Mach2GTO vs 10u for remote use

I have a 10 Micron GM1000HPS but have no experience with a Mach 2 (only an AP1200 GTO). With that said, I do build sky models with both, so that may be relevant.

The 10 Micron is as close to an "astronomy appliance" as you're going to get. Once you get used to the software, it is essentially set-it-and-forget-it. I've never traveled with it, but it is quite heavy for its load capacity (It weighs 43 pounds but carries 55 pounds maximum). The RA and dec axes cannot be separated (if you wanted that, now you're talking a 10 Micron GM2000 which is quite a more expensive). For shorter and intermediate focal lengths (500-1000mm), unguided subs are a breeze. When I shot longer (2000 -2800mm), I found doing a sky model and guiding was superior to unguided though I could still get decent unguided subs at 1960mm; just found they were even better with very gentle guiding in addition.

Similarly, for Astro-Physics, the Mach 2 weighs 42 pounds and can be separated from its base. Unlike other AP mounts, the RA and dec axes cannot be separated for travel. Load capacity is a bit higher at 75 pounds though it also depends on your OTA height (see the graph on the AP Mach 2 site for details).

APCC Pro is great software but the interface lacks the finesse of 10 Micron. Equally as capable though. For maintenance, if you're getting a new Mach 2, doubtful that you would need to do anything for several years at least. Dealing with gear mesh is not required with a Mach 2 from what I see in the manual, and regreasing is done via a port rather than gear box disassembly like I do for the AP1200.

Conversely, 10 Micron does NOT want you messing with the mount if something is wrong: Either have them remotely diagnose or send back to them.

I have both mounts permanently on piers. Either of your two considered mounts are going to give you on par performance: it is up to your comfort level with software, how you prefer maintenance to be done (quasi-DIY with AP vs. send-out with 10 Micron), and the size OTA you are considering.

Clear skies,
Ben

​​​​​

I use a Mach2 for remote imaging in Chile and it is a real work horse.  I’ve owned other AP mounts and I think that the Mach2 is the best mount that AP has ever made.  It is quiet, the encoders are properly implemented as digital setting circles so that it never gets lost, and the fit and finish are absolutely world class.  The APCC software is very good; although not quite as good as the PW4 software on my L-series mounts.  Sky models are fairly fast (MUCH better than what I used to have with my former AP1600) and the pointing accuracy of the mount with the model is excellent.  One other consideration is service.  AP is very easy to get on the phone and they are very responsive to questions and service requests.  Even though you may never need it, that is worth a lot.  If your name came up on the list, it’s a no brainer.  Buy that mount.  You will be very happy with it.

The title of your post indicates that you want to use the mount for “remote use” then you say that you want to use it for “traveling”.  Traveling and remote operations are not the same thing.  The Mach2 is not an especially light weight mount and although you certainly could travel with it, you should be prepared for lugging around some heavy stuff and a moderately long and involved set up.

Good luck with it!

John

Thanks for the input everyone. Sorry, my title was wrong, I mostly travel with my mounts. I will either set up in the backyard or travel an hour north to my club observing site.
Would you advise getting the AP Eagle tripod?
Dan

Bray Falls:
That being said, I've used a bunch of 10u mounts and they were all lovely. Never used an AP mount before.

Well, of course, that's a big reason to buy a premium mount! It is a bit like saying unless you plan to regularly race cars on a  racetrack, there is no reason to buy a Ferrari or a Porsche. For regular city driving, a Honda Civic will do the job just as well. Nonetheless, there is no denying that a Ferrari is lovely to drive even if you never race it. My Mach 2 has been an absolute joy to use. My old GM811G or even my Mach 1 could possible have done the same as well, but not with the absolute confidence with which the Mach 2 does.

Bob Lockwood:

Bray Falls:
The price difference between a premium vs. non-premium mount is almost enough to get a whole extra travel rig! 

That being said, I've used a bunch of 10u mounts and they were all lovely. Never used an AP mount before.

That being said, you should try using one before you say it's not worth the price. As for the AP Eagle tripod, it's a good tripod, though I prefer ATS tripods, 
I have two.

I've used plenty of premium mounts and plenty of non-premium mounts. I am only suggesting that if the goal is to take more photos or do more astrophotography, there is a more efficient route.

And regarding the car analogy, yes I would say having a Ferrari to do the job of a Honda Civic is wasteful. This is why I think low-weight capacity premium mounts largely don't make sense (barring some use cases like extreme remote observing, or satellite tracking). When you get to the point where you are trying to tow large loads with your Civic, then I think switching to a F250 is a more practical option. 

But since the established goal is a travel rig, unless the plan is to use a 2500mm FL scope, or a huge high drag 12" newt, there is no practical need for any of the specs these mounts have.

If you have your heart set on either choice, and money is no question, I'm sure you'll be happy either way. Having the possibility to upgrade OTAs more heavily in the future will also be a plus.

Mach 2 will fade into the background and just work perfectly. That is worth the extra weight over tinkering with more budget friendly mounts that may be faster to setup. 

You will setup, run a 20min dec arc model while its getting dark, and then start imaging. You may not even need to guide. 

If you have the money, and the strength, you will appreciate focusing on other aspects of the hobby and not tinkering. Like viewing, or sleeping. :-)

My experience is with the Mach2 hands on, while I've had the PW and Paramount mounts remotely installed.  I think the Mach2 would be excellent to have in a remote facility.  I have not used the 10 Micron mounts but have never heard a bad word said about them.

To @Bray Falls comment about overkill; that is true of course.  But I would assume that for a remote install something more than a small refractor is planned or if not could be an option down the road.  On concern with the sub-premium mounts in a remote setting is dealing with the lack of a home position.  But this is off the OPs question. 

I should add that if you do plan on a very light payload the Mach2 might be difficult to balance.  My friend tried the AP 92 stowaway and the 10 pound counterweight was too much while not counterweight was too little.  Of course this is solvable by adding weight to the payload.

My one complaint with the Mach2 is that I don't find the software to be intuitive.  Certainly, TheSkyX is a bear to learn for Paramount users given that it code piled on planetarium app.  The Planewave software is much more intuitive and direct to my needs at least.  All that said, you will figure out the AP software and in a remote setting you really won't need to touch it frequently anyway.

So how does one decide?  Mount do eventually need service and if you are in the US that is a big plus for AP.  If you are in Europe that's a big plus for 10Micron.  

Kevin