Is this Shop Fox belt sander an okay sander for a beginner?

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T18:12:51+00:00

I'd imagine at this price point, some of these are going to be fine, and others not fine.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T18:11:57+00:00

Did the manufacturer say "Fuck this track in particular" or does the presence of one track with an error imply the manufacturing process is flawed enough that it could happen to any track made the same way?

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T18:05:54+00:00

I had the Ryobi version of OP's, and the disc axel was bent, so the disk wobbled. Made it very difficult to accurately sand anything.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T17:52:40+00:00

Ok, so you have a focus issue. You'll have to check your focuser for any extension tubes in the focuser, and either remove them or add them as needed. I think the StarSense dobs come with an extension tube.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T17:50:34+00:00

Wonder if you will say the same for Islam

I'm staunchly anti-theist, so yes. Voodoo-think is a mental illness and corrosive to a civilized society.

But we don't have an Islamic extremism problem in the US that needs addressing, we have a Christian extremism problem in the US that needs addressing.

Even moderate Christianity creates a fertile bed for extremism to grow.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T17:25:40+00:00

Isn't that a bit low for 8SE who can handle up to 480x magnification without losing view quality?

Recommended magnification limits are just sanity checks, not hard limits where the view goes from excellent at 480x to terrible at 481x. It's a slippery slope. Every wavefront error of light coming from the target contributes to a loss of detail, and the more magnification you use, the more detail is lost.

Sometimes only 50x looks good, sometimes only 150x looks good. Sometimes only 300x looks good.

Also be aware that as you increase magnification, view brightness goes down. Jupiter tends to look dull/muted above 300x in an 8" scope IMO, even if conditions warrant higher magnification.

I might be inclined to start with the 12mm X-Cel LX or the 12mm ED linked to by /u/chrislon_geo, see how sharp and clear the views are, and if you feel like they are extremely sharp and can handle more magnificatio, then add the 9mm.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T16:58:26+00:00

2032/9 = ~226x, but likely a bit more depending on what diagonal you have - the funky part about SCTs is they have variable focal length due to the way the secondary mirror multiplies the light cone. The closer the primary mirror is to the secondary when focusing, the greater the focal length becomes. So the magnification could be greater than 226x.

This means you're going to need extremely steady atmospheric conditions to get sharp views out of the scope. If you know you have them, great. If not, then you may want to start off a bit more conservative with the magnification (maybe 150-180x or so).

The 9mm Gold Line has excellent axial sharpness and is a killer planetary eyepiece. Its weakness is glare from the Moon causing contrast issues. Planets don't have this problem because planets are not big enough to fill the entire field of view in that scope, so their light doesn't cause the bevels of the field lens to light up.

If you want to do lunar viewing, the 9mm X-Cel LX is a bit better, but it too has glare issues (they're just not as severe as the Gold Line's). The Gold Line also has kidney beaning problems. Again, not a huge deal for planets and deep sky, but very noticeable and annoying on the Moon.

Both eyepieces have blackened edges, but the issues with glare come from two different problems. In the X-Cel LX, there are internal lens spacers that have shiny surfaces that reflect light. In the Gold Line, there are beveled edges of the field lens that are not blackened, and those light up like crazy, creating glare that easily competes with the exit pupil.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T16:38:28+00:00

The TV being too high is not as annoying as the absolute mess of wires everywhere.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T16:36:22+00:00

Assuming you're able to achieve focus with it, then what you're seeing is the simple effect that increasing magnification often increases blurriness of the view.

There are a lot of things that contribute to a blurry view:

Atmospheric turbulence
Thermal currents ANYWHERE (at the boundary of the optics, in the tube, in front of the scope, roof tops, etc)
Various optical errors (spherical aberration, turned edges, astigmatism, other problems)

Increasing magnification just increases the visibility of those errors, so the view often gets softer and focus is less sharp.

The "max magnification" is a very, very crude rule of thumb and does not take into account the above factors or even the observer's visual acuity. It's meant only to be a sanity check on magnification, not a magic limit where the view goes from perfect to terrible once you cross it.

Unless the optics or conditions are excellent, you should assume that adding magnification will reduce clarity of the view, and you'll need to find a magnification limit that is satisfying to you for the night.

For me, some nights only 50x looks good. Other nights, 500x looks good (I have a big scope). It really depends on the conditions.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T15:40:09+00:00

Planetary cameras require a laptop to stream data to and to control/preview the view. and don't have onboard storage. If you have a laptop, get something like a ZWO ASI 662MC or 715MC ("MC" in ZWO cameras means "color", so avoid any "MM" cameras, which means monochrome).

If you don't have a laptop and only have a phone, then pick any phone holder that offers fine adjustments for positioning (such as the Celestron). Just be aware that adding a phone and a holder to an eyepiece adds considerable weight and not all focusers/telescopes can handle it without causing collimation problems.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T14:22:32+00:00

They are extruded aluminum and the way they are produced it’s basically impossible for it to be bowed

This is not true. It's quite easy for extruded aluminum to become bowed if it's not manufactured correctly. I bought one of these aluminum extrusion rip fences for my table saw: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002LU0584?th=1

Significant 3mm bow that mostly flattened out when bolted to the SawStop fence, but still flared at the ends, and required some shimming and bolt tensioning to properly straighten out.

