Date   

Re: Parting out 13" South Bend s/n 3127TKL10 Los Angeles Area Local Pickup

comstock_friend
 

The dials and screws are gone, but no, 13" dials, nuts and screws are considerably larger than 10k dials, nuts and screws.

John


Re: Heavy 10 (1958) collet closer

carbure2003
 

Dismantle the unit and ensure the bearing balls are still in the unit.

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Ruth Busch" <jbusch@centurylink.net>
To: SouthBendLathe@groups.io
Subject: [SouthBendLathe] Heavy 10 (1958) collet closer
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 17:58:14 -0700

I am unable to lock a collet. When i pull the collet lever i do not feel the typical snap that tells me it is tightened. any ideas?

____________________________________________________________
Unbelievable German World War 2 Photo Shocks Americans
pro.healthresponses.org
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5b7e87b6d5b0c7b60ab7st04vuc


Re: ADV: [SouthBendLathe] Heavy 10 (1958) collet closer

Ruth Busch
 

Typically, when I tighten a collet (5C), I feel a snap as i do it. What is causing the snap that tells me the collet is tight.

----- Original Message -----
From: "ken campbell" <deltainc@grm.net>
To: "SouthBendLathe" <SouthBendLathe@groups.io>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2018 2:36:27 AM
Subject: Re: ADV: [SouthBendLathe] Heavy 10 (1958) collet closer

if 5c collets themselves  don't really snap.... they just become
smoothly  harder to tighten . ....  and be careful of over tightening
without the correct size stock in them .      now the collet CLOSER on a
HC does snap, but that is the closer " cam " .

ken, 5c in AHC, HNC, HC, 13 Southbend , Conquest, SB  Magnaturn ...8-)


Re: ADV: [SouthBendLathe] Heavy 10 (1958) collet closer

ken campbell
 

if 5c collets themselves  don't really snap.... they just become smoothly  harder to tighten . ....  and be careful of over tightening without the correct size stock in them .      now the collet CLOSER on a HC does snap, but that is the closer " cam " .

ken, 5c in AHC, HNC, HC, 13 Southbend , Conquest, SB  Magnaturn ...8-)


Re: ADV: [SouthBendLathe] Parting out 13" South Bend s/n 3127TKL10 Los Angeles Area Local Pickup

ken campbell
 

hey if it has taper attachment i am interested in the clamp that clamps onto the rear way near the tailstock  and holds the rod stabilizing the taper bed .  mine broke, i cobbled up an ugly ( better? )  one, but would like an original .

thanks, ken


Heavy 10 (1958) collet closer

Ruth Busch
 

I am unable to lock a collet.  When i pull the collet lever i do not feel the typical snap that tells me it is  tightened.  any ideas?


Re: Parting out 13" South Bend s/n 3127TKL10 Los Ange les Area Local Pickup

carbure2003
 

On the compound rest on a 10K, you may run into problems with dials larger than 1 3/4 in dia

It could come in interference at some angles with the cross feed dial. I would not go larger than 2 1/4 dia on the cross slide.

Guy Cadrin

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Rogan Creswick" <creswick@gmail.com>
To: SouthBendLathe@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SouthBendLathe] Parting out 13" South Bend s/n 3127TKL10 Los Angeles Area Local Pickup
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 12:54:18 -0700


Do you happen to know if the hand cranks and graduated dials from the compound and cross slide will work on a Light 10K?
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 9:11 AM comstock_friend <jfriend314@gmail.com> wrote:I'm parting out 13" South Bend s/n 3127TKL10 for Los Angeles area local pickup. Bed is 6 foot. Anybody interested, let me know what you want. Parts will be cheap.

John
____________________________________________________________
One Cup of This (Before Bed) Burns Belly Fat Like Crazy
Celebrity Local
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5b7dc37d2d040437c6f4ast04vuc


Re: Parting out 13" South Bend s/n 3127TKL10 Los Angeles Area Local Pickup

Rogan Creswick
 

Do you happen to know if the hand cranks and graduated dials from the compound and cross slide will work on a Light 10K?


