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 CG4 appropriate for a skywatcher 102 Mak?

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Albanyco

Albanyco

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 63
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2019
  • Loc: Albany, NY

Posted 20 April 2021 - 11:10 AM

Is this a good mount for this telescope or is it too much gun? Looking for a reasonably priced mount for grab and go. If not this one does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks.

 

Garrett

 

 


  • PirateMike likes this

#2 alphatripleplus

alphatripleplus

    World Controller

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 122,325
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012
  • Loc: Georgia

Posted 20 April 2021 - 11:26 AM

I have a 102mm Mak that is fine for visual on my Super Polaris mount. So I would expect that the CG4 can handle that sized Mak for visual use.


  • PirateMike likes this

#3 PirateMike

PirateMike

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,840
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2013
  • Loc: A Green Dot On A Blue Sea

Posted 20 April 2021 - 11:42 AM

I have a CG4 and it seems that the tripod is quite heavy, maybe not to good for a light "grab and go" setup but may be acceptable for you. YMMV.

 

 

Miguel   8-)

 

.


  • BlueMoon likes this

#4 hcf

hcf

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 753
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2017

Posted 20 April 2021 - 11:50 AM

If you want a lighter EQ mount you can try the ES EXOS Nano EQ

 

https://www.cloudyni...nano-eq-thread/

 

There is a review of a C90 with the mount, in that thread.

 

The CG-4 is more future compatible, in case you upgrade to a heavier scope later.


  • BlueMoon likes this

#5 BlueMoon

BlueMoon

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,430
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2007
  • Loc: South Central Idaho, USA

Posted 20 April 2021 - 11:51 AM

A SW Skymax 102mm Mak weighs 4.6# and is 12.5" long. Add eye piece, diagonal, red dot, and round up to say, 5#. Well within the range of a Twilight or Porta II Alt/Az if you want to stay closer to "grab n go". Not that a CG-4 is heavy, but you will still want at least a casual Polar alignment if your going to use the DEC and RA axes for movement. Alt/Az is a "setup and point" solution. As a light, short tube scope, any oscillation using any of these 3 mounts will be minimal and quickly damp out.

 

Clear skies.


Edited by BlueMoon, 20 April 2021 - 12:46 PM.


#6 Albanyco

Albanyco

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 63
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2019
  • Loc: Albany, NY

Posted 20 April 2021 - 12:26 PM

Thank you guys for your advice!



#7 Mike G.

Mike G.

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,315
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2013
  • Loc: Oberlin, Ohio

Posted 20 April 2021 - 03:32 PM

CG4 is almost too much mount for a 102 mak.  I have two CG4's, one with the 1.75" tubular steel legs and one with old Vixen adjustable wood legs.  either will take my C8 without breathing hard and damp in 2 seconds or less.  I also have a C6 and Synta 100mm mak but usually use either of those on my TW1.  as stated, the CG4 can be used as GnG, but a TW1 or Porta Mount (or similar) makes more sense for 100mm mak.  that said, you get a lot of extra capacity for down the road upgrades with a CG4 and with rough polar alignment and a motor kit, hands free tracking.  the CG4 on a decent tripod is a robust, reliable mount that is built to last for many years.



#8 Albanyco

Albanyco

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 63
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2019
  • Loc: Albany, NY

Posted 20 April 2021 - 05:20 PM

Thank you for your replies. I ended up skipping the CG4 and went with an explore scientific EXOS Nano. I already have a 10 inch dobsonian on wheels so I figured this manual mount would be fine for my proposed.
  • BlueMoon likes this

#9 BlueMoon

BlueMoon

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,430
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2007
  • Loc: South Central Idaho, USA

Posted 20 April 2021 - 05:26 PM

Thank you for your replies. I ended up skipping the CG4 and went with an explore scientific EXOS Nano. I already have a 10 inch dobsonian on wheels so I figured this manual mount would be fine for my proposed.

Nice piece of kit and about as "grab n go" as one could want in a GEM. That should compliment your Mak pretty well I'd think. I don't know if you saw it but here's a CN thread on the topic on the Nano: https://www.cloudyni...nano-eq-thread/

 

Clear skies.


Edited by BlueMoon, 20 April 2021 - 05:27 PM.


#10 alphatripleplus

alphatripleplus

    World Controller

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 122,325
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012
  • Loc: Georgia

Posted 20 April 2021 - 05:55 PM

I already have a 10 inch dobsonian on wheels so I figured this manual mount would be fine for my proposed.

Agreed. Nothing wrong with trying to keep it simple if that fits your needs.



#11 hcf

hcf

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 753
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2017

Posted 20 April 2021 - 06:53 PM

Thank you for your replies. I ended up skipping the CG4 and went with an explore scientific EXOS Nano. I already have a 10 inch dobsonian on wheels so I figured this manual mount would be fine for my proposed.

The Counterweight on the EXOS Nano might be insufficient (or barely sufficient) for  the Mak. If you can, add a CW from ES to your order.

There are some links to appropriate CWs from ES on the EXOS Nano Thread.




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