when is a precision vice not a precision vice>?

[larry phelan 1Participant @larryphelan1]

David,

Not sure I would agree with you all the way. I know "you get what you pay for" most times,but if an item is that bad that it is unfit for purpose,it should not even be offered for sale to begin with.

No body expects to get tool room quality for small money,but at least the item should be usable.

I think both of those Members had a reasonable complaint. Perhaps it,s too easy to be led astray by relying on a name or a maker.

Look at it this way,there are cheaper ways of getting a doorstop !

PS Glad to see you are still around , I enjoyed many of your articles in the MEW over the years.

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Well he was still around in 2013 when this thread was started.

[Nick HulmeParticipant @nickhulme30114]

Posted by larry phelan 1 on 17/08/2018 12:04:58:

David,

Not sure I would agree with you all the way. I know "you get what you pay for" most times,but if an item is that bad that it is unfit for purpose,it should not even be offered for sale to begin with.

Sadly the market is driven by cheap buyers who expect "Summat for Nowt" so the dealers cater for it.

It is entirely the fault of the majority of buyers buying cheaply irrespective of quality, if no-one bought cheap rubbish there'd be no market for it.

[PeteParticipant @pete41194]

Possibly a proper example of the difference between cheap and something that works as intended might prevent some from misinterpreting what's meant. Deciding to jump up to a much larger mill some years ago was going to be at the far end of what I really wanted to spend. And tooling up that mill has turned out to be far more expensive than I'd thought. Shortly after buying that mill I then bought 2 Kurt "style" 4" capacity milling vises. They looked pretty good on the surface, nice smooth and mostly well finished castings. At least the painted and well ground surfaces lead me to think they should be fairly decent. In use I started seeing some inaccuracy's far outside what was wanted or that should have been there. The vise beds were checked and both were ground parrallel to the bottom surfaces, the jaws well finished and all looked fine. The rear fixed jaws on both vises were then checked with indicators as each was tightened. I was seeing .005" – about .007" deflection even under moderate tightening pressures and a workpiece would not stay tight to the parrallels no matter how much a dead blow was used. The rear jaw was lifting so I readjusted the set screw at the rear of the movable jaw that prevents that. Sometimes it then didn't lift, but it wasn't a very consistant condition.

At that point I decided on a full disassembly. As they say don't judge a book by it's cover. The internal surfaces that you can't see even when judging how well somethings made in a display case were much much different than those exterior ones are. The wedge used on Kurt type vises were in the as cast condition. That design requires the half ball to smoothly slide down that angle and help pull the movable jaw down as the vise get's tightened. But here's where the real problems started showing up. The internal as cast surfaces were extremely rough with more than a few incompleted cast sections. I then took one of the vise body's down to the local radiator shop and paid them so I could use there sand blaster. Finding a blow hole ridden and bondo filled casting under that smooth paint meant that even though I could have fixed what some of the mechanical problems were I can't begin to fix faulty castings who's quality of cast iron was now more than a little suspect. Lot's of problems on some of the cheaper tooling can be fixed by the end user. Stefan Gotteswinter on Youtube shows doing exactly that on quite a bit from the far east and ending up with a far superior bit of tooling. You still have to start with something sound enough to make the effort worth while. Those 2 vises cost me approximately $400. At best they'd be ok for less than precision work on a drill press. I'm also sure anyone here would have reached the same conclusions as I did. So finding out I'd now wasted everything they cost was at best an expensive learning lesson for me. Are some of those cheaper (not the very cheapest) vises any good? Likely some are. Mine certainly weren't. I suppose a great deal depends on which factory is making them and there own quality control for the cast irons specifications and quality as well. I also learned that the less your prepared to spend then the more double checking you should be prepared to do to obtain the minimum of what's required to match your expectations and needs. Upgrading to 2 more 6" capacity vises then cost a bit more than 1k. However that money wasn't wasted and they do exactly what decent vises should. I also tested and checked there internals to be sure I did get what I was paying for. My lessons have been learned the hard way. I now take little I buy on faith including checking as best I can anything with well regarded brand names on them.

[Brian WarwickParticipant @brianwarwick88192]

Clearly I am missing something here, I thought the question was "when is a precision vice not a precision vice" not everyone slagging cheap vices or telling stories of how they purchased a piece of equipment that was not as good as they hoped.

