[distracted]

I am looking to buy a CNC mill to make plastic injection molds (up to 12" x 12") and production machining of small machine parts. Budget is around 10k. I also want to make some small turned parts and thought adding a lathe head (like Sturges Turning Head™ Spindle) to the mill to do the few parts I need?
Does anyone have a recommendation on what I should buy? New / Used? Make/Model? What should I stay away from? Is a lathe head a good idea?
I consider Tormach, Industrial Hobbies, but I assume there are other good one out there.
Thanks in advance!

[wizard]

I am looking to buy a CNC mill to make plastic injection molds (up to 12" x 12") and production machining of small machine parts.

12 x 12 isn't exactly small you need a fairly big ill to cover such a large block.

Budget is around 10k.

You are in used mill territory here. To cover what you want a minimal budget would be 50K.

I also want to make some small turned parts and thought adding a lathe head (like Sturges Turning Head™ Spindle) to the mill to do the few parts I need?

I'm not convinced it is worthwhile. Further really small parts can be chucked in R8 collets and turned that way.

Does anyone have a recommendation on what I should buy?

I don't think you have a chance in hell of finding a new mill for 10K that will cover what you need. Assuming 12 x 12 is firm you will need a y axis that can exceed that by at least a coule of inches.

New / Used?

Used but you need to watch out here, the mill could very well have a control that is too old and sufferes from a lack of memory for mold making.

Make/Model? What should I stay away from? Is a lathe head a good idea?

Personally I think the lathe head is a waste of time.

I consider Tormach, Industrial Hobbies, but I assume there are other good one out there.
Thanks in advance!

If you are willing to limit your mold size the above machines might work though I wouldn't call either one of them mold making machines. It really depends upon the accuracy you seek. Well that and the fact that they are rather small mills to work on large injection mold bases.

[distracted]

Thanks for your comments Wizard. The 12x12 is on the outside of the molds I want to make. Most will be in the 6 x 6 size range. They would only be for making small parts for the most part.
Good comment on chucking in the R8 collet for turning. That would work perfectly for the parts I want to make.
I am aware that the older cnc controllers can be a problem for running large programs, especially since many of the G-code generators do not produce very efficient code.

[wizard]

Thanks for your comments Wizard. The 12x12 is on the outside of the molds I want to make. Most will be in the 6 x 6 size range. They would only be for making small parts for the most part.

That in a nut shell is the problem, if you really want to do those large molds then you need a machine that is in a whole different class. If the budget doesn't allow for that sort of machine then you need to consider farming out the big work.

Good comment on chucking in the R8 collet for turning. That would work perfectly for the parts I want to make.

It is a half assed approach that make do with what you have. It is far from perfect.

I am aware that the older cnc controllers can be a problem for running large programs, especially since many of the G-code generators do not produce very efficient code.

Fortunately for the adventurist you can do a PC upgrade on most machines.

[mmoe]

As wizard has stated, you may be best of farming the work out. Mold making of small parts is perhaps the most demanding task you can tackle since finish quality generally has to be absolutely top notch. I think you will have a difficult time finding a machine for under 10k that can produce the necessary finish quality. This is why it costs so much to have a mold made.

If you don't need high quality molds or they aren't detailed at all, then you may be fine with a machine in that range. It would probably be a used CNC bridgeport style mill, which I often see with older controller for under 10k (often closer to 5k). If you shop well, you could leave yourself enough room to upgrade the controller to something new. I've spent about $2500 upgrading my CNC router with a CS Labs CSMIO IP-A controller which runs on Mach 3, and I'm including all the costs other than my time in that. That would include the controller ($750), brand new relays ($100) wire (about $500 worth, you'd use less on a mill), tons of In/Out modules ($500 and probably won't need on mill), Mach 3 softwared ($150), PC to run machine ($400) and misc. other stuff such as crimp on connectors, etc. ($100). If I were to retrofit a basic mill, I think it cold be done for closer to $1500 so long as you can reuse the original motors (as I did on my router). New motors would add another $1000-$1500 if needed.

