Stephen Paul wrote:
Does anyone know the pactical differences in these scopes, aside from price?

I'm concerned about the plastics of the CPC mostly. They don't look as
robust to me as those on the GPS models. Also, what about the new Meade LX90
series in 10" and 12" apertures? Are these more robust or less robust than
the Celestron 9.25 and 11?. While optics are obviously important, it is also
important that the mechanics of the mount be robust and long-lived.

I'm considering the purchase of a GoTo SCT for binoviewing (as I've
indicated elsewhere), and while 8" would be ideal for portability reasons,
10" or greater would better suit my skies, as well as help make up for any
loss of light in the binoviewer.

-Stephen

Hi:

The CPC doesn't use "North and Level" during its GPS alignment...this
is to avoid patent infringement problems with Meade. Instead, there's
SkyAlign, where you point the scope at 3 bright objects. It figures out
what these objects are with the help of GPS and completes your
alignment.

Redesigned fork...LOOKS sturdier than that on the GPS. We'll see when
Celestron releases the 11.

Redesigned tripod...somewhat better.

Cheesy plastic handcontroller holder instead of the hole in the fork
arm that made all the Nexstars look so cool and furturistic. ;-).

No carbon fiber tubes.

Bigger drive base with a larger azimuth gear assembly (should have
painted the base and arms black and the tub orange, though). ;-)

The 8 inch LX90 is a great scope, but I'm afraid the 10 and 12 OTAs
will "challenge" this fork/drivebase. We'll see... ;-)

Peace,
Rod