Jump to content

Narrowband

EQ8: Dec binding or total failure?


Dark Matter

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 257
  • Created
  • Last Reply

There seems to be a lot of folk willing to state an opinion having never seen or touched an EQ8.

Meanwhile Skywatcher remain as the company responsible for the most popular range of mounts in the history of amateur astronomy........let's not forget that :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A spring loaded worm assembly is just a work around "cop out" and although it keeps the worm in mesh, the eccentricity of the wormwheel just adds to the potential periodic error. SW have admitted to the problem but it is no more acceptable to say you have to put up with it any more than manufacturers of SCT's saying you have to put up with image shift when focusing. The DIY section of this forum is full of clever fixes for fixable issues but few would face having to refigure an astigmatic mirror if necessary.

There is a subtle difference between direct drives and friction drives. A direct drive, by definition, would be just the motor driving the RA shaft, a friction drive can have a gearbox formed by plain friction discs with no backlash or periodic error. (Unless the diameters are eccentric.   :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tim,

Are people not allowed an opinion on something that potentially they are looking at purchasing?

Have you had chance to use one? If so, what did you make of it?

I dont doubt that Skywatcher will fix the issue, but I really don't think it's unreasonable to say that a mount shouldn't be shipped if it's not up to the job...at least in some cases. There are some good EQ8s but there should be only good EQ8s. Having a mix of both gives consumers no confidence, and when spending 3k, people are going to want confidence.

I grant you that I don't have one, but it was under consideration as a remote mount. Recent reports have shed some doubts on its suitability, which I'm sure will be fixed in the coming months, but I think it's fair to have an opinion about the situation. It's human nature to form an opinion, and at this stage there is some doubt.

Obviously the only reports you read are the bad ones. Those with fully working EQ8s won't make a big song and dance. This effect will skew the average to the negative side.

Cheers

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be a lot of folk willing to state an opinion having never seen or touched an EQ8.

Meanwhile Skywatcher remain as the company responsible for the most popular range of mounts in the history of amateur astronomy........let's not forget that :p

hi tim, id be the first to admit that im one of those people , but I think the principle of any company charging a lot of money for something where they have neglected to implement some simple QC in a key part of the system is something everyone would have an opinion on.

its not really fair for big companies to be able to do this and its only through potential endusers expressing their views will synta feel compelled to act. I dont think the "mend it yourself" approach is good enough when many of these mounts have only seen a few hours service, if that.

I know the other day there was a post where the leg brace brackets on someones eq8 appears to have been fitted the wrong way round at the factory before shipping ..... again ansimple QC issue.

unfortuantely its the customer and supplier who is left to sort out the issues and I know from previous posts that both the leg brace issue mount, and the one olly has have both come from flo who has worked admirably to sort out these issues on mounts that were given the green light at the factory.

So as I said, I hope skywatcher sort this out, even if dont own an eq8.

cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was not the first batch of Mesus that had the problems but the second, the siTech versions which are suitable for robotic control.

A tiny point of correction if I may. I was supplied with one of the many SiTech versions that didn't have the problem - it was just a very small batch of (albeit SiTech) later versions that had the issue. Ironically, the fault was introduced in response to user requests - some users complained about the projecting motor assemblies so Mesu replaced the original design with a more flush fitting design at a higher cost (which was not passed on to the end user!) and this didn't work as specified by the motor supplier. Current examples use the original motors.

.... and now back to the EQ8!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not having a dig at anyone, honest! :)

Yes Paul, I have had the opportunity to inspect a working EQ8. The mount has the potential to be a game changer and is a lot of mount for the money. Personally I prefer a little more refinement, but I have no doubt that the EQ8 will go on to become very popular once it's foibles are ironed out. It is still early days, and these are hardly mass produced items, and sometimes no amount of beta testing shows up all the kinks ( just ask Microsoft!!) but once they get into general regular use the little issues surface and can be dealt with.

So rather than condemn or berate any company or worse, nation for their approach to QC, lets rather watch with interest how they respond to consumer feedback. The point has been very well made in the thread that few products make it to market these days without need for refinement or revision.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strewth, looks like I opened up a can of worms re my EQ8?  But then, if one does not give feedback, how can a manufacturer make better next time?

As the old saying goes: "Sometimes, one has to be cruel to be kind". Meaning the next SW EQ mount, is going to be super-duper!

again, I believe what I'm experiencing doesn't necessary apply to ALL EQ8's. I just happen to get one that fell through the cracks and yes, it will get fixed.