If you are willing to do a retrofit yourself and you can find a mill with a bad controller, you can probably buy it for under $5000 easily. The problem there is just that there aren't always machines like that available, so patience is key. Keep in mind that you'll also need software to generate the programs, which will run anywhere from $250 to $10,000 or more by itself. Plus you need CAD software to draw or model your parts in, which can also run anywhere from $35 to $7500 depending on what you choose.

I would just skip the lathe idea myself, but you could add a rotary axis later when you've figured out what you actually want it to do and have also learned the basics of working with these machines. Programming a 4 axis machine requires both an investment in software that is higher than 3 axis machines, plus more knowledge of using the software and setting up the machine for the job. I'd just start by leaning to run it as a 3 axis machine first, then add on later if you're still inclined to do so.

I don't know how much room you have for a machine, but another thing to keep in mind is that the bigger and older the broken machine is (as in bad controller), the cheaper it usually is sold for. If you have a lot of room, you may be able to find a broken down machining center for the price of scrap metal. I've even seen these machines virtually given away depending on the circumstances simply because they cost too much to transport if you have to hire it out. These owners have also probably been quoted $20k-30k for a retrofit, so they just aren't interested in fixing the machine either. If you are savy and can handle machinery, it's not too expensive to hire a local guy with a big truck, have an appropriately sized forklift delivered from a rental house to both ends of the move and haul it off yourself. I've done this and what a rigger would charge $5000 to do will be closer to $1500-2000 doing it yourself. If the machine was $1000-2000, it could be worth it. Most guys selling these machines know what they spent having it dropped of, and just want the machine out of their way. In some cases, a shop that is moving or lost it's lease will be ideal because they have a time limit as to when they need to get rid of the machine. If they don't get rid of it in time, they have to pay to move it and will avoid that at all cost (not paying $5000 to move something by giving it away is basically the same as selling it for $5000 in that case). These large machines do weight 15,000lbs, and take up quite a large footprint. On the plus side, they probably can hold the tolerances needed for decent mold work. My latest machine falls somewhat into this category, where I spend $3000 on the machine, which weighs about 8000lbs and another $800 to get it home by doing it myself ($600 forklift rental including delivery and $200 to hire a guy with a trailer off craigslist). After the $2500 retrofit, the machine works as well as it did when new. A similarly built machine today would run $125k and up, so not a bad investment of $6200 and my time.

[acannell]

uhh..i beg to differ guys..seems like some people on here really NEED it to be difficult to get a quality used mill. not sure why that is.

seems like there is also an obsession with converting things to mach 3. original controls were designed for the machine to make parts. remember, at some point, even that 25 year old machine from the 80's was on a trade show floor being shown off doing the latest and greatest. so if it can handle your file size and run blocks at the rate you need, id consider using the original control. if it has a tape input only or runs blocks at 10 per second max and you need to do 200 per second max, you might look into some kind of upgrade, which may or may not involve a conversion to mach 3. remember these older machines were still in shops a decade after they were bought, and companies came out with upgrades to allow tape machines to use serial ports, or floppy drives, or whatever was the latest greatest. so youve got to do your research on individual machines and figure out how you can get from point A to point B (or should I say JOG from point a to point b..get it? oh man) in that particular case.

new tormach cnc mills are less than $10k

there is a banner ad at the top of this forum showing an IH mill for $12k

very nice condition VMC's from the 90's can be found in the teen-ks..but thats above your budget

if you have high mold finish requirements you can get there via post machining processes like media blasting or polishing.

full-size used VMC's on ebay that are up and running go for about $6k at the low end (leadwell from 1991). add in $3k for any minor repairs, tool holders, rigging, shipping, and a rotary phase converter if you dont have 3 phase power.

if you can be patient and are a resourceful guy who can take on possibly a broken circuit board or some other minor mechanical repairs, you can score. i just got a Dyna myte 2900 for $2k. It was a garage find on craigslist near me, so shipping was $150 on a trailer (also craigslist lol). Im only in about $100 in repairs (missing spindle amp). The ballscrews and iron are good so I think I scored.

heres one i almost bought..

