Japanese machines vs. Haas

[AMCNitro]

This may sound like a silly question but when running a cell of horizontals do you take into consideration the materials you're cutting in each station? I have 5 haas verticals and run nickel in 3 of them exclusively, aluminum in one exclusively. I assume to maximize productivity in a cell your recycle bins are mixed with whatever materials are run through in que. My nickel scrap (not so much recently) is valuable and only worth half if it's contaminated with other chips.

I was once asked a similar question, "how come you dont clean the machine out of chips so they dont contaminate?".  Same answer as Bob, I dont have the time to be cleaning the machine out, I make more money when the machine is running than I make from selling the chips.  Only time I did clean out the machine was when I had an order of 125 titanium parts with a lot to hog out, I sold the Ti chips for about $800

[MIL-TFP-41]

Everything I heard and seen...it appears that Mori-Seiki is going the route of doing low end components and machines....going the opposite direction Makino, Matts, ect. Time will tell if this was a wise plan.

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

Well, our new VF-3SS is sitting on the floor getting power hooked up.  There are no cheap injection molded housings, it's all steel.  The trunnion didn't ship with it so I have to wait 'till next year!

[Mjölnir]

Everything I heard and seen...it appears that Mori-Seiki is going the route of doing low end components and machines....going the opposite direction Makino, Matts, ect. Time will tell if this was a wise plan.

 

We've got a Mori Seiki 1035eco that's worse than any Haas or Fadal I've ever used. It's fairly accurate, but it's not rigid, nor is it reliable. And the service from the nearest Mori dealer blows chunks big time. It's three years old and if we could find some fool to purchase it for half of what we paid for it, we'd probably replace it with a Mazak Nexus 510.

 

How about a German vs Japanese machines thread?

 

We've got both now. Mazak and Mitsubishi vs Hermle and Ingersoll.  

 

I'm biased. Am of German heritage, myself.

[Mike@Lustre]

Last shop I was in had 3 HAAS,s 2 of them where only a year or 2 old , the lathe we bought a few month before I left was a headache , hard drive crashed a few weeks after buying the machine Getting decent service was a joke as the techs are total hacks!!! . The one tech wiped out a brand new tool probe on the lathe  , another tech did not tighten up all the mounting bolts on the power chuck .

 

My current shop has 3 Doosans and I am very impressed with the machines and the service we get . $$$$ well spent .

[JoshC]

I believe that the machine purchased needs to be based on the parts your company plans on cutting and tolerances. For high accuracy moldwork, a higher end machine like makino or DNG mori would be a good choice, but if your cutting some simplistic prismatic parts with low complexity then the Haas will get it done just fine. Also someone mentioned earlier about a new hire, I would much rather have a new hire out of school crash a haas than a makino as haas parts will be cheaper and more readily available typically.

[BenK]

Which one is cheaper to crash should never be a consideration. If your operators are that poor it's time to replace them.

 

Haas machines have their place but they do not belong in the same conversation as a Makino or Matsuura. Haas is the American equivalent of a Chinese built machine. They are a budget machine at best. 

[JoshC]

Which one is cheaper to crash should never be a consideration. If your operators are that poor it's time to replace them.

 

Haas machines have their place but they do not belong in the same conversation as a Makino or Matsuura. Haas is the American equivalent of a Chinese built machine. They are a budget machine at best. 

 

You should never consider a crash? Why has this never happened at your facility? I like the comment, if your operators are that poor its time to replace them... so anyone who crashes a machine is considered a poor operator then and they all need replaced? Sounds like you have some godlike operators over there, I bet they are high paid.

[jeff]

You should never consider a crash? Why has this never happened at your facility? I like the comment, if your operators are that poor its time to replace them... so anyone who crashes a machine is considered a poor operator then and they all need replaced? Sounds like you have some godlike operators over there, I bet they are high paid.

I think you're taking his comment out of context.

He's right,when buying a machine you shouldn't take into consideration which is cheaper to crash. If you have crashes that often where it's an issue, then replace the people that are the cause.

