Warco WM250 back issues

Hi..I’ve just bought a Warco WM250V..can anyone tell me of any back issues that have information regarding reviews and mods for the lathe..

Cheers John

Edited By John Hall 7 on 02/05/2018 09:35:02

If you put "warco wm250" in the search box at the top right of the page and send it this will bring a result inviting you to view all Forum entries. This will give you 20 previous threads to look at. That's a start!

Hi John,

You will find Journeyman's WM250 review is here.

Thor

As mentioned by Robbo above...

Have a look at for another avenue...

**LINK**

​George.

... some more links...

**LINK**

George.

And this will allow you to search for magazine back issues which you wanted rather then forum posts.

Thanks everyone...but it was magazine back issues with articles relating to the lathe I was looking for..

Cheers John

No sign of any mags with Warco 250v info...😟🛶

In your searches don't be too tight on the specific model, certainly not the final V. Look also at Warco lathes in general, then find the equivalent model for Chester and look for that too. Plus in looking for titles they might have used a vague title like 'what I did today' so it isn't as all encompassing as google.

Just remember to read ‘between the lines’ of any review. Reviews are notoriously biased - one way or the other.

There is also the fact that a modification or accessory could be fitted to more than one machine so may not have actually mentioned the WM250 in the title.

Hi, John,

There is tons of stuff on the internet for this generic type of lathe. I'll try and find time in the next couple of days to look for some of the links.

In the meantime, you could try searching for info using "9x20 Lathe" - there are many generic models with minor (and some major) differences, but the majority of it is applicable to all the lathe models.

The modification almost everyone recommends is changing to a 3-phase motor/VFD - I have done my lathe, and it is vastly better and simpler than the stock setup. Other 'must-do' mods include a more robust saddle mounting ring, There are (were?) also some Yahoo groups which deal specifically with this lathe, and if they are still in operation they are a good source of info - there used to be 'rebuild' and 'setup' articles available there. Grizzly in the States also do an online manual for their version of this lathe which is quite useful.

I have to say I don't remember very much from ME and MEW in terms of modifying this lathe.

I started with a mini-lathe. They're more basic than a WM250V, and early models at least benefited from after work like polishing or fitting brass gibs and removing burrs etc. They don't have a saddle lock, or stop; some had dubious electronics, not everyone is comfy with plastic gears, and headstock bearings can be upgraded to tapers etc. In consequence of their simplicity there's much interest in tweaking and accessorising them.

Could be that less is written about modding WM250 & family because this group of machines is markedly more capable. There's no particular need to improve them. A.N.Other suggests fitting a 3-phase motor - good advice except recent WM250Vs already have one, so you don't need to bother!

I'd use it and see if any shortcomings jump out. Most of the published advice on using lathes would apply to the WM250; as far as I know it doesn't have any peculiar limitations or special features.

Enjoy!

Dave

There was an article (One man and his lathe) about the Grizzly version of the lathe in MEW233.

Thor

I worked through most of the 70s on Wyverns, (big) Binns & Berrys, Elliotts, Colchesters and Harrisons.

I never thought much of Myfords when I was doing it for pay - primarily because they were so small and simple, and had no feed- or screwcutting gearbox - but developed a bit more respect for their simplicity and robustness when I got my own Speed 10.

When I changed it for my WM250V that was much nearer to the industrial centre lathes I'd worked on. True, for each change gear setup only 3 feed or thread pitches were available - but it did powered crossfeed, usable for milling in the vertical slide as well as facing, and you could reverse feed direction. Changing speed didn't involve shifting belts. And the 3-jaw chuck, gripping true within about a thou or less on the standard jaws over most of its range, is I think the best I've used anywhere.

Chief niggle to me is the grim business of chuck changing - three nuts with very little fiddle-room and needing a steel flat to be interposed against the headstock casing to force off whichever 's in place. 3-jaw is quite legitimately a tighter fit than the 4-jaw. This makes me a little unwilling to do it - as much as anything else from fear of getting a bit of swarf trapped where it'll spoil the 3-jaw's concentricity.

Overall I think it'll do whatever I need. Haven't yet decided whether I can get by without a milling machine; I do a lot of milling in the (Myford swivel) vertical slide, and I've got occasional access to a Bridgeport clone, and - again from the 70s - it's a type I'm very familiar with.

I clamp a length of bar in the chuck, and wiggle it off with that. That means you can use both hands when it does come loose. A few mm more clearance between the flange and the headstock would have been a good idea

+1...'A few mm more clearance between the flange and the headstock would have been a good idea'... The amount of choice adjectives I've come out with when changing chucks is unbelievable ... ' Oh dear another 10 mm clearance would be beneficial'... or words to that effect.

George.

Would flanged nuts be better...no fiddling with washers?

Think some confusion has crept in here:- Mick B1 notes that he changed to a WM250V, and goes on to talk about the difficulty of changing chucks - that access to the three retaining nuts is difficult. There seems to be some confusion there - as far as I am aware, the chuck retained by nuts is the smaller 7x10 chinese lathe, not the larger WM250 or 9x20.

I have both a WM250 variant, and a version of the smaller 7x10 'chinese' lathes. On my WM250 (commonly known as a 9x20), the chuck is retained by a thread - it simply screws on, and a setscrew is used to prevent it 'unwinding'. There were even two tommy bars in the toolkit to remove chucks. I have never seen a 9x20 with a chuck retained by nuts - perhaps Mick B1 has a 'one-off'!

The smaller 7x10 uses three nuts to retain the chuck. The chuck fits against a flange, and three studs pass through that, and nuts have to be fitted to retain the chuck. The difficulty is that the flange is very close to the headstock casting, and there is not much room to get the nuts in or out. Mick also notes that he has to use some force to get the chuck off. Mine is a close fit, but I don't have to force it. I guess this is probably due to the quality/cost of the machine.

SoDs remarks about the 7x10 are relevant. I would add that there is tons of stuff on the Internet about modding both the 7x10 and the 9x20. I also would say that, having started with the 7x10 and moved onto the bigger 9x20, I wish I had started with the 9x20! - it is so much better that it is hardly worth the trouble of looking at the 7x10, unless cost is a factor.