72 replies to this topic

[Victory Pete]

I got the email from AP that a Mach 2 could be mine. I am not sure what to do, currently I have an EQ6R, EQ8R and a G11. They all fit on my C120 pier and seem to cover all size scopes I could possibly want. I have 2 weeks to decide.

Edited by Victory Pete, 19 April 2024 - 01:35 PM.

[Jim Waters]

Pass on the mount if the others meet your needs.  Spend the money on other toys.

[SteveGR]

The question is, as I see it, are you happy with the results you currently get with your existing equipment?  It seems like a lot of money if you are.  If you are not, would the Mach2 address the things you are unhappy with? 

 

The fact that you are here asking at all would seem to indicate you have some strong doubts.

Edited by SteveGR, 19 April 2024 - 02:27 PM.

[Victory Pete]

Haven't really used any of it yet for any serious AP.

Edited by Victory Pete, 19 April 2024 - 02:55 PM.

[Marcelofig]

If you can afford it without significant financial damage, get it. No one has ever said "I regret buying an AP mount".

[Cbaxter]

No doubt it is an amazing mount. However, that is a $%*! Ton of cash for a 75 lbs payload capacity.

[Victory Pete]

Therein lies the quandary.

[Victory Pete]

If I could have rented a table at NEAF, I could bring all 3 of my mounts and see what happens. Then walk over to the the Astro Physics booth with a deposit.

Edited by Victory Pete, 19 April 2024 - 03:11 PM.

[Noltimier]

Unfortunately AP will not be at NEAF this year.

 

On February 1, 2024 Marj Christen posted "We will not be attending NEAIC/NEAF this year since it is too close to the eclipse. We simply can’t do it all."

 

Regards,

Mark

[Victory Pete]

I missed eclipse and NEAF due to a broken hip.

[jdupton]

Pete,

 

I got the email from AP that a Mach 2 could be mine. I am not sure what to do, currently I have an EQ6R, EQ8R and a G11. They all fit on my C120 pier and seem to cover all size scopes I could possibly want. I have 2 weeks to decide.

 

   I also had an EQ6 (no R -- older version) and an EQ8 (again, no R -- original version) and upgraded to the AP Mach-2 GTO-L. I found it to be a very significant upgrade. Even though the EQ8 could handle my scopes, there was always some issue that just wasn't "quite right". The largest issue was Declination backlash which changed with ambient temperature. I could adjust it out for most seasons when I imaged with the mount the most but if the ambient was over about 95° F, then the declination axis would occasionally bind up during a slew. 

 

   There have been no such issues with the AP Mach-2. It works perfectly under all conditions. The APCC-Pro software that is bundled with the Mach-2 adds many features that make using the mount so much easier and pleasurable.

 

Haven't really used any of it yet for any serious AP.

   Now, here is the issue. If you will remain visual only, the Mach-2 may not mean much to you. It is a fine mount but for visual use only, I can understand your quandary. It would have been a hard decision but if I only did visual astronomy, I would probably have passed on the Mach-2 (or never put my name on the list in the first place). The only feature that the Mach-2 and APCC might give you for visual use is if you use the mount for visually following satellites across the sky. 

 

 

John

[Victory Pete]

Pete,

 

 

   I also had an EQ6 (no R -- older version) and an EQ8 (again, no R -- original version) and upgraded to the AP Mach-2 GTO-L. I found it to be a very significant upgrade. Even though the EQ8 could handle my scopes, there was always some issue that just wasn't "quite right". The largest issue was Declination backlash which changed with ambient temperature. I could adjust it out for most seasons when I imaged with the mount the most but if the ambient was over about 95° F, then the declination axis would occasionally bind up during a slew. 

 

   There have been no such issues with the AP Mach-2. It works perfectly under all conditions. The APCC-Pro software that is bundled with the Mach-2 adds many features that make using the mount so much easier and pleasurable.

 

   Now, here is the issue. If you will remain visual only, the Mach-2 may not mean much to you. It is a fine mount but for visual use only, I can understand your quandary. It would have been a hard decision but if I only did visual astronomy, I would probably have passed on the Mach-2 (or never put my name on the list in the first place). The only feature that the Mach-2 and APCC might give you for visual use is if you use the mount for visually following satellites across the sky. 

 

 

John

I will be doing serious AP, I just bought an ASI2600 Duo. I figured I would use the G11 for AP and when I get a big reflector, use the EQ8-R Pro.

[Jim Waters]

Haven't really used any of it yet for any serious AP.

Well then; you have 2 weeks to decide if the existing mounts meet your AP needs.

[Jim Waters]

I will be doing serious AP, I just bought an ASI2600 Duo. I figured I would use the G11 for AP and when I get a big reflector, use the EQ8-R Pro.

I have a G11G and use it for AP.  Its a 'Like' / 'Dislike' relationship.  Sometimes 'Hate'.  The DEC backlash can be up to 60 seconds.  The Spring Loaded Worms and other things require adjustment and rework occasionally.

 

If you have the money to burn sell the existing mounts and get the MACH2.

