Ruprecht 75
(VDBH 65; MWSC 1657; OCL 786; vdBergh-Hagen 65; ESO 166 08; FSR 1499; FoF 42)
0.91
UTI
0.8
CN
1.0
Cdens
0.75
CC3
1.0
Clit
1.0
Cdup
Radius (P>50% members)
3.3 [arcmin]
- CN 0.8 Rich
- Cdens 1.0 Very dense
- CC3 0.75 High quality
- Clit 1.0 Very well-studied
- Cdup 1.0 Unique
Overview
Ruprecht 75 is a rich, very dense object of high C3 quality. Its parallax locates it at a moderate distance, below the mid-plane, affected by low extinction. It is catalogued as a near-solar metallicity, old cluster, but with a large variance across recent sources for the mass parameter (see Parameters). It is very well-studied in the literature.
Note: This object contains blue stragglers according to at least one source.
Note: This object shares a small percentage of members with a later reported entry. See table with shared members information.
Distant
Low extinction
Near-solar metallicity
Old
Contains BSS
Data
| Reference | Year | RA [deg] | DEC [deg] | Plx [mas] | pmRA [mas/yr] | pmDE [mas/yr] | Rv [km/s] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UCC | â | 140.486 | -56.319 | 0.219 | -6.091 | 5.032 | -3.805 |
| Li et al. | 2025 | 140.486 | -56.314 | 0.202 | -6.118 | 4.995 | â |
| Hu & Soubiran | 2025 | 140.478 | -56.325 | â | â | â | â |
| Almeida et al. | 2025 | 140.487 | -56.317 | â | â | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2024 | 140.482 | -56.313 | 0.216 | -6.055 | 5.027 | 0.585 |
| Cavallo et al. | 2024 | 140.478 | -56.325 | 0.22 | â | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2023 | 140.482 | -56.313 | 0.216 | -6.055 | 5.027 | 0.585 |
| Just et al. | 2023 | 140.475 | -56.314 | â | â | â | â |
| Jaehnig et al. | 2021 | 140.486 | -56.319 | 0.234 | -6.097 | 4.993 | â |
| Rain et al. | 2021 | 140.486 | -56.314 | 0.202 | -6.118 | 4.995 | â |
| Dias et al. | 2021 | 140.487 | -56.317 | 0.201 | -6.122 | 4.966 | -2.056 |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2020 | 140.486 | -56.314 | 0.202 | -6.118 | 4.995 | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin & Anders | 2020 | 140.486 | -56.314 | 0.202 | -6.118 | 4.995 | â |
| Liu & Pang | 2019 | 140.503 | -56.331 | 0.237 | -5.964 | 4.921 | â |
| Soubiran et al. | 2018 | 140.486 | -56.314 | â | â | â | -2.18 |
| Bica et al. | 2019 | 140.484 | -56.303 | â | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2018 | 140.486 | -56.314 | 0.202 | -6.118 | 4.995 | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2016 | 140.475 | -56.314 | â | â | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2014 | 140.479 | -56.317 | â | -1.14 | 0.33 | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2013 | 140.479 | -56.317 | â | -9.65 | 5.46 | â |
| Dias et al. | 2002 | 140.479 | -56.317 | â | -9.65 | 5.46 | â |
đĄ Note: The UCC values are estimated from its identified members.
| Reference | Year | Dist [kpc] | Av [mag] | DAv [mag] | Age [Myr] | [Fe/H] [dex] | Mass [Msun] | Bfr | BSS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Li et al. | 2025 | 3.77 | 1.02 | â | 1494 | -0.020 | â | â | â |
| Hu & Soubiran | 2025 | â | â | â | â | -0.240* | â | â | â |
| Almeida et al. | 2025 | 3.70 | 1.20 | â | 1416 | â | 203 | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2024 | â | â | â | â | â | 1686* | â | â |
| Cavallo et al. | 2024 | 2.78 | 1.12 | â | 2089 | -0.220 | â | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2023 | 3.97 | 1.25 | 1.08 | 789 | â | â | â | â |
| Just et al. | 2023 | â | â | â | 1230 | â | 491 | â | â |
| Jaehnig et al. | 2021 | 4.26* | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Rain et al. | 2021 | 4.34 | 0.74 | â | 1413 | â | â | â | 1 |
| Dias et al. | 2021 | 3.70 | 1.20 | â | 1416 | -0.165 | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2020 | 3.94 | 0.39 | â | 1698 | â | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin & Anders | 2020 | 4.34 | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Liu & Pang | 2019 | â | â | â | 1070 | 0.500 | â | â | â |
| Soubiran et al. | 2018 | 4.34 | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2018 | 4.34 | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2016 | 4.41 | 0.78 | â | 1230 | â | â | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2013 | 4.41 | 0.78 | â | 1230 | â | â | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2002 | 4.30 | 0.74 | â | 1413 | â | â | â | â |
(*): Indicates that this parameter is assigned more than one value in the corresponding reference.


Almeida et al. (2025)
Mass determination: invalid due to poor quality CMD. Isochrone match: worst fit.
Cavallo et al. (2024)
Gold sample.