I have the Shapeoko 3 XXL model (Pre-Dec 2019) and just completed the upgrade from the belted Z axis to the new HDZ,
The upgrade document said to carry over the existing spindle mount for my compact router. I am now upgrading the old compact router to the new 65mm VFD Spindle kit. However, The spindle is too small to fit in the existing spindle mount from the old compact router. Even when I tighten the two socket head screws all the down, there is still a large gap between the spindle and the mount and I am not able to secure the spindle in the mount.
Do I have to buy the 65mm spindle mount or is there a spacer that I need to allow the new spindle to fit securely in the existing mount from the compact router?
If a new spindle mount is required for this upgrade, then why was it not included in the VFD Spindle kit?
This is very disappointing because I cannot complete the upgrade for the spindle without an additional accessory that should have been included.
Anyone else encounter this problem when upgrading to the 65mm VFD Spindle kit?
The original SO3 had a 69MM mount that fits the Dewalt router. They (C3D) shipped a spacer that fits in to reduce to 66MM for their router and the Makita. As @WillAdams posted you can get the spacer. I have an SO3 XXL that was also converted from belt to HDZ and the stock mount works well but for the price a dedicated mount for your spindle might be worth it. Back when I bought the HDZ I bought the 80MM spindle mount to future proof myself. However the SO3 being a great machine would likely be way overkill to put an 80MM spindle on. The SO4/5 are better candidates for the bigger and more powerful spindles. Since I dont have the C3D spindle I cannot say from personal experience about its suitability for purpose but from reading here on the forum that is as big as I would go on an SO3.
Having the HDZ you just need to regularly do the maintenance of oiling the bearings, cleaning the linear rails and occasionally wipe down the linear rails and put some Mobil Vactra #2 oil (also called way oil) on. If you do the maintenance then put a paper towel under the parked Z because for a few days excess oil will drip down the linear rails and can also drip on your project. So wipe off the excess before starting a project until the excess oil quits dripping.
My personal opinion based on having the following:
S3 with HDZ and ER-11 Router
S4 with Router
SPro with Router
SPro with ER11 C3D 65mm Spindle (at work)
S5Pro with C3D ER11 65mm Spindle and now C3D 80mm Spindle
HDM 1.5kw
HDM 2.2kw (at work)
The motion system of the S3/S4 is well matched to the power of the router, but the 65mm spindle would work awesome. On the SPro the 65mm spindle is perfectly matched to the motion system. They both run out of oomph around the same load. The 80mm spindle is a heavy unit and I think weighs too much for the belt driven machines. The S5Pro is perfectly matched to the 80mm spindle.
I am super stoked they went with a ER16 on the 65mm spindles. That makes them accept more tooling and 3/8" is nice for rigidity on longer endmills for people doing deep cuts.
I remember asking for information related to this issue and @LiamN helpfully provided me with the information I needed before adding a 2.2kw ER20 spindle to my machine. Edit to add, the PwnCNC 2.2kw air-cooled spindle/VFD (plug and play on my standard SO3) has been running faultlessly since my upgrade in March 2024.
The belt drive in question here is for the Z-axis â the original two versions from the SO3 Launch edition and Summer 2016 machines, not the newer versions since the Z-Plus was released.
I bet it runs well. I personally just donât see how that big and powerful of a spindle has any real advantage over a 65mm one on the belt driven machines. Why have a spindle that stalls at twice the load of the motion system? The increased inertia would make for the need to reduce acceleration or limit the feedrate so that the inertia doesnât make the belts skip on the pulleys or the pulleys skip steps. I always advise for a balanced approach.
I guess the singular advantage would be running some 1/2" tooling really slowly if you need to do really deep cuts.
Of course. I am in complete agreement with that approach. I always wanted to push my machine to see what could be achieved. On the supplied configuration from new, I succeeded in machining 20mm thick aluminium stock using belts and the Z Plus Z axis while using the Makita trim router. After upgrading the belt path, belt tension adjusters and exchanging the baseboard for a very stiff SMW aluminium one complete with modular vices, I had wanted to achieve the best performance balance I could get. The PwnCNC spindle/VFD combination was very tempting and I am delighted with it.
I am awaiting tooling so I can try my hand at machining mild steel and cast Iron. Not for the fast production values that would warrant a different machine purchase, but for achieving what is possible. My small SO3 has been an outstanding user experience and because I am well past retirement age, I have the time to put into fettling the whole plot to make it work. It speaks to the basic quality of the machine that I have been able to successfully machine slate, glass, wood, aluminium, brass and ceramics. It has been a continuous balancing act between desired outcome and having the required mechanical sympathy⌠so as not to ask the machine to undertake tasks it could never achieve.
I have used a really effective surfacing tool on a 1/2" diameter shaft. I used it for covering a lot of ground, which to me is 400 x 400mm. I have surfaced some very hard African Rosewood workpieces too. Intuitively, I think the 1/2" shaft tool was probably providing a mechanical advantage over the 1/4" shaft. Possibly, the torque differences would not be noticeable between the two different shaft diameters. It would need a real mechanical engineer to describe the differences to me and the actual advantages/disadvantages between the tools.
