new scope...how perfect should I expect it to be?

I would have stopped before writting:

this utter lack of professionalism in letting the scope
leave your factory in such a condition.

How did this telescope make it out of your factory in such a condition
and what is your explanation for the total lack of quality control?
I await your response before I pack it up and send it back to
Astronomics for a full refund and move on to Meade."

Save those comments for the news group. Your letter up to that point
was very reasonable, and to me indicates that you deserve another scope
on their dime. Tearing into their credibility won't help you at this
point. Leave that to your lawyer if they don't give you satisfaction
(which I'm pretty sure they will).
I suspect if they would have shipped you a clean scope that didn't star
test as well as your TVs, you might chalk it up to mass production,
design limitations, less money=less performance, etc. shrugged and kept
the scope as a mostly satisfied customer.

Shawn

Shawn wrote:
I would have stopped before writting:

this utter lack of professionalism in letting the scope

leave your factory in such a condition.

How did this telescope make it out of your factory in such a condition
and what is your explanation for the total lack of quality control?
I await your response before I pack it up and send it back to
Astronomics for a full refund and move on to Meade."


Save those comments for the news group. Your letter up to that point
was very reasonable, and to me indicates that you deserve another scope
on their dime.

Agree: Always best to write such things and then send it a day or two
later .. but maybe he did (and did not send it but to us).

Agree: Always best to write such things and then send it a day or two
later .. but maybe he did (and did not send it but to us).

No, I sent it when I was upset last night right after opening the boxes.
A few things I didn't metion that also led to my frustration...

1. The angle at which one of the tripod legs extends is larger than the
other two by about 1/4 inch where the leg spreader is positioned, so
that I have to push that leg in to get it to touch the spreader.

2. In addition to all the other cosmetic issues with the scope, the
decal reads "Special Editio" along with a large bubble under the "E". No
big deal on the decals, but it just adds to the impression of
carelessness when taken together with the large amounts of glass dust,
moderate dust inside the scope, the grease in the baffle tube and the
swirl marks on the mirror.

3. I purchased 2 TMB/Burgess 9mm planetary eyepieces and they were
accompanied by a letter and some replacement parts telling me to
disassemble the eyepiece and replace the retaining ring in the barrel
with one that includes baffles, which I did, although putting a screw
driver that close to the lower lens made me very nervous.

So, except for the Astrozap dew shield, every single thing I ordered had
quality control or fit and finish issues. Now that I'm calmed down from
the series of disappointments of last night, daylight tests of the scope
and eyepieces seem to show perfect performance. It was just the
succession of one thing going wrong after the other that caused me to
show my frustration at the end of the letter and tell them I'd try Meade
instead. I'll know more when the cloudy go away from upstate NY, but so
far, it seems like it was all cosmetic and will not significantly affect
the optical performance of the telescope or eyepieces.

--
Clear Skies,
Paul Murphy

(remove gemini to email me)

Paul Murphy wrote:
Agree: Always best to write such things and then send it a day or two
later .. but maybe he did (and did not send it but to us).


No, I sent it when I was upset last night right after opening the boxes.
A few things I didn't metion that also led to my frustration...

1. The angle at which one of the tripod legs extends is larger than the
other two by about 1/4 inch where the leg spreader is positioned, so
that I have to push that leg in to get it to touch the spreader.


Same was true of my Nexstar8GPS. I ended up having to grind the leg
ends where they met the central hub of the tripod using my bench grinder
to make the angles even. This became apparent only when I upgraded the
original plastic spreader to an inflexible metal Starizona spreader last
month.

2. In addition to all the other cosmetic issues with the scope, the
decal reads "Special Editio" along with a large bubble under the "E". No
big deal on the decals, but it just adds to the impression of
carelessness when taken together with the large amounts of glass dust,
moderate dust inside the scope, the grease in the baffle tube and the
swirl marks on the mirror.

3. I purchased 2 TMB/Burgess 9mm planetary eyepieces and they were
accompanied by a letter and some replacement parts telling me to
disassemble the eyepiece and replace the retaining ring in the barrel
with one that includes baffles, which I did, although putting a screw
driver that close to the lower lens made me very nervous.


But this sounds like TMB (not Celestron or the distributor). Sounds
like an upgrade, to be sure. I would not put this in the quality
control realm.

So, except for the Astrozap dew shield, every single thing I ordered had
quality control or fit and finish issues. Now that I'm calmed down from
the series of disappointments of last night, daylight tests of the scope
and eyepieces seem to show perfect performance. It was just the
succession of one thing going wrong after the other that caused me to
show my frustration at the end of the letter and tell them I'd try Meade
instead. I'll know more when the cloudy go away from upstate NY, but so
far, it seems like it was all cosmetic and will not significantly affect
the optical performance of the telescope or eyepieces.


Good to hear that, Paul. In the end that is the most important thing :-)

Phil

No, I sent it when I was upset last night right after opening the
boxes.
A few things I didn't metion that also led to my frustration...

1. The angle at which one of the tripod legs extends is larger than the

other two by about 1/4 inch where the leg spreader is positioned, so
that I have to push that leg in to get it to touch the spreader.


2. In addition to all the other cosmetic issues with the scope, the
decal reads "Special Editio" along with a large bubble under the "E".
No
big deal on the decals, but it just adds to the impression of
carelessness when taken together with the large amounts of glass dust,
moderate dust inside the scope, the grease in the baffle tube and the
swirl marks on the mirror.

Heh, nice.

Maybe you can call up Celestron and talk the the owner!

rat
~( );

Agree: Always best to write such things and then send it a day or two

later .. but maybe he did (and did not send it but to us).

Yeah, that'w what Abe Lincoln did.

rat
~( );

The flashlight test is tough on any scope not kept in a class-10 clean
room. You might be the unlucky guy who received one of the inventory
remnants left over from the holiday production rush. It's not supposed
to work that way, but quality control might be a bit less "involved"
during the months when more stuff has to ship to retailers.

This hobby is funny in that some companies will make state-of-the-art
optics with beautiful multilayer coatings and then ruin the whole effect
with a handful of cheap screws that save them maybe twenty five cents in
manufacturing costs.


Paul Murphy wrote:
About 5 years ago I bought a TV Pronto and I bought a TV 102 a couple of
years ago. In both cases the optics and the fit and finish were
absolutely perfect, which may have led me to be a bit more critical
about optical and mechanical fit and finish standards. I was looking for
a very, very portable 8in SCT and I thought the NexStar 8i XLT would be
perfect for me for use going up and down the stairs in my apartment (no
elevator).

Well it arrived and I can't decide if I should pack it up for a refund
or give it a chance. I've only had 3 clear nights since the end of
November, so I'm not sure how soon I can test it under the stars.

Here's the letter I sent Celestron support and I'm wondering if I'm
....

leave your factory in such a condition.

How did this telescope make it out of your factory in such a condition
and what is your explanation for the total lack of quality control?
I await your response before I pack it up and send it back to
Astronomics for a full refund and move on to Meade."
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Any input would be appreciated. I fear that if I spend more money on an
LX90 I will lose out on the extreme portability and may end up with the
same fit and finish problems. Thanks!