Member postings for CotswoldsPhil

I did not notice the email window is a bit of a security breach. Perhaps Neil could could add this to the list of potential enhancements for inclusion in the next revision of the website software.

Regards

CotswoldsPhil

Edited By CotswoldsPhil on 07/10/2014 11:31:17

The last post beat me ...

Typo fixed + there is a check box next to the send button to send the website form email to yourself as a record.

Edited By CotswoldsPhil on 07/10/2014 11:34:36

Hi Gordon,

PAYG / mobile numbers are acceptable on the web-site, but not if you want to advertise in the magazine - been there, done that. I tried advertising on the web-site first and was lucky to find a buyer. My reason for getting a new PAYG number for the advert, was simply to protect my personal number / email address from the potential of being added to the lists that scammer's appear to use. Ever since Ebay had the problem with data theft, early in the year, I have been receiving unwelcome emails from unknown sources.

Paranoid, not yet, careful yes.

Regards

Phil

Hi Neil,

Tis a strange world we live in.

Regards

Phil

Hi Neal,

My aim was describe how to remain safe on the Internet - I have no problem with, and did, provide a landline number for the magazine advert which was submitted. Farming data from hard-copy magazines is somewhat more tedious and costly than from websites.

CotswoldsPhil

I've recently sold my ML7 via the for sale section of the site and I can report it was a positive experience.

I did contact (then) 3 Wanted adverts, via the PM system, all of which appeared genuine, but were not of interest.

Fortunately - I wasn't asked to photograph the ML7 balanced on parts of my anatomy.

Steve Sharman reminds us "to NEVER give out your email address on a public forum" very good advice indeed, but your telephone number is just as precious. Looking at a random selection of current adverts some land-line numbers and mobile numbers are available to browsers, once registered and logged in.

For my advert, I purchased a Pay-As-You go Sim/Telephone number from Vodafone for £10 including £10 worth of calls. I used this new telephone number in the advert for initial contact with potential purchasers.

I realise that for small value items this might be over-the-top, where scammers are probably more interested in higher returns. You cannot be too careful, the rogues are our there waiting to pounce.

What did surprise me was that no personal details were required to purchase the Sim, which I could have bought for cash, no questions asked. So, apart from CCTV images of the transaction in the shop, purchasing a Sim is all but untraceable.

CotswoldsPhil

Neil,

... No account needed I'm afraid. I'll post a sticky warning...

I've just looked up a wanted ad. without logging in and no details are available - it says "log-in to see details". Once logged in to my account, then email is available along with any other contact info supplied by the advertiser.

CotswoldsPhil

Hi Brian,

I only mentioned 601 because that's what I've had on the shelf for years, shelf life seems very good. Here is the link to Loctite's retaining compound page.

http://www.loctite.co.uk/loctite-4087.htm?primaryFacet=000000028Z#.

I'm sure I've seen 638 mentioned elsewhere as a general purpose retainer - looking at the spec. it cures a lot quicker too. I'm sure that other members will have different suggestions.

Are you soldering the covers on the hubs after assembly of the spokes? This might help you make your decision.

Regards

Phil

Hi Brian,

I remember doing just that on my Minnie - oversized a bore on rear wheel hub. So I opened up the bore and slipped in a bush with 601 retainer and tried again. Second time I got it right; bit of a faff, but all part of the learning process

Regards

Phil

Michael, my pleasure, all learned when I changed the bearings on my Super 7 a couple of weeks ago.

Cotswoldsphil

It's a woodruff key, Myford part no 700002 (there are two of them on the spindle) that has obviously been displaced when the headstock rear gear/collar was installed, at some earlier time. The perpetrator must have thought it lost, so made a replacement as Michael describes. I can see exactly how this might have happened, although the tumbler gears being misaligned with the headstock driver gear should have raised an alarm when everything was refitted.

Myford's instructions are quite specific about ensuring an even load on the inner races of the annular contact bearings (you can just make out some identification on the inner race in the photo) by only loosening the screwed adjusting collar's locking screw by just enough to allow it to be turned by hand. As shown, when reassembled, the force applied to the inner race through the misplaced woodruff key would not be as Myford intended.

Looks a bit like a woodruff key to me. The pull on the preset loading collar is going to a bit lob-sided, I fear, and not like that intended by Myford.

CotswoldsPhil

Hi,

I started the thread because I was looking for an ML7 tailstock to use my Cowell ML7 attachment on my (new to me) Super 7 and was astonished at the prices being achieved for secondhand parts.

My recently purchased Super 7 (1972 vintage) unlike Michael's ML7R does not appear to have been abused in any way, apart from grease in the annular contacts in the headstock and a slightly noisy 3/4 hp motor. The motor has probably suffered from lack of lubrication as it is quite difficult to get to the pulley-end motor oiler on a S7. I think I paid a reasonable price for it based on what has been on offer over the last 12 months.

I've had a ML7 since 1969 and built a Minnie traction engine with it along with some tooling. I'm self-taught (I'm not a apprenticed engineer). The ML7 & Super 7 are not, to me, intimidating machines (they are reasonably quiet, accurate, but light enough to move reasonably easily.

My spare-time in the workshop is on the increase and I look forward to putting the Super 7 to work with my next project.

CotswoldsPhil

ouch!

Phil H

Hi Michael,

I've just looked at my original manual for my 1965 vintage ML7 - carriage assembly - C20 Hex Lock nut 2BA. I also know that the cotter retaining screw in the tailstock is 2 BA.

Also the 3 holes in the topslide where the 4 way toolpost indexer fits are 2BA

Myford seemed to like 2BA

Regards

Phil H

My machines both use the early narrow guide setup ie only the front shear is used, making the rear shear (both vertical faces) potential datums.

CotswoldsPhil

I've just measured my ML7, I've had it nearly all of it's life - well from 1969 (1965 vintage) I know it has little wear 0.0005 width and thickness variation - 6 inches from chuck to tailstock end. The vertical gap between the rear shear and the saddle casting is 0.022 both ends. 1/16 sounds too much. The Super 7 (1972 vintage) which will replace the ML7 has 0.014 gap both ends and is in a likewise condition. Someone may tell me that it is wrong to have equal measurements bearing in mind the the lathe should face convex.

CotswoldsPhil

Hi Rod,

Slightly off topic, but thanks to your photos I now realise what the threaded hole in the casting next to the headstock oiler is for. I must make a Thomas Dividing Attachment to go with the Potts Milling Attachment which came with the Super 7. My next project is some form of clock with remontoire compensation.

CotswoldsPhil

JES,

My ML7 (1965) is for sale... only because I've managed to obtain a Myford Super 7 (1972 vintage) in very good condition, at what I consider to be a fair price.

CotswoldsPhil

The 'make-do' capability of the vertical slide is no doubt a compromise, but for someone with very limited space, i.e. no room for a milling machine however small, it provides a means to mill components with some accuracy, especially if combined with collets to hold the cutter. The swiveling version of the slide gives you the additional capability of milling on an angle.

CotswoldsPhil

The pulley on the Super 7 (1972 vintage) I have has 2 grub screws - 1 clamping the key (which is present) and one at 90' bearing on the motor shaft, albeit with a little bruise to the shaft. However, I was able to pull the pulley off quite easily without any damage. Did the pulley design change over time? as you all seem to be talking about only one grub screw being present.

CotswoldsPhil