Official Luthiers Forum!

Good news! We've made the decision to go ahead and produce the Collins Saddle Slot mill as featured in another recent OLF thread: http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=43204

What we would kindly request from OLFers is some of the collective wisdom of the forum for recommendations for laminate trimmers. Sadly, as you all know, the PC 310 aka R2D2... is no longer available so we have to pick something else.

If you have direct knowledge and experience with laminate trimmers and what you use or know meets the following criteria we would like to hear from you in this thread please.

Criteria

1) Metal body

2) High Quality

3) very little if any runout

The base, adjustments, etc. are all moot to us in the the mill will take on these tasks.

No particular order for this criteria, it's all important to us. As for runout if you have never had so much time on your hands as to check runout on your lam trimmer no worries, let us know what your experiences have been anyway, please.

Also the Bosch Colt is already ruled out because one of our very trusted sources went through a number of them measuring average runout of .005" or so on all of them - not good....

Saddle Slot Mill Update:

Since we posted the Collins Saddle Slot Mill on this and other forums we have generated more than a lot of interest and have folks waiting for them. Again it's not intended for hobbyists unless you like the best of the best in your stuff and also see the value in a high-precesion tool for slotting saddles perfectly every single time. The mill is designed for commercial use, busy shops be it builders, repair folks, or both. Schools are also more than interested in these as well.

What's changed since we last posted about the CSM on the OLF are a couple of things.

First we are going to make it capable of being clamped to a guitar body so that vacuum clamping, the pump, plumbing, etc. is not necessary although the mill will be "vacuum-ready" meaning that you can upgrade your system in the future simply by purchasing, borrowing, stealing... etc. a vacuum pump (and some noise canceling headphones.... too).

Since we flat out refuse to cheapen the thing in any way all of these mills will be set-up for vacuum out of the box but you now may also use clamps as well. This was a suggestion to us from elsewhere that greatly expands who can use these.

Our machinist gave us the idea of recessing the bottom plate of the unit for the vacuum gasket or, if you are not using vacuum, the gasket also serves as a pad against the guitar body.

Pricing: Although far from finalized we found out that some of the rails and bearings can be had from a reliable, repeatable source for less than what we initially thought and this will remove at least a couple hundred from the cost to produce.

So in short the price is coming down, the market for these mills is expanded to non-vacuum-sorts as well and of course the good news that we are now committed, or should be...... to producing the Collins Saddle Mill.

So please let us know your favorite lam trimmer if it meets two of the criteria above. And of course if you want a CSM (Collins Saddle Mill) I'm happy to put you on the list with no commitment on your part beyond PMing me.

Lastly this is not the business that we are in or intended to be in. Our priority is our repair and restoration biz so I am not all that sure how long these mills will be available so if you want one let us know please? It's likely that production will be limited.

Thanks!

I've switched all my laminate trimmers and jigs over to the Dewalt DWP611. In my experience, it is noticeably more powerful than the PC310 and certainly the Bosch Colt (I've owned both). The runout is minimal and the arbor/collet has a very long shaft. You can get precision collets for these which drop the runout to under 0.001". It is slightly bigger than your typical laminate trimmer but by only a very small amount. The longer I've used it - the more I realize that it is just a superior tool for most of the applications that we employ.

Many thanks Toonces the Dewalt sounds like a great candidate and we will be sure to evaluate them.

Any other recommendations, anyone?

Thanks

If you made the mount act as a sub base, then a person could use whichever trimmer they preferred. This might also simplify the design and construction and help bring down the expense. A simple square sub base mounting surface should be easier to construct and align than a mount that has to grip the body of the router. For added visibility the sub base could have a cut out on one side, and the end user could modify their particular base if they so desired.
I make this suggestion without any intention of acquiring one of these mills, so take it for what it's worth. My own jig making tends to the simple and crude, use what's at hand type of thing.

The Dewalt 611 - a great tool. Their plunge base is very nice too and is not available from other lam trimmers.
I think that any option you consider should have the precision collets and nut available from precise bits too. It is a great resource.

_________________
Burton
http://www.legeytinstruments.com
Brookline, MA.

I would definitely vote for a sub base that accepts multiple router models. Periodically a new router comes along that is better than others, and I change when that happens. There are at least a couple of router jigs out there on the web that I might like to own and use, but they don't fit the routers I have or use.

