CAM vs Fusion 360

[steelsurgeon]

What are everyones thoughts on programming in Fusion 360?

Shop I work at has been using FeatureCAM for probably 15 years or more. I was initially trained on MasterCAM in school but have not used it much since. I have become pretty good at using FeatureCAM and do all the programming here. But like many others have surely noticed, the writing seems to be on the wall for FeatureCAM.

That being said, we have a new owner, hes the son of the original owner here and was already involved in the business so it was no major shake up with him buying the place. Hes an engineer and semi familiar with Fusion 360 and wants to start using it more and eventually gearing up to switch over to it completely for the inevitability that AD kills off FC.

So I have started messing around with Fusion, and it may just be me, but it seems clunky compared to FC and nowhere near as powerful. Keep in mind, I have only messed with it for a few hours and have no formal training or experience on it. I do have a decade or more experience with FeatureCAM and MasterCAM so in my mind it should be relatively comparable to them, but it does not seem to be. Am I wrong here?

Is it a mistake to try to start programming with Fusion 360 instead of a standalone CAM software? I think it is, personally, but boss man disagrees and thinks Fusion 360 is the answer going forward.

Where is the best place to start to learn Fusion 360 as it looks like I will have to start learning anyway?

 

[empower]

What are everyones thoughts on programming in Fusion 360?

Shop I work at has been using FeatureCAM for probably 15 years or more. I was initially trained on MasterCAM in school but have not used it much since. I have become pretty good at using FeatureCAM and do all the programming here. But like many others have surely noticed, the writing seems to be on the wall for FeatureCAM.

That being said, we have a new owner, hes the son of the original owner here and was already involved in the business so it was no major shake up with him buying the place. Hes an engineer and semi familiar with Fusion 360 and wants to start using it more and eventually gearing up to switch over to it completely for the inevitability that AD kills off FC.

So I have started messing around with Fusion, and it may just be me, but it seems clunky compared to FC and nowhere near as powerful. Keep in mind, I have only messed with it for a few hours and have no formal training or experience on it. I do have a decade or more experience with FeatureCAM and MasterCAM so in my mind it should be relatively comparable to them, but it does not seem to be. Am I wrong here?

Is it a mistake to try to start programming with Fusion 360 instead of a standalone CAM software? I think it is, personally, but boss man disagrees and thinks Fusion 360 is the answer going forward.

Where is the best place to start to learn Fusion 360 as it looks like I will have to start learning anyway?

there's literally hundreds of threads here about fusion... do a little search.

 

[steelsurgeon]

there's literally hundreds of threads here about fusion... do a little search.

I did search. I did not find exactly what I was looking for so I made a post.

 

[Micmac1]

I think its been said on here in a bunch of forums but basically if you are not doing ITAR work, and sticking to mostly 2 axis turning and ,3 axis occasional 4 axis milling, fusion 360 cant be beat for the price however it can be clunky at times. We use CamWorks and fusion, youger generation like fusion, more experienced guys tend to go with camworks.

 

[gregormarwick]

What are everyones thoughts on programming in Fusion 360?

Shop I work at has been using FeatureCAM for probably 15 years or more. I was initially trained on MasterCAM in school but have not used it much since. I have become pretty good at using FeatureCAM and do all the programming here. But like many others have surely noticed, the writing seems to be on the wall for FeatureCAM.

That being said, we have a new owner, hes the son of the original owner here and was already involved in the business so it was no major shake up with him buying the place. Hes an engineer and semi familiar with Fusion 360 and wants to start using it more and eventually gearing up to switch over to it completely for the inevitability that AD kills off FC.

So I have started messing around with Fusion, and it may just be me, but it seems clunky compared to FC and nowhere near as powerful. Keep in mind, I have only messed with it for a few hours and have no formal training or experience on it. I do have a decade or more experience with FeatureCAM and MasterCAM so in my mind it should be relatively comparable to them, but it does not seem to be. Am I wrong here?

