I've been wondering this for a while. I have a Bridgeport although i really didn't want a 2000lb machine. How do the Zay and IH machines compare? Does anyone have experience with both to give some comparison? I liked the idea of a benchtop that could be broken down more easily than a bridgeport but i've heard about sooo many quality issues. It's hard to beat a bridgeport for a home shop. I bought mine for $1600. it needed a little tlc but it's coming along. It seems like the benchtop mills would be easier and cheaper to cnc too.

Bridgie guys will tell you there is no comparison--Bridgie wins hands down due to mass and fine American craftsmanship. You're a Bridgie guy now, so that's your story and you are sticking to it!

I'm a square column guy. My story is supposed to be that the Bridgie wouldn't fit, or I couldn't afford it. It can never be that I thought the square column was better than the Bridgie. It might sometimes be I didn't think I had the talent to restore the Bridgie and wanted to get started making chips sooner.

LOL,

BW

P.S. I'd be curious to know from an objective source what the real diffs are, but this is the Internet, and there are no objective sources! LOL

Well i do have some import too. I have a grizzly mill lathe combo. It's the mid sized one, not the $900 one. It is a miserable mill and an ok lathe i can't complain too much, i've made alot of chips on it. The bridgeport however cuts metal like hot butter. Very smooth finishes with a 3/4" end mill.

Is it an actual Bridgeport, or clone? If actual, I assume it was purchased used? What did you do to restore it to operating condition?

I have no experience with round column mills such as you describe, so can't comment there. The IH mill will take a big cut with a nice finish. I regularly use a Lovejoy 225 3" 7 insert face mill to square blocks. I would expect the Bridgeport can take quite a bit more depth of cut due to rigidity.

Another significant advantage of the Bridgeport is range of speeds. The top speed of the IH out of the box is 1500 rpm, which is really too slow to be ideal for a lot of aluminum work, IMHO.

Best,

BW

I didn't have to do much to my genuine bridgeport. It really just needed cleaned, the head lubed, and new way scrapers. My grizzly mill lathe combo is the one where the mill head is fixed height. The only z dimension is with the quill and we know how bad that is.

They really don't compare. The IH mill probably comes the closest to comparing though. But I don't think it is fair to ask it to compare, a bridgeport is 3x the mass of even the largest benchtop! Still, some of these benchtop mills have a great amount of capability. My X3 can take some pretty aggressive cuts with a 1" endmill. Figure a bridgeport has such a huge capability, even if you divide that in half you are still left with more than acceptable performance. My basement is not a real machine shop, I can settle for a benchtop :).

I have a Bridgeport, it is accurate, can take a hefty cut, it is big. If I am working in stainless or hard metals I will use it, or if I am doing something large.

Limitations to consider for square column mills.
1) Do not get a gear head machine, they are noisy, they do not go fast enough. I have an older belt driven square column and a newer gear head machine. I think the gear head will make me go deaf. The top speed is not too good when using small cutters in aluminum. Small cutters = high speed = noise
2) The spindle is a given distance from the column. That is it. My newer mill to, get good use of the entire table top I am constantly moving out off the end of the ways and binding becomes an issue that last inch or two.
With my Bridgeport for rely big pieces I can clamp down the part, work as far in as possible, then relocate the head further out and continue to work the part.
3) Vertical adjustment is a lot more problematic in the square column mills, my new mill worse than the old, the new one has a rack and pinion, they ought to be strung up for that one, the old has a stationary vertical screw and a captured nut in the head that when turned that raises and lowers the head. It is a lot more controllable. Even so, it can be hard to get that one mill increment.

Hope this helps.

there is no comparision between a bridgeport mill and a dovetail column mill when you are trying to get it down the steps, disassembled, with a handcart.

I wanted a 3000lb bridgeport clone, I have the space, but it would have quadrupled the cost to have it rigged into my shop which is three floors down with outside access on a hill.

Jerry

This would be like comparing a toyota pickup to a Ford straight truck .

They both move things and do it well, one just can do a lot more at once.

I can park a toyota in my drive way.

The straight truck cost 4x to operate.

I could keep going.


chris

I really would like to use an IH mill. They seem the most intriguing to me and probably the best comparison to a Bridgeport. Anybody near Baltimore, MD got one? I'll let you try my Bridgeport.lol

I looked at the IH dovetail mills. They are ZAY 45's and the last guy went out of business or sold to someone else. I hear that they had good support and are looking for orders.

