Member postings for Chris Crew

I must fully agree with those people commenting on the awesome power of the 10M. I have no idea what motor or speed is on mine, simply because I have never bothered to look, except that it is single-phase and looks as if it is the original supplied with the machine although I have no way of knowing. I use it mainly for flatting castings as a single point tool is no issue to sharpen and if it's round-nosed you can use the traverse in both directions. Even though there is a plate giving ram speeds I find it is really just a matter of judgement and guestimation as to ram travel and speed. The only real inconvenience I find is the awkward aligning of the ram crank to alter the distance of travel. I have been meaning to make a handle for the clutch pulley to alleviate having to pull it round by hand to facilitate ram adjustment but I just haven't got round to it yet. Perhaps I might now check out exactly what motor is fitted to it.

I too have a Vertex 4" vise on a swivelling base. I can't fault it for the price, just like all the other so called cheap 'Chinese crap' I have (dividing head, rotary table, boring head etc.) everything does exactly what it says on the tin perfectly accurately enough for anything outside of the tool-room at Rolls-Royce.

I bought an ML7-R forty one years ago and started converting it to a Super 7 last year by replacing the cross-slide and top-slide with S7 parts. Finally fitted a clutch today, so it's now an S7 in everything except the serial number. I considered fitting a gearbox but dismissed the idea because it would limit the adaptability of the lathe to cut worms etc. and using the change-wheels gives a vastly greater selection of threads and pitches.

I am a reasonably affluent pensioner, good pension, no mortgage, no more family financial commitments etc. and I still find back-shed engineering a 'rich man's hobby' and prices seem to be going up all the time. For someone who wants to, understandably, support their child in pursuing an interest without, say, a grandfather with a wealth of knowledge and lifetime's collection of tools and equipment, is going to prove expensive whatever the starting point.

I was 27 years old when I managed to buy our first terrace, with a spare upstairs room for a workshop, and I took out a bank loan to fulfil a dream to buy a new Myford with a chuck and a set of cutting tools only to find how limited it was. I had to build a bench, acquire files, drills, castings to make something with and all this while paying the bills and all life's other expenses. Obviously, I am not alone in this and other people will have similarly struggled too in their younger days.

So for a young Mum wanting to support their child I would suggest maybe channelling the young lad's enthusiasm to maybe the junior section of a modelling engineering club, or a smaller gauge model railway. If the lad eventually gains reasonable employment he will be able to make his own choices on what to spend his spare income on but I think he will find like the rest of us it's a never ending story. I wish the lad and his mother well for the future and just one last point, if they are going to be buying used machines and tools etc., beware and take advice because there is so much junk out there and always someone willing to take advantage of enthusiastic ignorance to off-load it.

I have made several back-plates for the Myford out of both cast-iron from an un-machined casting, College Engineering Supplies (I think), and from a 6" noggin of steel, although I don't know what it was it machined pretty freely.

I don't know what lathe you are making the back-plate for or the mounting, but if it's for a Myford/Boxford screw on mounting and this is the lathe it's intended for, I would suggest you obtain an un-machined cast iron casting. The rationale for this suggestion is that, if you haven't got a big lathe to part it off or a big enough power hacksaw/band saw, sawing through a round 6" noggin will take you all day. I have parted 6" in a Colchester with no problem at all but some people seem to have an inordinate amount of trouble with parting off.

When/if you screw-cut the thread, mount the tool up-side down and cut the thread of the rear face of the bore. Doing it this way means you can still use the set-over top-slide method and you don't have to think about reversing the direction of the cross-slide when withdrawing the tool, you can also see what is happening too. If you are making it for a Myford use a nose-threaded tail-stock chuck mounting as a gauge for the thread and be sure to make the register part as accurately a diameter as possible. Put a mark, or better still a positive stop on the lathe bed at just over the length of the thread so you don't accidentally run the tool into the bore. Screw-cutting does not have to be done at the speed of light as the same amount of metal is removed and same number of cuts taken whatever speed the lathe is running at. Cast iron dust is something a vacuum cleaner takes care of in seconds.

Edited By Chris Crew on 15/02/2021 20:15:36

Edited By Chris Crew on 15/02/2021 20:17:39

Yes, you are right, you scallop out the centre of the bar with it supported and then take the very lightest cuts with the bar unsupported before measuring them with a micrometer. If you can get it to within a thou. you will be doing fine. It's really not that important to me, at least, because it's only on a 'flimsy' lathe like the Myford that any adjustment by flexing the bed is possible. Don't get me wrong, the Myford is a fine machine in its class, I would never part with mine, but you certainly could not make any such adjustment on, say, a Colchester because the bed is like the Rock of Gibraltar so you are governed by the inherent accuracy of the machine or not.