I suspect a power board failure. But then, any misalignment in maching is going to have an adverse affect on the output of the product.

Having saved up for this mount only to have it fail so soon, tends to leaves a sour taste in one's mouth. But then, that taste can be removed quite quickly by the sweet taste of success.

All will be revealed and fixed, when the technician pulls it apart. I'll be back... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strewth, looks like I opened up a can of worms re my EQ8?  But then, if one does not give feedback, how can a manufacturer make better next time?

As the old saying goes: "Sometimes, one has to be cruel to be kind". Meaning the next SW EQ mount, is going to be super-duper!

again, I believe what I'm experiencing doesn't necessary apply to ALL EQ8's. I just happen to get one that fell through the cracks and yes, it will get fixed.

I suspect a power board failure. But then, any misalignment in maching is going to have an adverse affect on the output of the product.

Having saved up for this mount only to have it fail so soon, tends to leaves a sour taste in one's mouth. But then, that taste can be removed quite quickly by the sweet taste of success.

All will be revealed and fixed, when the technician pulls it apart. I'll be back... :)

A can of worm gears :grin:

Or in this case worm gears made out of old cans... :grin:

Anyway lets hope it gets sorted quickly as I would like to have one myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depending on the eccentricity of the worm a few hours in the lathe with some lapping compound should see it right.

Anyway if there are any EQ8 owners who fancy a straight swap for my lapped and belt driven EQ6 Im up for it :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SW can't be surprised at this reaction. Which Incidentally I believe is a very mild mannered & polite reaction compared to some other consumer forums! I think SW opened themselves up to this by not doing anything about their QC record. SW are moving into the higher end we were told. Releasing product lines (Esprit) to directly compete with "luxury" brands is giving the consumer certain expectations. How can we be expected to react when those expectations are somewhat dashed!

I still want to be able to have a working as advertised EQ8. However, I stopped my self from pressing the buy button after I opened the case of my Esprit 80 to realise I was having flashbacks to almost 3 years before when I unpacked the 80ED. The lack of QC hasn't changed. The issues were almost identical too!

As I said in Ollys thread. I will only buy another SW product if it is personally QC'd by the dealer first. Whom I see time & time again going out of their way to protect SW's reputation. I hope SW recognises that!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just SW, I purchased an iOptron IEQ45 that took nearly a year to get performing as advertised, but it has to be said that since its introduction there have been continuous  improvements made in response to problems so no doubt will happen with theEQ8. 

Spring loaded worms weren't much help on the iEQ45, made the whole thing bounce up and down :)

Talking of  iEQ45, where has Jesper disappeared to ?

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To all that have responded to my EQ8 woes and suggestions, a big thank you! :) Not every EQ8 is bad.

How many flash cars have you seen or heard of that have been recalled for some minor mechanical or electrical fault? Not every car is bad. And telescope mounts are no different.

Would we put down a Leica DSLR, a Ferrari, or in our case, a Paramount ME or an AP 1200 an ASA, some other top-end mount or even an EQ8 if it had a fault..? It might raise an eyebrow or two, but we'd still but them. 

Synta make damn good gear and I for one, will continue to buy and use their products with pride even though I just happened to catch a fish with a few barbs on it.

As to my dilemma, it seems more like a power board failure, as this 'jamming or stalling only happens at Rate 9, as all other speeds are good, because I can slew the Dec and RA a full 360 at Rate 8, without the slightest glitch. Had I'd been able to select a GOTO rate other than 9, I'd be Ok, but it's Rate 9 that is causing the problem, which make me think its a voltage problem even though I have 13.8VDC 5Amp power to the mount.

Re this, I've suggested to SW engineers to allow the user to select a GOTO slew rate other than 9 in a future Skyscan firmware. Whether they take this suggestion remains to be seen, as some other mounts G11 and Titan 50 have this. Fast slews using worm and wheel will eventually wear away or burn out a motor. So a slower slew rate would put less strain on motors and gears. No one speeds along the highway in low gear, eh?

As a mount designer and maker for may decades, it wasn't the sheer size, its name, its fancy looks, its maker or where it was made that sold the mount, but by its end-user performance, as I lived by two motto's '..A tree is only as strong as its roots are deep...' and '. buy (or build ) your last mount (and or telescope) first.

