I’m just going to throw out there that there are some April Fools Day product ideas in here.
3 Likes
I’m truly sorry this is the way those conversations come across to you, but I understand. I’ll offer my perspective, only because I suspect this issue will increase with each release. Your creations are awesome, and the fact that you put them out into the world is so generous. Thank you.
One of my concerns is the conflation of the idea of a modification to try and change (improve??) machine performance in certain applications, and customizations that just allow a machine to better fit into a persons workspace, or allow for a person to achieve some non-performance related goal (i.e. Peter Panels for aesthetic preferences).
I work in my garage, and the table needs to serve as an assembly/worksurface, and the motion system currently needs to carry my laser as well. I don’t consider either of these as mods that are intended to affect the core motion or structural components. I just don’t have room for a second table for the laser, and I do worry that I’ll damage the belt anchors when assembling a cabinet on the table. I would offer that in my mind I am so excited to see the improvements in the LR4 that I am finding ways to make it work in my space. I think your work is so awesome, that I’ll make the effort (and accept responsibility for my choices) to customize it for my space. In fact, I agree and have chosen to put the belts in their normal place while I get some experience with the LR4 (since that absolutely could/would affect the core motion system.) Perhaps my perception of their vulnerability in my space is overblown. (Although I’m also the knucklehead that knocked his entire LR3 to the floor and cracked the first core. 
)
I think my tribute to Doug “Status of LowRider mods” thread was inappropriate, and I’ve learned that lesson.
I’ll also keep my further discussion of customizations to my own build log, which I’ll start this weekend. As many have already said, these small changes will probably move us much closer to your goal. I do worry that as the community grows, and customizations become more and more common, the discussions of bringing certain common customizations forward (like the ability to hold other tools like a laser) will also naturally be more common.
However, I also want to know that my customizations (better word than mods) truly come from a place of sincere appreciation and gratitude as well as a strong desire to enjoy the benefits of each new release, and to participate in the community.
3 Likes
I have never doubted that even for a second.
3 Likes
This has been a very crazy learning experience for me. There are lots of mods I expect, laser, pen, other spindles. Lots of mods I never expected paintbrushes, idex, swappable spindles.
It is just something was happening the last year, that I did not realize until I started this thread…I loved the LR3 there was very little I wanted to change. I had my sights set on the jackpot, mpcnc and zen since I just finished a new MP3DP. I had not realized all the other changes and completely new builds made me feel like the LR3 was lacking in someway and I should change it.
The Primo is sold old in CNC years it is insane, yet no one needs to modify it very much. It easily does everything everyone wants. That was not true for the LR3. I tend to only update a machine when I get a new idea, lr2 to LR3 added the beam, mpcnc is mostly been core changes. This update was done because I felt like I didn’t make the LR3 right. Again, I did not know this until this thread started.
So now I am just going to be very protective of the yellow brick road. If you have not seen it yet, we just had a question “do I really need to make a fancy new table?” That is like a punch in the gut to me. We strayed, and newcomers are thinking they need more than they do to get started.
5 Likes
We will bring it back! I hope we still get to see some of the crazy ideas get tried, and I know we will. But you are right, we need to be directing to a “stock” start not all this other craziness.
I know I have seen where people wanted this or that before but were talked into trying it stock and then found out it was much better than they realized. And I hope we can get people to see just how good this thing is in stock form. I know it blew me away in the beta!
1 Like
That sounds fun!
There was a CNC video I forget who linked it… They put a mini circular saw on a CNC instead of a router and added the ability to rotate the saw around the z axis so they could cut linearly like a table saw or skew the blade to make scallop shapes in the wood surface. Super cool, but way out there with that 4th axis.
2 Likes
I’m pondering whether presenting a couple options for basic table designs would be helpful. It’s easy to say that “a big (enough) level surface will do”, but perhaps it’d make things easier for new users that don’t have such surfaces (and don’t want to sit on the floor) to suggest a solution that consists of a few 2x4s and a sheet of plywood… with plans and instructions.
1 Like
This thread was very helpful for me when I was trying to figure out what to do about a table. Honestly, for me, the table was the most intimidating part.
3 Likes
Yeah, a quick scan of that thread has some good stuff. The thread linked in the docs has some other good stuff (but then you need to know “how to do parametric stuff”… could be scary). I think the yellow brick road should have “here’s simple plans and instructions for 3 different table sizes”… no deciphering threads with 100s of posts and asking the new user to figure out what it all means, the pros/cons of everything in those threads and requiring them to make “scary critical” decisions about a table. Boil it down to “How big? Here’s your basic table design.” It could start with a few (3?) different size options. Later it could be evolved to a “table calculator” that spits out plans and instructions for basic tables that coincide with the calculator for the machine itself.