With the greatest respect, like 'Inspector Meticulous' I think you may be being a little too concerned with getting it precisely correct. In the real world it is very unlikely that your chuck will close precisely concentric or the un-ground stock you put in it for most jobs will be exactly round. Most turning jobs are about just reducing diameters over quite short lengths that is why beds wear most nearest the chuck, so even if your lathe is cutting .005 thou. taper over the length of the bed over an inch at the headstock end the run-out is all but undetectable.

I accept I may be criticised for holding such opinions, but I am only an amateur pottering around in a back shed workshop, however well equipped it may be, and everything I make usually fits together or works effectively enough but we all have disasters from time to time and learn from them. I do not work in the tool-room at Rolls-Royce where I would be required to achieve world-class production standards, and rightly so.

You don't say how far your bar was protruding from the chuck. Perhaps if you centre-drilled it and supported it with a centre from the tail-stock you may be a bit more successful or only had a couple of inches out from the chuck. Also, if you are such a raw beginner why not buy some ready ground turning tools or some cheap tipped tools from such as Ebay. There are a lot of people who will tell you the cheap Chinese tools are rubbish but I can tell you the shanks are as well machined as any more expensive item I have examined and the tips cut well enough for me. I bought a set of seven for under £20 for the Myford from Ebay and found them to be so good I bought a larger shank set for the Colchester and I expect them to last the rest of my life, at the very least. Price does not always equate to quality only the dealer's profit!

You need to get some known free-cutting steel like EN1A not less than 25mm in diameter to take some test cuts and get the 'feel' of the lathe. Not all steels cut freely with a good finish, black rod for example is very 'gritty' and doesn't form nice swarf or finish. You should get some soluble oil as a cutting lubricant too. I know some people can't bear the thought of it on their cherished machines but I all my machines are equipped with 'suds' pumps. About 20:1 dilution is about right and if you can get some Rocol anti-bacterial to put in it, so much the better as it stops a black gunge forming in the reservoir and the oil and water from separating out over time. It's cheaper to go down to the local oil merchant and buy a 5 litre container of it than the ridiculous prices charged for small bottles of the stuff then you will have almost a lifetime supply.

Edited By Chris Crew on 12/02/2021 01:37:25

As regards 'upside-down' screw-cutting tools I am just trying to clarify in my own mind exactly what this means as regards screw-cutting. I always cut internal threads on the rear-face of the bore with the tool inverted but it is still a standard screw-cutting tool. This method has several advantages : - a) you can use the set-over top-slide method which puts less stress on a necessarily slender screw-cutting tool when cutting small internal threads. b) you don't have to remember to withdraw the tool in the opposite direction to cutting external threads. c) you can actually see what is happening in the bore to a certain extent.

Even if you were cutting left-hand threads it is only the side-rake angle that has to be reversed if you grind screw-cutting tools with side-rake for using the set-over top-slide method, otherwise just grind top-rake and use the tool for both right and left hand threads. Always cut left-handers with the tool moving away from the chuck and the lathe rotating conventionally. It would be difficult to cut left-hand threads with the top-slide set over for moving away from the chuck in any event. A screw-on chuck, as on the Myford or Boxford type lathes, will always unscrew unless specially secured. I have had a chuck fly off when I accidentally knocked the Dewhurst switch lever over and threw the Myford into reverse.

I have an Ainjest rapid threader on a Student and its an absolute godsend when screw-cutting so I was considering making and fitting either the Radford or Cleeve device to knock out the half-nuts on the Myford but I am yet to decide if these devices will knock out the half-nuts fast or precisely enough. I think they should.

'I assumed this to be because of the use of the 29 tooth mandrel wheel and the 'timing' of my original set up has been lost. Certainly had it been a thread readily available straight from the gearbox there would have been no problem'.

If I am reading you correctly, yes there would have been a problem and you would have had to use the methods already described to pick up the thread if the top-slide had been disturbed, the half-nuts dis-engaged or the work removed from the chuck. This would be necessary even if the gear-box settings had been available or just change-wheels used. Even when the use of the TDI is possible threads don't automatically pick-up in exactly the same position just because you drop the clasps nuts in at the indicated position. This is because you would have to be very sure the work was re-mounted in exactly the same position, both protruding from the chuck and the thread already cut in sync. with the lead-screw when it was cut. Both these conditions would be impossible to achieve.

In the home workshop I would suggest there is no 'wrong way' or 'right way' of doing any job. There is only 'your way' and if it worked, then it must be 'right', surely?

