First experience with a cheap scope -- puke!!

I'm a real beginner at this amateur astronomy stuff -- got my first scope,
an XT-8, in January and my second, an ETX-90 in April.

An older gentleman joined our astronomy club last summer and at our
Christmas party this week he told me that his son bought him a scope for
Christmas last year and that he has not been able to see anything with it
since he got it. It's a Tasco 114mm reflector on an EQ mount, sitting an a
tripod. I offered to come out and check the collimation. Just got back
from spending three hours at his home.

What a mess. First, I had to remove the primary and center-spot it,
re-install primary, and collimate the scope -- which was a real experience,
though it did collimate finally.

Then I attacked the mount -- I don't know a thing about EQ mounts but I
could tell this one had problems. Took it apart, put it back together,
snugging up nuts, bolts, screws, and whatever. Lined up the finder scope
with the main scope (very frustrating). Read the instructions with him and
figured out which knobs to turn to make it go up and down, then, figured out
how to polar align it for tracking.
Of course, none of this really matters because the tripod was not even worth
the name tripod.

Now I understand what you guys mean when you talk about avoiding department
store scopes. There should be a law against selling this junk.

I left with him my latest Orion catalog and gently pointed him to the 4.5-
and 6-inch Dobs -- he is 80 and could not carry anything bigger. Problem is
the Tasco was a gift from his son and he really can't replace it -- "Sorry,
son, you gave me a piece of **** for Christmas so I put it out for the
trash." I jokingly suggested that he could get another scope and hide it
when his son visits -- maybe he'll take the hint.

Sad. He's a very nice gent, wife died two years ago so he lives with his
old dog and his amateur radio equipment (for you hams out there, at age 80
he still copies 30 WPM in his head -- after working on the scope he and I
cranked up his old Drake gear with his Viking Matchbox antenna tuner feeding
an all-band doublet with twin-lead and made a few CW contacts on the low end
of 80). I'll probably haul my 8-inch Dob out to his home -- it's fairly
dark -- and let him see the difference.


--
----
JAS

"JAS" wrote Sad. He's a very nice gent, wife died two years ago so he
lives with his
old dog and his amateur radio equipment (for you hams out there, at age 80
he still copies 30 WPM in his head -- after working on the scope he and I
cranked up his old Drake gear with his Viking Matchbox antenna tuner
feeding
an all-band doublet with twin-lead and made a few CW contacts on the low
end
of 80).

Neat! And good work helping him with the 'scope.

dit-dit

Howard Lester




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Tasco products *used* to work well. Maybe now they're having them made to
the same designs by people who no longer understand how to tell whether they
work?

Tasco products *used* to work well.

Hi Michael:

Yes they did. I had a Tasco 11TR for a little while in the mid 70s (the
red-tube 4.5") as a young G.I. I bought it to tide me over while saving up for
a better scope. But I was...surprised. I picked it up on sale at the BX, and
didn't expect much at all. But, dang, it was alright. The mount, while not the
Rock of Gibraltar, was OK, and despite the spherical mirror, it did a
respectable job on the planets, and impressed me with what it could do on the
deep sky under the dark skies I had up in Arkansas.

Peace,
Rod Mollise
Author of _Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope_
Like SCTs and MCTs?
Check-out sct-user, the mailing list for CAT fanciers!
Goto http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index.html

"Michael A. Covington" wrote
in message ...
Tasco products *used* to work well. Maybe now they're having them made to
the same designs by people who no longer understand how to tell whether
they
work?

These Tasco Galaxsee scopes are pretty much the same scopes as the Celestron
FirstScope series.. They should all be being made by the same people.

Rod Mollise wrote:

Tasco products *used* to work well.

Hi Michael:

Yes they did. I had a Tasco 11TR for a little while in the mid 70s (the
red-tube 4.5") as a young G.I. I bought it to tide me over while saving up for
a better scope. But I was...surprised. I picked it up on sale at the BX, and
didn't expect much at all. But, dang, it was alright. The mount, while not the
Rock of Gibraltar, was OK, and despite the spherical mirror, it did a
respectable job on the planets, and impressed me with what it could do on the
deep sky under the dark skies I had up in Arkansas.

I had essentially the same scope though it was a white tube that I got
in 1969, I think. I think it was the 11TE. I didn't know anything so I
wouldn't have known if it was good or bad but I lucked out. By the time
I got my 8" I knew the difference and knew it was OK. Later I realized
I should have kept it! But boy, that metal tube sure did get cold and
the eyepieces I can do without.

Mike Simmons

Good for you for helping him out. You did a lot of work on that junk
just to get it working. With your help he may get to see something with
it after all.

Mike Simmons

Now I understand what you guys mean when you talk about avoiding department
store scopes. There should be a law against selling this junk.

I'll probably haul my 8-inch Dob out to his home -- it's fairly
dark -- and let him see the difference.

