FARO CMM Arm or Laser Tracker? A 6-Step Cost Checklist Before You Buy

I'll be honest with you: I've approved purchase orders for FARO portable measurement systems, and I've also killed a few. Both outcomes were the right call at the time.

This article is the cost-control checklist I run before any capital request for a FARO CMM arm or laser tracker reaches the budget file. It comes from six years of tracking measurement-related invoices in our procurement system—roughly $180,000 in cumulative spend if you want a number. You don't need my numbers though. You need the checklist.

There are six steps. Work through them in order; they're designed to catch the expenses that never appear on the price quote.

Is this checklist for you?

Use this checklist if:

• You're building a budget case for your first portable measuring system.
• You're comparing quotes that don't line up item by item.
• Someone asked for a “better” measurement solution but hasn't defined what “better” means.

Ignore it if you already have a clear technical specification and you're in a hurry to get the PO signed. In that case, skip straight to Step 4—because that's where the negotiation mistakes leak money.

The 6-step cost checklist

Step 1: Match the tool to the actual measurement problem

When engineering sends a request that says “we need more measurement capability,” I ask for a list. Not a general wish list—a concrete list of parts, features, tolerances, and how often each one gets checked. Until that exists, every quote is guesswork.

Once the list is on the table, you'll usually see that measurement tasks fall into tiers:

• Simple length, diameter, and step checks: hand tools are faster and often more appropriate than any coordinate measuring system.
• Complex 3D geometry: freeform surfaces, GD&T datums, reverse engineering—this is where a FARO CMM arm earns its place.
• Large assemblies or tooling: when parts are bigger than an arm's reach, a laser tracker is typically the right tool.

There's no shame in a caliper. My team still uses Mitutoyo calipers for dozens of routine checks, and they're the right call for those jobs. One caution: if you're wondering where to buy Mitutoyo calipers, use an authorized distributor. I've seen counterfeit Mitutoyo calipers offered online with fake calibration certificates. The authorized channel costs a little more, and it's worth it.

Step 2: Check whether a simpler at-line sensor can do the job

This is the step most people skip, and it's the one that has saved us the most money.

A surprising number of inspection tasks don't actually need full coordinate measurement. If the job is a pass/fail check on a fixed fixture—presence, gap, position, or clearance—an inline sensor can give you 100% inspection for a fraction of what a coordinate measuring system costs.

Here's a concrete example: a capacitive cylindrical proximity sensor. It mounts in a fixture and detects a target or movement of a target without physical contact, outputting a simple pass/fail signal. We replaced one manual hourly sampling routine with a fixture built around a capacitive cylindrical proximity sensor. Now every cycle gets checked automatically, and the operator doesn't need measurement software to read the result.

That's not an argument against owning a FARO CMM arm. It's an argument against buying one for problems it's overkill for. Use the right tier for each task and your metrology budget goes further.

Step 3: Rule out skills and process problems before buying equipment

The most expensive measurement purchase is the one made to solve a problem the existing equipment didn't create.

I learned this close to home. A supervisor submitted a requisition for $18,000 in spare electronic boards. Recurring failures, he said. When I asked what the diagnostic procedure was, there was a long pause. Nobody on that shift knew how to test a capacitor with a multimeter. An $80 multimeter and a 45-minute lesson on how to test a capacitor with a multimeter—checking for shorts, open circuits, and out-of-range values—solved most of their recurring issues. They bought one replacement board instead of eighteen.

The same principle hits dimensional measurement. I once put a planned portable arm purchase on hold because the problem was unstable results from the existing gage. The gage was fine. Operators had never been trained on datum alignment, and the part was flexing in the fixture. Two days of training fixed the readings. The arm never got bought.

Before you request quotes, do a measurement system analysis on the current equipment. If repeatability is poor, find out why. Sometimes the answer is a $2,000 training course, not a $60,000 machine.

Step 4: Compare total cost, not just FARO laser tracker price lists

Here's where procurement people earn their keep. Everyone wants to know the FARO laser tracker price—the line item on the quote. It matters, but it's maybe 60% of the story.

When I evaluate quotes, I build a three-year cost model with these lines:

• Hardware price, including probes, batteries, cases, and shipping
• Calibration cost and frequency
• Software: perpetual license or subscription, plus upgrades
• Training, including travel
• Accessories and consumables
• Estimated downtime for service or calibration

The first laser tracker quotation I managed had two bidders. One looked cheaper by about $5,800. But it didn't include training, listed calibration as a separate add-on, and added freight charges the other vendor included. Over three years, the “cheap” option was about $3,700 more expensive. The lower price was an illusion created by comparing different scopes.

I still kick myself for not requiring itemized quotes from day one. If I had, we'd have spotted that difference before we got deep into negotiation, not after. Now I use one rule: if a quote doesn't break out the same line items as the others, it's not comparable yet. Ask for a revised quote before building any spreadsheet.

Step 5: Ask what happens when it breaks or needs calibration

Nobody puts this in the budget, but they should.

Ask the vendor:

• How long does routine calibration take from pickup to return?
• Is a loaner available if the system is down for more than a few days?
• Are service techs regional, or does the unit have to ship across the country?
• What does the annual service plan actually include?

For a FARO CMM arm used on the shop floor daily, calibration turnaround is a real cost even though it's not on the original order. We once had a system out for calibration for eleven days, and everyone felt it. Since then, we schedule calibration during planned shutdowns and budget a spare measurement solution for that window. Those costs now appear in every capital request I review.

Step 6: Make approval conditional on a live trial

Paper specs are fine. Measurements on your actual parts are better.

The fastest way to avoid an expensive mismatch is to make a live pilot a condition of approval. The pilot has to include three things:

1. Your operator runs the system, not the vendor's application engineer. They can make anything look easy.
2. You measure parts from your real production mix, including the problem parts that triggered the request.
3. You export the data into your own reporting format before you sign anything.

If a supplier won't arrange a practical trial, treat that as a red flag. Most measurement system suppliers, including FARO, will support a live pilot because they know their equipment benefits from it.

Common mistakes I still see in purchase requests

• Buying the largest configuration “to be safe.” Extra measuring volume and extra probe options add cost and rarely get used. Buy for the parts you actually measure.
• Comparing first-year costs only. Over three years, software subscriptions and calibration fees make a cheap-looking quote expensive.
• Assuming every measuring tool has the same uncertainty. Hand tools, sensors, CMM arms, and laser trackers all have different limits. Match the tier to the tolerance.
• Skipping the calibration check. A system without a current calibration certificate is a conversation piece, not a measurement device.

Where this checklist stops

One honest limitation before you go: I'm not a metrology engineer. I can't tell you which FARO model matches your specific tolerance stack-ups or scanning requirements. What I can tell you, from a procurement perspective, is how to compare what you're being offered.

If your application genuinely requires portable 3D measurement with traceable results—on the factory floor, on large parts, or at remote sites—a FARO CMM arm or FARO laser tracker is a defensible investment. But if your real problem is a simple dimensional limit check, buy a caliper and save the six-figure budget for something that needs it.

The best part of catching these costs before the PO: no surprises in the next quarterly budget review. That's the version of metrology procurement I can defend at the end of the year.