The noise which matters to you is what is conducted through the feet to the floor -- unless you have it close to a wall shared with another apartment.
The connection from the motor to the rest of the lathe is normally V-belts, or flat belts on a really old lathe. The gears are mostly in the thread drive from the spindle -- at least in anything which you are likely to get up the stairs.
I don't know. Check Logan's web site. See whether a related machine (same size) was available with a quick-change gearbox. If so, expect to have to change the leadscrew, and probably some other gearing in the headstock when you make the change. Or get another machine with the right setup, and sell this one.
Forgot about that one. It's fairly new, I haven't seen one, but have read good things.
The MM 7x14 has the longer bed, "true Inch" feeds, digital tach. Seems like I read that they check theirs out, possibly clean and tune before shipping.
Boy that's a tough call. Given that the Logan has no QC and maybe not an automatic apron, I might lean toward the 8x12, considering you can get
20% off with an email coupon, which makes it $423. And it would be new.
On re-reading this, I have to add - I'd lean toward buying the 8x12 and then trying to get the Logan guy to give me a bargain on it, thus ending up with a good deal on both :) But that's just me.
Ok, so what you are saying is that you would choose the 8" x 12" Harbor Freight(Central Machinery) lathe for $529.99($424 with coupon) over the
7" x 12" Micro-Mark(Microlux) lathe for $495.95(on sale).
formatting link
formatting link
(I guess that quick change gears are not available in any of these hobby lathes). :-(
I'm apprehensive about even trying to convince my landlord to let me use the storage room for that 800 pound Sheldon EL 46 P for $560, or the 900lb South Bend Heavy 10L for $400. So I'll probably just order one of those "hobby" lathes above.
(As for deep *drilling* in tough materials, I can get by for now, since I now have a Rotabroach).
With the problem that it offers a bit more chance for the bed to twist, since it is not as firmly supported. Of course, since it will be on a wooden floor anyway, there is probably not *that* much difference.
That is one (minor) advantage to the older Atlas 6x18" lathes. The bed is supported on *three* feet, two under the headstock, and one under the tailstock end, so it is difficult for the mounting to twist the bed at all. (Of course, this means that if the bed *is* twisted, there is not much that you can do to correct it. :-)
Note that this *may* apply only to the older ones with the bronze bearings (such as the one which I have), and not to newer ones with tapered roller bearings. I've not really had a chance to check on this with one of the later ones.
I would think that this would increase the chance of chatter, but decrease the vibration transmission to the floor.
There may not be a linear correlation between the specific audible noise that the user hears and the vibrations tranmsmitted down to the floor, so I'd think that it is best not to consider them the same thing.(But correct me if I'm wrong).
Also the hard wooden floors seem to me to be more solid than MDF. A better idea might be a flat heavy flat metal base.
Is this called the Atlas 618?(That newsgroup is defunct). Someone called me today and stated that he was selling a mint one for $850.
So I guess it comes down to the specific gear noise that Gunner was referring to.(Though I'd think there wouldn't much much of a difference bewtween it and a nother lathe(all factors taken into consideration). At least he had a solution to the problem that I could use if I found myself with one of these lathes.
A seller dropped his price to $425 for a mint Microlux(see above).
So I guess I'm in the home stretch. I'm assuming that most of you here would still go for the 8" x 12" from Harbor Freight *if* you had to decide bewteen the two. Am I correct?
(I guess my second "learning tool" after this will be a mini mill).
This pretty much agrees with my feelings. What you hear will come from the sheet metal (perhaps) covering parts of the lathe, as well as the transmitted vibration from the floor.
Yes -- but enough mass of flat metal would probably be as difficult to get upstairs as the machines themselves. Perhaps more so, if as a single slab.
That is one name which is applied to it. Mine was a Sears Craftsman version of that lathe -- and a quite old one, at that. And
*don't* get it confused with the *other* 6" Craftsman lathe, which has a serial number starting with "109", and which was made by a company named "AA". This is a *very* flimsy machine, even compared with the little Atlas.
That seems to be *way* too high for that machine. As discussed here before, it is a limited machine, with its major benefit being that
*you* can carry it up the stairs intact, and the motor as a second trip. (This is assuming that you have a table on which to mount it. The table would add significantly to the bulk and the mass.)
The gears of the Atlas above are cast zinc. The ones on my Clausing (and I believe the ones on the Logan) are machined steel or cast iron. The gear tooth pitch on the Atlas 6x18 is a finer pitch, so any gear mesh noise would be a higher frequency. This might make a difference in the sound transmitted to the neighbors through the floor.
