To dual mount on a CEM60 or swap scopes on my HEQ5?or not?

[maxchess]

I am trying to plan out my longer term equipment strategy, rather than go for impulse purchases and would like some advice on dual mounting scopes.

At present I have a roll-off shed with steel pier in concrete block. The mount is an HEQ5-Pro, stellar tuned and belt driven which is supposed to have an astrophotography payload of around 11Kg.  My main camera is an ASI294MC. Guide camera Lodestar x2. 
I switch between two scope set ups.  (Weight for both includes cameras and filter draw.)
•    ES102 with 50mm guide scope, FL=714, weight is 7.5 Kg
•    C8 (not edge) with 6.3  FR and OAG, FL = 1260,  Weight is 8kg
So clearly I cannot mount both on my HEQ5 Pro.
One of the reasons for going with a fixed pier in a shed is that once set up and aligned, I can just push back the roof, align, focus and get imaging in 5 mins.  However as targets change I need to swap scopes, rebalance, rewire etc. Not a massive effort but I am wondering if I could dual these scopes and perhaps eventually add something like a WO GT71 FL= 420, weight 2.93  for the wide stuff.  So total weight around 19kg.  Then maybe in the future go for a Mono camera and filter wheel and even perhaps an C9.25 Edge pushing the weight to around 23kg. 
To do this I would plan to buy a CEM 60    mount that claims a payload of 27.2 kg, although it is not clear if this is imaging, although I can’t see why anyone would buy one just for visual. I would then just guide with the OAG.

So I have two questions:
Is this a realistic strategy or would I loose guiding accuracy by loading the mount in this way. Perhaps even compared to keeping the HEQ5-Pro and swapping when necessary.  Or maybe just forget the GT71 and C9.25
If I do go down this route, what is the best way of dual or triple mounting? I have read that mounting two dissimilar scopes side by side risks unbalancing the setup, but also that mounting the ES102 on ADM rings risks flexure.

Any other advice or observations most welcome.

Thanks

Max
 

[JamesF]

From FLO's website:

"iOptron's quoted max' payload is a guide only. If you will be using the mount for astrophotography (or your telescope is unusually long or large) we recommend the quoted max' payload be reduced by 1/3rd."

James

[JamesF]

It appears that iOptron themselves are a little cagey about the payload, too.  They say:

"These are only guidelines. Some telescopes are very long or very big for their weight and may require a larger mount. Remember also that imaging requirements are more rigid than visual observation"

James

[WanderingEye]

As has been stated above, 27kg is really just a guideline for visual, and to reduce by 1/3 for imaging purposes, so that would be approx 18kg, which is actually equal or even a bit less than the EQ6 payload for imaging...🤔🤔 go figure...

Edited December 25, 2019 by WanderingEye

[Andy274]

This is my setup & it pisses that load (110 & 70mm apo's with cameras, filter wheel etc) on the CEM60. I moved from the HEQ5 & never looked back

[WanderingEye]

59 minutes ago, Andy274 said:

This is my setup & it pisses that load (110 & 70mm apo's with cameras, filter wheel etc) on the CEM60. I moved from the HEQ5 & never looked back

Yes, but I am sure that “load” is well under 18kg... 😀👍

[Andy274]

Not weighed it to be fair but its definitely an upgrade over the skywatcher. A friend of mine has an early paramount & the rms error on my 60 is half that of his paramount. He was quite upset by that. If id have known what it meant I probably would have felt really smug. 

All I can say is I love mine & would go ioptron over skywatcher anyday

[wornish]

2 hours ago, Andy274 said:

This is my setup & it pisses that load (110 & 70mm apo's with cameras, filter wheel etc) on the CEM60. I moved from the HEQ5 & never looked back

Both of your scopes are relatively short focal length (770mm and 420mm) which means that imaging is more tolerant of tracking errors.

The combined weight of a two scope setup would be somewhere near the CEM60 limit so I think you might be pushing it if you plan on using a scope with over 1500mm FL.

You might end up regretting pushing it to the limits and then face another upgrade IMHO

[maxchess]

So what would be the next step up from a CEM60?

[JamesF]

CEM120?

James