$4k hurco BMC 20 on ebay...very nice condition, needed a circuit board. owner was very cooperative with phone discussions. but it was very far away and i didnt want to spend that much. Hurco Three Axis CNC BMC 20 Machining Center | eBay

[mmoe]

It seemed more to me like your example of the Hurco proved my point. Big machine, broken machine, less than $5000. I think that is point for point exactly what I suggested the OP look for. Throw a CS Labs CSMIO IP-A in there and it would be as capable as any new machine and the retrofit could be done in a week (40 hours of actual work or less) by a reasonably competent person that's never done it before. Move it yourself and the total cost is around $6500 sitting in your shop ready to go unless there is something more wrong with such as the motors/bearings, etc.

You'd still need CAD and CAM software, but you get pretty capable software for around $1000-$1500 total. I'd recommend Cubify Sherline edition ($250) or Viacad 2d/3d V8 ($35) for CAD and I think Bobcad V25 offers one of the best values in CAM software (you can upgrade to different packages, run a lathe, etc. where most software in the same price range is less flexible). If you're a good negotiator, you can get a pretty well featured Bobcad Mill Standard package for the same price as their "Express" package. I'd recommend that you try to get a good price (around $1000) on their Mill Pro version, which has a few very useful additional tool paths. You may even get them to throw in the Lathe component at that price. Also, if you a laptop, you may be able to ask for a second license thrown in.

acannell,
If you regularly deal with older machines, you really should look into the CS Labs products. They are truly industrial quality controllers that work beautifully with large machinery via ethernet connection to the host PC, and the pricing is very good. They will be compatible with the upcoming Mach 4, which will be extremely fast compared to Mach 3 and capable of running up to 6 individual controllers simultaneously from the same software (don't ask me how, I have no idea). If I understand it correctly, that would mean that if you have six 6 axis controllers on 6 different machines, you could operate up to 36 different axis in 6 different coordinate systems from one computer simultaneously. Over the last year, products have been developed that have gone well over the line between hobbyist and industrial, and the CS Labs products aren't the only ones. It is worthwhile to start paying attention to where Mach is headed, as there will be opportunities to retrofit older machines as a service, and the benefits to the end user is quite tangible in terms of operating speeds (cycle times) and customization of the machine. Imagine having a shop with Haas, Fadal, and Hardinge equipment where every one has the same interface. It would be a much more productive environment since you would only need to train yourself or employees to operate one type of controller. Mach 3 is a bit unrefined and still works quite well, but I think that Mach 4 is likely going to be a huge leap.

[acannell]

36 different axis in 6 coordinate systems? sounds like more of the "craze". i.e. cnc machines being ends-in-themselves. if i bought that hurco id replace the axis PCB and have a working CNC machine that I can upload gcode to, and be done with it. why would I want to start replacing hurco's carefully designed control system? its like buying a used car and replacing the ECU to be a modern one because it has surface mount components and uses a faster CAN bus than OBD.

exactly what is the tangible benefit in cycle times going to mach 3 from a control designed in the 80's or 90's? blocks per second or maximum program size, perhaps, but even controls in the 90's have program sizes in the megabytes, or ways to feed infinitely long files through the serial port, and could execute 100's or 1000's of blocks per second.

isnt this really just a fascination with specifications and capabilities? would anyone really buy a new haas and replace the control with mach 3?

It seemed more to me like your example of the Hurco proved my point. Big machine, broken machine, less than $5000. I think that is point for point exactly what I suggested the OP look for. Throw a CS Labs CSMIO IP-A in there and it would be as capable as any new machine and the retrofit could be done in a week (40 hours of actual work or less) by a reasonably competent person that's never done it before. Move it yourself and the total cost is around $6500 sitting in your shop ready to go unless there is something more wrong with such as the motors/bearings, etc.