[Bob W.]

You should never consider a crash? Why has this never happened at your facility? I like the comment, if your operators are that poor its time to replace them... so anyone who crashes a machine is considered a poor operator then and they all need replaced? Sounds like you have some godlike operators over there, I bet they are high paid.

I think what he meant was he wouldn't build a shop and spec machines based on how costly they are to repair when crashed.  Personally, my decision making in this area is based on performance alone.  If the machine generates an extra $200k per year over a Haas, the cost of replacing a $30k spindle when crashed doesn't even figure into the equation.  On my Haas machines I was replacing spindles every two years due to wear, with a day or two of down time each time and that DID figure into the equation of justifying better equipment because it was always at the worst possible time.  Of course all operators have issues, including myself, but if I were buying a new machine and I was really concerned that Joe would probably crash it here and there, The machine would be ordered and Joe would be out the door.  If I thought Joe might crash it sometime in the next 5-10 years, well that is pretty normal in this shop so Joe's job would be safe.

[crazy^millman]

I think what he meant was he wouldn't build a shop and spec machines based on how costly they are to repair when crashed.  Personally, my decision making in this area is based on performance alone.  If the machine generates an extra $200k per year over a Haas, the cost of replacing a $30k spindle when crashed doesn't even figure into the equation.  On my Haas machines I was replacing spindles every two years due to wear, with a day or two of down time each time and that DID figure into the equation of justifying better equipment because it was always at the worst possible time.  Of course all operators have issues, including myself, but if I were buying a new machine and I was really concerned that Joe would probably crash it here and there, The machine would be ordered and Joe would be out the door.  If I thought Joe might crash it sometime in the next 5-10 years, well that is pretty normal in this shop so Joe's job would be safe.

 

Bob agreed seem the penny wise $1000 dumb mentality to often. I will go buy this 1998 cheap HMC verse a brand new machine because it is the better deal. Then It will sit for 9 months costing the company over $750k in lost production and cause the company to be late because ti was a great deal.

 

HAAS machines have their place and I ave bought them when I was running companies, but the purchases was with the understanding I was getting what I was paying for. It was not with the thought okay I am perfect and will never crash the machine. Anyone with that mentality soon shows themselves the door. It was with the thought I have been given this budget to get a machine and what where my options at the time? I needed to replace 15 year old machines and show things could be done better and they served that purpose. They allowed the company to improve capabilities to get the work that needed to be done. That was a Prototype shop and +/-.002 to +/.03 were the typical tolerances.

[JoshC]

I think you're taking his comment out of context.

He's right,when buying a machine you shouldn't take into consideration which is cheaper to crash. If you have crashes that often where it's an issue, then replace the people that are the cause.

Ok I gotcha. and I wasn't saying purchase a machine on strictly replacement part costs and availability although I do think it should at least be considered. Mostly what my initial statement was mentioning was I think purchasing a machine should also be based on your part complexity. If I'm just cutting 1-2-3 blocks all day with a +/-.010 tolerance that's going to get ground and has no complex surfacing, it may be difficult to justify the price of the makino over the haas, however if your doing 3d milling and mold work of high accuracy, that price can justify itself pretty quickly with how much polishing, etc. that may get saved. Those are my $.02

[BenK]

You should never consider a crash? Why has this never happened at your facility? I like the comment, if your operators are that poor its time to replace them... so anyone who crashes a machine is considered a poor operator then and they all need replaced? Sounds like you have some godlike operators over there, I bet they are high paid.

 

I'm not sure why you took offense to what I said but you took it the wrong way. 

 

I understand things go wrong but to hold back on a purchase that could net the company millions because you expect Joe to crash is not good business. Crash cost is not a consideration because simply it shouldn't happen. If I'm worried about a crash I will dig into the root cause and eliminate any foreseeable issue. A better plan of attack would be to eliminate human error from the equation. When purchasing a machine there are a lot of things to consider. If you are making some simple widget in low volume and that's all you ever want to do, than by all means look at a Haas. Take that same part to high volume and its another story. 

