Which to buy; Warco GH Universal vs Weiss VM32H Mill

[thisdesignedthatParticipant @thisdesignedthat]

Just looking at the bare machines currently (I plan to add DRO, powerfeeds myself later down the line)

From what I can tell, they both are very similar in size. Both have 1.5kw motor. VM32H comes with a Z axis motor, unsure if the GH Universal has similar.

Non DRO GH Universal =  £2895

Non DRO VM32H = £2485

GH Universal

Gear Head Design: 75-1600rpm (6 speeds)

320kg (I guess the additional weight is from the gear head design?)

VM32H

80-5000 rpm (variable speed)

240kg

 

Table size and table travels are very similar

GH Table Size – 800 x 240mm

Cross traverse
245mm

Longitudinal traverse
585mm

VM32H Table Size – 840 x 210mm

Cross traverse
200mm

Longitudinal traverse
580mm

——

Any thoughts?

[DiogenesParticipant @diogenes]

What’s going to be it’s main diet?

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Hopefully it will be munching metal. But it would help to have an idea of what sort of work you plan to be doing on it.

If it were me I would opt for the Weiss presumably from Amadeal. My main reasons would be:

-not having to reach up to raise and lower the head particularly as the universal has the handle on the left and most people are right handed.

– Brushless twin belt ratios will be a lot quieter than a geared head machine and as I tend to use a lot more carbide cutters these days the higher spindle speed allows for faster feedrates

Otherwise not much difference so may come down to if yyou prefer a traditional motor or are happy with the electronics of the variable speed Weiss. I’ve had vari speed machines for almost 20years and not had an issue so again a point in favor of the Weiss.

The DRO (3-axis) would be the first thing I would add and often cheaper than factory fitted. Power X axis is nice particularly with the highspeed spindle as you may not be able to wind the handle fast enough to keep up.

[Diogenes]

On Diogenes Said:

What’s going to be it’s main diet?

Aluminium and steel small parts, just regular hobby machining bits and bobs (making tools for tools etc). Nothing too extreme.

On JasonB Said:

Hopefully it will be munching metal. But it would help to have an idea of what sort of work you plan to be doing on it.

If it were me I would opt for the Weiss presumably from Amadeal. My main reasons would be:

-not having to reach up to raise and lower the head particularly as the universal has the handle on the left and most people are right handed.

– Brushless twin belt ratios will be a lot quieter than a geared head machine and as I tend to use a lot more carbide cutters these days the higher spindle speed allows for faster feedrates

Otherwise not much difference so may come down to if yyou prefer a traditional motor or are happy with the electronics of the variable speed Weiss. I’ve had vari speed machines for almost 20years and not had an issue so again a point in favor of the Weiss.

The DRO (3-axis) would be the first thing I would add and often cheaper than factory fitted. Power X axis is nice particularly with the highspeed spindle as you may not be able to wind the handle fast enough to keep up.

Great insight Jason, thanks! I have the weiss\amadeal 290vf lathe and very happy with it. Bought it beginning of 2025. Aside from the control board going pop on the first startup (amadeal quickly replaced FOC) its been a great machine

I like the idea of infinite variable speeds and will indeed be using carbide because I did plan on sharing some of the inserts I have bought for the lathe so that is probably enough to sway me to the Amadeal option.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Even solid carbide can be had for not much more than HSS these days so don’t just limit yourself to inserts.

[Dave SParticipant @daves59043]

I pretty much only buy solid carbide upto 8mm diameter. If you look around then there are quite good deals from the industrial suppliers like apt, mill tools etc.

Between 8 and 16mm it depends on what is available, though I tend to jump from 8mm to 16 or face mill.

Inserts for face mill and 16mm tool, which are the remove a lot of stock fast tooling

Dave

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

If using mainly on small light alloy parts and presumably using small cutters, go for the Weiss. The higher speed is ideal for this and small cutters on steel. The electronic speed control and belts will produce a lot less noise and vibration than a single phase motor and gearbox. This may even result in poorer surface finish with the Warco.
The only advantage I can see for the Warco is the larger cross traverse but the shorter travel on the Weiss is unlikely to be an issue for most uses.

Robert.

[VicParticipant @vic]

Have you considered a traditional style knee mill like the Warco VMC? They’ve been rightfully very popular with hobbyists over the years. Other makes of the same basic machine are also available. Warco also sell a variable speed model. Just a thought, I’ve been very pleased with mine.

