Satisfaction.....

Charles, you are preaching to the converted here.

For some reason I'm not sure of the pricing of the CVA's hasn't kept in line with some of the more popular lathes like the Colchester even though they were never in the same class.

When you consider that the CVA cost £25,000 in the 1980's when a Colchester was about £4,000 it really opens the difference up.

Most CVA's were bought by blue chip companies like Rolls Royce, British Aero, Plessey and similar companies as these were the only companies able to afford them. When a decent S/H Colchester cost about £3,000 you can get a CVA for about a grand and the difference is like night and day.

-- Regards,

John Stevenson Nottingham, England.

Visit the new Model Engineering adverts page at:-

same class.

Keep talking them up, chaps, I'll have one for sale soon

Seriously, I totally agree, but no ordinary mortal can justify owning three of them. ....Though if I had the space, I could try ;-) When I got rid of my Ward capstan lathe, I bought a Schaublin bed capstan with the plan to adapt it to a CVA for occasional use, though it's still in the Pending department. Given the space, I could have it permanently set up on one lathe, probably the only CVA-Schaublin in existence

Tim

line with some of

in the same class.

ester was about

Aero, Plessey and

When a decent S/H

the difference is

Charles, pleased your reaction is the same as mine.. Tim, have you really got three? I would like a taper turning attachment for mine, I don't suppose you've got one have you?

Andy Cawley

with some of

the same class.

Aero, Plessey and

a decent S/H

difference is

If he keeps them any longer he'll have four with the dark nights drawing in and the breeding season starting...........

I can't confirm this one way or another but it's my view that they were ordered and built with taper turning if needed. So far I have never heard of one for sale unless it was off a scrapped one and many are looking.

It's not something that can just bolt on as an attachment as the whole cross slide is different and possibly the feed screw as well. This is why I think they could have been a pre-order to make sure they could get everything lined up to the accuracy they needed.

Tim is the best judge of this as he has one of each.

-- Regards,

John Stevenson Nottingham, England.

Visit the new Model Engineering adverts page at:-

line with some of

the same class.

was about

Aero, Plessey and

When a decent S/H

difference is

Yes there are quite a few different parts, including the feed screw and its associated thrust bearings etc.

Yes I've got three of them (only two here at the moment),only one of them with taper turning. One will be for sale soon, but it won't be the one with the TT.

Cheers Tim

It's like waiting for a Bus, none for ages, then...

Just noticed one for sale on the inside back page of this months MEW, from Home and Workshop machinery. It's a model A and is on offer for the princely sum of £495. Which is only twice as much as a coolant system for a Myford shown further down the page.

Says it all really.

Peter (with not enough room in the garage)

....and roughly half what they're asking for a Denford Viceroy with no screwcutting gearbox. Nothing wrong with a Viceroy for what it is (I had one for a while), but a toy compared with the CVA. Mind you, the one at H&W doesn't seem to be quite ready to roll, there are one or two bits missing.

Tim

Yes but Steve is an optimist !

AWEM

You could fit it in if you got rid of the washing machine.

Given what's not there on that lathe it'll be the best part of £1000 by the time you've got chucks, face plate and toolpost so it's no bargain. The lathe does have a "rebuilt by...." label on it so it *might* be worth the effort but it would still be an expensive CVA. And no, I don't need another. One CVA is enough for most people. Tim Leech now has 3 and there's a danger that they'll start breeding.

Charles

It's got a chuck with a backplate that can be copied. Toolposts are just lumps of iron and JS's drawings (of get another Multifix out of the cupboard :-). I'd be more worried about the claims that:-

"needs a couple of change wheels for the gearbox drive and a toolpost selling as is"

That statement makes is sound as if it's only fit for the knackers.

OTOH, if I wasn't up to my arse in rebuilding Hardinge and Beaver, I'd probably be looking for a CVA and would have been tempted to knock them down on this one.

What do you reckon.. (Hardinge HLV and CVA Mk 1A Series 3) or (Myford ML7 and Hardinge HLV)? Do you think I should offer them a swap for an ML7 :-)

Mark Rand RTFM

Nah, every home should have two!

Cheers Tim

If you have a lathe of that type and vintage, it's probably essential to have a second one for spares, though a third could be considered bordering on the obsessional :-).

Doesn't look like a particularly good deal to me. Looks like it's had a very busy life, not much tlc along the way and there are very few accessories, which is where all the real value is. Wait long enough and everything eventually seems to turn up at auction or on Ebay at half what a dealer would charge and I tend to wait in a zen like trance, willing it to happen, (well, sortof) until just the right machine turns up.

A CVA is a beautifull piece of kit though, but there are alternatives. I'm looking at something else at the mo, even though am still in the process of rebuilding the Boxford. Strange how this machine tool stuff can become obsessive, but hopefully more positive news on that next week.

How about a Holbrook 5x20 Minor for example ?. Looks even better than the CVA.

Beautifull, understated looking machine. Art in metal imho...

Chris

Chris

I've never seen a Holbrook Minor in the flesh although they look very nice from the description. But you can really compare it to a CVA. One is 5"x 20" and 3/4 tons and the other is 6.5" x 30" and 1.5 tons. Apples and oranges. Compare the Holbrook Minor to a Hardinge if you feel the need, or even a Boxford if you want to depress yourself.

Charles

Having moved one of Tim's lathes (Ward 2A) both in, and then a couple of years later, out again, it seems that there is 'possibly' more fun in playing with the machines than actually using them....

Having said that, Tim does seem to get more out of his than most!

Peter

-- Peter & Rita Forbes Email: snipped-for-privacy@easynet.co.uk Web:

Just in case I get tempted - how much floor space is needed and is the spindle nose D1 3 camlock?

Jim

D1 3 camloc. Length 72"

Email me if you want more info or a floor plan etc.

Charles

I would agree that you really can compare it to a cva, in terms of the level and long term repeatability of precision the machine is capable of. However, it's meaningless to compare the machine weight and for the sort of work that I need to do, the added swing or bed length is irrelevant. Like the difference between any world class vs average product, it's what's under the skin that counts.

Anything else is just willy waving, imho :-). Sorry, argumentative mood tonight obviously...

Chris

Actually it's all been entirely logical, I can explain if you've got half an hour spare Well it was logical until CVA No3, I put a bid in because it was just down the road, really, and it has some good points though it may be a bit of a curate's egg. I didn't expect to be the high bidder!

They certainly do get used, though sometimes sporadically.

Tim

Chris

My comment was that you shouldn't compare apples with oranges. I didn't say that one was better than the other. I just indicated that they're made for different purposes and will suit differebt work.

Taking the bait I'd suggest that your methodology means that it's OK to compare a DSG17T with a Hardinge or Holbrook Minor. The redundant 3

1/2" of centre height or 28" of bed length are both immaterial because the "long term repeatability and precision" are comparable? Only when viewed through the lens of "the sort of work that I need to do".

Equally argumentative tonight

Charles