"Michael Koblic" writes:

Heed Jim Wilkins' previous posts:

1) Take the Sieg vise off the swivel base - you will gain rigidity,
Z-axis space and some space on the table. On mine the holes were
smaller than the mounting slots on the swivel base. It took me a while
to overcome this but then I am slow...

Sounds good, but I'd be (possibly needlessly) worried because of the
size of the thing. I'd have to bolt it to the nearest T slot, which
would have almost half the bottom of the vise hanging in the air in
front of the table, and the work piece held over the rear edge of the
table. I guess the table and the vise are both stiff enough to let me
do this, but the zig-zag geometry of the fixtures feels wrong. At the
same time, the work piece is held quite high, adding moment arm to the
side forces trying to twist and turn the table.

I guess what I was thinking was that a smaller vise might sort of fit
the table better, and be bolted to it in a more symmetrical manner,
while holding the work piece over the table itself, and not more than an
inch, say, above it. Surely, the target, when mounting a work piece,
must be to get it as close to the table surface, and as centered on the
table, as possible?

2) The LMS vise is the same size - 80 mm. What would you gain by
getting it instead? Furthermore, Jim explained why this is a bad
choice. I had a look at the smaller version in my local shop and I
agree with him. It could be a right PITA to operate.

Ah, yes. That's the one he mentioned, of course. Anyway, I may be
worrying for no good reason -- but I still suspect that I might be
better off returning the ($150) Sieg vise, and looking for something
like the quick vise on http://lmscnc.com/1145 instead.

Anyway, if I'm just being silly here, and should pipe down and make some
swarf instead, please tell me so!

-tih
--
Self documenting code isn't. User application constraints don't. --Ed Prochak