Surely if you purchase a vice that is sold to a standard and it does not meet that standard you return it, or is it a case of purchasing something hoping its going to be better than the spec offered and when its not blaming the supplier for selling exactly what was advertised.

Do you buy based on the looks of an item rather than its specification, if the item does not have a specification or you can not trust the supplier then don't buy it unless your buying it as a project.

[PeteParticipant @pete41194]

Sigh, here we go again. I thought I gave a proper example of "supposedly" precision milling vise's that clearly werent. And just like Fizzy's example both as I said looked very nice as well.Or aren't Kurt type vises now classified and defined as something precision? A common bench vise wouldn't fit that precision term, but a milling vise should and better be if you expect any precision and dependable results while machining parts held in them. And I wasn't as you call it slagging anything at all, I was stating exactly what could be possible even when not buying at the very bottom of the price ladder. And the full story was a little more complex than I thought would even need mentioning. Apparently that wasn't correct. Buying both those vises in person over 3,000 miles from where my home is happened to be very convienient for me at the time since getting them home cost me nothing. And no where were there any accuracy guarantees. I based my purchase on what I was told and was seeing at the time. And as I also said both vises were quite precisely ground and finished. My checks did show that. So my gut feeling while buying them wasn't wrong. But they only fit that precision term until you actualy put them under there working loads. I then went on to explain WHY that was so. Investing even more money to ship them back that 3,000 + miles would have been more costs. So it wasn't a just pop down a mile or two to the local dealer to return them type of situation.I simply decided to write the mistake off as the most cost effective way forward. Fizzy the OP's exact question was a bit more than "when is a precision vise not a precision vise" since you want to point back to the OP. It was also "should we have to". I gave some first hand examples and reasons that doing a lot more than simply machining the jaws and tightening some bolts as he did might be required. Even to the point where it might become impossible to fix some core issues if there serious enough. So should we have to as he first asked? Certainly not, but I thought I made it plain that if you don't do some checks yourself then how would you know if it's a precision vise or not. It should also be obvious that he did that checking and fixed what wasn't precise on his vise. I wasn't arguing for or against what some think of as RR quality. Others who seem to know a fair bit seemed to understand my points and didn't consider it going off on a tangent. Yet it still seems some took them as condensending and OT. I implied nor meant either and have already said as much before. It's quite apparent that's still not to be believed by some who chose to take it that way. You can take my posts as exactly what they say without any added and unsaid words or implications. Michael, Larry, Hopper and Nick's last posts were what I was responding to, or does doing that not make any sense to you either? Exactly as Nick pointed out had I not bought cheaper rubbish I wouldn't have needed to replace them. Both of what I bought were sold as Kurt style vises with the same working principals as the real Kurt's use. Using that in the sales description is a deceptive at best way to entice a buyer into thinking there a lot better than they were. Given the precision mine were made to where it could be seen and measured at home they could have easily passed some fairly impressive accuracy guarantee's had they even had them. And just static testing would have agreed with any half decent numbers as well. So simple testing to the numbers wouldn't have made them unfit as you say. Using them did. So is my post now understandable to you Brian or do you want to needlessly complicate the issues and argue some more?

Anyone here is of course free to form there own opinions. I'm certainly not arrogant enough to expect or think anyone will or even should to have the same opinions as mine. That however doesn't automaticaly make what I've tried to show as at least one hard learned lesson as being wrong now does it? Some of the guilty might be quite surprised in what a few of the most knowledable members here have to say in private messages about the style of personal sniping and argumentive posting that's becoming more and more common on this forum. And I can think of a few who were the very best and most knowledgable who suddenly left for those exact reasons. I can honestly say I don't blame them at all. To me this forum is much less than it once was because those people are now gone. If I really wanted to defend and explain every single one of my words then my ex wife and I would still be married. The need to constantly do so for a few total strangers seems tiresome, illogical and a waste of mine and others time imo. Some here seem to have an undiagnosed but fully developed Don Quixote complex. If my posts bother you that much then your also free to ignore them. I'm here for one reason only, to learn what I don't already know. If I can try to pass along a few bits of information at times that might help someone while doing that then that's a bonus to me that I can return just a small fraction of what others have done for me.

