Re: Alternate Mill Geometry?
- From: Cliff <Clhuprich@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 14:58:42 -0400
On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:30:48 GMT, BottleBob <bottlbob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>> The traditional Mill structure neeeds 80" of space for 40" of travel.
>So the most reasonable
>choice might be a used Horizontal.
To get 40" of travel at the spindle he's probably
still going to need closer to 80", if not more.
Don't forget how wide the ways & column
would be.
80-40=40
40/2 = 20" per side.
The ways must extend beyond the max
column travel a little bit too.
Even that's (80") pushing it IMHO.
Does anyone recall such a narrow column
on any decent machine?
--
Cliff
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Alternate Mill Geometry?
- From: BottleBob
- Re: Alternate Mill Geometry?
- References:
- Alternate Mill Geometry?
- From: Paul
- Re: Alternate Mill Geometry?
- From: BottleBob
- Alternate Mill Geometry?
- Prev by Date: Re: The little voices inside my head won't be quiet!!
- Next by Date: Re: Off topic posting explained
- Previous by thread: Re: Alternate Mill Geometry?
- Next by thread: Re: Alternate Mill Geometry?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|