>Though the polish is quite nice, the figure isn't. The outer 1" of the mirror
>is turned down severely. When I last worked on it, I spent many, many hours
>with all manner of special strokes, pitch lap pressed down by waxed paper on
>the outer edge, etc., to no avail.
What do you mean by "severely" ? I'd say that anything up to ~1/2 inch difference in zonal measurement can be fixed by applying appropriate polishing technique (not talking machines here - just by hand). Anything above that, it will be much faster for you to go back to grinding ... And yes, f/4 is a tough cookie. Wisely recommended by Texerau "to be avoided by less experienced opticians". Even _his_ Cassegrain primary was made slower ...
>I have the blank for making the cassegrain secondary. I'm not real sure how I
>will test the whole thing. Most likely borrow a flat from someone, maybe even
>make a flat.
Think about Dall-Kirkham (or Pressman-Camichell) configurations, if your 'scope is going to be planetary one. If you insist on making the classical Cassegrain, rather than making the flat, why not using the polished secondary tool as a reference (easily tested, and easily made spherical), as described in Texerau's book ? It is far easier than making a good 10" flat ...
Bratislav