AZ-EQ6 GT Pro vs EQ6-R PRO load capacity

[FaB-Bo-Peep]

Hi everyone,

I'm just wanting to make sure I've got my facts correct regarding the load capacities of these 2 mounts. From what I can see the AZ-EQ6 GT Pro, (which looks like a very sturdy mount), has a thicker diameter weight bar than the EQ6-R PRO, (25mm as opposed to 18mm), and yet it's imaging load capacity is less, (18kg as opposed to 20kg). This is correct yes?

I think the observing load capacity is the same for both at 25kg yes?

 

Thanks in advance

?

[david_taurus83]

Hi. I'm not sure of the Skywatcher quoted load capacities but I was imaging with my 200p on the AZEQ6 when i first got it. 12kg and was fine. Are you planning on buying one or the other? What are your intentions? Visual or imaging? Both?

[MBJ]

The az eq6 pro has weight capacaties of 25kg eq mode and 25kg + 25kg az mode.

[FaB-Bo-Peep]

Ok let me explain a little further. I have a Skywatcher 250 PDS and want to use this for imaging. The all up weight of the OTA, tube rings, wedge, red dot finder & DSLR is 14.5 kg but I'm not sure if moving the 2 x 5 kg weights to the end of the weight shaft extension will balance this combination or if I will need to add a 3rd weight over and above what's supplied with either mount. If I need to add an extra weight I estimate that this will increase the total load to around 18.5 kg. At some point I will add a guide scope / camera and this will also need to be counter balanced which would probably take the all up load to around 20 kg. 

I believe the 25 kg capacity for either mount is for viewing and the manufacturer's stated for imaging is less but I'm trying to confirm that the AZ-EQ6 GT is 18kg whereas the EQ6-R PRO is 20 kg as I think the extra 2 kg would be useful to have but I can't understand this difference as the weight shaft on the AZ-EQ6 GT  is a much large diameter, why is this when the imaging capacity appears to be less? 

Edited May 7, 2019 by FaB-Bo-Peep

[david_taurus83]

Well with my 200p I had to add the 6" extension bar to push the 2 x 5kg weights out a an inch further for balance. Not sure why the bar is thicker. The AZEQ6 comes with a puck you can attach to the end of the counterweight shaft and mount another scope in ALT AZ mode. Possibly the reason its thicker.

If your set on imaging only, then I'd probably recommend the EQ6-R as I only got the AZ for both visual and imaging.

AZ design does enable me to run cables down through the mount.

The latitude bolt does stick out like a sore thumb though just begging to snag a cable one of these nights!

 

 

[pete_l]

3 hours ago, FaB-Bo-Peep said:

If I need to add an extra weight I estimate that this will increase the total load to around 18.5 kg. At some point I will add a guide scope / camera and this will also need to be counter balanced which would probably take the all up load to around 20 kg.

The amount of counterweights used to balance a load to not contribute to the specified load of the mount.
And, it is better to add an extra counterweight and have then all nearer the centre than to have fewer, further out.

[FaB-Bo-Peep]

15 minutes ago, pete_l said:

The amount of counterweights used to balance a load to not contribute to the specified load of the mount.
And, it is better to add an extra counterweight and have then all nearer the centre than to have fewer, further out.

Not even if they are over + above the 2 x 5 kg ones supplied with it?

[Merlin66]

Not your mount but the older NEQ6Pro...

I have mine loaded up (probably around 17-18Kg) with a C11, Spectroscope, four cameras, Electronic finder etc.

I need five (!!!) counterweights to get good balance. I've been running this rig for almost ten years, no issues, no drama.

 

[wimvb]

I think that mount performance is more about achieving good balance and keeping the weight as close as possible near the centre of gravity (as per @pete_l's advice) than it is about a kg here or there. 

[FaB-Bo-Peep]

Thanks for all the useful feedback everyone. I think ideally I would like to find an EQ6-R PRO at an attractive price but if an AZ-EQ6 GT Pro comes up then I could be tempted. From the comments I don't think I would go wrong with either.

[alan potts]

I have to say I always thought them to be the same 20kg, it is only the last year or I have seen 25kg tagged to its label. I bought mine when they came out. Now I know this I am thinking of giving the 12 SC a ride at about 18-19kg.

[Starlight 1]

8 minutes ago, alan potts said:

I have to say I always thought them to be the same 20kg, it is only the last year or I have seen 25kg tagged to its label. I bought mine when they came out. Now I know this I am thinking of giving the 12 SC a ride at about 18-19kg.

I had 18kg on a heq5 and it work ok , I try putting a 250pds on it and it was no good , will not hold in any wind at all. I got the az-eq6 just for that scope . Then the mount and scope was to big to fit in my 6x8 shed with out taking it down to close the roof. I give up .

[Skipper Billy]

The mass is only one factor - a big scope acts like a sail in a breeze and even though the scope might be within the mounts stated capacity a large lightweight 'scope will get blown about.