What's new
What's new

Universal Mill vs Turret Mill

SLRist

Plastic
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Location
Portsmouth UK
For some time I've been planning to upgrade my mill to something properly decent. I have a reasonable amount to spend having sold a second car, and wanted to avoid the potential pitfalls of buying an old used industrial mill, so have been looking to see what can be bought new in the (very) low 5 figures range. I'd been looking at various beefed-up Bridgeport clones, but I have an issue with ceiling height in my workshop - 2.4 metres (7'10") max, and this is a real issue with turret mills. Then I came to thinking that one of the universal mills might be a better bet - something like this model:

VICTORY 32 Mill – Chester Machine Tools

universalmill.jpg

These are well within my height restrictions, and would seem to provide additional flexibility as it has the ability to mill horizontally as well as vertically. My guess is that they're also rather more rigid than a Bridgeport style mill. The obvious limitation is the lack of a quill. I'm not quite so bothered about the inability to swing the head of the mill laterally.

Having not used a universal mill without a quill before, I was wondering whether someone could tell me whether this proves to be a huge obstacle in practice. I plan to hang onto my existing - very junior - mill which will be demoted to duties as a glorified drill press.

Grateful for any advice - thanks.
 
Hi SLRist:
Turret mills are so much more versatile than these Huron style mills that I wouldn't even consider one of these unless you intend to do a lot of bog-standard milling of reasonably large parts.
True, they are typically stiffer than a turret mill (but not this flimsy looking little thing) but they are clunky for anything other than taking milling cuts on longish parts with power feed.

The ideal circumstance for you would be to find a smaller turret mill; there is a Bridgeport clone out there that is a sort of "3/4 sized Bridgeport" that a buddy of mine bought (Taiwanese but nicely built and branded "Sharp Machine Tools".
He's been very happy with his and it's a great hobby sized machine.
Table stroke is 24 x 10 I believe and it's an R8 spindle with about 2 ponies to drive it.
Not the most rigid mill on the planet, but a very decent machine that you can actually work professionally on.

I have no idea whether you can buy something like this in the UK.

Your other option is to find a nice Aciera or Deckel FP1.
Those are nice machines too and prices are roughly competitive with new Asian machines at least in my area (western Canada).
You could also look at the quintessential British mills; I've heard that Tom Senior mills can be made to do good work.

I'd stay away from this beast...You'll likely find it awkward to use.

Cheers

Marcus
Implant Mechanix • Design & Innovation > HOME
www.vancouverwireedm.com
 
For some time I've been planning to upgrade my mill to something properly decent. I have a reasonable amount to spend having sold a second car, and wanted to avoid the potential pitfalls of buying an old used industrial mill, so have been looking to see what can be bought new in the (very) low 5 figures range. I'd been looking at various beefed-up Bridgeport clones, but I have an issue with ceiling height in my workshop - 2.4 metres (7'10") max, and this is a real issue with turret mills. Then I came to thinking that one of the universal mills might be a better bet - something like this model:

VICTORY 32 Mill – Chester Machine Tools

View attachment 215158

These are well within my height restrictions, and would seem to provide additional flexibility as it has the ability to mill horizontally as well as vertically. My guess is that they're also rather more rigid than a Bridgeport style mill. The obvious limitation is the lack of a quill. I'm not quite so bothered about the inability to swing the head of the mill laterally.

Having not used a universal mill without a quill before, I was wondering whether someone could tell me whether this proves to be a huge obstacle in practice. I plan to hang onto my existing - very junior - mill which will be demoted to duties as a glorified drill press.

Grateful for any advice - thanks.

I'd say keep looking. THAT one has no advancing quill, nor any especially marvelous claims otherwise, either. Many others do.

My "Quartet" is a rare - and I daresay "weird" - example, but there were better choices made, UK & Continental European - Med to the Arctic circle - more than most.

US practice - where power and space were not so dear, we ordinarily just placed two mills, different persuasions, rather than invest in a single "combo" mill that needed more time and nuisance over long years for its sex-changes, one task to the next.
 
