EQ6Pro-counterweight rod and tripod legs

[DJDD]

Hello,


When I read the Article about balancing the telescope on an EQ mount (in Projects & Articles) it mentioned that the counterweight rod should be positioned over one of the legs.

When I view Tandum's HEQ5Pro in the Classifieds I see that that is the case. (see image attachment, HEQ5Pro.jpg).

However, on my EQ6Pro there just does not seem to be a way to do this. the mount can only sit on the tripod one way, and the azimuth screws could not turn the mount around far enough.

I do not think that i can rotate in any other axis so that the counterweight rod lies over a leg of the tripod. See the EQ6Pro jpg's.

Is that normal? or should i look behind the door for my brain?

thanks for any assistance.

DJDD

[BC]

I don't have an answer for you but just want to reassure you that your numerous questions are being followed with great interest by others (certainly by me). I also managed to slip in on the $1,495 EQ6 Pro from the shop in WA and it is in transit now. I anticipate that many of your issues will arise for me, so thanks. I haven't noticed questions like this in the past.

Bruce

[33South (Chris)]

On a standard Black EQ6 if you take the head off there is a square pin sticking up that the azimuth bolts push against, this unscrews.

You should also see another threaded hole on the leg side of of the plate.

[tempestwizz (Brian)]

The EQ6 base on the tripod will not allow significant rotation of the mount itself. One leg of the tripod will neccessarily be pointing North (for us down under). This (fixed) orientation thereby allows the counterweights to swing past the tripod closer-in without risk of fouling the legs.
The horizontal centre of gravity is immediately under the middle of the tripod. There would be no need/advantage to have the counterweights swing over a particular leg, as the weight on each is even.
BC

[Terry B]

Originally Posted by tempestwizz

The EQ6 base on the tripod will not allow significant rotation of the mount itself. One leg of the tripod will neccessarily be pointing North (for us down under). This (fixed) orientation thereby allows the counterweights to swing past the tripod closer-in without risk of fouling the legs.
The horizontal centre of gravity is immediately under the middle of the tripod. There would be no need/advantage to have the counterweights swing over a particular leg, as the weight on each is even.
BC

The little square pin that that sits on the top of the mount for the azimuth bolts to push against is removeable and can be put on the side with the single leg.
I think this is better. The reason for this is that when you take the OTA off the scope before taking the counterweights of, the scope can very easily tip if the counterweight bar is on the other side. The other option- to take the counterweights off first risks the scope tipping up and your OTA hitting the deck. Not Good!

[DJDD]

Originally Posted by Terry B

The little square pin that that sits on the top of the mount for the azimuth bolts to push against is removeable and can be put on the side with the single leg.

i noticed the other hole but was unsure what it was for. it does seem the safer option, although at the moment the mount is quite stable with the ED80 on it. as well, the mount seemed stable when i just had the counterweights on it, however, they are half-way up the bar at the moment. of course, without a bigger scope it is hard to tell.

Originally Posted by tempestwizz

There would be no need/advantage to have the counterweights swing over a particular leg, as the weight on each is even.

thanks, tempestwizz.
once the scope/weights are balanced I can see that it will not matter.
as i mentioned above the whole thing seemed quite stable at all stages.

Originally Posted by 33south

On a standard Black EQ6 if you take the head off there is a square pin sticking up that the azimuth bolts push against, this unscrews.

thanks, 33south. that caused me some confusion early on!
I saw the threaded hole but was no sure what it was for.

Originally Posted by BC

I don't have an answer for you but just want to reassure you that your numerous questions are being followed with great interest by others (certainly by me). I also managed to slip in on the $1,495 EQ6 Pro from the shop in WA and it is in transit now. I anticipate that many of your issues will arise for me, so thanks. I haven't noticed questions like this in the past.

well done on getting the cheaper EQ6Pro. I really like it. i am just frustrated that the skies are not clear here in MEL!

I think you have never seen questions like these because most people understand the setup without trouble! i think the stock of brain matter was running low when i was born...

anyway, i am glad my questions may (?) help others.

maybe in the end I should rite an Article...

cheers,
DJDD

[bojan]

Originally Posted by tempestwizz

The horizontal centre of gravity is immediately under the middle of the tripod. There would be no need/advantage to have the counterweights swing over a particular leg, as the weight on each is even.
BC

I do not think this is the case. Just have a better look, and you will see that the centre of gravity is roughly ~10cm off the centre (towards the DEC axle, away from polar finder).
This is the reason why some people (including myself) recommend changing the position of that pin, so that one leg could be under the counterweight.

EDIT: You will also have easier access to polarfinder.

[DJDD]

Thanks, bojan.

I will make the change tonight and see how it goes.
certainly, access to the polar finder would be easier with the other arrangement.

thanks again, everyone, for your replies.

cheers,
DJDD