"bob" wrote in message ...
That would be disappointing, since Celestron sells the 9.25 on an EQ-5
mount. If the mount is not up to the task, they shouldn't sell it as a
package.


Hi Bob,

IMHO the EQ5 mount is adequate (at least for my Celestron 8" Newt) for
visual work only. Admittedly the longer tube of the Newt makes harder work
for the mount but 8" Newt vs 9.25 SC would have (ballpark) similar inertia.

HOWEVER- the trap NOT to fall into (and I did) is to get the EQ5 and then
retro-fit Celestron's dual- (or single-) axis motor drive. This option
seemed attractive to me, but the build quality of the retro-fit is woeful. I
can't say this too many times or loudly enough. When the retro-fit kit
arrived I attempted to fit as per the (somewhat brief) instructions. Some
gear parts were so inaccurately machined that they simply would not line up.
I wasted far too much time sourcing other shims and washers etc to get the
parts aligned. Once lined up, the periodic error is enough to make even
low-powered visual use somewhat frustrating, and high-powered views give
stars appearing and disappearing like yo-yos. Photographic work is
impossible. The hand-controller also had a fault - the Northern/Southern
hemisphere slide switch would only maintain contact once it was taped into
position. I sent this part back to my supplier who kept it for 8 weeks then
sent it back (unchanged). (This is a local distributor gripe - *not* a
Celestron gripe, but the switch problem should not have made it past quality
control).

I have since discarded this kit, and the mount now serves in the original
unaltered mode as a reasonable hand-guided EQ5. It is very stable (if a
little heavy), and vibration damping is very reasonable (and I don't use
vibration suppression pads, although I hear of many who swear by them).

Good luck with your purchase.

Al