 

 

I think what he meant was he wouldn't build a shop and spec machines based on how costly they are to repair when crashed.  Personally, my decision making in this area is based on performance alone.  If the machine generates an extra $200k per year over a Haas, the cost of replacing a $30k spindle when crashed doesn't even figure into the equation.  On my Haas machines I was replacing spindles every two years due to wear, with a day or two of down time each time and that DID figure into the equation of justifying better equipment because it was always at the worst possible time.  Of course all operators have issues, including myself, but if I were buying a new machine and I was really concerned that Joe would probably crash it here and there, The machine would be ordered and Joe would be out the door.  If I thought Joe might crash it sometime in the next 5-10 years, well that is pretty normal in this shop so Joe's job would be safe.

 

 

This is a great way to explain it. I will always go for that extra $200k over a cheaper initial purchase price/repair cost.

[mkd]

Which one is cheaper to crash should never be a consideration. If your operators are that poor it's time to replace them.

 

Haas machines have their place but they do not belong in the same conversation as a Makino or Matsuura. Haas is the American equivalent of a Chinese built machine. They are a budget machine at best. 

 

 

I'm not sure why you took offense to what I said but you took it the wrong way. 

 

. Crash cost is not a consideration because simply it shouldn't happen. If I'm worried about a crash I will dig into the root cause and eliminate any foreseeable issue.

 

 

 

EVERYTHING MATTERS in business.

if it wasn't an issue and could *actually be eliminated, we wouldn't be talking about it.

 

 The fact the many smart people here can rationalize that it is not a factor in THEIR decision making process is irrelevant to disproving that "it doesn't matter".

 

worked at a shop full of Mazak Hori's. One would get crashed nightly ( due to positive TLO's being zeroed be different setup guys).

reset, home, continue. rinse repeat.

those mazaks were awesome to hold up to it. Now that's a cheap crash.

 On the other hand i've seen the aftermath of a lathe crash. Broke a casting. $50k of 1995 dollars

[BenK]

EVERYTHING MATTERS in business.

if it wasn't an issue and could *actually be eliminated, we wouldn't be talking about it.

 

 The fact the many smart people here can rationalize that it is not a factor in THEIR decision making process is irrelevant to disproving that "it doesn't matter".

 

worked at a shop full of Mazak Hori's. One would get crashed nightly ( due to positive TLO's being zeroed be different setup guys).

reset, home, continue. rinse repeat.

those mazaks were awesome to hold up to it. Now that's a cheap crash.

 On the other hand i've seen the aftermath of a lathe crash. Broke a casting. $50k of 1995 dollars

 

 

So I'm supposed to expect a machine to crash because it can't be eliminated? I'm sorry if I don't agree. Every effort should be made to eliminate the possibility of a crash. Even your example of a tool offset being removed can be safeguarded against if you choose to. I guess I will side with "the many smart people" and stick with my way of thinking. A machine gains me $200K a year is worth the added cost of the spindle. Saving $15K isn't worth loosing $200K.

[Bob W.]

I have a macro call built into the tool changes of all my machines that does numerous tool checks.  One such check is a minimum tool length check.  If the tool length is shorter than 2.5" it will alarm the machine.  There is a lot that can be done to make things more bullet proof by automating checks such as this, and pallet checks, etc... through macros.

[JoshC]

So I'm supposed to expect a machine to crash because it can't be eliminated? I'm sorry if I don't agree. Every effort should be made to eliminate the possibility of a crash. Even your example of a tool offset being removed can be safeguarded against if you choose to. I guess I will side with "the many smart people" and stick with my way of thinking. A machine gains me $200K a year is worth the added cost of the spindle. Saving $15K isn't worth loosing $200K.

 

so we are assuming that the Makino will bring in 200K more than the haas a year? In that case its worth a few spindles , if the makino only brings in 20K more than the haas, is it really worth the down time and the spindle costs? Downtime is everything for some companies but I think we are arguing about the wrong topic here.

