 inch apo has some magical ability, it's just the lack of collimation and ventilation in the mirror scopes combined with awful seeing condtions and dropping temps.  Seeing conditions here seem poor 90% of the time.

 

I would also urge you to jump on the TEC160ED in the classifieds.  That scope is rare and a huge bargain IMO.  It's f/8 which is better than f/7 for visual observing (IMO) and has a TEC lens.  I think it's only 25 or 26 pounds.  The increase in planetary detail going from 4-inch to 6-inch apo is enormous.   I would try to make it all the way to 160mm if you can, if not the TEC140 will also give a huge boost over the FC100DL.  

 

I recently downsized my heavy EQ mount to use a DM6 with a 6-inch apo, it's working out great so far.  Very quick setup time means you're going to use it more and get a better chance at good seeing.  If you want amazing planetary views, get the biggest apo you can and worry about the mount later IMO. 

 

Also - I think the "cool-down" issue is massively overwrought in these forums.  I find the larger the lens, the longer it takes to cool....don't see any difference b/w the types of lenses.  I live in a winter climate and cooling is a total non-issue for me.  If you want a big scope it will take a little longer to cool-down...no big deal.  Throw the scope on the mount, take the cap off, it usually takes another 10-15 minutes to get everything else ready.  Spend the next 15 minutes on some low-power views like M42 or the Pleaides. 

 

By then - 30 minutes - the 6-inch lens will be cooled enough for excellent high-power views.  After another 30 minutes, it will be 100% cooled down.  It's never been a problem for me.  If you're at home you can put the scope & case outside earlier in the evening to cool down.  However, that will mean the scope dews up faster as well.

I am so glad I am not the only one who has experienced a 4" Tak outperform much larger scopes on planets due to issues of seeing and cooling.  I have had my Tak set up next to my 20" Obsession at a dark site and provide better views of planets in late summer until about 4:00 am when dawn is approaching and the temperature finally stops dropping -- then the Obsession shines on planets and easily outperforms the Tak.  But for the early part of the evening through the middle of the night, the Tak typically wins on planets when set up against any of my mirrored scopes, including the 20" Obsession, my C-8 and my 12" Skywatcher.

 

I see so many posts here saying things like "just set your dob/C-8 out for an hour at sunset and its ready to go by the time the sky gets really dark" or " I've never seen a 4" scope outperform an 8" or larger -- its against the laws of physics," etc.  Well, that just hasn't been my experience.  About a week or so ago I wanted to see some higher resolution views of Mars than what the 4" Tak can provide and the weather forecast was good, no clouds and relatively mild temperatures for early October.  So right as the sun was setting, I set up my C-8 in the driveway and let it sit three hours.  Dang thing still wasn't cooled enough to give good views of Mars.  I went inside and got out my Tak and set it up next to the C-8 and in five minutes it was giving better views.  I viewed in the Tak for about an hour and kept going back and forth between the two.  About an hour later (after a total of four hours of cooling), the C-8 seemed to finally cool down and stop boiling so much and it gave acceptable views, but the seeing was not great that night.  I could make out the same albedo features in both scopes but more easily in the Tak even though they were brighter in the C-8, since the Tak seemed to handle the seeing better with more frequent and longer moments of clarity and there seemed to be more contrast.  Then the dew started forming on the C-8 (but not the Tak) and I packed it into the garage and went back for another hour or so of blissful viewing in the Tak.


  • laedco58, gjanke and gozer like this

#34 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 663
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 11 October 2020 - 01:39 PM

My pleasure.  I'm 67 and hefting my AP178 F9 up to the cradle rings is not a problem.  Forty +/- pounds is my limit though.

 

Now, I've sold plenty of scopes and many have "expressed interest" and I pretty much say "OK" but the ones that say "I'll take it."  always get my attention and my response very quickly.

 

Jeff

Well in addition to saying I was interested, I did ask a couple of questions about how old the scope was, how long he has had it and if he was the first owner.  It's a lot of money to lay down for something sight unseen, just based on a few photos and a very brief description in an ad and I was hoping to get a little more detail on condition.

 

Is that a bad strategy?  Can you tell the condition is excellent from the ad?  Should I just send another message saying "Upon further reflection, my friends on CN convinced me this is the scope for me, so I'll take it"?



