Mills with tilting heads..?

[Ron LadenParticipant @ronladen17547]

I have been thinking about going up in size from my SX2P mill, I,m not in a rush probably some time next year. So I am spending some time researching what is available and making comparisons.

One thing I have noticed is a number of machines in the size I would be considering have tilting heads, for instance the Sieg SX3 which is one on the list now has this feature which it didnt on the previous model. I am a bit hesitant at mills with tilting heads, is it an area for loss of rigidity..? Also when using the tilt (cant see I would use it much) can the head be easily brought back to correct alignment or is it a case of having to tram the mill..?

My hesitation is maybe unfounded so I would appreciate any ones experience or thoughts on tilting head mills.

Ron

[Ron LadenParticipant @ronladen17547]

[Anonymous]

The head on my Bridgeport mill tilts in two axes. It's not a feature I've used more than a handful of times in the last 20 odd years. I prefer to get the required angles with an adjustable angle plate or other fixtures. I believe that later Bridgeports had dowels to reset the head to vertical, but if I move the head i have to tram it afterwards. I tend to check the tram on a regular basis as the head can move under heavy cuts. So definitely an area where rigidity is lost in exchange for potential flexibility (pun intended).

On a practical note the Bridgeport head is very heavy, and even with the worm drives it is hard work moving it and then retramming.

In theory the head can be moved 90 degrees to create a poor mans horizontal borer, but when I need such a facility I tend to use the horixontal mill. For drilling and light milling parallel to the table I prefer to use a right angle drive rather than move the head.

Andrew

Edited By Andrew Johnston on 26/10/2019 10:33:24

[Paul LousickParticipant @paullousick59116]

My previous mill was a Sieg SX3 with a tilting head and my latest a RF-45, also with a tilting head. As far as I can see there is no loss of rigidity. The rigidity is more so in the support column, not in the head mounting.

A mill with a tilting head allows you to perform more milling operations than one with a fixed head. The SX3 and the RF-45 only swivel in one plane but I would prefer one that swivels in 2 planes, like that on a Bridgeport. .Traming the head on a mill is a simple operation using a dial indicator.

Paul.

[EmgeeParticipant @emgee]

Hi Ron

The head on my mill rotates 90 deg CCW but I have only ever used it once in that manner in about 8 years,
I normally set the job to suit the cut, either on an angled table or angled in the vice.

I note it is stated the head will index at 0 and 90 deg so when trammed it should return accurately if rotated.

Emgee

[Clive FosterParticipant @clivefoster55965]

Ron

I think your concerns about tramming the head back into alignment are very valid but can be worked round. Especially if there is no mechanical drive to give controlled movement like Andrews Bridgeport has. Even with the Bridgeport worm and wheel drive it is, as Andrew says, hard work. So much so that stripped, or seriously worn, worm wheel sets are a known issue. My worm wheel was! Although not huge the components involved don't look seriously undersized to the naive eye. If I ever shift mine again its getting a bungee cord or three hooked up to the ceiling to take much of the strain. Or something similarly effective and equally Heath Robinson.

I know the SX3 is rather smaller but the head still looks a decent lump to move. The tilting head on the Chester Lux type mill I used to have was a similar manual device and, frankly, was too heavy for safety when working on your own. It nearly got away from me the two times I tried and, even when nearly vertical was a total pain to get just so.

I see the high torque version of the Sieg SX3 from Arc has indexing at vertical and 90° which should make resetting easier. Assuming of course that the factory setting is accurate. Hopefully it will be close enough for all sane work but dead on is unlikely as there simply isn't the money in the price to pay for the careful fitting of the whole machine needed to get super accuracy.

I'd be seriously looking at some kind of lever and test bar to mount in the spindle to help controlled movement and accurate setting. A hefty, accurate, test bar in the spindle dropping onto a dead vertical receptacle on the table should be very effective at confirming things are in line and, possibly, taking out the last few fractions of a degree error. A similar, longer bar could be used to give more leverage when setting the head. Better grip too. Its hard to get a nicely secure hold on lumpy castings. For final adjustment a couple of blocks could be bolted to the table so the lever bar could be pushed from side to side under feed screw control.

Given the size of work and cutters usually envisaged I can't see any significant loss of righty if everything is well made and seated properly. Assuming the joints are good and secure the limitation will be the column stiffness.

