CAD CAM EDM DRO - Yahoo Group Archive

Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Rong Fu RF-45 versus Birmingham YRF-45

Posted by Jon Elson
on 2003-07-25 10:16:11 UTC
turbulatordude wrote:

>every time the R8 vs the MT discussion come up, there is no clear
>winner.
>
>
>
Well, I started off with a Bridgeport M head mill, with the B&S #7
spindle taper. It was a TOTAL PAIN! Although there were some
spindle flexibility issues that also bothered me, the trouble of
adapting all sorts of tooling to that spindle were a substantial
reason for upgrading to R-8. I have stub milling arbors, boring
heads, fly cutters, a wide range of end mill holders (I rarely use
collets anymore) several Jacob's chuck arbors, etc. that all work
much better with a direct arbor, rather than mounting everything
with straight shanks held in collets.

I am a big believer in the R-8 taper as the universal spindle for
smaller milling machines. Thus is entirely due to the wide
availability of arbors, etc. in this taper.

Jon

Discussion Thread

sinecyan 2003-07-24 23:56:02 UTC Rong Fu RF-45 versus Birmingham YRF-45 David A. Frantz 2003-07-25 02:34:00 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Rong Fu RF-45 versus Birmingham YRF-45 Torsten 2003-07-25 03:35:24 UTC Re: Rong Fu RF-45 versus Birmingham YRF-45 turbulatordude 2003-07-25 07:39:47 UTC Re: Rong Fu RF-45 versus Birmingham YRF-45 Jon Elson 2003-07-25 10:08:28 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Rong Fu RF-45 versus Birmingham YRF-45 Jon Elson 2003-07-25 10:16:11 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Rong Fu RF-45 versus Birmingham YRF-45 dro_guy 2003-07-25 21:31:29 UTC Re: Rong Fu RF-45 versus Birmingham YRF-45