Review on the HEQ5-R PRO

After having owned a few of them, I can say that my thoughts are that there is probably so few reviews because there is little to say.

The heq5 is a mount that just does its job.. its not fancy, it doesn’t have a boat load of features… or high end precision, it simply works… mine were great out of the box, and with a little tweaking and a belt mod, they were brilliant… nobody is going to come and ask you about your heq5 at a star party… but youre also very unlikely to have any issues… they are a solid platform, and sure, its a small bump in price to move to a eq6 r pro, but that’s a big step up in weight for a payload capacity increase, but that payload capacity increase is only important if you need it, and performance wise, if you run both mounts at 75% capacity, their performance is about equal.

If portability is a requirement and payloads will be small, then of course, it makes more sense. I do think though that it is already using a belt drive system so not sure that the belt kit is needed.

Tony Gondola · Aug 24, 2026, 02:52 AM

I do think though that it is already using a belt drive system so not sure that the belt kit is needed.

Correct - the new one… The original HEQ5 (of which, I’ve owned 3 or 4 since 2008) were spur gear driven… and were reasonably good out of the box - but when belt driven they became fantastic, sometimes achieving RMS guiding error as low as 0.45”…

The new model has a number of aesthetic and ‘quality of life’ improvements, but I would venture a guess (based on what I know of skywatcher) that apart from the belt drive, it will not be a meaningful improvement over the previous model… I certainly don’t believe that an existing HEQ5-Pro owner would upgrade to the HEQ5-R Pro, when they could do a belt mod for a couple of hundred dollars (off-the-shelf kit) or ~$45 if you buy the required components and DIY a solution, and have the same overall performance…

I’ve run some ‘reasonable’ setups on a HEQ5 Pro (8” RC, 8” F/5 newt, C9.25 etc) without issue except for in a good breeze, anyone running a 50~110mm refractor would have 0 issues with a HEQ5… The old ‘Mount mount mount mount mount’ order of equipment importance is accurate, I think a LOT of people end up with CONSIDERABLY more mount than they will ever appreciably need as a result of this mantra… I’ve owned 2 scopes in 20 years that really NEEDED more than a HEQ5, but still didn’t NEED the mount I bought to carry them… At some point we all need to be a little more sensible about what is ‘required’ and what we want to tell our wives is 'necessary’..

Jim Raskett · Aug 24, 2026, 02:08 AM

Alex nailed it. Exactly the way that I feel about my HEQ5 -Pro.

I didn’t want the extra weight of the eq6r Pro to drag through the house and I don’t plan to upgrade scopes beyond my 102 and 61mm refractors. My HEQ5 Pro has handled them wonderfully for the past 3-4 years.

Good out of the box, but sweet with the Rowan belt kit and even sweeter with a tuneup including worm adjustments

Never gives me a bit of trouble and guides great every night. Very happy with the performance of my HEQ5 Pro.

Yes I agree for the HEQ5-PRO, I had it for 7 years and it worked great. I sold it to upgrade my setup (last year) but I never had the time and money until now to do the improvement.

That’s why I’m looking for the HEQ5-R PRO that can carry a bit more and has effectively a few “quality of life“ improvement.

The EQ6-R is also great but I think its cable management is not good at all, it has a great payload capacity but in return it is as heavy as a tank. for payload, I’m looking at the wave 150i, but again and as you said, will I need this payload capacity ? I’m currently using a 150/750 PDS and accessories, and I’ll probably move to a 200/1000 but probably not above this.

Tony Gondola · Aug 24, 2026, 01:40 PM

Gabriel · Aug 24, 2026, 07:27 AM

Tony Gondola · Aug 24, 2026, 02:59 AM

Here’s a bunch of reviews per the PO’s original request.

https://telescopicwatch.com/sky-watcher-heq5-pro-review/

https://astrobackyard.com/heq5-vs-neq6/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiJtsXVl63k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QzpBxv13yk&t=558s

https://www.astro-baby.com/reviews/Sky-Watcher%20200P/sky-watcher%20200P%20HEQ5.htm

https://givemespace.art/blog/f/sky-watcher-heq5-review-still-worth-buying

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bx1A7Brp6U

I’m looking for reviews on the HEQ5-R pro, not the HEQ5-PRO. The “R“ version is a new one. Almost no review on it.

This is what I found in a quick search, sorry it’s not helpful. Honestly though, I wouldn’t expect much of a difference other than improved guiding performance. Other comments in this thread seem to confirm that.

but, this is a review on the HEQ5, not on the new one, I don’t need that sorry

Alex Nicholas · Aug 25, 2026, 04:33 AM

Tony Gondola · Aug 24, 2026, 01:40 PM

other than improved guiding performance

Even that remains to be seen… It may have less backlash due to not being driven by spur gears, but then the tolerances on the worm meshing could be worse than the original resulting in massive backlash regardless…

Unfortunately for OP, the best he can do is either take the plunge on the new HEQ5-R Pro and hope that it delivers better performance on top of those QoL improvements the new mount offers, or go to the wave 150i or wave 100i and deal with the whole ‘harmonic vs worm drive’ thing…

As someone who’s had a harmonic mount for a few years now, I’ll throw this into the discussion - Despite the weight advantage that harmonic mounts offer, I would prefer a worm driven GEM over a harmonic mount any day of the week… My spine being as horrific as it is, I don’t get to make such choices, but if the weight of the HEQ5-R pro mount/tripod is not a deciding factor, I would go that over a harmonic mount any day of the week… Just my 2c…

why would you prefer it over a harmonic mount ?