Date   

Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

Thomas G Brandl
 

I haven't followed this thread from the beginning.  This is interesting subject of 'V' ways vs flat ways (or boxed ways) and mixture there of. I haven't been around an American Pacemaker. I am presently putting back together a Monarch 10EE round dial. Possibly this weekend. A few things snapped together for me on it. I would say that the 10EE uses roller bearings to keep the saddle on. I think that this then would allow a bit closer clearance to hold the saddle to the bed. So, in SB case with the 'clack' holding down the back, it would need a bit more clearance. So, with an operation torqueing the saddle to the rear, the rear 'V' would be stabilizing the saddle.
    I think Atlas lathes have both as boxed ways. OK considered a bit below SB lathes. Still, I think there high end lathes with double boxed ways. So, it to would give even wear.
                                                                                                     Tom


Eddie,
You and Jim have a couple of good points. I've never thought much about in terms of 9" or dirt in the way.
Regarding the two V-ways instead of one V and a flat way, it is a solution that was considered sturdier and helping equalizing the wear between front and rear way. It was implemented in many good lathes, like American Pacemaker, Lodge & Shipley, Hendey, etc.
A friend of mine is restoring an old Pacemaker and his surveying the wear on the ways confirmed that the wear on both ways is practically equal. Here is his thread on PM forum: of information and good ideas on lathe restorations. Well worth reading it.

Paolo

On 9/12/2014 03:15, Edward Draper eddie.draper@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:

 
Paolo,

On the subject of redundant restraints, can anyone explain why SB lathes have 2 V ways for the saddle?  The other lathes I often use (Colchester, Harrison, Dean Smith & Grace, Lang, Somua) have the more correct arrangement of a V nearest the operator and a flat on the remote side.  Completely avoids costly matching of saddles to beds (and isn't a swarf retainer). 
 
Eddie

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.



This email has been scanned for Malware.
______________________________________________________________________


shars scars

ken campbell
 

gee ... just what i needed ... a shars magnetic backed dial indicator  to quick stick on my lathe bed to show bore-depth .. ... how handy !!   ooops what they sent me was a lug-backed dial indicator also a seperate magnet with a flimsy mounting dock.  oh well, $20  ...   wouldn't be so bad if they had included  $6.50 for the hour it will take me to mount it .  ( g ) .
 
ken
 
oh, if you a good magnet, tear down some old hard drives ...wow !!
 
 

 


Yahoo is at it again!

Jim B. <btdtrf@...>
 

I guess Yahoo has a new spam filter.

Two of our member’s posts have been caught up in it today.

It appears that if there is a link in a post, even if the link points to Yahoo, the post is marked a spam and awaits a moderator.

Hopefully, “This too will pass”.

 

Until then, sorry of any delays.

Jim B.

 


Re: Broken quick change gearbox

oscar kern <kernbigo@...>
 

Try squirting some  (kroil penetrating oil) in the needle bearing


On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:53 AM, "Bemac502000 bemac502000@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" wrote:


 
Thank you Daniel I finally got the gearbox off no apparent damage but the left tumbler seems a bit tight when I engage the right tumbler and manually turn the lead screw it turns good but the right tumbler rotates a bit ( it isn't engaged) I did try engaging it in the feed it crashed at goes in hard and seems to turn hard also. I'm thinking the needle bearings in the tumbler maybe? Can't really be sure no damage either because cant see all the teeth on all the gears.
Bill M.


On Sep 11, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "d6crawler d6crawler@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...> wrote:

 
I used an electric impact hammer and gently backed the screws out with a good fitting bit. You can also use the spring loaded kind that you hit with a hammer but I think the electric one is better and does less damage.

As I recall the lead screw stays attached until you remove it from the box.

Good luck,
Daniel




On Thursday, September 11, 2014 6:22 PM, "Bemac502000 bemac502000@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...> wrote:

 
The gear box is now freed up thanks Ted worked perfect any tips on removing the three slotted screws holding the gearbox to the ways I couldn't budge them. How does the lead screw come out of the gearbox or do you remove the whole thing?
Bill




.