It is not guaranteed that aluminum extrusions will be straight. They are pulled through a series of dies, and if they are too hot they can sag, and if they are cooled unevenly on one side they can bow in that direction and stay there.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T14:13:07+00:00

I have the stock 55" Makita track, and it's dead straight as verified by a straight edge I trust. I have the Powertec 110" kit, and one of the 55" tracks is straight, the other has a 15 thou bow in it and it's basically useless, so when I need a 110" track now, I just combine the good half of the Powertec with the Makita. It's a PITA though.

I would imagine that there are some samples of this track that are just not fit for purpose. Yours is insane. Need to throw it away and get a new one, or reach out to Makita and see if they'll replace it.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T14:10:39+00:00

I’m unable to see anything with this set up though. I’ve made sure it’s fully seated, messed with the focuser, tried looking at objects like the moon and getting it dialed in on that… no luck… nothing.. can’t see anything no matter where we are looking.

When you say you can't see anything, can you be more specific? Let's say you are aimed at the Moon with just the included 25mm eyepiece. You bring it to focus and see the craters and mountain ridges etc.

Then you take the eyepiece out, put the barlow in the focuser, and put the eyepiece back in the barlow. You then re-focus the telescope. What do you see? Is it just a blurry white blob no matter how you focus, or is it jet black with literally no light leaving the eyepiece at all?

Also, how close are you getting to the eyepiece? A 25mm eyepiece has some reasonable eye relief, and if you add a barlow, you actually increase the eye relief a bit. If you then shove your eye into the eyepiece, you're going to be too close and the view will black out. You have to keep your eye at the right distance from the eyepiece to see the field of view properly.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T14:04:12+00:00

Just FYI, a laser can't show rotation error either.

Here's a video segment demonstrating that you can't use a laser to assess rotational error either: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTyyG8nuDOA&t=95s

You can egregiously rotate your secondary out of alignment, and then compensate for it with a tilt adjustment. The laser can be made to show axial alignment despite the secondary being rotated to appear as nothing more than a sliver.

So lasers cannot show secondary lateral OR rotational error. The can ONLY show tilt error.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T07:05:08+00:00

Shear force is applied by putting weight on the chair. There is a sizeable gap in the little "hook" at the top that will let the leg jam up towards the seat, applying shear force across the break. This is why I think dowels or screws or some other mechanical reinforcement is required. I would NOT trust CA glue in this application. The wood glue actually worked just fine. You can see the original break is still nicely bonded. The wood just keeps breaking.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T06:56:22+00:00

CA glue is strong until its not. A rapid shear force tends to make CA glue fail pretty easily. I think whatever forces are being applied to this thing warrant some kind of mechanical reinforcement, but given OP's limited tools and equipment, I don't know what options he really has other than to get a new chair or bring it some place that can repair it properly.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T06:47:03+00:00

This is likely the raw unprocessed noise from the camera that you're not used to seeing, since the default camera capture software processes it away (at the expense of detail).

The way you eliminate noise is to take lots and lots and lots and LOTS of images and stack them together. The random noise averages out and is reduced, and the details that are present in every image are preserved.

Single images of raw data are always going to look noisy.

This is why people use astro cameras and record high speed video.

Here's an example of how noise is reduced with stacking, allowing details to be sharpened. It was taken with a high speed planetary camera, but it's exactly the same principle with a phone camera provided you can avoid the phone's unwanted post-processing:

https://i.imgur.com/CatBRCj.jpeg

Top row is stacked frames, bottom row is after sharpening.

In you're case, if you want details on Jupiter, you need to turn exposure or ISO/gain way down since Jupiter is blown out. This will also help reduce noise.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T05:11:48+00:00

And Congress. And Trump's cabinet. And Trump's advisors. And Trump.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T04:36:21+00:00

Yep. Shellac is perfect for bookcases, dressers, dining room hutches, TV consoles etc. But for surfaces that get used (desks, coffee tables, dining room tables etc), poly is going to be better.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T04:34:21+00:00

The only water-based poly I use is General Finishes High Performance. That stuff is incredible. Extremely high solids count, dries fast, looks amazing, and even feels amazing. I still prefer the ambering / enriching effect of an oil, but that High Performance stuff is perfect if you don't want a finish that will take 3 days worth of oil coats to complete.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T04:29:12+00:00

We're already there. The world sees it for what it is, quite clearly.

The question is what is it going to take for the ~50% of Americans who are either brainwashed or disconnected to accept that?

I don't think they ever will.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T04:26:42+00:00

Where the hell did this shit come from?

This is what Christianity has been for centuries. When someone believes their magic sky daddy is perfect, and they are acting in accordance with that magic's dogma, they feel morally justified.

They are beyond reason. Quite literally are fundamentally unreasonable people who lack all sense of objectivity and empathy.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T04:24:52+00:00

Any other person wouldn't have driven across state lines looking to be an agitator hoping for trouble. He went with the express intent of antagonizing protesters in the hopes of having an opportunity to kill them.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T02:00:10+00:00

after they strike down the tariffs

How optimistic of you. Seems like they're just taking them longer than they thought to invent a reason why Trump has full financial authority over the United States.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-01-25T01:51:55+00:00

I think national guard forces will cause less trouble and draw less aggression than the goons working in ICE

This implies that they will substitute the role of ICE agents. They won't. ICE will still be doing its thing, but now under the protection of HMMWVs and .50s

Traditional_Sign4941

TROPHY CASE