[Victory Pete]

I have a G11G and use it for AP.  Its a 'Like' / 'Dislike' relationship.  Sometimes 'Hate'.  The DEC backlash can be up to 60 seconds.  The Spring Loaded Worms and other things require adjustment and rework occasionally.

 

If you have the money to burn sell the existing mounts and get the MACH2.

I don't like the 2 week limit; I don't like the exclusiveness of the AP products either. I know they can only make so many but all that bothers me. It is like an eclipse; it is elusive and undependable.

Edited by Victory Pete, 19 April 2024 - 03:52 PM.

[Dean J.]

I don't like the 2 week limit; I don't like the exclusiveness of the AP products either. I know they can only make so many but all that bothers me. It is like an eclipse; it is elusive and undependable.

I hope you don’t get one then.  I have to wonder if this post isn’t just a troll.

[Victory Pete]

I hope you don’t get one then.  I have to wonder if this post isn’t just a troll.

No need to wonder at all. Not sure why you even bothered posting.

[wheels2040]

I can't recommend an AP Mach2 enough. It is just a fantastic mount. And the support is second to none in my experience with my previous Mach1 that I bought used and with the new Mach2. 

[Victory Pete]

I can't recommend an AP Mach2 enough. It is just a fantastic mount. And the support is second to none in my experience with my previous Mach1 that I bought used and with the new Mach2. 

How about future support, any idea about that?

[Kolenka]

I will be doing serious AP, I just bought an ASI2600 Duo. I figured I would use the G11 for AP and when I get a big reflector, use the EQ8-R Pro.

 

This does make things harder for sure. The G11G should be a good mount for photography, and has been proven in the field for years now. It's also noticeably lighter than the Mach2.

 

I jumped straight to the Mach2 from the SXD and don't regret it one bit. But it's also a much larger jump going from a mass-produced mount that needed a 3rd-party electronics board to track/guide properly, to a "last mount you'll ever need". I've been shooting at up to about 700mm without a guide scope at all, which is certainly nice to be able to pull off, but it's not a requirement to get good data. I'd be lying if it didn't bring a smile to my face every time though.

 

I agree with Jim, see how you get on with the G11G for imaging before the window closes. I think you've already got a setup that can go a long way.

[Victory Pete]

Does anyone find the saddle knobs to be too small? I have small knobs on my G11 that bug me but the knobs on the EQ8R are big enough to get some leverage on them.

[Kolenka]

How about future support, any idea about that?

In what way? It's a fairly new mount in their lineup, but the Mach1 was around for something like 10 years if my memory isn't bad. Parts/adapters/etc are still available for the Mach1 (partly because of shared components with other AP mounts for things like the control box). 

 

What's the specific concern?

[Victory Pete]

In what way? It's a fairly new mount in their lineup, but the Mach1 was around for something like 10 years if my memory isn't bad. Parts/adapters/etc are still available for the Mach1 (partly because of shared components with other AP mounts for things like the control box). 

 

What's the specific concern?

Roland retiring and closing up shop.

[Kolenka]

Roland retiring and closing up shop.

 

Roland retiring will not end AP. In his own words from 2016:

"The mount production pretty much runs itself with almost no input from myself. If I were to retire today (which I am not doing btw) it would make zero difference in the future of our mountings. I do spend the majority of my time in the optical shop with making the lenses and mirrors. I have a great crew that makes the mechanical parts and helps with the assembly of all the bits and pieces. I also spend a fair amount of time developing ways to make optics in a more deterministic way that requires less of the old school techniques and uses more advanced processes that can be done by people other than myself. So, I am passing down my knowledge as time passes, and you will eventually see AP scopes being offered with optics by other top world class opticians. And yes, we are also very much making plans to develop new leadership of this company in the business end of AP."

 

So it's not as if Roland is looking to close everything done once he's ready to kick back (if ever), he's building something that will survive him. I will admit that there have been many smaller shops that haven't done so well in that area (Half-Hitch being one of them, sadly). 

 

 

Does anyone find the saddle knobs to be too small? I have small knobs on my G11 that bug me but the knobs on the EQ8R are big enough to get some leverage on them.

This sort of thing seems fixable with third party knobs?

[Victory Pete]

Roland retiring will not end AP. In his own words from 2016:

"The mount production pretty much runs itself with almost no input from myself. If I were to retire today (which I am not doing btw) it would make zero difference in the future of our mountings. I do spend the majority of my time in the optical shop with making the lenses and mirrors. I have a great crew that makes the mechanical parts and helps with the assembly of all the bits and pieces. I also spend a fair amount of time developing ways to make optics in a more deterministic way that requires less of the old school techniques and uses more advanced processes that can be done by people other than myself. So, I am passing down my knowledge as time passes, and you will eventually see AP scopes being offered with optics by other top world class opticians. And yes, we are also very much making plans to develop new leadership of this company in the business end of AP."

 

So it's not as if Roland is looking to close everything done once he's ready to kick back (if ever), he's building something that will survive him. I will admit that there have been many smaller shops that haven't done so well in that area (Half-Hitch being one of them, sadly). 

 

 

This sort of thing seems fixable with third party knobs?

Thanks for this reply.