Benefits of upgrading from AM5 to observatory grade mount?

I was also advised to upgrade from AM5 to observatory grade mount but for now I don't see any benefit. Guiding is 0.4-0.6 depending on seeing. I would only upgrade if my setup is over mount kg limit.

Speaking as an EQ6R-pro owner, the 8 is a nice mount with some great refinements. Its payload capacity certainly puts it in the “observatory class”. On the other hand, carrying the kind of payload it’s designed for, I wouldn’t expect better performance then what you are already seeing. Along with great payload capacity I’d also be looking for refinements like encoders. sky modeling, limit switches and so on.

“Observatory grade mount” - what do you have in mind? The AM5 is a tiny and rather weak little mount, nothing else!

Any well known larger mounts from iOptron, Skywatcher upwards are lightyears better than that little thing.

Observatory grade - then you talk about 10Micron, AB, SB, Planewave and ASA. But I am pretty sure, you do not need such a mount - especially coming from an AM5.

Look at EQ8R-Pro, iOptron CEM120EC2 and similar mounts, I am sure those types are more than large and stable enough for your plans.

I am a user of both plus an EQ6R-Pro and all of them are fine. On the large iOptron, there is my 12”Truss and on the EQ8R-Pro the RASA11… both mounts well under their photographic payload limit.

If it isn’t broken, don’t change it. It looks like you have good guiding with what you have, so I would stay with it until it no longer performs that well, and put the money towards something else……like another scope!

ckhorne · Oct 8, 2025 at 07:47 PM

Georg N. Nyman · Oct 8, 2025, 06:39 PM

Any well known larger mounts from iOptron, Skywatcher upwards are lightyears better than that little thing.

“Lightyears better”? Under what metric? I need my mount to move my scope and keep it on target, ideally with little fuss.

My AM5 (with a fully loaded 9.25” SCT @ ~36lbs and 2300mm) can routinely guide in the 0.4” RMS range, and “just works” every time. No mess, no fuss.

I manage a CEM120EC for a local school. Adjusting the belt tension is a pain. The software in finicky. Maintaining alignment requires leaving it always powered. It’s a pain. Does it have a larger weight capacity? Sure. Does that mean it’s “lightyears better”? No. If anything, I’d rather have an AM5 if it meets the weight requirement.

My PHD2 performance from just a couple nights ago.

To the OP: Define the problem you’re trying to solve first, then find the solution.

Wonderful plot!

I am a huge AM5 fan but when I purchased my EdgeHD 11, I made the decision to upgrade the mount so as not to run so close the the AM5’s capacity. I considered many traditional mounts like the EQ8, Paramount MyT, etc. In the end, my positive experience with strain wave technology led to me pick the iOptron HAE69C-EC.

The HAE69C-EC is by no means what I would call “observatory grade” but it is meeting my needs. The main advantages over the AM5 I’ve observed include the following:

1) No counterweights required for my fully loaded EdgeHD11.

2) The encoders allow me to run long (5 second) guide exposures which is handy when imaging at f10 and there’s few guide stars in the OAG.

3) Set-up time is comparable to the AM5 once you get used to the quirky polar alignment adjustments.

I’ve previously used traditional mounts like the HEQ5 Pro and prefer the simplicity of strain wave mounts. The main advantage I see with a mount upgrade (traditional or strain wave with encoders) is the ability to run longer guide exposures if using an OAG. My experience with the AM5 demonstrated significant guide degradation when using longer exposures.

That is a very interesting point. One may acquire an exceptional mount or just a good mount. My AM5 has always run 0.1-0.2 with my Svbony 122/ SQA 55. I imagine it depends on the production run date.

Georg N. Nyman · Oct 9, 2025, 06:18 AM

Having said this, probably I am lucky with my mount and you have bad experiences with iOptron.

I would suspect it comes down also to the situation and the operator. PHD2 can be finicky to get dialed in, and that can be true with any mount.

My point was that a lot of modern mounts are capable, as long as you respect their limitations (especially weight range). I think modern guiding software is largely to thank for this, and that really blurs the line of what an “observatory class mount” actually means. I wouldn’t consider the AM5 to be in that class, but then again, it works very well for me, so I wouldn’t discount it as incapable.

Having said all that, my 9.25” pushes it at the limit (I do use two 11lb counterweights). I wouldn’t consider it adequate for a C11. If they made an AM7, then it may make sense (and I’d personally upgrade).

The only thing that bothers me with AM5 is in fact driver support.

• slew to alt/az stopped working for me for some reason, it can only slew to ra/dec

• custom parking support

• parking in general will hang in NINA

I’m sure there’s more. This is the only reason I would upgrade to something with robust driver support.

BlackStarsAstro · Oct 16, 2025, 01:03 PM

Robert Žibreg · Oct 16, 2025 at 06:48 AM

The only thing that bothers me with AM5 is in fact driver support.

• slew to alt/az stopped working for me for some reason, it can only slew to ra/dec

• custom parking support

• parking in general will hang in NINA

I’m sure there’s more. This is the only reason I would upgrade to something with robust driver support.

I have a similar experience with parking scope in NINA. Park will work flawlessly for months and then it stops. Idk if it’s the AM5 or NINA.

I don’t know if it would help but when I unpark my mount in NINA I always click “set as park”. Not sure if it’s needed in my case, it’s just an old habit but I never have parking issues.

I’m surprised that nobody has mentioned this yet:

IMO, in this hobby, a key differentiator between an “observatory class” mount versus other mounts is its ability to operate unattended.

• Is it capable of slewing into the pier?

  • If it does, does it destroy something? (Strain-wave geared mounts often do)

• Can it recover from an unknown position where it cannot platesolve?

  • Or can it at least remember its position through a power outage?

To me, these matter much more for observatory operation than whether it can carry X kilograms of payload or guide within Y arcseconds RMS.

Robert Žibreg · Nov 8, 2025 at 07:09 AM

Well, it functions properly now. 📷 11710.png

What are we looking at here?