Re: Broken quick change gearbox

Bemac502000
 

Thank you Daniel I finally got the gearbox off no apparent damage but the left tumbler seems a bit tight when I engage the right tumbler and manually turn the lead screw it turns good but the right tumbler rotates a bit ( it isn't engaged) I did try engaging it in the feed it crashed at goes in hard and seems to turn hard also. I'm thinking the needle bearings in the tumbler maybe? Can't really be sure no damage either because cant see all the teeth on all the gears.
Bill M.


On Sep 11, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "d6crawler d6crawler@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...> wrote:

 

I used an electric impact hammer and gently backed the screws out with a good fitting bit. You can also use the spring loaded kind that you hit with a hammer but I think the electric one is better and does less damage.

As I recall the lead screw stays attached until you remove it from the box.

Good luck,
Daniel




On Thursday, September 11, 2014 6:22 PM, "Bemac502000 bemac502000@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...> wrote:

 
The gear box is now freed up thanks Ted worked perfect any tips on removing the three slotted screws holding the gearbox to the ways I couldn't budge them. How does the lead screw come out of the gearbox or do you remove the whole thing?
Bill




.




Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

Paolo Amedeo
 

Eddie,
You and Jim have a couple of good points. I've never thought much about in terms of 9" or dirt in the way.
Regarding the two V-ways instead of one V and a flat way, it is a solution that was considered sturdier and helping equalizing the wear between front and rear way. It was implemented in many good lathes, like American Pacemaker, Lodge & Shipley, Hendey, etc.
A friend of mine is restoring an old Pacemaker and his surveying the wear on the ways confirmed that the wear on both ways is practically equal. Here is his thread on PM forum: http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/antique-machinery-history/american-pacemaker-lathe-restoration-259065/ A lot of information and good ideas on lathe restorations. Well worth reading it.

Paolo

On 9/12/2014 03:15, Edward Draper eddie.draper@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 
Paolo,
 
THEORETICALLY you are absolutely correct.  The register diameter between the plain portions of spindle and attachment is a redundant restraint.  However, please consider the situation when an un-noticed piece of swarf or dirt attaches itself to the thread.  Instant misalignment.  If the register is a close fit, it tells you about this, as the thread goes stiff before it bottoms on the face register and you take it off and clean it.
 
On the subject of redundant restraints, can anyone explain why SB lathes have 2 V ways for the saddle?  The other lathes I often use (Colchester, Harrison, Dean Smith & Grace, Lang, Somua) have the more correct arrangement of a V nearest the operator and a flat on the remote side.  Completely avoids costly matching of saddles to beds (and isn't a swarf retainer). 
 
Eddie

From: "Paolo Amedeo machineshop@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]"
To: SOUTHBENDLATHE@...
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 5:16 AM
Subject: Re: [SOUTHBENDLATHE] Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?
 
What I'm writing now, is likely to stir a long discussion as it has happened in the past. However, I must repeat it: if the end of the plate is truly perpendicular to the threads and contacts perfectly the spindle all the way around, you don't need to worry at all of the clearance between the unthreaded portion of the plate and the spindle. Essentially, the threads are a taper and, under load (i.e. the "back face" of the face plate contacting uniformly the spindle), it centers itself on the spindle and you would need to exercise a tremendous side force in order to disturb such alignment.
If I were you, after having mounted the face plate in the reverse orientation and touched-up the "back-face", I'd mount it correctly and touch up the front and the outside. In order to convince yourself that this is plenty enough, you could remove it and mount it multiple times, checking the run-out each time.

Paolo
Damascus, MD

On 09/11/2014 11:45 PM, Curt Wuollet wideopen1@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 
That's something I was considering, turning some steel plugs and pressing them in. Got the spindle measurements, my spindle happens to be 1.509. The backing plate is 1.512, so theres lots of clearance.To fix that I have to remove at least .400 to .500 of the hub and bore the threads out for 3/16. Might be a good idea to do the .400 so theres room for a second chance. This should give full engagement of the threads and minimum overhang. On the motor gambit, it's a Baldor farm duty (quality) motor, so I'm going to rewire it to make sure that's all good and take it apart if no change. Baldor had a full info packet for the motor to download so there's no guesswork. Regardscww




This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.



Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

Jim B. <btdtrf@...>
 

This philosophy has been discussed many times and, often the but not always, the discussion winds up with needing a tight fit on the registry diameter as opposed to the step behind it.

 

Look at the many posts by Dennis Turk on this subject.

 

This philosophy would be true IF the step behind the threaded portion were more substantial than it is on the 9” Workshop and the 10K. There the step is quite small. I have purchased chucks where the bevel on the mounting plate was larger in diameter than the step.

I think the step on the 10L/10R is adequate.

If you use only the rear step and allow the fit of the registry diameter to be a bit sloppy and if there is play in the threads then sidewise force on the work clamped in the chuck can cause the work to move a bit off center.

I believe on these (9“ Workshop and 10K) lathes you need to make use of both the registration diameter and the spindle step.

 

I usually chase my backing plate threads to be a tight fit on THE spindle and the registry diameter to be a ring fit. I try to avoid any significant chamfer on the backing plate where it meets the step, just enough to clear any fillet on the spindle.

 

There are some instructions, on chuck fitting, that really reinforce Paolo’s statements. They want the operator to blue the chuck and check the contact on the step and scrape it in until a goodly portion makes contact.

 

Again I think that approach may be fine on many lathes but not the 9”Workshop or 10K

 

I think I could find the fitting instructions I mentioned but I could not post them due to copyright issues.

If anyone is interested I might arrange a personal copy.

 

Jim B.


From: SOUTHBENDLATHE@... [mailto:SOUTHBENDLATHE@...]
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 12:17 AM
To: SOUTHBENDLATHE@...
Subject: Re: [SOUTHBENDLATHE] Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

 

 

What I'm writing now, is likely to stir a long discussion as it has happened in the past. However, I must repeat it: if the end of the plate is truly perpendicular to the threads and contacts perfectly the spindle all the way around, you don't need to worry at all of the clearance between the unthreaded portion of the plate and the spindle. Essentially, the threads are a taper and, under load (i.e. the "back face" of the face plate contacting uniformly the spindle), it centers itself on the spindle and you would need to exercise a tremendous side force in order to disturb such alignment.
If I were you, after having mounted the face plate in the reverse orientation and touched-up the "back-face", I'd mount it correctly and touch up the front and the outside. In order to convince yourself that this is plenty enough, you could remove it and mount it multiple times, checking the run-out each time.

Paolo
Damascus, MD


Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

druid_noibn
 

Hi Curt,

A guess - the two threaded holes are for screws to be used to separate the backplate from the chuck. 

I have several older chucks where after removing the mounting screws, the backplate is beautifully tight.  To separate the two, I either have to put the mounting screws back in and tap them with a hammer, or if the threaded holes are present, put a couple of screws in to push against the chuck body.

Be well,
DBN


On Friday, September 12, 2014 3:17 AM, "Gregg Eshelman g_alan_e@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" wrote:


 
On 9/11/2014 10:16 PM, Paolo Amedeo machineshop@...
[SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
>
>
> What I'm writing now, is likely to stir a long discussion as it has
> happened in the past. However, I must repeat it: if the end of the plate
> is truly perpendicular to the threads and contacts perfectly the spindle
> all the way around, you don't need to worry at all of the clearance
> between the unthreaded portion of the plate and the spindle.

That's why you must do the final cutting on a backplate on the lathe it
will be used on, to ensure the locating boss is concentric to the
spindle and that the mounting face is perpendicular to the spindle.

The locating surface on the spindle is the shoulder, not the unthreaded
section. Wear or roughness on the shoulder can cause a tilt in plates,
chucks and other tooling. If you leave clearance to the "register" some
debris or damage there won't be a problem.

Put a test indicator on the shoulder and the unthreaded section of the
nose and see if they are both equally true.

