Review: Bushnell Voyager 78-9440 (was Seeking review of BushnellVoyager line)

Several people responding to my original question suggested I post
a review of this scope. I guess case studies may be useful?
OK, here goes:

The Bushnell Voyager 78-9440 is a classic trash scope.
I got it for free. I paid too much.
Still, after some useage it is not completely without good points.

This is a simple 60 mm refractor. The optics seem fine to
my amateur eye. Although the user's manual says it has
..9" eyepieces, and tells how to use the enclosed adapter
with 1.25" eyepieces, my scope actually came with two
1.25" eyepieces in 8 and 12.5 mm. The diagonal is built to
take 1.25", and the adapter is for .9" eyepieces. So all
I had to do was discard the adapter. This is all to the good.

These are no-name eyepieces (literally - there is nothing at all
printed on them beyond the focal length), A flimsy plastic-housing
diagonal is included, which the manual describes as optional.
There is no way to mount the eyepieces without the diagonal.

Those are all the good features. They are good enough for
observing the Moon. I find that's all I use this for in
practice. Although 60mm is sufficient to see other targets, the
bad features of this scope make it usuable for finding targets
smaller (harder to aim at) than the Moon.

The focus rack is good enough, though not as smooth as I'd like.
With a little effort I am able to achieve focus that is as good
as my aging eyes can tell.

I somehow expected a 60mm telescope to bring in dimmer objects
than my 35 mm binoculars. I know, with both eyes my brain has
more light to work with. But even using the binoculars with
one eye, I believe I can make out dimmer objects than I can
with this scope.

Naturally, I have almost never used the higher-power eyepiece
with this scope. It does show more detail in lunar features,
but the difference is subtle. A simple plastic Barlow tube and
an erector tube also come with this scope. I have never bothered
to take either out of its bag.

Both the box and the user's manual gush over the hardwood tripod.
In fact, the tripod in my box is aluminum. At full extension
it is only approximately 4.5 feet tall, which means to aim at
anything much above the horizon I have to lie on my back on the
ground.

The mounting is a standard camera mount with pan and tilt.
A nice smooth camera mount is undesirable, but can be used.
This is not a nice smooth camera mount. It has both stick
and slop. When I find a target I have to estimate how much
to offset my aim to account for how much the mount is going
to move after I lock it down and let go of it. The manual
claims the mount has fine adjustment controls that permit me
to track targets as they move. There are no such controls.
This mount puts the trash in this trash scope.

The second trash feature is the finder. A flimsy plastic
5 x 24 mm scope mounted on the main tube, the finder has
only 1 set of 3 adjustment screws. As far as I can tell
after months of experiment, there is absolutely no relationship
between how I turn the adjustments and how the finder moves.
I have been completely unsuccessful aligning this finder
with the main scope. The finder, for all useful purposes,
does not exist.

The result is that I have to aim the main tube by eye.
It is extremely difficult to find a dim target with no working
finder. This will proabably become easier as I learn the
minor stars and become better at star hopping.

An unusable mount, an unusable finder, a short tripod, and
a user's manual that has little in common with the product
make this a mostly unusable telescope. If I had it to do over
again, I would not accept this free scope. I won't give it
away - I would not saddle somebody else with this lemon.
I have not yet brought myself to take it to the landfill, so
I'll probably continue to set it up on good Moon viewing nights.

So I don't yet own a real telescope. Someday I will
buy one. The Bushnell Voyager 78-9440 will definitely
make me avoid buying anything with the Bushnell name on it.

--
Glenn Holliday