Rowan AZ100 Mount Owners Thread

[johninderby]

15 minutes ago, Fedele said:

and we are in February 2022, after the trumpeted announcements

Your comments are very unfair and uncalled for I think. Remember they are developing a complete new GOTO system from scratch which takes considerable time. to complete the software. How long do you think it took Skywatcher to develop their Synscan system. Years I would think.

Edited February 5, 2022 by johninderby

[Deadlake]

I agree @johninderby, it takes as long as it takes too beta test software in the field. Also this is really Rowans first software project (I guess) and a bit of a reputitional risk for them. If it goes wrong then some telescopes could get broken. 

Of course maybe if Rowan shipped some beta mounts to the US where they have constant sun Rowan would get more consistent testing of the mount...

[johninderby]

Or perhaps they need to acquire a villa in Tennerife. Then I wouldn’t mind staying there for a few months carrying out beta testing. 🙂🙂🙂

[Space Hopper]

1 hour ago, Fedele said:

and we are in February 2022, after the trumpeted announcements

Its a good job you're not on the Astro Physics waiting list........🤨

[Deadlake]

1 hour ago, Space Hopper said:

Its a good job you're not on the Astro Physics waiting list........🤨

This is true, for scopes they have one model the AP130GTX. Now just a mounts company, a bit like Vixen in Japan.

Edited February 5, 2022 by Deadlake

[Stephenstargazer]

Do we know which to expect first, the AZ75 or the 100 motor drives? From the comments above I expect the 75 is less difficult? Either way for a small company to launch and supply new product is a big step compared to a limited run for trials.

[Speedmaster]

On 26/01/2022 at 11:21, johninderby said:

If the mount is properly adjusted balancing should be easy and not over sensitive. Being a used mount you never know how it may have been misadjusted.

Having the clutches adjusted properly makes a difference. A touch of altitude lock may help. Also set the balance with the scope at 45 degrees not horizontal which would make getting balance harder.

CW aren’t needed with the AZ100 fpr smooth operation. You would only use a CW if the tripod was unstable because of the weight of the scope.

I first used the AZ100 with a UNI18 and thought it was really solid then when I got the Planet it was in a different league. Just so much better than the UNI and zero vibration.

My AZ100 with a 125 APO.

Thanks for your reply. Indeed the planet is a beautiful piece of kit and looks solid as a rock. It is my next upgrade  for now the uni is doing a fine job. 
 

i had a look and tried your 45 degrees tip. It is ok but still not “plug and play”. What do you mean by “if the mount is properly adjusted”? Do I need to adjust something, how do I know what to adjust? It is used but was used with care. 

I also tightened a bit the alt clutch while balancing. 

Also balancing with a bino (baader maxbright 2) is much more sensitive than with regular diagonal/ep. Balancing changes dramatically as you reach the zenith, so it is never “perfect” throughout the entire alt axis. 
 

mount’s behavior is a bit strange/difficult/different from what I’ve been used to. The giro ercole for ex was less painful to set and to use, but also had much less features.  What I understood with the Rowan is that you can’t have your telescope perfectly balanced and have that buttery smooth movement you get when you loose the clutches. 

[Stephenstargazer]

6 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

Now just a mounts company, a bit like Vixen in Japan.

Really? Vixen JP website lists many products, though supply in Europe is very poor since Bresser took it on. (Probably a topic for other threads)

[Stephenstargazer]

28 minutes ago, Speedmaster said:

I also tightened a bit the alt clutch while balancing. 

Nope! You want them free while balancing.

 

28 minutes ago, Speedmaster said:

Balancing changes dramatically as you reach the zenith, so it is never “perfect” throughout the entire alt axis. 

Yep! That's just basic mechanics because of your scope and the attachments.

 

28 minutes ago, Speedmaster said:

that buttery smooth movement you get when you loose the clutches. 

Yes you can! In fact the slow motions work EVEN with the clutches done up. You sure you (or previous owner) have not used the azimuth lock, or damper, instead of the clutch. Check the manual ??

Edited February 5, 2022 by Stephenstargazer

[johninderby]

Set the alt and az clutches slightly loose and the alt lock completely loose for now. Found having the alt clutch in particular overtightened isn’t good for smooth movement. I can move the scope from low angle to vertical and it stays balanced. You don’t have to have the clutches fully tight to use the slo mo controls. You should be able to move the scope easily by hand as well as using the slo mo controls.

