Re: Advice please: Standard verus Rotating Pier Adapter

Joe Zeglinski

Thanks Kent - that was just the answer I was looking for.

Now I'm glad I got the RPA, and will likely go for another. Although I
plan on making a permanent pier, I'm not yet ready to commit to full "rebar
and concrete" - but rather a very deep, stout pillar, in the ground, for now.
So if there is any minute ground shift over the short year or two, the RPA
should give me less hassle in minor very precise, alignment touch ups.


----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Advice please: Standard verus Rotating Pier Adapter

In a message dated 4/17/07 12:45:50 PM, writes:


I would appreciate some advice about using the SPA versus RPA. I
purchased the RPA with my new AP900, since it looked like a better, wiser,
choice. Now I am considering a second pier adapter, for an alternative
permanent fixed pier.

I see how my RPA works , but I wonder, what are the difficulties with
using the Standard pier adapter, which made the RPA a more desirable,
more expensive, option? I intend on transferring the AP900 between a field
tripod, and the permanent post in the yard, so the small inconvenience of
simply "loosening" the four hold down knobs for the Standard adapter fine
adjustment, may not justify the price difference, for me. There must be some
other aspect, or convenience, of using the RPA, I may have missed.

Much appreciated,
I believe the Revolving Pier Adapter was produced primarily for those who
don't have a permanent pier and set up and tear down, either in their own
or some remote site. While the original standard pier adapter works great,
doing polar alignment, loosening and tightening the 4 screws can slightly
shift the alignment. With the RPA, this doesn't happen, making polar alignment
less time consuming.

Kent Kirkley

See what's free at

To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-gto list
Yahoo! Groups Links

Join to automatically receive all group messages.