Member postings for CotswoldsPhil

Hi Len,

Thanks for advising that the ML7 was ostensibly a small toolroom lathe, how many small Chinese made machines might you expect to find in a toolroom today I wonder. So maybe discerning model engineers adopted the ML7 / Super 7 as the machine of choice because of its pedigree.

CotswoldsPhil

Rod describes Myford's following very well,

I was inspired in the 60's by work produced on a Myford Super 7 with all milling done using a swiveling milling slide. The only other makes of small model engineering lathe I was aware of at the time, were the ML7, Drummond - round and flat bed and I think a Flexispeed?, and of course the little Unimat.

If I was starting from scratch would I buy a second-hand Myford ML7 or Super 7; certainly, so long as it came with all the accessories to make it a useful machine without further cost.

CotswoldsPhil

And Finally...

I've swapped the front casings between the spare 1/2hp (a bit worn) and the 3/4 hp on the Super 7 (a lot worn). I had to adjust the end-float with some shims, but what a difference to the Super 7 motor, a bit less tension on the new belts - I don't do heavy work. The (new to me) Super 7 motor is now nice and quiet and running to my satisfaction like the 1/2 hp motor on the ML7.

I will miss the trusty ML7, it's up for sale after 45 years, so I've put some pictures in an album to remember it by in years to come.

Once again many thanks to all contributors.

Regards

CotswoldsPhil

I think Hopper's figures illustrate the point I was trying to make, that prices are really out of kilter by a wide margin. In 1969 I paid £115 for a second-hand (4 year old) ML7 in very good condition, with some tooling, chucks, no milling slide though but including a 1/3 hp motor. I could not stretch to a new one or a Super 7 which I really wanted, on my £4 / week wages.

I've now managed, after all these years, to purchase a Super 7 (1972 vintage) in very good condition for what I think is a fair price, it needed work to replace the annular contacts and some work on the front motor bearing and new belts. The ML7 is still in excellent condition; my activities in the intervening years have been to complete a Minnie traction engine. The ML7 will be for sale in the Classified section of the site as soon I can tear myself away from the Forum, and decide on a fair price. I've put photos of my ML7 in an album so I can remember it in years to come.

Regards

CotswoldsPhil

Hi Michael,

I have a Myford price list from March 1970 obtained when I bought a swiveling vertical slide for £9.10.0 - you could buy a basic ML7 less motor for £106.0.0. A cabinet-stand, tray, and raising blocks was a wopping £30, nothing new there then.

Regards

Phil H

Edited By CotswoldsPhil on 05/09/2014 09:58:11

Hi Clive,

Thanks for the sizing information, that could help explain the unworn off-centre hole in the bearing I have to hand. Could it be that the split bearings, pre-formed with oil passages, were first pressed into the end-caps and then broached with the end cap+bearing in a jig, registered on the machined rim which locates with the stator? This would correct any potential inaccuracy in the end cap die-casting. This bearing, even after 50 years, is still a nice slip fit on the motor shaft.

Regards

Phil H

Edited By CotswoldsPhil on 05/09/2014 09:30:28

Evening all,

Thanks for your patience...

The bearing as removed from the rear of the spare motor.

I've taken a load of photos (they are in an album) to illustrate the problem - do have a look, it tells the whole story, no point in repeating them here, but I will include the most telling pictures here. The bearing does not appear to be worn.

The other end is similar.

So, I think I might have stumbled across a reworked motor which has a distorted rear cover, I remember it having a slight wobble, but no obvious play, which is why I removed the bearing in the first place. Just my luck. However, the front cover off the spare motor might do the trick, it appears to have a bit of bell-mouth wear but much less that the S7 motor which is visible when the belt is tweaked. I will try the front cover swaps tomorrow and give up on the spare bearing idea - well, I might as well put it back in the spare motor where I got it from, removing the experimental oilite I made.

Once again, thanks for all your input - the knowledge out there is tremendous.

Regards

Phil H

Hi Everyone,

I'm not ignoring you, I've just got back from domestic duties and will be going into the shed later this afternoon.