I suspect some of the other adjustments have been played with. 

The manual.

https://www.rowanastronomy.com/pdf/AZ100Mount.pdf

Edited February 5, 2022 by johninderby

[Stu]

I would agree, the clutches can be set to a level where the slo motion controls work well but you can also push the scope to where you want, and it stays put.

[Deadlake]

1 hour ago, Stephenstargazer said:

Really? Vixen JP website lists many products, though supply in Europe is very poor since Bresser took it on. (Probably a topic for other threads)

But how many scope models compared with Takahashi?

[swsantos]

I had suggested to them at one point an accessory similar to the altitude adjuster that would go between the dovetail and the mount that would allow the saddle to move up and down relative to the mount which would allow two axis balancing and therefore provide smooth balance at all angles even with a heavy eyepiece or binoviewer. My Nova Hitch has this and it is a game changer and is the only advantage that the AZ100 does not have over the Nova Hitch. When the Nova Hitch is properly adjusted I can point my telescope at any angle and it will not pitch forward or backward freewheeling with all the clutches and friction disengaged.

Overall the AZ100 is a better mount and I am hoping that once the tracking becomes available that that will be the definitive improvement over the Nova. But boy it would be nice if two axis balancing could be added to the AZ100.

Steve

[johninderby]

So will the AZ100. Can disengage the clutches and move the scope from low angle to vertical and it stays there.

Edited February 5, 2022 by johninderby

[Stu]

1 minute ago, swsantos said:

I had suggested to them at one point an accessory similar to the altitude adjuster that would go between the dovetail and the mount that would allow the saddle to move up and down relative to the mount which would allow two axis balancing and therefore provide smooth balance at all angles even with a heavy eyepiece or binoviewer. My Nova Hitch has this and it is a game changer and is the only advantage that the AZ100 does not have over the Nova Hitch. When the Nova Hitch is properly adjusted I can point my telescope at any angle and it will not pitch forward or backward freewheeling with all the clutches and friction disengaged.

Overall the AZ100 is a better mount and I am hoping that once the tracking becomes available that that will be the definitive improvement over the Nova. But boy it would be nice if two axis balancing could be added to the AZ100.

Steve

That sounds like a very ingenious solution. I’ve achieved the same effect by mounting a weight at the front of the dovetail hanging down below the scope. This can be set to counter the weight of binoviewers or a long, heavy eyepiece and provides balance through the whole range of altitudes. I used this on an Ercole but haven’t found it necessary in the AZ100.

[Sunshine]

Are there any updates on the AZ75? I heard it was being tested by a couple of members, I'm curious!

[johninderby]

2 minutes ago, Sunshine said:

Are there any updates on the AZ75? I heard it was being tested by a couple of members, I'm curious!

I’ve heard it is close to release so hopefully not much longer.

[Deadlake]

14 minutes ago, Stu said:

That sounds like a very ingenious solution. I’ve achieved the same effect by mounting a weight at the front of the dovetail hanging down below the scope. This can be set to counter the weight of binoviewers or a long, heavy eyepiece and provides balance through the whole range of altitudes. I used this on an Ercole but haven’t found it necessary in the AZ100.

I’m coming to the conclusion that if I want to swap EP’s a weight on the Losmamdy bar is the best solution. The scenario is using a TV 55 mm and then swapping to a 20 mm XWA. The FT3545 will be totally out or nearly all the way in and that changes the balance. 

No other solution.

[johninderby]

So all you want is a rail under the scope with a motorised weight that automatically moves to correct balance when you change an eyepiece. Simple. 😁😁😁

 

Edited February 5, 2022 by johninderby

[swsantos]

57 minutes ago, johninderby said:

So will the AZ100. Can disengage the clutches and move the scope from low angle to vertical and it stays there.

It does not when there is a heavy eyepiece or binoviewer on the telescope. It cannot be balanced on the Y axis if the center of gravity is greatly above the horizontal plane of the OTA and as a result in cannot stay put from every angle if there is no friction in play. Yes it does deal with smaller eyepieces that don’t mess with the Y axis balance much that’s true, but with an Ethos or 31mm Nagler is does not. And that’s OK the AZ100 is awesome and friction can be used to mitigate a lot of Y axis imbalance but with heavy stuff in the diagonal there can be some challenges.

The Nova Hitch can because it has two axis balancing. Of course it is set for my average eyepiece weight which in about a 13mm Ethos and I obviously don’t adjust it for each eyepiece change, but even setting it for an average helps for everything.