[Robert Atkinson 2]

On Robert Atkinson 2 Said:

If using mainly on small light alloy parts and presumably using small cutters, go for the Weiss. The higher speed is ideal for this and small cutters on steel. The electronic speed control and belts will produce a lot less noise and vibration than a single phase motor and gearbox. This may even result in poorer surface finish with the Warco.
The only advantage I can see for the Warco is the larger cross traverse but the shorter travel on the Weiss is unlikely to be an issue for most uses.

Robert.

Hi Robert, excellent point on the steel cutting and gearbox surface finish, hadn’t thought of that. The GH Universal is seeming less and less a suitable option

On Vic Said:

Have you considered a traditional style knee mill like the Warco VMC? They’ve been rightfully very popular with hobbyists over the years. Other makes of the same basic machine are also available. Warco also sell a variable speed model. Just a thought, I’ve been very pleased with mine.

I have, and do like the look of them, and see a few boxford knee mills on ebay but i will probably convert this to  to CNC in the future so a vertical mill is better suited for this.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

High speed spindle is even more desirable if going CNC, mine spends most of it’s time at the max 5000rpm.

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

The VMC is a vertical mill.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

What was meant was that it is better to have the CNC move the head than the table so the benchtop type machines are more suited to conversion.

It’s a pity that Weiss don’t do the ball screw equiped machines with a similar top speed, I think they are only 2000 or 2500?

[JasonB]

On JasonB Said:

What was meant was that it is better to have the CNC move the head than the table so the benchtop type machines are more suited to conversion.

It’s a pity that Weiss don’t do the ball screw equiped machines with a similar top speed, I think they are only 2000 or 2500?

Yes the VM35L (ballscrew) only tops out at 2250 RPM

I want to use the mill manually for a few years before switching so would rather have e alead screw, I’ve heard ballscrew and not well suited for manual mills

[Clive FosterParticipant @clivefoster55965]

Jasons comment on the desirability of 5,000 (or more) rpm to exploit the use of modern, smallish, carbide cutters raises important questions of machine design philosophy.

The Warco is old school “traditional” design philosophy for this type of hefty, fixed column bench mill. Right from their inception, over 30 years ago, these have been best thought of as a Bridgeport on the bench. Metal removal capabilities, working cube area etc being not vastly dissimilar to a Bridgeport if the ram isn’t being exploited most especially the earlier, smaller, round ram variety. As such it’s sensible to follow Bridgeport practice when selecting the appropriate (HSS) cutter sizes and rpm. In the days when I had a machine of that style I was most impressed by its ability to shift metal.

If you plan to work Bridgeport style the primary issue with the Warco is hand elevation of the head. Mine had a tiddly crank handle on the side which was both inconvenient to reach and ‘kin hard work. At least it was right handed, unlike the Warco. I’d regard power drive of the head lift screw as per Wiess pretty much essential. The Wiess hand wheel travel dial is a nice touch but it’s high and well out or reach for both easy turning and reading. I had one of my DRO scales on the head lift. The power downfeed on the Warco is nice touch but I question how useful it is to a Model Engineer doing small work. I rarely use mine on the Bridgeport I now run. Accept that the GH head gears will be noisy but that is the price for rising torque at low rpm to better handle bigger cutters.

The Weiss design philosophy seems a little incoherent. As Jason says 5,000 rpm is great for small carbide cutters but, even with modern brushless motor drive, considerable sacrifice of torque at low RPM is inevitable. So if you plan to work Bridgeport style it’s likely you will be power limited on larger HSS cutters. Power head lift is great and the dial on the hand wheel potentially useful until you get round to adding DRO. However if you plan to go modern with smallish high speed carbide cutters the big head is likely to be a major inconvenience. With a short cutter visibility and access for set up will be seriously restricted. Thats why my version had to go. Got fed up with peering round the head trying to get a straight look for alignment. Seriously considered a straight shank ER collet extension so I could lift the head but that still did’t cure the other space issue of limited table area and movement. But I’m home workshop guy working 12″ to the foot scale so table area is more important to me than to those working in smaller scales.

Drifting off topic.

Taking Jasons idea and running with it my take on a more suitable machine to exploit smaller carbide cutters would be to use a vastly smaller head with an ER16 collet spindle. Think Taig head on steroids. Forget a moving quill. Use a second dovetail slide for equivalent short down feed. Minimal controls and gubbins on the head and arrange what there are Bridgeport style well above the main spindle bearings et al leaving a slim nose so you can see what you are doing underneath. High speed small cutters mean less spindle loading so you don’t need the relatively hefty bearings and big head to hold them traditionally used. ER16 takes up to 10 mm native so many folk could do without a drill chuck altogether. Ball screw equipped, CNC ready, design with stepper feed as standard makes sense. Small cutter loads means a smaller screw than the usual conversions will do.