I also must also apologise for 'shouting' a bit last night - I think I had overdosed on information...

Thanks for all your interest - back shortly with some progress.

Regards

Phil H

Hi Phil,

The end caps are cast alloy, with a machined register for the stator and with the bearings pushed into a bored hole. I'm working on the rear so unable to rotate the cap. Having eased (bell-mouthed) the experimental rear oilite bearing the spare motor is running as expected. I reassembled the casings in the same alignment and bumped everything up with the plastic hammer whilst tightening the 4 bolts. Whats odd, is that the hole in the Vandervell (thanks for the correction) bearing, is NOT concentric with the outer diameter, it is out by 0.3mm when clocked in the lathe on a true 17mm mandril. However the oilite I made was concentric.

I'll take some pics later tomorrow - the workshop is all bedded down for the night.

Thanks for you interest

Regards

Phil H

Hi Graham,

I have 4 Bullfinch burners the standard 1230 sound as old/used as yours is. The 'standard' 1230 puts out 4.5kw, the large 1250 - 12.6kw, the very small 1470 - 0.32kw and the 1472 you are looking at only 0.75kw.

So where does all this lead; the 1472 is quite a small burner compared to the 1230 and the 1470 tiny. The difference in heat output between the 1230 and 1472 is considerable.

I've invested in some Sievert Cyclone burners which I now use for silver soldering, they are not supposed to blow out so easily in confined spaces, the smaller 19mm one puts out 3.1kw. the larger 25mm - 10.3kw, enough I hope, for the eventual boiler making which is still to get going. I think it's a winter project plus I need to sort out the oversight by a boiler inspector!

All the data shown above came from a spreadsheet I compiled from the Internet in order to compare burners.

All the while, the Bullfinch kit gathers more dust.

Regards

CotswoldsPhil

Hi Neil, no they are split mild steel backed about 1.5mm wall and pushed out very easily, but the white metal internal diameter is not concentric with the outer by about 0.3mm 0.012 in old money, making me think that they were sized in situ. by some method.

Hi Swarf,Mostly! The originals are white metal (VP Products) - I made an oilite bush as an experiment using very sharp tools to prevent rubbing, it was also soaked in oil overnight. The bush has been installed in the spare motor and so far I have not seen any bronze slush near the bearing, but time will tell. I'm not sure about the compatibility of a non hardened shaft running in an oilite bush albeit at the rear of the motor with no side load from a belt. Fortunately there is an oil passage directly to the shaft via a hole in the bearing.

The idea was to use an unworn rear bearing from a spare (not so good) motor to replace the worn front load bearing end of the lathe motor.

CotswoldsPhil

Hi Michael,

That's clever, I made an attachment to my sack truck to swap the ML7 and Super 7 around - more in the album. A couple of nuts and all was safe. By combining the two methods I think the hop-ups would have allowed me to load the sack truck unaided.

I think I've answered my own question - Are Crompton and Parkinson white metal bearings line-bored, I think the answer is yes...

I remounted the 17mm mandril I used to make the oilite bearing and clocked the white metal bearing I removed from the spare motor - the bearing slips nicely on the mandril but the outer shell runs out by 0.3mm or 0.012 inch - quite a bit. So it's going to be a bit of a lottery swapping the bearings - some thinking will be in order.

CotswoldsPhil

Hi Neil,

I subscribe to ME and get MEW via my Newsagent. I wrote the Small Chains article in ME published this week. I'm just getting active again with model engineering, after years of stop start activity.

I'll prepare an advert as well as adding one to the website. Do you have a deadline?

Regards

CotswoldsPhil

Alan,

Blimey - the secondhand prices I've been seeing are a real bargain then.

CotswoldsPhil

Michael - I always thought die-cast parts were less expensive?

Neil - Can I join in on the reader ads for ML7's? Mine's detailed in an album I've created ready for a sale. What's classed as a good deal?

Flying Fifer Is £749+vat your offer of a tailstock + the machine as well? I've already started looking at the Cowell and how I might adapt it. Could be an article there somewhere.