If your not bothered about the quill a Huron as big as the height it will allow would be my choice every time before a bridgeport as for wasting time taking head off to go horizontal it only takes 15mins and I like the extra table space and traverse a Huron gives add the fact it takes a far deeper cuts and the head swings side and forward in my opinion a much more desirable machine and they rarely break down theres plenty of used ones available.Unless the newer versions have changed the moving to final posistion by the handwheel can be a back breaker especially in the "Z" axis with those round bakelite handles should imagine they have done away with them but you do get used to them as you can move very close to your mark as with confidence as they stop exactly wher you want them to,Overall a very nice machine built by the france and in their day often used in the aerospace industry
 
For some time I've been planning to upgrade my mill to something properly decent. I have a reasonable amount to spend having sold a second car, and wanted to avoid the potential pitfalls of buying an old used industrial mill, so have been looking to see what can be bought new in the (very) low 5 figures range. I'd been looking at various beefed-up Bridgeport clones, but I have an issue with ceiling height in my workshop - 2.4 metres (7'10") max, and this is a real issue with turret mills. Then I came to thinking that one of the universal mills might be a better bet - something like this model:

VICTORY 32 Mill – Chester Machine Tools

View attachment 215158

These are well within my height restrictions, and would seem to provide additional flexibility as it has the ability to mill horizontally as well as vertically. My guess is that they're also rather more rigid than a Bridgeport style mill. The obvious limitation is the lack of a quill. I'm not quite so bothered about the inability to swing the head of the mill laterally.

Having not used a universal mill without a quill before, I was wondering whether someone could tell me whether this proves to be a huge obstacle in practice. I plan to hang onto my existing - very junior - mill which will be demoted to duties as a glorified drill press.

Grateful for any advice - thanks.

The mill in your picture is pretty common here with the caveat that a number of different manufacturers make them...differently. Quality wise. It's excellent - very accurate, capable of a decent and stable cut, leaves a B/Port in the dust. The table travels are a bit on the short side - I found that 800mm minimum is a sweet spot there. The absence of a quill is VERY irritating in non-production setting. I'd be able to recommend something different once you tell us what you're doing with it. But, a new mill ( or lathe ) beats a used dilapidated one by many miles. You want to push a button and start working not do endless and uncertain repairs of yesterday's greats, now today's rubbish. Ask me how I learned that...
 
I don't see any provision for swiveling the table, which I think is what makes a "universal" mill.

True. Semantically, at least.

This one might be more accurately described as a "combination" mill, though IIRC, the ancient B&S "Universal" of similar layout didn't necessarily always have a swiveling table, either.

"What's in a name, and why?", then.

On the "Quartet" the turret column permits setting either/both horizontal & vertical spindles at an angle to the table, rather than setting the table to an angle to the spindle's axis. 180-plus degrees, actually, as the vertical and horizontal spindles are (ordinarily) on opposite ends of the turret or its ram, and neither is limited to the rather effective "in tram, now" plunger stop built-in.

Even so, not the same end-result, as it means there is a divergence, early-on, and at even shallow angles, of cutter axis from center of the table travel.

By comparison, the universal table on my Burke #4, where the table pivot is always ON the same CL as the horizontal spindle, (and/or a supplementary vertical head mounted to it and the over-arm), setup for cutting helical gears or spirals would be simpler.

Mind - absent a Dividing Head meant for the task, (mine was not) gearing to match, (neither even has provision for that) it isn't really an application I'd want to mess with on either of my mills.

FWIW-not-much-dept?

A "Quartet" is a multiple of the mass of a Bee Pee (~ 2 1/4 tons..) in a shape that doesn't LOOK all that much larger. That part is deceptive. A 'space saver' it is not. It needs a rather large space footprint. Not just table traverse - one needs room to rotate the turret a full 180 degrees to switch from horizontal to vertical use.

Huron, Rambaudi, Van norman, Abene....B&S, legions of horizontals with add-on vertical heads...other fellow-travelers... at least don't need all of that "turntable" space.
 
Given the choice of that ram type machine or a Bridgeport style machine I think I'd go for the ram type. Not having a travelling quill is a blow but other than that the ram type looks good to me.
A Bridgeport type machine is very versatile with all the degrees of adjustment you get, having said that the same degree of versatility means you lose rigidity.

