#1  
Old 03-03-2021, 06:40 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 16,815
EQ6-R versus AZ EQ 6GT

The main difference for me in the AZ EQ 6 GT would be the dual encoders so you can disengage the clutch and the mount maintains alignment.

What is the tracking like on these models? Much the same?

I would only be using a fairly light weight APO setup.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-03-2021, 08:09 PM
Startrek (Martin)
Registered User

Startrek is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3,296
Iíve never owned or used an AZ EQ6GT but I own 2 off EQ6-R mounts ( one in Sydney under Bortle 8 skies and one on the South Coast NSW Bortle 3 skies , this ones going into my NexDome within 2 weeks ) and can certainly recommend these mounts for payloads up to 15kg and excellent performance with tracking and guiding. Dec backlash is minimal out of the box and they are easy to tune if you wish.
EQ6-R mount in Sydney has a 9kg payload ( 6Ē f6 newt )
EQ6-R mount down south has a 15kg payload (8Ē f5 newt )
Iíve seen folk sticking 10Ē f4 and 10Ē f5 newts on these things in an Obs with no issue

Guiding numbers vary as we all know due to conditions etc....but Iíve had these mounts down to Dec 0.62 and Ra 0.72 with piggyback guide scopes and 1000mm focal length. With lighter payloads, fine tuning balancing and mounts Dec and Ra drive and worms , using an OAG thereís no reason why you could get tighter guiding numbers

My EQ6-R in Sydney is a early 2019 model with the additional USB port and the EQ6-R down the coast is a late 2018 model without USB port ( just standard RJ45 handcontroller port )
I control both mounts with EQMOD and the new Ascom Stellarium
NB: In nearly 4 years of imaging Iíve never had to release the clutches on my mounts during imaging nor have they slipped so never even thought of or considered needing encoders for alignment re acquisition at anytime
Hope others can chime in and provide their own advice and experiences on either mounts
Good luck with it
Cheers
Martin
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-03-2021, 10:13 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 16,815
Thanks Martin, that's a reassuring writeup.

Greg.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Startrek View Post
Iíve never owned or used an AZ EQ6GT but I own 2 off EQ6-R mounts ( one in Sydney under Bortle 8 skies and one on the South Coast NSW Bortle 3 skies , this ones going into my NexDome within 2 weeks ) and can certainly recommend these mounts for payloads up to 15kg and excellent performance with tracking and guiding. Dec backlash is minimal out of the box and they are easy to tune if you wish.
EQ6-R mount in Sydney has a 9kg payload ( 6Ē f6 newt )
EQ6-R mount down south has a 15kg payload (8Ē f5 newt )
Iíve seen folk sticking 10Ē f4 and 10Ē f5 newts on these things in an Obs with no issue

Guiding numbers vary as we all know due to conditions etc....but Iíve had these mounts down to Dec 0.62 and Ra 0.72 with piggyback guide scopes and 1000mm focal length. With lighter payloads, fine tuning balancing and mounts Dec and Ra drive and worms , using an OAG thereís no reason why you could get tighter guiding numbers

My EQ6-R in Sydney is a early 2019 model with the additional USB port and the EQ6-R down the coast is a late 2018 model without USB port ( just standard RJ45 handcontroller port )
I control both mounts with EQMOD and the new Ascom Stellarium
NB: In nearly 4 years of imaging Iíve never had to release the clutches on my mounts during imaging nor have they slipped so never even thought of or considered needing encoders for alignment re acquisition at anytime
Hope others can chime in and provide their own advice and experiences on either mounts
Good luck with it
Cheers
Martin
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-03-2021, 07:32 AM
The_bluester's Avatar
The_bluester (Paul)
Registered User

The_bluester is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Kilmore, Australia
Posts: 2,905
What are you aiming to do with it? I have the Orion badged version of the AZEQ6 (Old one, not a GT)

For visual it is a great thing, I always used it in Alt-Az mode and the encoders were really handy. I specifically bought it as I was sick of the slew time of my old Celestron CPC mount. Call me the unplanned and impatient astronomer, I would pick targets as they appealed to me and without any great planning of which order to see them so repeated slews across half the sky were common on any given night and the CPC was pretty slow. The encoders made it possible to just release the clutches and point manually, which I did often.

As an AP mount they seem to be able to perform as well as an EQ6, but they are harder to balance. The clutch design and axis bearing design is different and it results in the payload (And counterweights) putting pressure on the clutches so they tend to drag and make balancing harder. The Dec is easy to deal with when in EQ mode, you just rotate the RA to a "counterweights up" position to take the weight off the clutch disc and it frees up nicely. The RA is more of an issue. If I change the payload I crank the altitude down as low as it goes which takes almost all the weight off the clutch so it is easier to balance. I had heard of people having issues with the encoders when imaging and guiding, so I run it with them switched off in EQMOD. If it retires from imaging at some point I will turn them back on again.

