Stability in AM5

14 replies334 views
Louis avatar

Hello all,

I’m planning to buy something with more focal length and can already say that it will be either the Askar 120 or the 103. I’m only owning an AM5 on the ZWO TC40 tripod and have no plans on upgrading it.

Does someone have any experience regarding this setup in terms of stability? I have worries that especially the 120 APO could be too exposed to strong wind due to its length of almost 1m (?) with extracted focuser, camera, EFW etc. attached. Unfortunately, I have never used a scope of this length before, so my own experience on that topic equals zero.

I hope you can help me a little bit :)

Clear skies, Louis

Well Written Respectful Engaging
Michael Cory avatar

Hi Louis,

I have an Askar 120 APO and I mount it on an AM5 with the TC40 carbon fiber tripod. Guiding is typically around 0.50” with winds of, say 6 mph or less. I try to avoid imaging with winds much above 12 mph and would expect to see the guiding numbers run higher under such conditions.

The first thing is that you will need a pier extension to use the Askar 120 on the AM5/TC40. I think the one I have is “ZWO 200 mm Pier Extension for AM5 Mount”. Without a pier extension I would expect to hit the tripod legs when pointing at/near zenith.

Also I use weights in the tripod weight bag. The picture below shows several 5 pound dumbbell weights in the bag (and my battery on the ground). Currently I use a pair of 10 pound free weights to help keep it stable. I’m quite happy with it!

Here is my setup…

📷 IMG_0437.jpegIMG_0437.jpeg

Helpful Supportive
Tony Gondola avatar

I second the weights. Without them the rig could blow over if you get a strong wind gust. I’ve seen that happen with heavier mounts then this.

Concise
bigCatAstro avatar

Michael Cory · Dec 18, 2025, 10:49 PM

Hi Louis,

I have an Askar 120 APO and I mount it on an AM5 with the TC40 carbon fiber tripod. Guiding is typically around 0.50” with winds of, say 6 mph or less. I try to avoid imaging with winds much above 12 mph and would expect to see the guiding numbers run higher under such conditions.

The first thing is that you will need a pier extension to use the Askar 120 on the AM5/TC40. I think the one I have is “ZWO 200 mm Pier Extension for AM5 Mount”. Without a pier extension I would expect to hit the tripod legs when pointing at/near zenith.

Also I use weights in the tripod weight bag. The picture below shows several 5 pound dumbbell weights in the bag (and my battery on the ground). Currently I use a pair of 10 pound free weights to help keep it stable. I’m quite happy with it!

Here is my setup…

📷 IMG_0437.jpegIMG_0437.jpeg

Great set-up! I use my old Sky-Watcher HEQ5 tripod with a weight/stones bag with the same pier extension. It has been very reliable.

Well Written Concise
Alex Nicholas avatar

I ran the Askar 120APO on the Emcan EM31 Pro mount (exactly the same weight class mount as the AM5). I did use a counterweight as I felt more safe, and you will 100% need the 200mm pier or the scope will hit the tripod legs.. Even with the pier, if you’re shooting mono, I would recommend rotating the camera so that the filterwheel is pointing ‘upwards’ away from the tripod. This will give you a little more safety around meridian limits.

As far as tracking/stability - Never had an issue.. Using an OAG I routinely guided at 0.3~0.6” RMS

Well Written Helpful Insightful Concise Engaging Supportive
Louis avatar

Thank you so much for your advices!

This really helps me. I think the consensus in all your comments is that it makes sense to use counterweights for more stability (either in the usual way on a counterweight bar and/or in the tripod bag).

Luckily, I already have the bar for the AM5 and some counterweights of different sizes. The point is that I want to keep my setup overall as lightweight as possible as I’m running my setup mobile.

Do you think the situation would change at all when using the smaller 103APO? There’s only 1kg difference to the 120APO… Rather on I could imagine going without the counterweight bar and only putting my Battery (ca. 3kg) and maybe a 2kg counterweight in the tripod bag.

Glenn Baxter avatar

Hi Louis,

From what others have said, It looks like the AM5 will be a great match with either scope. I have the AM5 with the carbon fibre tripod and love it. That’s with a 102mm refractor and full mono imaging train.

You’ll definitely need the pier extension. The PE200 has a higher weight rating than the one with three columns. I also hang a 5 kg dumbbell off the central knob underneath so it partly sits on the ground, for more stability. I also have the scope sitting on risers off the plate for added clearance as the EAF would sometimes still clip the tripod and rotate the camera. With the scope now further from the centre, I’ve felt more comfortable with a counterweight. All well within the limits of the mount.

I think a weighted base will do just as well for you as a counterweight but that’s something you can test by extending the scope and giving it a nudge. Would you be happy with the stability it shows if a gust of wind came along?

Where I’m living now is quite windy so at home I try to shelter the scope with outdoor furniture on the balcony or my car parked beside the scope in the driveway.

I feel the weakest link in these setups is the tripod, not the mount. In the last week, I’ve upgraded the tripod to something high end which is a beast but not as easily managed. With the Zwo tripod, I could flick the image train and it would vibrate like a guitar string. With the new tripod, it doesn’t budge at all.

That might be something to consider down the track. The standard setup has served me very well for a few years as it should for you.

Helpful Engaging Supportive
Louis avatar

Glenn Baxter · Dec 19, 2025 at 10:57 AM

Hi Louis,

From what others have said, It looks like the AM5 will be a great match with either scope. I have the AM5 with the carbon fibre tripod and love it. That’s with a 102mm refractor and full mono imaging train.