Is it a mistake to try to start programming with Fusion 360 instead of a standalone CAM software? I think it is, personally, but boss man disagrees and thinks Fusion 360 is the answer going forward.

Where is the best place to start to learn Fusion 360 as it looks like I will have to start learning anyway?

Fusion is absolutely nowhere near as powerful as Featurecam. It has a long ways to go before there is parity there, so do not be too eager to switch. I think it very likely that when it does reach parity, most of that functionality will be locked behind pay-per-use paywalls.

And perhaps consider moving to a different system that is not going to be a downgrade.

I am using Featurecam, and I have zero intentions of moving to Fusion unless there are massive changes to the Fusion business model, and a real push to bring it up to functional parity with Featurecam.

 

[steelsurgeon]

Fusion is absolutely nowhere near as powerful as Featurecam. It has a long ways to go before there is parity there, so do not be too eager to switch. I think it very likely that when it does reach parity, most of that functionality will be locked behind pay-per-use paywalls.

And perhaps consider moving to a different system that is not going to be a downgrade.

I am using Featurecam, and I have zero intentions of moving to Fusion unless there are massive changes to the Fusion business model, and a real push to bring it up to functional parity with Featurecam.

That is my opinion as well. Sadly, not my bosses opinion.

 

[mhajicek]

The most important aspect from my point of view, is that if you use Fusion, Autodesk owns and controls your data. In an industry that requires DNAs, that makes Fusion not an option; simply using the software would violate the NDA. On top of that, you'd better be secure in your cashflow; if you miss a payment you get locked out of the software and your business grinds to a halt. Same thing happens if Autodesk decides to jack the price up and you can't pay it, if they discontinue it on a whim, or if they have server problems (that's happened to people here), or if your internet is out for too long. It's also happened that an update breaks a previously working file, and updates are mandatory.

Buy something with a perpetual license, and you can use it indefinitely, securely, and entirely on your local system. Updates become optional. There are people still making money with Mastercam versions that they bought 20+ years ago and never updated. The software still does everything it did when they bought it.

 

[empower]

The most important aspect from my point of view, is that if you use Fusion, Autodesk owns and controls your data. In an industry that requires DNAs, that makes Fusion not an option; simply using the software would violate the NDA. On top of that, you'd better be secure in your cashflow; if you miss a payment you get locked out of the software and your business grinds to a halt. Same thing happens if Autodesk decides to jack the price up and you can't pay it, if they discontinue it on a whim, or if they have server problems (that's happened to people here), or if your internet is out for too long. It's also happened that an update breaks a previously working file, and updates are mandatory.

Buy something with a perpetual license, and you can use it indefinitely, securely, and entirely on your local system. Updates become optional. There are people still making money with Mastercam versions that they bought 20+ years ago and never updated. The software still does everything it did when they bought it.

if you cant afford 500/yr, you're prob doing something wrong as a business, lol

 

[mhajicek]

if you cant afford 500/yr, you're prob doing something wrong as a business, lol

Sure. How about when they know they have enough people hooked, and they jack the price up year after year? Or start hiding functions you rely on behind much steeper "premium" price points? If you have your entire library of repeat parts done in their software, and you want to be able to do revisions and optimizations, they have you over a barrel.

 

[empower]

Sure. How about when they know they have enough people hooked, and they jack the price up year after year? Or start hiding functions you rely on behind much steeper "premium" price points? If you have your entire library of repeat parts done in their software, and you want to be able to do revisions and optimizations, they have you over a barrel.

if they're repeat parts, why do you need the cam file? NC files can be stored on local server. we do this routinely.

 

[mhajicek]

if they're repeat parts, why do you need the cam file? NC files can be stored on local server. we do this routinely.

As I said, revisions and optimizations. I try to improve my processes every time I run a part, don't you?

 

[empower]

As I said, revisions and optimizations. I try to improve my processes every time I run a part, don't you?

hardly ever, most of the parts we do are 100+ qty, just got a PO for 6500 parts. what that means is i spend the time to dial it in the first time and not worry about it later.

