Carvewright may be missing out

[liquidguitars]

Hi Steve,

And, on the same test pattern, try to drill a hole .250" diameter at any depth you choose.
Dosen't matter, 1.121 or 1.123 the holes will come out oblong and angled.

I think you need to adjust your CW, Thats your belts worn or slipping. I have drilled into a 3/16 wood dowl head with
the 1/8 cut bit indexing on my sled spaning over 25", and 1/32 of the dowl outside remained. dead on.

Might not matter on a git fiddle or rosette, but when you try to place some basically precision geometry on a project, it's not gonna happen; yet anyway.

yea it matters!! You can fix your CW to drill a lot better shown in your photo without the software upgrade...

Ask Chris or TC, they confirmed it yesterday on their own machines.

Not sure, confirmed what? that its software or your hardware as I am getting good drillouts on my end.
LG

[phoenix02]

The issue isn't just software. I think they don't make it a pro level machine because it can't handle it. How many of you are using the carvewright 8 hours a day, 5 days a week? I bet not too many. It doesn't have the build quality for that, or the reliability to do it for very long. It was never made as a professional quality machine.

It targets a market sector- enthusiasts- but other than that, it can't compete. The other big problem, other than software is speed. It's too slow to be used professionally, day in and day out. The errors are too dodgy- Even if you use a piece of MDF to do a test cut, then step up to something better, even figured cherry and maple in the $5-10+/ bf range, that final wood has a good chance of erroring out and being ruined. Sure, if you're an enthusiast that plays with this as a hobby, you can afford the loss, but if you're doing serious work with high end figured woods- think high figured sapele at $30/bf, etc- it adds up quickly to a major loss. Doing a bookmatch, over 14", two pieces that need to be carved? One side gets ruined and it's all trash.

Down time is also a major issue when you're relying on a machine. There is an obvious difference in quality and usability when you look at the CW compared to real CNCs. It's not just the CNC nomer on the nameplate that you're paying for.

-Michael

[pkunk]

The issue isn't just software. I think they don't make it a pro level machine because it can't handle it. How many of you are using the carvewright 8 hours a day, 5 days a week? I bet not too many. It doesn't have the build quality for that, or the reliability to do it for very long. It was never made as a professional quality machine.

It targets a market sector- enthusiasts- but other than that, it can't compete. The other big problem, other than software is speed. It's too slow to be used professionally, day in and day out. The errors are too dodgy- Even if you use a piece of MDF to do a test cut, then step up to something better, even figured cherry and maple in the $5-10+/ bf range, that final wood has a good chance of erroring out and being ruined. Sure, if you're an enthusiast that plays with this as a hobby, you can afford the loss, but if you're doing serious work with high end figured woods- think high figured sapele at $30/bf, etc- it adds up quickly to a major loss. Doing a bookmatch, over 14", two pieces that need to be carved? One side gets ruined and it's all trash.

Down time is also a major issue when you're relying on a machine. There is an obvious difference in quality and usability when you look at the CW compared to real CNCs. It's not just the CNC nomer on the nameplate that you're paying for.

-Michael

So what's your point, Michael? LHR marketed this as a hobby level machine and says in all their literature & advertising that it's not for comercial use. You have a problem with that?

[cabnet636]

i want the "pro" per se software for use in a commercial application with a full blown stepper/serve motor gecko driven 600inch per minute machine.

the carvewright for what it is is right on!!

cabnet

[Gman_Ind]

