djstedman, I upgraded from X7 to X8, and have had both programs open at the same time. When I do the exact same order of operations X8 behaves differently than X7, hence the frustration. I have been using MC since V8 and this is the first I've noticed the issue. I guess my main gripe is that I work with a lot of part "families" where maybe one or two details will change. It is much easier to open an existing program, with all of its toolpaths, tool libraries, stock models, etc already ready to go, and then import the Parasolid of the new part and apply the existing info to the new part. Now, if I forget to save the program file as a new file immediately, there is a much greater chance of overwriting the old file. Anyway, I'll have to learn to adapt. Thanks Mastercam.

I understand that, and will have to retrain myself in my order of thinking, but why change something that has been the same in Mastercam (and quite frankly, Windows) after what, close to 20 years? Bottles the mind.

Been playing with X8 for a few days and so far I like it. (Who'da thunk you'd actually be able to see selected chains in an "X" version of MC ) The problem I'm having is this: For years, I have been opening files by going to file>open. In previous versions, MC would first allow me to select the file I wanted to open, and then ask me if I want to save the file I was working on. When I clicked yes, it would then take me to the folder that I was working in with the file name highlighted at the bottom. I'd then click save and everything would be dandy. Of course, in X8 this is different. Now, when I click file>open, a small box opens immediately and asks if I want to save changes to the file. The problem is that it only gives me the immediate file name and not the entire file path like EVERY SINGLE VERSION OF MASTERCAM THAT I'VE USED SINCE 1998! While this may see trivial, I'm afraid it will lead to some overwriting of files since I rely heavily on subfolders to keep my thousands of programs organized. Anybody else notice this? Is there a setting that can be changed in the cofig file? Am I crazy? Am I doing it all wrong? Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks guys! I didn't want to use the evil "post" word and risk a warning slap from Webby. To be fair, the post I am using was probably written at least 13-14 years ago (back in the V9 days) and has been updated whenever I've installed new versions of MC. I'll play around with it and see if I can get it to spit out what I need. Have a good weekend.

So, I program for a number of different machines and have for the most part been using floating tap holders for the last 15+ years. These seem to work okay for the limited amount of tapping we do, so I generally haven't had an issue with the code MC spits out. Typical code: (TAP M5) G0G90G40G80G54 T18M06 M01 S318M3 G0X2.3473Y.5319 G43H18Z.1 M8 G99G84Z-.45R.1F10. X1.2475Y1.1669 G80 M9 G91G28Z0M05 Fast forward to now: I am finding that using rigid holders with a rigid tap cycle allows us to go much faster and control the thread depth more accurately. (Duh .) My machines seem to enjoy having an M29 in the code to turn on rigid tapping, which MC doesn't spit out when I post code. Is there a setting in the machine or control def that would post the M29 for me? I would like the code to look like this (same code as above but with M29): (TAP M5) G0G90G40G80G54 T18M06 M01 G0X2.3473Y.5319 G43H18Z.1 M8 M29S318 G99G84Z-.45R.1F10. X1.2475Y1.1669 G80 M9 G91G28Z0M05 Up until now I've just been manually editing the code before I send it to the machine, but sometimes I forget. Especially on a Friday afternoon so close to time Any help would be appreciated Thanks, BT

Did you miss the part where he said, "If it's raw stock that's saw cut to length, that should be sufficient." Why dial something in to +/-.001 when +/-.020 will suffice? If it's raw stock that's going to get cut on 5 sides, who gives a rat's a$$ if it takes .030" off one side and .020" off the other? (Unless your radial DOC's are critical for tool life, but in that case you'd take greater care.) If the part is getting cleaned up and everything is in spec then you're golden.

I'm no rocket surgeon nor do I use some fancy schmancy CAD program, but even my software will update the print when I update the model. Much easier to do this than to "scribble up" the drawing. Plus, when you are working on Rev23 (like my current project) of an assembly, it's nice to know that the model is current. Nothing like spending a week machining all the parts only to find that they don't fit together, all because the model didn't get updated. Man, am I glad we don't do job shop work anymore!

Seriously Webby, can you make the default font size just a tad larger? It seems to be the most common complaint about the new layout. Sure, we could do the old control mouse thingie, but what should we have to every time we open the website? I'm not thrilled with the color scheme either, but I could live with it if I could read the dang text.

I think the biggest improvement would have to be that now, when you select a chain, you can actually see the chain you selected! This is revolutionary. Congrats, Mastercam, for making something that worked in V9 work almost as well again, nearly a decade later.

You believed something your reseller told you? Perhaps you should step on your own big toe for that one!

Is X8 going to come out before X7 MU3?

In my case, it seems to have made my Verify crash more often. Gotta love progress!

Who needs Off Topic when the main forum provides gems like this! The only thing missing is Micro

gcode, yes, but it was acting funky and didn't work. What DID work was downloading MU2 (just came out Monday according to my resaler ) installing it, rebooting my computer, and reopening the file. After all that, Verify started working almost as well as the previous versions it replaced. I guess the lesson to be learned is before trying to do any programming, check with MC to see if there are any new Maintenance Updates, Service Packs, Rev changes, etc. You never can be too careful. Thanks for the help though.

I am having the same issue with stock placement of round stock. Verify wants to put it on the z axis, which is not where I need it to be. In older versions of MC there was a box in Verify called "center on axis" that you could uncheck and it would put your stock where it needed to be. Of course, this option is missing (or very well hidden) on the new and improved Verify that comes with X7. SOOO AGGRIVATING! Any ideas? As per usual, my reseller isn't around to answer questions so I have to lean on you guys. TIA...