 

[Dan B]

If you do go with Fusion check out NYCCNC.com. There's a lot of helpful information there.

 

[gregormarwick]

hardly ever, most of the parts we do are 100+ qty, just got a PO for 6500 parts. what that means is i spend the time to dial it in the first time and not worry about it later.

And if you need to move it onto a different machine, or some of the tools you have optimised it for go EOL or are out of stock?

We do 1-5 qty parts mostly, and they often are a couple of years between repeats, often up-rev'd.

We don't keep nc code at all.

People throw that "if you can't afford x" argument around all the time in defense of Fusion. Consciously or otherwise, it's a strawman, or at the very least a very lazy argument.

 

[empower]

And if you need to move it onto a different machine, or some of the tools you have optimised it for go EOL or are out of stock?

We do 1-5 qty parts mostly, and they often are a couple of years between repeats, often up-rev'd.

We don't keep nc code at all.

People throw that "if you can't afford x" argument around all the time in defense of Fusion. Consciously or otherwise, it's a strawman, or at the very least a very lazy argument.

i get where you're coming from, i do! it just isnt an issue for us.

 

[specfab]

I am not an experienced programming user of Fusion (by a very long shot), but I was an early adopter of the package for modeling work, as I was already a middling AutoCad user, and at a point where I was starting up a single-person shop, between mergers and acquisitions of various companies I had worked for. It looked like a good deal for the money. That said, I started working with the CAM functionality a couple of years ago, some months after they added it to the package. I found it (at THAT time) to be rather easy to use, intuitive, and seemingly streamlined, in my ignorant state. Today, I am still no expert at all, and it seems like the programming effort is much higher, most likely because of my inexperience and all the features that have been added in the meantime. It may be much more like "real" CAM software now.

I am commenting only because I have to agree with others that point out the hazards of cloud-based software. I would never rely on this software as a single-source for running your CAD/CAM operations, if I were at all worried about critical scheduling and having control of data. I have had probably two dozen incidents where either my ISP was out to lunch, or the Autodesk servers were down, and I could NOT do the work that I had planned. In the company that I own with a couple of partners, we use Solidworks and Smartcam, stand-alone packages where we have complete control of the data. For my single-person shop, I am not relying on this stuff on an hour-to-hour basis for success.

 

[len_1962]

I am not an experienced programming user of Fusion (by a very long shot), but I was an early adopter of the package for modeling work, as I was already a middling AutoCad user, and at a point where I was starting up a single-person shop, between mergers and acquisitions of various companies I had worked for. It looked like a good deal for the money. That said, I started working with the CAM functionality a couple of years ago, some months after they added it to the package. I found it (at THAT time) to be rather easy to use, intuitive, and seemingly streamlined, in my ignorant state. Today, I am still no expert at all, and it seems like the programming effort is much higher, most likely because of my inexperience and all the features that have been added in the meantime. It may be much more like "real" CAM software now.

I am commenting only because I have to agree with others that point out the hazards of cloud-based software. I would never rely on this software as a single-source for running your CAD/CAM operations, if I were at all worried about critical scheduling and having control of data. I have had probably two dozen incidents where either my ISP was out to lunch, or the Autodesk servers were down, and I could NOT do the work that I had planned. In the company that I own with a couple of partners, we use Solidworks and Smartcam, stand-alone packages where we have complete control of the data. For my single-person shop, I am not relying on this stuff on an hour-to-hour basis for success.

You do get HSMWorks with your Fusion 360 that you can use inside of SolidWorks, if you are current with SolidWorks you have SWCAM too.

 

[steelsurgeon]

If you do go with Fusion check out NYCCNC.com. There's a lot of helpful information there.

Its been a while since I had a chance to get back to this thread.

We have indeed started the process to switch mainly due to having to work with 3D models and getting into more 4 axis work. I had watched a few of his videos before but never the Fusion ones until now. They are a great asset and help alot.

My first impressions of Fusion, having never used it before, is it is ok. I like some features of it but there are many things I would like to see different.

