Member postings for David Standing 1

For £60, you aren't going to get much.

It probably feels horrible to pedal, won't be stable, and won't be good for you ergonomically.

This is probably one of the best half decent budget exercise bikes to go for, that isn't crap:

**LINK**

Oliver

It is totally impossible to put any sort of meaningful value on the machines, without clear photographs.

One man's 'as new' Myford is another man's boat anchor.

Indian back street butcher!

He made it from two nuts, because that was what he was asked to do, per the messaging in the 'WHY' bit at the end of the video.

Beautiful workmanship, particularly considering the humble source materials, which I expect was the whole raison d'etre.

First thing I would do with that chuck, bearing in mind it is on a MT, is to set it up appropriately to alleviate damage to the quill, so the chuck is facing upwards, jaws fully retracted, and using a brass packing piece in between, take the aforementioned 4lb lump hammer, and give it one full force crack with the hammer to drive the chuck home in the quill.

I kid you not, that may apply enough force to just crack the taper free, so you can use a MT extractor.

I would also try a taper extractor, and as suggested above, machine it so it has a shallower taper.

If that doesn't work, what I would try then is to make two identical wedges, and machine them thin enough so you can apply one from either side, grease them well, and if you have a big enough vice, don't hit the wedges, but squeeze them in the vice, so you apply pressure rather than force, and it is evenly from either side.

I have got some MT shanks apart that have also been together for years, you just have to work out non destructive ways to do it, whilst applying the most effective force.

Ron

Are you using the tool slide or carriage wheel to advance the cuts?

I note you have been playing with the gib strips

Try locking down whichever axis you aren't using to see what effect that has - if you are advancing with the tool slide, lock the carriage, if you can, and vice versa.

Also try winding on your next depth of cut, and then locking the cross slide before advancing the cut.

Just takes some of the variables out of the equation.

Mark

You probably can get 16mm tools in and achieve work centre (although I don't think that is what Boxford ever intended), but you will need the deepest tool holders.

The deeper the holder, the further you can lower the bottom of the cutting tool.

The Rotagrip/Bison ones are 35 or 44mm height.

The OEM ones are 38 or 44mm height.

I have probably around 40 tool holders, a mixture of all four types.

The platform the cutting tool sits on is around 5mm lower on the 44mm height tool holders than on the 38mm ones.

What are the RDG ones? Dunno, and there is no helpful information on their website.

Unless you can persuade someone at RDG to measure the overall height of their two types of toolholder, and the height of the tool platform off the base, I would not take a chance on them.

Edited By David Standing 1 on 24/01/2019 14:59:19

Mark

Don't get sidetracked by metric or imperial, as far as I know all the Dickson type QCTP and holders are metric.

I suspect your toolholders are TO/SO, which ties in with the markings on the toolpost.

Is yours a 'Rapid' marked toolpost? Boxford fitted these to many of their X10 lathes.

Can you measure the thickness under the part of the toolholder beneath where the cutting tool sits?

I suspect it is 10mm, +/- a bit.

Last question, and the most important one, do the toolholders you have sit the cutting tool tip at the correct centre height?

Posted by Mark Turver on 24/01/2019 07:14:31:
Hi guys, this may have been answered, but my tool post (on my Boxford 10-20sts) is stamped Boxford S0/B PD My tool holders have an opening of 19mm, 3 are metric, my parting holder is definitely imperial, (all the bolts are and it is taller than the metric holders) I'm not sure what size holders to buy. I contacted RDG, sadly the sales guy sounded uninterested/ bored
and told me he'd send me an email of their T51 holder. Email almost instantly arrived, with a "high quality CAD" attachment, which turned out to be a top elevation hand drawn (what we used to refer to as "fag packet drawing" of a tool holder, no height supplied that almost, but did not match mine. The CAD reference at least gave me my laugh for the day. I read with eager interest in this thread that T00 is the same as S00, and wondered where to get them, and what if anything /B PD referred to?
Apologies if this has been answered in another thread, best regards to all, Mark.

Mark

If you have an SO fitting, which should be correct for an X10 series Boxford, your toolholders should be 73mm long.

And to edit and add a couple of things, firstly the Rotagrip/Bison equivalent of SO fit is TO.

You will also see there are TO and T1 holders, plus TIX.

The only difference is the height of the tool holder, and that dictates the tool height, since the floor of the TO and T1 holders is a different thickness.

For SO/TO, your toolpost should be 73x73x51mm high.

If your holders are 73mm wide and 35mm high, they are TO/SO holders.

If they are 73mm long and 44mm high, they are T1/S1 (or T1X) holders.

The two different in height holders have a different holder tool slot base height, and thus dictate the centre height of the cutting tool.

If you are really lucky and have Bison tool holders, that is easy, standard tool holders should be engraved 4494-62 or 4494-62N on the front.

4494-62 are 44mm high holders, 4494-62N are 35mm high.

Once you get your head round the way these are dimensioned, it is easy, honest!

Edited By David Standing 1 on 24/01/2019 10:00:30

Fairly soft landing for a Fat Albert, that's what they are built for! A hook would have probably stressed the airframe more.

Having roofed a building with slate, the traditional way to put holes in slate (certainly that thickness) is to punch them. Seriously.

As to cutting them to size, one way is as Jason says, with something like a small sharp hatchet, or a bill hook (the straight part) etc, or these:

**LINK**

This isn't supposed to be sarcastic, only positive - ARC are extremely helpful, would not a call to them asking the process required be the easiest thing?

I can understand why you may not want to call them, I wouldn't either - but it may be the right thing - from the horse's mouth, etc 

Edited By David Standing 1 on 18/01/2019 12:48:42

Ross

I meant uncoated inserts, but this is probably clear now from subsequent posts from others

Do a search for the other 10,000 posts on the same subject?

Another quick answer, use uncoated tips.

A bandsaw?

And time to feel smug - my metric Boxford 330 will do every single thread listed above, including 24, 26 and 56 tpi.

As a coincidence, I rebuild old steel framed pushbikes!

As said above, my 'British made' Boxford 330 lists 26 tpi as a thread it will cut with just one change wheel substitution.

Jason

You are probably aware that for many years Boxford have primarily focused on the education market, which is why safety compliance is very high on their list of priorities.

As a sad by product of this, it is why I managed to get my virtually unused 330 for peanuts - it came out of an education establishment that, like so many others, was closing its engineering department. My 330 had sat in the corner, unloved, until bought back by the service technician that had installed it a number of years earlier.

Back on track, my geared head Boxford 330 will happily cut 26 tpi with just one change wheel substitution in the gear train.

I know I champion these at regular intervals, but the X10 series Boxfords (330, 280, 10.20, 11.30 etc) are very capable lathes, and can be bought in good condition secondhand for little money, if you keep your eyes open - certainly for a fraction of the new cost.