Regarding hanging a weight downwards off the dovetail to counterbalance a heavy eyepiece, ADM makes dovetail counterweights and certainly they would work and even allow easy balance adjustments for different eyepieces but I think that something built into the mount and not hanging off the OTA is a more elegant solution and I find that setting the Nova Hitch to an average Y axis balance for my eyepieces works very well.

 

Steve

Edited February 6, 2022 by swsantos

[bsdsgl84]

Any updates on the pillar extension for the Rowan AZ100 that got mentioned some time ago? 

bsdsgl84

[Stu]

7 hours ago, swsantos said:

but I think that something built into the mount and not hanging off the OTA is a more elegant solution

Of course yes, I agree that is a more elegant solution. Just so I understand, it involves being able to adjust the position of the scope vertically (when horizontal) with reference to the Alt axis? It may be something Rowan can look in to.

[Stu]

7 hours ago, Sunshine said:

Are there any updates on the AZ75? I heard it was being tested by a couple of members, I'm curious!

We should be getting the final iteration with some useful improvements to test within a couple of weeks so hopefully it’s getting close now. Not sure of exact dates though.

5 hours ago, bsdsgl84 said:

Any updates on the pillar extension for the Rowan AZ100 that got mentioned some time ago? 

bsdsgl84

These had to wait for the machines to finish the AZ75 parts first but hopefully are next up to be worked on.

[Stu]

7 hours ago, Deadlake said:

I’m coming to the conclusion that if I want to swap EP’s a weight on the Losmamdy bar is the best solution. The scenario is using a TV 55 mm and then swapping to a 20 mm XWA. The FT3545 will be totally out or nearly all the way in and that changes the balance. 

No other solution.

Shifting the scope forwards or backwards in the rings (which I don’t think you you can do on your setup), or moving the dovetail in the clamp (with care!) should work for this as the main change is in front to back balance. A weight will obviously achieve the same thing though, agreed. The bigger challenge is going from something like a Vixen HR to a 31mm Nag and still expecting perfect balance at all angles.

Where my weight works well is countering long and heavy eyepieces eg 31 Nag or binoviewers which stick out a long way from the scope and therefore make it impossible to balance as the altitude increases to the zenith. It does work well, and the scope stays where put with the clutches disengaged. I don’t think any mount I’ve used can avoid the scope dropping back at the zenith with clutches disengaged (don’t know how @johninderbymanages it unless the mount is set to be a little stiff even with clutches disengaged). With clutches set right it’s no problem.

It does sound like the Nova Hitch system achieves this well though.

[Split Zygote2]

I have adopted this approach to fully balance the scope in all axes and it works well for me (hopefully the picture will upload or you will all be

mightily puzzled) The 90 degree offset of these particular dovetail clamps is achieved without modifying either the mount or the clamps.

The Losmandy dovetail however has had a couple of extra holes drilled in it to attach the flange which  holds the counterweight bar.

 

With this arrangement I can routinely mount refractors of up to 20 kilos all up weight with an additional 15 to 20 kilo of counterweight. If correctly

adjusted the scope and binoviewers will stay exactly where you put them with all clutches completely disengaged as the offset of the weight with

respect to the horizontal axis of the mount balances the offset of the binoviewer load with respect to the centre line of the OTA. Without this

arrangement I have to tension the clutches significantly  to overcome the imbalance!  When correctly set up, using this weight offset approach,  a

sweet spot can be found where the scope can be moved precisely with  one finger and without further adjustment the slow motion controls can

also be employed.

 

With care (scope vertical) the adjustment of the the weight offset is practical in the  field and I have inscribed a rule on  the dovetail to aid in this.

A stop bolt to prevent the weight sliding through the clamp when the scope is horizontal is also a very good idea. The Rowan clamps are most

excellently engineered and any slippage would be the result of user error but given long enough user error will almost inevitably occur.
 

It is possible to extrapolate from this and produce an arrangement where the scope rather than the counterweight is offset from the horizontal

axis of the mount (as in the Nova Hitch). I have made up a separate dovetail plate for doing this. I use this approach for shorter lighter scopes

(TV85, a counterweight is unnecessary) where an Ethos and Powermate used in combination causes similar balance issues. Indeed completely

balancing a TV 85 before this approach on any alt/az mount that I tried ( 4 in all including TeleVue's own before the AZ 100 came along) was all

but impossible