Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

HEQ5 Loading

John

By John
in Discussions - Scopes / Whole setups

Recommended Posts

John

John

Posted
Posted

Being the proud owner of a 5" F/9.4 refractor I'm now faced with the very real issue of mounting this thing adequately for visual, rather than imaging, use.

I like alt-az mounts however the Tele Vue Gibraltar that I currently have, although a very well made and capable mount, can't cope with the tube length.

So I'm thinking of getting an EQ mount for it. The OTA is around 50 inches long and it weighs around 7 kilos "loaded". My current thinking is an HEQ5 "standard", ie: non-GOTO but driven on both axis.

I'm not confident that an EQ5 or CG5 would be up to the job although the latters 2" steel legs (and taller tripod ?) would be a plus I guess - perhaps an HEQ5 on the EQ6 tripod would be worth thinking about :D

An EQ6 would be too much for me to handle I fear - this has to remain a portable set-up if it's going to get used.

Any and all advice / views welcomed on this and also other suggestions to improve stability such as more robust dovetail bars, tube rings, etc ,etc :)

Thanks,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Merlin66

Merlin66

Posted
Posted

The HEQ5pro will take a telescope loading of up to 15Kg.

AFAIK the stainless steel legs on the HEQ5 are the same as the ones on the EQ6.

It's a great little mounting, underated by some; good stability, can be easily lifted and carried and has good tracking capabiities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Ritchie

Ben Ritchie

Posted
Posted

AFAIK the stainless steel legs on the HEQ5 are the same as the ones on the EQ6.

My EQ6 has a beefed-up tripod compared to the HEQ5 I had, not a massive difference though.

I wouldn't have put my 5" f/8 on the HEQ5, it wouldn't have been robust enough. The issue is as much the weight distribution (at both ends, for a refractor) as anything else - it's much more at home on an EQ6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgs001

jgs001

Posted
Posted

I've only got a pair of short tube fracs... the longest being 24" long, but the combined load is about 6 Kg... The HEQ5 Synscan handles it with ease so that, even unguided, I'm able to consistently get 2 to 3 minute subs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mike bacanin

mike bacanin

Posted
Posted

John,the HEQ5 tripod legs are 1.5 inch, while the EQ6 are 2 inch.

I think the 5 inch will show some eyepiece shake on the HEQ5 due to the moment arm effect.

My Tak 128 is rock solid on the EQ6, but i appreciate your comment regarding the portability weight issue.

The tripod on the HEQ5 is the weak point.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Merlin66

Merlin66

Posted
Posted

Mike,

Sorry mate... I've just measured the S/steel legs on my HEQ5pro mounting ( white body) and they are 1.75" diameter....

I've successfully mounted an ED80 and a 6" f3.6 Cometracker on a dual bar with the HEQ5pro and had no problems. Same with the 150mm Mak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for all the feedback and ideas so far folks :)

I'm now thinking of an HEQ5 followed by a replacement tripod (the taller of the Berlebach ones perhaps ?) ...... or ...... alternatively an sturdy alt-az such as the WO Ez-Touch or a Bresser Giro mounted on a Berlebach or similar tripod - they seem to have a high load capacity however it's the moment arm effect caused by the long tube that really poses the challenge I feel.

Staying with alt-az should remove / reduce the need for counterweights which will help maintain portability and cost-wize I reckon both approaches (HEQ5 or sturdy Alt-Az on nice quality tripod) are in more or less the same league.

I posed a similar question on Cloudynights and the Tak Teegul mount was mentioned a number of times - a bit pricey though as far as I can see. Theres a review of the OTA I have (Meade / Bresser 127L) on Cloudynights with the scope on what looks like an EQ2 as an interim mount :D - can't see how you could even test the scope on that !.

Or ...... it sounds like an EQ6 would certainly be up to the job and probably affordable in non-goto form - I guess that would entail a 3-part carry / set up routine though - or can the mount and tripod be handled as one carry ?.

Any thoughts on these options ?

Thanks,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted

Ummmm ..... I found the HEQ5 on the standard tripod was inadequate for a WO FLT 110. Changing the tripod for a Berlebach Planet helped a lot, but it's an expensive upgrade.

The EQ6 really isn't a lot less manageable than the HEQ5, the bulk is more of a problem than the weight (assuming the mount & tripod stay in one piece). I think it's a much better solution.

If you want to use a 'frac visually, a half pillar extension is pretty well a must, that makes the HEQ5 standard tripod much, much less attractive .... it rings, and the weight & larger moment of inertia of the extension will make things much, much worse.

FYI the HEQ5 is supplied with a tripod with tubular stainless steel legs 1.5" in diameter; the EQ6 tripod looks similar but the diameter of the legs is 2". That half inch makes a big difference (but you will still almost certainly want to fill the hollow legs with sand to improve the damping).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Merlin66

Merlin66

Posted
Posted

I agree the EQ6 is a larger more solid mount; but you quickly get tired of lugging it in and out at night. In a more permanent location (observatory) it's 100%

(BTW see message above - the HEQ5pro legs are definately 1.75" s/steel)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Merlin66

Merlin66

Posted
Posted

The mounting details of the EQ6 head and the HEQ5pro are identical. - The tripod top has a Socket with a large(?) cast pin to engage the Az adjusters, a 10mm(?) screw comes up from underneath to lock everything into place. (Like the older EQ models)

I've never tried to fit either of them on anything other than the SW tripods so don't know about others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted
The mounting details of the EQ6 head and the HEQ5pro are identical. - The tripod top has a Socket with a large(?) cast pin to engage the Az adjusters, a 10mm(?) screw comes up from underneath to lock everything into place. (Like the older EQ models)

I've never tried to fit either of them on anything other than the SW tripods so don't know about others.

I have an EQ6 and a HEQ5 (both the old non-Goto models) and the tripods arn't interchangable on those...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted
On the white HEQ5pro GOTO and EQ6 GOTO series mounts, the tripod mounting section both look very similar, but I've got to admit I've never actually tried to make one head fit the other's tripod/ socket.

Berlebach have a seperate order number for the HEQ5 as opposed to the EQ6; I don't think they'd do that if there was no difference in the mounting. They do look similar but the dimensions could be different enough not to fit interchangeably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
  • Author
Posted

A few more questions on mounting a long tube refractor if I may:

- At the moment my scope has a shortish dovetail bar so the tube rings are around 6 inches apart. Would it improve stability to use a longer dovetail bar so the tube rings are further apart or would the longer dovetail bar have some potential to flex and therefore introcure more vibrations ?.

- Would upgrading to CNC tube rings and a better quality dovetail bar reduce vibrations ?.

- Do anti-vibration pads actually work ?

Thanks,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.