On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 9:11 AM comstock_friend <jfriend314@...> wrote:
I'm parting out 13" South Bend s/n 3127TKL10 for Los Angeles area local pickup. Bed is 6 foot. Anybody interested, let me know what you want. Parts will be cheap.

John


Parting out 13" South Bend s/n 3127TKL10 Los Angeles Area Local Pickup

comstock_friend
 

I'm parting out 13" South Bend s/n 3127TKL10 for Los Angeles area local pickup. Bed is 6 foot. Anybody interested, let me know what you want. Parts will be cheap.

John


Re: SB1002 Owners?

john kling
 



On Monday, August 13, 2018, 9:53:09 AM EDT, kalos53@... <kalos53@...> wrote:


I'm aware of only three SB1002 owners (including me). Are there others in this io Group?


SB1002 Owners?

kalos53@...
 

I'm aware of only three SB1002 owners (including me). Are there others in this io Group?


Re: Another head stock / spindle question on clearances 141/2"

oscar kern <kernbigo@...>
 

.001-.002  I run mine at.0005, but I hand scraped the.bearings  in big difference 

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 10:39 AM, John M via Groups.Io
<cudaboy66@...> wrote:
I was reading over on checking the spindle clearances (via dial ind and 2' pipe) what has me curious is everything covers the later model with sleeve bearing not the old style cast iron bearing.
The specs i am seeing are some say .0007 to .0010, other specs are .007 to .010 but none make mention on what type of bearing. Mine is showing .007 but I can not see that being right because I can actually feel the spindle move up when I lift it.


Re: Another head stock / spindle question on clearances 141/2"

Steven H
 

I personally can’t imagine a seven to ten thousandths (.007-.010”) spindle bearing clearance spec on a South Bend lathe.

Steve Haskell

On Aug 3, 2018, at 11:39 AM, John M via Groups.Io <cudaboy66@...> wrote:

I was reading over on checking the spindle clearances (via dial ind and 2' pipe) what has me curious is everything covers the later model with sleeve bearing not the old style cast iron bearing.
The specs i am seeing are some say .0007 to .0010, other specs are .007 to .010 but none make mention on what type of bearing. Mine is showing .007 but I can not see that being right because I can actually feel the spindle move up when I lift it.


Another head stock / spindle question on clearances 141/2"

John M
 

I was reading over on checking the spindle clearances (via dial ind and 2' pipe) what has me curious is everything covers the later model with sleeve bearing not the old style cast iron bearing.
The specs i am seeing are some say .0007 to .0010, other specs are .007 to .010 but none make mention on what type of bearing. Mine is showing .007 but I can not see that being right because I can actually feel the spindle move up when I lift it.


Re: 1954 9" model A headstock bearings (long winded reply)

John Losch
 

7/27/18

To all:

My thanks to all who replied to my initial inquiry.  All replies were helpful, and told me things I wouldn’t have though of myself.  The consensus was to loosen the cap screws, and I did.  The job went smoothly, and the essentials are done.  I need to clean some of the externals of the headstock, and put them back to complete the job.  

I was originally concerned that the front headstock bearing was not taking oil.  I now know two reasons, and one ain’t in the books.  One would be waxing, or other deterioration of the feeder wicks to the spindle.  The other is that the lathe is not going to take oil when it doesn’t need it.  After seventy years at the bench, I am now retired.  My Southbend never had to work very hard.  It was used for making and repairing clock and instrument parts: all light work.  Now it is used mostly for tinkering in my shop, and occasional teaching.  The lathe is also retired.  We both eat and drink less than when we were younger and more active.  

I did find one feature that I have not seen in the literature.  There is no machined flange on the front of the spindle.  Instead, there is a fiber washer very firmly fitted to the end of the front bearing.  It is there, obviously, to keep dirt and chips out, and oil in. When the lathe was new, it pumped oil unmercifully, and the factory or dealer sent a man from Southbend to try to correct the problem.  As luck would have it, I was not there to see what he did, but I was told he removed the spindle then reassembled it.  Whatever he did the problem was abated, but did not seem to be fully cured for years. After a while, either I got used to oil pumping, or the Southbend brand type A oil I used built a dam where it was needed.  I remember that I used that oil on several spindles in my shop, and the oilers always ended up with a dark brown coating that prompted a friend to remark that he never saw spindle oil make so much residue. ____?????