Edited By Chris Crew on 11/02/2021 21:15:38

I have a Dimplex 2Kw convector heater which can be switched to 1Kw and controlled by a thermostat. It is switched on at the very lowest settings 24/7/365. The temperature in the workshop, which is a precast concrete garage 21' x 13' with a 'site office' type wooden front replacing the 'up-and-over' door aperture, hardly ever drops below about 50/55 degrees even on the coldest of days. Obviously, if the ambient temperature is above this from about early Spring to late Autumn the heater is not using any power. I have noticed a slight increase in the Winter quarter electricity bill but nothing too un-affordable and I am prepared to pay it to keep condensation and rust at bay.

The roof is corrugated 'asbestos' with a coated sheet steel outer skin screwed to purlins. Between the two roofs is 4" of loft insulation. The walls of the building are not insulated. Since adopting this method of heating I have had no trouble with rust or condensation because of the relative stability of the temperature.

Edited By Chris Crew on 11/02/2021 20:35:14

It has been interesting and informative to read the responses provoked by my previous post. Regarding the post from JA as far as I am aware 'portable' constructions that are under a certain internal volume, i.e. those that can be dismantled and removed like my pre-cast concrete workshops, are exempt from any sort of planning requirement or permissions. (actually I don't think you need planning for house extensions, e.g. permanent conservatories, that do not extend beyond a certain distance from the rear of your property, but that's another story). I would agree that it is only common courtesy to inform immediate neighbours of any intentions if you happen to be on speaking terms with them, but should they object and you do not propose to do anything that it is not within your rights as a property owner they cannot legally do much about it. Anyone may choose to be deterred by objectors or they may elect to stand on their rights as I would choose to do with as much diplomacy and civility as I could muster in justifying my actions. Happily, for me at least, I have not been tested in this situation. (Yet!).

I think that even if you did need planning permission for anything that had been built over 20 years ago without any objections being received over that time, you would get it almost automatically retrospectively on the grounds of 'established use' if you had to apply. However, I am not a lawyer and only have cursory knowledge of planning matters, so I stand to be corrected and educated on this last point.

Edited By Chris Crew on 08/02/2021 14:26:55

Edited By Chris Crew on 08/02/2021 14:29:41

"Of course, there was also the thought about not wanting to import something into a residential estate which could be described as a small industrial machine which rather restricted my choice to lathes for the hobby market."

I have to say that this comment by Peter G. Shaw for me raised a wry smile! Whilst I don't live on an estate I certainly live in a residential area and I hope I have every consideration for other residents, but I am now just wondering what they might say if they knew I had a Jones & Shipman 1310 cylindrical grinder at the back of my attached garage alongside a Colchester Bantam and an Elliot 10M. Nobody has actually said anything about it yet or the two pre-cast concrete sheds at the bottom of the garden that contain between them three lathes, a J & S 540 surface grinder and three milling machines of light industrial size together with a few other bits and pieces that could be considered to be above pure model making requirements.

It actually never crossed my mind that any other resident could have any reason to object to what I did within the boundaries of my own property as long as it did not cause any nuisance. Maybe I have been wrong for all these years?

Edited By Chris Crew on 07/02/2021 19:58:07

Edited By Chris Crew on 07/02/2021 19:58:46

I have four lathes, a Myford ML7-R which was bought new in 1979 and has since had a Super 7 cross-slide and top-slide fitted, so it's a Super 7 less gearbox and clutch. Then there is a Colchester Student, ex-St. Thomas' Hospital medical engineering department and still in superb condition. I also acquired a Colchester Bantam 2000 which I have repaired since some clown, not me!, managed to topple it off a pallet. I have never used it but have repaired it over the last few years although I think it has had a hard life given the excessive wear on the slide screws that I replaced. I also have a Myford ML10 which came from a late colleague's estate, again I have never used it and have no wish to as I consider it a very poor design and wouldn't recommend this British made machine to anyone having examined its constructional features.

I have to say that as a lathe the Student walks all over the Myford, but only as a lathe. The Myford is a complete machining centre upon which I have accomplished many operations from milling, gear-cutting and slotting key-ways etc. before I acquired other machines for the workshop. It is a complete machining centre within itself and has had many accessories and attachments designed for it by some very clever people over the years, many of which I have made, and I would not part with it for all the tea in China! The Student does all the 'heavy lifting' in the workshop and with an Ainjest rapid threading attachment makes screw-cutting a doddle and I screw-cut every thread whenever practicable.

However, all that being said, if I were to be starting all over again I would probably be tempted to start with a Myford Super 7 or ML-7R because there are some good examples to be had in pristine condition having been owned by very fastidious people and little used, but there is obviously a lot of junk out there. I would never consider a Colchester or Harrison etc. unless I could be certain it had been very lightly used by a private owner. The rational being that as these machines pass from owner to owner over the years they can only wear and deteriorate so I think I would rather buy a new Far Eastern machine. Again, only a personal opinion, but I think there is lot of xenophobic nonsense spoken about 'Cheap Chinese crap'. Everything that I have of far eastern origin has performed perfectly satisfactorily, from a Nu-Tool pillar drill which has given good and accurate service for almost 40 years to a Vertex dividing head and rotary table which have proved to be indispensable. Not everything that was made in this country was of the highest quality, i.e. the ML10, and not everything that is made in China is crap.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter for what it's worth. In the end you pays your money and you takes your choice!

Edited By Chris Crew on 06/02/2021 23:18:29

Edited By Chris Crew on 06/02/2021 23:24:35

Nothing to do with parting PB but maybe as of interest, I have just parted this last week a 5" noggin of mild steel in a Colchester Student to make the 90T bull-wheel for the Parkes gear hob backing off device with no problem at all. No digging-in, no breakages and a tool protruding 2.5" from the tool holder, although I let it out in stages. This is not the first time I have done this as I have parted various large noggins previously to make back-plates for the Myford. The tool holder is the J&S type that holds an Eclipse type of blade, used straight off the grinding wheel, and held in an home-made rear tool-post as near a copy of the OEM accessory as I could manage.

Can't speak for PB but my method of parting these large noggins, and for all other parting in steel, is moderate speed (increased as the diameter decreases) and lashings of coolant pumped on, not dabbed or squirted, and a good cut that should not be interrupted once it has started. Aim for a nice 'hiss' and a ribbon or ringlets of swarf. I have used the power cross-feed before but not on this last occasion. The noggin was held as tight as possible in the 4-jaw independent chuck as I believe, or have been told at least, that four-jaws hold work more securely than 3-jaw scroll chucks and if I ever see a hacksaw near a lathe, I reach for my revolver, LOL!

Well, for my 'two-pennyworth' I find it incredible that anyone would want a machine that just plugs straight into a wall socket with nothing in between. Small No-Volt Release devices are cheap as are start and stop buttons. All my machines, both single-phase and three phase run with converters, are equipped with NVR devices but that's only me.

I have had a small Machine Mart 'Tiger' compressor in my workshop for the last thirty years, it is constantly switched on and fires up to replenish the reservoir as and when if I am blowing swarf off the machines or I occasionally drag it down the drive to reflate a car tyre. A few weeks ago it occurred to me to remove the drain plug on the bottom of the cylinder and, guess what? After thirty years constant use absolutely nothing came out, not a drop of water or anything else for that matter, so I replaced the drain plug and expect the compressor to be still going strong long after me!

I made the Radford spherical turning attachment which was subsequently improved by George Thomas. I believe similar designs are now produced by our Asian cousins but I suspect any purchase of one of these devices would be money down the drain. The reason being that if the device does not rotate on an axis very precisely at the lathe centre height all it will produce is egg-shaped monstrosities. Clearly, the only way to get the axis at the precise height is to bore the body of the device in the lathe on which it is to be used.

My device produces spheres that are perfectly satisfactory as ball handles etc. where cosmetic appearance is all that really matters. However, I have recently made the Radford worm-wheel hobbing attachment, the design of which called for universal joints rotating around a sphere rather than a 'spider'. Although the balls I produced looked perfectly spherical to the naked eye, I found that they were not as accurate as expected when rotated in the U/J casings and had to be mounted on a spigot and eased with a file in the lathe to effect a fit without any binding or rubbing.

If, like me, you are under no commercial obligation to remove as much metal in the shortest possible time and are not subject to inspection or examination, then what works for you is the correct optimum speed which you can adjust to best suit the finish you want to achieve and to keep the chatter/noise down. I will, no doubt, be castigated by 'Inspector Meticulous' for expressing such an opinion, but I take the view that my workshop is 'my space'. Whilst I am working in there, there is no 'wrong way' or 'right way' of doing any job, there is only 'my way'. If I was working in a commercial environment I would, quite rightly, be required to work in the most efficient manner and to recognised industry standards, but the fact remains that this does not apply in the home workshop.

Again, and I can almost hear the brickbats heading my way, but in my personal opinion too many people seem to want emulate industrial production standards and textbook working which may be taken as a starting point and guide but adherence to which is sometimes hardly possible in the back shed . Whilst I always seek to produce my best work, I sometimes have to apply a little common sense, ingenuity and guesswork to what I do which for me 95% of the time works perfectly well. My apologies if this view offends some of the purists.