[michael mParticipant @michaelm]

Pete, well said. Unfortunately the forum seems to becoming increasingly an outlet for vanity publishing, pedantry and puerile attempts at humour. Though there are still a few bright spots, it's perhaps not surprising that some of the well respected no longer post. Sadly, your objective assessment doesn't seem to fit the bill anymore.

Michael

[David ColwillParticipant @davidcolwill19261]

Could this post be deleted?

Unless i am missing something, it appears to have been moderated to the point of being unintelligible.

I can't see much point in reading replies to points that are no longer visible.

Clearly as a group we cannot be trusted with issues like this!

David.

[Former MemberParticipant @formermember19781]

[This posting has been removed]

[Brian WarwickParticipant @brianwarwick88192]

Wow I certainly hit a nerve there didn’t I, well let me say at no point did I make any snipe or argumentative comments I simply voiced an opinion and by having a view that clearly you disagree with I am being argumentative.

Surely if someone can make the statement the reason there is no precision vices is because of the MAJORITY of people buying cheap which by your own admission you have then that statement should offend you more than anything I said.

At no time did I mention you or your post or comments so I don’t understand why you are so offended. I thought I was posting a valid opinion and did not do it to offend, I also thought I was joining an open discussion but clearly by your post there is an exclusive club where the member PM each other when they don’t like a post.

I do not understand why you have taken any comments to heart, I am genuinely sorry if I offended you as it was never my intention to offend anyone and happily apologies for that but I will not apologise for having an opinion.

[joe king 2Participant @joeking2]

Brian Warwick – nothing wrong with your post at all and nothing for you to apologise for imho.

Tis some of the others that should be doing that.

Forum has two problems – members are incapable of keeping to the subject matter in hand and Mods not as on the ball as they should be and it is getting worse and spoiling it for me hence my low number of posts

Joe

[Anonymous]

Posted by Brian Warwick on 18/08/2018 11:00:50:

At no time did I mention you or your post or comments so I don’t understand why you are so offended. I thought I was posting a valid opinion and did not do it to offend, I also thought I was joining an open discussion but clearly by your post there is an exclusive club where the member PM each other when they don’t like a post.

Hmmm, first post in over 4 years; it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that it was at least partly in response to the previous post? Unless of course you're just randomly posting every few years.

There is no exclusive PM "club". Like most regular posters I use PMs on occasion. There are several reasons; to avoid cluttering up the forum with off topic discussions, to offer help and specific advice, or make arrangements that do not need to be on the forum. Of course I sometimes make comments in a PM that I wouldn't make on the forum, but that's part of life and not specific to this forum.

Andrew

[Brian WarwickParticipant @brianwarwick88192]

Hmmm, first post in over 4 years; it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that it was at least partly in response to the previous post? Unless of course you're just randomly posting every few years.

I am aware its an old post and had completely forgot about it until I received an email informing me of new posts and I don't think its a reasonable assumption, I have appologised for any misunderstanding but clearly this is not enough for some people.

Now just lets end the matter and move on.

[joe king 2Participant @joeking2]

Time for the mods to lock this thread

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by joe king 1 on 18/08/2018 12:21:23:

Time for the mods to lock this thread

.

Oh dear

I revived the thread for two reasons:

1. I had found what I consider to be a decent and proper 'benchmark' for what might constitute a 'precision vice' … [you can't debate what is not one if you don't know what one is]
2. We have some new members contributing to the forum, and I thought it would be good for all of us if we saw some new thinking.

Unfortunately, it's not going to plan.

MichaelG.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by joe king 1 on 18/08/2018 12:21:23:

Time for the mods to lock this thread

.

Was this another of your 'social experiments' ?

[joe king 2Participant @joeking2]

Posted by Michael Gilligan on 18/08/2018 16:58:03:

Posted by joe king 1 on 18/08/2018 12:21:23:

Time for the mods to lock this thread

.

Was this another of your 'social experiments' ?

YAWN 

 

Edited By joe king 1 on 18/08/2018 17:09:29

[Ian Skeldon 2Participant @ianskeldon2]

Maybe we could make this thread into a more useful thread providing advice rather than opinion?