All the world and his wife adds a DRO just as soon as they can afford it so why not go radical and dump the handles altogether and control the machine electronically either by via MPG handset or, more precisely, by typing the next stop position into the DRO box. Big issue would be rethinking the DRO to make a control system rather than just an indicator. For example including the ability to simply program clearing a rectilinear pocket or automatically drill holes on a pitch circle.

Clive

 

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

They do certainly benifit from a different mind set to get the best out of them due to the reduced low down grunt at slower spindle speeds and generally being a bit less rigid. The twin belt ratios of the Weiss will go some way to making it a bit more able at lower revs as the slow ratio still allows the motor to be running faster where it performs better. My X3 has a lower wattage motor than the SX2.7 but won’t stall as easily when running slowly due to having a lower ratio but I only really need that with slitting saws and big boring head jobs.

As soon as a DRO is fitted the mill also becomes a precision drilling machine so the quill is still desirable at least for me it is. No more marking out and then trying to pick up a punch mark so that reduces the need to see what you are doing. Just use an edge finder to locate a corner or my preference the ctr of the part and you can just look at the screen when cutting so visibility becomes less of an issue.

I also use the quill for initial cuts with teh boring head which saves a lot of cranking teh head up and down, mostly just doing the final pass with the quill locked and the head lowered by hand, that is why I like on the X3 as the Z handle is at the front similar to a knee mill.

If budget allows then both ER32 and 16 holders are nice to have and do give you the option to see what you are upto with the very small cutters as well as being able to clear the swarf more easily with air. A couple of side lock holders in say 4mm and 6mm would be another option if you can find a 4mm one which is the size a lot of >=4mm carbide shanks are.

Clive’s last paragraph is really what you can do with Wizards in your CNC program, most will have simple operations like PCD, pocket, face, slot etc where you just enter start position, length, no of holes, etc and the cutter size and just press go. Handy for those that may not have grasped CAD and CAM. Then there is always the jog with mouse or MPG which is really just controling three power feeds.

[thisdesignedthat]

On thisdesignedthat Said:

On Vic Said:

Have you considered a traditional style knee mill like the Warco VMC? They’ve been rightfully very popular with hobbyists over the years. Other makes of the same basic machine are also available. Warco also sell a variable speed model. Just a thought, I’ve been very pleased with mine.

I have, and do like the look of them, and see a few boxford knee mills on ebay but i will probably convert this to  to CNC in the future so a vertical mill is better suited for this.

The Warco VMC is a Vertical Mill. I’ve noted several people have converted them to CNC.

https://www.mycncuk.com/threads/2934-Warco-VMC-Turret-Mill-CNC-Conversion

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

That video in the second post makes it look rather geriatric. You would be there for a month of Sundays. Also the video is 14yrs old, the benchtop mills were not so plentify or capable back then.

[Clive FosterParticipant @clivefoster55965]

Wizzards!

Indeed so Jason.

I just avoided the word to escape the instant “CNC is complicated” reaction which is, given 2025 affordable technology, as obsolete as the video Vic pointed us to. That was an unwelcomely explicit reminder as to why I decided not to get further involved with early 2000s hobby CNC (or 1980s/90s industrial) beyond dropping far too much money on a Taig CNC and “wonderful programs” that clearly weren’t going to cut it to my satisfaction.

However once the Rubicon of integrating a DRO system to the machine, presumably via magnetic strips safely under the slides, and fitting feed motors as standard there is no earthly reason why a full suit of Wizards can’t live on an advanced DRO. Implementing vector path following for 2D wizard capable shapes is trivial. For stepper motors just a master clock with suitable control generated division ratios between the two axis drives. I imagine it’s little harder with modern servo divers but hardly insurmountable. Especially with the basic DRO providing real time positional feedback.

If the machine is run by vector following, rather than standard incremental point to point G-code friendly style, everthing needed for a basic, but effective, CNC set up is already there. Given a vector line output from a CAD program the machine will follow it just fine. Hardest part is probably cutter diameter compensation.

The price / performance / capability / availability ratios for the things needed to make this sort of solution sensible for ME / Home Shop friendly machines is now in place so there is no reason for it not to happen. 20 years ago that Taig very brutally told Clive that his development engineer instincts of about 5 years out were seriously in error.

its only recently that I realised how critical the ready availability high speed, small diameter carbide cutters is to making such a device work.

Clive

[Author]

Posts