Random thought from Phil's noggin

With the closeness of the rails it may not matter but I’d venture to guess potential racking(for x) with a belt on one side only? With them close together, its likely a non issue.

I don’t see much advantage to that unless you are going to have rigid attachments to the X carriage, over to the outrigger with V-wheels to ride the outrigger. Then you would have some real support for the spindle/router.


pretty smart dudes on here that can run the numbers

you could probably source a larger/stiffer beam that would be close to the performance of dual beam.
at least at the scale we’re working with it seems feasible.

some of the franken-builds on here shown large single sided beam(s) to maintain large work area.
they actually have gotten some pretty rigid setups from what I have seen

I’ve asked that question myself…

Increase in cost, build complexity, increased maintainance, increase in failure points and less upgrade potensial.
=> smaller market, less revenue.

Should be pretty cool. My gantry is 6 or 7 inches wide (i forget)… (my machine is not an XC) … and I can literally ride my gantry if i wanted too. it is as stiff as … (insert your own joke here)


… Phil, you don’t have "just thought"s

ha ha ha ha


Mine has 2 X rails. They just happen to be bolted together :wink:


With two X rails, I’d want the gantry to span and roll on both putting the spindle between it all. The way you rendered it just provides additional cross bracing without any benefit to the Z axis since nothing is connected to it(the added rail).

I was going to go the dual rail route for a new machine I want to build…it would likely use a rotational axis to hold the Z carriage, and give its size and center of gravity, it’s better off being hung from two. Makes the rail placement a bit more ideal, so one isn’t hanging upside-down.

1 Like

A picture is worth a thousand words. :wink:

I think I would be more ridgid if x rail was 80x40mm. The wheels would be farther apart reducing rotational force. The cantilevered forces would be reduced.

1 Like

I think it’s time for Inventables to launch a Version 3 of their X-Carve; complete with a wider X axis, linear slide rails, and smaller/quieter spindle options and a 1500-1800mm Y axis.

1 Like

I’m pretty sure they are already working on that behind closed doors.

I would be a big supporter of sturdier extrusions, linear rails all around and leadscrews.
For me anything short of this would be more a Xcarve 1.5 than a bonafide 2.0.