Ray (Shiraz) is getting excellent results with his EQ8. Not sure if he has done anything in the way of modifications to his or other issue but it seems to be doing him well.
Ray (Shiraz) is getting excellent results with his EQ8. Not sure if he has done anything in the way of modifications to his or other issue but it seems to be doing him well.
Belt drive terminology, as used by the big manufacturers, usually refers to a belt from the motor to the worm sprocket, not to a belt driving the ring (RA or DEC rotation). The Avalon Linear does use total belt drive i believe.
The EQ8 would be belt driving the worm on both RA and DEC.
There are adjustments internally to belt alignment, clearance, etc that can affect performance. Out of the box, quality control can vary. There is no substitute for knowing how to tune your mount for optimal performance; and this includes worm end bearing play, ring and worm meshing, etc.
Do you need the EQ8 capacity? Perhaps compare to the Celestron GGE Pro that is currently on sale at Bintel for much less than an EQ8.
Thanks Glend,
I am doing some long term research.
I will have to change my job location within 1 year from now &
I'm just wondering about buying a larger mount to
suit a much larger telescope than I have now.
The site I'm thinking about is near Lara 3212 in Victoria
but I don't even know what the seeing conditions are like yet.
However I do know that it's a dark site & you can easily see the Milky way at night.
I'll need to check that out with my 10" f4 carbon fiber Newt.
on my modified EQ6 mount at some stage.
not really - the spring loaded worms are the most significant upgrade being discussed. if you searched for the word problem in the equipment forum you'd find most mounts mentioned for one reason or another including the high end ones.
that looks interesting Peter - thanks for posting.
Allan, the EQ8 suffers from some penny pinching decisions in the manufacturing stages and one basic design fault as outlined in the article that Peter linked. However, it is worth noting that it costs about 1/2 - 1/3 as much as a 40kg "name" brand and can deliver the goods if you work around the backlash issues. Spring loaded worms will fix the backlash/runout and if anyone can put together an upgrade set that works (without introducing a whole new set of problems), it will be up there with some very good mounts, since the basic design PE seems to be about 7 arcsec p-p.
the stripdown video shows swarf - mine regularly ends the night with a layer of damp dust all over/in it, so a bit of swarf is actually quite minor by comparison - shouldn't happen, but not a game changer. Additionally, using grub screws to lock threads is fairly standard - eg the EQ6 - it isn't pretty if you pull it down, but it works fine. The rust is also annoying, but it has no effect on performance. Overall, if you care about finesse and beauty, don't go there - if all you care about is quite robust functionality, the EQ8 is worth a good look.
that looks interesting Peter - thanks for posting.
Allan, the EQ8 suffers from some penny pinching decisions in the manufacturing stages and one basic design fault as outlined in the article that Peter linked. However, it is worth noting that it costs about 1/2 - 1/3 as much as a 40kg "name" brand and can deliver the goods if you work around the backlash issues. Spring loaded worms will fix the backlash/runout and if anyone can put together an upgrade set that works (without introducing a whole new set of problems), it will be up there with some very good mounts, since the basic design PE seems to be about 7 arcsec p-p.
the stripdown video shows swarf - mine regularly ends the night with a layer of damp dust all over/in it, so a bit of swarf is actually quite minor by comparison - shouldn't happen, but not a game changer. Additionally, using grub screws to lock threads is fairly standard - eg the EQ6 - it isn't pretty if you pull it down, but it works fine. The rust is also annoying, but it has no effect on performance. Overall, if you care about finesse and beauty, don't go there - if all you care about is quite robust functionality, the EQ8 is worth a good look.
Thanks Ray for the info.
Looks like it's not worth buying until Skywatcher fixes up those problems
or a kit is available to modify it.
I am only in the planning stages so there is no urgency.
I know that with my EQ6 I had to change the counterweight shaft
to get it to work to my satisfaction: https://www.flickr.com/photos/247194...in/photostream
Thanks Peter,
I am normally get a bit better than your graph with my EQ6.
I watch the guide graph & if it goes more than 1.5"
I cancel the picture & start again.
I lose about 1 in every 20 pictures.
