I own a Kt 1CH horizontal mill and a nice Bridgeport but am thinking of adding another vertical mill to the collection, which would be the preferred mill. I really like my Kearney Trecker, but wondered what would be the most accuate and best investment.

They are all old. The most accurate will be the one least worn out.

John Oder

If you already have a nice horizontal mill and a decent Bridgeport, the Van Norman will be somewhat redundant. The real value of the VN is the ability to get both a horizontal and a vertical mill in the same compact floorspace in a small shop.

You will find the VN a lot more rigid and powerful than the Bridgeport, but it has a smaller working envelope in vertical mode, has lower spindle speeds,# and will probably have no quill. That said, it is a very versatile and quick machine for angled setups, far moreso than a Bridgeport. Once you learn how to use it, the VN is a great machine.

The little VN #6 has no power feed, straight hand mill. The 12 is practically identical, but has a really nice gearbox powerfeed on the table. If you can find and fit a big 22L or similar with the full power knee (power on all three axes with adjustable stops and rapids on all), your Bridgeport might start getting lonely.

At the last shop I worked at. We had both the Cincinnati and Kearney Trecker.
But no Van Normans. I can’t remember why, But I much preferred the
Kearney Trecker over the Cincinnati machines. At my present company. The first machine I ran
Was a vertical Kearney Trecker. From 1969. They were getting rid of it because of a .002”
Bow in the table. It was a beautiful machine. My previous employer would have killed for it.

I'm new to the world of milling machines, just got a 1973Kearney and Trecker 310 s-15 in very nice condition.
I asked a retired machinist friend to keep an eye out for a good machine for me.
He had been watching Ebay for over a year when this machine and a smaller 205 s12 came up.

From what he says and also what the local Machine tool dealer, Bell Machinery, told me, K&Ts in general are the best mills ever built and the K& T 310S-15 in particular is a real sweetheart. Of course "best" is subjective.

The owner of Bell told me that if any manufacturer built a machine to the standard of the 310 today (he claims none do)it would cost in excess of $200,000.


I know the machine is capable of far more than I will ever accomplish with it in my hobby shop, almost seems a shame that it isn't out being worked in a real shop somewhere.

What John said, condition is everything. I'm partial to Cincinnati myself.

Cinci or K & T ? That's a hard one to call, both top notch machines built to high standards. I'm going to have to sit on the fence on this one. I'd have either in a flash. Regards Tyrone

If all the named machines are equal in condition, I would take the K&T. I have never run a Van Norman.
A friend has a Cincinnati #2 universal I would not mind having however. It is a war machine that he served his apprenticeship on. He has the universal dividing head and the gear box and gear train for it. I found him another plain machine with a vertical head. The last time he saw the universal run was back in the 1960's. It was ordered with a vertical head, but it was lost [or stolen] in transit.

I have both a 1951 Kearney & Trecker 2H Universal, and a 1945 Cincinnati 2MI Universal mill. Both are in good working condition, and I like using them equally well. As far as the design of the components, the accuracy and overall quality, the K&T mill is better. That says alot, because the Cincinnati is a very good machine!

Mark

I run both daily; Cincinnati 2LR and Kearney 205 SA and occasionally our Kearney 3CK. Each unit has its pro's and no con's. They both are really sweet and I feel lucky to have them. Both are Cat 50 and really well equipped: horizontal with vertical heads. The 205 has a compound head which has really come in handy. Both switch between horizontal and vertical-- but that is more easily done on the Cincinnati(just change the cutter(but a different model Kearney is configured that way as well)). I really think the preferences are going to be model specific however, because I have seen both companies with comparable arrangements and it really depends on what you need to do. I have some parts that are only feasible on a horizontal and most of our parts make use of the tilt head.

I still am looking for arbor supports for the 205 SA.

Best of enjoyment.
Dan

I have a K&T 2ch and a cincinatti I like both alot but the K&T is a little smother on the gear shifting but the cincinatti is a bit notchy feeling more like a tractor than a sports car but I do like the simplicity of the cinci the K&T is full of parts I have been into both of them and K&T was not afraid to add more parts and pieces. The Cinci is less complex less elegant in design but both are great.

On both horizontals and verticals, of each make
we have plenty around here. I avoid slotting unless
there's no other way, so I use them allot for facing / squareing
of blocks, and used to pocket out holder-blocks for molds
on the horizontals.

I would certainly "guess" that the Cin'ty's ram would be more solid than
K&T's posts......just a guess.
K&T ....... love the feeds and rapid's smooth and positive levers.

m1m