Quality Problems With the Sieg sx2.7

Just for clarification Dave...

• There is a direct relationship between calibration, inspection, and what the end user is prepared to pay. Living in Europe and USA, our markets are extremely competitive, and that is reflected in the price. Israel seems to be another matter.
• Arc used to offer a tune up service. Demand was good, but noise from competitors about this service which we offered was negative. Sales doubled after we stopped offering the service!
• For hobby machines, Buck and Hickman, Cromwell, Zoro, Granger, MSC, are extremely wealthy companies, but less geared to assist in comparison to Chester. Still, they are a great channel for sales, for those who wish to use them.
• If Nir wants a Western/near Western offering, he can always consider a new EMCO, followed by a WABECO.
• Nir may or may not be unlucky with the machine he has. There may or may not be a problem. Here speculation takes over. The rust/paint touch up are cosmetic - easily fixed by discussion between Nir and his supplier.
• Knowing SIEG, the probability of a bad batch in terms of inspection before they left the factory are low. What happens in transit is another matter. As I mentioned before, there was an issue with the paint on some of the SX3.5DZP machines in a particular batch ARC received, but that was dealt with.

At the end of the day, this really is a conversation to be had between Nir and his supplier.

Ketan at ARC.

I suspect that most manufacturers would be cautious of precision calibrating a machine then shipping it half-way around the world in a crate with no control over the conditions for the final installation.

Even just the temperature cycling and vibration involved in transport can be enough to put a machine out of adjustment.

Neil

I don't understand the logic of this argument.

How did Colchester, Harrison and all the other machine tool manufacturers manage to export their machines abroad without them losing precision

Martin.

They charged more for them and made them more substantial. A new M300 will set you back about £27,000 today yet you can get a similar size import for £3,000, something has to give. They probably also sent a man to commission the new machine but that costs money too. People seem to be under the illusion that if they pay 1/10th the price they will still get the top spec product or simply don't know what sort of spec machine they need to make the things they want.

We also don't know what spec the machine was at before Nir pulled the gibs out, not saying it is causing the problem but can't comment on the delivered machine as it's not in it's delivered state

Edited By JasonB on 01/10/2020 17:15:18

Dave, Thank you for your kind words, as I said weight is the problem for me, more than price. And for the moment it seems that the supplier will tell me anything just to get rid of me...

Ketan Swali, I already saw all Blondiehacks videos on youtube she is awesome! However her results look too good and are one of the reasons I expected much more accuracy from this machine. Most Chinese mini mills have a head that is connected to a rotating face connected in turn to the column. In such configurations you can adjust both the base and the head. And this is exactly why I tried to stay away from them. I believed that 0.02mm is what to be expected from a machine like that (at the beginning). And I wanted a fix head so it will not move with time by vibrations. Now I know that this was a dream. So in principle it would have been easier to have this option to play with the head.

My main point is that now, after inspecting two machines. I realize that the machine comes accurate within only 0.1/2 mm which is in my believe - terrible. I can deal with a head that is not normal to the table, by adjusting the column base. However the fact that the second mill column is not parallel is a major problem that can be solved only by disassembling and machining and so on...

Before I bought this mill I told my supplier I had ~0.5 mm deviations in my old setup. He told me I would not have any problems like that in the future and that I should expect to see at least one order of accuracy above what I have. But this is not correct. Being able to mill is nice, but I never really bought it for that purpose. I needed accurate positioning of holes. Using my DRO I can generate a set of coordinates. Then I can just cut my material with a band saw and sand it a little and make holes. I didn't dream of paying so much money for the same order of accuracy.

Ketan Swali, this WABECO is looking very promising, I accidently have one of their drill stands from my grand father and it is very old J at least I thinks it is theirs. But 7,000 plus shipping plus TAX is a big no go. I am a Hobbyist I don’t earn money from this.

Neil, if this is truly a fact that temperature can affect the accuracy so much. (I know it would in the order of tens of microns but not more than that). Then why are they not using a smarter assembly? As I said, If I had an extra flat surface between the head and the column – all I had to do is measure alignment – then insert a shim – recheck and so on – problem solved. And the argument about a play is not relevant – for that you take a heavy duty mill.

Martin, I completely agree.

JasonB, taking the gibs out has zero effect on the accuracy whatsoever. The gib is simple their to match between two flat surfaces, It is meant to be used as a bearing surface. And in the case of wear one can tight it up to get better movement and less play. In the first mill I didn’t touched the gibs and I had 0.4mm difference between left to right across the entire table. And I presume it is because of the table own weight on the right side and the fact that the gib was loose. The gib is not a calibration means. I never known that I need to pay so much for accuracy – here my lake of experience come into play, I saw on YouTube people showing accuracy of 0.01/2 mm on cheap Chinese mini mills and believed it to be standard.

Boy, I thought having this toy in my collection will make my life easier...

Nir

Hi Martin,

There is no logic to argue, but I really don't expect a person with your level of compitance to understand.

Ketan at ARC.