It looks like I'll just pick up the Microlux(for $425) for now. Funny thing, is that I had gotten in touch with the seller when I saw him post the ad at Craigslist. And now I come to find that he is the one that had the same lathe posted on eBay two consecutive times(at $399) with no bidders either time.
He also told me that the owner of the company(Micro-Mark) is his father.
Anyway, I'd appreciate any recommendations for starting accessories from that list on the same page.(The 4-jaw independent chuck and the milling attachment are already on my list).
Looking at the list, I'm not sure which I would select in part because I am not sure what all of your tasks would be.
One suggestion is that you find a quick-change toolpost from another source. The one offered has one major problem from my point of view. It has only a single mounting point for the tool holders, so you would have to loosen the clamp bolt which holds the toolpost to the compound, rotate the toolpost, and re-clamp it to switch from turning to facing or boring. Often a project will require several such switches, and a toolpost with two mounting points at 90 degrees to each other would allow you to set the toolpost square to the work, and simply switch holders to change functions.
One reason for a quick-change toolpost is to have a given tool wind up at the same depth every time you put it on the toolpost. (Presuming that you have set the dials for a critical part of what you are doing.)
Also -- when you get a quick-change toolpost, you will want more toolholders than come with the one which they offer, as the toolholders have stops to allow you to set the height of the tool in that holder, so that is always at the right height. Having to change tools within holders is a major waste of time.
An example of one which is probably a reasonable size for your lathe can be found on the following web page:
formatting link
Your lahte is a 7" machine, IIRC, and the Myford mentioned in the list for this toolpost is of a similar size (but *much* more expensive. :-)
I have a similar one (though a bit smaller, I believe) on my Emco-Maier Compact-5/CNC (5" swing), and I find it to be excellent for that machine. I have a clone of the BXA size (Series 200) on my 12" swing Clausing.
The prices of this are significantly greater than the ones offered by your vendor, but these are better toolposts. I would suggest that you get the set (toolpost and four holders), and one or two spares each of the following two:
7-196-9448 4494-48 T & F Toolholder $35.00
7-196-9548 4495-48 V-Groove Toolholder $55.00
You should not need more than one of the parting tool holder (and you'll have to order the parting blade to fit it separately.)
For the parting blades, I like the Mo-Max T-profile ones, and have them (in appropriate sizes) on each of my lathes. I don't see any tool bits for the parting tool in their list, so I would suggest that you also call MSC and register. They will send you a 4000+ page catalog each year, and will have things which smaller places will not have. They also have *very* quick delivery.
Note that I have no financial interest in the vendors mentioned above (New England Brass and Tool and MSC), but I have been a satisfied customer of theirs for several years.
I can tell you which *I* would get. The Bison one is all steel, and has a design which enhances its rigidity. (The toolholder is drawn into firm contact with a pair of V ways in the same direction that most cutting forces operate.
The other is a "piston" style. The shiny buttons in the middle of the dovetail faces presses *out*, so the dovetail wings of the holder contact those on the toolpost, and it is pressed into the direction from which the cutting forces come.
Add to that the aluminum construction, and I would expect deformation under heavy cutting loads (heavy for that machine, not heavy overall). The hard anodize coating will help somewhat against wear, but not really against deformation, IMHO. Note that the usual Aloris style (actually, mine is a Phase-II from China or Taiwan) is the "wedge" style. One side of the dovetail is movable in such a way as to widen the dovetail as the lever is operated, pulling the tool holder in firmly against the flats either side of the dovetail on the toolpost, again pulling the tool holder in the direction that the cutting forces act.
The Phase-II (and some other clones) come with a choice of the wedge style operation (which I got) and the piston style. Another problem with the piston style is that the angle of the lever shifts about 90 degrees when you go from the turning dovetail to the facing/boring dovetail, and this could risk bringing the handle into contact with the chuck jaws -- especially if you hit the handle with no tool holder on the post, say while you are drilling a workpiece in the chuck using the tailstock chuck.
There was a similar absolute difference in price between the piston and the wedge style toolposts from Phase II. I'm glad that I got the wedge style. (There does not (yet) seem to be a wedge style toolpost for the smaller machines, but the Bison one is a clone of the Dickensen(sp?) one used by Myford lathes in England, and of the one (branded "EMCO" which came on my 5" Emco-Maier Compact-5/CNC lathe. I have put a lot of use on that toolpost and the holders (and got a second set of holders from an eBay auction to provide a large enough collection of tool holders so I don't have to change tools between holders often.
I've been considering this whole tool post issue for a several of hours, and perhaps it's the wording, but after studying the pics of these tool holders I don't think I am any closer to understanding all of this.(Which goes to show why live or video instructions are the way to go to avoid steep learning curves).
