Hi Jake, I may be a bit late with this comment, but these days if you can manage it, using an invertor AC motor controller is generally better than either a static (capacitors and inductors) or rotary (same but with an idler motor). It can be a bit more involved using an AC motor controller with a mill, but the results are also much better since you get a fully variable speed machine. The difficulty comes with machines that have multiple motors. A mill will often have separate motors for power feeds and for coolant pumps. They have to be separated so they are not being run from the AC motor controller...usually not a problem since they are usually single phase motors, generally only the main drive needs three phase, and that is the one you want the controller on. Of course one advantage is that you can often run an AC motor controller from a single phase supply...this depends on getting the right controller, but is very useful for amateurs who do not have three phase in their houses. Anyway, a Bridgeport is a fine machine and you should get some good work out of it. Although I would have to say that a big shaper, or even better a planer, would be far more in keeping with the steam punk theme. I have four shapers, ranging from 6 inch through 10", 14 inch, and 18". There are of course things that a vertical mill can do that a shaper cannot, so I have a Chinese mill as well. The 14 inch shaper has the old flat belt drive system as seen in 19th century workshops, with fast and loose pulleys and a four step pulley for the speed change. I have not set that up yet, I may donate it to our local technology museum where we are setting up a belt drive workshop. We also have an 1860's beam beam pumping engine which we fully restored to steam a few years back. This is all at MOTAT in Auckland New Zealand.

I'm not sure if I regards myself as a Steampunk or not, I'm probably more of a traditional steam hobbyist except that I really love the anachronistic and creative aspects of a lot of the steampunk work. (I grew up reading Verne and Wells.) I tend to approve most of all of things that work at least to some degree as intended, so I sympathise entirely with the sentiments of the "stick a gear on it and call it steam punk" video. On the other hand, I am perfectly happy to go along with anachronistic features, as for example any of the computers built into Steampunk case must be. I'm building a 30 foot long by six foot beam steam launch. It has a compound twin engine, built from published plans which I modified a bit...piston valves on both cylinders instead of a slide on the low pressure for instance. The boiler is water tube and will be oil fired, using waste cooking oil. Unlike the biodiesel guys I will be able to burn this as is, just straining the worst of the food debris out to avoid clogging the burner. The hull is modelled on Late Victorian/ Edwardian Windermere boats and Thames inspection launches, except for being about half the length. The actual structure is modern, being strip plank cedar with glass inside and out, but of course with paint on looks like an original. The deck is planked to look like and original , but the planking is very thin and the actual support is a foam core with thin plywood either side. All looks original, but much more practical.There will be plenty of anachronistic features, eg imitation antique oil lamps with modern high power LEDs inside. The boat is big enough to allow my wife and I to overnight in it but can be trailered to suitable lakes and rivers. I have been working on it ten years, it may be ready to launch in a year or two.

regards
mjolnir