Clive

Edited By Clive Foster on 26/10/2019 11:26:54

[vintage engineerParticipant @vintageengineer]

I think Warco do one.

[David Standing 1Participant @davidstanding1]

Posted by vintage engineer on 26/10/2019 11:23:34:

I think Warco do one.

I don't think that was the original question

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

As I see it (for a single plane adjustment head) it is no different than setting the tram, so should not change the rigidity one iota – it’s just tramming to a different angle, rather than exactly 90 degrees to the table. As per Andrew, I would rather set the angle of the job rather than alter the tram of the head. Available head-space might be an issue when adjusting the job.

Even with stops, I would be checking the tram after moving it – until I was confident it moved back perfectly…

I’ve not even considered tilting the head on my machine – well I have considered it and dismissed the idea!

[Ketan SwaliParticipant @ketanswali79440]

Hi Ron,

I would tend to go along with Andrew's comments, and avoid using the tilting facility on the head…. of most manual milling machines.

Based on discussions over the years with various users of manual milling machines with a tilt facility, about 3 out of 10 are able to get on with the facility. The other 7 either can't or don't want to use the facility.

At the time of development of the SX3s JS and my comments on the subject were out voted by those who wanted the feature on the machine.

Ketan at ARC.

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Agree with everyone else. I've used my milling machine's tilt feature once because it's so much easier to tilt the work than it is to tilt the head. The exception was chamfering the edges of ten 200mm long strips where I thought it quicker to clamp them straight and tilt the head rather than make a simple jig. I don't think it was!

Re-tramming Chinese mills is a bit of a pain but not difficult. Cost-cutting on hobby machines often involves a minimalist approach to adjustments. Rather than the machine having a helpful mechanical adjuster, the operator has to fiddle with it, for example during tramming by having to hold the head exactly vertical whilst tightening a bolt. There's a bit of a knack to it.

I wouldn't avoid buying a mill with a tilting head. It's a mostly neutral feature!

Dave

[Ketan SwaliParticipant @ketanswali79440]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 26/10/2019 12:14:31:

I wouldn't avoid buying a mill with a tilting head. It's a mostly neutral feature!

Dave

I wouldn't avoid buying any manual milling machine which has a tilting head… I would just consider it to be a limited use 'novelty'.

Ketan at ARC.

[John MCParticipant @johnmc39344]

I have two vertical mills, similar in size, one tilts, t'other doesn't. If one had to go it would be the fixed head one. The tilt facility is infrequently used but when needed it is very useful. Rigidity isn't compromised as it might be by using a tilting vice, for instance. I really cannot see any objection to using the tilt facility when needed.

One thing I would look for in a tilting head is where the clamping bolts are. Ideally they should be well spaced away from the axis of tilt to avoid the problems that Bridgeports are notorious for, heads moving under heavy cuts. This happens because the 4 bolts clamping the head are too close together and there is a lot of mass (motor, speed control, etc) along way from the axis of tilt.

John

[vintage engineerParticipant @vintageengineer]

Yes it was part of the question in the post!

Posted by David Standing 1 on 26/10/2019 11:51:59:

Posted by vintage engineer on 26/10/2019 11:23:34:

I think Warco do one.

I don't think that was the original question

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

Posted by vintage engineer on 26/10/2019 12:24:41:

Yes it was part of the question in the post!

Posted by David Standing 1 on 26/10/2019 11:51:59:

Posted by vintage engineer on 26/10/2019 11:23:34:

I think Warco do one.

I don't think that was the original question

I can’t see it!! Perhaps you could point out the precise wording that requests names of suppliers. I thought Ron had that covered all by himself.

[JAParticipant @ja]

I have a Wabeco with a tilting head. The head is dowelled to keep it vertical in normal use. It is infrequently used tiled, about once or twice a year. However I think it is a useful feature.

One comment, the head moves in the vertical plane but the tool will move at the angle of the head. This, sort of, doubles the thinking required before machining with the head tilted.

JA

Edited By JA on 26/10/2019 12:52:13

[GrottoParticipant @grotto]

I've got a Bridgeport clone with a tilting head.

I don’t use the tilt often, but when I do I find it a great feature. I find it easier/quicker to set up work level on the bed, and tilt the head rather than set up the work on an angle.

tramming the mill afterwards isn’t anywhere near as much of a hassle as I thought it would be.

