[l u k e]

The price seems fair..

[txcowdog]

No... never heard of it. How about a link.

[holbieone]

http://www.lasercenteredgefinder.com/

for the money it looks pretty cool

this is what i use ,a bit more in price but well worth the money
http://www.wenzel-wkp.nl/Nieuws/3D_t...ster_ip67.html

[dertsap]

lazer seems kinda funky to me , i sure wouldn t use it in a machine shop

wood work i would think it may be ok

[Pres]

lazer seems kinda funky to me , i sure wouldn t use it in a machine shop .. wood work i would think it may be ok

Interesting synopsis.

Why would wood make a difference with a laser dot?

Without making this too hard, do you have any concrete conclusions metal would present kind of a problem?

The one I own seems to work ok on metal (no wood -yet).
I just "split" the red dot when aligning scribe marks.
(saves using the 'ol centerpunch approach or a wiggler)

Pres

[geo.agun]

You are not going to get +-.002 out of it but +- .005 is more along the range. For a lot of work that is more than adequate. What I find it most useful for is very quick positioning holes that have been previously laid out.

An example would be a series of transfer punch marks indicating where holes need to be placed. Mating to an existing pipe flange is a good example. The old way; if there were an even number of holes, I could measure the bolt circle and calculate the x and y positions and take into account any rotation of the pattern. With the laser pointer I hold the piece in place, mark the hole locations, clamp down the piece, position it under the laser and drill, reposition and drill. I do not need to measure or calculate to get the holes right where I want them.

This little device has saved me a lot of time.

[dertsap]

Interesting synopsis.

Why would wood make a difference with a laser dot?

Without making this too hard, do you have any concrete conclusions metal would present kind of a problem?

The one I own seems to work ok on metal (no wood -yet).
I just "split" the red dot when aligning scribe marks.
(saves using the 'ol centerpunch approach or a wiggler)

Pres

is this simple enough for you , machinist tolerances are tighter than a carpenters !

[l u k e]

You are not going to get +-.002 out of it but +- .005 is more along the range. For a lot of work that is more than adequate. What I find it most useful for is very quick positioning holes that have been previously laid out.

Thats pretty much what I had figured. I don't really need an edge finder but for the price I may pick one up.

[InspirationTool]

I have one, and don't find it any good for picking up edges. Seems to pick up pin pricks quite well though.

I got an lighted electronic edge finder... I am getting good use out of that one. I don't have to worry about it rubbing while I fiddle with the computer to input the offset.

-Jeff

[One of Many]

I also think there are far to many variables in a non-contact referencing device to trust it much below 1-2 beam widths and even that could be exponential the further distance it is pointing at IF the beam is not rotated on the axis to verify a true centerline.

Their video shown in operation and only one instance was it rotated in the spindle. The runout of the beam was far too obvious.

I don't think it is a fair comparison in competition to a standard edge finder or indicator, but I can see where it would handy in a few rough and rapid setups. Then take a true reference cut to set 0,0.

If the head is out of tram or the work holder doesn't hold it properly on center or straight, I liken it's trustworthyness on par with a square and a plumb bob!

DC

[jackson]

I will have my guys stick with the regular edge finders, the laser to me is just like digital calipers just dont trust them

[fpworks]

(see link below)
This is no doubt my favorite edge finder. It is expensive, but you get what you pay for. I can pick up x, y, AND z off a corner in about 30 seconds total, and NOT have to offset for edge finder diameter. I experience .0001" - .0003" repeatability in x and y, and about 0.0005" in z.

You will also need a ring gage to calibrate it in your particular machine.

The only more accurate method that I know is to use the indicator and gage ring method, but that is a LOT slower.

http://www1.mscdirect.com/CGI/NNSRIT...MT4NO=18267548

[holbieone]

(see link below)
This is no doubt my favorite edge finder. It is expensive, but you get what you pay for. I can pick up x, y, AND z off a corner in about 30 seconds total, and NOT have to offset for edge finder diameter. I experience .0001" - .0003" repeatability in x and y, and about 0.0005" in z.

You will also need a ring gage to calibrate it in your particular machine.

The only more accurate method that I know is to use the indicator and gage ring method, but that is a LOT slower.

http://www1.mscdirect.com/CGI/NNSRIT...MT4NO=18267548

look at the second link in post #3

[fpworks]

Yep, same exact piece, although it is labeled as an SPI product. Haimer's looks a little different, but I bet it is still made by the same company.

I bought mine back when they cost $100 less. Even at the current price, still worth it.

[holbieone]

Yep, same exact piece, although it is labeled as an SPI product. Haimer's looks a little different, but I bet it is still made by the same company.

I bought mine back when they cost $100 less. Even at the current price, still worth it.

there's a lot of knock offs

i have two ,one real and one knock off

the real one is nicely made and the knock off is less quality

but they both function just about the same

[fpworks]

Where can you get the cheap knock offs?

(got a new VMC coming, and it will need one)

[l u k e]

Thanks for all the input, I guess I'll keep my $60...

[holbieone]

Where can you get the cheap knock offs?

(got a new VMC coming, and it will need one)

i bought mine on eBay ,but i just looked and can't find the person the was selling them

[holbieone]

this is the same as my knock off
http://www.lineartools.co.uk/script/...135&cat_id=113

[kentavv]

I got one of those laser edge finders recently. I have a really hard time being consistent with it. +-.004 is probably the reasonable range of repeatability.