[sac-forum] Re: Paramount or Mathis?

Matt, thank you for the references to the discussion groups you listed; 
and, Steve, thanks for your observations - buying into a user community 
that can help with problems is an important consideration.
Stan

Steve Coe wrote:

>Stan;
>
>I have had a chance twice at Riverside to use the Mathis drive system
>and I have seen several Paramounts in operation.  I would go with the
>Paramount.  Put it on a solid, cinder block pier and it would be an
>excellent mount for most any scope you would care to bolt up to it.
>There are several users "bragging" that theirs carries over 200 pounds
>of carefully balanced telescopes....lot of them.
>
>The Mathis is an excellent set up, but very heavy and if you are ever
>planning to move it from the pier it is a crane install and de-install.
>Somewhere in my photo collection is a shot of four hefty guys lifting
>the Mathis onto a metal pier at Riverside.
>
>Also, with the Paramount you buy into a user community that can help
>with problems and give you some feedback.
>
>My 2 centavos;
>Steve Coe
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Matt Luttinen
>Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 7:14 PM
>To: sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [sac-forum] Re: Paramount or Mathis?
>
>Stan,
>
>I am no expert since I have never had the luck (or $$$$) to own one but
>=
>it's
>safe to say that the Paramount is the standard by which all other =
>high-end
>mounts are judged. You could not possibly go wrong with a Bisque =
>Paramount.
>Plus, it is "transportable," (I have seen a few in the field) whereas =
>the
>additional weight of the MI-500 could be a problem if you wanted to take
>=
>it
>out.
>
>You might try the ScopeMounts group on Yahoo for more information:
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ScopeMounts/
>
>or
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SoftBisqUser/
>
>I imagine that both mounts are great, but it seems that the Paramount is
>more prevalent among power users--I see more of them in private
>well-equipped observatories than any other brand. Heck, even some pros =
>use
>them for "small" scope rigs that do automated surveys and such.
>
>The MI-500 would no doubt do a nice job in your observatory, and it =
>costs 2
>grand less, so there it is . . .=20
>
>Matt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>

Other related posts: