ercole or mini-ercole giro mount

[Piero]

As I am going to order a Tak FC-100DF, I also started thinking about potential giro mounts "for the future"  .

Right now I use a video tripod. The tripod can hold up to 7kg, whereas the head up to 5kg. For the beginning using light eyepieces and my 1.25" diagonal, this might be okay-ish at low-medium power, but who knows. Of course I will try it first. 

 

Among the several choices of Giro mounts, I feel that the Ercole / mini-Ercole are nice offers.

- http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p8256_Giro-Ercole-Mini-Azimutale-Montierung-fuer-Instumente-bis-9-kg.html

Weight: 2kg

- http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p4202_GIRO-ERCOLE-Altazimuth-Mount-for-Telescopes-up-to-15-kg.html
Weight: 4kg

 

With 1.25" equipment, the payload will be:  

- Tak DF is 3.5kg  
- dovetail, tak clamshell, dovetail clamp: ~0.7kg    (tot: 4.2kg)
- 1.25" TV everbrite diagonal: 0.25kg       (tot: 4.45kg)
- heaviest 1.25" `small` ep: 24 Pan: 0.27kg     (tot: 4.72kg)

 

BUT this might be the heaviest payload one day:

- Tak DF is 3.5kg  
- dovetail, tak clamshell, dovetail clamp: ~0.7kg    (tot: 4.2kg)
- 2" Baader BBHS diagonal (..one day..): 0.5kg       (tot: 4.7kg)
- ES30-82 (heaviest ep, alhough it might be replaced by an ES34 68 (0.68kg) on day):  1kg    (tot: 5.7kg)

 

=> So, essentially 4.5kg - 5.7kg for a tube of 815mm.

Both the Giro mounts can hold it. However, the Ercole can hold it without counterweight, the mini-Ercole requires one. 
Is it better a stronger giro mount without counterweight, or an medium giro mount with counterweight? Any thoughts / suggestions / experience with giro mounts and one of these? 

Thanks in advance, 

Piero

[JG777]

I think if this was me I would go with the non counterweight version purely because you can never be over mounted and also it gives you a bit of future proofing without the faff of playing around with weights. My 6 kilo set up which is on a Sabre mount needs no counterweight and once balanced moves around like a dream.

[Stu]

Depends how portable you want to be Piero. The Ercole is a fine and very capable mount and I'm sure you would not regret buying it, unless you had to carry it too far

That said, I think it is only 3kg so once you have added a counterweight to a smaller mount the weight is less of an issue than the size.

[Piero]

The AOKswiss AYO 2 is also interesting:  

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth/aokswiss-ayo-ii-alt-az-mount.html  

It's a bit more expensive but comes with larger bearings. 

Aside from the payload weight, it seems to me that a counterweight might be necessary when light tripods are used, hence for equilibrium reasons. I am just thinking about light tripods with substantial payload capacity (e.g. carbon fiber tripods by Induro or Gitzo). Will the mount weight be sufficient for "counterbalancing" the telescope weight at each azimuth position, safely?

[JG777]

I have an AYO 2 with encoders being delivered tomorrow :-) The plan is it will live on a UNI18. Thinking about this there is this recent thread which may interest you, Highburymark uses a Tak with a lightweight Gitzo and ercole mini

 

[spaceboy]

The ercole is a superb mount but it's not small. I think the mini-ercole has had some good feedback from members on here and should cope with the TAK ok.

[Piero]

2 hours ago, JG777 said:

I have an AYO 2 with encoders being delivered tomorrow :-) The plan is it will live on a UNI18. Thinking about this there is this recent thread which may interest you, Highburymark uses a Tak with a lightweight Gitzo and ercole mini

 

Congratulations! It seems a very nice mount to me! And the Berlebach UNI18 looks lovely!  

Looking forward to reading your thoughts about the AYO 2, Sir! 

[Piero]

I clearly missed this  

 

[Piero]

How long settling times are with these mounts after tapping? Any idea? 

[Stu]

1 hour ago, Piero said:

How long settling times are with these mounts after tapping? Any idea? 

My view on this is that the mounts are very capable and any damping time comes largely from the tripod. 