You'd still need CAD and CAM software, but you get pretty capable software for around $1000-$1500 total. I'd recommend Cubify Sherline edition ($250) or Viacad 2d/3d V8 ($35) for CAD and I think Bobcad V25 offers one of the best values in CAM software (you can upgrade to different packages, run a lathe, etc. where most software in the same price range is less flexible). If you're a good negotiator, you can get a pretty well featured Bobcad Mill Standard package for the same price as their "Express" package. I'd recommend that you try to get a good price (around $1000) on their Mill Pro version, which has a few very useful additional tool paths. You may even get them to throw in the Lathe component at that price. Also, if you a laptop, you may be able to ask for a second license thrown in.

acannell,
If you regularly deal with older machines, you really should look into the CS Labs products. They are truly industrial quality controllers that work beautifully with large machinery via ethernet connection to the host PC, and the pricing is very good. They will be compatible with the upcoming Mach 4, which will be extremely fast compared to Mach 3 and capable of running up to 6 individual controllers simultaneously from the same software (don't ask me how, I have no idea). If I understand it correctly, that would mean that if you have six 6 axis controllers on 6 different machines, you could operate up to 36 different axis in 6 different coordinate systems from one computer simultaneously. Over the last year, products have been developed that have gone well over the line between hobbyist and industrial, and the CS Labs products aren't the only ones. It is worthwhile to start paying attention to where Mach is headed, as there will be opportunities to retrofit older machines as a service, and the benefits to the end user is quite tangible in terms of operating speeds (cycle times) and customization of the machine. Imagine having a shop with Haas, Fadal, and Hardinge equipment where every one has the same interface. It would be a much more productive environment since you would only need to train yourself or employees to operate one type of controller. Mach 3 is a bit unrefined and still works quite well, but I think that Mach 4 is likely going to be a huge leap.

[wizard]

36 different axis in 6 coordinate systems? sounds like more of the "craze". i.e. cnc machines being ends-in-themselves.

There is much more to the CNC world than four axis machining steel. We have a CNC controller running six axis at work on a machine that never does anything maching wise. In fact it is a packaging machIne with a programming language that is largely G-Code. The more axis of control you have the further you can expand your control horizons.

if i bought that hurco id replace the axis PCB and have a working CNC machine that I can upload gcode to, and be done with it.

That is great if you can get away with it. Sometimes it just makes sense to control your capital outlays. In this case though the budget is such that I really think he will have to go very low end or to a machine requiring significant repair, thus the serious need to consider PC based control. Further mold making covers a very wide array of possibilities, in the long run all that RAM on a PC based controller can be a significant advantage over aging hardware.

Given a choice between a machine with a proprietary controller and one that is PC based I'd go for the PC based system if it can get the job dome.

why would I want to start replacing hurco's carefully designed control system?

1. Technology changes.
2. Accessibility
3. Repairability
4. Local functionality

Even if we assume a Hurco control, is carefully designed there is a vast gulf technology wise between a 1980's controller and something built today. Back in the day, when I had whole department of CNC lathes to maintain, we upgrade the controls several times before the hardware was retired. Back then the execution speed of the interpreters really benefited from hardware upgrades but things changed technology wise also. For one we got away from sine wave encoders and the tuning involved in keeping them running.

its like buying a used car and replacing the ECU to be a modern one because it has surface mount components and uses a faster CAN bus than OBD.

Not at all! You would do an upgrade to just feel good, that would be silly. You do it to realize real benefits suitable for the work you are doing.

exactly what is the tangible benefit in cycle times going to mach 3 from a control designed in the 80's or 90's? blocks per second or maximum program size, perhaps, but even controls in the 90's have program sizes in the megabytes, or ways to feed infinitely long files through the serial port, and could execute 100's or 1000's of blocks per second.

