CQ350 reliability

There are not only 10um or AP mounts in the world. There are manufacturers of other very reliable and less expensive mounts too.

Its a shame the CQ350 was so poorly designed. My RA shaft was cracked, and they took it back with a full refund. 

I would not switch to iOptron.  There QC is no better and possibly worse the SW.  And their customer service is definitely worse than SW.  You would still be fighting with them to take back your 1st mount.  Be grateful SW backs their products.  iOptron certainly does not. 

I agree with what someone else who said, save up for an AP or 10 Micron.

After ripping this mount apart and reassembling it, I am actually a big fan of this mount.  The Dec is a little more work to get to but access the the Ra work block to me was pretty simple once you know how.    I work in a field where things wear out so some yearly clean and lube is a norm for me.  I don’t like mounts that are hard to fix if there is an issue.    Skywatcher has been great to work with by phone and email.  Alex is the guy that’s been helping me source the parts I needed.  If you are good at adjusting the pulleys, bearings, and worm and ring mesh then this mount is a good one.  I do think they had some sort of issue in the manufacturing of the CQ looking at the inside of mine.   Not super important things but things you notice that aren’t right.  There’s another CQ-350 thread in here with pictures of what I’m talking about.   The choice is yours in the first end but I know my gen 1 CQ-350 went almost 2 years before it started spiking in RA.  Tonight I test my repairs!!!   Good luck to you in whatever you choose.

Robin Lim:
I have CQ350 and not really impressed with the guiding performance in RA, compared with EQ8-R Pro.
One of the way to reduce cost is to upgrade it to EQ8-R as it uses the same base as CQ350 so you don’t need to change tripod/pier and can use the same counterweight.
I use 2 EQ8-R at 2 different remote observatories and it just works, no issue at all. One of it has been running for 4 years now.

My experience has been similar.  My CQ350 was very unreliable.  My extremely used EQ8-R pro (which lived outside in the Arizona Sun for 4 years before I bought it), never gave me an issue.  I tuned the backlash once a year and that was it. I very much regret selling it. 

My CQ350 lasted 8 months and took a poop.

Robin Lim:
I have CQ350 and not really impressed with the guiding performance in RA, compared with EQ8-R Pro.
One of the way to reduce cost is to upgrade it to EQ8-R as it uses the same base as CQ350 so you don’t need to change tripod/pier and can use the same counterweight.
I use 2 EQ8-R at 2 different remote observatories and it just works, no issue at all. One of it has been running for 4 years now.

Just a comment:
The EQ8 / EQ8-R has the same base layout, but its "north pin" is on the south side - so you would need to turn your pier adapter by 180 degrees or drill a new hole.
Other than that: yes the EQ8-R is good replacement for a CQ350 - also because you don't need to mess around with drivers and software - it will just work.

Disclaimer: I am talking about stationary setups here - regarding lifting and moving around an EQ8-R vs. an CQ350 there is a BIG difference.
The CQ350's weight is very similar to an AZ-EQ6, while an EQ8-R is just HEAVY.

Thanks for your feedback OP. I wanna go with this exact setup some months ago but the payload was to important (as you said 27kg for a 35kg max payload and as others said: Mount mount mount first). So i though about the eQ8-r. Then a friend told me about the JTW trident GTR.
I just received it last week (so no feedback at the moment) but it price is close to the eQ8-r and it's direct friction drive. (Will switch to rc14 instead of rc12 then)

I'm running an eq8r with shibumi astro engineering mods for anti backlash with clamp pulleys, idlers and belts from aliexpress. Iv also gotten use to taking it apart and improving it because it was never assembled well at the factory.

Edit: runs like a dream ✨️

@Mike H - Sky View Observatory :
Answering completely off topic to a comment that went slightly off topic is certainly not what the OP intended.
This thread is about reliability of the CQ350 and discussing alternatives.

@Brian Boyle: as many wrote in this thread - why not instead considering an upgrade to an EQ8-R?

I struggled with the CQ350 until they finally took it back on return due to a damaged RA drive shaft.  Then I bought the Pegasus NYX-101, which is a beautiful mount.  Did everything they advised but still couldn't get guiding under 1.0 even with an OAG at a focal length of 600mm.  That went back on the 29th day.

Someone mentioned SWA mounts are difficult to guide with.  The Pegasus was my 2nd attempt after the trying the WD-20, which had the same crappy results.  So, I agree with this person whole-heartedly!  I've been scorned by SWG mounts and now will only but traditional EQ mounts now. 