#35 Scott99

Scott99

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,307
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 11 October 2020 - 01:52 PM

And I don't fully understand why Yuri said what he did in that oft-quoted S&T article about the TEC 140/160. I easily noticed the difference on the planets and deep sky when I compared the two scopes. The 160ED was always better. It may have been just an off-hand comment by someone who routinely looks through 180mm and 200mm+ TEC refractors. For him, the visual differences between 140 and 160 may not be significant compared to the improvements seen in the 180 and 200+ scopes.

agree!!!  I never understood this either.  For me, every 10mm increase in apo-ture marks a large increase in planetary & DSO details that become visible.  6" refractor opens the door to seeing details in DSO's that are considered faint and difficult and going for faint "challenge objects" like globulars in M31, quasars, fainter galaxy clusters, etc.

 

Sure, shorter f-ratio scopes and smaller aperture is "easier to handle". But a modern 6-inch f/8 apo?  I have friends who had to buy a van to fit their big dob inside.   With a TEC160 your scope will still be lighter than all the dob guys' rocker boxes, OTA's, or even the mirror by itself.  25 pounds is just not a large telescope.  It will be a long and graceful swan that rewards a little extra hassle with magnificent views.  You'll feel and appreciate the image scale of the longer focal length.  No more need for barlows and simple ep's like orthos and plossls are nearly sharp to the edge. 

 

I'm using this Lightware case for my 6" f/9 which enables easy movement of the scope - perfect for TEC160ED - I use an extra layer of foam under the case in the car - this will fit in the back seat or trunk/cargo area of most vehicles:

 

https://lightwareinc...50-flip-lid-50/


Edited by Scott99, 11 October 2020 - 02:03 PM.

  • RAKing, michael1959, gozer and 1 other like this

#36 Scott99

Scott99

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,307
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 11 October 2020 - 01:58 PM

Is that a bad strategy?  Can you tell the condition is excellent from the ad?  Should I just send another message saying "Upon further reflection, my friends on CN convinced me this is the scope for me, so I'll take it"?

Based on the seller's perfect feedback and the clean appearance of the scope I would be comfortable taking it.  It's SN #4 so it's probably 10 years old I'm guessing??  Maybe a little older.  

 

If you're worried about the lens you could specifically confirm there are no marks or sleeks in the coating, or you could ask for closer pictures.  But given the tube is completely free of scratches or damage and his feedback rating I would take it.  He does not look like a scope abuser to me lol.gif

 

sorry for the double-post - it's always fun to spend someone else's money!laugh.gif laugh.gif


Edited by Scott99, 11 October 2020 - 02:02 PM.

  • Jeff B, gozer and Ihtegla Sar like this

#37 R_Huntzberry

R_Huntzberry

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 226
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2011
  • Loc: North Florida Lat 30.30

Posted 11 October 2020 - 02:05 PM

The seller is not the original owner, I sold that scope quite a few years ago. It was in pristine/ as new condition when I sold it and based on the on the Astromart pictures it appears to be the same.

The optics on this scope are stunning. You will not be disappointed.

Cool down was never a problem for me but I live in Florida so take that for what it's worth.

 

Here's a few old pictures I've posted here before but will give you a direct size/bulk comparison between the 140 and 160.

 

 

Best regards,

 

Richard

 

 

 

 

TEC140-160.jpg

 

Lens_01.jpg

 

Lens_02.jpg

 

 


  • Paul G, Neptune, Scott99 and 7 others like this

#38 3 i Guy

3 i Guy

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 527
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Central Texas

Posted 11 October 2020 - 02:07 PM

Well in addition to saying I was interested, I did ask a couple of questions about how old the scope was, how long he has had it and if he was the first owner.  It's a lot of money to lay down for something sight unseen, just based on a few photos and a very brief description in an ad and I was hoping to get a little more detail on condition.

 

Is that a bad strategy?  Can you tell the condition is excellent from the ad?  Should I just send another message saying "Upon further reflection, my friends on CN convinced me this is the scope for me, so I'll take it"?

I believe this scope(#4) is probably a 2010 vintage, same as my 140. I found an old CN thread from 2011 about 160’s and Ziggy(RIP-Ziggy) was discussing how good his #1 was. 
 

Good luck, I hope the seller responds to your questions and you’re the lucky winner!


  • Scott99, gozer and Ihtegla Sar like this

#39 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 663
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 11 October 2020 - 02:24 PM

The seller is not the original owner, I sold that scope quite a few years ago. It was in pristine/ as new condition when I sold it and based on the on the Astromart pictures it appears to be the same.

The optics on this scope are stunning. You will not be disappointed.

Cool down was never a problem for me but I live in Florida so take that for what it's worth.

 

Here's a few old pictures I've posted here before but will give you a direct size/bulk comparison between the 140 and 160.

