Would I be able to get away with using an EQ6-R pro to hold a 13.5KG reflector?

[pipnina]

I'm contemplating partially converting my 10" dob into a goto / astrophotography telescope (while ideally maintaining the ability to use it on the dob mount) The tube as it stands with telrad and finder weighs about 13.5KG.

I have found tube rings for it on FLO, but obviously (having used a GEM before and knowing the pain well) I might run into issues with balancing if the dob "wings" get in the way? I also found the EQ6-R PRO which claims to have an imaging weight of 20KG, but I'd like to check with anyone who owns the mount before looking to buy it

What do you guys think about making a conversion? Worth the effort? I'm thinking of maybe doing this for when the planets rise up this year.

 

Cheers.

[alacant]

Hi. Works well here with an older 250px on an even older EQ6. Things we needed to do: stronger primary springs, larger secondary, wide dovetail, plate across the top of the tube rings, proper focuser oh and perhaps most important of all; it has to be guided by an OAG. Well worth the effort. Great with galaxies and planetaries. Without having to put arrows to show where they are!

HTH and good luck.

[xtreemchaos]

i should think you will be fine, aslong as its not too windy, id put more on it but i do take the maxweight with a pinch of salt, ballance is the main thing within reason if ya know what i mean. charl.

[tooth_dr]

Can also be used with an ED80 

 

[Craney]

31 minutes ago, alacant said:

@alacant   Don't you need to watch out for the OTA hitting the tripod leg ??   

[alacant]

7 minutes ago, Craney said:

watch out for the OTA hitting the tripod leg

No, it misses. Lucky:)

With our 6" f8, not so as the tube balances further away from the primary end, sometimes losing say 30 minutes crossing the meridian.

[pipnina]

51 minutes ago, alacant said:

Hi. Works well here with an older 250px on an even older EQ6. Things we needed to do: stronger primary springs, larger secondary, wide dovetail, plate across the top of the tube rings, proper focuser oh and perhaps most important of all; it has to be guided by an OAG. Well worth the effort. Great with galaxies and planetaries. Without having to put arrows to show where they are!

HTH and good luck.

Thanks for the response

Why do the rings need a plate across the top? Do they slip? Which model of the EQ6 are you using? I'm hoping to avoid spending more than I have to and an OAG might be too much (i want to avoid it being computerized for now). Are the primary springs for the primary mirror? Mine seems to have screws only (though I haven't exactly taken it apart to check).

Very nice images, by the way

20 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

Can also be used with an ED80 

Well I suppose that's the carrying weight proven then

[pipnina]

Also, how do you balance an OTA on these mounts, can the handset tell you?

[laser_jock99]

1 hour ago, xtreemchaos said:

i should think you will be fine, aslong as its not too windy, id put more on it but i do take the maxweight with a pinch of salt, ballance is the main thing within reason if ya know what i mean. charl.

Charls' right- you can get away with a lot more provided you are finely balanced in both axes. You don't want to stress the drive train in any way. Things like stopping the scope dead mid slew could strip teeth off the gears due to the inertia!

I can image up to 20 mins with my 12" F4 and 35Kg of counterweights (albeit that's a tad extreme).

[alacant]

16 minutes ago, pipnina said:

Why do the rings need a plate across the top?

It makes the tube stiffer -particularly if you're not gonna use an oag-, makes it easy to carry, removes that fragile tinny sw noise when you tap it and is available for the cost of a beer from your window frame supplier:)

 

16 minutes ago, pipnina said:

Are the primary springs for the primary mirror?

Yes. 

[tooth_dr]

2 minutes ago, laser_jock99 said:

Charls' right- you can get away with a lot more provided you are finely balanced in both axes. I can image up to 20 mins with my 12" F4 and 35Kg of counterweights (albeit that's a tad extreme).

Sorry this is off topic - I notice your focuser is pointing away from the pivot, any reason for this? 

[laser_jock99]

5 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

Sorry this is off topic - I notice your focuser is pointing away from the pivot, any reason for this? 

Pivot?

[xtreemchaos]

ive 13 kg +3x5kg CW on a Heq5, i get 2min unguided as long as it isnt too windy " i have a f11 frac on it what catches the wind". charl.

[tooth_dr]

4 minutes ago, laser_jock99 said:

Pivot?

The central point, pin, or shaft on which a mechanism turns or oscillates. A moment is the turning effect of a force around a fixed point called a pivot.

I was just wondering why you have the focuser away from the central point, as this would increase the moment, more so with cameras/filter wheels etc.

[Craney]

28 minutes ago, laser_jock99 said:

 

Ha ! ... reminds me of this ..

That dates me.....   who knows ??  ... setting up a 300mm could become an Olympic sport.

 

[laser_jock99]

20 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

I was just wondering why you have the focuser away from the central point, as this would increase the moment, more so with cameras/filter wheels etc.

I find having the camera/eyepiece opposite to the mount makes the whole thing more accessable. For instance I can easily collimate the scope in it's 'park position', facing the other way it would be over six feet off the ground and possibly hit the sliding roof.

 

When the scope is facing up the camera is over 9 feet off the ground and only accessable by step ladder. Leaning across the counter weights and mount to reach the camera would be even more tricky than it is already!

[tooth_dr]

1 minute ago, laser_jock99 said:

I find having the camera/eyepiece opposite to the mount makes the whole thing more accessable. For instance I can easily collimate the scope in it's 'park position', facing the other way it would be over six feet off the ground.

 

When the scope is facing up the camera is over 9 feet off the ground and only accessable by step ladder. Leaning across the counter weights and mount to reach the camera would be even more tricky than it is already!

Thanks! I was just curious, very good reasons. I have only just set mine up, so haven’t used it in anger. I have the focuser facing inwards. I don’t think there is any way to avoid the fact the end is pretty high up!

 

 

 

[pipnina]

So over all would it be worth going for an EQ6-R PRO over a NEQ6-PRO? About £300 difference but if there is a significant improvement from one to the other it might be worth it.

Also, are the "dob wings" likely to get in the way, or are they easily attachable/detachable?

[Marci]

They represent the natural balance point (more or less) and rings go either side of them, so they can be left on, but are simple to remove / reattach also if needed (i.e.: weight of imaging train moves balance to the point that the wings obstruct where you want the rings).

I can balance my Skyliner 200P with finder / guidecam, motor focuser & DSLR, with the dob wings still in place.

[alacant]

8 hours ago, pipnina said:

EQ6-R PRO over a NEQ6-PRO

Hi. Whilst I think we've established that an eq6 will do what you want, I don't think many of us have experience of the eq6r. Maybe start another thread. Something like,  'eq6r or neq6, which is best?'?