Uc300

[Ger21]

I would highly recommend the ethernet version, along with the UB1 breakout board.
http://www.cncroom.com/interface-cards/uc300eth-ub1

Note that there is no "lathe" mode in UCCNC at this time.

For lathe use, I think the Centroid acorn may be the best hobby control right now.

[Chaz]

I would highly recommend the ethernet version, along with the UB1 breakout board.
http://www.cncroom.com/interface-cards/uc300eth-ub1

Note that there is no "lathe" mode in UCCNC at this time.

For lathe use, I think the Centroid acorn may be the best hobby control right now.

Thanks Gerry.

I did figure this out later once I did a bit more research.

Sounds like a reasonable device. The supplier I linked has doubts about UCCNC and prefers to keep using Mach 3 however it gives me options.

[Chaz]

Gerry, does this board - https://www.cnc4you.co.uk/UC300 - need a Breakout board of sorts or is this all that is needed?

[Ger21]

Yes, both the USB and ethernet UC300's need a breakout board. (or multiple breakout boards).

The ethernet UC300 is more powerful and faster than the USB version, and the cost is about the same.

Imo, UCCNC is much better than Mach3. Better trajectory planner, and mostly bug free. If you find a bug, they'll usually have it fixed in a few days.
It's missing some features that Mach3 has, but for most people, but they are features that most people don't use anyway.

[JAZZCNC]

Chaz if your converting lathe you want Centroid Acorn. Nothing else can touch it. Watch this.
http://www.centroidcnc.com/centroid_...ontroller.html

[Chaz]

Thanks, spotted it too, looks good.

Will it allow me to use a rotary turret with some form of macro like Mach?

[JAZZCNC]

Thanks, spotted it too, looks good.

Will it allow me to use a rotary turret with some form of macro like Mach?

Yes I think it's already setup to do that but if not then it can be made to do it thru macros and the built in PLC.

[m_c]

Chaz if your converting lathe you want Centroid Acorn. Nothing else can touch it. Watch this.
http://www.centroidcnc.com/centroid_...ontroller.html

I've been able to do all that for the past 5 years on my lathe (and not have limited IO)... ;-)

The real benefit of Acorn would be the conversational programming, but you have to consider how often you'd use it.
It is something I thought I'd really miss when I dumped Mach3, but in the past 5 years, there's only be once where I've really missed having the ability. However nearly everything I do is repeat production, so I design it once on a computer, generate the G-code, and copy it to the lathe where it remains with just an occasional tweak if needed. If I was doing more one-off/repair parts on the CNC lathe, I'd of probably pulled my hair out by now.

[JAZZCNC]

I've been able to do all that for the past 5 years on my lathe (and not have limited IO)... ;-)

To do that did it work straight out the box.? . . . How much C programming did you have to do to get it working how you wanted.?
How stable is the Software, is it tried tested on Industrial strength machines.?

There's more to a product than just I/O in my book. Look how many all singing dancing stuffed to the gunnels with I/O motion controllers have failed or been less than popular ie: Kflop . . just because there software is hardwork or just plain lacking or bug ridden.

Sometimes somethings are worth paying little more for even if sometimes that means getting less IMO.!