39 replies to this topic

[mountman]

And here is why I think that the drive is Magnusson - the label on the mounting plate.  Could this be an incorrect assignment of origin?

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[mountman]

The saddle is from a Dobbins Instrument Company mount or from Parallax Instruments (who acquired the patterns to cast them). 

Spent about an hour going down this rabbit hole.  Very interesting.  The 16" rings that came with this mount are identical to Parallax Instruments Standard Tube Rings.  So, I think that shiefspiegler has definitely pointed me in the right direction here given his ID of the saddle.  Saddle + Rings = Dobbins/Parallax.

However, I can find no pictures on the web of mounts that are identified as Dobbins and any pictures that I found of Parallax mounts (on their site) are modern - of course.

 

I had thought that the mount was a very old Cave (late 50's) due primarily to the hand knobs and other sorta similar aspects.  Now I am wondering if the mount only goes back to the '80's.  I'd love to see a picture of a Dobbins mount with an eye out for those hand knobs and the RA drive.

[apfever]

No date on the motor with that mounting plate removed?

 

It might be Magnusson.  It is single digits temp and snowing and a short jaunt to the barn, but going to be worth it.  Seems similar to the Magnusson mount as I recall....ohhhhhh better take the camera too.....nasty out but here goes....

[mountman]

I found a Magnusson mount on the Forums here

https://www.cloudyni...agnusson-mount/

in a topic started by Bartine.

 

Looking at the pictures of the mount posted there, I have to say that the RA drive and circle there look exactly like my mount with the exception of the size of the spur gear.  But the casting is different than mine without the axis clutch/clamps and hand knobs.

[mountman]

No date on the motor with that mounting plate removed?

 

It might be Magnusson.  It is single digits temp and snowing and a short jaunt to the barn, but going to be worth it.  Seems similar to the Magnusson mount as I recall....ohhhhhh better take the camera too.....nasty out but here goes....

I'm just not inclined to take the RA drive apart in the current weather temps......

Dating the motor will have to wait.  

[apfever]

Yeah, that was chilly.  I thought the motor was out by the picture in entry #26.  I think the motor might be dated 67.  Looks like a "DA..." on one side of the bracket, and "67" on the same line but other side of the bracket.

 

Not Magnusson, still looks Telescopish to me. Here's my Magnusson.

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 

[mountman]

The picture in #26 was a picture that I took a year ago when I was re-greasing the mount and adding the needle bearings.  I also thought that the "67" that I could see might be the date.

 

Anyway, your Magnusson mount doesn't look anything like mine.  It does look like the mount pictured in the ad copy here

https://www.cloudyni...agnusson-mount/

so I can't dispute what the mount's looked like unless Magnusson changed things up over the course of their tenure.

 

I'm starting to think I might have the telescope equivalent of Johnny Cash's Cadillac.

[apfever]

I'm starting to think I might have the telescope equivalent of Johnny Cash's Cadillac.

Could be but I think the basic GEM mount is a production unit. The machining on the mounting tang is quite rough but it is a bit outside ATM to cast and machine the shaft housings and related parts.  The pier cap looks factory, close but not quite Cave. 

Also see this LINK on same subject.

Mountman, I'm by Buckley AFB (now Space Base).  Bring what you want, come out and look at it all, compare, take pictures, ask questions, sometimes I remember things - I think. To me, this is the fun part  about having this stuff. We can get on the comp to check things that click. Can't beat two heads at the same place and time to figure. 

 

Known:

Setting circles are Magnusson - commonly used by many manufacturers.

Legs are Cave or Telescopics

Drive matches Magnusson

Unused OTA mount parts are Telescopics

Knobs distinctly used by Telescopics

 

 

The basic mount looks closest to Telescopics. Many makers like Magnusson also made parts for other manufacturers. It gets messed up. Heck, Star-Liner used an entire Edmund mount for one of their production scopes - after they ground the name "EDMUND" off the castings and rearranged the parts (I have that one too).  

Edited by apfever, 12 February 2025 - 12:03 PM.

[mountman]

I found a Telescopics catalog here

 

https://wiki.telesco...970_Catalog.pdf

 

page 5 shows a mount head that is the spittin' image of mine.  Including the set screw (barely visible) in the flange of the mount that secures the latitude positioning of the mount.  When I saw that, I wondered if Cave had that "feature".  If not, then that points towards Telescopics more definitively.   My mount has longer shafts which accommodate the Magnusson features but that is an easy customization for the factory to incorporate upon request.