Regards

CotswoldsPhil

Hi

Does anyone know if Crompton Parkinson white-metal motor bearings were line-bored on assembly? The reason for the question, the front bearing on the (new to me) Super 7 motor is a bit worn in the direction of the belt tension, and therefore a bit noisy. The bearings appear to be unobtainable, at reasonable cost, as advised by Brook.

I've extracted a rear bearing ( Vanwall Products - in good condition being still a close fit on the shaft) from a spare motor. I made an oilite bearing as a replacement as an experiment to test longevity. The oilite bearing was first bored and then the outside turned on a mandril for accuracy, but the motor locked up until I resorted to some 'fitting' to ease the new rear bearing.

I now have a spare bearing to hand and the fact that the shaft in the Super 7 motor is not worn, replacing the bearing might do the trick, however, I don't want to knock-out the worn bearing before being sure that the work stands half a chance of succeeding. I can't just swap the front covers because the front bearing in the spare motor is worn in a similar way.

Regards

CotswoldsPhil

Hi Michael,

I've been researching Myfords a bit before buying an early Mk11 Super 7 (1973) to replace my ML7 (1965 vintage) mainly because when I was a nipper, my Uncle had one, and I watched him make fine I.C. engines on it, I need the higher spindle speeds for the small stuff I tend to make.

I'm sure you are aware of the lathes.co.uk site - here is an extract with a potted history from http://www.lathes.co.uk/myford/page2.html

I hope I've not broken any rules - the extract is duly acknowledged.

Myford ML7R
Introduced at more or less at the same time as the power cross feed Super 7, this is the lathe that confuses people new to the make. Although called an ML7 - and you would therefore expect it to be a development of, or directly related to, the original machine of that name - it was actually a non-power cross feed Super 7, but without a clutch and fitted with ML7 cross and top slides. It was designed to fit below the Super 7 in place of the ML7 and allowed a rationalisation of production around just one design of bed, headstock and tailstock. The lathe was eventually fitted with Super 7 cross and top slides, the ML7R name dropped and the "new" model renamed "Super 7 Sigma".

I look forward to your exploits; I've already replaced the annular contact bearings in my headstock with great success (they had been packed with grease) - story board in my album.

Regards

CotswoldsPhil - I'm also a Phil H (there appear to be a couple of Phil H's on the Forum)

Edited By Neil Wyatt on 04/09/2014 20:06:42

Edited By Neil Wyatt on 04/09/2014 20:10:02

Hi Nick,

I guess then that I should swap the tail-stocks on the machines, upgrading the ML7 to a Super 7 tail-stock and sell on the ML7 with S7 tail-stock, adding the Cowell attachment to the (new to me) Super 7. I'm not getting on well with the ejector mechanism on the S7 tail-stock, I keep ejecting the drill-chuck.

Regards

Phil H

Morning,

I've been looking for a ML7 tailstock to be able to use the Cowell attachment on the (new to me) Super 7 (as advised elsewhere on this Forum) but the prices being asked are unreal. There appears to be a growing market in expensive bits from broken Myfords.

I'm astonished at the prices being asked / made on 3Bay and GumTr33 for what look like scruffy basic machines with little or no tooling. Over the last couple of nights I've watched the end of auctions for ML7's to try and gauge their worth ready for the sale of my ML7.

ML7 (MK1 tailstock) no clutch, no stand, just a basic machine, which looked to have been repainted some years before - it made £510.

ML7 (Mk11 tailstock this time) no clutch, no stand, a little basic tooling, but no 6 inch 4 jaw, it made £700.

ML7 (Mk1 tailstock again) looks neglected with visible rust, no clutch, on a stand with some tooling and 2 chucks asking £950.

Inside the back page of the latest MEW are adverts for ML7's - no clutch, no stand, just a 3 jaw chuck included; asking £1225 and £1425 + 20% Vat, they are later wide-guide saddles at least.

What's happening to Myford prices?

Regards

CotswoldsPhil