Celestron Vs Celestron...plus Celestron optics.

A couple of questions.....

1...Hope this does not reignite the unsolveable issue of Meade vs Celestron , however, I am interested in various opinions regarding the quality of the early orange tube C8's vs the later models. Opinions seem to be greatly divided upon this issue eg, the early models manufactured to a greater precision than the overly mass produced latter models etc.

2...Does anyone know a web site where I can get hold of the optical specifications of the Meade or Celestron Schmidt- Cassegrains? I am after the actual figures of the finished lens and mirror surfaces..... Maybe with ideas of hand refiguring to a high degree of acuracy using a caustic tester.

Plus a site which exposes, preferably using Autocad 2000/2002 showing detailed schematic drawings of either a Celestron or Meade fork mounting for the Schmidt- Cassegrains. NO, I am NOT going to breach copyright :S . Would change the design enough to keep within legal boundries .

Help would be greatly appreciated.

1...Hope this does not reignite the unsolveable issue of Meade vs Celestron , however, I am interested in various opinions regarding the quality of the early orange tube C8's vs the later models. Opinions seem to be greatly divided upon this issue eg, the early models manufactured to a greater precision than the overly mass produced latter models etc.
--------

I suggest looking at "Uncle" Rod Mollise's pages. Rod is an Astromart sponsor and author of "Choosing and Using the Schmitt-Cassegrain Telescope." As far as I am concerned, he is the "MAN" when it comes to SCTs and he has a wide range of knowledge and experience. His website is a good one and has some good information about buying SCT's.

http://skywatch.brainiac.com/astroland/index.htm

From what I gather, Rod says that the newer Celestron SCT's are more consistent in their quality.

As far as refiguring an SCT, you probablly ought to post that in the Equipment group or some such place rather than a beginners forum. I would suspect that the corrector would be the problem.

Jon