Guys who've used "Huron" machines swear by them and that machine is really like a smaller, poor man's " Huron ". One place I worked at had a similar machine to machine a large radii on a component by tilting the vertical head in two planes and using a large milling cutter. Prior to that they had been boring the radii on a hor bore.

Regards Tyrone.
 
Given the choice of that ram type machine or a Bridgeport style machine I think I'd go for the ram type. Not having a travelling quill is a blow but other than that the ram type looks good to me.
A Bridgeport type machine is very versatile with all the degrees of adjustment you get, having said that the same degree of versatility means you lose rigidity.

Guys who've used "Huron" machines swear by them and that machine is really like a smaller, poor man's " Huron ". One place I worked at had a similar machine to machine a large radii on a component by tilting the vertical head in two planes and using a large milling cutter. Prior to that they had been boring the radii on a hor bore.

Regards Tyrone.

Spec sheet showing "net weight 2100 kg" is good news, too, IMNSHO.

That's only about 500 Avoir less than a "Quartet" - most of which is in the Quartet's more massive ram, multiple motors (four, if one counts the built-in coolant pump), otherwise H-spindle, V-spindle, and knee traverse power.

Waaay stouter than a Bee Pee any way you measure it.

Also more than stout enough to allow pulling its OEM vertical and hanging a Bee Pee or any of several other suitable heads on it that DO have an advancing quill.

"Nod", too, if one needs that.

Wouldn't be surprised if BOTH are available options, brand-new, and purpose-fitted, from the maker, BTW.

Worth a recce, that?
 
Poor boys Huron is probably as good a way as any to describe that machine.

If you haven't already done so its worth nipping over to the Huron pages at http://www.lathes.co.uk/huronmillers/ to see the sort of work that style of machine is intended to do. Despite the swivelling head its in no way shape of form a Bridgeport substitute. Its best thought of as a horizontal mill with extra cutter access capabilities due to the swivelling head. The sort of thing Huron style machines do really well is cutting surfaces on big. tall or otherwise hard to mount castings and fabrications. Often a less huge (Hurons are much bigger in the metal than they photograph) alternative to planer/mill. Horizontals, and Huron type machines, are great at burying you in chips but the manner in which they need to be driven seriously limits the jobs that they can be used for.

Gate do what looks to be the same machine, model PBM-UM5, see PBM-UM5 (MOA) | Gate Machinery . Going by the pictures I'd want a cycle helmet or hard hat before using it in horizontal mode! The swivel head poking way out the front looks perfectly positioned to clonk your head on when walking round concentrating on set up. Seems about the same level as the lowest branch on my apple tree. Be rich man if I had a quid for every time I've head butted that whilst mowing!

I'm not sure that you realise just how physically large it is. Pictures are deceptive. Absolutely need to get a look at one and spend some handle twiddling time before buying.

Being faced with the same sort of "upgrade from Bridgeport despite low ceiling issues" (8 ft 1") I currently reckon a bed mill is the decent option. After all the head doesn't have to be run right up to the top of the column. Then the question becomes CNC or not. If CNC whats the point of a quill anyway? These days if you are spending serious money CNC is probably the more correct route unless very sure that manual really is the only way.

Clive
 
I own a German-made Lietz Universal Horizontal toolroom mill, with rotating table, set of change gears for 4th axis and a vertical head. I've used the vertical head a couple of times but the lack of a quill is definitely awkward. I've rotated the table once.

Normal work-around with the vertical head is to relocate work so that the "X" axis becomes the "Y" axis, which is convenient for some boring and drilling operations but not for 90% of work. Naturally, mills like these require a collection of tombstones and other semi-specialized tooling that, while not hard to obtain, might be costly.

Mine sits idle most of the time and is used almost exclusively for squaring stock. With a helical slab cutter, it does this superbly. I guess I could get along without a vertical mill (i.e. a quill) if I had to but it wouldn't be easy and definitely would be time-consuming.

PS, FWIW, when the vertical head is used, it is quite rigid, secured both at the driven side and the outboard end by the overarm. The additional rigidity is (again) mainly useful for roughing or squaring stock and adding little to the versatility of the head.
 