So if I was to ask the following question,

I wish to buy a vice for my medium sized milling machine, (make and brand of milling machine not relevant), medium as in not the smallest or largest of the various mills for sale.

I would like to the vice to have a minimum of 4" jaw and maximum of 6", I would like it be as rigid and as accurate and repeatable as possible for the money I have available ( £150-£300 ) I don't mind if it swivells or not. I live in the UK and want to know that I can return the vice shout it fail or not meet requirements.

Please offer your views based on your purchse of a vice matching my requirements.

Thank you,

Ian

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

I'm afraid I can't offer you any advice Ian as although the milling vice I purchased 11yrs ago falls within your size requirements it only currently retails at about 50% of the minimum you want to spend so anything I suggest would be pure speculation based on what I can see on the net.

The vice I do have has been perfectly adequate for my needs and many engines have been made with it

[Andrew TinsleyParticipant @andrewtinsley63637]

I would have thought the answer to the OPs original question is straightforward. A precision vice ceases to become that, when someone is dissatisfied with it.

Depends on the person, simple isn't it?

Andrew.

[Ian Skeldon 2Participant @ianskeldon2]

Hi Jason,

I thought that adding the post might offer an opportunity for members to share their views on vices bought in what I think would be relavent to newbies reading the forum. I faced that very dilema some years ago and have to admit that the vice that I bought from a well known retailer and sometimes contributer to this forum is adequate for most of the work I do. I do know that an upgrade will be on the cards at some point and then I would look to spend more than the figure quoted.

I won't be the first (nor possibly the last) to make the point that a damned good milling machine will produce only mediocre results if all of the fittings are not of the same or better standard.

Hi Andrew,

Yes I think your view and others of a similar vein have been posted, I was hoping that some of the more helpful and knowledgeable members might like to offer something simple and helpful for newbies or would be members looking for advice (advice, is that a pun?).

Ian

[Anonymous]

Posted by Ian Skeldon 2 on 18/08/2018 22:13:31:

I was hoping that some of the more helpful and knowledgeable members might like to offer something simple and helpful…………………

I couldn't possibly offer advice, just opinions. All of my machine vices are rather larger than you're looking for, so not really relevant. And I must not mention the make of my main vice or I'll get excoriated again.

My personal opinion is that a swivel base is a waste of space, metaphorically and literally. I've only needed to set my vice at an angle once in a decade, and I did it by indicating along some cheap (Chronos I think) angle blocks set against the rear jaw.

Andrew

[michael mParticipant @michaelm]

Maybe we could make this thread into a more useful thread providing advice rather than opinion?

There you go. Despite Ian's reasoned and common sense question two posts later we're back to facile comments.

Bearing in mind that advice given is generally subjective there is possible no one correct answer. Personally I've been more than happy with vertex vices, K4 and K5 are within your price constraints and are very widely used by model enginers. If you want to move further upmarket you could perhaps consider Bison. In my experience the major suppliers will resolve any problems if you're disappointed with the product . Chronos, RDG, Rotagrip, MSC. The latter certainly give exemplary service. No doubt there are others just as good.

Again, a personal view, I wouldn't want to be without a swivelling vice. You're not obliged to use the graduations for angle setting, use any means you choose. If you do a lot of angular setting, as I tend to do, then it's well worth having. It's argued that a a swivelling vice is less rigid than a fixed, and I'm sure that's correct but it's created no problems for me. If you're wanting huge cuts with red hot swarf it could be another matter.

Another factor to consider is if you have a small mill table, as I have, you occasionally need to remove the vice to fit something else; rotary table, angle plate, whatever. A swivelling vice offers great facility in quickly resetting true to the table axis.

Bear in mind that whatever you go for will depend to a large extent on the work you're doing.

[Anonymous]

Posted by michael m on 19/08/2018 10:12:03:

There you go. Despite Ian's reasoned and common sense question two posts later we're back to facile comments.

………………………

Bear in mind that whatever you go for will depend to a large extent on the work you're doing.

You've obviously missed the subtle distinction between advice and opinion. I don't suppose anyone here has tried out the complete range of machine vices that are available. So most of what is offered is opinion based on whatever the poster has. Nothing wrong with that, and it can be valuable, but it's not the same as advice.