_________________
“ The meaning of life is to find your gift and the purpose of life is to give it away” Pablo Picasso

A multi-base or one you mount the router yourself would be nice.

However, I have no problem if the unit comes with a dedicated, high quality, permanently mounted laminate trimmer that has little to no runout and I don't have to worry about installing it.

In fact I would prefer that.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

I would like it to come with "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Saddle Mills" or DVD. I recently put together a tow- behind fertilizer spreader, took two hours, the crummy manual said it should take thirty minutes but then I am, rather dull.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

Hesh, I have tried multiple laminate trimmers and have found nothing that compares with the Dewalt 611. Powerful, speed adjustable, excellent depth cut adjustability and under a thou for runout. My vote!

Mike Franks
www.mjfranksguitars.com
www.facebook.com/mjfranksguitars

The idea of a sub-base adaptable to different motors (both present or future) certainly has strong appeal. It also presents some challenges however, to ensuring accuracy and allignment. For example, if the self-installed motor were a fraction of a degree offside to side, the effect on a clean plunge would be essentially catastrophic - there's simply no room for error at all here.

For this reason I think we're going to have to stick with a dedicated motor that can be fit in a more rigid housing which we can guarantee good allignment on. Since the loss if our beloved PC310 however, finding a good motor with metal housing, light weight, and good collet options with low runout seems quite a challenge. I was looking at the Makita RT0701c, but the Dewalt may perhaps work better. I like the Makita design and soft start, but as Burton pointed out availability of custom collets would be a factor to consider, and it doesn't look like the folks at Precise Bits plan to develop any for this model.

I'm going to try a local tool store to put my hands on a few models today, and hopefully stock up on some metal stock as well. Got the first batch of bearings in today, and although I still have to put them through some stress tests, it's looking good so far.

So motors - light weight, low runout, metal housing, and preferably compatible with custom precision collets - looking like the Dewalt is in the lead at the moment.

I will never forgive B&D by the way, for dumping the 310 when they bought Porter Cable. Heck, I have an old 310 that's probably 50 years old (when it was a Rockwell product), and with new bearings and brushes it's still running great (parts are still compatible with models made decades later). How can a company just dump the flagship model of an entire tool category?

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

I'm still using the same Makitas you used fifteen years ago (wow it's been that long).....

I don't know if they still even make those.

I stopped by the tool shop today, and short of going with some sort of specialty spindle motor (which presents problems of collets and power supplies), it looks like the Dewalt is pretty much it. Nothing else that size or smaller is made with a metal motor housing any more. I'm going to pick one up and give it a try.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

Hesh,
I have the Bosch Colt in a bishop cochran plunge router base (pretty expensive), so I'm committed to it in that application. I use it for tail wedges, peg heads, rosettes, etc. I've not noticed a problem with runout, but I don't know what I would be looking for. Would it be a problem for the type of processes I use it for?
thanks, Mike

I have a Makita RT0700C that I am very happy with. A plunge base is available for it--I have one and I like it. When I was shopping for it, I compared it to the Dewalt 611 and decided that I like the collet on the Makita much more. I am very wary of collets that consist only of a nut on the slotted end of the armature--I've had bits slip too many times with that design. I got an advertising email from MCLSWOODWORKING today pushing this router http://www.mlcswoodworking.com/shopsite ... outer.html
It appears to be identical to the Makita. I have several small routers including the PC310 and a couple of the Ridgids. If I could only keep one, it would probably be the Makita.

Hi Mike - One of our dear friends evaluated the Colt and I think that he tried several of them, new in boxes. The amount of runout that he measured, and he's a real pro at this, was very much excessive.

Not saying that the Colt is not good enough for other methods and jigs but what is one of the differentiating factors here with the Collins Saddle Mill is very high accuracy. As such runout of .005" or more, what was observed with the Colt(s) is very much unsuitable and not in keeping with the bearings, design, beefiness, etc. that all are intended to produce a highly accurate, very rigid structure.

Now some folks may not care if their saddle slots are .099 at one end and .105 at the other, we do.... Also in the applications that you are currently using it for uber accuracy is not as important as fitting saddles. A well fit saddle should have contact everywhere, not be tight but be snug and slightly looser with a UST. And of course the bottom should be flat matching a flat saddle slot. Why is this important? Because the strings are the engine of our instruments and the saddle is the interface to the top. A poorly fitting saddle is counter productive to all of the other things that we do in search of responsive, beautiful sounding instruments.

