CGX and PEC

[DRCORTEX]

Does a CGX, which is belt driven, still require PEC modelling, or can I simply use PHD's PEC correction ?

[toc]

Im not sure it requires it, but you can certainly do it. I set it up with CPWI and it seems to work, but I've not done rigorous testing...

[glend]

While it can be setup, it is questionable whether it is worth bothering with. In five + years of imaging with my CGX I have not found it necessary. If your mount drives are properly adjusted, and worm spring tension, pullback range correct, it should not be necessary. The worms are effectively riding on spring suspension and avoids most of the ring to worm interface 'slop' caused by manual mesh set systems, where PEC is most effective.
However, while the CGX worms are belt driven, thus eliminating gear slop in the drive interface, the CGX does still use a worm to ring interface, albeit with spring suspension, and in any of these type of arrangements, the quality of the worm and ring machining is the defining factor in absolute achievable error elimination.
If your guiding, there is nothing wrong with trying PHD PEC, but start with a properly adjusted worm system. Instructions on worm adjustment are located in the CGX manual, or should I say they used to be in the manual.

[DRCORTEX]

Thanks everybody. I guess the real deal, will be when I start guiding. I am reasonably happy with what I get. Living in a Bortle 6 , guiding is only going to help a bit. In the end, what you see is what you get.

Cheers,

Doc