I would agree with the last point. I do a lot of milling with work mounted directly on the table as the work is far too big for a machine vice. I also use box cubes and angle plates a lot. More rarely I use dividing heads, rotary tables and a tilting angle plate. My machine vice gets moved around my milling machines, so it rarely stays for long on one mill. Setting it square is simple. Roughly line up with the T-slots, fit the clamps and tighten one more than the other. Run a DTI down the back of the fixed jaw and tap the vice to keep the DTI reading the same. The idea is that the vice pivots around the tighter clamp. Another pass to check and job done. I normally look for better than 0.01mm over the jaw width, about 150mm. I can't measure any difference in the thickness of the jaws over the width, even with a tenths micrometer.

Andrew

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Ian Skeldon 2 on 18/08/2018 20:02:33:

…

I wish to buy a vice for my medium sized milling machine, (make and brand of milling machine not relevant), medium as in not the smallest or largest of the various mills for sale.

I would like to the vice to have a minimum of 4" jaw and maximum of 6", I would like it be as rigid and as accurate and repeatable as possible for the money I have available ( £150-£300 ) I don't mind if it swivells or not. I live in the UK and want to know that I can return the vice shout it fail or not meet requirements.

…

There's a problem with the question as stated, which is the Requirement is vague. This makes it hard to advise because we don't quite know where Ian is coming from! For example in the world of professional milling machines, a Bridgeport is considered "small". In my garage it would be "huge". Likewise, the purpose the vice is put to matters. What's acceptable to me may be overkill for some and unacceptable to others.

What I can reveal is what I use on a WM18 mill and why:

This is a machine vice sold with a cheap drill stand I made into a tapping stand. The vice is unsuitable for precision work. The grip is weak, the jaws lift, and you cannot reset work in it to less than about 0.5mm. Turning it over reveals a crude lightweight construction.

Subjected to any kind of strain, it's going to bend. This one is such rubbish you might wonder why it's not been binned. Actually, once in a while this heap of tat is useful. When I use the milling machine as a drill press, and the grown-up vice is elsewhere, this horrible vice is 1000x safer than holding rough work in my hand. In this mode, lightness is a virtue.

I own a drill-press as well, and on that use a much heavier machine vice. Still cheap, it has a much better grip on the work, and the weight helps accuracy when positioning and drilling. On the downside, the jaws lift, and it's not repeatable. Also the moving jaw is able to swivel slightly, which isn't helpful when milling.

I don't use it on my mill for drilling because the extra weight and sharp edges are liable to ding the table, which the cheap one doesn't.

When I bought the mill, I ordered a vice from Warco.

The main criteria was size; a vice that's either too small or too big for the machine restricts what you can do. I find the swivel useful once in a blue moon, and often don't bother to fit it.

This vice was my mainstay for two years. Not high quality, but certainly 'fit for purpose' in my workshop. The advantage of a more expensive vice is mainly speed and reliability. Setting up work on a machine often takes much longer than cutting. Working for a living, you need a vice that will clamp with a minimum of fuss over and over again. The main problem with cheaper vices is you have to take more care – they are less trustworthy. For example, to counter jaw lift, it might be necessary to tap the work down with a hammer and check with a DTI. In my amateur workshop the extra fiddle and time wasting isn't a problem. I amble along doing random jobs rather than repetitive work and – despite bad language am – 'doing it for fun'. The psychology of the amateur operator may matter a great deal. To me, an untidy inefficient workshop is a comfort and I don't enjoy using tools for their own sake. Others are very different; they take pleasure from owning and using good tools in a tidy, efficient workshop. If you are the type irritated by shortcomings, spend more money.

The vice I use most today is a DH-1 from Warco seen here with the optional aluminium high jaws fitted. (Normal jaw fitted at handle end.)

I bought a DH-1 partly because of an annoying feature of the previous example, which is that the rear jaw has a deep internal stress relief fillet. This can be a problem when using thin parallels – rather than sitting on the machined surface they drop into the fillet. But my main reason for buying a DH-1 was because it's more flexible – the jaws can be used in different configurations, which is handy 10% of the time.

Unfortunately I'm not aware of a best value vice that can be identified by brand-name or supplier. But, in my experience, buying from an established British vendor reduces the risk of getting a complete dud considerably.

Hope that helps,

Dave

[Author]

Posts