Also, FYI, there is no fiber washer at the outside of the rear bearing.  Instead, there is a thin steel washer, almost like a shim between the end play adjustment collar and the left end of the rear bearing.

Finally, at risk of being too long, I will report that the play in the bearings after returning the cap screws to their original tension, as far as I can tell, is a slight one thousandth according to my version of 75 pounds pressure.  I will get one of my younger friends, early seventies, to see how the indicator reads when he pushes and lifts the bearings.  

Again, many thanks for the help.  This project has been a lot of excitement at a time when a ripening tomato in my garden is a big deal.  

Jcl



On Jul 25, 2018, at 12:25 PM, comstock_friend <jfriend314@...> wrote:

Not sure on how Halligan removed his spindle, but here's how I did it without beating things with a hammer. Nice and easy by tightening the nut at the spindle nose. Reverse process to replace the spindle...

You can try it with the bearings tight or loosen them up. Note, if you have developed a scoring in your journals, pulling through while tight might add additional marks to your journals and or spindle.

John <100_9494.JPG><100_9495.JPG><100_9498.JPG><100_9500.JPG>


Re: 1954 9" model A headstock bearings

Paul Alciatore
 

Why loosen those screws?

You mention the oilers. When I got my SB9 I wanted to change to a serpentine belt and removing the spindle was the only way. So I did. And I discovered that the felt in the oilers had completely worn down. The springs behind the felt were rubbing on the spindle bearing and scratching it. Of course, I ordered and installed new oilers.

But back to why to loosen those screws. If your oilers are badly worn and your spindle has been scratched, you want as much clearance for those scratches to not damage the bearings in the headstock when you remove the spindle.

You say your lathe is over 60 years old, like mine. Don't be surprised if the oilers are worn, perhaps completely worn out.


--
E. Paul Alciatore III
Beaumont, TX
PAlciatore@gt.rr.com


Re: 1954 9" model A headstock bearings

comstock_friend
 

Not sure on how Halligan removed his spindle, but here's how I did it without beating things with a hammer. Nice and easy by tightening the nut at the spindle nose. Reverse process to replace the spindle...

You can try it with the bearings tight or loosen them up. Note, if you have developed a scoring in your journals, pulling through while tight might add additional marks to your journals and or spindle.

John


Re: 1954 9" model A headstock bearings

Clifford Dickson
 

While I would not use any hammer on my SBL, here’s what the SBL lubrication chart for 9” & 10-K’s says about spindle removal:  image1.jpeg
Based on the amount of use the lathe has seen over the years, headstock bearing adjustment may be needed. 

On Jul 24, 2018, at 9:46 PM, mike allen <animal@...> wrote:

        same here . I just followed the instructions in the rebuild book . it would have been simple to check the torque before disassembly with a needle torque wrench . I also have a Seneca Falls Star lathe with plain bearings

        that has the 2 bolt bearing caps like the 10 " SB . & here is all I could find when I was looking for info for that lathe

        https://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/antique-machinery-and-history/seneca-falls-back-gear-removal-307184/?highlight=Seneca+falls+back+gear+removal

        I guess until; I'm told otherwise  I will just tighten like I normally would tighten a bolt without reefing on it & keeping within specs

        animal


On 7/24/2018 7:13 PM, glenn brooks wrote:
I ran into two interesting phenomena when I adjusted and shimmed the headstock on my 1919 7” Dalton Lathe. Same bearing and shim arrangement as the 9” South Bends.  When you shim to a .001”, they don’t tell you what torque to apply to the bolts that secure the spindle cap.  You can easily torque the spindle so it does not move - completely eliminating the .001” clearance.  So you have to decide how tight to make the bolts that hold the bearing cap in place.  I’d love to hear from anyone who knows how tight they should actually be.