 

The "best" machine for me, may be the "worst" machine for you or vice versa. We do not all get the same type of work, same skill level or manufacturing experience so I think there will never be a best machine to recommend.

To get us back to the original topic I think we can look at some pros and cons and let everyone decide on what they want

Makinos: pros: very accurate, very fast, great finishes, great accuracy, can be ran in production with little maintenance

cons: expensive

Haas:

pros: Cheap, parts readily available, very popular so its easy to find operators

cons: not as accurate, not as fast, not as good finish, lightweight and not very rigid.

I probably overlooked a ton of pros and cons, but I'm sure if i did someone here will point it out

[Bob W.]

so we are assuming that the Makino will bring in 200K more than the haas a year? In that case its worth a few spindles

When I moved my work from the Haas VMC to the Makino HMC it netted well over that per machine.  I run job shop work, molds, and short run production with pretty loose tolerances.  It was all work that could easily be done on the Haas machines, Makino just did it better, and faster, by a lot.

 

I keep arguing this because I feel there is the perception that higher end machines are only justified for balls out production, or crazy accurate parts.  This is not the case at all.  They can help shops become extremely efficient and much more profitable.  I know my shop took off like a rocket when moving to the HMCs from Haas machines and became much more profitable.

[Reko]

When I moved my work from the Haas VMC to the Makino HMC it netted well over that per machine.  I run job shop work, molds, and short run production with pretty loose tolerances.  It was all work that could easily be done on the Haas machines, Makino just did it better, and faster, by a lot.

 

I keep arguing this because I feel there is the perception that higher end machines are only justified for balls out production, or crazy accurate parts.  This is not the case at all.  They can help shops become extremely efficient and much more profitable.  I know my shop took off like a rocket when moving to the HMCs from Haas machines and became much more profitable.

I mentioned some of your points to my boss... and while he didn't deny it could be true... he still felt like the risk was much smaller with the sub-$200k Haas UMC750.

 

I believe we are going to make some positive strides utilizing this machine... and if can make it hum, then perhaps he will give my next suggestion a shot... we may get a Makino horizontal in here yet.

[mkd]

When I moved my work from the Haas VMC to the Makino HMC it netted well over that per machine.  I run job shop work, molds, and short run production with pretty loose tolerances.  It was all work that could easily be done on the Haas machines, Makino just did it better, and faster, by a lot.

 

I keep arguing this because I feel there is the perception that higher end machines are only justified for balls out production, or crazy accurate parts.  This is not the case at all.  They can help shops become extremely efficient and much more profitable.  I know my shop took off like a rocket when moving to the HMCs from Haas machines and became much more profitable.

we know you are not just talking, but making it happen.

 For me the things you are often saying seems paradigm shifting from my poor boy mentality of doing things on the cheap as much as possible.

I know the problem with ANY non pallet machine (ie. generic VMC) is that a guy always has his head in them.

 To me, the only way a shop is going to take off like a rocket with your machinery changes is by taking advantage of pallet loading and rotating to different sides, additionally taking advantage of tool magazines. For short job shop runs the speed of the machine seems pretty inconsequential compared to getting jobs on/off machine through tooling and prog methods (which you seem to be killing at) all which can be applied to a VMC to some degree.

 

 It would be an interesting choice between buying TWO pallet Haas' each with at least one nice rotary tombstone verses ONE makino hori. Without a specific part in mind if i had to write the check tomorrow two spindles SEEM greater, IMHO.

[mkd]

So I'm supposed to expect a machine to crash because it can't be eliminated? I'm sorry if I don't agree. Every effort should be made to eliminate the possibility of a crash. Even your example of a tool offset being removed can be safeguarded against if you choose to. I guess I will side with "the many smart people" and stick with my way of thinking. A machine gains me $200K a year is worth the added cost of the spindle. Saving $15K isn't worth loosing $200K.

Murphy says yes. Business is a calculated risk.

 

 not arguing with anyone's justification.