I converted an L00 backplate to a screw on one for a 17" LeBlond. Cut
off the threads to shorten it to where the end of the spindle was flush
with the face, then bored and threaded it. Did all that on a 19"
LeBlond. Then I put it on the 17" to cut the face to mount a 4-jaw
chuck. Worked just fine and no difference in runout between mountings.

The threads hold/force the centering through the action of being two
interlocked spiral wedges.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com




Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

Gregg Eshelman
 

On 9/11/2014 10:16 PM, Paolo Amedeo machineshop@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:


What I'm writing now, is likely to stir a long discussion as it has
happened in the past. However, I must repeat it: if the end of the plate
is truly perpendicular to the threads and contacts perfectly the spindle
all the way around, you don't need to worry at all of the clearance
between the unthreaded portion of the plate and the spindle.
That's why you must do the final cutting on a backplate on the lathe it will be used on, to ensure the locating boss is concentric to the spindle and that the mounting face is perpendicular to the spindle.

The locating surface on the spindle is the shoulder, not the unthreaded section. Wear or roughness on the shoulder can cause a tilt in plates, chucks and other tooling. If you leave clearance to the "register" some debris or damage there won't be a problem.

Put a test indicator on the shoulder and the unthreaded section of the nose and see if they are both equally true.

I converted an L00 backplate to a screw on one for a 17" LeBlond. Cut off the threads to shorten it to where the end of the spindle was flush with the face, then bored and threaded it. Did all that on a 19" LeBlond. Then I put it on the 17" to cut the face to mount a 4-jaw chuck. Worked just fine and no difference in runout between mountings.

The threads hold/force the centering through the action of being two interlocked spiral wedges.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com


Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

eddie.draper@btinternet.com
 

Paolo,
 
THEORETICALLY you are absolutely correct.  The register diameter between the plain portions of spindle and attachment is a redundant restraint.  However, please consider the situation when an un-noticed piece of swarf or dirt attaches itself to the thread.  Instant misalignment.  If the register is a close fit, it tells you about this, as the thread goes stiff before it bottoms on the face register and you take it off and clean it.
 
On the subject of redundant restraints, can anyone explain why SB lathes have 2 V ways for the saddle?  The other lathes I often use (Colchester, Harrison, Dean Smith & Grace, Lang, Somua) have the more correct arrangement of a V nearest the operator and a flat on the remote side.  Completely avoids costly matching of saddles to beds (and isn't a swarf retainer). 
 
Eddie

From: "Paolo Amedeo machineshop@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]"
To: SOUTHBENDLATHE@...
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 5:16 AM
Subject: Re: [SOUTHBENDLATHE] Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?
 
What I'm writing now, is likely to stir a long discussion as it has happened in the past. However, I must repeat it: if the end of the plate is truly perpendicular to the threads and contacts perfectly the spindle all the way around, you don't need to worry at all of the clearance between the unthreaded portion of the plate and the spindle. Essentially, the threads are a taper and, under load (i.e. the "back face" of the face plate contacting uniformly the spindle), it centers itself on the spindle and you would need to exercise a tremendous side force in order to disturb such alignment.
If I were you, after having mounted the face plate in the reverse orientation and touched-up the "back-face", I'd mount it correctly and touch up the front and the outside. In order to convince yourself that this is plenty enough, you could remove it and mount it multiple times, checking the run-out each time.

Paolo
Damascus, MD

On 09/11/2014 11:45 PM, Curt Wuollet wideopen1@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 
That's something I was considering, turning some steel plugs and pressing them in. Got the spindle measurements, my spindle happens to be 1.509. The backing plate is 1.512, so theres lots of clearance.To fix that I have to remove at least .400 to .500 of the hub and bore the threads out for 3/16. Might be a good idea to do the .400 so theres room for a second chance. This should give full engagement of the threads and minimum overhang. On the motor gambit, it's a Baldor farm duty (quality) motor, so I'm going to rewire it to make sure that's all good and take it apart if no change. Baldor had a full info packet for the motor to download so there's no guesswork. Regardscww


Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

Gregg Eshelman
 

On 9/11/2014 9:22 PM, Curt Wuollet wideopen1@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:


6 holes and I can tell by inspection, it's not balanced. Actually there
are 8 as there are a couple small threaded but not countersunk holes
opposite each other. The way they did it it has 5 holes on one side and
1 hole on the other, ignoring the small symmetrical holes. Perhaps
that's why the 3000 RPM rating, that's the speed where it chases you
around the room. A holes worth is small compared to the combined mass,
but what were they thinking?
Easy to fix by turning some cast iron plugs to a slip fit in the holes then gluing them in with epoxy.

Of course only plug the holes you won't be using. ;)

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com


Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

eddie.draper@btinternet.com
 

I was going to suggest grinding a calculated amount away adjacent to the common hole, but I like Paolo's idea better.  You need to fill solidly ALL the unused holes (except the 2 small ones which are in balance with each other).  Alternatively if you are using the 3 hole method and not the 4, you fill only the hole oposite the common one as the other 2 of 4 will be opposite each other.  For perfection, you would use the same material as the backplate is made from (presumably C/I) but the density of steel is pretty close so will achieve most of the required effect.
 
Not surprised it chases you round the room at 3,000 rpm, and no they weren't thinking!  A text book example of a triumph of "value engineering" over good design.
 
Eddie

From: "Paolo Amedeo machineshop@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...>
To: SOUTHBENDLATHE@...
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 4:27 AM
Subject: Re: [SOUTHBENDLATHE] Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?
 
Curt,
Nobody is stopping you from plugging the unused holes with set screws, reducing therefore the unbalance.

Paolo
Damascus, MD

On 09/11/2014 11:22 PM, Curt Wuollet wideopen1@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 
6 holes and I can tell by inspection,  it's not balanced. Actually there are 8 as there are a couple small threaded but not countersunk holes opposite each other. The way they did it it has 5 holes on one side and 1 hole on the other, ignoring the small symmetrical holes. Perhaps that's why the 3000 RPM rating, that's the speed where it chases you around the room. A holes worth is small compared to the combined mass, but what were they thinking?Regardscww


Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

Paolo Amedeo
 

What I'm writing now, is likely to stir a long discussion as it has happened in the past. However, I must repeat it: if the end of the plate is truly perpendicular to the threads and contacts perfectly the spindle all the way around, you don't need to worry at all of the clearance between the unthreaded portion of the plate and the spindle. Essentially, the threads are a taper and, under load (i.e. the "back face" of the face plate contacting uniformly the spindle), it centers itself on the spindle and you would need to exercise a tremendous side force in order to disturb such alignment.
If I were you, after having mounted the face plate in the reverse orientation and touched-up the "back-face", I'd mount it correctly and touch up the front and the outside. In order to convince yourself that this is plenty enough, you could remove it and mount it multiple times, checking the run-out each time.

Paolo
Damascus, MD

On 09/11/2014 11:45 PM, Curt Wuollet wideopen1@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 

That's something I was considering, turning some steel plugs and pressing them in. Got the spindle measurements, my spindle happens to be 1.509. The backing plate is 1.512, so theres lots of clearance.
To fix that I have to remove at least .400 to .500 of the hub and bore the threads out for 3/16. Might be a good idea to do the .400 so theres room for a second chance. This should give full engagement of the threads and minimum overhang. On the motor gambit, it's a Baldor farm duty (quality) motor, so I'm going to rewire it to make sure that's all good and take it apart if no change. Baldor had a full info packet for the motor to download so there's no guesswork.

Regards

cww



Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

Curt Wuollet <wideopen1@...>
 

That's something I was considering, turning some steel plugs and pressing them in. Got the spindle measurements, my spindle happens to be 1.509. The backing plate is 1.512, so theres lots of clearance.
To fix that I have to remove at least .400 to .500 of the hub and bore the threads out for 3/16. Might be a good idea to do the .400 so theres room for a second chance. This should give full engagement of the threads and minimum overhang. On the motor gambit, it's a Baldor farm duty (quality) motor, so I'm going to rewire it to make sure that's all good and take it apart if no change. Baldor had a full info packet for the motor to download so there's no guesswork.

