Is 2.0 worth the price?

[TerryT]

As for your Rock Chuck's not working because of new features that are being added to the software, how is that LHR's fault?

I certainly don't want to start a war, but I have fought them before when necessary. With all due respect, How is it LHR's fault that APPLE puts out a OS that is full of pitfalls?
I think you are the one that said "good luck getting Apple to fix YOUR problems." Seems to me that it is a problem with the apple operating system and the way it handles idle aps?.?. There are many software developers that don't even bother trying to have a mac version of their software.

I guess everyone has an opinion and you know what they say about that. LOL

Again, no animostity here, just curious about your comments as they seem contradictory.

[gapdev]

Terry,

Any programmer that is truly serious about developing programs for multiple systems (Windows - Mac - Linux), will have those systems available for testing on. When I was writing Communications Software (back before the Internet), I had DOS boxes, Windows 98 Boxes, and Windows XP boxes. My software was tested and confirmed to work on all the various systems that I supported.

If LHR claims to have a Mac version of their software, then I expect that version to work. If they don't support Mavericks, they should say so, BEFORE I spend a ton of money buying their upgrades, long bits, and everything else that is version 2 related. It is the developer's job, NOT MINE, to make sure his software works on the platform he/she claims to support.

It surely IS NOT Apple's fault that Designer stopped working, especially since LHR doesn't even have a Mavericks development system.

Now granted, LHR is not a normal Software Developer. But, one of the reasons I purchased the Carvewright is because it has a Mac version of the software. I expect the software to work with my Mac. My Mac should NOT have to adjust to work with their software.

Kenny

[gapdev]

[QUOTE=tierman;217750]

it appears to me that the latest upgrade is limiting my use of my machine by making the machine bit and chuck specific.

I'll bet that wasn't intentional. Since they don't have a Rock Chuck modified machine, I'm guessing that it never occurred to them that they might cause problems with Rock machines.

Kenny

[SteveEJ]

LHR.. Any responses to the bit and Rock Chuck questions? I am sure I am not the only one that are wondering if the long bits and software (2.004) are a good option for us with the Rock. I would really want to do deep carving with the machine and new software (I now have the money for it in my piggy bank) but stopped when I read about the issues. Cannot the firmware be made to work with both? I really don't care if it is slower finding the bit plate.

Thanks,

[TerryT]

But, one of the reasons I purchased the Carvewright is because it has a Mac version of the software. I expect the software to work with my Mac. My Mac should NOT have to adjust to work with their software.

Kenny

Kenny, thanks for the response. I appreciate your point of view. Now a question for LHR. Do you have beta testers on the Mac side? If not, I think there are some here that would volunteer. If so, what happened?

[gsdsj]

LHR.. Any responses to the bit and Rock Chuck questions? I am sure I am not the only one that are wondering if the long bits and software (2.004) are a good option for us with the Rock. I would really want to do deep carving with the machine and new software (I now have the money for it in my piggy bank) but stopped when I read about the issues. Cannot the firmware be made to work with both? I really don't care if it is slower finding the bit plate.

Thanks,

I with Steve, as I have already purchased 2.004 around Thanksgiving. There was no mention of it would only work with the CT in the description of 2.004 or the FAQs. As for the Maverick thing, I'm glad it got resolved. I own 2 CWs, both with the Rock and need to decide what to do next. An honest answer would be nice. Greg

[gapdev]

If I still owned my Rock Chuck, I would go with Bergerud's solution to modifying the Long Bits. Heating them up and adjusting them, along with some Loctite 640 Sleeve Retainer, there should no problem modifying the bits to work with the Rock.

I always got Z Errors with my Rock. Whenever I got them I knew I didn't put the bit in far enough. Adjust the Bit to the proper height and the Z errors went away. So, you guys with the Rock already have to be careful with your bits, why should the long bit be any different?

What would be great is knowing where to buy those bits without the Carve Tight adapters and all would be hunky dory!

Kenny

[gsdsj]

If I still owned my Rock Chuck, I would go with Bergerud's solution to modifying the Long Bits. Heating them up and adjusting them, along with some Loctite 640 Sleeve Retainer, there should no problem modifying the bits to work with the Rock.






What would be great is knowing where to buy those bits without the Carve Tight adapters and all would be hunky dory!

Kenny

I have never had any problems with the Rock, all my bits have functioned properly thru 1.87. As soon as I installed 2.0 the bits zoomed across the rail and flew down deeply into the bit plate. It's not just the long bits, don't own any, it's the standard bits, tried it twice and not willing to take the chance of bending the bit plate anymore. Never an issue before, don't think the CT users need to adjust their bits, why should I? Greg

[gsdsj]

And by "a great many", you mean the 3 maybe 4 vocal forum members on this thread.

I am sure there members like me that lurk in the background for info on this forum, read several times a day sucking up as much info as I can. Rarely post 70 something posts
since 2008. So how many of us quiet members own a Rock, how about a poll to find out. Greg

[bergerud]

LHR.. Any responses to the bit and Rock Chuck questions? I am sure I am not the only one that are wondering if the long bits and software (2.004) are a good option for us with the Rock. I would really want to do deep carving with the machine and new software (I now have the money for it in my piggy bank) but stopped when I read about the issues. Cannot the firmware be made to work with both? I really don't care if it is slower finding the bit plate.

Thanks,

LHR has designed the deep carving software and bits for the CT. The bits only come with the CT adapters. These deep bits are impossible to use with the QC or Rock as they are with the installed CT adapters. If put into a 1/2" Rock or 1/2" QC adapter, these long bits will not get above the bit plate. The bits have been made as long as they can possibility be and just get above the bit plate with the CT. (In case you do not know, the CarveTight chuck is almost 1/2" higher than the Rock and the QC and so bits install almost 1/2" higher in the CT. )

This is not an insurmountable problem for the Rock or daring QC user. The adapters on the deep bits just have to be moved or removed. This is easily done with a propane torch.

If you have a 1/2" Rock, all you have to do is heat the adapter and move it down the bit shank 3/8 or 1/2 of an inch. (Note that this procedure also solves the 1/8" cutting bit problem Rock users have had ever since the CT adapters came out.)

If you have a 1/4" Rock, all you have to do is heat the adapter and take it off. Put a collar on the bit so it clears the bit plate by 1/8" and away you go.

If you have a QC, you may still be able to deep carve but you will have to be very careful. Either you have to take off the CT adapter and Loctite the bit into a 1/4" QC adapter, or you have to move the CT adapter down the bit like the 1/2" Rock user and Loctite that into a 1/2" QC adapter. If, however, your QC wobbles or does not hold the QC adapters well, I do not think you should even try the deep carving. Having an $80 bit come out of the QC, rip through your belt, and break, will not make for a good day!

Another note about the new 2.004 bit finding procedure. The procedure has been made more time efficient by having the truck move faster toward the bit plate until it gets near where it expects the bit to touch. All of the standard CW bit lengths are assumed in the procedure. If you have a CT with standard CW bits, all will be well. If, however, you have a non standard bit which is longer than the software expects, it can get slammed into the bit plate causing a z stall. This is what some of the Rock users have experienced. It is not the end of your world! You are using CT adapter bits in your Rock and they are 1/2" too long. Get out the propane torch and move the adapters.

I believe that these bit "length windows" are going to be relaxed in the next release. Maybe an extra 1/2" of grace. (This, I think is for the Rock users who use CT bits.)