Thank you Mr Christen.  That helps me understand the benefits and differences of each of your Mach 2 and 1100 non-AE mounts which are similarly priced.  If I may summarise my understanding:  A Mach 2 w built in AE, will provide DYNAMIC wind resistance with the AE feedback system, while a larger and similarly priced 1100 non-AE will provide MECHANICAL wind resistance through its larger gear/drive system.  An 1100 non-AE can later be upgraded to AE to then provide both mechanical AND dynamic wind resistance.  I suspect that the 1100 w AE dynamic response would be a bit slower than the Mach 2's response with its faster motors (based on slew speed).  Is that correct?  Would the Mach 2's dynamic feedback then be even faster (ie tighter) at higher power supply voltages since its slew speeds are faster with them?

Wind resistance is important to me as my worst case is a long setup at over 55" from front of dew sheild to back of camera, and live on the prairies here in Alberta where still nights with clear skies are few and far between and no permanent observatory.  At just under 40# for my setup, it shows as being well within the Dec weight and inertial moment graph of the Mach 2, but I assumed that graph was for "general" loads, and does not factor in wind resistance.
Top photo for fun is my friend John's "ultimate wind resistance"package of a RedCat51 on his AP900.

And my (new to me) imaging package of an AP130EDT w an 8300 based camera on, yes, a G11, which has the wind resistance of a piece of tissue paper.  Note that I started with a much smaller setup so I didn't notice wind issues until I put this together.  (roll eyes)