24 replies to this topic

[Nautilus]

We are wondering what other member’s experiences have been with these mounts in terms of

damping when using the focuser and using the slow motion controls.

 

In particular we are referring to refractors over 80mm, Maks over 102mm, SCTs over 127mm, and reflectors over 114 mm.

 

Also are there any other issues you have found using these scopes on those mounts.

Edited by Nautilus, 17 February 2025 - 03:10 PM.

[kasprowy]

I've put an ETX125 on the SVBony and it worked fine. I've put short refractors on it and that worked good as well. My Tak FC100DZ seemed to be too much, but I think it would probably handle an FC100DC. I mainly use it with my Apex 102 Mak and ETX 125 Mak. The slow motion controls work well. I don't have any experience with the Twilight I.

Edited by kasprowy, 17 February 2025 - 11:02 AM.

[jeffreym]

With the Arm vertical and having the TW1 on a 2" tripod (AVX or LXD-75), I have used my 9.25" SCT without trouble.  It is definitely an overloaded setup but it worked for me.  Yes, it shakes some but I can tolerate that given the equipment I would have to take to the field to make it steady.  Recognizing the overload and not wanting to wear out the TW1, eventually I bought an Omegon Twinmaster AZ (not much heavier but has a LOT more capacity) and put that on the LXD-75 legs.  I find the 225 to have similar characteristics as the TW1 but I have never put the 9.25 on it as I bought that later.

 

So, there is a limit of course but I think heavier, shorter scopes will work on either.  Scopes like the C6 SCT, C8 SCT, 127 Mak, 102mm refractor up to f/7 doublet, and the Orion ST120 seem reasonable.  My 90mm triplet does fine. 

 

Even I would not put an f/7, 127mm triplet refractor on one. . .

 

Have fun,

Jeff

[Polyphemos]

The load bearing and damping capability of the SV225 mount is severely diminished when the inadequately resistant nylon lock nuts securing the altitude and azimuth axis shafts back out and allow for the introduction of slop into the system. There is a very great difference in the performance between a SV225 mount with or without properly torqued axis retention nuts.

 

The difference can be as significant as having a mount satisfactory for only 80mm or smaller refractors, or adequate for 100mm refractors or larger. When we talk about the mount’s capabilities are we talking about the mount as designed or as constructed; they’re not necessarily the same thing.

 

I doubt that any factory delivered SV225 mounts in their present configuration will retain proper axis nut torque for long and SvBony appears to have fumbled once again by not adequately testing their products before offering them to the public. You’ll know if your SV225 mount has lost its azimuth axis integrity if you can see lateral movement in the joint when you grab the upright arm and give it a good side to side twist. If the azimuth joint is loose the altitude joint won’t be far behind.

 

Fortunately the problem can be easily and inexpensively solved and the mount restored to full functionality using commonly available tools and hardware. When it’s manufacturing problems are solved and the SV225 mount is working properly it really is a very capable mount.

 

[Neanderthal]

C5 / PiFinder / large Astrotech 1.25" diagonal / Pinty laser with a Morpheus eyepiece is a cakewalk for the Sv225 mount. Put a capable tripod under it and I think it'll be good for at least a 10-12 pound load.

 

 

[Dave Novoselsky]

The best of this basic breed is the Sightron mount currently available for $349 from Hutech.  Superb fit, finish and build quality in comparison to the Svbony, Porta etc.  of course you do get what you pay for and there is a substantial premium but if you want something that will last in the long term . . .

[jcj380]

ST120 on a TW-1 was fine, but after adding Astro Devices encoders things got a little shaky.  Adding a wood plate to the arm made no difference that I could see.  Too bad PiFinder wasn't available at the time - I wonder how that would have been instead of encoders.  An AT102ED was too much for the TW-1 IMO.

 

I switched to a SkyWatcher AZ5 and ScopeTech Zero, eventually sold the AZ5 (and the 120!).  I admit I'm tempted to try the SVBONY, just for grins with my current refractors (60ED, 72ED, ST102).

Edited by jcj380, 17 February 2025 - 01:51 PM.

[Polyphemos]

The best of this basic breed is the Sightron mount currently available for $349 from Hutech.  Superb fit, finish and build quality in comparison to the Svbony, Porta etc.  of course you do get what you pay for and there is a substantial premium but if you want something that will last in the long term . . .

I think the Sightron mount is great but it’s a quite a bit lighter duty mount than the SV225. While it may hold similar maximum loads for a time I don’t think it will hold up to those loads over the long-term as well as the SV225 mount because the mechanical components of the former are significantly smaller and less robust than those of the latter. It’s also missing the very useful and effective setting circles included with the SV225.

[Dave Novoselsky]

I think the Sightron mount is great but it’s a quite a bit lighter duty mount than the SV225. While it may hold similar maximum loads for a time I don’t think it will hold up to those loads over the long-term as well as the SV225 mount because the mechanical components of the former are significantly smaller and less robust than those of the latter. It’s also missing the very useful and effective setting circles included with the SV225.

