The theory sounds simple: to achieve the same effect, either use bigger counterweights, or a longer counterweight bar. I am thinking to replace the default bar with a new one that's 20" long, and avoid using very heavy iron hockey pucks.
The total weight of the telescope + bar + counterweights will be less. That means less friction in the bearings. So that's good, no?
But the total moment of inertia (rotational inertia), if the telescope weight does not change, will remain the same. It will just be accomplished with less dead weight, spread further away from the polar axis. So that sounds about the same.
Bottom line is - will I see a more relaxed tracking, less struggling autoguiding, compared with using a shorter bar and heavier counterweights? What's your experience?
Oh, and my back will benefit from carrying smaller steel hockey pucks across the field.