 

Given that all of the Cave piers that I have seen have some sort of plaque or marker which identifies them as "Cave" and my pier does not, that also points to Telescopics.  Or, at least, something other than Cave.

 

Here is what I think the mount is:  Telescopics (circa 1970) which has been upgraded/retrofitted with Magnusson circles and RA drive.

 

The only part of the puzzle that still has me baffled is the mounting plate and the 16" rings that came with the mount when I got it.   The saddle has been identified here as Dobbins or Parallax and I have confirmed that the rings are identical to Parallax.  If Parallax got their molds from Dobbins, then it is conceivable to me that the saddle and rings are Dobbins (predating Parallax which I believe got started in 1991).

 

The next leap of faith is to speculate that Telescopics bought some of their components from Dobbins.  Can anyone here confirm that?

 

IF all of the above is accurate then I have a complete and original Telescopics with the Magnusson upgrade.  End of story.

 

I'm going to pull the ad (it has drawn zero interest anyway) and re-list the mount later with accurate information.

 

Again,   many, many, many thanks to all here for your wealth of knowledge.

[mountman]

For those who may have interest in the Telescopics scopes, the following link was provided me by apfever and is an interesting read.

 

https://www.cloudyni...hl=+telescopics

[John Rose]

I have two Cave Piers with no sign of any sort of label. They could have been repainted. 

[RalphMeisterTigerMan]

If I didn't know any better, I would hazard a guess and say that it looks very much like a mount and pier from a 1980's Meade 10-inch DS F/4.5 reflector. The one which advertised that for, I think it was, $299.99 more you could get the Sealmaster Ballbearings (highly recommended).

 

Clear skies and keep looking up!

RalphMeisterTigerMan

[deSitter]

I found a Telescopics catalog here

 

https://wiki.telesco...970_Catalog.pdf

 

page 5 shows a mount head that is the spittin' image of mine.  Including the set screw (barely visible) in the flange of the mount that secures the latitude positioning of the mount.  When I saw that, I wondered if Cave had that "feature".  If not, then that points towards Telescopics more definitively.   My mount has longer shafts which accommodate the Magnusson features but that is an easy customization for the factory to incorporate upon request.

 

Given that all of the Cave piers that I have seen have some sort of plaque or marker which identifies them as "Cave" and my pier does not, that also points to Telescopics.  Or, at least, something other than Cave.

 

Here is what I think the mount is:  Telescopics (circa 1970) which has been upgraded/retrofitted with Magnusson circles and RA drive.

 

The only part of the puzzle that still has me baffled is the mounting plate and the 16" rings that came with the mount when I got it.   The saddle has been identified here as Dobbins or Parallax and I have confirmed that the rings are identical to Parallax.  If Parallax got their molds from Dobbins, then it is conceivable to me that the saddle and rings are Dobbins (predating Parallax which I believe got started in 1991).

 

The next leap of faith is to speculate that Telescopics bought some of their components from Dobbins.  Can anyone here confirm that?

 

IF all of the above is accurate then I have a complete and original Telescopics with the Magnusson upgrade.  End of story.

 

I'm going to pull the ad (it has drawn zero interest anyway) and re-list the mount later with accurate information.

 

Again,   many, many, many thanks to all here for your wealth of knowledge.

Telescopics! That was the name I couldn't place, but I remembered visually the catalog and that's what first popped into my head when I saw your mount.

 

-drl

[mountman]

I have two Cave Piers with no sign of any sort of label. They could have been repainted. 

I certainly wondered about that.....  whether Cave released mounts that had no name plate.  As your case implies, maybe they did.   Given the weight of all other evidence, however, I still conclude that it is Telescopics. 

As to whether a label could have been painted over or any location where a label previously had been positioned has been painted over, I can see no evidence of that on my pier.

 

For what it is worth, my pier is 6" diameter.  I throw that out just in case that distinguishes it in any way that anyone here knows about.   I'm not optimistic that it does, however,

[mountman]

If I didn't know any better, I would hazard a guess and say that it looks very much like a mount and pier from a 1980's Meade 10-inch DS F/4.5 reflector. The one which advertised that for, I think it was, $299.99 more you could get the Sealmaster Ballbearings (highly recommended).

 

Clear skies and keep looking up!

RalphMeisterTigerMan

It would be even closer to the DS16 given that the DS16 had the same/similar hand knob on at least one axis.

However, I have had two 628's, one 625, one 826, one RG10, two RG12's and one Starfinder 6" equatorial.  I'm familiar with Meade design tenancies and proclivities from back in the day.  I'm just not seeing Meade here.  Mount head, circles, drive, saddle and pier legs all deviate from Meade.