Trying to ID an antique lathe

I was send this photo with no description today (probably in response to a
wanted ad of mine, we'll find out) and I'm trying to ID the old girl. All I
know is what's in the photo--immensly old, cross and apron look homemade, has a
backgear and jackshaft.
In the dropbox as "oldlathephoto.jpg".
Anyone know what this thing is? My knowledge of antique machines is lacking.
Also, any idea of worth (in northeast MA), assuming average condition? I know
that the extremely old models aren't worth nearly as much as, say, an SB9.
GTO(John)
Reply to
GTO69RA4
Loading thread data ...
Without the makers plate (or legs with the name cast in) still attached, it's pretty generic old lathe, though I suspect there might be an expert who could, with approapriate photos of details, match it to a particular factory despite that. I'll assume you've not just missed a makers mark in the deep layers of scunge which build up on old lathes?
It bears some overall similarity in style to my 1880's era FE Reed from Worcester, Mass. But many lathes of that era look quite similar. IMHO and IME, not worth much, unless it runs surprisingly well and you have the right buyer. I have bought (from estate sales) lathes twice the size with all factory-made parts (of similar vintage) for $250-$400. Of course, there may be some lowering of price as difficulty of moving goes up with size...but those crude-looking homemade parts are off-putting.
Reply to
Ecnerwal
Thanks. Like I said, I just have this photo, so no idea if there's a tag somewhere. I did a lot of poking through lathes.co.uk and it seems to be a Barnes, minus the stand, seat, and pedals. Apron is probably original, but the cross still looks shopmade.
GTO(John)
Reply to
GTO69RA4
How you doing up there John? That's an old one alright, The photo is hard to see much detail, who ever has it sure has alot of "Stuff"
Reply to
Wayne
The apron and the dual lead screw identifiy that as a Barnes machine. See also:
The shape of the tailstock is quite distinctive as well. Lennie (a regular here) can give more particulars to identifiy the individual machine.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
Reply to
jim rozen
Looks awfully similar to my WF&John Barnes. Can't tell from the pic if it has twin leadscrews or not, headstock and tailstock very similar, Barnes had no compound, the cross slide could be angled.
Reply to
Lennie the Lurker
Resized and enhanced, it's a Barnes. Change gear is on the upper leadscrew, evident that it doesn't line up with the visible lower screw. Jackshaft not original, pedals might have been more like it. Date possibly from 1890's. Legs would have attached several inches from each end of the bed, two bolts in each. Seat attached in about the middle of the bed, oh hell, look at the lathes website, good pics there. IF you don't want it, steer him my way, mine isn't in very good shape, sat outside in the leaves in parts for a couple of years.
Reply to
Lennie the Lurker
It's a barnes, but apparently some of them did have compounds. This may have been an add-on option at the time of purchase, I've seen seneca falls machines with, and without them. The older ones tend to not have them.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
Reply to
jim rozen
Directly below the lower leadscrew, on the flange part of the bed is the model number, pic is not good enough, I can't bring it out at all. My guess would be a Barnes #4 1/2, identifying it as a 9" swing machine. The cross slide is not home built, it's original as it is, identical to mine. If complete, with legs, pedals, seat, it would be worth some bucks. Not sure what incomplete machines bring, probably not much. Threading chart was a brass plate riveted to the leg at the headstock end, mine is still there and even readable.
Like I said, if you're not interested, I am.
Reply to
Lennie the Lurker
Thanks for the info. The guy with it sent me another photo, of the headstock, cross slide, and DIY jackshaft. See "oldlathephoto2.jpg" in the dropbox. Is that the original cross?
I'll probably have a look at it as soon as the guy will cough up a time. I hope that more tooling and the rest of the changegears are around, as this was used by the late father of the seller.
GTO(John)
Reply to
GTO69RA4
It's different from mine, but that could mean it was made for toolroom use or it might have been built with a larger cross slide if it was intended for line shaft power. Mine was originally foot powered, but that part of it is what I don't have. Change gearing for them is standard 20Dp gears (I think), Boston has them, although pricey.