Last edited:
Hi All:
This business of which brand or style of machine is "better" is a question that often brings a good bit of passion into the conversation.
Those who've run big heavy equipment tend to regard those machines as more capable, and if you want to remove a lot of material, there's no argument.
But if you look at the OP's post, he gives the very strong impression he's a hobbyist looking to fit a mill into his garage.
A ram style milling machine with a universal head and a top speed of 1750 RPM is TOTALLY inappropriate for a user like that unless his hobby is way out there in crazyland.
Sure you can whack off a quarter inch at a time from a 2000 pound steel block, but I'll bet he can't even put a block like that onto his machine unless he happens to have a spare forklift parked behind the shop.

A turret mill, Bridgeport sized or a bit smaller however, is a super capable machine for most of what most hobby guys do.
It doesn't matter that you can't bury a 2" shell mill in 4140 on a Bridgeport...you CAN drill a 1/16" hole with it and do it rather well.
You can run a 1/2" endmill and remove lots more material than you can with a cold chisel and a file, but you can also run a 1/32 endmill and nibble around on tiny stuff too, so if you want to make your model steam locomotive or whatever, the better choice is obvious.

That Victory 32 the OP is looking at is hopelessly clunky for anything small or delicate.
The OP is scaling up from a mill-drill...this thing is like buying a dump truck to go get your groceries.

Cheers

Marcus
Implant Mechanix • Design & Innovation > HOME
www.vancouverwireedm.com
 
"You can run a 1/2" endmill and remove lots more material than you can with a cold chisel and a file, but you can also run a 1/32 endmill and nibble around on tiny stuff too,..."

Same for a 12,000lb 25hp Cincy #3 vertical. I have done lots of fine work in that machine, and never broke an endmill, thanks to the geared three axis powerfeed that lets you actually calculate a chipload before you even start cutting. I haven't used the Bridgeport copies at work since we got the #3 and the #2 horizontal ten years ago. In my three year absence, I was forced to use one of those 3/4 size Taiwanese Bport copies at the chrome shop and it did work, but it was miserably flimsy and underpowered. Same could be said for a 9"SB versus a 12" Leblond Regal, but I know which one I prefer.
 
Thanks all - It does sound to me like I need to be looking at a Bridgeport clone. The heaviest, chunkiest one I can physically fit in the space available. Turns out my space is even smaller than I remember - 2.3m (7"6") - though I can cut a strip of drywall giving me a channel between the ceiling beams to gain an extra 400mm height giving 2.7m (8'10") but only 530mm (21") wide. Probably enough to accommodate the motor on a turret mill though, and as it will run the length of the garage - I would be able to swing the head down inside the channel if I needed to - assuming I orientate it square-on to the wall. Far from ideal, but possible...

As for use - not just tiny stuff - anything from overboring engine blocks downwards really. I was always told that you can use a larger machine for the small stuff, but not a small machine for the big stuff.

I've seen turret mills being offered from various vendors - very hard to tell the wheat from the chaff, and there is a lot of variability in the basic offerings - ISO taper, variable drive speed, digital scales on axes, air drawbar, ballscrews, coolant pump etc. Baileigh seem to offer some well spec'd ones when they're on sale (which seems to be quite often) - but definitely not cheap.
 
Thanks all - It does sound to me like I need to be looking at a Bridgeport clone. The heaviest, chunkiest one I can physically fit in the space available.
Perhaps I am "mentally contaminated" by having spent far more time on pure horizontals than on Bee Pee or Toolmaster .. but I think for the range of work now stated, you were better-served with your initial inclination.

A horizontal doesn't just need less vertical space for itself (and drawbar). It usually needs less vertical space for the mounted-up workpiece.

As to stout? My Quartet has a more massive ram for it vertical head and with more useful power (#9 B&S taper) than a Bee Pee / clone can transfer with the common R8 as its weakest link.

But also.. was fitted by a previous owner with an adapter for the 5 HP 40-taper horizontal spindle that mounts a re-purposed K&T universal head - also 40-taper. And... a K&T slotter. Bee Pee's have similar options, too. Deckel's as well.. "plus-plus", even - if one can afford to collect 'em. But neither are anywhere near as stout as even a "medium" horizontal or combo can support.