This the individual has to evaluate at the time the equipment is purchased. However one big benefit of getting away from proprietary controllers is cost over a machines life span

isnt this really just a fascination with specifications and capabilities? would anyone really buy a new haas and replace the control with mach 3?

Most likely not, but come on this isn't what we are talking about here. We are talking about buying a used mill at a very low price point, thus either old or broken, and reconditioning it to the point it is suitable for mold making.

As to the original posters quest, I still think it makes sense to farm out the production of the large molds to a shop setup to do this sort of work. This then makes working with the stated budget a lot easier. In a nut shell this is what the discussion is all about, finding the best fit for a limited budget.

[mmoe]

isnt this really just a fascination with specifications and capabilities? would anyone really buy a new haas and replace the control with mach 3?

Does a new Haas come with a controller from the 80's or 90's? Of course you wouldn't buy a new Haas and replace the controller. You're making arguments that are irrelevant. Again, I have stated that I'd look for an older machine with a bad controller and replace it.

There is no fascination with specifications beyond what is actually useful. The 6 different coordinate system capability only speaks to the overall robust nature that Mach 4 will have. What do you think the application of such a feature is for? Industrial applications where loading machines are in use along side of CNC machinery most likely. That level of sophistication is unusual at any price, yet you'd be looking at software that costs less than most CAM systems. Those specifications point to the direction of Mach, which is clearly not a continuation of serving only hobbyists. That is the indication of the hardware as well, though I'm sure you are still picturing some little break out board that hooks up to the printer port or USB port.

The practical end user benefit to replacing an '80s or 90's controller is that you can accomplish more jobs in less time and honestly with less knowledge. Last I checked, that means that I both save clients money by charging less for each part (less machine time), profit more per part and deliver parts in a more timely fashion. I'm currently bidding a job where I could have never met the price per part needs of the client with the original early 90's controller, even if I could have replaced it. The machine would have simply run too slow unless I was willing to charge a $20/hr shop rate, which I'm not. Also, a 3 1/2 inch floppy doesn't compare with the usability of a USB disk. A USB emulator for an older CNC controller runs as much as the entire replacement controller from CS Labs, so what sense would it make to use an emulator (which also has to have the files parsed into 1.44mb pieces). Drip feeding through RS-232 is also not very fast and there is no comparison between drip feeding a 3d mold file to a old controller and running it right out of memory. I've had it both ways, and there is no comparison. With RS-232 and if the controller can even handle the feedrates of a program I run now, the machine would run, run, pause, run, run, pause. Before you'd get half way through a complicated program, the Mach 3 ethernet controller would have made 3 parts. Plus, the total workflow of going from drawing to finished part is undeniably simpler with a modern controller of any kind than it was with a controller from the 80's or early 90's. For someone who has never had experience operating a CNC, a Mach controller will result in making that first part much sooner than it would happen with an older controller.

A year or two ago, I would not have thought this to be a reasonable route, but a year or two ago there really weren't any ethernet based controllers which is what has changed the game for Mach. You can continue using older controllers and I really don't mind one bit. You have the experience and knowledge necessary to do so. For those who have never used a CNC before, it would be far easier to learn with a newer controller, and especially one that has considerable support from other users the way that Mach does. I have a friend that has owned a couple CNC machines for over 15 years, but had never used either of them because they seemed too complicated, so he hired people that knew what to do with them. After replacing one of the controllers with Mach, he's amazed at how easy it is to use and has really taken to doing the CNC work himself. He also knows it will be very easy to train others in the shop who didn't previously run the machine to operate it, where before they were somewhat at the mercy of the one guy that understood the machines. As far as I know, and I've known him for 15 years, he had never used CAD before, let alone CAM software, but is now cutting jobs on the CNC routinely. The machines were there for 15 years, but for those who don't know them the older controllers are very intimidating and convoluted. There isn't anywhere for a newbie to turn to learn how to use them easily. With Mach, he just got on Youtube and within a couple days was fluently using the software. There is a whole lot of benefit rolled into that which is hard to replicate since it seems to have grown that way organically and spontaneously.