Reply to
Lennie the Lurker
I have a sneaky suspicion that the compound slide on that machine was either a home-made copy of, or a direct adaption of a real Hardinge DSM top slide. The handle and dial, if any, are not correct. But the full-width T-slot across the end of the slide is pretty reminiscent.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
Reply to
jim rozen
Could well be. Looking through the lathe site, I think it was on the larger models before a good shot of the cross slide was shown, and the slide appears as mine is, tiny. However, I have several compound slides here, from machines unknown, and the T-slot on many of them is similar to the one in the picture. As is the length and flat top on them. One of the larger Barnes shots Tony has shows a "Boring" table attached, but don't know if it was something attached or if that's how the machine was built. But, if it's a #4 1/2 or #5, it might be safe to assume it's a modification. Still a pretty cool old machine though. The old foundrymen knew how to cast some of the most beautiful curves.
Reply to
Lennie the Lurker
Agreed. Seeing the modern stuff it just looks so boxy. The tailstock in particular on those barnes machines seems quite artistic. The headstock on my seneca falls machine has the reverse tumbler setup incorporated *inside* the casting - that must have taken some doing.
The add-on compound in his barnes machine looks like a hardinge DSC slide but as you say the size seems a bit off - too small. If it were it would have hardinge's stamp on the upper surface I think.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
Reply to
jim rozen
Thanks for all the info, guys. I'll see what's with the cross slide when I go to look at it. Unless the guy wants something unreasonable for it (over $100-150?) or it's in terrible condition, I'll probably buy it. Hopefully the rest of the gears and tooling are down there somewhere.
It'll be intersting to see how machining is on this thing--I've never used one from the 1800s. Also'll be nice to finally own a real lathe. Other than an abortive SB9 restoration (needed cabinet, underdrive, changegears, oilers, all small wear parts, assorted small castings, and had a scored rear bearing) soon to be parted out, I'm currently a vintage Unimat guy.
GTO(John)
Reply to
GTO69RA4
Oh, by all means search high and low for that stuff. Ask if there's anything else that goes with the machine, boxes, crates, barrels, etc.
My personal nightmare is that I kick off, and Ms. Mulligan winds up parting out my shop - and the old lathes get sold without the change gears, and the newer stuff gets sold without the tooling that belongs to it, and all the bike parts get thrown in the trash because nobody can figure out what they're for, and all the special bike tools get thrown in the trash, because, well, 'they look like just scrap metal.'
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
Reply to
jim rozen
I haven't been through this yet, but it seems to me that photograph albums are the solution. You don't even need to have prints, digital albums should be just fine. In fact, once you get into the swing, the lower cost of digital images should encourage much more complete coverage of the accumulation.
One side bonus of this would be the documentation value for homeowner's insurance claims as well. I keep a high deductible, but a big loss (like a fire - K.O.W.) would be crippling for a while.
I've still got bins of tools and tooling from my grandfather that I'm cleaning and identifying, and he didn't have nearly the stuff you've shown in dropbox pictures.
Pete
Reply to
Pete Bergstrom
I posted some pics in the dropbox of my brother's lathe, which he is "storing" at my house. If I can believe the legs it's a B. F. Barnes, a single-lead-screw model, sold by C. W. Marwedel of San Francisco (by the dealer's plate). Anyone know of the age of this one?
Reply to
Hitch
The ridge halfway up is there for a purpose, it's where you adjust the setover. Mine may have moved at one time, but I think those days are long past.
I also have a Barnes drill and the foundry work on it is also beautiful, "Leave no bracing uncurved." Guess it just doesn't look "modern" anymore, much to our loss.
Reply to
Lennie the Lurker
If it isn't worn so badly it can't be adjusted, they're beautiful to run. Not fast, but they can do very fine work. Oh, yeah. "Dials? We don't need no stinking dials." Don't look for any, they probably won't be there.
Reply to
Lennie the Lurker

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.