On Sep 5, 6:32 pm, wrote:
On 5 Sep, 02:12, "Capt. Rob" wrote:



On Sep 4, 6:13 pm, wrote:

On 4 Sep, 01:07, "Capt. Rob" wrote:

My

4" refractor can outperform a 20 year old 10" reflector.

Uh, Donal....a Cave Astrola reflector from the early 80's will easily
top the highest end 4" refractor. It's simply going to collect too
much light over the 4 and transmission coatings don't equal raw
aperture. They've been making VERY good mirrors for even longer than
20 years.
I thought you knew something about this, but it sounds more like
you've read a lot of Vixen and Tak ads.

Ahhhh.....

You can't afford a Tak?
I've been reading the posts about cars. I think that
neither you nor Oz can afford an Aston Martin.

Regards

donal
--

I could buy a Tak tomorrow, but it would be inferior to my CPC scope
since it would be tougher to setup and would get less use. I'm
planning on a GT-R, which is better than an Aston Martin.

The GT-R is FASTER than the DB9. If you think that means
that it is better then you are not really qualified to own an Aston.





The GT-R is FASTER...oh an it also handles better in ALL conditions,
has AWD, better driving position and comfort, more reliability. The
Evo X also does better, but it's not faster in stock form, though it's
pretty close. The poor DB9 can't even hang with a Vette.
Now, before you look any dopier, consider the following: The new GT-R
does 0-60 in 3.2 seconds and pulls well over a full G on a skid pad.
It's FAR better balanced than a DB9 and can be driven well in snow and
rain. You just don't know what a handful a DB9 is on a twisty road
compared to a GT-R or Evo X and you don't understand how fast the GT-R
is. It's utterly in a class all it's own, which is why I'm on a
waiting list to get one.

Nice work, Donal...you utterly showed your ass again.



R.