Sponsored By:

Subject: Re: Alignment Report etc.
From: Brian Cherkas
Reply To: mapug@shore.net
Date: Fri Nov 25 10:26:30 1994

Robert Fields wrote:

>Not to diminish your concerns about control control regarding loose
>screws and such, I'd like to add a couple of words here.
>
>I'm quite pleased to see that most quality control concerns have switched
>from *optical* quality ... to loose screws and knobs turning smoothly.
>It really seems like Meade has made tremendous strides in terms of
>optical quality. Personally, I find my LX200 to have razor sharp images
>and amazing contrast. While there will *always* be room for improvement, I
>think Meade may be focusing their efforts correctly - that being good optics.

Agreed. Optical quality is of prime concern to us. I didn't mention optical quality only because I have been satisfied. But to attach a perfect mirror to a non-perfect housing can lead to problems. I've owned two LX-200's to date (one 10" and one 12"), both have had mechanical and electrical malfunctions early in the warranty period - one necessitated returning to Meade for repair. If it were not for my belief that the LX-200 is the best thing around to date, I would have purchased another telescope. I don't want to scare off would-be LX-200 purchasers - the telescope is amazing, but has the same probability of potential defects just as any other consumer purchase.

Maybe Meade's quality control is fine, and that their shipping methods/containers aren't - hence causing loose screws and such. Either way, I believe someone should do some checking into. I suggest all new telescope owners to write down the actual condition of their newly arrived LX-200 (loose screws et al.) on the warranty/registration form which should be sent back to Meade.

Brian.

--+ -- 0=/ || 0=/ | Brian Cherkas --------------------/TWA| ----------------------- (@ ooo ooooo oooooo ooo > cherkas@crl.com -------- ----- / compuserve/73644,1444 0=\ || \__| \--+