RE: [ap-gto] 900 vs. 1100 mount review

Sep 14, 2016



#54010 Sep 14, 2016

Bravo Bob !�������� This was a welcome and succinct summary of thedifferences affecting the user enjoyment of these mounts. Could have added theload carrying difference.�� Almost makes me want to exchange my beloved ...AP-900/1200 mounts.��*******������ However, one thing I really wish AP had .finally. donefor the new CP4, was to provide suitable, preferably screw-on,�� .plasticprotection caps. for all the connectors . especially the large ones .unused. bymost of us. I hate dew dripping down into the open (never used) sockets such asthe ENCODER and AUX -�� pins getting fouled or oxidized, or their becomingbug nests. Guess I will have to use electrical tape on the other unused ports(e.g. USB, Ethernet, and AUTO GUIDER relay port) ... or plug in a dummy cut-offplug as a kludged filler . since I will continue to just use RS-232, fornow.�������� Such caps can.t be very expensive ... until users haveto buy them in large .minimum order. quantity, and also adding the shippingcharges for something so trivial, and more easily affordable (considering theCP4 price) -�� by including the first set of caps with each CP4shipment.�������� At least we still get ONE anti-static RS_232 port��protector cap, as has been done in the past.Protective terminal caps would make it look tidier and moreprofessional.��Joe


#54014 Sep 14, 2016

Dear Bob, ��Thank you very much for your comments. Our team worked very hard to incorporate changes that we thought would be useful and we are very happy to hear that theyare. Thanks again for posting. ��Clear Skies, ��Marj ChristenAstro-Physics, Inc11250 Forest Hills RdMachesney Park, IL 61115Phone: 815-282-1513Fax:

��From: []

Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 10:58 AM


Subject: [ap-gto] 900 vs. 1100 mount review

Contact Us
This Site's Privacy Policy
Google's privacy policies