Second issue, old bearings will develop oblong wear patterns over time, as the spindle adjustment gets progressive larger. So when you disassemble the headstock and reshim to a thou, and torque back down, you might find you need to scrape the bearing back into round. Otherwise the spindle will grab on the high points of the bearing, and stick, or not tighten down to the proper .001” clearance.

I experienced both issues when rebuilding my Dalton. Took several days of scraping, bluing, fitting, and shimming to discover the right alignment.

Never did figure out what the “correct” torque should be to hold the bearing cap in place.  Just estimated tightness with a screwdriver. Which wasn’t tight enuf as they have worked loose, causing play in my bearing that I again have to deal with, at some Point.

Glenn B.



On Jul 24, 2018, at 6:56 PM, Steven H via Groups.Io <stevesmachining@...> wrote:

Maintenance manual reads “With the indicator set on the spindle as near to the shoulder as possible, force spindle down (using a length of bar stock in the spindle bore) then exert about 75 lb. lift. If the reading indicates a movement of over .001” (over one thousandth), the bearing cap at the front end will have to be removed and a .0015” lamination peeled off the laminated shim on one side. If necessary repeat on opposite side. If the reading indicates a movement of less than .0007” (seven tenths), a .0015” thick lamination will have to be added to the existing shims. Follow same procedure for test at small bearing end.”

So it sounds to me that SB wants about .001 inch movement when exerting 75 pounds of lift on each end of spindle.

Steve Haskell

On Jul 24, 2018, at 9:20 PM, mike allen <animal@...> wrote:

        just curious , if ya havn't pulled the spindle yet how much measured play does it have ? . I was in to big of a hurry to measure mine before I tore it apart for cleaning .

        tks

        animal


On 7/24/2018 4:11 PM, John Losch wrote:
7/24/18

Hello,

I am about to remove the spindle from my 1954 Model A 9” lathe, which I bought new in 1954.  It has been the workhorse of my shop for over sixty years, and is still nearly like new.  Except right in front of the chuck the scraping is still visible on the bed, and only the jaws of the 3 jaw scroll chuck show appreciable wear.  

Several years ago I replaced the Vee belt (16 speed Cone pulleys) and I admit I butchered the process of removing the spindle.  I used a wood mallet to drive the spindle out of the bull gear, replaced the belt and reversed the process.  Sorry I did that, but I am older and smarter now.  Right now I need to replace the spring-wick oilers because the front spindle bearing is not taking oil.

There is a series on you tube with a fellow named Halligan who gives a pretty detailed demonstration on removal and reinstallation of the spindle.  He seems to know his stuff.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eheyzA9h-yc   This is the part on reassembly (including that he forgot to put the endless belt in place), and I did not, at the moment, find the URL on removal of the spindle.  It involves the use of a long screw, and pressuring the spindle out of the bull gear.  All well and good, and I will follow his advice.  

There is one part I question, however.  He advises to loosen the cap screws at the front and rear bearing of the spindle.  This is the model with wick oilers, and only one screw at the front and rear bearings.  There is no top oiler.  The purpose was to allow shimming of the bearing.  He gives instructions on resetting the bearings, but I still wonder why I would “mess” with the still good settings.  I have checked play.  

My question is why would I disturb the setting of the bearings if they are within specification?  The spindle is designed so that the bearing areas of the spindle should slide in and out of their bearings unless they have been badly worn and shimming has been changed.  Nothing has been changed on my lathe. 

I would appreciate any advice or opinions more experienced South Bend Guys have to offer.  

Thanks in advance
John Losch 























Re: 1954 9" model A headstock bearings

mike allen
 

        same here . I just followed the instructions in the rebuild book . it would have been simple to check the torque before disassembly with a needle torque wrench . I also have a Seneca Falls Star lathe with plain bearings

        that has the 2 bolt bearing caps like the 10 " SB . & here is all I could find when I was looking for info for that lathe

        https://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/antique-machinery-and-history/seneca-falls-back-gear-removal-307184/?highlight=Seneca+falls+back+gear+removal

        I guess until; I'm told otherwise  I will just tighten like I normally would tighten a bolt without reefing on it & keeping within specs

        animal


On 7/24/2018 7:13 PM, glenn brooks wrote:
I ran into two interesting phenomena when I adjusted and shimmed the headstock on my 1919 7” Dalton Lathe. Same bearing and shim arrangement as the 9” South Bends.  When you shim to a .001”, they don’t tell you what torque to apply to the bolts that secure the spindle cap.  You can easily torque the spindle so it does not move - completely eliminating the .001” clearance.  So you have to decide how tight to make the bolts that hold the bearing cap in place.  I’d love to hear from anyone who knows how tight they should actually be.