True but I was referring to build quality and anticipated longevity rather than load capacity.

[Nautilus]

I think the OP does not talk about Sightron mounts just those in the header. You are then comparing a mount about 3X more costly.  It is like comparing a Mercedes to a Chevy Cruzer.

 

I forgot to add Vixen Porta 2 in the discussion.. Oops.

Edited by Nautilus, 17 February 2025 - 03:29 PM.

[Polyphemos]

True but I was referring to build quality and anticipated longevity rather than load capacity.

Longevity and load capacity are inextricably related if you compare the mounts at equally high loads. Put an equally large load, say a 115 mm refractor, on both mounts and I would expect the Sightron to quit long before the SV225. I wouldn’t anticipate either mount suffering a premature demise if they’re used with reasonable loads within their capabilities.

 

As to build quality, minus the unnecessary blunder with the nylon lock nuts and the too thick paint beneath the setting circles, when I compare the two mounts to my eye the SV225 is similarly well built. The Sightron isn’t without its own faults and I returned my first due to excessive gear mesh lash that I couldn’t adjust out, and an excessively delicate finish that blemished if you looked at it wrong. The slow motion control knobs are not a thing of joy either.

 

The Sightron does have the advantage that by it’s clever design it’s configurable to a variety of scopes and situations and can be disassembled for smaller transport. With the SV225 what you see is what you get but what you get is, I suspect, a stronger and more robust mount.

[Polyphemos]

I think the OP does not talk about Sightron mounts just those in the header. You are then comparing a mount about 3X more costly.  It is like comparing a Mercedes to a Chevy Cruzer.

 

I forgot to add Vixen Porta 2 in the discussion.. Oops.

Well, at least they’re all similar in that they’re reasonably affordable Alt-Az mounts with slow motion controls.

[Neanderthal]

True but I was referring to build quality and anticipated longevity rather than load capacity.

If you are suggesting that the Sv225 is not built well or will last very long, what are you basing this assumption on? Other than a poor selection of two locknuts and the occasional overzealous powder coating where the alt and az rings reside, I haven't seen any indication yet that this mount isn't made pretty darn good. Most of the time, we'd be complaining that not enough powder coating was used, lol. For the extra $225 saved, one can get the finest locknuts on the planet and still have enough money left over to buy one or two more Sv225's. 

[Dave Novoselsky]

No, I was a very early supporter of the SV225 on this site if you check my posting and I have and continue to recommend it.  The post I was responding to suggested that some of the components it uses might lack longevity.  I responded pointing out that one could select the much more expensive Sightron mount if that was a concern.

 

However I have been using and enjoying the SV225 for more than a year now and have no plans on replacing it with anything similar.

[Neanderthal]

No, I was a very early supporter of the SV225 on this site if you check my posting and I have and continue to recommend it.  The post I was responding to suggested that some of the components it uses might lack longevity.  I responded pointing out that one could select the much more expensive Sightron mount if that was a concern.

 

However I have been using and enjoying the SV225 for more than a year now and have no plans on replacing it with anything similar.

[brightsky]

TLI, SV225, Porta II, Sightron, AZ5, etc are all lightweight A/Z mounts with slow motion controls.  I have not tried all of these personally but have formed an opinion by reading about them and using an AZ5 with my refractor.  Generally all are good for refractors under 100mm and 100mm refractors under F7, but a lightweight setup with a 100mm refractor above an F7 on any of these mounts with a lightweight or CF tripod is problematic, I think.  The problem is shakiness above about 100X.  It may settle quickly on better mounts but still is present and increases with magnification.  A heavier tripod helps, but that defeats the lightweight goal.

I have come to believe that building a lightweight setup for a 100mm refractor above F7 using any of these lightweight mounts  is borderline.  That doesn’t mean that they will be unusable or not have proponents but that there will be compromises in using them particularly with longer but also with heavier 100mm refractors. 

Of the above mounts, the Sightron seems to have the best reputation for steadiness.  
Reported experiences of using all these mounts with smaller 60-80mm refractors are numerous and very positive.

 

My opinions only.  I have been trying a long while to make a lightweight grab and go out of my F 7.4 100mm and steadiness has been an issue with a light and less expensive A/Z mount on a CF tripod.  I am still looking for the ideal light mount. 

Edited by brightsky, 17 February 2025 - 06:16 PM.

[Dave Novoselsky]

TLI, SV225, Porta II, Sightron, AZ5, etc are all lightweight A/Z mounts with slow motion controls.  I have not tried all of these personally but have formed an opinion by reading about them and using an AZ5 with my refractor.  Generally all are good for refractors under 100mm and 100mm refractors under F7, but a lightweight setup with a 100mm refractor above an F7 on any of these mounts with a lightweight or CF tripod is problematic, I think.  The problem is shakiness above about 100X.  It may settle quickly on better mounts but still is present and increases with magnification.  A heavier tripod helps, but that defeats the lightweight goal.

I have come to believe that building a lightweight setup for a 100mm refractor above F7 using any of these lightweight mounts  is borderline.  That doesn’t mean that they will be unusable or not have proponents but that there will be compromises in using them particularly with longer but also with heavier 100mm refractors. 