I have put plenty onto my Giro-WR including a 120ED side by side with a 4" triplet (I think) and the two things which are issues are the scopes clashing with the tripod legs because it is a small short mount, and the stability. Putting the mount on a short pillar solves the first, and using a decent tripod such as an EQ6 2" stainless steel one or a Gitzo/Induro or similar solves the second.

The Ercole has more height to it so does not need a pillar, I suspect the mini Ercole is similar.

[iPeace]

An Ercole Mini should do splendidly. Carries the lump of a fully-loaded built-like-a-tank TV-85 on a good photo tripod without a counterweight:

Or, for even more stability and smoothness, use a counterweight and stick it on a heavier tripod:

So it's as portable as you need it to be, but gets it done with panache in less mobile situations.

As long as the payload is reasonable, I recommend it over the full-sized Ercole as it is even smoother on the azimuth axis. Nothing wrong with the full-sized Ercole, mind you, it's just bigger and heavier - because it has to be, in order to support larger payloads - and so it requires more of a push to get moving.

 

[jetstream]

3 hours ago, Stu said:

My view on this is that the mounts are very capable and any damping time comes largely from the tripod. 

I have heard the tripod plays a huge role as well. My limited experience with the SV mount and the 120ED does suggest that the mount does play a role in the damping time, along with the tripod of course. I am very interested to hear everyones experience on damping times with their set ups.

[Piero]

A large bearing can make the movement more fluid. A good reason to have them in dob mounts.

I think it depends on the ratio between effective payload and mount payload.

Tripods.. definitely..

I observe on the grass and that helps reduce vibration a lot compared to concrete. 

[Stu]

6 hours ago, Piero said:

A large bearing can make the movement more fluid. A good reason to have them in dob mounts.

That is very true, the smaller mounts tend to be a little more 'grabby' and harder to fine tune the tension.

EDIT spell checker managed to change 'mounts' to 'more Mrs'! Corrected now!

[Piero]

5 hours ago, Stu said:

That is very true, the smaller mounts tend to be a little more 'grabby' and harder to fine tune the tension.

...which is moving my attention towards the AOK II...   

[John]

8 hours ago, jetstream said:

I have heard the tripod plays a huge role as well. My limited experience with the SV mount and the 120ED does suggest that the mount does play a role in the damping time, along with the tripod of course. I am very interested to hear everyones experience on damping times with their set ups.

I've found hardwood tripods improve damping times noticably. My Oberwerk hardwood tripod looks quite slender and a touch insubstantial but it's just as solid as the CG5 2" steel tripod that it replaced, lighter and, IMHO, better looking 

I also have a Berlebach Uni 28 which is heavier duty than the Oberwerk - I use this with my largest frac - the TMB / LZOS 130 F/9.2 triplet.

I think another one of the key things about tripod design is the way that the legs and the hub fit together. These joints need to be really firm and robust to ensure that the various forces that the scope and mount head generate are not translated into twist within the tripod legs.

With alt az mounts generally I've found the ones with the larger bearing surfaces have provided the most stable platforms for the scopes. The Ercole scores well on this but I have to say that I was surprised that the Skytee II marginally out performed the Ercole when it came to handling my large 130mm triplet

 

 

[Piero]

3 minutes ago, John said:

I think another one of the key things about tripod design is the way that the legs and the hub fit together. These joints need to be really firm and robust to ensure that the various forces that the scope and mount head generate are not translated into twist within the tripod legs.

I completely agree with this. My current photo tripod is well design as ^^^^ says. Compared to my very first photo tripod (which cost less, but had similar specs apart from the head), the difference in stability is certainly noticeable. Vibrations don't reduce easily. 

I think it is a bit of all the design: tripod feet, the clamps for the legs extension, leg-hub attachment, and finally the mount head of course.  

[Piero]

7 hours ago, Stu said:

That is very true, the smaller mounts tend to be a little more 'grabby' and harder to fine tune the tension.

EDIT spell checker managed to change 'mounts' to 'more Mrs'! Corrected now!

Ahah!  