Second issue, old bearings will develop oblong wear patterns over time, as the spindle adjustment gets progressive larger. So when you disassemble the headstock and reshim to a thou, and torque back down, you might find you need to scrape the bearing back into round. Otherwise the spindle will grab on the high points of the bearing, and stick, or not tighten down to the proper .001” clearance.

I experienced both issues when rebuilding my Dalton. Took several days of scraping, bluing, fitting, and shimming to discover the right alignment.

Never did figure out what the “correct” torque should be to hold the bearing cap in place.  Just estimated tightness with a screwdriver. Which wasn’t tight enuf as they have worked loose, causing play in my bearing that I again have to deal with, at some Point.

Glenn B.



On Jul 24, 2018, at 6:56 PM, Steven H via Groups.Io <stevesmachining@...> wrote:

Maintenance manual reads “With the indicator set on the spindle as near to the shoulder as possible, force spindle down (using a length of bar stock in the spindle bore) then exert about 75 lb. lift. If the reading indicates a movement of over .001” (over one thousandth), the bearing cap at the front end will have to be removed and a .0015” lamination peeled off the laminated shim on one side. If necessary repeat on opposite side. If the reading indicates a movement of less than .0007” (seven tenths), a .0015” thick lamination will have to be added to the existing shims. Follow same procedure for test at small bearing end.”

So it sounds to me that SB wants about .001 inch movement when exerting 75 pounds of lift on each end of spindle.

Steve Haskell

On Jul 24, 2018, at 9:20 PM, mike allen <animal@...> wrote:

        just curious , if ya havn't pulled the spindle yet how much measured play does it have ? . I was in to big of a hurry to measure mine before I tore it apart for cleaning .

        tks

        animal


On 7/24/2018 4:11 PM, John Losch wrote:
7/24/18

Hello,

I am about to remove the spindle from my 1954 Model A 9” lathe, which I bought new in 1954.  It has been the workhorse of my shop for over sixty years, and is still nearly like new.  Except right in front of the chuck the scraping is still visible on the bed, and only the jaws of the 3 jaw scroll chuck show appreciable wear.  

Several years ago I replaced the Vee belt (16 speed Cone pulleys) and I admit I butchered the process of removing the spindle.  I used a wood mallet to drive the spindle out of the bull gear, replaced the belt and reversed the process.  Sorry I did that, but I am older and smarter now.  Right now I need to replace the spring-wick oilers because the front spindle bearing is not taking oil.

There is a series on you tube with a fellow named Halligan who gives a pretty detailed demonstration on removal and reinstallation of the spindle.  He seems to know his stuff.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eheyzA9h-yc   This is the part on reassembly (including that he forgot to put the endless belt in place), and I did not, at the moment, find the URL on removal of the spindle.  It involves the use of a long screw, and pressuring the spindle out of the bull gear.  All well and good, and I will follow his advice.  

There is one part I question, however.  He advises to loosen the cap screws at the front and rear bearing of the spindle.  This is the model with wick oilers, and only one screw at the front and rear bearings.  There is no top oiler.  The purpose was to allow shimming of the bearing.  He gives instructions on resetting the bearings, but I still wonder why I would “mess” with the still good settings.  I have checked play.  

My question is why would I disturb the setting of the bearings if they are within specification?  The spindle is designed so that the bearing areas of the spindle should slide in and out of their bearings unless they have been badly worn and shimming has been changed.  Nothing has been changed on my lathe. 

I would appreciate any advice or opinions more experienced South Bend Guys have to offer.  