Of the above mounts, the Sightron seems to have the best reputation for steadiness.  
Reported experiences of using all these mounts with smaller 60-80mm refractors are numerous and very positive.

 

My opinions only.  I have been trying a long while to make a lightweight grab and go out of my F 7.4 100mm and steadiness has been an issue with a light and less expensive A/Z mount on a CF tripod.  I am still looking for the ideal light mount. 

Stellarvue MC2 and a good wood tripod?

[Polyphemos]

 

With this Omni 102 AZ scope with a GSO focuser, ES 2” mirror diagonal, and APM 30mm UFF eyepiece yielding 22X magnification, vibration is not noticeable. At higher magnifications over 100X or so a sharp rap on the focuser or tripod leg damps out in under two seconds. I’d say the SV225 mount over an Artcise AS90C tripod handles this 102mm scope with relative ease.

[brightsky]

Stellarvue MC2 and a good wood tripod?

Probably the best choice.  It would add a few pounds of weight with the mount, column, and base adapter, a new 500+ dollar investment, and have no slow motion controls.  I am trying to stay with a 10# ARTCISE AS90C tripod for grab and go.  Steadiness though might be gained with an MC2 when compared with the aforementioned mounts.

Edited by brightsky, 18 February 2025 - 12:19 PM.

[Dave Novoselsky]

SLO mo controls are fine but a gentle and deft touch works just as well IMHO

[balcon3]

We are wondering what other member’s experiences have been with these mounts in terms of

damping when using the focuser and using the slow motion controls.

 

In particular we are referring to refractors over 80mm, Maks over 102mm, SCTs over 127mm, and reflectors over 114 mm.

 

Also are there any other issues you have found using these scopes on those mounts.

In my experience the Vixen Portamount II is great for a 80mm f7 refractor. I have read that other people use it for 100mm f7 refractors with a sturdier tripod. For my 100mm f7.4 refractor I now use a Vixen APZ mount on Vixen HAL130 tripod. It is wonderfully ergonomic and stable (the tripod tray helps alot) and the slow mo controls are perfect. I can also use it for my Mewlon 180c, and it holds it well. 

[Nautilus]

Has anyone tried a 130mm f/5  reflector on these mounts and what were  your findings?

[jcj380]

It’s also missing the very useful and effective setting circles included with the SV225.

I've seen a lot of complaints re: setting circles on other mounts.  The 225 circles are usable and reasonably accurate?

[CollinofAlabama]

Has anyone tried a 130mm f/5  reflector on these mounts and what were  your findings?

Michael, well, kinda.  I had the SV225 out for a first light on the 7th.  The picture has me with the AT102ED mounted, but I actually used my C130SLT tube mounted on the SV225 setup.  I found it a bit too wobbly, but I haven't done Jim's (Polyphemos) modifications.  I've been putzing around with other alt-az mounts after this, so need to bother to take it apart and run to the hardware store, which I will eventually do.  I believe the essentials of the SV225 are solid, but, yeah, probably the minor updates he and other contributors to his thread outline will improve things mightily.

 

FWIW, I have found that the C130SLT is, overall, easier on mounts than the F/7 AT102ED.  The AT102ED is quite heavy, compared even to my C102GT F/10 achromat.  Although the moment arm for the C102GT is greater, I am certain, given it weighs in something like 60% of the AT102ED,  it would be easier to mount than the AT102ED.  And the C130SLT is, in my opinion, more like the C102GT than the AT102ED.  So, assuming I bother with the minor and necessary updates Jim, et alia, outline in his thread referenced above and these mods work (and I'd bet they will), yes, the SV225 should easily be up to the task of handling a Celestron, or similar weight 130mm F/5 scope.  But you'll need to fix the bloody lock nuts goof-up that SVBony has implemented.  But that hardly sounds problematic.  A small investment in precious time, yes, but even for someone as generally bad at engineering as me, not really a problem.

[Polyphemos]

I've seen a lot of complaints re: setting circles on other mounts.  The 225 circles are usable and reasonably accurate?

When I had my CG-4 equatorial mount I didn’t have much appreciation for setting circles either, but the ones on the SV225 seem larger, easier to read, and more accessible. I’ve used them during the day to locate Venus, Jupiter, and Saturn, and during the night to find objects that eluded my eyes within my light polluted skies.

 

As to accuracy, they’re as accurate as you’re able to estimate degrees and fractions of a degree between 5mm markings, and like any setting circles on an alt-azimuth mount the azimuth plane must be level. That’s why I’ve mounted a large diameter and accurate level on my mount. I’ve had the best results by indexing off of a bright star near to the object I’m looking for and making a short hop from there. A wide view eyepiece is also a big help.

 

When I’ve had difficulty finding an object it’s most often because I wasn’t using the current time on my SkySafari app, so of course the object was somewhere else entirely, but that’s user error. In summary, and in direct answer to your question, I’ve found the SV225 setting circles to be both very useful and effective.