Member postings for Lathejack

Good point, wish I had thought of that 35 years ago when I first stated making them, particularly when the old lathe was put to use to twist them.

Maybe the brass twist I made for the Showmans engine would have looked better if done as you suggest.

Edited By Lathejack on 02/02/2017 21:03:02

I used my rotary table mounted on a stand and connected to the lathe spindle to cut new divisions and stamp new numbers onto the flanges of my Warco VMC mill. This was to replace the standard factory glued on scales.

I made an expanding mandrel to grip and drive the lathe spindle, and first I cut the divisions with a cheap carbide tipped lathe tool mounted on its side.

The fourth photo shows the numbers being stamped. The number stamp can just be seen mounted in the toolpost behind the block of steel used to guide it. The turret castings base flange and front verticle flange for the swivelling head were both done this way.

Thanks Paul.

I twisted the brass rod cold, I can't remember for sure how many turns, but I think it was maybe three and had no problems at all.

And thanks Nick, it seemed to turn out ok.

Edited By Lathejack on 01/02/2017 23:48:05

Edited By Lathejack on 01/02/2017 23:57:24

This is the method I used to twist some 3/16 square brass rod. This brass rod was bought from the Harrogate Show, and the seller said it was a grade that would probably break if I tried to twist it. But I had a go, and it worked fine, and the pitch comes out quite even.

I made the Barley Twist to upgrade the Wilesco Showmans Engine I bought for someone as a birthday gift in 2015. The Wilesco method was simply round brass rod with a coil spring slid over it to give a crude effect of Barley Twist.

Years ago when I used to make gates and railings I would use the same method to put a twist into a portion of 10mm steel square bar, later using an old lathe.

Edited By Lathejack on 01/02/2017 21:48:39

Very nice. That's one of the earlier versions that Warco offered in the 1980's and early 90's. They have deeper and wider castings than later versions, with scraped guideways on the top surface of the knee and on the vertical guidways of the column, and are the same as the machine that Myford offered as the VME.

The later Warco A1S mills with slimmer and shallower castings, as on the current Chester version, are still good machines but just not as good as the earlier ones. As well as a much narrower saddle, later ones also had a knee casting that wasn't as tall, which I think allowed the knee and table to be wound lower, and contributed to the increase in room between the spindle and table.

I took a look at the A1S for sale, it looks like an earlier type, very nice and well worth the money, but it's just too far away from me even if I was tempted. There is also an equivalent Myford VME on offer for twice the price.

Edited By Lathejack on 30/01/2017 19:21:54

Well I have just done a bit of digging too. Axminster no longer appear to list it on their site.

Chester, however, do still list it as the 830 VS mill. Apart from the variable speed, this is the same as the later versions of the A1S that Warco offered, up until they discontinued them.

Chester list all the dimentions and capacities. As I mentioned, when I examined one of these machines not too long ago it appeared to be made in Taiwan, and quite nice too. I also see from Chesters site I have just looked at that it has a Taiwan price tag as well.

The Warco A1S mill was, if I remember correctly, a larger beefed up version of the VMC mill. It had the same overall design and appearance, with an 8x30 inch table with increased travel, a larger diameter quill with much more room between the spindle and table.

Earlier versions of it that Warco sold in the 1980's were the same as Myfords VME mill, later Warco A1S mills were of slightly different manufacture with rather spindlier castings used, but still nice machines. More recently Chester and Axminster have been selling new versions of these machines, together with the next one in the range with the head mounted on an adjustable ram. These new ones still appear to be made in Taiwan when I examined one.

I have also owned a Warco VMC mill for about 20 years now, mine is a Taiwanese version made in 1997. I fitted a 1 HP 3 phase motor and VFD a few years ago, and it turned it iinto a much smoother and quieter machine. I have only ever considered replacing it with one of the bigger versions, such as an A1S or a VME.

Edited By Lathejack on 29/01/2017 18:46:55

Edited By Lathejack on 29/01/2017 18:53:34

As for the colour of Warco vs Chester, and others, well maybe if you are faced with a similar deal from different suppliers for the same machine then colour might just decide it for some. Blue, red and the brighter colours being used on machine tools can make the workshop seem a more pleasant place to be. Acres of dirty battleship grey can look a bit grim and uninviting.