When a bloke asked for amount, I'd ask him what does he want to swing on it - weight of scope and cameras?, Is it for AP or visual? it is to be portable or permanent? Does he want dual axis drives, what size of RA wheel and slew speeds, etc.. This would create a customer to rethink or he would say:  ".. Yep, that (or this) is what I want. Please build it..". Months later he gets a mount fit for ESO.. lol..

Rest assured, Synta will always be there to assist and help those who help themselves. I'll report back when we have found and fixed my EQ8 fault.

Clear skies to all of us in 2014.

James

James

Yes you would put them down and you have to. Otherwise we will all end up accepting substandard products regardless of price. On top of this we have consumer rights to protect us from such business practice. There will be some fundamental problems with some products and this can often be tracked back to business related decisions. Some business will ensure that their products are manufactured to high standards and optimised before they leave the factory. it is evident that SYNTA are not one of those business by the problems that are reported about both their lower priced products and their higher based products.

I asked the question here about "problems with your mount out of the box" and just about all makes had at least one such account. A subsequent question was how did it get fixed and tales of manufactures and dealers taking personal responsibility for the problems by installing a replacement part or delivering a replacement mount. However SYNTA products tend to be resolved by a series of recommendations by the dealer for fixing it or in the end the owner strips it down and fixes it themselves. This I guess is fine for a £1000 mount you take the risk and there are plenty of self help groups about. Stripping a £3000 mount down to see if you can fix it yourself is a BIG risk. Once a dealer starts to play with these kind of amounts of money they need to be prepared to sort thing out quickly. People will be much less forgiving and certainly more demanding of quality, reliability and customer service in this price range. It remains a fact that poor SYNTA mounts don't get shipped back to China, SYNTA don't want them back. They end up being pushed out to another buyer until someone is prepared to put up with it or fix it themselves this is pretty much how this market works and has done for a long time. Our biggest problem is we have few options and the dealers know it.

How many manufactures make a mount for under £800, £1500, £3000. I can think of three and all of them have had problems with their mounts for one reason or another.

We have to complain and it needs to get through to the dealers and manufactures that there are a number of customers that are not happy with the reliability or quality of their products. If we don't they wont change. I think there is a culture in armature astronomy that we are all in this together manufactures, dealers and end users, we have this kind of club mentality that its OK they are trying there best and as long as they are in the club it can be  brushed over and we fix it together.

Five years ago I dropped out of astrophotography  because I couldn't afford the quality equipment that would allow me to do what I wanted. I remained a casual observer but in the last six months I have wanted to get back into it but all I have seen are problems after problems with new refactors & mounts regardless of costs. Clearly dealers and manufactures have just continued to push  what ever comes of the line out of the door. I have seen that there remains a few manufactures and individuals that pride themselves in their products or services its not all bad just generally not good enough.

Sorry about the rant its not aimed at you I am just disappointed that if I buy a new mount in almost any price range that there is an inherent risk of buying a lemon in a box.

Kevin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those out there who can afford to put down £3k on a mount, why the obsession with the Skywatcher products in the first place? We all see the "Made in China" sticker on the mounts/scope/accessories. We all know that China has a bad reputation in terms of quality control, product reliability etc... (not saying that everything coming out of China is bad, but... it's not "made in Germany" quality if you know what I mean).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those out there who can afford to put down £3k on a mount, why the obsession with the Skywatcher products in the first place? We all see the "Made in China" sticker on the mounts/scope/accessories. We all know that China has a bad reputation in terms of quality control, product reliability etc... (not saying that everything coming out of China is bad, but... it's not "made in Germany" quality if you know what I mean).

Because there's nothing else on the market, at that price, that can carry that payload, has dual encoders, works with EQMOD etc etc. And there may be even one or two EQ8s that actually work. :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those out there who can afford to put down £3k on a mount, why the obsession with the Skywatcher products in the first place? We all see the "Made in China" sticker on the mounts/scope/accessories. We all know that China has a bad reputation in terms of quality control, product reliability etc... (not saying that everything coming out of China is bad, but... it's not "made in Germany" quality if you know what I mean).

