Thee Mill Debate Continues

[chris mabbott]

Which mill, again?

Greetings all,

The self debate over which mini or bench mill to buy still rages on, and on

After much debate and study I have decided against the quantum machine for a few reasons, i.e plastic gearing and a noisy motor. Although it does posses qualities that I do like.

My good eye has now turned to the Sieg super X2 which seems to be a very robust design and has had plenty of thought put into its continual refinement. The upgrade from the previous model includes a brushless, belt driven motor with electronically controlled variable rpm and high torque.
Although not equipped with a digital tach, one can be added as an option.

Like most of these machines, it’s fabricated in China under “guidance”. I’m sure it has many twins under different paint but this model I feel might be the one. Apparently much input from experienced machinist has influenced its design..

I was also considering the X3 which is about 30 kilos heavier and almost 1 meter in height, it is the in between model after leaving modeling and just before entering the floor standing grade.
Although, and this has been echoed many times I’m sure,
For the purpose I intend to use it for, the X2 will probably fit the bill, as I don’t foresee doing any super heavy/large projects and I know, at least right now, what I want it for.

Fitted out with a good set of collets, a set of HSS 3&4 flute end mills, a clamping set and a good vice, an oil tray and the digital tach, it would run around 1000 UK pounds with shipping!
The quantum would be about a 150 more but watching the videos of it, I get a feeling of fragility, like it’s not beefy enough.

I was also debating the MT3-R8 question and I’ve concluded that attachment wise, availability is equal and priced the same, so I will go with the MT3 metric sets.

I’m curious to hear if anyone has used one of these Sieg machines and could offer a few insights based on their experience/use.

[tmac1956]

Chris:

Here’s a guy who is using a Cowells 90CW Lathe/Mill and is currently building the Daniels Turbilloun watch. The neat thing is that he has the time to document everything on his site. That little machine will do just about everything, but I suspect the cost is very high for such a device (I suspect that a fully loaded Sincere would do just as well for a lot less money). Anyway – if you (or anyone here) hasn’t seen the site, it’s very informative.

http://watchmaking.weebly.com/

Just FYI…
Tom

[chris mabbott]

Those Cowell machines are nice but grossly overpriced, the one they show on the site is basically the same as the Sieg but cost 5 times more without any accessories, so you’re looking at around 3 – 4k uk pounds 😯 You can get a used industrial turret mill for that.
Avoid like the plague anything that states….HAND MADE 😆

[david pierce]

Chris,
As far as I can tell from the internet pictures the SEIG SUPER X2 is the same mill that Tom and I have. If the X3 is the next size up and you have the room and budget, my advice would be to go with the larger machine. The larger machine can do anything the smaller machine can do but it will have more capacity and power. What ever you decide I can tell you that the Harbor Freight (Seig X2) is a very nice machine. I like the R8 spindle a lot better than the MT for a mill but go with the one you think will suit your needs the best.
david

[chris mabbott]

David, thanks for checking in as I was patiently waiting for your opinion, which I value.

Ive been teetering on the MT/R8 choice but with your comment I think I will go R8. As you’ve mentioned before, easier to change out tools rather than giving it a whack lol.

I was for a brief moment considering the X1 as it is a higher speed, 5000rpm as opposed to 2500 on the larger high torque models. But then I realized that I’d probably never use 2500 rpm, much, not that I’m going to be cutting thick and hard, nor anything that requires that high a speed.
Mostly for watch parts, some drilling. The materials I’ll be using will be brass, aluminum, mild to medium steel and wood.

Which bring me to my next question, end mill selection..

For wood, I understand that HSS 2 or 3 flute mills are better for wood, less chip clog, and they run cooler than cobalt/carbide cutters?

For the other soft to medium materials, I suppose the 4 flute carbide cutters would produce a better finish.

I’ve been watching many demos of various models on YouTube, the thing that I noticed most is that very few people use a cutting fluid. It was drilled into us that no matter what, you ALWAYS use a medium to maintain coolness, lubricate the cutter, and flush away chips thus improving end finish.

Am I missing a new trade secret or is it laziness, lack of knowledge, or not wanting a mess lol

Thanks for your responses gents..

