I was surprised to read Rod Wodaski in The New CCD Astronomy book call the Losmandy G11 (pg 175) "risky due to variations in accuracy from mount to mount, and often requiring some TLC to get the most out of your mount"
and from pg 133
"The Losmandy G-11 has been the entry-level mount of choice for imagers on a budget for sime years. The GM-8 is not stiff enough to be a good imaging mount, but some folks have had good success by putting the G-11 tripod and saddle on the GM-8. If you are going to take that approach, you might as well just go all the way and get the heavier G-11 head, too. The price difference between the GM-8 and the G-11 is not large.
The G-11 has larger periodic error than most of the mounts mentioned here (ed. Paramount, Atro-Physics, Takashi - he certainly likes the high-end doesn't he?), but you can usually guide out the error satisfactorily if the focal length of your imaging scope is under 2000mm. There is some variability in the periodic and random errors in tracking from mount to mount, and some web sites have sprung up with suggestions on how to improve tracking accurcay. The G-11 Tuning page is an excellent reference:"
http://www.tfh-berlin.de/~goerlich/cg11tune.html
"The G-11 is often spoken of as capable of carrying 60 pound loads, but for imaging somewhere around 30-35 pounds is more realistic."
Interesting huh? G-11 is an entry platform for rich kids playing with imaging or a dream mount for any of us cash strapped fellows!