I have to agree with this (I am guilty as well), I just got a new tripod for my camera which I am told is made in Italy at the Manfrotto factory. The quality is unbelievable, fit and finish is perfect and its CNC machined out of aluminium alloy billet, everything just works as it should. If I put this up against the AZ4-2 I bought this year there is absolutely no comparison, one of the legs on the AZ4 just sticks when pulling it out (slightly oval), it was supplied with a southern hemisphere degrees dial so as much use as a chocolate teapot and if you loosen the clutches it feels a bit lumpy and sticks, the fit and finish is just adequate with its ready chipped paintwork flaking off and its poor quality leg locking screws. Okay I doubt I could mount the Evostar 120 on the photo tripod however I have mounted the 15x70 Helios no problem and suspect it will take my 80mm F5 Refractor easily as its limit is 8Kg. It even comes with a sprung loaded hook for adding extra weight underneath, this quality product costs £69.95 against the £177 I paid for the AZ4....is the AZ4 worth £100 more? I am not sure it is.....Its not a direct comparison but really to illustrate the point that we do seem to be getting sub-standard quality in the astronomy market for the money and worse still some people appear to except this as the norm. I don't have an EQ8 but have a number of Skywatcher products and only one of them has lived up to expectations for the money and that was the ST-80 (the Evostar 120 came complete with tube blackening flaked off and stuck to the optics internally) I suspect all this acceptance boils down to the fix it and fettle nature of amateur astronomers which in a way is part of the enjoyment of the hobby however a point must come were this is unacceptable and the enjoyment starts to leave. 

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because there's nothing else on the market, at that price, that can carry that payload, has dual encoders, works with EQMOD etc etc. And there may be even one or two EQ8s that actually work. :grin:

I wonder how long they will work for?  :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is the worm gear that is eccentric, this would take more than a few hours to correct.  :eek:

Agreed, there's no way an eccentric gear should have ever been put in a finished product.......that's not bad QC that's just contempt for your customers.

Sorry SW this is a big fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those out there who can afford to put down £3k on a mount, why the obsession with the Skywatcher products in the first place?

Because another mount with the same capacity and similar (on paper, at least) specifications would otherwise cost £6k.

If you look at SW's products, they are cheap, capable and have some rough edges. People make their buying decisions in the full knowledge of what Skywatcher sells, so complaints about paintwork, fit 'n' finish, "rattles" etc. are somewhat unrealistic. If you want a mount that can carry 15kg for photographic work, you can buy an EQ6 for £1k, or an M-Uno for £4k. Most people are willing to sacrifice the "gloss" for price.

So it is with the EQ8. It's a brand new product, it's half the price of comparable products. Sure, it has some teething troubles - but apparently not one that stops it from working completely -  (although we have no idea of the extent - just some of the owners have reported a problem, the satisfied owners are pretty quiet) but you should expect that with the first release of any new product: be it a car, a software package or a mount. And never forget that with consumer protection regulations, people can send it back if they really can't live with it and they won't have lost anything. Let's see how many do that :evil:

I'm confident that in time the next release will work - and if it doesn't: me and everyone else who's held back, will look elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few thoughts on questions raised by this issue. Its been observed that a number of EQ8 mounts appear to have non-concentric gears causing unacceptable variable backlash. My first thought is how widespread is this problem? Is it a generic tolerance issue due to the type and quality of the bearing specified in that some mounts have minimal error while others have major error and a lot fall in-between? Or is it a 'bad batch' were mounts manufactured between certain dates have the error while others outside the dates are OK? It would be useful if users with acceptable mounts could join in to gauge the magnitude of the problem.

Is there a specification that can be quoted to say that the mount doesn't meet it? Or is it a general 'not fit for purpose' problem that would have to be argued and ultimately rely on the goodwill of the dealer, or a resort to legal routes? Is it a problem that can be overcome by guiding the mount? Is it a fundamental design error that cannot be corrected without replacement of the part(s)? Or is it an error than can be corrected by repair of the affected part? If it is a fundamental error, is it indeed possible to replace the part with a different one, or does the design prevent this?

If SW or the dealer accept that the mount is faulty, and if the fault is repairable, how is it to be done with minimal impact on the user? Will the user be expected to 'fettle' or adjust some parts under guidance, will new parts be issued for user installation, or will the mount have to be sent back for repair?

I was about to get one of these mounts, but until there is some kind of official statement on this issue from SW or dealers I'll be holding back. I could be wrong but I presume most mounts would be drop shipped from the importer (OVL?), so the dealer has no chance to check the mount. So really the dealer should make the importer unpack every mount and check for this problem, reject them as necessary and state that this has been done with an attached quality statement. This would nip the issue in the bud before it becomes an epidemic, and would also reassure potential purchasers that they can buy the mount with confidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.