[jetstream]

Does anyone know how the Ercole Giro mount shafts are held- bushings or bearings? A view of the insides would be great or details of their construction would help me in my decision as well. Thanks,Gerry

[Stu]

1 hour ago, jetstream said:

Does anyone know how the Ercole Giro mount shafts are held- bushings or bearings? A view of the insides would be great or details of their construction would help me in my decision as well. Thanks,Gerry

Does this help at all Gerry?

The GIRO-Ercole mount differs trough the new radial/axial bearing without lubrication. Inside their are high quality plain bearings which counteracts the rotation and a lateral load. Furthermore the support points and length of bearing has been extended significantly. So the mount can carry more weight. Also the finish and some cosmetically changes completes the overall picture.

http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2015/05/03/tele-optic-giro-ercole-alt-az-mount-review/

[Piero]

I am just looking the "German pages" in the AOK website. 

Here you can see photos showing the several connections : http://www.aokswiss.ch/d/pdf/Testbericht_AYO_dt.pdf  

 

 

[Piero]

On 25/07/2017 at 18:51, JG777 said:

I have an AYO 2 with encoders being delivered tomorrow :-) The plan is it will live on a UNI18. 

How do you find it?  

[John]

During the past 12 months I have owned both an Ercole, a Giro II (or maybe a III ?) and a Skytee II.

My goal was to find a single mount from those 3 that did the best job of handling my TMB / LZOS 130mm F/9.25 triplet.

After quite a few nights comparing them I was surprised at the outcome. The Ercole and the Giro II / III performed pretty much the same with the big frac on board. The Ercole seemed more sturdy because it is a more massive design but in terms of carrying the scope and minimising vibrations at high magnifications, there was little or nothing in it. That was the 1st surprise. The 2nd surprise was that the Skytee II proved better than both the Ercole and the Giro with the big refractor. There was less vibration, vibrations that did occur dampened more quickly and, with the ADM clamp upgrade, the Skytee II held the large, long optical tube more firmly in terms of being reasonably resistant to changes of weight at the focuser end eg: switching from 1.25" to 2" eyepieces.

I sold the Giro II / III on (reluctantly becuase I really liked the finish and simplicity of the mount) and ran the Ercole and the Skytee II together for a while. The Skytee II's advantages with my largest and heaviest refractor remained through that period though so I decided to let the Ercole go.

This was honestly not the outcome that I was expecting. I thought that the superior (German) engineering of the Ercole would give it the edge over Chinese made Skytee II and ultimately I had expected to sell that mount on. But I could not argue with the performance difference each time I used the mounts with the larger scope

The Skytee II has it's faults and it's finish is not in the Ercole, Giro or AYO class but it is a very capable heavy duty alt azimuth mount, once it's dovetail clamps have been upgraded from the poor stock items. It's overkill for the Tak and Vixen 4" fracs which is why I'm sussing out the new AZ5 from Skywatcher. For my ED120 and APM / LZOS 130 refractors the Skytee II does a very sound job IMHO.

My one remaining gripe is to remove some backlash that aflicts the Skytee II's azimuth slow motion control. More "tweaking" to be done there

BTW all the above comparisons were done using the Berlebach UNI 28 tripod which is a very sound companion to any of these mounts. Tall too, if you want it to be

 

 

[JG777]

6 hours ago, Piero said:

How do you find it?  

I missed the delivery on the day but did manage to collect it the following day. I haven't had enough time to properly assess it or test the encoders as we were travelling away for a few days but when I get back will take some pics and maybe a mini review. I did quickly mount it on the UNI18 and attach my VX6 on it, moving it around was buttery smooth in Alt and AZ so my initial feelings are very positive. More to come!  

[Piero]

2 hours ago, JG777 said:

I missed the delivery on the day but did manage to collect it the following day. I haven't had enough time to properly assess it or test the encoders as we were travelling away for a few days but when I get back will take some pics and maybe a mini review. I did quickly mount it on the UNI18 and attach my VX6 on it, moving it around was buttery smooth in Alt and AZ so my initial feelings are very positive. More to come!  

Thank you John, I'd be very interested in hearing your thoughts even though your VX6 (F8?) is a rather different scope from a tak-100.