I have always quite liked green machine tools. I remember Warco's 1327 lathes from the 1990's, they were a nice shade of green with a yellow headstock cover, which reminded me of the acres of Rapeseed with its bright yellow blossom and green shoots.....marvellous.

I remember when Myford changed the colour of their VME milling machine to a pale blue and off white combination. They were not best pleased when I commented that it now looked like part of a bathroom suite. Oh well, can't please everybody.

Edited By Lathejack on 21/01/2017 01:10:28

Edited By Lathejack on 21/01/2017 01:12:08

I have never bought a machine from Chester, just a few bits of tooling years ago when they used to have a large stand at shows such as Harrogate.

As for Warco, well my first and last major purchase from them was a 1330 geared head lathe around 12 years ago. While in their showroom, face to face with the boss, I ordered and payed full price for the 1330 lathe.

While there I made a point of warning them not to send me the demo/display lathe we were looking at, or any other demo/display machine they might have elsewhere, only a new machine fresh from its crate. I was assured that I would of course recieve a new machine, but it would be a 5 - 6 week wait for new stock to arrive.

But the lathe was delivered just 2 weeks later, it was quickly offloaded and positioned in my workshop. Before I had time to take a look at the lathe there were two power cuts which lasted six days. My workshop has no windows, so it is pitch black without lights.

Finaly about a week after delivery I managed to take a closer look, and to my horror discovered they had indeed still sent me the 21/2 year old ex demo machine. It was in a terrible mechanical state inside the headstock, and even had a worn bed with patches of corrosion on which sand paper had been used to clean it up. It ran so bad it was unusable, all far worse than the replacement which has already been discussed on this site. What a diabolical thing to do to a customer.

As I said, it was my last purchase from Warco, a shame because I have always liked a lot of their machines, which usually look a bit tidier than some of Chesters equivalents.

Edited By Lathejack on 20/01/2017 19:59:05

Edited By Lathejack on 20/01/2017 20:21:57

I also have an Elliot 2G, I bought it around 20 years ago and it also has always had a large amount of backlash when it the high range. I have always done as Andrew mentioned, and just wind the chuck backwards before switching on to take up the slop to avoid the sharp loud clunk.

When the low range backgear is engaged there is only a small amount of backlash.

Many years ago I did remove the gearbox cover and couldn't find any wear or broken parts, so I think it may be just the way they are made.

A few years ago I bought a three phase motor and VFD for it, and these can be programmed to give a very gentle startup and acceleration up to speed. So, as well as other benefits, that should remove the need to wind the chuck back before starting, once I fanaly get it fitted.

Edited By Lathejack on 07/01/2017 18:16:55

Edited By Lathejack on 07/01/2017 18:23:08

I never get anything engineering related from Santa, just the usual socks, T shirts and those awful foreign soft centred chocolates.

So this Christmas I treated myself to a new hydraulic bike lift, plus yet another BSA motorcycle to go on top of it.

And a New Years resolution is to try and finaly get that Red Wing engine in the background finished.

I haven't come across an Emco 14D, so can't offer any help with your request. But just out of possible interest I remember many years ago drooling over the Maximat Super 11 lathes and almost bought one myself. These were the earlier green models with the square type geared headstock and screw cutting gearbox, before Emco put the curved covers on a lot of their later red and black range.

Recently I was browsing the Grizzly Machine Tools site from the USA. While looking at their current Far Eastern made South Bend branded 'Heavy 10' model I noticed it looked familiar. I then realised it was a copy of the old Emco Maximat Super 11.

The new Grizzly South Bend Heavy 10 is pretty much just the same as the original Emco version, same type bed casting, geared headstock, screwcutting gearbox, complete carraige assembly and topslide and tee slotted crosslide. Apart from cosmetic differences and a Camlock mechanism on the tailstock the major other difference is the Taiwanese or Chinese South Bend version uses a triple V bedway, with two V's guiding the saddle, a typical design feature of the old original South Bend lathes.

I seem to remember that the Emco lathes typically used a rather small V for the tailstock, and a larger buttress type single V for the saddle.

Anyway, I just found it interesting that a Taiwanese or Chinese copy of one of the larger Emco lathes was still being produced. I have only come across copies of Emco's smaller machines before, as well as the FB2 mill, incuding the red and black copies that were badged as Emco.