So here goes... My new Micro-Mark lathe has a "four position tool post" that comes standard with it. Micro-Mark also sells two more. A "Quick Change" tool post(#82506) and a "Rocker" tool post(#82689).
Now these small machines will not have to deal with the forces that a large one weighing several hundred pounds and up will (thanks to the motor which is less than 1/2hp). So I'm wondering if the whole ridgidity issue is as big a factor as some may think.
BTW. The seller auctions the A2Z CNC tool posts on eBay.(The anodized and non-anodized versions). And has an 800 number for questions.
formatting link
?ViewItem&item=7587092107 Darren Harris Staten Island, New York.
Ok, I'll use stainless steel as the extreme because I figure that if I can do it in stainless the softer metals should be no problem.
I don't know what the milling attachment for the lathe will allow me to do, but some things below may require totally different tools. Nevertheless, I still want to see how much I can get done on a lathe before I really need a dedicated milling machine.
I will need to: Bore 1/4" wide, 1/4" deep circular grooves in S.S. Turn down 7/16" diameter S.S. rods to 1/4". Thread S.S. rods to fit rod-ends, knobs, ect. Mill round S.S. rods into square rods. Tap 1/4" diameter holes into 7/16" diameter S.S.rods. Drill 1/8" diameter holes through 1/4" S.S. rods. Mill 3/4" wide, 1/8" deep grooves in S.S. plates. Radius corners to 1/2" in 1/16" thick S.S. plates. Mill out 1/4" diameter, 1/4" deep "cups" in S.S.
This is a form of "turret" toolpost, which can be rotated to bring one of four tools into play. If any stick out the other side (such as a facing or boring tool mixed with turning tools), the number which can be mounted goes down.
In a serious turret lathe with a turret toolpost, there will be an index to allow the toolpost to stop at the same position each time it is fully rotate. This is for production runs. Such a lathe probably also has a bed turret (turns from the end of the workpiece), or a turret carriage (which does the same thing, but which might have side-to-side motion in addition.
On these turret toolposts, each tool must have a number of shims mounted under it to adjust the height to the proper height for the intended operation. This is no serious problem for a production run, where the extra time taken to set up the proper shims takes time off the production of hundreds or thousands of parts. But -- for hobbyist, or prototyping, the time taken for setup of the turret may be for a single part, and thus is a waste of time.
Such a toolpost can be quite rigid, but not very convenient in non-production work.
A quick-change toolpost has an adjustment on each tool holder (which drops onto dovetails or ways on the toolpost for quick change). The adjustment causes it to return to the same height every time it is put onto the toolpost. This is the proper height for the tool mounted in the holder. The only time that needs to be changed is if you change the tool mounted in the holder. This saves a lot of time in both production and in one-off projects. The main trick is to have enough tool holders so you have one for each tool you are likely to use often, one or two spares for the rarely used tools to be mounted in (so you don't have to disturb the height setting for a frequently-used one), and one to hold an indicator for centering workpieces in a 4-jaw chuck, or for checking centering in a 3-jaw.
A good one is quite rigid, and a cheap one trades off some rigidity.
This toolpost holds a single tool, and you have to adjust the height every time you mount a tool in it. And, the "rocker" design changes the angle of the tool as you adjust the height, so the rake angle may not turn out correct.
These are typically the least rigid of the choices, especially if it is a lantern style toolpost. (I've seen rocker style block toolposts which are more rigid, but the rake angle error is still a problem.
They will not have to deal with the same forces as ones weighing
800-5000 pounds (not just several hundred), but everything on the lathe is smaller, including the shanks of the tools, so there is proportionally as much flex in a small machine as a large one. The flex (lack of rigidity) leads to chatter, which leads to rapid dulling of the tools, and poor finish and accuracy on the products.
And actually -- quite a few of the smaller machines are proportionally *less* rigid than their larger counterparts, so the problems of flex are greater. The cross-slide and compound often have too little metal for their size, so you want to minimize the other sources of loss of rigidity.
I notice a difference between 1/2" shank tools and 5/8" shank tools in my quick-change toolpost (which maxes out at 5/8"). Larger machines may have 1" shanks. Smaller machines may accept only a 1/4" or even a 1/8" shank. Even on the 5/8" shanks, I find it better to minimize the unsupported length when the tool is mounted, because even the 5/8" size shank still can introduce a loss of rigidity. Just think what happens with a 1/4" or smaller shank.
I don't like aluminum for serious toolholders, though you might get away with it for some light work.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.