Any Bee Pee "clone" - upgrade, really - that can match that flexibility AND have decent power, such as a Basque-country Republic-Lagun or one of the heavier Taiwanese models, isn't likely to fit under my 8' ceiling or your lesser one and/or will be a nuisance to use if shoehorned in.

Ex: Tip of the Quartet drawbar is 17" below the 8' ceiling, wrench flats much lower yet. Fortunately, the head is easily swung-over if/as/when it needs pulled full-out.

"Been a while", but ISTR even a 1J is taller, and a 2J surely is, no?

2CW
 
Hi again SLRist:
I had pretty much exactly the same situation in my former shop that I'd set up in a Mini Storage warehouse in downtown Vancouver.
I was able to park a full sized Bridgeport clone by doing exactly as you're contemplating, taking the drywall away between two joists and setting up the machine so the motor would just clear the joists when I needed to tilt the head.
Worked brilliantly.

In reference to your comments about big machines and small jobs, here's my take: the thing about using a big machine for small stuff is that everything becomes very awkward and therefore time consuming.
I can certainly turn a 1/8" diameter bar on a 24" swing lathe, but it's not an attractive option.
Just chucking the bar becomes a problem, never mind the massive power consumption every time you spin it up.
Everything is further away from where your nose needs to be, everything is heavier and therefore less sensitive to move, so you quickly lose the feel of what your cutting tools are doing, and although Mike C is correct that you can calculate feedrates and make a tiny cutter work even if you can't feel it or hear it or even see it, everything becomes a much more elaborate production; much like driving a CNC mill.


So I encourage you to pick a machine well suited to most of what you'll do.
It'll be awkward at the ends of its range of course; but no matter what you pick, there will be some work for which it's not well suited.
If you're severely space constrained and are buying to a budget your options are a bit limited.
A very nice mill for someone like you (from what very little we know of your work mix) would be something like a Deckel FP2 in decent shape.
They're relatively small for their work envelope, they're reasonably rigid (orders of magnitude better than a Bridgeport) and you can get just about every accessory known to man for them, so you can make them do a lot.
Bridgeports by contrast are at least as versatile, can still make very nice work and are typically a fifth of the price.
Whatever you end up getting, in my opinion a quill with at least 5" of stroke and a DRO are worth a lot.
Heavy hogging capability would be far down MY list, as would be a huge table.

Cheers

Marcus
Implant Mechanix • Design & Innovation > HOME
www.vancouverwireedm.com
 
I own a German-made Lietz Universal Horizontal toolroom mill, with rotating table, set of change gears for 4th axis and a vertical head. I've used the vertical head a couple of times but the lack of a quill is definitely awkward. I've rotated the table once.

Normal work-around with the vertical head is to relocate work so that the "X" axis becomes the "Y" axis, which is convenient for some boring and drilling operations but not for 90% of work. Naturally, mills like these require a collection of tombstones and other semi-specialized tooling that, while not hard to obtain, might be costly.

Mine sits idle most of the time and is used almost exclusively for squaring stock. With a helical slab cutter, it does this superbly. I guess I could get along without a vertical mill (i.e. a quill) if I had to but it wouldn't be easy and definitely would be time-consuming.

PS, FWIW, when the vertical head is used, it is quite rigid, secured both at the driven side and the outboard end by the overarm. The additional rigidity is (again) mainly useful for roughing or squaring stock and adding little to the versatility of the head.


"X axis becomes Y axis"? I'm lost on that. All that would require is clocking the workpiece 90 degrees.
 
As above,one shop I worked at we had a row of No.2 Parkson universals and one BP. If a small boring job came along,and the BP was occupied,it would have to be done on the Parkson.
 
Thanks implmex - I have noticed the Deckel FP2 - it looks like a good machine - if a little limited in X-travel. My only issue is that I think I'd be taking a big punt buying a used machine in a model I'm not familiar with. There's a lot which can go wrong with an old mill, and you can't just drive it down to the local garage to have it fixed unlike a second hand car...

On the plus side, buying used, you will seldom lose a lot if you decide to sell it and buy something else.
 








 
Back
Top