Thanks in advance
John Losch 























Re: 1954 9" model A headstock bearings

glenn brooks <brooks.glenn@...>
 

I ran into two interesting phenomena when I adjusted and shimmed the headstock on my 1919 7” Dalton Lathe. Same bearing and shim arrangement as the 9” South Bends.  When you shim to a .001”, they don’t tell you what torque to apply to the bolts that secure the spindle cap.  You can easily torque the spindle so it does not move - completely eliminating the .001” clearance.  So you have to decide how tight to make the bolts that hold the bearing cap in place.  I’d love to hear from anyone who knows how tight they should actually be.

Second issue, old bearings will develop oblong wear patterns over time, as the spindle adjustment gets progressive larger. So when you disassemble the headstock and reshim to a thou, and torque back down, you might find you need to scrape the bearing back into round. Otherwise the spindle will grab on the high points of the bearing, and stick, or not tighten down to the proper .001” clearance.

I experienced both issues when rebuilding my Dalton. Took several days of scraping, bluing, fitting, and shimming to discover the right alignment.

Never did figure out what the “correct” torque should be to hold the bearing cap in place.  Just estimated tightness with a screwdriver. Which wasn’t tight enuf as they have worked loose, causing play in my bearing that I again have to deal with, at some Point.

Glenn B.



On Jul 24, 2018, at 6:56 PM, Steven H via Groups.Io <stevesmachining@...> wrote:

Maintenance manual reads “With the indicator set on the spindle as near to the shoulder as possible, force spindle down (using a length of bar stock in the spindle bore) then exert about 75 lb. lift. If the reading indicates a movement of over .001” (over one thousandth), the bearing cap at the front end will have to be removed and a .0015” lamination peeled off the laminated shim on one side. If necessary repeat on opposite side. If the reading indicates a movement of less than .0007” (seven tenths), a .0015” thick lamination will have to be added to the existing shims. Follow same procedure for test at small bearing end.”

So it sounds to me that SB wants about .001 inch movement when exerting 75 pounds of lift on each end of spindle.

Steve Haskell

On Jul 24, 2018, at 9:20 PM, mike allen <animal@...> wrote:

        just curious , if ya havn't pulled the spindle yet how much measured play does it have ? . I was in to big of a hurry to measure mine before I tore it apart for cleaning .

        tks

        animal


On 7/24/2018 4:11 PM, John Losch wrote:
7/24/18

Hello,

I am about to remove the spindle from my 1954 Model A 9” lathe, which I bought new in 1954.  It has been the workhorse of my shop for over sixty years, and is still nearly like new.  Except right in front of the chuck the scraping is still visible on the bed, and only the jaws of the 3 jaw scroll chuck show appreciable wear.  

Several years ago I replaced the Vee belt (16 speed Cone pulleys) and I admit I butchered the process of removing the spindle.  I used a wood mallet to drive the spindle out of the bull gear, replaced the belt and reversed the process.  Sorry I did that, but I am older and smarter now.  Right now I need to replace the spring-wick oilers because the front spindle bearing is not taking oil.

There is a series on you tube with a fellow named Halligan who gives a pretty detailed demonstration on removal and reinstallation of the spindle.  He seems to know his stuff.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eheyzA9h-yc   This is the part on reassembly (including that he forgot to put the endless belt in place), and I did not, at the moment, find the URL on removal of the spindle.  It involves the use of a long screw, and pressuring the spindle out of the bull gear.  All well and good, and I will follow his advice.  

There is one part I question, however.  He advises to loosen the cap screws at the front and rear bearing of the spindle.  This is the model with wick oilers, and only one screw at the front and rear bearings.  There is no top oiler.  The purpose was to allow shimming of the bearing.  He gives instructions on resetting the bearings, but I still wonder why I would “mess” with the still good settings.  I have checked play.  

My question is why would I disturb the setting of the bearings if they are within specification?  The spindle is designed so that the bearing areas of the spindle should slide in and out of their bearings unless they have been badly worn and shimming has been changed.  Nothing has been changed on my lathe. 

I would appreciate any advice or opinions more experienced South Bend Guys have to offer.  

Thanks in advance
John Losch 





















4661 - 4680 of 105613