Sponsored By:

Subject: [M]: Board problems vs Version of LX-200?
From: RA
Reply To: mapug@shore.net
Date: Wed Mar 12 03:44:51 1997

Just a quick thought which may get some people thinking. I've seen some
comments about unreliabilty on peoples mother boards on their LX-200's.
I've noticed that most of the board problems are from people who have
older telescopes. My telescope is a version 3.34. I was wondering if
these board related problems are related to older versions of the Meade
LX-200's? Reason for this is that most of the problems I read lately are
people who calim to have out of warantee telescopes, which I think makes
them over a year old. To my recollection, the latest versions has some
extra reliability built into them to prevent some of these problems.
I use to have a older Mustang that was always a pain in the neck
because of problems that always seemed to crop up. I was always
complaining about it. Then I sold it for a later version of the GT model
and even 10 yrs later, its a reliable as a rock.
Could this be whats happening out here with these unreliable boards?
Who out here has the lastest 3.34 version who has had problems with their
mother board?
Finally, does it appear the the 10" lx-200's in general have a better
reliability rate then the 8's or the 12's? This last comment may not have
any logic behind it but it appears the 10 inch owners arent the ones with
the problems.....but its just a thought at this point bases on what i am
reading?
It would be nice to hear of what version of telescope people have when
they are having problems. Maybe most of these unreliability bugs may no
longer be an issue on the latest version which may give some newbee some
confidence when considering a new LX-200.

Ralph

I'd be willing to put together a spread sheet to track what kinds of
problems people are having with what version of telescope people have if
this information starts getting posted. It may or may not shine some
light on just what the problems are or more importantly, were!

Ralph