Regards

cww


On 09/11/2014 10:27 PM, Paolo Amedeo machineshop@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 

Curt,
Nobody is stopping you from plugging the unused holes with set screws, reducing therefore the unbalance.

Paolo
Damascus, MD

On 09/11/2014 11:22 PM, Curt Wuollet wideopen1@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 

6 holes and I can tell by inspection,  it's not balanced. Actually there are 8 as there are a couple small threaded but not countersunk holes opposite each other. The way they did it it has 5 holes on one side and 1 hole on the other, ignoring the small symmetrical holes. Perhaps that's why the 3000 RPM rating, that's the speed where it chases you around the room. A holes worth is small compared to the combined mass, but what were they thinking?

Regards

cww




Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

Paolo Amedeo
 

Curt,
Nobody is stopping you from plugging the unused holes with set screws, reducing therefore the unbalance.

Paolo
Damascus, MD

On 09/11/2014 11:22 PM, Curt Wuollet wideopen1@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 

6 holes and I can tell by inspection,  it's not balanced. Actually there are 8 as there are a couple small threaded but not countersunk holes opposite each other. The way they did it it has 5 holes on one side and 1 hole on the other, ignoring the small symmetrical holes. Perhaps that's why the 3000 RPM rating, that's the speed where it chases you around the room. A holes worth is small compared to the combined mass, but what were they thinking?

Regards

cww



Re: Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?

Curt Wuollet <wideopen1@...>
 

6 holes and I can tell by inspection,  it's not balanced. Actually there are 8 as there are a couple small threaded but not countersunk holes opposite each other. The way they did it it has 5 holes on one side and 1 hole on the other, ignoring the small symmetrical holes. Perhaps that's why the 3000 RPM rating, that's the speed where it chases you around the room. A holes worth is small compared to the combined mass, but what were they thinking?

Regards

cww

On 09/11/2014 02:54 AM, Edward Draper eddie.draper@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 
The answer to your question about whether the 3 plus 4 hole attachment affects balance:
 
If there are 2 entirely separate sets of holes, 7 in total, it won't, because each set is balanced within itself regardless of how the 2 seta are phased relative to each other.  The trouble starts if they share a single hole at any point, i.e. only 6 in total.  You'd have one hole's worth too much metal at that position.  I'd be interested to know which you have, and if the latter, an enquiry to the supplier might reveal whether they have taken any compensatory steps. like removing further metal adjacent or adding some opposite.
 
Cheers,
 
Eddie

From: "Curt Wuollet wideopen1@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]"
To: SOUTHBENDLATHE@...
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 2:13 AM
Subject: Re: [SOUTHBENDLATHE] Anyone try a Shars fully machined backing plate and chuck?
 
Back on topic, the chuck and backing plate showed up today. When I got home the screen door was hanging open because the mailman left the package there. Kinda stuffed into a flat rate box with much tape and even a band to hold it. Rounded up my old F20 camera and took a picture of the freshly opened boxes. It's got that "new chuck" smell. Nothing looks attractive in oiled plastic bags, so I grabbed some paper towels and proceeded to unwrap. Looks really good, just like the picture on Ebay.Big ol chunk of dense cast iron, finished well, no visible voids, all bearing surfaces ground and flat. I cranked out the outside jaws and cranked in the inside jaws. Both sets are very closely fitted, no play in the slots and just clearance in and out. Moves smoothly. Only one defect, the cross handle for the key is loose. The backing plate is drilled for both 3 and 4 bolt patterns (I wonder how this affects balance?) and is machined on all surfaces. Of course, I had to go see if it would screw on the spindle. Nicely threaded and went right on, meaning the register is probably too large, I'll get dimensions later. Snugged it up against the shoulder and swung the indicator on it.  About .5 thousandths axial and 7 thousandths radial. So you could actually just turn the step and bolt the chuck on and you wouldn't be too far off.You would only be using 3 or 4 threads, but you could do it. My bearing/spacer hasn't arrived yet and I don't have too much time tonight, So I'll probably go look at the motor issue. No buyers remorse yet.RegardscwwOn 09/09/2014 06:15 PM, Curt Wuollet wideopen1@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE] wrote:
 
