Shaper Origin the first handheld Cnc machine
- Thread starter Mkholdings
- Start date
Seth, was that $300 the profit you you would have made keeping the cnc job in house or just the subbed fee you paid the jobber?
Did that include the hour of your time you would have spent running the Origin ? Did it include the opportunity cost of you're not being able to utilize that hour doing another task that produced revenue for your company?
That sublet job should have included margin for you when you billed it back to the client, so there should be $90-$100 dollars going into your business on that $300 sub out so that you can have resources to do things like buy new Festools.
On the surface , it seems you've just laid out an easy payment plan or self rationalization for getting a new toy. Nothing wrong with that, I'll wager just about all the members of this board have done that at some point.
Did that include the hour of your time you would have spent running the Origin ? Did it include the opportunity cost of you're not being able to utilize that hour doing another task that produced revenue for your company?
That sublet job should have included margin for you when you billed it back to the client, so there should be $90-$100 dollars going into your business on that $300 sub out so that you can have resources to do things like buy new Festools.
On the surface , it seems you've just laid out an easy payment plan or self rationalization for getting a new toy. Nothing wrong with that, I'll wager just about all the members of this board have done that at some point.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2007
- Messages
- 10,359
These things can be very situational and anecdotal. Yes the full $300 would have had some offset. In this case I had time to run the shaper, and create the pattern. Granted some of that time I could have been doing something else. However I would not have needed to take time to make two trips to the CNC shop, etc.
And I could have had the parts same day or next instead of a week later. In this case it was not a production item either. I needed two not ten or twenty. So there was no "mass" production time or money savings by having outsourced it.
Realistically It would have made a $200 difference on my end. But the general point I was making is that the Shaper, even at a fairly high cost, has a profit generating place.
And, Svar and Bohdan pointed out, additional non-monetary advantages.
Not saying the Shaper is right for everyone in every situation, just pointing out that it has place in the professional world. Having one wouldn't mean that I would use it in place of a CNC shop every time but it would be a good tool in the arsenal for me.
Seth
And I could have had the parts same day or next instead of a week later. In this case it was not a production item either. I needed two not ten or twenty. So there was no "mass" production time or money savings by having outsourced it.
Realistically It would have made a $200 difference on my end. But the general point I was making is that the Shaper, even at a fairly high cost, has a profit generating place.
And, Svar and Bohdan pointed out, additional non-monetary advantages.
Not saying the Shaper is right for everyone in every situation, just pointing out that it has place in the professional world. Having one wouldn't mean that I would use it in place of a CNC shop every time but it would be a good tool in the arsenal for me.
Seth
Michael Kellough
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2007
- Messages
- 7,101
I have a Cutawl K-11.
It's an early 20th Century tool that is still used in industry, primarily for cutting slots for die stock.
The Cutawl is basically a sewing machine liberated from the table. The reciprocating shaft is offset in swivel bearings so the blade follows the lead of the operator. It is the ultimate scroll saw and acn cut acute inside corners that the Shaper could approach only with the tiniest end mill (and commensurate slower stock removal).
The Shaper is in many ways the 21st Century replacement of the Cutawl (except for the above example which is a piece of cake for a laser cutter or high pressure water jet). Although generally similar in size shape and function, the Cutawl requires supreme focus from the operator while the Shaper only needs casual attention. And the Cutawl requires a full scale template secured to the work beforehand.
It's an early 20th Century tool that is still used in industry, primarily for cutting slots for die stock.
The Cutawl is basically a sewing machine liberated from the table. The reciprocating shaft is offset in swivel bearings so the blade follows the lead of the operator. It is the ultimate scroll saw and acn cut acute inside corners that the Shaper could approach only with the tiniest end mill (and commensurate slower stock removal).
The Shaper is in many ways the 21st Century replacement of the Cutawl (except for the above example which is a piece of cake for a laser cutter or high pressure water jet). Although generally similar in size shape and function, the Cutawl requires supreme focus from the operator while the Shaper only needs casual attention. And the Cutawl requires a full scale template secured to the work beforehand.
Michael Kellough
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2007
- Messages
- 7,101
Just found an official price sheet for the Cutawl K11 from 1958.
The price at that time was $195. Probably pretty close to the 2016 price of the Shaper.
The price at that time was $195. Probably pretty close to the 2016 price of the Shaper.
Michael Kellough
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2007
- Messages
- 7,101
Michael Kellough said:
Some designs require less focus.
Back in the day workers in store display shops ran the things all day long, with no visible hearing protection. Maybe cotton balls? It's pretty much like freehand routing but the noise is much less annoying.
I think it will be a success. One way to improve it is to use reusable markers/beacons or just surrounding stationary objects instead of the tape for positioning and orientation. With all the current development of Structure From Motion technology it's a logical direction.
Similar threads
