Last updated: 17 June 2002

This is a "User Opinions" page where YOU can express YOUR opinions. Contributions are welcome of course.

Subject:	etx-90
Sent:	Wednesday, June 12, 2002 0:35:18
How long are you going to be uncritical, technoapologist for the
inexcusably slipshod   work in the ETX scopes. It is all fine and good
to suggest solutions for and provide a forrum for these  instruments?,
but the Meade king has no clothes.  I do not work hard to earn money to
buy a product that becomes a fixer -upper project. I expect it to be
whole.  For example, the flip up mirror is crap, and poorly executed. 
So while I enjoyed your site, I'm  never,ever,ever buying from so-called
Meade Instruments again!  These scopes are not Instruments.
Mike here: Thanks for the opinion. We all have them. I will continue to provide a support forum for ETX telescopes where users can post their positive and negative experiences.

And from AOL:

      Sending message "Re: etx-90"
      ** Farflekspek - This member is currently not accepting e-mail.

And more from this individual:

Subject:	Money money money
Sent:	Wednesday, June 12, 2002 0:59:53

Mike here: Actually I don't. I don't work at Apple either but prefer Mac OS over Windows.

And from AOL:

      Sending message "Re: Money money money"
      ** Farflekspek - This member is currently not accepting e-mail.

Subject:	In reference to the negative OPINION on Meade in the Editorial Section
Sent:	Friday, June 14, 2002 23:57:02
From: (Blais Klucznik)
Hello Mike and the Group,

Although I can fully understand a person's disillusionment with the
Meade ETX, in my case the ETX125, I think Mike's site is doing a
wonderful job in trying to help out a number of ETX owners getting their
scopes up and running well.  Sometimes it only takes a tweak to do this
but in some cases a particular ETX might need a major overhaul.  Yes,
that is very unfortunate.

I don't think there has been an ETX125 user that voiced stronger
complaints about this issue than myself.  Yet I had three options:

(1) Return the scope to the manufacturer which I chose not to do.

(2) Place the entire scope, very gently, in the trash barrel and call it
an entire waste of money.

(3) Make intelligent use of the valuable information available on this

I chose the third option because unless I could get it up and running
like I thought Meade should have done I really had no legitimate beef.

After reading a great number of entries on this site regarding this
particular model I implemented those that were well documented and
directly related to the mechanical aspects which were causing my scope
to function in a manner that wasn't very desirable, at least to me.  To
these I added some additional, albeit, bold revisions which I call The
Mad Mod and now I have a ETX125 that responds the way I thought it
should have when it came from the factory.  It remains a joy to use even
today and that spans a time of a year plus or minus some.

There is a point to my purpose of writing this note.  Yes Meade's
product may not be what we expected.  Especially when one, such as
myself, had been involved for over 35 years in very rigorous quality
control practices in the design and manufacture of electronic systems
for the military.  But conditions today are different than what they
were in the past. Thus it leaves us in this dilemma.  Either we pay a
large amount of money for GOOD quality scopes which we purchase from
companies which do not deal with mass production or we turn to the less
expensive poorer quality scopes from the mass producing companies such
as Meade.  It is OUR choice.

Yes, Meade could and should market a scope with less problems and I say
this because many of the problems are caused not by design but by sloppy
workmanship and very poor quality control.  On the other hand is there
any other mass-produced scope company out there that does it any

In the end we must realize that things today are different than what
they were in the not to distant past.  But we cannot ever go back home

Thank You for taking the time to read this note.


Blais Klucznik

Return to the top of this page.

Go back to the Editorials Page.

Go back to my ETX Home Page.

Copyright ©2000-2 Michael L. Weasner /
Submittal Copyright © 2002 by the Submitter