I must say that when buying anything new guarentee periods don’t sway me

if the product arrives and works as makers intended then its ok …so 3 months should be adequate to find any problems

on a mill (or lathe) the only problems you are likely to have are the motor and drive boards in time

anything else is really the operator and unlikely to be covered by warentee

The Amadeal is not the same as the other two which do both come out of the Sieg factory.

Supplier backup, knowledge and spares would be something to consider not just a guarentee, would a mostly woodworking based supplier have the same knowledge of the machines and engineering in general as one that only does enginnering tools and machines?

Well, after owning a MYFORD VMB for 3 years or so I discovered, when I got round to tramming the column, that one of the hold down bolts was held in the casting by paint.

The additional 2 years guarantee with Axminster is costing almost 500 pounds if it were me I would go with the ARC SX2.7 and the saving would cover the DRO set.

Given your list I’d find the extra couple of hundred beer tokens and buy my Warco VMC again. Having used several full sized millers I can’t contemplate using a machine with a head that moves up and down. The VMC was well over budget when I bought it but I’m so glad I spent the extra money. Good luck with whatever you decide.

When budgeting for a mill remember that tooling, cutters, vice(s), rotary table, collets, work-holding, parallels etc etc will all be additional costs.

Obviously you don't need to buy all of these at once, but in time you may find you have doubled the cost of the mill.

Don't think that follows at all …. that a DRO slapped on at the factory or seller would be more reliable than one "lovingly installed" by the end user model engineer.

I'm sure it could happen, but is there any evidence that DRO's are routinely 'slapped on'? Anyone got a tale to tell?

Can't generalise about model engineer installations either. Quite likely folk buying new machines are beginners who don't have the tools and experience needed to fit a DRO yet. And fitting them can be awkward – much depends on the structure of the machine and what's in the mounting kit. Here the factory or retailer has a big advantage over newbies; sellers know what they're dealing with, have tools and support, understand what to buy, and what to avoid. (If they get it wrong, for example by fitting a scale on a lathe cross-side such that it blocks access to the carriage lock, other customers will have noticed!)

Even experienced Model Engineers might prefer to cut metal rather than enjoy fiddling with machinery, and people short of time often choose to save it by flashing the cash. We're all different!

Dave

Without going into detail, we find it difficult to agree with the SIEG factory DRO installation, and we find it difficult to deal with after sales issues arising from factory fitted DROs.

For this reason we prefer to sell machines without factory fitted DROs. We prefer to promote supply of magnetic scales from M-DRO. They have clear knowledge and understanding of the products they sell. If a person buys the kit from them, in our opinion they are best geared to offer correct support for these scales.

ARC provided M-DRO with the machines to help them make SIEG machine specific kits. Having just visited their site, I can see that they now have 2-axis kits on this page. At some point I believe that they will also be offering a 3-axis kit. If anyone wishes to find out further, they should ask M-DRO.

ARC suggests that if a person wants DROS, they should consider supply from M-DRO. We have no commission or financial interest in promoting their kits. The deal is made directly between the buyer and M-DRO, without any middle man, so M-DROs price is competitive too.

Ketan at ARC

Edited By Ketan Swali on 27/06/2022 10:53:45

A little confused by your post Robin. Respectfully, all the machines mentioned in OPs post are produced by factories in Mainland China, rather than Rong Fu in Taiwan.

The Axminster and ARC SX2.7 are made by SIEG factory in Shanghai, and the Warco and Amadeal machines are different, and made by some others in another province.

Regarding the DROs, the buyer makes his or her own decision. Be it factory installed, kit from M-DRO or some other. We only make suggestions to guide people based on our experience in this industry.

Ketan at ARC

I always say that if you are in the fortunate position to choose between R8 and MT3 spindle fitting, choose R8.

Dave – SOD,

A bit of history based on my observation over the years…

About 20 years ago, you could fill a room with the R8 and MT tooling crowd to find what is better for their machine, lock the room and tell them that they can only come out after making a unanimous decision. On the technical front, neither would agree that one was better than the other, arguing their corner as you have. On the question of price, MT won, as it was a lot cheaper back then in comparison to R8. Also there was justification to use MT in both their lathe and mill.

As newer people entered the hobby, various things happened…

1. Some such new people found it difficult to deal with the friction fit of the MT tapers, as engineering knowledge has been deteriorating over time. For example:

• failing to clean the mating surfaces of transport oil.. making the friction fit useless
• overtightening the MT tooling inside the spindle.
• Combine the overtightening with expansion due to heat generation from use, so making it difficult to loosen the drawbar, because they fail to understand that they needed to allow the spindle area to cool down again… especially due to over tightening.
• Using the wrong kind of hammer – ie using a claw type hammer (hitting the drawbar to kingdom come without getting a release) instead of using something like a rubber mallet, and failing to hit the drawbar sharp enough to release the taper fit

We fielded a high number of calls to address above issues when we offered options of MT3 and R8, As most of the machines we sell now are R8, such calls are very much in the minority with R8, as R8 don't generally have such an issue as it is not a tapered friction fit in the spindle. Above issues are user related based on poor knowledge.

2. Twenty years ago, MT was cheaper than R8. People were using end mills of a larger variety of shank diameters, threaded etc.. With exception of carbide end mills, sellers like ARC went down the standardisation route offering plain shanks in 6, 8, 10, 12mm with different cutting diameters on the end. So, the user could now consider R8 collets in four standard sizes, so one no longer needed to invest in a full range of collets.

3. R8 collets/tooling wasn't really ever more expensive than MT3. It was a marketing thing. Production of R8 has always been higher than MT3. When we first started in this business, we were advised to avoid selling R8 products at prices similar to MT3, as we would not be taken seriously. Those were the early mail order days. before internet became popular.

4. With the advent of Internet forums in early 2000s, the newer generation specially in the U.S., started talking about their negative experiences with MT3. A certain percentage of it was born out of fear and poor knowledge based on point 1 above, combined with the idea that the bearings would somehow get damaged by hitting the drawbar hard – which is not true, as you have explained.

5. Some of these new comers decided that they wanted to convert their machines to CNC. In the process, some wanted to adapt their cnc project to incorporate quick change tooling, especially R8 end mill holders and ER collet milling collet chucks. R8 provided easier ejection of R8 tool and better 'repeatability' in location than MT. A lot of these projects failed to get off the ground, but the seed was sown, and the ideas/concepts spread slowly across the world.

As a result of the points mentioned above, sales of MT3 machines reduced from 7 out of 10 back in 2004, to around 2 out of 10 by around 2015, in th case of ARC, and 8 out of 10 – predominantly a younger age demographic choosing R8 machines. If one wanted to re-sell their machine second hand, it was and is far more easier to re-sell a Metric R8 machine in the U.K., vs. an Imperial or MT3 machine.

ARC stopped selling MT3 machines when we had to hold one or two pieces of a specific MT3 models for nearly two years. Our sales are driven by market demand.

Hope the above adds to the reasoning for MT3 vs R8.

Ketan at ARC