I agree with you that most of the complaints are likely unreasonable expectations. I recently used the Twilight I with my 127mm Mak to take images of Mars, which came out very nice. The only time I can understand having a rock-solid mount is when doing long exposure DSO imaging.

Ed D

 

Wow, an ED 152? That is overloading the arm and it is eventually going to fail (crack and snap apart). I tried mounting my new 120mm f/8.3 achro on my Twilight, which I could immediately see was overloading the mount. I used to have a 102/1000 and tried it on the Twilight and agree it was doable, but really pushing it.

Last night I was checking out my Twilight I because I did notice a bit of movement between the altitude drum and the arm, as well as the azimuth drum and the base. I loosened the bolts and took off the drums. Each one has a self-locking nut to hold the pivot point together. I snugged the nuts a little and checked to make sure the motions were smooth without being too tight. Presto, good as new. This falls under normal wear and maintenance.

I also decided to reattach the arm vertically, mainly because I want that little bit of height. The mount doesn't lend itself to observing around zenith when set up like this, but my neck and knees don't like it when I have to bend like Gumby.

Ed D

 

Kadmus, welcome to AC. A couple of years ago, on the website I believe we are both referencing, the Twilight I was hailed as a great mount. The thing is, that is a very large website with many, many members. Everyone has differing opinions and experiences. The problem I find with discussions on that website is that there are individuals who are intolerant, those who push their way of doing things on others, etc. I learned a lot there, but I can now see through the BS and don't frequent that website much. I'm primarily active in the imaging and sketching forums, especially when the planets come out to play.

The Twilight I has limitations, to be sure, just as everything else on this earth does. Bladekeeper mentioned an ED 152 on a Twilight I. Well, I mounted my smaller 120mm f/8.3 on mine, which is a large and heavy refractor, and I could clearly see that not only was it unstable, but the mount was so grossly overloaded that I determined the arm would crack sooner than later. Another reason these excellent mounts are trashed is because some people expect a mount to stop moving within nano-seconds or be as solid as the Rock of Gibraltar. I'm into imaging and understand the importance of rock solid mounts. Would you believe that I have used my Twilight I for imaging? Yeah! All scopes are going to exhibit movement to varying degrees when touched or moved, and that varying degree of movement applies to all types of mounts. Yes, some mounts are shakier than others.

The Twilight I is a great little lightweight mount that can handle reasonable loads. It is a very nice mount for grab-and-go when I don't want to mess with anything larger, and by far my most used mount. Always consider not only the weight of the scope, but probably more important is the length. Also, make sure the scope is mounted so it is balanced, not front or rear heavy. My AT72ED is a rear-heavy scope. I use a 7" long dovetail bar so I can mount it further forward, on any mount, and balance it.

The Twilight I should handle your 80mm f/6 OK. When you use the slow motion controls, or use the 1:1 focus knob the scope is going to oscillate a little, but should settle down quickly enough. It's not going to be as rock-steady as the Twilight II, but it's not going to be horrendous.

Contact your vendor of choice and ask about the return policy, just in case you don't like it.

Ed D

 

I have an AR102 that I use with the Twilight I. Shaking is reasonable and not excessive. Almost all scopes shake when moved or touched to some degree. I use a red dot finder or a green laser pointer instead of the finder scope that came with the AR102, which is a personal preference. This takes a little weight off and helps. I do use a 2" mirror diagonal, the one that came with my Meade R5, which is heavier than my 1.25" diagonals, but works great with my 32mm 70deg eyepiece. Still, the AR102 works on the Twilight I, although it is at the upper weight limit.

I have also thought of using lighter scope rings and shorter dovetail bar to take off more weight. The rings/handle/bar assembly that come with the AR102 is heavy. I had light rings for a 4" scope, but sold them thinking I would never own another 4". Surprisingly, that salad bowl sized excuse of a dew shield is very light.

Ed D