The only issue I have had in the time I have had it (6 years) was the clutch discs compressed enough that the RA axis fouled on the body of the mount and it stopped tracking. The axis and clutch design means that if that happens the tighter you try to set the clutch, the harder it drags! I made up aluminium shims to add to the clutch height (As I figured new clutch discs would do the same eventually) and it has been perfect ever since, that was a couple of years ago. The message in that one is only set the clutches "tight enough" as the tighter you set them, the more you will compress the disc. The clutch is a compressed felt pad arrangement in between the aluminium housing and the brass worm gear assembly, the clutch action simply squeezes it all together. They work a lot like the clutch in a car where the EQ6 is a totally different design, better at the job IMO but they would either take more setup time in the factory or have a lot more variability on how they work, more in terms of end float of the axis bearings than anything else.

For the same purposes and payload I would be happy to buy another one.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-03-2021, 07:50 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 16,815
Thanks Paul.

It would be mainly for imaging but also for visual so accurate goto's would be important.

I plan on mounting an AP130GT which is not a very heavy scope and cameras would be Proline 16803 (heavy) or QHY600.

Imaging targets would be the larger wider fields. A bit narrower than an FSQ.

Greg.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The_bluester View Post
What are you aiming to do with it? I have the Orion badged version of the AZEQ6 (Old one, not a GT)

For visual it is a great thing, I always used it in Alt-Az mode and the encoders were really handy. I specifically bought it as I was sick of the slew time of my old Celestron CPC mount. Call me the unplanned and impatient astronomer, I would pick targets as they appealed to me and without any great planning of which order to see them so repeated slews across half the sky were common on any given night and the CPC was pretty slow. The encoders made it possible to just release the clutches and point manually, which I did often.

As an AP mount they seem to be able to perform as well as an EQ6, but they are harder to balance. The clutch design and axis bearing design is different and it results in the payload (And counterweights) putting pressure on the clutches so they tend to drag and make balancing harder. The Dec is easy to deal with when in EQ mode, you just rotate the RA to a "counterweights up" position to take the weight off the clutch disc and it frees up nicely. The RA is more of an issue. If I change the payload I crank the altitude down as low as it goes which takes almost all the weight off the clutch so it is easier to balance. I had heard of people having issues with the encoders when imaging and guiding, so I run it with them switched off in EQMOD. If it retires from imaging at some point I will turn them back on again.

The only issue I have had in the time I have had it (6 years) was the clutch discs compressed enough that the RA axis fouled on the body of the mount and it stopped tracking. The axis and clutch design means that if that happens the tighter you try to set the clutch, the harder it drags! I made up aluminium shims to add to the clutch height (As I figured new clutch discs would do the same eventually) and it has been perfect ever since, that was a couple of years ago. The message in that one is only set the clutches "tight enough" as the tighter you set them, the more you will compress the disc. The clutch is a compressed felt pad arrangement in between the aluminium housing and the brass worm gear assembly, the clutch action simply squeezes it all together. They work a lot like the clutch in a car where the EQ6 is a totally different design, better at the job IMO but they would either take more setup time in the factory or have a lot more variability on how they work, more in terms of end float of the axis bearings than anything else.

For the same purposes and payload I would be happy to buy another one.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-03-2021, 09:24 AM
The_bluester's Avatar
The_bluester (Paul)
Registered User

The_bluester is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Kilmore, Australia
Posts: 2,905
I have been imaging with my C925 on it for the last six months or so and it guides to about 0.6" pretty reliably. It is not impossible to balance, just a little harder than an EQ6 and needing a different technique. If I was being smart I would re cut it's pier to tip the top plate down towards the south. It might make polar aligning a little more tricky but it would allow the RA axis to be dropped down below the vertical to release the clutch better. Rules out using it in ALT-AZ mode on the pier though.

Visually, with care taken to level the tripod top and care to center the alignment stars well it was pretty good for gotos. It was quite rare to need to put the widefield EP in the SCT to find the target.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-03-2021, 07:50 PM
rbronca
Registered User

rbronca is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 47
With my AZ-EQ6 I have a full load (20+KG - SW CF 10" F4 newt, Moonlite focuser and QSI 683 WSG-8) and now guide in the .5 to .8 range total.

I have re greased, replaced bearings, belts and tweaked meshes, but the new PHD2 multi star guiding made the largest difference. I use a Loadstar v1 off the QSI OAG for guiding.
Hope this helps.


Robert
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-03-2021, 08:55 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 7,295
With the arrival of my Mach2..... I know where there is an excellent G11G2 going for a good price
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 07:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement
Limpet Controller
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement