Were these lathe/mill any good?

Were these lathe/mill any good?

Home Forums General Questions Were these lathe/mill any good?

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #27192
    not done it yet
    Participant
      @notdoneityet

      Warco WMT800

      #455639
      not done it yet
      Participant
        @notdoneityet

        I’ve just seen this on gum tree. Looks like it could be an impressive machine with turning and both vertical and (quite limited) horizontal operations all combined in the one machine.**LINK**

        Might be an option for some. It just looks a possible better alternative to the average chinese lathe with mill/drills available at the present time?

        Was it any good or anyone with any experience of them? Why did Warco drop it from their lines? Where was it made – China or Taiwan?

        Just interested, not even thinking of buying!

        #455642
        Michael Gilligan
        Participant
          @michaelgilligan61133

          It may, or may not, be mechanically sound … but it’s an Ergonomist’s nightmare !!

          MichaelG.

          #455648
          John Haine
          Participant
            @johnhaine32865

            Avoid at all costs.

            #455651
            Journeyman
            Participant
              @journeyman

              A compromise at best and you can buy a NEW Chester Centurian for less!

              John

              Edited By Journeyman on 06/03/2020 09:11:51

              #455653
              not done it yet
              Participant
                @notdoneityet

                I know I did not get on well with my cm500 – it has provided me with an innate dislike of this type of ‘multi-purpose’ machines such as these. I just used the CM500 as a lathe/drill really.

                Multi-purpose and Chinese were not a good combination, for sure. I just wondered whether this machine was any different – like better if made in Taiwan.

                Does it have two motors? The change-over was, and presumably likely still is, poor on the cm500. This one has even more centre height, so possibly even less rigid.

                Go on, John, give your reasons for avoidance at all costs.

                #455659
                Mike Poole
                Participant
                  @mikepoole82104

                  The headstock and tailstock seem too tall for the length in contact with the bed. I imagine the tailstock tending to lean if asked to apply any force for drilling duty. The proportion of things would not seem to indicate much rigidity in the machine so only really suitable for light duty.

                  Mike

                  #455670
                  John Haine
                  Participant
                    @johnhaine32865

                    Mike has said it all really.

                    #455688
                    Mick B1
                    Participant
                      @mickb1
                      Posted by John Haine on 06/03/2020 10:40:48:

                      Mike has said it all really.

                      +1 for that. It's true that the geometry looks as if rigidity has been the subject of unrestricted sacrifice in exchange for theoretical capacity.

                      I looked at a similar machine in Machine Mart once, and it had been so casually assembled that I could make no estimate of how much work it would take to put it into useful condition. I walked.

                    Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
                    • Please log in to reply to this topic. Registering is free and easy using the links on the menu at the top of this page.

                    Latest Replies

                    Home Forums General Questions Topics

                    Viewing 25 topics - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)
                    Viewing 25 topics - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)

                    View full reply list.