Scopes sharing an EQ3-2 mount?

[Macavity]

Rather a specific problem, but the hardware must be fairly common? So GENERAL thoughts welcome.

When I bought my first scope - A Skywatcher ST102/F5 Short-Tube refractor, it came on an AZ3. Later I bought an EQ3-2 and, later still, a Skymax MAK127 OTA. Now I use the AZ3 with the MAK (It's just about equal to the task!) as a "grab and go" scope. The Refractor sits, in rings, bolted directly to the EQ3-2. Basically, I'd like to (optionally) SHARE the EQ3-2 between MAK and refractor.

Firstly, the refractor (now) has a 2" back end and is quite "rear heavy" (Know the problem! LOL) so the default of bolting the tube rings DIRECTLY to the EQ3-2 requires conterweights on the nose of the OTA. (O.K. but a bit inelegant!) Has anyone a solution so a ST refractor can be "SLID forward a bit"? Secondly, Skymax 127mm MAKs come with a photographic bar screwed to the OTA. Is there some "hardware" combo that might allow it to SHARE the (modified) EQ3-2. Again a degree of "slide-ability" might be useful?

Precision response not required (Like my machine shop ability!), so Ideas re. standard "bits" to think about?

[SteelRat]

Got a black one of these on my mount - might fit an eq3/2.

[GazOC]

Teleskop Service sell something similar to what Matt has.

Mac, wouldn't the scopes be better of the other way around? ie the Mak on the EQ and the refractor on the AZ?

[The Warthog]

I may be missing something here, but can't you slide the refractor up the rings to balance it? It's desirable, IMHO, to have a rear-heavy rrefractor, because that shortens the back so you don't have to get on your hands and knees to see things at zenith. I have two scopes and one mount, but I have never used both scopes at once, preferring to choose a scope for the night, and use it.

[Macavity]

Ah, the "plate" idea seems solid (sic). Might be able to cobble something like that. Thinking: The balance point of both scopes is now (fairly) predictable, and I can always drill more holes! Any "philosophical" points are welcome, so I take your point Gaz. I do suspect the MAK is indeed more "deserving" of the EQ3. One (previously undisclosed) problem is my health, so I prefer to have my setups in (wimpishly!) small chunks and prefer Alt-Az over additional counterwights in any "grab and go" setup. The EQ3 is also quite fun in Alt-Az mode (even!) - For sweeping with the wider field refractor. 'Tis true indeed, WH, one could/should slide refractor forward/backwards, but a short tube "Startravel" only just about fits between the rings, with little room for sliding...

I know, a tad (not deliberately so) "awkward" - I GENUINELY appreciate suggestions! The odd bit of "brainstorming" cannot goes amiss? Someone somewhere (me, even!) might learn something. Aside: Were I a rich man, I'd probably go for one of them Williams Optics' "Easy Touch" thingies, and stick one/both scopes on that. For the moment, I can but dream...