[david pierce]

Chris,
Keep in mind that an instructional demo on Youtube is actually a PHOTO-OP usually done by people who bought a video camara and a machine and were not professionally trained. If you watch a a Youtube of RGM watch parts being machined you will see the way it is actually done on a professional level. The parts are flooded with coolant during the machining process. Since this is not practical in a living room or spare bedroom shop I use cheap motor oil and a cheap paint brush to apply oil during cutting. When I bought my mill the MT model was on sale for $150.00 and the R8 was $450.00. Other than the spindle taper the mills were identical. I bought the R8 model. The plastic gears will actually protect the machine from serious harm if some dumb moron tries to push the machine past what it was designed for. People buy these mills, put a large end mill cutter into the spindle and then try to plough through a thick piece of steel. When the teeth get stripped off of the gear nothing else is stressed. A small mill requires small cutters and lite cuts. A larger mill can use larger cutters and take heavier cuts. The same is true with a lathe. This is why I say the Taig is better suited for clock parts than the Sincere.
david

[daryn]

Another “Asian ” option is the wiess machines, I’ve the smallest benchtop model,

[daryn]

The wiess mills have a separate drilling quill which makes drilling a doddle, has a built in dro for the quill which can be slow thread feed or fast drilling lever , collum is fixed, head can be rotated 90 each way , table and collum have tapered gibs, works well for its size , Morse two socket but has a release nut so no hammering required !

[daryn]

I’m definitely in agreement with David, ad big and heavy as you can fit in the workshop and budget, more mass is always best when considering milling

[arutha]

http://www.weiss.com.cn/products_detail/&productId=272.html Looks like this

[stevefox]

This is the mill I bought a couple of years ago:

http://www.lathemaster.com/Lathemaster%20LM25L%20Milling%20Machine.htm

I didn’t know until I looked them up today that it is a Weiss.
I always wondered, but never could find one that has identical specs.
It is one of the few that has over 19″ Y travel. It appears to me to be a little heavier that the other small mills, too.
Mine is quiet and does everything ask of it. It is way overkill for clock work, but I do mostly other things.

Steve Fox

[daryn]

Hi
Steve I think that’s the next size up from mine , I wanted a small one right next to me on the bench
Happy with it and would definitely consider a bigger one if space allowed!
Daryn

[david pierce]

In my world view a Bridgeport size mill is the standard for a manual milling machine. Any mill larger than that is too large to operate manually and any mill smaller than that means that lighter cuts and feeds must be taken to compensate for the size. When CNC mills first came out for small shops, in the mid to late 1970s, Bridgeport was the first choice. It was quickly discovered that a more massive machine was required for this application. The first CNC mill I had experience with was a mill called a Digitcom. The mill was one size up from a Bridgeport and used ball screws and stepper motors. It had to be programed in a tab-sequential format but had full 3 axis interpolation. As the company grew we added larger machines that programed with G and M codes and used servo motors. They worked a lot better than the stepper motors.
david

[daryn]

Hey David , that must’ve been a very interesting time to be working in that industry!
I have a keen interest in the old mechanical swiss type automatics and I should think seeing the transition from those to modern cnc must have been very exciting!
Watching a live tooled five axis cnc “machining centre” in operation is quite a thing to behold, if it’s not moving to fast to see , however for me it doesn’t hold the same hypnotic fascination of the purely mechanical automatics , hats off to the guys that sat down and worked it all out !

[david pierce]

Daryn,
In those days CNC machines were just introduced into the smaller shops. Large manufacturing companies like Lockheed had them and used a mainframe timeshare program called APT to program them. The smaller shops did not have access to the APT system so it gave me an opportunity to advance in the company. The more senior employees and the shop owners came from the old “by gosh and by golly” machining process. If the part had a shiny finish and it worked, in their world it was a properly made precision part. As customers became more knowledgable and sophiscated this system was no longer acceptable. The new system involved building a mathematical model of the part and then putting this into a machine program format. Holding you mouth right and putting a nice finish on the part no longer worked. Years later computers became more powerful and computer aided manufacturing programs became available but this was not the case in the early days.
david

[Author]

Posts