[mkd]

I have a macro call built into the tool changes of all my machines that does numerous tool checks.  One such check is a minimum tool length check.  If the tool length is shorter than 2.5" it will alarm the machine.  There is a lot that can be done to make things more bullet proof by automating checks such as this, and pallet checks, etc... through macros.

 

cool macro

I had an apps guy change machine to neg offsets when i had the power.

[Bob W.]

we know you are not just talking, but making it happen.

 For me the things you are often saying seems paradigm shifting from my poor boy mentality of doing things on the cheap as much as possible.

I know the problem with ANY non pallet machine (ie. generic VMC) is that a guy always has his head in them.

 To me, the only way a shop is going to take off like a rocket with your machinery changes is by taking advantage of pallet loading and rotating to different sides, additionally taking advantage of tool magazines. For short job shop runs the speed of the machine seems pretty inconsequential compared to getting jobs on/off machine through tooling and prog methods (which you seem to be killing at) all which can be applied to a VMC to some degree.

 

 It would be an interesting choice between buying TWO pallet Haas' each with at least one nice rotary tombstone verses ONE makino hori. Without a specific part in mind if i had to write the check tomorrow two spindles SEEM greater, IMHO.

Here is what has been driving my philosophy.  Watch one of your machines run and record the actual cycle time of the part.  Now take the value of the part ($100 part with 25 minutes of cutting time for example).  With the value of the part you can determine what shop rate you COULD be working at if you were able to keep the spindles going non stop.  Now at the end of the day have a look at how many parts you actually have finished and sitting on the counter and it will probably represent about 40% of what COULD be done if the spindle was to keep going non-stop.  The other 60% is waste due to the machines, people, and processes that are in place in that shop.  I have made it my mission to find a way to minimize this waste and make it productive, somehow.  The first step was to get horizontal machines.  The second step was to automate as much as possible via macros and technology.  The third step was to standardize our processes, and the fourth was to revisit every program to increase its efficiency and truly utilize the machine's performance.

 

When I did comparisons between the two machines, Makino and Haas I saw a 25% improvement in speed with the Makino over the Haas with the same program.  Once optimized for the Makino it would have been a much bigger spread.  If I am able to push $75k per month through the Makino with a single shift the Haas could only do $56k.  $56k is waaay too optimistic with a Haas VMC though because it isn't a pallet changing machine.  That is a valid comparison when comparing a Haas HMC to a Makino HMC though.  Two Haas HMCs could outperform one Makino HMC but at the cost of additional manpower and floor space.  My shop had 1200 square feet and given the equipment I have, I may have had the capacity of $1000 per square foot of shop space, just for arguments sake...  If I was running Haas machines it would have been $300 per square foot of shop space.  With Makinos I might have been able to produce $450k per employee where with a Haas it might be closer to $300k per employee.  It goes on and on...  Any way you slice it, it is all about efficiency.  Time, space, materials, etc...

[Bob W.]

My point is, these differences aren't pocket change, they are serious $$$.  Enough $$$ to make it worth really taking a hard look at more than what the machine costs, but where it puts the shop and what it brings to the table.  My argument above doesn't even mention tolerance or surface finish, those are icing on the cake.  Implementing things like this isn't a cake walk either.  You don't just order one and all the sudden whammo, making 50% more $$$.  It takes a lot of effort and investment to really get it going right and it is a continuous process.

[MIL-TFP-41]

I have a macro call built into the tool changes of all my machines that does numerous tool checks.  One such check is a minimum tool length check.  If the tool length is shorter than 2.5" it will alarm the machine.  There is a lot that can be done to make things more bullet proof by automating checks such as this, and pallet checks, etc... through macros.

 

A bit off topic...tho one place I was at had a similar system in place. When programming, we had to define the holder and the projection, which in turn gave us a gage length. That information was loaded into a file. The operators had to set the tools according to this.  When a tool was called up in the machine, the length offset of the tool in the spindle was compared to the length that was in the tool file. If it was different by anymore than .100"  then the machine alarmed out. So many checks like this can be implemented, it just takes some leg work up front.