That's the benefits as I see them, and they aren't about theoretical specs, but actual performance and convenience concerns. They are:

1: easy to implement and will reduce repairs needed on machine (due to very little necessary electronics outside controller, most repairs I made used to be part of PLC system relays, etc., now no PLC and only a handful of relays)
2: machine times will be reduced, drastically for an 80's era machine (if doing work for others, this translates to better service, more profit)
3: integration with modern software is easy, put file on usb and walk over to machine (cut a file of any size you like that fits on your computer)
4: training material is abundant on Youtube, controller functions are easily self taught
5: support through piers is second to none, there are thousands of very helpful people using the same controller (no other controller compares in that regard)
6: hardware is often very scalable, you can get hardware that meets your specific machine needs
7: hardware is often updated via firmware, new features that may not yet have been thought up can be added to the control after it's already installed, controller is always up to date
8: hardware is inexpensive (from an industrial perspective, not a hobby perspective necessarily) even at the most robust performance levels
9: hardware is flexible and can control a wide variety of machines with same precision as OEM controller


I'm just trying to supply information. If the OP wishes to buy a machine like that Hurco and then pay the same to fix it as it would cost to replace the controller with something more modern, that would be his choice. I think we both know that you often can't just throw a new board in and turn the machine on, since many of these machines require the parameters be reset to get the machine going. I'm pretty sure that it would be easier for a novice to deal with a new Mach controller than replace a bad card and rework all of the needed machine parameters, if they even knew what that meant. I just know that I've been there and done that both ways, and know that I won't have to think very hard about it in the future.

[acannell]

Does a new Haas come with a controller from the 80's or 90's? Of course you wouldn't buy a new Haas and replace the controller. You're making arguments that are irrelevant. Again, I have stated that I'd look for an older machine with a bad controller and replace it.

There is no fascination with specifications beyond what is actually useful. The 6 different coordinate system capability only speaks to the overall robust nature that Mach 4 will have. What do you think the application of such a feature is for? Industrial applications where loading machines are in use along side of CNC machinery most likely. That level of sophistication is unusual at any price, yet you'd be looking at software that costs less than most CAM systems. Those specifications point to the direction of Mach, which is clearly not a continuation of serving only hobbyists. That is the indication of the hardware as well, though I'm sure you are still picturing some little break out board that hooks up to the printer port or USB port.

The practical end user benefit to replacing an '80s or 90's controller is that you can accomplish more jobs in less time and honestly with less knowledge. Last I checked, that means that I both save clients money by charging less for each part (less machine time), profit more per part and deliver parts in a more timely fashion. I'm currently bidding a job where I could have never met the price per part needs of the client with the original early 90's controller, even if I could have replaced it. The machine would have simply run too slow unless I was willing to charge a $20/hr shop rate, which I'm not. Also, a 3 1/2 inch floppy doesn't compare with the usability of a USB disk. A USB emulator for an older CNC controller runs as much as the entire replacement controller from CS Labs, so what sense would it make to use an emulator (which also has to have the files parsed into 1.44mb pieces). Drip feeding through RS-232 is also not very fast and there is no comparison between drip feeding a 3d mold file to a old controller and running it right out of memory. I've had it both ways, and there is no comparison. With RS-232 and if the controller can even handle the feedrates of a program I run now, the machine would run, run, pause, run, run, pause. Before you'd get half way through a complicated program, the Mach 3 ethernet controller would have made 3 parts. Plus, the total workflow of going from drawing to finished part is undeniably simpler with a modern controller of any kind than it was with a controller from the 80's or early 90's. For someone who has never had experience operating a CNC, a Mach controller will result in making that first part much sooner than it would happen with an older controller.

