A rude reminder of the recent past

[hess]

I have 3 units 2 CC and 1 CW the newest one is band new with one hr o it and I had never changed over the QC to the Rock yet as I was just using it for scanin

Well yesterday I had the other 2 that are eq with the rocks working when a bud who we had been working a crave for 3 days came over so thought heck just need to add a 30 min smal carve to completed it so use the new one with the QCs. Yep you guessed problems

the unit was clean and lubed the spindle has never been off the bit went in just like up town and about 1 min into the crave on a very nice piece of Cherry I hear this old familiar sound buy the time I could reach the unit the sinpdile was well on the way to the trash but worst then that 3 day of work and wood are gone.
Im very Glad CE decided to go with a unit set up like the rock and looks like they got it right.
It is sad they did not see fit to recall what was left out there and get rid of those sucky QC.
Anyone says user error suck on your socks as I have been down this road for over 3 years, the red lines were in line this time the spindle came off

So an FYI to any of you newbie running the QC units chuck those QCs before you live to regret it. When I 1st started with CW My 1it unit tossed a bit out into a stud less than 1 foot from my 10 year old GD head course most of the alders and cw here yell UE, UE but them within 2 year CW themselves changed the units

Now to CW out there before you get your shorts in a wad I thank you for stepping up there and getting it right thus allowing us to has a safe and reliable unit like we have now but the whole QC thing still sucks

[Frederick_P]

Too bad they didn't reward Ron Justice for his excellent work in saving so many users from dumping their machine in the trash bin. They should have licensed the Rock and supplied them with every new machine, offered them to existing customers who had the QC at cost and owned up to their design blunder. Instead, they took Ron's innovation, made a version of their own and ensured that it was proprietary so it would be difficult to use third party bits. Ron may have saved their butts by providing a solution that, if left unsolved, could have completely destroyed the credibility of the machine. Instead they blamed their customers for "user error" and told Ron to stick it. I think that will also be remembered for a long time.

[liquidguitars]

Too bad they didn't reward Ron Justice for his excellent work in saving so many users from dumping their machine in the trash bin.

I had three machines at the time very true..

Anyone says user error suck on your socks as I have been down this road for over 3 years, the red lines were in line this time the spindle came off

So true! one of my first calls to LHR was telling them about the QC..

[DurhamDev]

Ok, as I read through, I find I don't know as much as I'd like to, so I figure this would be the perfect thread in which to have a couple of questions answered... I've watched the installation video for the Rock Chuck, and have to say I'm impressed. All things considered, for $149, you seem to get a quality product and almost everything you need to replace the QC (that's the "quick chuck", right?)...

I have a "B" model, I believe, and I actually was given a spare (brand new) collet and band that just looks like a replacement QC. Given what I've read above, I think I'm pretty anxious to replace what I have with a Rock Chuck or CarveTight. If I go Rock Chuck, I would probably go with the 1/2" model, and probably add the three additional sleeves so that I can use any size bit. When I read up on the different collet adapters for the CarveTight, are they essentially the same as the sleeves for the Rock Chuck?

I guess it all boils down to this: Given the choice, what benefit does the Rock Chuck give over the CarveTight?

[SteveEJ]

Retrofitting older units with the QC, Using bits that are not pressed into bit holders for the CT, not having to buy all your bits from one source. Just off the top of my head. I am sure someone will come up with some cons but I have the Rock and my issues mostly went away after I installed it. JMHO

[DurhamDev]

Using bits that are not pressed into bit holders for the CT, not having to buy all your bits from one source.

...ah, good call. Question - I don't have the bits readily available, and I can't say that I have the answer off the top of my head. I was provided a pretty large set of bits, and all of them are in the existing 1/2" or 1/4" bit adapters (of which I think I also have four or five extras)... Do they hold the bit in place with an Allen screw or something? (If not, how do they hold the bit in?)

[liquidguitars]

I guess it all boils down to this: Given the choice, what benefit does the Rock Chuck give over the CarveTight?

As far as I know their about the same.

[hess]

...ah, good call. Question - I don't have the bits readily available, and I can't say that I have the answer off the top of my head. I was provided a pretty large set of bits, and all of them are in the existing 1/2" or 1/4" bit adapters (of which I think I also have four or five extras)... Do they hold the bit in place with an Allen screw or something? (If not, how do they hold the bit in?)

Out of all those router bit you will use maybe 3 unless you are really into diffent stuff but most patterns call for 1 to 3 of the same bits.
The carve bit and cutting bits are the main work horse. the Rock will handle both all them with the sleeves.

The screw up was me because I have a rock as well as a another chuck made buy the maker of another chuck , Mark sell them they work well cost about the same as a rock
I did not want to take the time to break the spindle lose witch in the past could be a hoot this time it saved me the hassle as it came off on its own. this caused the board to be ruin which was about 30 buck of Cherry and today when cooled enough to be around the unit without throwing it in the trash im now out a bit also. What did I learn? Dont trust those units with the QC they will cause you problem big and small. My 1st unit lost a bit missing my GD by a foot they vibration caused many issues that are now not problems with the CT but Ron and the the maker Mark is selling were the main reason for CW changing the units.
I also agree it would have been great to see CW stand up and retrofit all the old units even if they asked for the cost back I would have been in
but they did like Steve pointed out and instead of using what had been proven to work and allow us the ability to used other bit makers they felt the need to push users into what we currently have most of us that have the Rock will never need to change out. my unit running them both have well over 400 hrs an d not one hic up

I have to say that the Flax we new users got back then as everything being our error got real old, most of them are still here now and provide most of the help and one that I respect very much provide the POMs but as of the coming out of the new CT and seeing what CW did with it well I droped all my memberships with the POMs and the CC and any thing CW was charging for. What do I miss ? The POM as Mike is great but because they are sold thought CW I will not buy them. until the day CW have the brass balls to admit most of that user error was really Quality Control from a company that was having growing pains Users got dumped on, Mods run wild with theaths and banding and deleted post, lots of problems That have been corrected EXCEPT an apology from CW to us who had suffed all the problems and wasted all that $$ on what they said was user error. That my rant
Now we will see if our Mods are indeed as good as I think they now are. If not this will get pulled or locked have a good day all

[rjustice]

Thanks for the kind words about the Rock Chuck system guys... I really do appreciate it

[lawrence]

Too bad they didn't reward Ron Justice for his excellent work in saving so many users from dumping their machine in the trash bin. They should have licensed the Rock and supplied them with every new machine, offered them to existing customers who had the QC at cost and owned up to their design blunder. Instead, they took Ron's innovation, made a version of their own and ensured that it was proprietary so it would be difficult to use third party bits. Ron may have saved their butts by providing a solution that, if left unsolved, could have completely destroyed the credibility of the machine. Instead they blamed their customers for "user error" and told Ron to stick it. I think that will also be remembered for a long time.

+1 and well said

Lawrence