David Urwick's original Metalmaster

A few machines to Mr Urwick's design (a dozen or so) were manufactured in the 50s and sold as The Impetus. David kept one of this batch for his own use. He later sold this machine to Mick Collins. David did a write up on his machine which appeared in the Model Engineer, I believe in the early 60s. David said that he produced the patterns and machined the castings himself. The photos which accompanied the article showed a number of differences to the commercially produced batch, the most obvious being the tailstock barrel feed which used a threaded hand wheel rather than a rack and pinion. Does anyone know what happened to the machine David built?

Dave

From lathes.co.uk

Hi Dave,

David's lathe went to Mick Collins, as far as I'm aware David gave Mick the lathe before he died. Mick has also gone to the big workshop in the sky. Micks family (guessing a little here) has recently put the lathe up for sale on the lathes.co.uk website, it was brought by a guy on the Metalmaster yahoo group. Hope this helps.

Cheers Kerrin

Thank you Ady1 and Kerrin. Having just re-read my posting I'm afraid I did not make myself clear. My understanding is that David Urwick made the original machine himself. It was this machine that he wrote about in his Model Engineer article. Some time after he made his machine, he arranged for some to be produced commercially, no exact figure but around a dozen or so were made. David kept one of these machines for his own use, it was this machine that was passed to Mick Collins. The one in Ady1's photo is identical to my own, except for the round table on the drill, the table on mine is square. David's original machine had a different tailstock, the barrel assembly being similar to that of the Myford ML7. There were a few other detail differences so it seems clear that there was an original machine made by David himself which was not one of the commercially produced batch. It was this machine that I was curious about. I have not seen anyone query this before, I just wondered if it still existed.

Dave

Wow!

I want one of those

Neil

Hi Dave,

I was fortunate enough to exchange letters with David way back in the mid 80's, at which time he was in his mid 80's and in hospital. If you have Micks lathe then I guess it's name plate will be Impetus, numbered 5? David had 5 sets of casting done, I know of 1 in the States, as to the others no idea, at the time I couldn't afford the £247 for the casting, plus freight, at the time it was probably a good buy! David's orginal (made in Malta if memory serves, & I think was left there), he made all but the head stock pattern, as it involved a complex core. The ones cast in the UK were made by a friend who was a great pattern maker by all accounts. The casting didn't include the drill press as David had decided to remove it from the design if memory serves.

Ive followed the Stepper Drive lathe series in M.E. & think it's a neat new generation of David's idea.

Hope you find this useful, if you do have this machine I'm jealous! Isaw it come up for sale & was very tempted, SWMBO was not impressed with the hints being dropped!

Cheers Kerrin

Thank you Kerrin. I got a little bit of history when I bought the machine. The original owner bought it at an exhibition (possibly Model Engineer Exhibition?), it was later sold to the person I bought it from. It has been sitting in a barn for many years and is in need of a repaint and replacement of the leadscrew nut, cross slide nut and feed screw. It is complete with the original stand and geared motor (working but noisy), change wheels, vice, boring head and bed mounted drill. It has an Impetus plate, No.6. My wife knows it wasn't expensive, I told her I could sell it for scrap and make a profit. ( judging by the weight of the stand, this is not a lie)

Did David have 5 sets of castings made and use one of the sets to produce the original machine? I had the impression that the castings were made in Malta. David brought back the machine he passed on to Mick Collins (No.5), which was one of the machines produced in the UK, it was this that set me wondering about his original machine.

I am still a little confused about the drill attachment. Tony Griffiths and others noted that they were not supplied with the UK produced machines, which seems to be the general view but I have seen pictures of 2 machines and both these and my own have the drill. Perhaps it was with the casting sets that the drill castings were not supplied?

The likely fate of the other 4 sets of castings is they are either rusting under someones bench or the late owners relatives have thrown them in the skip.

Thanks again, Dave

Not one of the original series ... but I've just noticed a MetalMaster advertised on HomeWorkshop.

MichaelG.

I have got a more or less complete set of drawings and construction articles of the Urwick lathe.

I was planning to have a go myself. I could supplement an article if MEW were to reprint the original series.

I have produced some CAD models of some of the parts for making polystyrene sacrificial patterns for the castings.

If anyone would like to continue the dialogue please contact me.

regards

Mike

Hello Mike,

I'd be interested if you do want to write it up, but a full build series would be excessive as I think few people would be ambitious enough to make one. Coverage of the special features would be good, though.

Neil

The Labormill seems very simalar to the metalmaster with simalar attachments and about the same scoop to do any job.

http://WWW.lathes.co.uk/labormill/index.html

I run the Raglan Machine Tool website on Yahoo and have been asked from time to time of both of these machines.

I have seen the Labormill in the flesh but only pictures of the Metalmaster and I am very impressed by the tasks they both can take on.

I had a dig in the ME stuff and his obituary states that the original MM went with him to Malta but there's no info on whether it ever came back when he returned

He built the machine in part to prove the efficiency of his triangular key gib

edit:

He also used the same system in the tailstock

Edited By Ady1 on 28/09/2014 13:09:16

Mike, It would be nice to see a brand new machine but interest would probably be a bit limited due to the present day cost of castings, a smaller outlay would buy a ready-to-go imported lathe.

Neil, I wonder if there would be any interest in a quarter size model.

John, I have not seen a Labormill in the flesh but it seems to be a good deal bigger than the Impetus. It looks like a very useful machine.

Ady1, Thanks for that! I had not seen it before. Did you notice the tailstock has a handwheel?

Daveb

For convenient reference: here is the patent.

... Click on < Original document > in the left-hand menu.

MichaelG.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 04/10/2014 08:14:09

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 04/10/2014 08:15:49

I had not seen it before. Did you notice the tailstock has a handwheel?

I'm not sure how he moved the tailstock

It's driven by a worm but the handle looks like a direct rack...

spooky

Tonys page

Edited By Ady1 on 04/10/2014 10:41:35

There was a comment on the tailstock in 3480

Having examined the actual lathe, I can vouch for
the ingenuity of its design, and its all-round capa-
bilities. There does seem, however, to be one weak
poinrt in this lathe, that is lack of rigidity when using
the tailstock for betlween-cenztre work, owing to the
fact that the tailstock is mounted on a separate bed
to the headstock. Possibly this could be overcome
by bracing across the outer ends of the two beds,
as is often done in the larger horizontal milling
machines.-Ed.

Hmm, maybe we should stop referring to this machine as a lathe, as that makes for unfair comparisons in functionality and pricing. It is more like a small machining centre than a lathe.

David Urwick himself called it a machine tool. It combines the features of a lathe and milling machine.

btw, the tailstock is rack driven according to the drawings.

Mike

I'm in discussion with Mike and hope to make full details of the Metalmaster available on this website soon, probably after MEW 222 is put to bed.

The issue of bracing the end of the upper bed was addressed by D.U, with couple of suggestions for how to brace it.

Neil

Perhaps a half size might be a better compromise between utility and affordability. Looking at the drawings I don't think the patterns and cores are overly complex but the low speed prime mover might be the stumbling block. Any thoughts?

Edited By Brian Oldford on 18/05/2015 21:21:26

Should have posted this link here before:

www.model-engineer.co.uk/news/article/the-metal-master-impetus-machine-tool

Neil