CSMIO/IP wanted

[Neale]

I use an IP/M with a slaved axis. These days, I home it using a trick that someone described a year or two back. You can go into the CSMIO config plugin control panel and select "no slave axis". I then have a specific "home all" button which runs a homing macro that homes X and A together (and actually Y as well but that's not relevant). I have fitted a home switch to the A axis and it all works very nicely. Then back to the plugin, re-enable the slave axis, and off you go. I keep meaning to test whether I can use the "offset zero" field in the Mach3 homing parameters to make fine tweaks to the A position but I haven't got round to that yet. The IP/S does all that by itself, of course, but it's an awful lot more to pay if that's all you need it for.

Personally, if I were starting again today, I would look very seriously at a UC300ETH and UB1 combination which appear to be very similar in capability, 24V interfaces, etc, to the CSMIO and with the possibility of losing Mach3 which causes me just enough problems to be irritating but not quite enough to bite the bullet and upgrade. There are other options, of course, but the thought goes through my mind that I could probably do a brain transplant on my current control box without major re-engineering that way. Losing Mach3 itself for something that is not years obsolete is attractive as well...

[JAZZCNC]

Personally, if I were starting again today, I would look very seriously at a UC300ETH and UB1 combination which appear to be very similar in capability, 24V interfaces, etc, to the CSMIO and with the possibility of losing Mach3 which causes me just enough problems to be irritating but not quite enough to bite the bullet and upgrade.

I'm going to agree but slightly disagree with this.? I agree Mach3 is getting long in the tooth and does have some issues under certain conditions. However, for routers with simple needs, I don't have any issues really.

Regards the Uc300Eth + UB1 combo then I've fitted a few now and I'm not impressed with the UB1. The connectors are poor and I've had a few issues with wires coming loose, I've also had some noise issues. Whereas the Cslabs connectors are rock solid and I've NEVER had a single issue with noise, even on very noisy machines with very high-frequency devices attached.

If I could find an IP/S at the right money then I'd go with that over UC300/UB1 because of it's quality and to be honest if Mach3 did everything I needed I'd even go with the IP/M if had all the I/O and frequency again because of its quality.

Thou that said I do agree that Cslabs/Artsoft relationship isn't great anymore so support isn't good and that does mean a lot.

To be honest, if I was in the market for a powerful controller with its own software that's well supported I'd be looking at either the ET6 or ET7 from Puruvesi.
Hand's up I've not tested them yet, so it's not a recommendation base don experience but soon will be doing. However, I have studied the hardware/software very closely because I am considering using them on the routers I build and it's very powerful combo that looks very well made. It also uses an "S" curve planner which I've used before on other more advanced controllers and they offer far smoother movement, esp on routers doing 3D type work.

https://shop.pv-automation.com/et6/1...onverters-none

Another good alternative is the Acorn but the software isn't ideally suited to routers, or it wasn't the last time I looked.