The new M4 has the motors and pulleys located as close as possible to the center of the router. I am wondering what was the reason for this compared to the old M2 where the motors and pulley were at the top anchor points. I am not suggesting it will be better if the motors and arms would be better where the anchor points are now and have the anchor points to the center of the router. Is it a matter of force like you would need more force on the corners to pull the router straight and keep it from wandering? I am just trying to understand a littler better on the design choices and how it all plays together. Also want to feel that much better about my M4 compared to my M2, wouldn’t take much though cause the M2 was a real finicky machine 
Well, one obvious benefit to the change is that I can pick the M4 up from my driveway or shed and bring it back inside for safekeeping. Another is that I can install multiple sets of anchor points and use whichever one meets the project’s needs, the weather, etc.
Yes I can see why everything on the unit is a great advantage its like having a robot router.
However I was thinking more along the lines of accuracy and performance. I would imagine the M4 is much better but I was kinda looking into the insight of why. I am sure there is lots of reasons which is cool and love to hear them but I was wondering about motor pulley placement and the 4 vs 2 motors would be cool too.
I know my M2 was not good at cutting down when the bit got dull cause the sled was not heavy enough to pull it down, so I had to help it with my hand (which was a drag no pun intended)
Point taken - I’d also love to see a discussion of how much (and why) the M4 performs better.
I believe the main reason for putting everything on the sled was to increase mobility and not make it constrained to the frame.
The maslow classic required a bit of work to dial it in and a few “quality of life” mods to make it easier to operate, but I wouldn’t really call it finicky. Once you dial it in and understand the operation it’s a pretty reliable machine (or at least it has been for me).
a large part was ease of wiring. If you think the maslow 4 has had problems with
encoder communications, think about what they would be if they were all 15’ long
instead if 1.5’ long
ease and consistance of assembly is also significant, having everything attach
to the sled at known positions greatly reduces possible sources of error.
David Lang
Gotcha, makes sense
This is the big reason. The dream is to someday make something that could be sold fully assembled and ready to work out of the box and for that to happen it’s all got to be in one place.