 

 

Best regards,

 

Richard

 

 

 

 

attachicon.gifTEC140-160.jpg

 

attachicon.gifLens_01.jpg

 

attachicon.gifLens_02.jpg

Thanks so much for your input -- what a small world.  Based on your feedback and others,  I was typing a follow-up message saying "I will take it," when the seller he got back to me on my original message from an hour ago saying the scope was already pending with someone who can pick it up locally -- I am a little too far away to pick up unfortunately.   I will have to keep my eyes out for another one.



#40 Scott in NC

Scott in NC

    Refractor Fanatic

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 32,990
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2005
  • Loc: NC

Posted 11 October 2020 - 02:38 PM

Don’t fret it.  A TEC 140 will likely come up for sale before long.  When it does, get it.  And if you get it and ultimately decide it’s the perfect scope for you, then you’re done.  But if you do get a 140 and you’re still not sure and another TEC 160 comes up for sale, then you can always buy it and sell off the one (140 or 160) that you like the least.  But don’t worry that you missed out on this 160.  I saw that ad long before you started this thread on CN.  Was I tempted?  Sure.  But I didn’t reach out to the seller to make an offer because I knew that I already had the best scope for me, a TEC 140. :ubetcha:


  • Jeff Bennett, BKBrown, gjanke and 2 others like this

#41 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 663
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 11 October 2020 - 03:04 PM

Don’t fret it. A TEC 140 will likely come up for sale before long. When it does, get it. And if you get it and ultimately decide it’s the perfect scope for you, then you’re done. But if you do get a 140 and you’re still not sure and another TEC 160 comes up for sale, then you can always buy it and sell off the one (140 or 160) that you like the least. But don’t worry that you missed out on this 160. I saw that ad long before you started this thread on CN. Was I tempted? Sure. But I didn’t reach out to the seller to make an offer because I knew that I already had the best scope for me, a TEC 140. ubetcha.gif

Thanks. Yeah, it's always disappointing when you miss out on something like that. But I am not the kind of person who can rush into spending that much money without a little research and deliberation. I just started toying with the idea of a larger refractor a few days ago and just saw that Astromart ad yesterday. Since the idea was so new I wasn't ready to spend that much money without sleeping on it for at least a night.

Has a similar experience last year I was looking for a big dob. I had just started researching the manufacturers and different types, when someone mentioned that JP Astrocraft had a nice 25" f3.5 with a Lockwood mirror up on his site that cost more than my car did when it was brand new. Well, at the time I didn't know who John Pratt was, since I had just started researching the manufacturers, and I had to spend some time deliberating the options before being comfortable spending that kind of money on a telescope. After I had finished my research, I went back a week later to make an offer on the 25" scope only to find out it was gone and John Pratt wasn't taking orders. Big disappointment!

In the end it worked out okay as I bought one of the very last 20" Classic Obsessions made before Dave Kriege stopped making them and shifted production completely over to the UC design. It is not a 25" JP Astrocraft but it is an excellent scope for the deep sky at my dark site and it leaves me enough money left over to build a small observatory at home and buy a 6" apo refractor.

Edited by Ihtegla Sar, 11 October 2020 - 03:09 PM.


#42 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 11 October 2020 - 03:28 PM

Thanks so much for your input -- what a small world.  Based on your feedback and others,  I was typing a follow-up message saying "I will take it," when the seller he got back to me on my original message from an hour ago saying the scope was already pending with someone who can pick it up locally -- I am a little too far away to pick up unfortunately.   I will have to keep my eyes out for another one.

Well, shoot.  I'm sorry you missed it.  Frankly, I was surprised it was "out there" for that long before getting snatched up.

 

"Well in addition to saying I was interested, I did ask a couple of questions about how old the scope was, how long he has had it and if he was the first owner.  It's a lot of money to lay down for something sight unseen, just based on a few photos and a very brief description in an ad and I was hoping to get a little more detail on condition.

Is that a bad strategy?  Can you tell the condition is excellent from the ad?  Should I just send another message saying "Upon further reflection, my friends on CN convinced me this is the scope for me, so I'll take it"?

 

Well, sorry for being a bit cavalier and flip, especially with your money (!)  My bad and I did not mean to offend and my apologies for not articulating what others quickly chimed in on.   You really have no down side here with the TECs.  I feel you are making the right choice with a TEC for what you're looking for.  Yuri sold over 700 of the 140's for a reason.  Of course, you can always post a "wanted" ad for either one too, which can give you multiple samples to choose from. 

