Take it from someone who once rejected a $2,400 expense report because a supplier couldn't produce a proper invoice: the purchase order is not the finish line. I'm not a metrologist. I'm the office administrator for a 180-person manufacturing company. I manage a small purchasing team that processes roughly 60-80 orders a year. In 2020, when I was asked to research FARO products for our quality lab and shop floor, I thought my job was simple: find the best handheld CMM for the money. I was wrong.
If you've ever bought equipment that looked great on paper and then sat unused for months, you know where this is heading. Here's the thing: the real problem wasn't choosing between FARO products. The real problem was that we didn't understand what owning a portable measurement system actually required.
What looked like the problem
Our engineering team asked for a portable measurement device. We had two applications: checking incoming machine parts and doing reverse engineering on legacy tooling. A fixed coordinate measuring machine would have been awkward. A handheld CMM seemed like the obvious answer.
So I did what any admin would do. I got quotes, compared accuracy specs, and watched demos. We tested a FARO arm and a competing unit. The FARO hardware was impressive. The price was higher, but the service contract seemed reasonable. I was inches away from submitting a purchase request.
I had a spreadsheet with columns for accuracy, range, price, and warranty. What it didn't have: operator training, calibration intervals, or report generation. In retrospect, that spreadsheet was built around the wrong data.
The problem is that I was asking the wrong question. I assumed the decision was "which FARO product fits our tolerance and budget?" That's a necessary question. It's just not the first one.
The deeper problem: what a quote doesn't tell you
After five years of managing vendor relationships, I should have known better. But in this case, I needed a humbling conversation with our quality manager. He pointed out three things that changed my entire approach.
To understand why, I had to separate the hardware from the system around it. That's not obvious when you're watching a polished demo.
1. Portable doesn't mean simple
A handheld CMM is not a fancy measuring tape. It's a precision instrument that requires training, stable thermal conditions, proper fixturing, and operator discipline. The salesperson walked me through a scan in two minutes. It looked easy. The reality is that consistent results take time to develop, especially when you're measuring parts with shiny surfaces or complex geometries.
I'm not 100% sure about exact accuracy numbers across every FARO model, but I do know this: if the person using the arm doesn't understand probe compensation and measurement repeatability, the quoted accuracy is theoretical.
2. You're buying into an ecosystem, not just hardware
The FARO app and the CAM2 software were mentioned in the demo, but I didn't pay enough attention. That was a mistake. The arm captures points, but the software is where reports become usable. If the software workflow doesn't fit your team, or if you don't have time for training, the hardware is just an expensive paperweight.
Take it from someone who now asks to see the software before the product spec sheet: the FARO app experience matters as much as the metrology data itself. If your team can't export a clean report after a one-hour test drive, expect friction.
3. Calibration and consumables are the real cost
This is where I almost made an expensive mistake. The quote for the FARO arm included calibration and a basic warranty. But it didn't include replacement probes, thermal compensation checks, or annual calibration turnaround time. Our lab lead shook his head and asked another question that sounded unrelated: "How often to change your columns HPLC Agilent?"
At first I thought he was changing the subject. He wasn't. He explained that the right answer is "it depends on what you're running, how often, and how well you maintain it." An HPLC column has a usable life, but no one can give a magic number without data. The same logic applies to a handheld CMM. You don't buy a $40,000 tool and ignore its calibration. You need a plan for maintenance, verification, and replacement parts.
The cost of skipping this analysis
We were lucky. We didn't buy the FARO arm before having these conversations. But the delays cost us about six weeks of engineering time and a significant amount of internal frustration. I also had a smaller incident with a different instrument that taught me the same lesson.
We bought a titrator from a supplier because the price was 15% lower than our usual vendor. What the quote didn't say was that electrodes and pump tubing were sold separately, and the device needed a one-time installation fee. The invoice came in $800 over the approved amount. Finance rejected part of it, and I had to reclassify the expenses from our lab budget. A colleague had warned me about vague quotes. I didn't listen. The $800 overage was a cheap lesson compared with what could have happened with the FARO arm.
We also didn't have a formal process for evaluating capital equipment because we rarely bought anything that expensive. That's how a small purchasing mistake nearly became a big one.
What I'd do differently now
If you're comparing FARO products, especially a handheld CMM, here's my practical checklist. It's not complicated, but it saves money.
- Start with a use case, not a spec sheet. If you're measuring large structures in a shop environment, a laser tracker might make more sense than an arm. If you're inspecting small- to medium-sized parts in a controlled area, an arm could be the right fit. Don't let marketing photos decide.
- Ask about calibration and consumables in writing. Annual calibration, probe replacement, battery modules, software updates—ask for all of it. The same way you'd ask how often to change your columns HPLC Agilent: get the recommended protocol and the associated cost.
- Test the FARO app and software with your own people. Not the salesperson. Your operator, your quality engineer, your manager. If they struggle to make sense of the data in a controlled test, they'll struggle on the shop floor.
- Verify the vendor can invoice properly. This sounds trivial, but I've spent more time than I'd like chasing handwritten receipts and missing purchase order numbers. If the vendor can't handle standard procurement, that's a red flag.
Per FTC guidelines (ftc.gov), performance claims in advertising must be truthful, not misleading, and substantiated by evidence. If a vendor says a product will "cut inspection time by 50%," ask for the data.
Honest limitations: when FARO might not be the right choice
I'm not saying FARO products are the answer for every measurement need. If your true requirement is sub-micron accuracy on small parts in a temperature-controlled lab, a traditional stationary CMM or a specialized optical system may be more appropriate. That's not a criticism of FARO. It's simply a reminder that the best tool depends on the application.
That's also why I've learned to avoid sales pitches that start with "our product can do everything." No tool can do everything. A handheld CMM fits an 80% use case for a lot of manufacturers. The other 20% need something else. Honesty about those limits is what gives the recommendation credibility.
The bottom line
Buying FARO products shouldn't start with "which one has the best specs?" It should start with "what are we trying to measure, who will use it, and how are we going to maintain it?"
I'm glad we paused. We eventually bought a FARO product once we had a clear training plan, a calibration schedule, and a software workflow that didn't require a full-time metrologist. The lesson wasn't about the hardware. It was about understanding the whole system.
If you're in a similar position and someone asks why you're being cautious, point them to the HPLC column question. You wouldn't buy a column without knowing how to change it, how often, and what it costs. Treat a precision measurement instrument the same way.
Leave a Reply