I wouldn’t say it’s an essential feature, but quite nice to have

[Gary WoodingParticipant @garywooding25363]

The Mk3 VH on my Centec 2B can tilt 90° in either direction. I seldom use it, but one job I did would have been very difficult without it. The 6 slots in the the photo are rounded and were milled with a ball-end cutter with the head tilted at 43°. I'm not sure how to do it without tilting the head, and ensuring a smooth transition between the angles.

[old martParticipant @oldmart]

The Tom Senior light vertical mill we are doing up has a tilt feature, and the head can be moved out to give about 5" more throat depth. It is primitive compared to a Bridgeport, but could be useful one day. There is a straight ground surface on the left side of the head, and I have tried tramming it with a dti. A test with 63 or 80mm shell mill will find out whether or not I have to make a conventional spindle mounted tramm.

[Ron LadenParticipant @ronladen17547]

Thanks guys for all the advice, I wont let avoiding a tilt feature limit my choice. I cant see me using a tilt that often but as one or two guys have said it can be useful. I quite regularly tram my SX2P so wouldnt have a problem doing that when changing from tilt back to vertical.

The reason I mentioned rigidity is even with my limited experience I have come to the opinion that with lathes/mills rigidity is king and I just thought of a tilt connection between the column and head as a potential weakness but if its well engineered I guess its ok.

Another machine on my list is the Sieg SX2.7 mainly because it is a fixed column with no tilt but looking at ARC,s pictures the SX3 appears to be heavier duty in comparison. I do realise of course that the machines I am looking at are hobby machines and they are what they are but as I am a bit paranoid about rigidity or the lack of it that is my first consideration before any other features.

Edited By Ron Laden on 27/10/2019 08:20:11

Edited By Ron Laden on 27/10/2019 08:20:50

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Ron Laden on 27/10/2019 08:04:56:

[…]

The reason I mentioned rigidity is even with my limited experience I have come to the opinion that with lathes/mills rigidity is king and I just thought of a tilt connection between the column and head as a potential weakness but if its well engineered I guess its ok.

[…]

.

This is probably off-topic, Ron; because its capacity is less than you probably want [so please forgive the intrusion].

If you want to see a well engineered small machine with a tilting head: Have a look at the BCA

**LINK** http://www.lathes.co.uk/bca/page5.html

There is no facility to ‘tram’ this machine … because it was built right in the first place.

The head is simply returned to its vertical position by replacing a [very slightly tapered] dowel pin.

MichaelG.

[Ron LadenParticipant @ronladen17547]

Its no intrusion Michael,

I see what you mean you only have to glance at it to see how well engineered it is, it may be small but I doubt it will have any rigidity issues, it looks seriously heavy duty with a build like that.

Very nice indeed.

Ron

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

The SX3 is certainly a lot heavier built than the SX2.7 so if you can afford it and have space it would be a worthwhile size increase. having an indexed head the SX3 should be a lot easier to tram than your SX2P so less of an issue if you do decide to use the tilt.

I've managed without a tilting head machine buy finding a way to mount the work at the required angle and the lathe makes a good horizontal mill for those jobs where you may want to swing the head 90deg.

It's interesting to note that all the more recent Sieg machines have a fixed vertical head SX2P, SX2.3 S & SX2.7, SX3.5 which would seem to suggest that they have found the market for swivels small.

[Ron LadenParticipant @ronladen17547]

Thanks Jason, as you know I dont have a lot of workshop space so that is something I also need to consider. If you get a minute could you tell me the dimension from the rear of the column to the front of the base casting. I know the overall dimensions from ARC,s website but it would be good to know the mills footprint for the minimum bench space required.

Ron

[Ketan SwaliParticipant @ketanswali79440]

Hi Ron,

Here you go:

For SX2.7 around 19 3/4":

https://share.icloud.com/photos/0OQPgWqas3Egu9wxevwv4v16Q

For SX3 around 21 1/2":

https://share.icloud.com/photos/05vurk-xdar-za8t-N0SI6M1w

Ketan at ARC

Edited By Ketan Swali on 27/10/2019 15:36:55

Edited By Ketan Swali on 27/10/2019 15:38:11

[Author]

Posts