First I would like to congratulate you on taking the time to help this older
gentleman. Second, as anyone reading this newsgroup knows, I agree that these
scopes are to be avoided if at all possible.

But at the same time, for some folks, these scopes are what they have and there
is not going to be something different or fancier. I believe this seems to be
the case here at least for now.

I suggest that rather than concentrating on how bad this Tasco 114mm scope
might be, consider what might be done to improve it. Many of us started with
scopes that are far worse than this one and still were able to enjoy observing.
I know I did and I was able to learn a great deal not only about the heavens
but also about the telescopes. Certainly I don't recommend buying such scopes
when better scopes exit but at the same, such scopes can provide a lot of
pleasure. 100 years ago, people would have killed for such a scope.

I believe that often with these department store scopes the OTA itself is
actually quite decent and the mount is workable. Hopefully this is not the
short tube Newtonian scope. If it is a standard Newtonian, the mirrors are
generally pretty decent because they are F8 or so and spherical, but nearly
diffraction limited. As Rod says, these work pretty well. Even the Orion
XT4.5 has a spherical mirror and it gets good reviews.

In general the limiting factors in these scopes are the eyepieces and the
finders, something can be done about the rest of the scope. And the eyepieces
and finders can be replaced for a reasonable cost.

Most of these scopes come with 0.965inch eyepieces that are not good (read
terrible.) Fortunately many of these scopes have removeable adapters so that
decent quality 1.25 inch eyepieces can be used. This is the place I would
begin. Bring over a few of your eyepieces and try them out, they should make
things a great deal better.

Decent quality Plossl eyepieces can be purchased from Apogee Inc, Adorama and
other vendors for aroudn $25. And these can be used with other scopes in the
future.

If the scope cannot use 1.25 inch eyepieces, then either buying some decent
Kellner's types from Orion or used ones from www.astromart.com in the 0.965
size is one option. The other option is upgrading the focuser.

Normally these scopes come with 5x24 finders that are essentially worthless,
they normally have a washer that reduces the effective aperture even more.
Some people have had success by removing the optics from these finders and just
using them as a sight tube. If this can be done without destroying the cross
hairs, then this is a reasonable way to go. Otherwise, upgrading the finder is
another option. Many 6x30 finders are available on www.astromart.com and
www.scopestuff.com has decent red dot finders for $20 plus $5 for the dovetail
if needed.

So, that really leaves the mount. Such inexpensive EQ mounts are not as stable
as a DOB mount but they can be made to work. The solid vibration free
performance that you experience with you DOB is not the normal with EQ mounts
unless one spends a good deal of money.

There are a few web pages around on how to do this. Hanging weights from the
center, making sure everything is tight, filling the legs with sand or foam,
making new wooden legs, these are some of the things that are possible to make
this mount workable.

So my suggestion is to avoid the temptation to show off your scope, that is
likely to lead to disappointment. I have made this mistake a time or two.

Rather, consider taking the attitude that you are going to make the best of the
situation and together you will make this scope into the best scope it can be.

------------

And I might add this thought. The son probably would not be offended to see a
nicer telescope alongside the Tasco at some point. My guess is that the son
was interested in giving his father something that could get him started in a
new hobby and that a new scope alongside the gift scope would simply be a sign
that the gift was a well chosen one.

But for now, decent eyepieces and improving the finder seem like the way to
make this into a scope that can provide pleasure and knowledge.

Best wishes to all

Jon Isaacs

First off, it was very generous of you to do the work you've done.

Next, if you're still willing, you can easily convert the OTA to a Dob.
Assuming decent images and usable eyepieces and focuser, a little wood, some
Teflon and Ebony Star will get him something comparable to the Dobs in the
catalog. I know several folks who've gone this way and ended up very happy.

HAve fun,
Frank

"JAS" wrote in message
...
....
What a mess. First, I had to remove the primary and center-spot it,
re-install primary, and collimate the scope -- which was a real
experience,
though it did collimate finally.

Then I attacked the mount ...

I left with him my latest Orion catalog ...

I'll probably haul my 8-inch Dob out to his home -- it's fairly
dark -- and let him see the difference.


--
----
JAS

"Michael A. Covington"
wrote in :

Tasco products *used* to work well. Maybe now they're having them
made to the same designs by people who no longer understand how to
tell whether they work?

I disagree. Ever since I can remember (the early 1960s) they have used
cheap, undersized mounts made of pot metal. Badly fit, and they tried to
take up the slop with nylon shims and grease with the consistency of STP.
Even the Tasco altazimuth was almost unusable brand new out of the box.
Almost impossible to find anything, and when you did find it, try to make
it stay put long enough to view it. Back then, the tube and optics were
usually OK but the focuser was always cheap and sloppy. Cheap Japanese size
oculars, etc.

You get what you pay for, and Tasco has always been the department store
loss leader.