I opted for a Grizzly G0519 R45 clone with the 3-phase motor. I was originally scared off from the motor but then I bought a Hitachi VFD for taking 220 to 3-phase for $210. This gives me variable speed, variable torque, almost instant reverse, modbus computer control of spindle speed, etc.

Not in Baltimore but lived in that area from 89 to 95. Now in San Francisco area, but if you are ever out this way...


Jerry

One way to look at this is that Bridgeports are old school. That is they represent the machining arts from an era long ago. Box column mills, especially when CNC'ed represent, newer approaches to metal working.

Now you are all about to say: "You can CNC a Bridgeport!!!", which is entirely true. The difference as I see it is that a well done CNC implementation eliminates the need for many of the adjustments that a Bridgeport has. Thus a box column mill, when CNC'ed, can be an economical alternative to the machining intense construction of a Bridgeport or clone.

Now some have mentioned the weight advantage of the Bridgeport. That can certainly help if th weight is in the right place. A well engineered box column mill however can put more of its weight into its simpler construction. Now at the low end there are not to many importers of larger box column mills that match the Bridgeport in mass, but that doesn't mean that they are not available. What I'm trying to say is that comparing a Bridgeport to a bench top mill is not exactly fair is some respects.

dave

One way to look at this is that Bridgeports are old school. That is they represent the machining arts from an era long ago. Box column mills, especially when CNC'ed represent, newer approaches to metal working.

Now you are all about to say: "You can CNC a Bridgeport!!!", which is entirely true. The difference as I see it is that a well done CNC implementation eliminates the need for many of the adjustments that a Bridgeport has. Thus a box column mill, when CNC'ed, can be an economical alternative to the machining intense construction of a Bridgeport or clone.

Now some have mentioned the weight advantage of the Bridgeport. That can certainly help if th weight is in the right place. A well engineered box column mill however can put more of its weight into its simpler construction. Now at the low end there are not to many importers of larger box column mills that match the Bridgeport in mass, but that doesn't mean that they are not available. What I'm trying to say is that comparing a Bridgeport to a bench top mill is not exactly fair is some respects.

dave
Well I thought I stated that in my analogy, but then again I was not direct. A bridgeport compared to square column I would argue is far more advanced in conception then any table top sqaure column. Thats not to say simplicty is not better, here I would say you are right. And the chi-com's have taken a older simple design and brought into a more modern era(one could argue they are not much more advanced the bridgeports of the 50's). The square column design has been around since the nearly the begining of industrial machining around the 1850's. Jig borers being the prime example as I was remined in a differrent post, are pretty much a the same thing. Now the real advance in technology is the bearing, which accounted for a good amount of mass on early line shaft equipement, has cut down on weight along with better metalurgy and engineering in construction. Once high speed bearings, came about, you saw a turn away from 2-5 ton horz. mills, to vertical solid arm machines. The next natural progression was the bridgeport, which had decisive speed advantage to most machines of its day. It could be a drill press, vertical machine, with decent horz. ablity and latter in its day a cnc machine. I would also say that not all "bridgeports" had round column with tilting heads.
The biggest square columns I have seen are more like drill presses gone hayware then milling machines, but thats not saying to much as I am sure there ones I have not seen. One thing to think about here is that compared to american companies of any given time frame the chi-com, and tawianese to some extent don't care about copyrights, so whom ever finds the good idea tends to be copied rather quickly. The only seperating factor at that point seems to be qaulilty control(if any) for the machine.
One other thing, to group a machine into an era from long ago, you should learn from history. We often forget our past, in more ways then one, and I think its better to build on it(like sieg) then shut the door on it. Its funny I have seen a shaper that can take nearly 3/8" of steel off in one pass(over 2' length), with HSS tooling. How many machines can you say can do that? Alot of people would wrongly try and use carbide tooling in it, get crappy results and say its the machine, then proceed to do something else.

I think the real comparison to the IH size machines would actually be a Rusnok mill, I worked at the company that made them. The time spent building those machines was incredible. From what I remember they were sturdy and could handle anything a knee mill could for its size, and do it well on top of a table.

chris