A discussion on improving the EQ5

[anthony2302749]

The purpose of this discussion is to present forum reads with information on the EQ5 mount, fell free to join in and share you own experience in using this mount.

I have own both the EQ4 and EQ5 (the EQ5 was used for Astrophotography), both of which were re-worked for better operation. I used the procedure as out line by Astronomy Boy (http://astronomyboy.com/cg5/). The EQ4 was problematic as this particular design was equipped with no bearings. Before I re-worked this mount it was very stiff, as you rotated the R.A. and Dec they would bind in certain spots. Using the procedure out line by Astronomy Boy the overall performance of this mount improved, but not good enough to be used for Astrophotography. It was interesting to note the amount of machine filling which was cleaned from the working parts of this mount.

I got my hands on an EQ5 mount (as I wanted to use it for Astrophotography) and it behaved in similar fashion to the EQ4. The EQ5 mount is an upgrade version of the EQ4 mount and is equipped with bearing on the R.A. Again using the procedure out line by Astronomy Boy the overall performance of this mount improved, and it was used successfully for Wide Field Astrophotography. Again it was interesting to note the amount of machine filling which was cleaned from the working parts of this mount.

In a previous discussion I mention the phrase “both RA & Dec are re-machined” this is just another way of saying “deburring and polishing” (see Improving the CG-5 Equatorial Mount Declination Axis, Part 3 http://astronomyboy.com/cg5/dec3.shtml ). Using a metal lathe make this process just that much easier.

The EQ5, while it is a good mount for general viewing and wide field Astrophotography it has not got a low enough periodic error for serious astrophotography. As a low price mount, it is a good way of getting your feet wet if you are a newbie and want to get in to astrophotography , but you will need to do so work on the mount to get the best performance. If you are a newbie who just wants to view the stars, planets etc then a Dobsonian would be your best choice.



Anthony

Additional reading

Cloudy Nights Telescope Review (a must read for EQ5 users and interested parties)
http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=824&pr=2x8x34

Amateur-Telescopes
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Runway/9731/drawings50.html


Excelsis review on EQ5 Mounts
http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/entry.php?sectionid=31&entryid=23&P HPSESSID=adbf40ec331c51456527c2e5a1 5e11d2

[serge]

I made some enhancements to my Skywatcher's EQ5.

The changes I made were to the worms' housings - to get rid of rubber O rings. The mount had a terrible backlash and it was taking about 5 seconds or so for the scope to start moving once the button on the handpad was pressed. I replaced O rings with ball bearings with 6 mm internal diameter. I had to drill bigger holes (see the red arrows) to accommodate the bearings and to allow the worm to be in the centre.

After the changes the backlash was almost gone - it still exists due to the backlash in the stepper motors' gears and I cannot do anything about that.

I have also followed astroboy's instructions for the rest...

Best Regards,
Serge.

[anthony2302749]

Nice one Serge, if I still had my EQ5 I would have done the same.

Anthony

Originally Posted by serge

I made some enhancements to my Skywatcher's EQ5.

The changes I made were to the worms' housings - to get rid of rubber O rings. The mount had a terrible backlash and it was taking about 5 seconds or so for the scope to start moving once the button on the handpad was pressed. I replaced O rings with ball bearings with 6 mm internal diameter. I had to drill bigger holes (see the red arrows) to accommodate the bearings and to allow the worm to be in the centre.

After the changes the backlash was almost gone - it still exists due to the backlash in the stepper motors' gears and I cannot do anything about that.

I have also followed astroboy's instructions for the rest...

Best Regards,
Serge.