For example, one thing I miss from FeatureCAM is the ability to pick a stock point or geometry point to use as an origin for your WCS, and then offset it from that point an amount of your choosing. Fusion has no option to do this.

Another is the tool library, there are no reamers in the stock library. Just having common sizes would be nice so I dont have to create a new reamer everytime I need one, I could just modify a generic one.

Also, what CAD/CAM software designer in their right mind would not include NPT threads? We do a lot of NPT threads and Fusion has no built in NPT thread values. You have to make a custom thread for them. This is a common sense inclusion and I can’t understand why it isnt included with all the other oddball threads that are included.

Overall, I think it could be a viable option. I do not like the subscription aspect of it at all. I still think FeatureCAM is a more powerful CAM program. I miss the ability to set default values for almost everything like you can in FeatureCAM. In Fusion, there is the ability to set some default values but nowhere near the amount in FeatureCAM. I do like the tool library itself more in Fusion, its not as clunky as FeatureCAMs.

Also, the post is in JavaScript so I had to learn some of that to make some minor modifications to the post. That wasn’t too hard because I have messed with macros before (on a very limited scale, but just enough) and it seems very similar to macros. The hardest part for me is finding where to put the features I want in the post in the 6000 line JavaScript file.

 

[steelsurgeon]

And if you need to move it onto a different machine, or some of the tools you have optimised it for go EOL or are out of stock?

We do 1-5 qty parts mostly, and they often are a couple of years between repeats, often up-rev'd.

We don't keep nc code at all.

People throw that "if you can't afford x" argument around all the time in defense of Fusion. Consciously or otherwise, it's a strawman, or at the very least a very lazy argument.

We dont keep NC code either. We (mainly myself) go into the part file each time and update tools/processes and repost the program into a temporary folder to send out to the machine. Works well for us as we may not run something for 6 months, a year or even several years sometimes. Usually by that point the program is out of date because tools have changed or been upgraded or we have learned an easier/better way to do something.

Also I find, no matter how good I think I made a program or how thoroughly I checked it, I often find something that could be improved upon. Or somebody else points out an improvement that could be made that didn’t even cross my mind at the time of creating the CAM file.

 

[steelsurgeon]

I am not an experienced programming user of Fusion (by a very long shot), but I was an early adopter of the package for modeling work, as I was already a middling AutoCad user, and at a point where I was starting up a single-person shop, between mergers and acquisitions of various companies I had worked for. It looked like a good deal for the money. That said, I started working with the CAM functionality a couple of years ago, some months after they added it to the package. I found it (at THAT time) to be rather easy to use, intuitive, and seemingly streamlined, in my ignorant state. Today, I am still no expert at all, and it seems like the programming effort is much higher, most likely because of my inexperience and all the features that have been added in the meantime. It may be much more like "real" CAM software now.

I am commenting only because I have to agree with others that point out the hazards of cloud-based software. I would never rely on this software as a single-source for running your CAD/CAM operations, if I were at all worried about critical scheduling and having control of data. I have had probably two dozen incidents where either my ISP was out to lunch, or the Autodesk servers were down, and I could NOT do the work that I had planned. In the company that I own with a couple of partners, we use Solidworks and Smartcam, stand-alone packages where we have complete control of the data. For my single-person shop, I am not relying on this stuff on an hour-to-hour basis for success.

Thats the part that concerns me the most as well, the cloud base. In my personal life the only thing I use the cloud for is my phone backup and I dont even like that. I have made my concerns clear to the boss about that and he isnt as concerned. Seeings how its his signature on my check and his cross to bear if it ever becomes a problem, Ill do it how he wants. He stands to lose a lot more than I do and its his decision.

The CAM side is more advanced than I thought it would be listening to others gripe about it. I was a bit fearful this was going to be agonizing to use but it hasnt been bad so far. We have the newest version and its pretty good for the price. Its still not as powerful as FC or MC in my opinion but I have also been using those traditional style CAM softwares for 10 years or more and been using Fusion for maybe 2 or 3 weeks now. Obviously, I am going to have a bias to FC/MC at this time.