Edited By Lathejack on 24/12/2016 21:02:30

Edited By Lathejack on 24/12/2016 21:04:19

Edited By Lathejack on 24/12/2016 21:21:06

The SwissTec lathes are Chinese, and are the same range of Chinese lathes offered by most suppliers of Chinese machinery.

I visited Pro Machine Tools to take a look at the Ceriani and SwissTec lathes. The new SwissTec machine on display I examined was one of the common Chinese 10x22 machines, more or less the equivalent of the Warco WM250 and similar 10x22 lathes from others.

The overall quality of fit and finish on the SwissTec lathe was definitely no better than any other equivalent Chinese made machine, so in that area at least there seemed to be no advantage in paying for one in order to avoid buying other well known Chinese versions. I have no idea if the the SwissTec electronics are any better.

In fact the SwissTec had a quick release type spindle flange, as on some other Chinese versions. But this one had a very thin release collar at the rear of the spindle flange and the collar was bent in three places from the pressure of the three mounting studs. So no special attention by the Swiss appeared to have been lavished on it.

Edited By Lathejack on 25/11/2016 20:38:55

Edited By Lathejack on 25/11/2016 20:55:06

Hopper.

Yes I have seen the longer actuating arms, but the 8 inch TLS brake is intended for my 1971 250 victor so I don't want to end up with it over braked. A carefully fettled standard conical TLS should be better than the 6 inch SLS conical brake currently fitted, but the Saftek brake linings that Gavin mentions might work wonders for the 6 inch brake as well. The longer arms could be a final solution if all else fails.

I agree that the earlier pre 71 Triumph/BSA TLS brake is excellent, I have one on my other 1969 BSA and it is fabulous. Over the years I have seen many discussions in mags and on the web about problems and improvements with the conical front brakes, but not a lot said about the earlier TLS brake because it works so well as it is.

Gavin.

The Nikasil coated alloy cylinders on your BSA are interesting. I remember buying and fitting a set of Gilardoni Nikasil coated alloy cylinders on my 750 Bonneville. They came with close fitting Mahle Pistons matched to the bores, they made the engine run a little quieter and cooler. I wonder if they are still available.

Here a few more items from the Autojumble. A set of genuine original brake shoes for the conical 8 inch brake, plus two sets of unused linings complete with a pack of Ferodo rivets. If all these fail to work well then I will look into the brake linings you mentioned.

Let us know how you get on with the fork legs.

Edited By Lathejack on 29/10/2016 02:57:43

Edited By Lathejack on 29/10/2016 03:08:48

Nice bike Gavin, have you found an aluminium alloy cylinder barrel for it? Or is it just the iron one painted silver?

The fork twist isn't helped by those front mudguards with spindly rubber mounted wire stays. As well as possibly a stiffer mudguard I'm sure you must have considered fitting a fork brace, I have seen them fitted to those forks in the past.

While at the Autojumble last month I picked up this front wheel, with the infamous Triumph/BSA conical TLS front brake. You mention your heavy braking, so maybe they are not too bad after all, with a bit of tweaking.

Those 1971 onward fork legs measure just over 13 inches long with the wheel spindle cap and four studs removed from the bottom of the leg. If your Myford is 19 inches between centres then there may be just enough room to grip the square lower end of the leg in a four jaw chuck and, as already suggested, use a fixed steady on the other end bearing on the machined surface under the rubber dust cap or gaitor with a steel sleeve to protect it, and a boring bar in the toolpost.

The circular machined top of the legs is around 57mm diameter, I am not sure what the capacity of a Myford fixed steady or the cheaper copies is. The legs have a wall thickness of just over 5mm, so there is just enough meat for a thin walled bush. As well as the other materials mentioned for the bushes, even aluminium alloy will be fine as that is what the legs are anyway, with the hard chrome stanchions running directly in them.

During the 1980's as well as Japanese bikes I also used a Triumph Trident and three OIF Bonnevilles as all year round everyday transport. These Triumphs had the same type of front forks as your BSA. I found that on a well maintained bike that was kept clean but regularly used the chrome on the stanchions didn't seem to pit but would still wear through to the steel underneath.

Japanese forks of the same type appeared to have tougher chrome and I never had any that wore the chrome, but they did suffer more from the odd spot of pitting, maybe because they were harder than the original BSA/Triumph items. Some of the newly made hard chromed stanchions, as well as re chromed ones, may hopefully be better than the originals.