You’ll definitely need the pier extension. The PE200 has a higher weight rating than the one with three columns. I also hang a 5 kg dumbbell off the central knob underneath so it partly sits on the ground, for more stability. I also have the scope sitting on risers off the plate for added clearance as the EAF would sometimes still clip the tripod and rotate the camera. With the scope now further from the centre, I’ve felt more comfortable with a counterweight. All well within the limits of the mount.

I think a weighted base will do just as well for you as a counterweight but that’s something you can test by extending the scope and giving it a nudge. Would you be happy with the stability it shows if a gust of wind came along?

Where I’m living now is quite windy so at home I try to shelter the scope with outdoor furniture on the balcony or my car parked beside the scope in the driveway.

I feel the weakest link in these setups is the tripod, not the mount. In the last week, I’ve upgraded the tripod to something high end which is a beast but not as easily managed. With the Zwo tripod, I could flick the image train and it would vibrate like a guitar string. With the new tripod, it doesn’t budge at all.

That might be something to consider down the track. The standard setup has served me very well for a few years as it should for you.

Hi Glenn,

with my current setup (focal lengths at 450 mm and 330 mm with a much shorter scope) I have never had any issues with wind wich is typical for my region.

The best case would be that I would make the same experience with one of the scopes either in the future regarding wind and its influence on the guiding accuracy.

Vroomfondel avatar

Tony Gondola · Dec 18, 2025, 10:56 PM

I second the weights. Without them the rig could blow over if you get a strong wind gust. I’ve seen that happen with heavier mounts then this.

I use a couple of cheap 1kg weights from Decathlon (tie wrapped together). https://www.decathlon.co.uk/p/weight-training-1-kg-28-mm-partly-recycled-cast-iron-plate/348950/m8816722

Does the job.

Never had a problem with my 125mm StellaMira rig.

You could probably fit a couple of 2kg weights if you wanted to be uber cautious…

Having said that, I don’t really go out with my larger rigs in gusty conditions.

alpheratz06 avatar

Louis · Dec 18, 2025, 07:07 PM

Does someone have any experience regarding this setup in terms of stability? I have worries that especially the 120 APO

Hello

I have a strain wave mount (not Zwo) which is a bit touchy to use with my fully fledged TSA120. I is acceptable if :

  • no wind

  • serious balancing about DEC axis (feasible on a table but rolling the lower dovetail and marking the position of the center of mass)

  • serious balancing about RA axis, by computation of the right distance to place the counter weight

  • maybe (or certainly ! ) invest in an oversized tripod. The lack of load balancing generates torques on the tripod head and may ruin stability.

Caleb Larsen avatar

Louis · Dec 19, 2025, 07:09 AM

Do you think the situation would change at all when using the smaller 103APO? There’s only 1kg difference to the 120APO… Rather on I could imagine going without the counterweight bar and only putting my Battery (ca. 3kg) and maybe a 2kg counterweight in the tripod bag.

Hi Louis,

I’m operating a setup with the 103APO and AM3 (OSC without a filter wheel). I’ve done as you are asking when I travel with my setup; leaving the counterweight bar and placing the battery & counterweight in the tripod bag, and it has worked well for me. My guiding is still good in that situation and the setup feels solid, although I wouldn’t do that on a more windy night. I’ve come to prefer bringing & using the counterweight bar more for my own peace of mind. If you were to go with the 103APO, I think it would be reasonable to leave out the counterweight bar and put the battery in the tripod bag.

Caleb

Well Written Helpful Concise Supportive
AstroGadac avatar

I use the Skywatcher Wave 150i, its the same class of mount as the AM5. With the carbon tripod it works ok with no wind. Otherwise it's not great, too flimsy.

I use now a steel eq6r tripod, good investment, its super stable (tripod weighs 7.5kg) even when there is wind. No counterweight needed imo.

Helpful Concise
Michele Rainville avatar

Looks like fun ! I am using am5 with my new 8” edge I upgraded the tripod to an avx tripod fits perfect and got an 11lb counter weight solid as can be. .3 arc sec guiding consistent with oag.

Paul Larkin avatar

Hi, Louis.

I’m not sure you need any more info, but thought I might chip in anyway as you never know what helps.

I have the AM5N and TC40 carbon tripod, but now only use my EQ6 tripod as I found the TC40 a little too flexy for my taste (even with weights in the bag). I bought the AM5N because I was tired of lugging my EQ6R mount around the countryside, so the EQ6 tripod was already in hand. (Note. THe EQ6R mount is brilliant and if I had a permanent setup, that’s what I’d use).

I use an EdgeHD8 and a Skywatcher 120ED on it, shooting mono. As Alex suggested, you’ll definitely need the extension if shooting mono and I found I was still at risk of hitting the tripod legs if not careful. So now I have the ZWO 200mm pier extension on top of the EQ6 extension. It might seem like overkill but I leave them bolted together and consider it just one large extension atop the EQ6 tripod; everything I put on top is now well clear of the tripod legs.

The AM5N is such a delight to use (plus carrying it about and lifting onto a tripod compared to the EQ6R) and the setup with the EQ6 tripod and extension combo is rock solid.

Cheers.

Paul

Helpful Respectful Engaging Supportive
Louis avatar

Thank you everyone for your advices :)

I think I’ll stay with current lightweight and "semi-windproof” setup until I got a beefier tripod (and mount). But I’m sure this thread will help other users who have the same plans as I did on the beginning of this thread.

CS, Louis