1 Like
The issue with that is, then every one thinks that have to have THAT table design.
I haven’t read the LR4 docs yet, but I think when I built my LR3, the docs said, and @vicious1 in the forum said, “any reasonably flat surface will do”.
No torsion boxes, or plans, or anything is required.
You can screw it to your dining room table if you prefer to get divorced soon 
This is what the Yellow Brick Road is about. The least daunting path to success.
I screwed together some 2x4s in a “winging it” design, and slapped some 3/4" MDF on top. That’s still my table today
5 Likes
I am 99.9% sure I have seen that done at least once in the forum 
Pretty sure he used it to cut a hole for a Zen table.
2 Likes
I mean, this is an oldie but a goodie! 1-Table - V1 Engineering Documentation
3 Likes
ah…Yep…I think that’s what I read, then stopped worrying about it and then
I think it took me more time to make space in my shop for that table than it did to build the table… and the machine 
5 Likes
I’m with you. I’d be good with part files and a picture for documentation and guidance. What the path looks like really depends on what lowest common denominator you’re looking to cater to; and I certainly wouldn’t suggest dropping the bar to entry too low. Maybe the bar is you need to be able to figure out how to arrive on (somewhat literally) a table. Perhaps the diversion in the docs to a parametric table design thread with over 100 posts just shouldn’t be there.
1 Like
Once upon a time, when I started my MPCNC, there was a subpage about autosquaring with square mellons as the picture and you saying chasing 0s is not the main idea about the MPCNC.
You also once said an easy table was good enough, then you made plans for the parametric table.
And I think both of those things were great. The autosquaring only enabled the LR3 and 4 to be made. How would we have gone about leveling Z? It would not have worked without, even with hardstops, because the gantry would have fallen down (happened to me when my endstops didn’t trigger). This makes the builds a little more challenging, but the results of the cuts a lot better.
So the road did change, including things that were once deemed optional, and that’s a good thing.
What we are never going to see you do are ballscrews. 
Or battery powered chainsaws.
1 Like
Hard stops work. I still haven’t installed endstops on my LR3. I prop up both ends with a constant sized block before engaging the motors.
3 Likes
I felt this way too. I think the way that Ryan now has it word it in the latest documentation is helpful and represents the range of options in a way that would have eased my mind.
2 Likes
That is the way i ran my mpcnc, but damn it if the endstops are not the cats meow! I was not a believer until my z max was 1 or 2mm’ s higher and all i did was measure and change pulloff, done in about 15 mins.
Now it just works every time! And very precisely too!
2 Likes
[Meant as constructive, and respectfully]
LR3 was (and still is) a great machine.
I’ve detected this sentiment of being forced to release an unneeded update to the LR in your posts for a while now. You seemed hesitant- maybe even pushing back against- releasing the LR4.
It certainly didn’t help things that the LR3 left the shop and the LR4 emerged from beta before you were really ready for even the soft release.
The truth, though, is that the LR4 absolutely IS a better machine all around than the LR3.
I hear your desire to avoid taking people through wild excursions off the beaten path and for most users building a stock machine first is indeed the way to go.
Pointing people back to the center is fine, but part of the enthusiasm is that people are going to want to modify things for their own situations, tastes, and even just to be different.
I know just a few Primo owners in person after the couple of RMRRFs that I’ve attended. Primo is indeed an awesome machine. But every single owner that I’ve met has since told me that they are seriously considering decommissioning it in favor of an LR4, maybe even in the same footprint. Every. Single. One.
It might be time to take a bit of a step back and face the fact that you’re somewhat a victim of your own success. The machines are awesome, and you’re a great designer. You’ve even gone out of your way to accommodate some of the mods you don’t necessarily agree with (e.g. extra limit switch locations).
The way to set the path so that others can follow it is to make it clear.
The documentation needs to be finished, and readable for those that actually read it. The content creators need to release videos and other stuff showing the builds and describing the options. I know a bunch of folks who will not read a book or web instructions and ask “can you point me to a video showing this”. I was asked that nearly every day at the big makerspace for every single machine there I worked with.
It’s also true that there are still limitations. The enclosures for controllers are rudimentary, people still run into regular problems with wiring and in particular with wire extensions. Workflow styles vary, and there still isn’t a decent discussion in the instructions to help folks sort out whether and why they should chose an SKR vs a Jackpot vs their own unique controller (Estlcam, or Klipper on whatever, or even RepRap firmware as examples).
It’s well and good to want to help folks find the path through the center, but you have a bunch of work to do to mow the overgrowth down so that the path is actually clear.
Time to redouble the efforts on that.
6 Likes
Agreed!
1 Like