4x4 X-50 Journeyman upgrade?

I really like this hardware setup but this is what is holding me back from purchasing. I need to do 48"x48" carves of what I’m planning to build. All that is needed is an upgrade kit to upgrade the Y axis to 48". From what I can tell the only additional hardware needed is 4 x 35mm (OD) stainless steel tubes and 2 Lead Screws, all cut to the correct length. Then you just need to recalibrate after re-assembling the y-axis. If there is no plan to offer such a kit at least provide the details of the additional hardware needed so customers can make the upgrade themselves.

1 Like

Hey David,

it was surely for a good reason that they offered a third “stiffy” rail for the 35 mm rails on X axis on Woodworker and when relasing Journeyman they offer the new X rail for 48″ workarea width only with rails of 50 mm diameter. Therefore I would assume for having 48″ workarea depth too, you should have Y-50 rails.

I don’t know if they are stainless steel, surely they are chrome-plated, induction-hardened steel, probably 52100 Bearing Steel Equivalent


– Source: MISUMI - Shafts - Precision Standards (PDF)

I don’t know whether the manufacturer @OnefinityCNC reveals/revealed which material/hardness they chose?

Bill wrote that on X-35 the dimensions are

Anyway if you are not able to do the machining of the feet yourself, and the manufacturer doesn’t sell you the parts you want, you can only purchase the 35 mm hollow shafts which, as I said, I believe for good reasons were not used when increasing the length for Journeyman’s 48″ workarea width.

1 Like

That makes sense. So they knew the limitations with the 35mm setup for long rails. Then they missed the mark with the Journeyman. A 4x4 X50 Journeyman with 50 mm rails on both the X and Y would have appealed to a greater market. I would have gotten one and I know a few additional people who would have gotten it as well. I really hope its on their roadmap. Its a pity that I’m in the market for a new one in the next 30 days and I will have to look for a different solution. But I just like the setup of the tubes for this form factor of CNC’s more vs the extruded aluminum. Hopefully I can purchase one in the future

That’s in line with what I was thinking of doing with an original WW before they came out with the Journeyman. I think I found the tubes online (McMaster or Online Metals I think).

You could go with a thicker wall tube to make up for the extra length and possible flexing that comes of longer tubes.

If you look into the ball bearing lead screws that are used, their price goes up dramatically for longer length, not to mention quality and availability.

Personally, I too wanted a 4x4 or 4x8 CNC machine, but I chose OF because of the price point AND quality of the design (no belts, etc).

While I’ve been waiting for my Journeyman I even contemplated building my own machine, based on the design ideas of OF. This is where I realized at the price point OF offers, I could not beat it without large time investment.

In my opinion, if you crave larger work areas, there are many commercial CNC machine options to choose from. But you will be looking at $7k+ price tags (and they will most likely employ rack-and-pinion drives, instead of ball bearing lead screws).


Hey Jim, hey David @DJM.Systems, hey Alex @suprak, hey all,

I would not be totally pessimistic. When we ordered the 32″×32″ Woodworker, there were already feature requests for machines larger than Woodworker and we waited a while but concluded they would not become available soon. Then shortly before we were finally expecting the Woodworker delivery, Journeyman 48″×32″ was released. We canceled our order immediately and ordered the Journeyman. Of course it would have been nice if it was advertised earlier, but who knows, if you asked them directly…

What would make a 48″×48″ Onefinity “Master” model realistic is the fact that the X-50 rail with its 1616 ball screw and its 50 mm linear bearings are already there…


Yeah, pre-Journeyman I looked at the option of getting longer tubes & screws to make a wider Woodworker. When 1F announced the JM, the cost for a WW + the tubes/screws was well more than the JM. The price of those parts was more than the delta between a WW and JM so they’re either getting a great deal or not taking much profit.

I just need (vs want) a 38" width so the JM and tiling are fine for me 4x4 would still need tiling (I’m setting up to do a set of 3D carved doors).

bye bye warranty :stuck_out_tongue:


Hey Alex, hey all,

before buying, I thought of the Lagnua iQ series. I also thought of buying the cnc-step High-Z/T (see here for discussion). If you look for alternatives, David @DJM.Systems, the High-Z/T it is available in up to 82.7″×41.3″.

But I really wanted to see how this thick hollow shaft/linear bushings/ball screw machine performs. I think the machine addresses not only to cnc users, but also to people that appreciate this unique design. Every CNC router I looked at is more or less ugly. The Onefinity is very different. On other machines, there is the base and the gantry, and the linear motion systems are attached to them. On the Onefinity, the linear motion system, i.e. the hollow shaft, * is * the gantry. And as for the drive mechanisms, other machines are so ugly that they need to be covered by metal cover all around. The Onefinity is naked. You put it there, naked, and it’s not only a machine, it’s also a piece of design. As soon you get rid of this ridiculous trim router, it’s both, technically and by design a beauty.