 

Once again, sorry, but also good luck in your search. waytogo.gif

 

Jeff


  • Ihtegla Sar likes this

#43 Scott99

Scott99

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,307
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 11 October 2020 - 03:41 PM

>>the seller he got back to me on my original message from an hour ago saying the scope was already pending with someone who can pick it up locally

 

no worries, it sounds like you were already out of the game when you first responded.  Every seller is going to jump at the chance for a local deal, it's always better to avoid shipping these scopes if possible. 

 

In addition to TEC140's which are an excellent value you could also watch out for Tak FS152's and older Astro-Physics 6-inchers.  These are all 22 pounds or less which keeps things portable, and the price is less than this TEC160ED would have been.  There are very few 160ED's out there - maybe 30-something? -  you could try a wanted ad and see if anything turns up.  



#44 michael1959

michael1959

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2011

Posted 11 October 2020 - 04:29 PM

In addition to TEC140's which are an excellent value you could also watch out for Tak FS152's and older Astro-Physics 6-inchers.  These are all 22 pounds or less which keeps things portable, and the price is less than this TEC160ED would have been.  There are very few 160ED's out there - maybe 30-something? -  you could try a wanted ad and see if anything turns up.  

 

If TEC's numbering system is faithful, there may be a few more than thirty 160EDs out there. Mine is No. 46. I think I got mine by posting a want ad. It was nearly a decade ago, so I don't quite remember who posted first. 

 

The demand must not have been there for the 160ED. A pity because it's a grand scope.


  • Scott99 and gozer like this

#45 Scott in NC

Scott in NC

    Refractor Fanatic

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 32,990
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2005
  • Loc: NC

Posted 11 October 2020 - 04:43 PM

The demand must not have been there for the 160ED. A pity because it's a grand scope.

Since the trend has been in favor of faster scopes, I suspect that TEC found it easier to sell the f/7 fluorite scopes than the f/8 FPL-51 scopes, even at the higher price of the fluorite models.


  • gozer likes this

#46 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 11 October 2020 - 05:23 PM

Since the trend has been in favor of faster scopes, I suspect that TEC found it easier to sell the f/7 fluorite scopes than the f/8 FPL-51 scopes, even at the higher price of the fluorite models.

Definitely that but also combined with glass issues lead to the demise of the 160 and 200 ED's.  Yuri told me the reject rates for the matching glasses for the FPL51 for the designs were just too high and coupled with the lower demand made the 160 and 200 ED's low profit, if there was any profit at all.

 

Jeff


  • Scott in NC, gozer and 25585 like this

#47 Scott in NC

Scott in NC

    Refractor Fanatic

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 32,990
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2005
  • Loc: NC

Posted 11 October 2020 - 05:30 PM

Thanks for that info, Jeff.



#48 vahe

vahe

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,804
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Houston, Texas

Posted 11 October 2020 - 06:02 PM

Since the trend has been in favor of faster scopes, I suspect that TEC found it easier to sell the f/7 fluorite scopes than the f/8 FPL-51 scopes, even at the higher price of the fluorite models.

In an old post Yuri states that the first three APO160 F/8's were done with fluorite, I wonder where did they go and who are the lucky owners of these, if one of them ever shows up for sale it will definitely catch my attention.

.

Vahe 


  • Paul Morow and gozer like this

#49 Scott99

Scott99

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,307
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 11 October 2020 - 10:11 PM

If TEC's numbering system is faithful, there may be a few more than thirty 160EDs out there. Mine is No. 46. I think I got mine by posting a want ad. It was nearly a decade ago, so I don't quite remember who posted first. 

 

The demand must not have been there for the 160ED. A pity because it's a grand scope.

good to know there are more!  When CFF began posting their numbers of sold refractors it showed their customers are choosing f/6-f/7 apos over f/8-f/9 by about 10 to 1.  In general.  That was surprising to me but it explains why Tak, TEC, AP, etc. are going with f/6 or f/7.   

With the TEC160 the f/7 FL was a lot more expensive so the ratio is probably lower, I doubt there are 400 160FL's out there.



#50 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 11 October 2020 - 10:22 PM

In an old post Yuri states that the first three APO160 F/8's were done with fluorite, I wonder where did they go and who are the lucky owners of these, if one of them ever shows up for sale it will definitely catch my attention.

.

Vahe 

Now that would be a nice scope!  I really like the F8 focal ratio myself.  

 

The comments about the 160ED's bulk I find interesting as for a 6.3" F8 triplet with the big 3.5" FT focuser, I consider it to be "light weight for" its aperture.  My CFF is actually about two pounds heavier despite its shorter length.  

 

Jeff

Attached Thumbnails

  • CFF With TEC 160ED R.jpg
  • TEC 160 Outside.jpg

  • Ken Sturrock, Paul Morow, gozer and 1 other 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