I have seen a few sets of 71 on BSA/Triumph forks on offer at my local Autojumble over the last 18 months, and they have all had badly worn chrome. One set did have a fairly good pair of unworn stanchions, and these were the more expensive chrome moly type. But some fool had ruined them by using a pair of Stiltsons on them leaving teeth marks all the way round on the working area just above the alloy leg. Honestly! Some people.

Edited By Lathejack on 28/10/2016 21:48:33

Edited By Lathejack on 28/10/2016 21:51:11

Edited By Lathejack on 28/09/2016 20:11:15

I visited Pro Machine Tools a couple of years ago just to take a closer look at the Ceriani lathes. The one they had on display was fitted with the gear box giving four selectable feed rates, Ceriani call it a Semi Norton gear box.

While I was examining the lathe the guy there told me that the gearbox allowed you to flick from a fine feed to a thread pitch and back again, but I don't think that is true. There are no power feed gears built into the apron, so powered longitudinal fine feed requires engaging the leadscrew thread, the same as when thread cutting. That means the quick change gearbox on its own, just like many others, cannot span the range from fine feeds to thread pitches without altering the change wheels.

Looking at the charts for fine feed rates and thread pitches appeared to show that every thread pitch required altering the change wheels, and that the four quick change feed rates of the Semi Norton gear box were only used when the change wheels were set up for fine feeds. So the gearbox appeared to be redundant when the machine was set up to cut threads, but still a useful feature for quickly changing between cutting feed rates when turning which is probably how it will be used most of the time.

The lathe was very well made and finished, but as Nigel above suggested, the bed does look a little puny around the gap area, and that detail has always irritated me. But the bed casting is very thick in places, upto 20 - 25mm thick if I remember correctly. The dovetail bed also has seperate guide ways for the saddle and tailstock, so much better than some other lathes with dovetail bedways.

I quite liked the lathe, and didn't think the asking price was too bad for an Italian made machine. I recall a comment a user made that the machine had " Hardinge performance at an import price" . So even allowing for a little exaggeration they appear to work very well.

The example I looked at had spindle speed changes by belt and pulleys, but there is a variable speed version. There are also a couple of videos on YouTube showing the bed castings being machined while set up on a large vertical & horizontal milling machine.

Edited By Lathejack on 19/09/2016 00:00:53

Edited By Lathejack on 19/09/2016 00:10:52

As well as the single digit jaw number some self centering chucks such as TOS have a serial number on each of the inside and outside jaws. This serial number is the same on all jaws and matches the serial number on the chuck itself. The jaws are ground while in situ in the chuck body for accuracy and the serial number confirms that the jaws are from that chuck. The serial number is usually on the back of the chuck under the backplate.

A few years ago I bought a new TOS four jaw self centering chuck from Chronos. As soon as I recieved it I knew it had already been opened and tampered with because the plastic strapping that seals TOS boxes was missing. Sure enough when I opened it one set of jaws that were rattling around loose in the box were a poor and very loose fit in the chuck body. The serial number on these four jaws did not match the number on the chuck body or the other jaws, plus the accuracy with them was pants.

It looked like the originally factory supplied jaws had been lost and someone at the shop had carelessly thrown in a mismatched set, it may have been a chuck that had been on display at some time. They posted a replacement very quickly, and all eight jaws on this replacement chuck have a serial number that matches that on the chuck body.

All the TOS chucks I use have these matching serial numbers on the body and all its jaws, and also a Pratt Bernard chuck although I only had one set of jaws for that.

Edited By Lathejack on 20/06/2016 00:31:01

Edited By Lathejack on 20/06/2016 00:45:51

Edited By Lathejack on 20/06/2016 00:53:02

I also have a Progress 2G drill press, I bought it almost 20 years ago. They are excellent machines, very rigid and the backgear makes them so usable.

I got rid of the three phase motor and fitted a single phase motor years ago and have always regretted it. So I have bought a new three phase motor and an inverter plus a pendant control and will run the motor on 240 volt three phase via the inverter from the single phase supply. I have already done this on my lathe and mill and what a difference it makes.

The smoother and quieter running, plus variable speed will make the drill even better to use. The programable gentle start up will also be very welcome as these drills sometimes tend to start up with a clunk when in direct drive.

Edited By Lathejack on 01/06/2016 19:06:40