Please share any information on your plans for adding an Automatic Tool Changer to the MR-1?
When to expect it?
Approximate price?
is the MR-1 updateable?
Thank You
Phil
I don’t foresee an ATC for this current design.
I can’t remember where I read it but they already stated there is no plan to ever include a tool changer.
can confirm. Aftermarket will be the only way.
Well, if @langmuir-daniel sends me a free MR1, I will set to work straight away designing an Automatic Tool Changer for it! 
2 Likes
I haven’t seen anything about tool changers.
How much time would it save?
I haven’t seen anything new about a 4th axis, It was the 1st thing mentioned in the add-ons.
What future add-ons are currently in the works?
The MR-1 base platform is a jumping off point for a wide variety of upgrades and expansions. Below is a condensed list of some of the options that will be released in the future that are 100% compatible with the first generation of MR-1 machines.
- 4th Axis kit including rotary indexer and tailstock. This option will allow the user to flip and index their parts to any angle for machining to reduce the number of setups required. It will be robust and rigid enough to machine aluminum and steel parts. The 4th Axis head stock will include an ER32 collet chuck as standard. An optional 4 jaw chuck and trunnion table will be available as well.
Questions have been asked but haven’t seen any answers.
We still have the M1xl and the M1 pro to buy before we get a tool changer guys.
Am I missing something? This isn’t designed to ever accommodate an ATC as far as I can tell. A 4th axis should be something they can offer. It would be nice to have one that is easy to remove. I ran a HAAS with a 4th axis and I rarely used it, the rest of the time it was just in the way.
Are ATC’s usually offered in machines of this size? I’m trying to think of how that would even fit.
There are several similar sized machines with ATC options. Most use an umbrella style ATC. A few use a location based tool storage for ATC. I think the umbrella uses the least amount of space. But those units cost more.
Per a post on YouTube, there are zero plans for an ATC.
The spindle design does not allow for an ATC to be implemented. This discussion keeps coming up in the youtube comments and on social media. There are no plans for an ATC for this machine (As previously stated by Langmuir), as it simply is not designed to accommodate an ATC whilst retaining the claimed repeatability or tolerance.
In addition to it not only being not possible with the spindle provided, the pros and cons of implementing such a system would require a fundamental rework of the machine (And quite frankly in order to hold proper tolerance and run out, it’d contradict the whole gantry style mill idea, as well as further restricting the already limited Z axis height) These design philosophies and decisions is WHY this product is available at the price it is, and capable of what it is - at it’s price point.
I understand the quality of life an ATC brings, but unfortunately it will contradict everything this product excels at - and for the price point that it is available, a 60 second tool change really is a small price to pay. My solution to those who will debate about production times being increased - you’re purchasing a hobbyist cnc mill which competes with small production units, and if the 60 second tool change is too much to absorb, then learn to optimize your CAM files better. There is more time to be saved in better CNC practices than an ATC.
This is not a wood router - and does not have the same expectations from the community as a wood router. To my knowledge, there are no other products in the market that compete with the MR1 in terms of affordability, capability, and manufacturer support (I’m sure you can find some unnamed offshore machine to support a debate).
The test machine was getting as close as 0.0005" on the test video. Find me a mill under 10k that can do that (With evidence, not just spec sheets). That is ten times more accurate than the typical accepted industry standard of 0.005".
The 4th axis option is not a bad idea - however it will run into the same issue: How can it be implemented without seriously impacting machine performance.
2 Likes
4th axis would just mount to the plates, no? I don’t see how that would effect performance.
I would imagine that in order to have powered rotation on the head, you would be introducing whatever small deflection may be present in the installed system. Whether it be a flat bearing, added gantry weight, design rigidity problems, etc. I wouldn’t imagine it’d be overly present in the X direction but very likely in the Y direction.
Our plan is to offer a rotary axis that bolts to the table (head stock and tail stock), so that you can index the part during machining. Commonly referred to as an A axis rotary indexeR (A mean aligned to the X Axis).
8 Likes
Hi. I had to reply and say . Yessss! please think and make the rotary index with a very large bore hole!!! This is the most important feature. It can fit a longer axle if it can go thru the chuck.
Everyone needs this , a chuck and large pass thru bore. I’ll buy it then and will be the best option on the market for a small shop like mine. Thanks Rob
I’m sure someone will design or is working on a design for an ATC for it, just like we designed THC for the plasma tables, before the OEM launched one. Don’t underestimate the brilliance of the makers on here!
Hi there. Like your facts about the MR-1 and agree. Can not wait to get mine.
However the off shore manufactures do not have a word to say about this cnc machine because …
1st they only offer a 9x7 inch x-y work area . I consider this a waste of money. What are you going to do if you want to make a larger part like me? Buy another 55 thousand machine?
2nd of all the ATC is no big deal for a hobbyist or small shop production. Langmuir has it right,
Affordability
3 Likes
Affordability + Performance > Convenience
2 Likes