The designer software is a polar opposite from conventional CNC G code writing software. It is more akin to a printer than a CNC router.
I have used a wide range of design software. As a job 8 hrs, 5 days a week I used mostly Intergraph CAD with raster overlay. They were unique with this product* at the time. Wow what a BIG difference from the AutoCad I learned in school, but a big part was similar to regular cad. The true cad used vector geometry to define shapes, parts, text even the title block. The unique trick Intergraph did was to incorporate raster or scanned (8bit data) as an integrated layer. the scanned image could be edited much like windows paint bitmap, except it had better and more specific controls to rotate and scale the image precisely. So the image could be used as part of the part drawing.
My point is G code writing software uses vector only CAD data.
LHR found away to use grey scale image (raster) data to define 3d space. and added limited vector editing ability.
The class of products is so different it would be hard to imagine a common format to base a conversion on. The end result is similar but achieved by vastly different means.
Just my opinion based on what I have seen.
*I was a cad detailer for Keeler Hardware '91-'97 we made thousands of cabinet pulls, knobs, hinges, escutcheons, brackets, keyholes and any other hardware used by the North American furniture industry. I had the task of making X drawings from designer sketchs for quotation and sample inventoy and then convert a fraction of those into production blue prints if we got the job. When I first started at the job we used a proprietary software that was custom written for our use.
I now support Catia, Solid works, Surfcam, MasterCAm, Wright mini mill/mini lathe. I claim no expertise with all or any of these programs but I am familiar.
I have written G code by hand, and have re-written a post processor for a specific machine. Neither of which I care to do ever again.

[phoenix02]

Pkunk-

That's exactly my point. I was saying that's why the software is dumbed down and made for a consumer. The original question was why the software could not be more advanced. My reply was the reason- the machine was never made for it. I think that with some major revisions, upgrades and higher quality- more QC- it could possibly be a pro level machine. The friction belt makes it hard for a pro to take it seriously, but it could be done, IF LHR wanted to enter that market segment. Right now they have a monolopy on the low end.

As an aside, I do wish, for that fact, that they had better quality control so their return rate wasn't so high- the people that are just starting out COULD be using this as a stepping stone in to a bigger and better unit; instead, a good lot of them are probably getting frustrated, returning it and think their experience would be the same with any other CNC.

-Michael

[pkunk]

Michael, that's one of the drawbacks of developing a machine for the masses, built to the dollar in China instead of high end here in the US of A. Most of my shop tools are Grizzly tools and the early ones (1990) were nowhere near the quality as the tools I buy from them now. I do still have my origonal tablesaw that's only needed new arbor bearings.

[liquidguitars]

Go Rockwell international! I am looking for a new long bed sander and the Griz could be the thing...

LG

[phoenix02]

Oh, good Lord, no! Not Rockwell International- anything but them! Well... they're better than anything made since, for the most part...

If you want Delta, go with Delta/Rockwell, little r, or before. Delta was fully absorbed into Rockwell when they were re badged Rockwell International, around 1973. From then until the Pentair buyout of 1983, Rockwell International cut costs anywhere they could and produced inferior tools to the older stuff. Sure, usable, not awful at all, but generally regarded as not quite as good as the older stuff. Thinner sheet metal, lower grade alloys, the start of the plastic era... little things.

On the other hand, things are just getting worse... Unisaws being made offshore, plastic motor covers, inferior motors... It's the name of the game for the modern, money grubbing corporate America! Make it offshore, cheaper, and take jobs away from American workers so that in the end, they can't afford the product anyway.

LG- Do you mean a long belt (wide belt) sander? Or are we talking an edge sander... one has a long belt, the other a long bed... I've just never heard of a long bed sander! If it's a wide belt you want, if you can swing the cash, get an older timesaver. There's a few brands out there that you can find for about the same price of a new offshore unit. Wide belt sanders have been made and used for about 100 years... Something I've learned and keep on learning- buy quality and you'll never be let down.

-Michael

[Digitalwoodshop]

Can you imagine if the designers took the Compucarve Concept and made it a Gantry Style machine 50 inches wide. Same Y and Z but longer and the X a beefed up drive to move the weight of the gantry. No more Sand Paper Belts... Vacuum Tables with Zones.....

Able to put a full sheet of plywood on the machine. Not trying to compete with the Shop Bot industrial units but a HOBBY unit.... Same Software.... It would just give you the capability to do bigger signs and SCANS in a HOBBY MARKET..... Same 1/16 and 1/8 inch bits....

AL