Poll about fixing the default F&S in CC already

Month after month I keep seeing posts of new users getting their feeds and speeds from Carbide Create, who either have no clue what to do when the recommended RPM is below 10.000RPM, or worse go ahead and use the recommended feedrate but at some wildly different RPM on their router. So here’s a (totally biased) poll for the community:

  • I think CC developers should fix the default feeds and speeds so that they match the Shapeoko capabilities when “Shapeoko” is selected as the machine type, not just default to the Nomad values, to avoid generations of new users getting confused.
  • Nah, that’s fine, I can recompute the appropriate feedrate in my head when CC comes up with an RPM value that is out of the Shapeoko router range.

0 voters


Allright, let’s use this coven to summon @robgrz now! :slight_smile:

Not sure if @robgrz will reply to your poll but I have a question in the meantime. As you know the F&S are dependent on material and you know that there are several sources for F&S values; the ones from the Shapeoko wiki, the ones from @wmoy, those from @gmack. I think the question is which ones should be used in CC?

Personally, if this is going to be revisited, I would like to be able to enter values for each type of material, cutter, a chipload calculator like the one in VCarve 10 and even a warning if the F&S exceed a certain threshold for the machine (Nomad or Shapeoko, Shapeoko with HDZ) in particular to prevent stupid moves like missing a decimal. The database should provide the ability to override the default numbers for Carbide cutters for all use not only for a given toolpath.

1 Like

That would be grand (and is way beyond my expectation, which was to at least fix the wrong RPM/FR recommendations for Shapeokoers)

I suspect that the CC team would not want to “complexify” the F&S model with notions like chipload, since CC is mostly aimed at new users. One possibility could be to keep the interface as is, but modify the recommended values so that they match Winston’s videos, as it would make sense that all recommendations emanating from Carbide3D are consistent.

If CC was at least partially open sourced, we could leverage the collective experience from this community to implement a kick-*** feeds & speeds plugin! (and this, is my yearly rant about CC being proprietary SW :slight_smile: )


Yep, having the ability to add macros and plugins was requested several times and I think that the expertise here is top notch. After all, basic Easel (a beginner software) and Vcarve/Aspire both proprietary have this ability that provides built-in features that Carbide Create can only dream of. If Carbide wants to expand their offerings to grow their market by opening-up the prosumer market (without abandoning their current clientele) with more capable machines HDZ and possibly something akin to HDZero, it should have software to match the capabilities of the hardware. The recent CAD offering does not provide CAM so people have to go to F360 or import a DXF and create toolpaths the very limited CC, upgrading to a tool database would be a first step in the right direction.

1 Like

I’ll be honest, as new user, I’d rather see blanks than wrong info…

Yay, the summoning worked !

More likely a coincidence, but in any case, THANK YOU @robgrz

And to all voters: you know what you have to do now (install 433 beta, play with the new F&S, and provide feedback to further improve the default F&S values in CC).

Was it just a coincidence???


@Julien Start some new polls please.


And an FYI- we’ll likely be moving away from a math-based speed and feed calculation that we have now to a more recipe-based approach in the coming months.


Something tells me this is due to @wmoy and his efforts.

the one thing I would really love is if there is a way, as part of the definition of a specific endmill, is to specify upper (and lower) bounds on things like inch-per-minute and depth-of-cut that clips whatever algorithm the tool uses.


This is great news. I agree @The_real_janderson’s hunch, and if you do embed all of @wmoy’s Material Monday F&S data in CC, and you’ll be pretty much done I think. Well, then you will need to implement adaptive clearing toolpaths in CC, but that’s a small detail, right :wink:

1 Like

Some have suggested that GWizard should be used for feeds and feeds, at least for wood. That seems reasonable since BW seems to be recognized as a “subject area expert” and reportedly has had a Shapeoko for some time now. Is that being considered?

Nope, GWizard is not an option we’re considering. Priority one for us is simplifying the workflow for the “average user”, which means we’ll be baking in tested speed and feed combinations for each cutter/machine/material combination.

Then, for the people who want to tweak data and share libraries, we’ll likely be saving user libraries in CSV format that can be easily edited and traded without having to be explicitly imported/exported.


Do you intend to use GWizard as a “starting point”? If not, how do you intend to proceed?

Winston, a pile of material, and a pile of cutters. Probably coffee too. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen him drink coffee but he’s going to need to start.


I have been working on an "easy " calculator for CC & Shapeoko that works kind of like this. I love the idea of user libraries too. I would love to be able to set my own defaults for specific cutters when used on specific materials.
Sent you a PM about the Calculator.

That sounds like a really worthwhile endeavor. Any chance he’d be willing to monitor and record cutting powers and document the cutting parameters sufficiently to enable others to replicate his findings and generate material K-factors/Unit Horsepowers? Recording video and audio would probably help with that.

I guess you would have to ask @wmoy himself.

1 Like