 


Re: Broken quick change gearbox

d6crawler
 

I used an electric impact hammer and gently backed the screws out with a good fitting bit. You can also use the spring loaded kind that you hit with a hammer but I think the electric one is better and does less damage.

As I recall the lead screw stays attached until you remove it from the box.

Good luck,
Daniel




On Thursday, September 11, 2014 6:22 PM, "Bemac502000 bemac502000@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" wrote:

 
The gear box is now freed up thanks Ted worked perfect any tips on removing the three slotted screws holding the gearbox to the ways I couldn't budge them. How does the lead screw come out of the gearbox or do you remove the whole thing?
Bill



Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (5)
--
Web: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SOUTHBENDLATHE/
More pix:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SouthBendLathePix/
Newbie guide: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SouthBendLathePix/ Files area
FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SOUTHBENDLATHE/files/SouthBendLatheFAQ.html
Post: mailto:SOUTHBENDLATHE@...
Email Moderators: mailto:SOUTHBENDLATHE-owner@...
* * * * *
Manage your subscription by sending a blank message as follows:
Unsubscribe: SOUTHBENDLATHE-unsubscribe@...
Stop delivery: SOUTHBENDLATHE-nomail@...
Daily digest mode: SOUTHBENDLATHE-digest@...
Individual emails: SOUTHBENDLATHE-normal@...

.




Re: Broken quick change gearbox

Bemac502000
 

The gear box is now freed up thanks Ted worked perfect any tips on removing the three slotted screws holding the gearbox to the ways I couldn't budge them. How does the lead screw come out of the gearbox or do you remove the whole thing?
Bill


On Sep 11, 2014, at 4:22 PM, "Bemac502000 bemac502000@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Ted and Mike I will get back to you Ted when I get it apart.
Bill M.


On Sep 10, 2014, at 11:27 PM, "Latheman latheman2@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...> wrote:

 

Reverse the spindle by hand until the gears free up. Then check for damage.
I have some new gears for the gearbox if you need them.

Ted

On Sep 10, 2014, at 11:08 PM, "bemac502000@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...> wrote:

 

Hi I accidentally ran my carriage into my tail stock on my 9" south bend model A I heard gears braking and now the gear box is frozen I can't even move the tumblers. Is there a source for the gears( not sure which ones I need yet still disassembling it) or would it be best to just buy a quick change gear box on eBay . I need advise as to my best options thanks in advance. Bill M.


Re: Broken quick change gearbox

Bemac502000
 

Thanks Ted and Mike I will get back to you Ted when I get it apart.
Bill M.


On Sep 10, 2014, at 11:27 PM, "Latheman latheman2@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...> wrote:

 

Reverse the spindle by hand until the gears free up. Then check for damage.
I have some new gears for the gearbox if you need them.

Ted

On Sep 10, 2014, at 11:08 PM, "bemac502000@... [SOUTHBENDLATHE]" <SOUTHBENDLATHE@...> wrote:

 

Hi I accidentally ran my carriage into my tail stock on my 9" south bend model A I heard gears braking and now the gear box is frozen I can't even move the tumblers. Is there a source for the gears( not sure which ones I need yet still disassembling it) or would it be best to just buy a quick change gear box on eBay . I need advise as to my best options thanks in advance. Bill M.


Re: Model 415 apron disassembly help - pinion gear shaft removal

Jim B. <btdtrf@...>
 

Ignore the last post. You want to remove the shaft, not the gear.
Jim B
Pessimist sees the glass half empty.
Optimist sees the glass half full.
Engineer sees the glass twice as large as needed.

Sent from my RAZR.

15321 - 15340 of 106848