I am thinking the EQ8-R is the way to go but it does require regular DEC adjustments. I've owned one in the past and still regret selling it to this day.

Someone mentioned he went with the iOptron CEM70 to replace his CQ350 and it performed for him way better than the Sky-Watchers.  I suspect his experience may be the luck of the lottery; bad picks from SW and a lucky good pick from iOptron.  I have heard a lot of negative things about iOptron mounts and worse things about their customer service.  All that said, I really, really want to try the CEM70 or CEM120, but I'm afraid to pull the trigger because of their crappy return policy (you have to pay the shipping back and for the original shipping to you) and their horrific reputation for QC and customer service.  It's not worth the risk to scratch this itch!

I would like to hear from others about their experience with the EQ8-R, particularly any of the later production runs.

Tommy Mastro:
I struggled with the CQ350 until they finally took it back on return due to a damaged RA drive shaft.  Then I bought the Pegasus NYX-101, which is a beautiful mount.  Did everything they advised but still couldn't get guiding under 1.0 even with an OAG at a focal length of 600mm.  That went back on the 29th day.

Someone mentioned SWA mounts are difficult to guide with.  The Pegasus was my 2nd attempt after the trying the WD-20, which had the same crappy results.  So, I agree with this person whole-heartedly!  I've been scorned by SWG mounts and now will only but traditional EQ mounts now. 

I am thinking the EQ8-R is the way to go but it does require regular DEC adjustments. I've owned one in the past and still regret selling it to this day.

Someone mentioned he went with the iOptron CEM70 to replace his CQ350 and it performed for him way better than the Sky-Watchers.  I suspect his experience may be the luck of the lottery; bad picks from SW and a lucky good pick from iOptron.  I have heard a lot of negative things about iOptron mounts and worse things about their customer service.  All that said, I really, really want to try the CEM70 or CEM120, but I'm afraid to pull the trigger because of their crappy return policy (you have to pay the shipping back and for the original shipping to you) and their horrific reputation for QC and customer service.  It's not worth the risk to scratch this itch!

I would like to hear from others about their experience with the EQ8-R, particularly any of the later production runs.

The second EQ8 I owned was the newer R version, and as I had owned the older model I thought I would give this a try, but for me it suffered all the same issues. The clutches were a bit better but not much, I had replaced the clutches on my older EQ8 with brass ones produced by a company in Ireland that now produce all sorts of EQ8 upgrades, including spring loaded worm blocks, but are very expensive.

My main issues were backlash on the DEC, and it could not be adjusted out as the worm wheel was not perfectly round, and SW said it was within tolerances, which TBH was bull****, you could only adjust the lash as the tightest point on the worm rotation or it would bind, if you did it on the loosest part then when it hit the tight spots it would bind and make an almighty noise.

This in time drove me mad and was just not happy, as the best I could get was 2200 ms of backlash, down from 4000ms, which IMHO was not good enough for an observatory grade mount. The o ly way to compensate was to guide in just one direction by having the PA off by about 5 mins, this worked but meant I could not dither, and after all we should not have to do this.

Then I had issues with the USB cable connection, and it would only be seen by the PC with a USB cable of 75cm or shorter, any longer and it would not get recognised, this was the same with an EQMOD cable too. I got a new motherboard for the mount and it was still the same, so in the end I gave up and moved to Ioptron, and have no issues, other than having to tension the DEC belt after a few months of use.

This was my experience with 2 EQ8 mounts one older and one of the newer ones, other users mileage may vary 
HTH

AstroStew:
My main issues were backlash on the DEC, and it could not be adjusted out as the worm wheel was not perfectly round, and SW said it was within tolerances, which TBH was bull****, you could only adjust the lash as the tightest point on the worm rotation or it would bind, if you did it on the loosest part then when it hit the tight spots it would bind and make an almighty noise.

When I took my CQ350 to the telescope shop to have the DEC backlash adjusted, the service guy (a 40 year AP veteran and professional mount mechanic) noticed it immediately.  He would adjust the backlash until there was none (he would have me shale the DEC plate to confirm), then he would turn the axis 180-degrees and ask me to shake the DEC plate again and it would show backlash!

That's just poor tooling at the manufacturer and poor QA/QC.  Just cheaping out.  I really don't understand either.  The new EQ8-R is 8K.  How much more would they need to charge to afford proper tooling?