A year or two ago, I would not have thought this to be a reasonable route, but a year or two ago there really weren't any ethernet based controllers which is what has changed the game for Mach. You can continue using older controllers and I really don't mind one bit. You have the experience and knowledge necessary to do so. For those who have never used a CNC before, it would be far easier to learn with a newer controller, and especially one that has considerable support from other users the way that Mach does. I have a friend that has owned a couple CNC machines for over 15 years, but had never used either of them because they seemed too complicated, so he hired people that knew what to do with them. After replacing one of the controllers with Mach, he's amazed at how easy it is to use and has really taken to doing the CNC work himself. He also knows it will be very easy to train others in the shop who didn't previously run the machine to operate it, where before they were somewhat at the mercy of the one guy that understood the machines. As far as I know, and I've known him for 15 years, he had never used CAD before, let alone CAM software, but is now cutting jobs on the CNC routinely. The machines were there for 15 years, but for those who don't know them the older controllers are very intimidating and convoluted. There isn't anywhere for a newbie to turn to learn how to use them easily. With Mach, he just got on Youtube and within a couple days was fluently using the software. There is a whole lot of benefit rolled into that which is hard to replicate since it seems to have grown that way organically and spontaneously.

That's the benefits as I see them, and they aren't about theoretical specs, but actual performance and convenience concerns. They are:

1: easy to implement and will reduce repairs needed on machine (due to very little necessary electronics outside controller, most repairs I made used to be part of PLC system relays, etc., now no PLC and only a handful of relays)
2: machine times will be reduced, drastically for an 80's era machine (if doing work for others, this translates to better service, more profit)
3: integration with modern software is easy, put file on usb and walk over to machine (cut a file of any size you like that fits on your computer)
4: training material is abundant on Youtube, controller functions are easily self taught
5: support through piers is second to none, there are thousands of very helpful people using the same controller (no other controller compares in that regard)
6: hardware is often very scalable, you can get hardware that meets your specific machine needs
7: hardware is often updated via firmware, new features that may not yet have been thought up can be added to the control after it's already installed, controller is always up to date
8: hardware is inexpensive (from an industrial perspective, not a hobby perspective necessarily) even at the most robust performance levels
9: hardware is flexible and can control a wide variety of machines with same precision as OEM controller


I'm just trying to supply information. If the OP wishes to buy a machine like that Hurco and then pay the same to fix it as it would cost to replace the controller with something more modern, that would be his choice. I think we both know that you often can't just throw a new board in and turn the machine on, since many of these machines require the parameters be reset to get the machine going. I'm pretty sure that it would be easier for a novice to deal with a new Mach controller than replace a bad card and rework all of the needed machine parameters, if they even knew what that meant. I just know that I've been there and done that both ways, and know that I won't have to think very hard about it in the future.

it seems like alot of the retrofitting and mach 3 craze is marketed towards people who want to make their CNC mill into a 3D printer for metal. they want toolpaths made on autopilot, and they tend to want to make 3D models..for instance look at the banner ads for deskproto, mach 3, meshcam, etc..you'll see lots of peoples faces, musical instruments, animals, etc...so combine autopilot and 3D models, you get multi-megabyte 3 axis toolpaths filled with rapids and very small movements. so thats where the focus on maximizing rapid feedrates comes from. and the need for high speed block processing and flash drives to hold huge toolpaths.

none of that has much to do with the world of machining non-decorative metal parts. most 3 axis geometry is not arbitrary and should follow curvature which can be defined precisely with far fewer blocks than a no-knowledge toolpath software package would output. that means less blocks per second and less storage space required. real toolpaths arent going to spend time in rapids, those are kept to an absolute minimum so cutting is taking place as much as possible. so faster rapids doesnt really matter either. they were making plenty complex injection molds in the 80's and 90's, so the idea that machines or controls from their era arent up to it doesnt make much sense.

show me a multimegabyte, high block speed toolpath that isnt just a decorative rasterization or blind waterline and its going to be a very expensive part, probably something out of area 51. they were making plenty complex injection molded parts in the 80's and 90's, so the idea that machines from those era's cant do it without a retrofit isnt true.