With the CSM we are going to include a lam trimmer, a high quality one as David mentioned above so that we can guarantee accuracy, proper laser alignment, etc. So your Colt is safe and still fine to use but we won't be engineering the mill for the Colt. I know lots of folks have Colts on this forum but sadly it's not accurate enough to make the grade for the CSM. It also has a plastic body IIRC which rules it out too.

The Cochran jig is very cool by the way and I always wanted one. But I never understood going to all of the trouble to engineer such a fine piece only to make them for Dr*mels.... well known to be the kings of runout and very much underpowered....

Well I picked up a Dewalt 611, and so far (as suggested by several here - thanks!) it seems the best candidate for the job. Testing the runout, if I install a true .250 pin it reads quite good, ~.001" runout. Most router bits unfortunately, tend to measure a few thousandths shy on the shank, and wit a few of those tested I came out with readings from .002" up to .004" runout.

The inside of the collet reads no more .00025" variance, so it seems that any slight under sizing of the bit shank and the collet (a painted collet) pulls off to one side. Burton (or anyone else who may have tried them), are the precision collets from PrecisionBits a reliable quality addition that you expect would make a measurable difference in this matter? I assume the answer is "yes", as they seem quite well made and and designed, but I've not had any experience with their collets myself as of yet.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

I'm pretty sure that the PreciceBits collets are simply ER collets that have been re-ground to work with the collet nut in the router they were modded for. Over on CNC zone those collets get nothing but praise. You might try posing this question in the CNC area of this forum.

Although I don't have any personal experience with them, I do have a set of cheapie Chinese collets that were like $40 for a set of 8 and in practice, I can't tell the difference between those and the high precision collets which cost $40 each I have for my most used sizes.

_________________
http://www.birkonium.com CNC Products for Luthiers
http://banduramaker.blogspot.com

I just did a quick test to be sure in the Dewalt 611 we have here at the Lab- I lightly clamped the trimmer in the Kurt vise and used my Interapid .0005 indicator for the readings. I rotated the spindle by hand.

First I used the Precise bits collet care spindle cleaner in the spindle as per the instructions. Then I tested the actual bore- I am getting a bit over a half thousandth of runout in the spindle bore itself. Some of that could simply be from chatter, it isn't the smoothest ground bore, which isn't the best sign.

Then I tested the Precise bits collet and nut against the Dewalt stock one with a .25 ground test pin at 1/2" out from the nut.

The Precise bits setup gave virtually the exact same reading as the spindle bore, slightly over a half thousandth.
The Dewalt stock reading was worse at just about 2 thousandths.

I think that since Dewalt does not offer a 1/8 collet as stock and that most people would likely use a reducer bushing (which itself has issues) to use 1/8" shank bits that the Precise bits collets are a big advantage in precision. This is, of course, based on an actual sample set of 1 but as Andy has said, there is a larger test group of dedicated users that all seem to agree.

I think it is worth saying too that dealing in 1 or 2 thousandths may be very picky for our uses of these tools. While we all ideally want everything to be perfect that is probably within tolerance for a saddle slot, or any cut in wood. Still, though, it doesn't hurt to be as precise as possible as long as it is within reason. And in this case, I think it is. The guys at Precise bits offer a very useful upgrade for a fair price.

I use a set on my Colt at my shop at home. I haven't done the same tests but noticed a bigger difference than I did with the Dewalt. With the upgraded collets and nut it really does run smoother. I understood that the Colts had a bad run and that the actual spindle was ground incorrectly. I seem to remember that this was at the same time Simon had his pretty incredible run of bad units. I think they have resolved that (and earlier ones seemed pretty good) but the Dewalt is just a nicer tool (in my opinion, of course).

If I was making a tool like this for myself I would be tempted to get a dedicated spindle with an ER-11 collet system. I can understand, though, that it would be trickier and more expensive.
It would look pretty sweet though

_________________
Burton
http://www.legeytinstruments.com
Brookline, MA.

Since I had the setup ready I checked the Colt we have here too. Just the spindle bore, I don't have a collet set for that here.
Spindle on this one (purchased new last year) was within .00025. As good as I would expect for a tool in that price range and better than what the Precise bits collets are rated at (.0004).

