New Equipment Issues

[TrevorW]

I'm just trying to get a feeling from what I've read whether the following may be true

"We are all to forgiving of crappy equipment tending to accept design faults as the norm when it comes to astronomical gear, yet would not be if similar problems happened after purchasing a general consumer appliance"

If something does not work as intended(advertised) we should send it back and ask for a refund!. I have read many times on this forum and others how people spend big $$$ on equipment and then void their warranty by trying to fix a problem themselves.

What do you think

Cheers

[Barrykgerdes]

If you purchase a device to do a particular task that the device is advertised for and it either does not work or is found not suitable for the task it should be returned for a full refund within the time specified.

However we often knowingly purchase items that may or not suit our purpose because they are the nearest thing to the desired function. In this case many of us do successfully get the items to do our requirements. If the device needs to be physically modified to do your job and does not work or fails do not expect the agent/maker to accept a return.

Sometimes we do make special interfaces to adapt a device to a job that was not originally intended. If the interface duplicates the intended use and the device subsequently fails you should explain to the agent/maker what you have done he may be inclined to listen to you but if you demand satisfaction he would be well within his rights to refuse.

I have been a user and a supplier at different times and have had some shonky claims recognised with tact and diplomacy both as a supplier and a claimant.

Barry

PS I have an LX200 telescope that had a number of failures of the motherboard in the first 5 years of its life. The last failure I had (1999) was repaired by a board I got from the dealer but it failed again within 3 months. I rang Meade and got onto the overseas supply manager and explained the problem and said I was quite happy to buy a repair kit. However they did not have a spare board or kit at the time but said they would let me know when one was available. I heard nothing more for four months. Then a parcel arrived with a repair kit of the new version Gratis.

BG

[renormalised (Carl)]

Especially with very heavily priced ticket items, such as the really expensive filter wheels and cameras, you expect them to work at least upto the standards claimed in the advertising and that when you connect them to your scope, you're not going to have to modify them to get them to fit/work. The manufacturers should take extra pains to make sure their quality control measures are upto scratch and that the equipment the ship out is 100% top quality, not just merely adequate.

If you pay $2500-$4000 dollars for a filter wheel, you expect it to work flawlessly. You should, given what you've just shelled out for it!!!! Same with the cameras and other expensive items. If you've just paid a heap for a scope...let's say a CDK700...you'd expect that for $185K you bought a scope that was going to do what it says it will do and performed to those expectations. I know I would. If it didn't I'd want to know why and I'd want something done about it if it didn't...promptly.

You should expect nothing less for any other bit of equipment that you own.

[Paul Haese]

The only thing I bought new that did not work well straight away was the GSORC8" Rather than send the unit back, I was proactive in solving a problem and informing the manufacturer how to sort the problem. It worked for me in many ways. The manufacturer was receptive and appreciative of my efforts.

Buying a second hand PME has been more trouble by comparison.

[naskies (Dave)]

One thing that frustrates me is the lack of, and poor quality of, specifications for a lot of astro equipment. Random examples: trying to figure out whether the holes in two different dovetails/saddles will line up properly when no measurements are provided for either. It's great if you know from experience what-connects-with-what, but as a technically-literate newbie it can be pretty frustrating...

[Tandum (Robin)]

Took me over 4 months to get a qhy9 that worked ok. The original had lines across the screen from bright stars and I was told it was a driver clamping issue, it was a known problem. I not only had to buy another brand of camera to do imaging, I had to seek legal advise on my rights regarding the qhy9. That's about when the camera was replaced. Oh, and I had to strip, rebuild and shim an orion OAG to remove all the slop in the thing.

[Shiraz (Ray)]

The basic problem is that we buy stuff that has a relatively small market. The manufacturers are trying to make a profit while maintaining the affordability of what is basically hobby equipment. Those manufacturers who provide well sorted gear can generally only do so by charging premium prices - the rest put out stuff that generally works, but known problems and basic design flaws often remain unfixed.

I have generally chosen to buy at the lower end of the market and the only things I can recall that were fully up to scratch were two Televue Barlows and Nebulosity software - everything else has required anything from tweaking to major rebuilds. But I knew that before I purchased and was prepared to work around the idiosyncrasies and put together systems that worked OK despite the failings of the manufacturers -the alternative was no systems at all.

I can see how someone might be p**d off if they found that their expensive high end equipment did not come up to standard. But the rest of us should really not be too surprised if that $1500 OTA turns out to be not quite as good as a $5000 OTA with apparently similar specs. Of much more concern to me is the odd manufacturer who refuses to supply spares so that users can repair their low end equipment when it breaks down - but that is another issue.