Every single reply from you has been that Siegmund’s hole size is a scam, we get it. But at no point did you really address the other points being raised.
For example: was the place-of-origin label intentionally covered, and if so, what’s the reasoning behind that?
Also on the structural side: the 5/16" grub screws on the X-Frame can only withstand a certain load (roughly around 1 ton) before deforming the cast underneath. In your Dragon Wagon comparison, you criticized Siegmund’s tack-welded construction, in your own test you loaded the table to around 6 tons. Your own system couldn’t withstand the entry-level table test you performed.
It would be helpful to see these points addressed directly instead of defaulting back to the same argument about competitors.
There are 14 3/8 set screws on one x frame plate 12” Apart. If you think you’re going to crush all of them I’d like to see it.
If you think you have me in some gotcha moment with the distributors that help bring Fireball products around the world, I think you don’t understand that companies work with each other all the time. Did you know that Stronghand/ Build Pro is a resale/wholesale warehouse of Siegmund tables and tools in the US? They have been for 10 years. Siegmund – Strong Hand Tools .
This thread motivated me to visit QM’s website and look at the 28mm offerings. After doing so, I think that if anything, Jason was understating the issues with the 28mm bolts in his video. There’s a pretty large variety of different 28mm bolt types that they sell to make their stuff work together. None of it appears to be interchangeable or multi-purpose, and it’s all very expensive.
Don’t take my word for it; look for yourself. After all, that’s all Jason was really telling you when he said to contact QM/Siegmund yourself and ask why they chose a 28mm hole size. It’s just encouraging you to do your own research.
My biggest question from the video was how easy would it be to use the other tables if you created a fixture map for them. I went to Siegmund’s website and there is zero information or CAD drawings that would help create a fixture map.
Conversely, Jason has all of the CAD for the fixtures and tables and numerous videos on how to create a fixture map. I’ve created a couple and based on his work and I can’t tell you how easy it was to make repeatable and correct parts.
The support from Jason and Fireball is worth the price of the table. And, before anyone calls me a fanboy, I’ve been critical of the small hardtail vise design.
To be fair, in the video Jason tells them to re-draw all the fixtures in CAD themselves, since the Fireball cad is graphics heavy. If you’re going to do that, you could do it with the Siegmund stuff as well. In fact, I would think it would be a lot more crucial to do fixture mapping with the Siegmund table if the fixture dimensions aren’t a factor of the grid pattern. With the Fireball pattern being divisible by the fixture size, somebody without CAD skills is going to find the setup to be more foolproof.
Fireball Cad is just fine. We leave in details that the customer can see and appreciate the tool when viewed. Things like chamfers, radiuses, threads ect. None of these features are necessary for a basic fixture map. It’s a recommendation if you want to redraw the part or not. If drawing a rectangle with a few holes in it is going to be a problem then it’s probably going to be difficult to fixture map or design your part you want to build with cad software.
Your own test was based on a point load. If the cylinder is placed directly over, or close to, one or two of the grub screws, those will take the load and deform. That the cast iron underneath will deform is simply a material limitation given the contact area and the diameter of the set screws.
In your own test, you criticized competitors for their design choices under your specific test conditions, but under similar conditions your own design would run into comparable limitations. That’s why I think it’s better to keep comparisons fair and focused, because in the end, calling out others while making similar design trade-offs yourself can leave a somewhat negative impression regarding the consistency of your arguments.
Regarding the other topic, you didn’t address it. If distribution happens through third parties, that’s understandable. But placing a label over the “Made in China” marking can be interpreted as intentionally obscuring the origin. You asked me to press Siegmund on potentially questionable practices, which is fair, but then it’s equally reasonable that customers ask similar questions in return.