Makes me wonder about the Dewalt? This is used in our school shop so it is not necessarily out of the question that someone abused it a bit. I would expect it to be closer to .00025, like yours checked out at.

_________________
Burton
http://www.legeytinstruments.com
Brookline, MA.

David and Hesh - Did you guys think about using a micro-die grinder something like the unit sold by John Hall for inlay work?

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

If they fixed the Bosch Colt bore to accept the Precise Bit nut/collet system then that makes it a much better machine; however, IMO, it is still underpowered and definitely outclassed by the Dewalt. From what I gather, the Bosch colt employs some excellent spindle bearings - the Dewalt bearings are likely not quite as good but I am getting under a 0.001" runout which is more than adequate.


Best Regards,
Simon

Looks like we may be perfecting ourelves out of a tool?

I'm not one to just settle fr something, but it appears that no one is making anything as accurately as they have in the past.

It may be that the only way to get something perfect would be to machine the collet and spindle yourself, whch I'm sur is out of the question.

Maybe your machinest can rework the DeWalt? Does he have a way of doing that?

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

I'm not trying to infer that they aren't up to the task, the Dewalt is probably fine as is, even without the upgraded collets.
I think we are being picky with our measurements just to do the due diligence.

I would bet the older 310's had just about as much runout.
No big box tool is a precision tool but it doesn't mean they are not good enough!

_________________
Burton
http://www.legeytinstruments.com
Brookline, MA.

Burton, thanks so much for taking the time to take those readings. I think the PreciseBits collet system is a definite addition to the system, relatively low added cost for measurable improvement in reliability. And yes, the old PC310's are certainly not free from runout - I have 3 and picked the one with the least when I put my original mill together.

And yes, we are probably splitting hairs when it comes to precision in an application like this, but it is nice to measure a saddle and be able to calculate your cuts reliably, or have the option of using a simple single cut with a 1/8" bit and be confident that a pre-made 1/8" saddle will fit well without .003" slop.

Andy - I should have thought to stop by some CNC forums with many of my early questions. No doubt that would be an ideal crowd with experience in addressing many of the issues I've been concerned with here.

As much as I want to strive for perfect, if we can get a final cut within a .001" tolerance, I think this threshold may be a good benchmark. Half a thou and I'll be thrilled, but when we get down in that lower range I expect that every move to halve the tolerances could easily begin to double the cost.

And as much as I want to avoid scope creep, and not add complications to the tool beyond it's original intentions, we are also working on design considerations to allow for expanded use in the future. Right now all the technology is in the carriage, with the base just a simple plate with some threaded posts for securing and locating the business end. We're strategizing different ways we can incorporate keyways or pin holes in the underside of the carriage though (a few extra cuts isn't going to affect initial cost) so that would allow easier adaptation to custom bases for other uses in the future.

Of course it's hard to plan for unknown changes, but a few X-axis channels and locator pin holes pre-cut in to the underside of the carriage, other bases could be easily designed, either as something we could offer as optional accessories down the road, or leaving it more friendly for others to make their own custom use bases for their needs. An X-axis slide for cutting pickup or tremolo cavities, or cutting slotted headstocks, pegheads repair splines - not sure what other uses or designs may come up, but this simple feature could allow for simple adaptation for a wide range of surface mill applications that we haven't even thought of yet.

I just routed a cavity for an added pickup in a 7-string electric with this a few months ago, and have used it for other solid body work in the past (when cuts were out of reach of the throat depth of my milling machine). I could certainly see use for a base that would allow active cutting along the X-axis, but that will be something to consider down the road. Just want to make sure it's easily compatible with as many foreseeable upgrades as we can reasonably forecast.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

Well, I'm satisfied that it will be as good as possible based on what I'm seeing out of the people putting it together. Due diligence is an understatement.



I've been cutting slots with a double fluted 1/8th inch bit from home depot using a cheap craftsman plunge router mounted onto a flimsy edge guide, and have been able to get tight, even, consistent saddle slots with flat bottoms suitable for piezo transducers. This thing will be a monster by comparison, even with a teeny bit of runout in the router.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!