Note that different solutions for cable dragging can destroy the appearance. Also the stock cabling is neither a beauty nor technically satisfying, but of course at same time they had to prevent it becomes too pricey.


I don’t want to distract people away from OneFinity, so I won’t discuss my choices and considerations of other machines here. I did after all purchase a Journeyman and am happy with that decision.

Feel free to message me if you want to know my opinions :slight_smile:

1 Like

Hey Alex,

I think with my posting above I am expressing that at the moment I would rather wait for a Onefinity X-50 Y-50 “Master” than buying something else, and with my sort of Ode an die Freude eine Onefinity CNC zu besitzen I don’t think I would distract someone away from Onefinity :slight_smile:.

I’ll be coming back to it :slight_smile:

I think one could look at the price difference between the woodworker with the x50 rail and the journeyman and double that price and add it to the cost of the journeyman to get an idea what the cost would be for a 4x4 1F with 50mm rails. It would be interesting if 1F offered a 35mm rail 57"(ish) long for anyone who wants to try the upgrade. I think the lead screw from the journeyman would be too short though for 48" so they couldn’t be used.

My thought is that Onefinity is incredibly busy just keeping their head above water to keep up with production & shipping. I’m sure they’ve thought about a 48" sq. machine, they are probably not missing much. I’m guessing they could theoretically build a prototype together with parts already on-hand. My guess is that someone has probably already thrown one together. And why not? There’s a lot of demand screaming for more/bigger when it comes to cutting area. Point is they could, but may not be prepared to fill the demand on top of what they already have.

And once again @Aiph5u my friend hits the nail on the head. The design is so simplistic that it just makes perfect sense. I’m an OCD tool designer by trade, and I would have been damn proud to have designed this machine. It’s dare I say a near-perfect design. I’ve said it before a few times. I spent a lot of time re-engineering my X-Carve with screw drive & linear rails, and it was as accurate as my Onefinity. But with linear rails bolted to aluminum extrusion, it’s still a compromise. The Onefinity is much more substantial and serious.


If the Journeyman had been 48x48 or there was another model that was 48x48 I would have bought the 48x48 model. Some are referring to it by the name ‘Master’, I would opt for ‘Craftsman’ . I don’t see that much more material to increase the Y from 32 to 48 inches. How much could it add to the cost, maybe $400 ? The four tubes and the lead screw need to be 16 inches longer, and add in a few more feet of cable. Is there something else required to stretch the Y direction out to 48 inches? Some software changes but no other hardware.

1 Like

Bob the Journeyman rail is much beefier across the board. It is not just the tubes and screw but also the anodized aluminum guides are taller and thicker. Not to mention all the other components, bearing & etc. The other issue, is that if you were to just apply this to Y rails is that it would bring the whole z axis up. and the existing Z-axis design would likely no longer reach based on how the X-axis ride on top of the Y-axis. IMO.


Hey John, hey Bob @Bob_D ,

I find this photo tells it well: :slight_smile:

Machinist vs X-50 End View Stock Photo
Differences Between X-50 Rails (upgrade) and X-35 Rails (standard)


Yeah, I don’t know where my head was at when I said that. Completely forgot the Y rails are 35mm. So it is just more than some longer rails and other bits. I was way off. Thanks for the kick in the head to wake me up. :slight_smile:

I really should have know better since I have the Journeyman. :slightly_frowning_face:

1 Like

@TheyCallMeJohn @Aiph5u @Bob_D. The difference in the Z axis can be made up by raising the bed instead of putting down just one sheet of MDF, 2 stacked sheets should be enough. Another solution will be to use 35mm tubes with ticker walls or do a hack I’ve seen someone do with extruded aluminum of filling the inside with cement.

Such an animal would be built with 50mm Y rails anyway, the same ones that are used on X. That’s the beauty of Onefinity, everything is modular. They already produce all the necessary components. I’m almost positive you could literally build your own 50 x 50 machine by buying 3 of the X50 woodworker upgrades.

Edit: the only new piece possibly necessary might be an adapter plate to transition the Y carriage to the X carriage, since it doesn’t look like it would otherwise be a nesting fit as it currently is.

If they had only designed the X50 carriage the same as the 35mm carriage, it could have been a bolt-together assembly. Defeat snatched from the jaws of victory?


Didn’t mean it as kick in the head. We are all friends here. :wink: