Member postings for ega

I think the point may have been covered before but is there any convenient way today to re-cycle worn out or broken inserts?

I shall never have a kilo of these but a mickle and a mickle makes a muckle!

Michael Gilligan:

Thanks again. I imagine there were many mixes of English and metric back in the 70s. The larger screw seems sensible.

Michael Gilligan:

Your linked item looks identical to mine save that mine has the J&S branding; it is surely incorrect for them to use the same type number as the real thing even though there is no real danger of confusion.

I am not myself worried; it's just a matter of deciding what to do and thanks to you and Nick I am now in a better positon to do so. I need to identify a suitable bearing and perhaps I could trouble you to post the diameter of the screw on yours (7/16" on the NiPPY)?

Thanks to both of you. It sounds a bit like the Burnerd Multisize chuck so far as getting the balls in and out is concerned.

I shall now see if I can translate this idea to my own vice.

PS I'm getting a bit tatty myself!

Edited By ega on 18/12/2018 19:26:12

Nick Hulme (and Michael Gilligan):

Thank you for this further interesting piece of information.

Assuming that your version is the same as Michael's, can either of you confirm that there is no keep plate as mentioned in my OP, please? And if so, is it just the retaining/blanking screw that reacts the clamping thrust (via the bearing)?

I don't know if the type 4608-001 was so marked but its net weight is given as 3.6 kg which might help with identification (the NiPPY is some 3.8 kg and the "mark 2" Unigrip 3.3kg).

Many thanks indeed for your excellent photos which I will digest alongside some of the NiPPY; at first sight, the construction seems somewhat different.

As you may have gathered, I felt that my later J&S represented a "dumbing down" of the design of the one you have. There is, however, one point where the later one may score in practice: "mark 1" has the leadscrew rigidly fixed to the moving jaw and this, along with the ant-lift plate underneath the slide, restricts the jaw's ability to accommodate a slightly out of parallel work piece; "mark 2" has a notch in the jaw which flexibly holds the (rotating) screw and allows a small amount of pivoting movement limited, of course, by the anti-lift plate.

Michael Gilligan:

Thank you. There is no urgency, of course.

There have been a couple of threads about the NiPPY vice in recent years, one including a reference to the Jones & Shipman version which seems to have been called the Unigrip, possibly a misnomer as the elaborate jaws of both versions permitted gripping the work in a variety of ways.

At a MEX some years ago I bought a simplified version of the Unigrip with plain jaws and RH M12 leadscrew working in a tapped hole in the casting. I have used this rather infrequently as the relatively fine screw makes adjustment painfully slow compared with the NiPPY arrangement of a LH 8TPI acme screw working in a threaded hole in the knurled handle. Having looked at a friend’s NiPPY I am planning to modify my vice to provide similar more convenient working.

The NiPPY’s clamping force is reacted via a keep plate rather after the fashion of the ML7 tailstock and there is a spring washer between the inner end of the handle and the bottom of the hole in the casting. According to my 1976 J&S catalogue, however, their type 4608-001 version’s handle was “mounted on ball bearings to give more gripping power, smooth action and longer life.“

I speculate that this may be a reference to a thrust bearing in the same location as the NiPPY’s spring washer and, presumably, that the keep plate is still necessary. Can anyone who has the ball bearing version comment, please?

I had an arrangement similar to the link on my vertical slide. Some vertical slides incorporate a vee between the tee slots.

The tailstock device mentioned by Neil Wyatt has the advantage that holes are automatically on centre.

Ron Laden:

Axminster do various angle gauges including one by Veritas at £7.20.

Another idea would be to turn a 40 deg groove in a piece of stock using acute angled left and right hand tools and setting the topslide to 20 deg either way; that method would allow you to make gauges to a variety of angles.

As MEs we certainly ought to be capable of applying suitable heat treatment; with or without, it helps if the file concerned is a thick one and the woodturner is not!

Thanks for the link. The Eccentric Engineer over on the right is a fan of cast alloy.

Woodturning scrapers were traditionally made from worn out files, of course (use with care!).

PS duplicate post caused by using back button - sorry!

Edited By ega on 16/12/2018 11:01:36

Thanks for the link. The Eccentric Engineer over on the right is a fan of cast alloy.

Woodturning scrapers were traditionally made from worn out files, of course (use with care!).

I have been very impressed by the performance of the Evolution circular saw. Used in a radial arm saw small workpieces can be clamped in position before cutting. If necessary a sacrificial sandwich approach is possible (I can't say I have used it for thin brass but it seems doable).

Edited By ega on 16/12/2018 10:53:55

Anyone who can readily fit a rear toolpost should not be deterred from trying one; with any particular way of working its advantages may or may not outweigh the problems experienced by Zan.

The GHT version can be swivelled 90 deg to get the blade out of the way and instantly reset to either of its two blades when needed. Having a separate turret means that other tools - boring, knurling, etc - can be deployed. Those who use form tools will get better results with the tool in the rear toolpost.

Myford were far from the only maker who favoured "across" tee slots and although their own early RTP was fastened by only one bolt the "across" style allows a firmer fixing via two slots.

Vic:

Thanks for the link to this comprehensive chart.

Some may see the hole saw recommendations as over-conservative.

The B&D pilot/bullet point bits are excellent but look difficult to sharpen; I haven't seen them on sale recently.

I do aim for this but does it really matter as long as the tool is appropriately presented to the bore?

GHT advocated running the tool upside down at the back of the bore.

Interesting comments about the side effects of barrier creams.

The otherwise excellent PR88 has, I suspect, had an adverse effect on the finish on my Myford which I painted some years ago with Myford's own touch up enamel; frequently-touched areas are now bare metal.

Thanks for the link. I think I now understand why the Mk 2 Super Seven is thought by some to be inferior in this area.

Thank you - that seems logical. I did try using a black platen cover and obtained variable results depending on the scanner settings. I did, however, find a clean copy of the catalogue concerned and have added it below:

PS I prefer the PDF format for this kind of thing but understand the software will not allow it.

Edited By ega on 14/12/2018 11:35:40