Another example of using the spindle use was I had wanted to mill some T6 6061 aluminium bar stock. I had used a BAS 261 Metabo bandsaw in my small workspace for about 4 years. The supplied mitre was very cheaply made and once it became ineffective, I contacted Metabo for a replacement mitre. They declined to supply a replacement unless I purchased a whole new machine.
I purchased a suitable mitre head and milled my own replacement bar for the âTâ track cast into the cast iron bed of the bandsaw. I can report that it fits well and does a fine job. pix below.
Miter slots on different machines are different shapes. They have been making miter slots on machines for a long long time and yet there is no standardization. In the US most are .75" but a lot of machines are made in Asia which is metric but made for the US market. I have a small Craftsman bench top bandsaw that has a non standard miter slot so like you I made one.
Ainât that the truth! I could not find any standard mitres that would fit. Overall depth of the âTâ slot was a strange 6.26mm. The slot width at its widest point was 19.77mm. The material width above the âTâ slot at the widest point was 15.32mm. I guess my cast table from Metabo was a Friday night item. This is not what I would expect from German manufacturing. With such weird dimensions, there was only the option of making my own âTâ rail remaining. I suspect that my ersatz Metabo item was made in China, whereafter it was drop-shipped from Shenzhen, just to make it look like it had originated in Germany.
Iâll second the larger shank tooling benefits of either spindle.
I commonly run 8mm shank cutters and they do seem quite a bit happier roughing out than the 1/4" shank cutters do. I have the 80mm 2.2kW spindle with ER20 collet so I can run 10mm, 12mm, 1/2" as well and I frequently take advantage of the cheap worktop cutters for roughing out, especially in cutter eating materials such as MDF.
Given the ER16 collet on the 1.5kW spindle, Iâm not sure Iâd bother with the 80mm 2.2kW just to get up to ER20, as others have said, the belt motion system doesnât really have the grunt to push those, the V wheels are certainly a limiting factor, my machine grew linear rails on the X axis to help hold that 2.2kW spindle better.
Hello Liam. I hope you are in good health and spirits.
I can certainly âfeelâ that the larger shanked cutters do not seem as troubled by resistance when meeting the workpiece. Probably that is just my imagination but the sound of the operation appears to my ears to be less tortured. Does the slimmer shank just reflect a smaller cutterâs increased susceptibility to deflection?
I do not think that ER16 was an option offered by C3D at the time I purchased my spindle upgrade and I had wanted to escape from the limitations imposed by 1/4" shanked tools. PwnCNC offered a plug and play 2.2kW air-cooled spindle and having just upgraded to the excellent HDZ Z axis, I was keen to try the spindle/VFD upgrade.
I am only giving my machine medium use and without strain gauges, I cannot tell how much is power is being lost through the belts. The regular and accurate tensioning, which I carry out as a weekly routine, may go some way to ameliorating the weaknesses induced by the belt drive system by dint of keeping the forces as constant as is possible.
You have just made me think about linear rails now. The surgery required to swap the belts for linear rails is possible and would be the ultimate upgrade, plus or minus a 32bit controller. I am now happily using Carveco Plus and gSender. I wondered how much of an issue it would be to upgrade the rails and controller, without affecting my ease of software use which I would be reluctant to lose. The anxiety that accompanies âif it ainât broke, donât fix itâ is probably responsible for that.
I can tell a difference when using the 5/16â and 8mm bits over the 1/4â bits in the 65mm spindle. If pushed at high rates the deflection as measured for diagnostics is visible although in the ten-thou range in hardwoods. Not âscientificâ testing but the same process used.
I am on page 12 to connect the VFD controller to the control board but the 6-pin connector on the cable from the VFD controller does not match the connector on my controller board Version 24e.
The control board has the original 4-pin round connector instead of the 6-pin square connector.
I saw this note on page 2 of the document so I did not think that I needed to purchase the additional PCB since my control board is V2.4e
âIf you have Shapeoko 3 with a V2.3 board and below (Shapeoko 3 machines purchased before Black Friday 2019), you will also need to purchase a Carbide Motion PCB with enclosure, which includes a new circuit board with the BitRunner connector installed.â
I am now stuck on this upgrade once again for the second time.
If your controller is 2.4e and it doesnât have a BitRunner connector, send a photo of your controller in to support@carbide3d.com and we will work this out with you.
Itâs a lot of work to upgrade the old SO3 machines to linear rails and ballscrews and not particularly cheap either. I upgraded mine to linear rails on the X as that was the weakest point of the V wheel system, but I still have belts on X and Y axes.
Given the Pro machines available now Iâd probably sell the SO3 and buy one of the factory Pro machines rather than spend the time and quite a bit of the money on the upgrade parts.
Well, here is an overview of someone who did just that.
I started my upgrade by buying a used XXL and planned on doing the work with my XXL then doing the swap of the rails and re-asseme the new XXL in short order.
Then things happened and I didnât finish it, then the SO5 Pro came out, and I want the 4 x 4 cutting area, so I stopped upgrading and sold the extra XXL.
