Celestron v Skywatcher mounts - best quality

[iapa]

I know that there are differences in payload between to two series of synta mounts

But - is the built quality of one better than the other? Or tracking/guiding accuracy better, or is horses for courses need you get a good or a bad one?

I’d take a better build quality over payload in what ever budget I’d consider - and no, not current in the market to replace any mounts as yet.

 

[johninderby]

Celestron and SW are both made by Synta so quality is about the same. It’s more a case of which mount is the better buy.

[malc-c]

Apples and oranges...  You can't compare. 

As mentioned both came form the same factory, but each have a different build criteria.  A few years back there were lots of posts form people considering the Skywatcher EQ5 against the CG5 from Celestron as both were around the same pricing point and payload capability, but what put a lot of people off was the sound the CG5 made.  It was nicknamed the coffee grinder.  This was because it used servo motors rather than stepper motors to drive the mount.  It was really loud, especially in the dead of night.  Build quality there was nothing in it... you wouldn't expect otherwise form the same company.  Performance, again both were on par, but the CG5 had larger diameter tripod legs and could handle a slightly heavier payload than the EQ5.  Back then the EQ5 scored over the CG5 as EQMOD made it possible to control from a PC, as Celestron use a different protocol which isn't supported.

[billhinge]

I had a CG5, got a skywatcher now - prefer the skywatcher, better and cheaper wifi dongle as well

Noise on CG5 is due to the plastic case amplifying motor noise, taking it off greatly reduces sound

Get a berlebach and sell the tripod