Edited By Ketan Swali on 01/10/2020 18:10:49

Edited By Ketan Swali on 01/10/2020 18:11:12

Fun fact, the WABECO F1210 is almost identical to the Sieg SX2.7L in any term. Weight less by 10 kg and yet manages to come to your door at an accuracy of 0.01mm. In my opinion, there is not much of a relation to changes in temperature and much more of a relation to simply - price.

Exactly, and why I said on the first page that if you feel you need that accuracy then you will have to pay for it however many people seem to turn out good work on these cheaper machines, why not try drilling some holes as has been suggested and see how they come out before sending it back.

Edited By JasonB on 01/10/2020 18:21:57

Nir,

You obviously know what you want, and this machine fails to meet your expectations. So perhaps you may want to call it a day. You have explored all the comments on here, and chosen what you wish to believe. Perhaps it is time for you to return the machine to the supplier and get a refund.

I really do not think you will find a solution to meet your expectations.

Ketan at ARC.

I worked for several years at a Machine Tool Agency who sold machine tools from the world to UK buyers and when a machine was sold to the customer, he wasn't allowed to de crate the machine that was down to us the suppliers engineers, all the customer did was make sure the foundations etc, if required were in place and the first time the customer was allowed to touch the machine was when we had got the machine set to the manufacturers specs and produced what ever the machine was to be used for. The company sold equipment from Pillar drills to machine tools used in manufacturing.

Martin P

Hi Ketan.

Is this meant as a joke or an insult?

Martin.

I doubt that anyone buying even a small industrial machine would expect to break it out of its crate, bung it on a stand, and expect it to perform to the very highest limit of the specifications. Instead they would have followed the manufacturer's installation procedure and subsequent fettling.

How many articles have ME etc published on levelling your new Myford?

Hi Martin,

How can I ever insult you? We have known each other for over 10 years now

Ketan at ARC

I must correct myself. WABECO sends with the table a test report. and the accuracy is considered good when below 0.05 mm on a certain length (200 - 300 mm depending on the test), not 0.01 mm this is only promised to the spindle on the German site (.de). (On the international site (.com) they also promise it to the table flatness but if you look at the test report you know that it is not correct (for F1200 & F1210)). So based on my results lets say that the Sieg is accurate in the order of 0.2 mm. You get only 4 time more precision and you pay 3 times over. And you get a standard motor - not brushless. So I think it is smarter to stay with the Sieg since I already bought it, and maybe JasonB is correct. Maybe using a DRO in a single plane - most of the time - will be all what I need. (Plus the Sieg looks cooler

New updates! Ok, so as you know I couldn’t accept the deviation in the column of the head so I payed the seller another 150 USD to ship me the first mill again (since I believed that the fact that I didn’t touched the gibs could have caused the errors) he agreed to let me check them at the same time (which was a nightmare – a lot of tests and numbers) to choose the least worst option for me.

So, after I played with the gibs the accuracy on both x and y axis did improve (for example: right to left height relative to the spindle across the entire table changed to 0.28 mm instead of 0.42 mm) but the head moved even more! 0.3mm when locked and again if the gib was all the way in - I lost movement of the head at the top – same scenario. (So even if I tought I might just replace the column if the seller allows such a thing – it was no longer an option).

So, realizing I have to stick with one of them, I thought maybe I’ll just take the table which is more flat, and adjust the spindle relative to it (ignoring side movements of the head) so I knew that the second mill should be flat and the first has about 0.05 mm deviation along the y axis. But being me, I decided to check again, and for my surprise, I found out that it was exactly the opposite! The first was accurate and the second was flat! For a moment I thought I may have Alzheimer, then I thought it might be because of heat cycles, but after checking for a few moments I found that when I look the x axis the entire table bends! (more significantly around the lock) How much? Exactly 0.05mm! So both tables are flat when they are not locked, but when you lock them both table bend upward in the middle! Such that, at the end of the table the gap appear – how could they not check something like that before manufacturing 100,000 units?!? So If I have a vise on top it will tilt! I know this is hard to believe but I am not joking:

https://youtu.be/M3DXUQretLY

So, to summarize my thoughts, the table bends when locked (0.05 mm), the head moves sideways when locked (0.2 mm) and the spindle is not parallel to the head (0.1)! In otherward nothing here stands as it should! So I decided to comment my opinion on the matter so that newcomers will have an idea of what to accept the Sieg is cheap relative to other options and you get all the features one can whish for – silent step motor, tapping mode, led screen, low speeds and high torque but you will never get out accuracy in any parameter! So long as you make sure that your quill is normal to the table and you use a DRO you can get accurate results with in that plane. But once you have to change height for different tool all measurement will shift. If I knew that, I would have gone with the WABECO it only cost 80 % more (look at the German site not the international one) it has standard motor (torque comes with speed), no dedicated tapping feature and the lowest speed is 140 rpm and no screen, but! It is accurate! It comes with a test report and the maximum error one can get is 0.05 mm which is perfect considering the price and weight. – Shame I didn’t found anything like that online at the time.

About the gib problem in the z axis, Pioter complained about it as well but he only had one mill to look at, **LINK** I looked at both mills and they poses the exact same problem. As I see it, it is a well known problem, and very much not a dud.

Hope this helps to someone, it surely would have helped me.

Nir