EQ6 or iOptron ieq45

[Neil27]

As the title suggests looking at mounting this in a roll off observatory and a permanent pier for visual only. May dabble in a little AP but not serious stuff.

I wonder what experiences owners have had with these 2 mounts. I realise the EQ6 is the stalwart for many people and that they give great service to many people but the iOptron looks a very good buy as well.

Any feedback would be very welcome, looking to purchase around late summer, early autumn ready for the dark skies to return!

Thanks for reading,

[midnight_sky_watcher]

Hi Neil,

I own 2 sky watcher EQ6 pros. They are great mounts, but had a few problems with the levelling of the tripods, before mounting the heads i used a spirit level to make sure tripod was level. ( my observatory floor is level when it was laid, and the centre line down the middle is exactly North South running. When I mounted the head on both mount tripods, the spirit level bubble was out by quite a bit. The dec scale was inaccurate as well. I also found the user manual has quite a few mistakes in it, which could put beginners off. But they are both operating brilliantly now.

Grant...

[ollypenrice]

I've used both quite extensively. The iOptron has some nice features. Polar alignment is easy (irrelevant to you in an observatory), the GoTo is stunningly accurate, it remembers its park position so it can Go To its alignment star with near perfect precision on successive nights. However, I cannot see this mount as any kind of equivalent to the NEQ6. It has a particular characteristic which is not liking long OTAs one bit. It will handle an 8 inch SCT because that is a short tube. If I put our TEC140 on it, a scope weighing only 10 to 12 Kg loaded, it is utterly hopeless and wobbles around too much for visual use, let alone imaging. I don't mean 'it isn't very stable,' I mean it wobbles. When I first had the mount it wasn't so bad but over time this dislike of long OTAs has worstened. The iEQ45 has motors spring loaded into mesh with the wheels and it seems to me that this spring loading has somehow weakened.

The NEQ6, in my view, is bigger, cruder, cheaper and better. It sounds like a can of nuts and bolts falling down a staircase but it works. That spring loading idea of iOptron's needs sorting.

Olly

[Neil27]

Thanks Grant and Olly.

I'm also considering the new ALT/AZ EQ6 that has just been released.

Olly, do you think my C11 edge would be OK on that mount, purely visual only and on top of a pier not a tripod?

I suspected the weight restrictions of the iOptron would become an issue.

Many thanks, Neil.

[Neil27]

Or to put it another way, which mount between 1 - 1.5k would you buy for a C11 edge and assorted smaller scopes. Mounted in a roll off for visual only.

Thanks,

[Dunkster]

I use the NEQ6 pro for my C11 and it's nice and solid. FLO lists the visual payload for the AZ-EQ6 at 25kg, the same as for the NEQ6. Btw, this is almost 2x the weight of the C11 ota alone, 13kg for the Edge HD.

[alan potts]

Dunkster,

I am toying with the idea of a NEQ6 myself, do you think one would stretch to my 12 LX 200 tube?

Alan

[Dunkster]

With the SCT being dumpy, you should be ok Alan, at least for visual, though I wouldn't want to try and wrestle the ota into a set of rings

NEQ6 is a good but of kit, see Olly's opinion above

[Marki]

AZ-EQ6GT is rated at the same capapcity as the NEQ6. If you will mainly be using the eq mode (for imaging), I'd probably go for the NEQ6, as its cheaper. I went for the AZ-EQ6GT as I want to use it mostly in visual. I had considered the iOptron45, but as I tend to mostly use long focus achromats I'm really glad I went for the skywatcher mount, and doubly so reading Olly's post.

I've been happy with it in eq mode so far, but not really had much chance to test it in az (well, barely much chance to test it at all given our weather). I think the clutch system for both ra and dec on the az-eq is mechanically much better than the eq model - no worries about upgradin bolts for fear they'll bend, for example. The synscan seems really crude compared to the IOptron goto Nova system, but does its job. I do find the iOptron goto system (on my minitower II) is very accurate. The Synscan system seems somewhat crude by comparison, but that may reflect my lack of familiarity with it yet. I'm still not sure how good the goto is or how accurate in tracking it is in az mode - I had some difficulties in alignment, but again I have not had much of a chance to try it out and get used to it yet. On the whole, the AZ-EQGT is solid, robust and stable, and I think I've made a good choice.

I'd have thought it would carry a c11 type tube with minimal fuss. My c8 looks like a toy on it .