What's new
What's new

Makino PS 105 vs Okuma genos M560 v for mold type works

Floyd29

Plastic
Joined
Jan 29, 2017
Hi,

We are considering to buy VMC for our mold works. Over last few months we have explored various options, however two options have stood out the most.

Makino ps 105 & Okuma Genos m560 v

We have to cut stainless steel, p20, hardened stavax (55 HRC) type materials. We make simple 2d type mold to complex 3d contour moulds. The cutters we use are 70 % in the range of 6mm to 30mm Dia & 30 % fall in the range of 2mm to 6mm dia.

We have really liked Okuma genos series. It's got bridge type construction with X & Z movement on spindle & y movement on table. 12000 RPM & OSP control with super nurbs.

Within the same budget we are getting MAKINO PS 105

Makino is offering 14000 Rpm spindle & core cooled ball screw as unique feature. However, the controller is equivalent to an upgraded fanuc Oi with 200 look ahead, 1ms block processing speed , AICC 2, nano smoothening etc..

They claim that with these features fanuc Oi will be able to perform decent 3d contouring as well. Does anyone has experience with Fanuc Oi 3d contouring capability?

We feel technically that Okuma could be a better choice as they are offering bridge like construction & more capable OSP P300 M-R controller.


BUT their presence in our area is negligible. Okuma's support & infra is still in its infant stage in India. Though they have sold quite a few machines in India but mostly to MNCs.



On the other hand Makino has invested a lot in India & is eager to push its machine in small job shops as well. They have already developed a core team which is open to work with customers in complex jobs. Further, spare parts & other services can also be expected to be better than Okuma for coming few years at least.

Please share your views as it may assist in making decision.
 
I'd want a thermally stable machine for mold work, and if the Genos doesn't have chilled ball screws I'd lean towards the Makino. The better support is a big factor too.

I'd suggest having a small test model cut by reps from both companies, using your supplied code (and no cheating on S/F) and see which gives the more consistent tool path finishes and geometry control (you have a CMM?). Maybe supply the tooling too so you know what was used for the cutting. Best proof is the results...
 
i recently visited a shop, where they were manufacturing molds

rough machines and finish machines

never roughing on a finish machine

well, i guess that somehow is obvious that a finish machine should always be used for finishing

if you intend to also rough on it, than you will weaken it .... again, at this point, machine accuracy may still be enough for your parts :)
 
Makino is offering 14000 Rpm spindle & core cooled ball screw as unique feature. However, the controller is equivalent to an upgraded fanuc Oi with 200 look ahead, 1ms block processing speed , AICC 2, nano smoothening etc..

there is no difference big difference in 12-14k rpm ... keep the machines at top speed for a while, and you are done ... consider an rpm amplifier :)

200look ahead, or look ahead size, matters when program has short lines with fast execution : thus there is no reason for great lookahead when G01 G91 X1000 F0.5 G94 is there :)

1ms block processing : block execution is generally greater than 1ms, thus control reaction/speed when reading future lines may be slower, without a loss in machining quality

if buffer is always ahead of your execution line, than it is great :) thus so far bought machines are ok :)

what means aicc2 and nano smoothing ?

Genos is a based entry machine from Okuma, with abso encoders and supernurbs : thus it sounds great for molds :) i know Genos characteristics ...

But Makino has cooled screws ... this means less corections, but does it has something like nurbs ? can you share a catalogue for Makino ? kindly !
 
Last edited:
i found a catalogue for Makino online : aicc2 seems to be the okumas_nurbs equivalent :)

bought have precision and repetability pretty close, within microns : check if makino also has absoencoders, and i think it has :)

i dont know : compute a crazy toolpath and run some tests, so to see which one handles better 3d shapes ? it may be irelevant, because in a mold shop time passes diferently, and a lot of caution is required

... based on specification, bought are ok :)
 
I would go with the bridge style over a c frame.... and I think the control is a better on the Okuma. I would bet Okuma could get a little more aggressive with pricing than Makino. Both would be pretty nice though.
 
Apples and oranges! FWIW the comparable makino is the F5.

Parts and service sounds to be a win for Makino.
there is a youtube video of Okuma super nurbs going against a makino/ fanuc. The Okuma wins handily. Is that worth the risk of no support? answer that and you'll have it.
 
I don't know if this is applicable, but doesn't the Fanuc NURBS option require CAM with NURBS support and special post output? I know SuperNURBS on Okuma just wants a fat stream of G-code to crunch on.
 
there is a youtube video of Okuma super nurbs going against a makino/ fanuc. The Okuma wins handily. Is that worth the risk of no support? answer that and you'll have it

you dont have 2 answer that if a good programer is in the house :)

he should run a new machine pretty fast ...

such elements are rare :)
 
makinos main broach / spindle has more powerful and larger bearings

okuma has bridge like construction

however, to compare rigidity, you should know / see each machine stripped :)
 
I always enjoy these comparisons, but one thing that keeps surprising me, is a Makino PS series machine being compared to an Okuma Genos series. Makino advertises their PS line as a more general purpose, dare I say "entry level" series machine. It might be unfair to describe them as "entry level" but that's what they appear to be, especially considering they have the "F" series & "V" series machines in their lineup. Yet, the "PS" machines seem to get compared against the Genos machines from Okuma quite often.

Trying to make an objective comparsion between these two would be almost futile really. I'm sure both machines are very high quality & capable of the job. What's probably more important, is to see if there's any certain "feature" or thing about either machine that jumps out as a big pro or con.

What I would do in your shoes, is provide a demo part model to be cut on both machines, and I'd supply the tooling for the test cuts as well. I'd make a sample program to be cut the exact same, on both machines. Then let the machine people suggest any changes they wanted to see and run the same part, but to their suggestions & parameters.

If by then it wasn't clear which machine stands out to you, then I'd pick the prettier machine, or whatever feature that stood out to you. :) Good luck.
 
What I would do in your shoes, is provide a demo part model to be cut on both machines, and I'd supply the tooling for the test cuts as well. I'd make a sample program to be cut the exact same, on both machines. Then let the machine people suggest any changes they wanted to see and run the same part, but to their suggestions & parameters.

That's such a good idea, that someone already suggested it in post #2... :D
 
It might be unfair to describe them as "entry level" but that's what they appear to be, especially considering they have the "F" series & "V" series machines in their lineup. Yet, the "PS" machines seem to get compared against the Genos machines from Okuma quite often.

Totally fair. Genos IS Okuma's entry level.
 
For me, the choice would boil down to the control.
The super user-friendly Okuma OSP control
or
the god awful Fanuc control. :ack2:
 
Yes. But it's worth it if you're doing mold work.

I saw a sample part from a machine using Okumas supernurbs. It was basically a lithograph of a scaled up dollar bill rendered in aluminum. the detail and accuracy were amazing.
 








 
Back
Top