Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [atlas_craftsman] piston type / wedge type ?

Expand Messages
  • Jon Elson
    ... No, my chuck is only about 90 Lbs (8.25 Phase-II adjustable 3-jaw with a D1-6 backplate). I have a 10 4-jaw about the same weight. I did make a ways
    Message 1 of 11 , Apr 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Brian Squibb wrote:

      >----- Original Message -----
      >From: "Jon Elson" <elson@...>
      > (The tailstock on the Sheldon weighs as much as the
      >
      >
      >>ENTIRE 12" Atlas machine!)
      >>
      >>
      >
      >So the first job will be making a crane so you can take the chuck off then?
      >
      >
      No, my chuck is only about 90 Lbs (8.25" Phase-II adjustable 3-jaw with a
      D1-6 backplate). I have a 10" 4-jaw about the same weight. I did make a
      ways protector that cradles the chuck and slides on the ways. I lift it
      as a
      unit onto the ways, align the spindle with the camlock posts and then slide
      it into place. After locking the locking cams, I can slide the
      protector out
      and remove it.

      I DID have to buy one of those engine hoists to remove the headstock,
      though.
      it weighs an estimated 700 Lbs, and is the size of a big-block V-8
      shortblock,
      at least!

      Really, the chuck is no big deal, it is one of the lightest parts of the
      machine.
      The carriage and apron are killers. I had to flip the carriage over roughly
      500 times while hand scraping the Moglice bedway liner to a fine fit on
      the ways. I put 2x4s on the bed and swung it up on end, then moved the
      2x4s and swung in on over. Definitely built up upper-body strength with
      that job!

      Jon
    • Jon Elson
      ... I read how to do this in the book machine tool reconditioning by Edward F. Connelly. This is the thing he is selling for $92.50 I think in the back of
      Message 2 of 11 , Apr 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Steve Forslind wrote:

        >Sheeeesh! Sheldon is bigger; Sheldon is heavier, Sheldon is tougher,
        >Sheldon is is better.... I feel so inferior... ;->
        >
        >--- In atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com, Jon Elson <elson@p...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >>I have a 15" Sheldon lathe, now, and I do think the greater
        >>gripping power of the wedge design could make a difference on this
        >>machine, as it is capable of MUCH heavier cutting, and is vastly more
        >>rigid that the Atlas. (The tailstock on the Sheldon weighs as much
        >>
        >>
        >as the ENTIRE 12" Atlas machine!)
        >
        >
        >>Jon
        >>
        >>
        >
        >You're right, Jon; I think I'll do the dovetails myself.
        >
        >
        I read how to do this in the book "machine tool reconditioning" by Edward
        F. Connelly. This is the thing he is selling for $92.50 I think in the
        back of
        Home Shop Machinist. A bit high, but a really good book with an amazing
        amount of neat tricks to make tough stuff easy.

        Jon
      • Chris Herzog
        ... All the advice I got was that a wedge was superior just as Jon mentioned but a piston would be fine on a machine the size of the Atlas. The piston models
        Message 3 of 11 , Apr 2, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Jon Elson wrote:

          > mark67chevelle509 wrote:
          >
          >
          >>When describing quick change tool posts, what exactly is the
          >>difference between piston and wedge ?
          >>
          >>
          >
          > Both have dovetails. The piston type has a plunger that forces the
          > holder out from the dovetail, causing the tapered sides of the
          > dovetail to grip against the post.
          >
          > The wedge has a tapered gib that actually PULLS the holder tighter
          > in against the post, as well as exerting a lot of outward force against
          > the tapered sides of the holder. There's no question it holds the tool
          > holder more securely.
          >
          > I used a piston-type post with my 12" Atlas, and I think it was plenty
          > secure. I have a 15" Sheldon lathe, now, and I do think the greater
          > gripping power of the wedge design could make a difference on this
          > machine, as it is capable of MUCH heavier cutting, and is vastly more
          > rigid that the Atlas. (The tailstock on the Sheldon weighs as much as the
          > ENTIRE 12" Atlas machine!)

          All the advice I got was that a wedge was superior just as Jon mentioned
          but a piston would be fine on a machine the size of the Atlas.

          The piston models tend to be much less expensive. I was going to go
          wedge (because it was "better") until Enco lowered the price on their
          Phase II AXA-sized piston post to $89.95 for the post and a complete set
          of folders (www.use-enco.com part #505-2253). I couldn't justify twice
          the price for a wedge (almost twice the price).

          At that price point there is really *no* reason to stick with a lantern
          style post and I haven't regretted it for a moment.

          You need to do a little grinding on the T-slot nut but it's not a big
          deal (it's really more of a "plate" and it's sized to fit a pretty good
          range of applications).

          You'll end up with something that is strong, repeatable, holds well, and
          makes your life a whole *lot* easier!




          --
          Chris Herzog Software Technologies Group, Inc.
          mailto:zog@... http://www.stg.com
          (708) 547-0110 x225 FAX (708) 547-0783
        • n8as1@aol.com
          In a message dated 4/2/2004 11:51:19 AM Central Standard Time, zog@stg.com ... agreed ...but dont dispose of the lantern post ...it is still valuable for
          Message 4 of 11 , Apr 2, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 4/2/2004 11:51:19 AM Central Standard Time, zog@...
            writes:

            > At that price point there is really *no* reason to stick with a lantern
            > style post and I haven't regretted it for a moment.
            >

            agreed ...but dont dispose of the lantern post ...it is still valuable for
            certain reaches /jam up situations .........find many uses yet ....also learn
            how to grind a chipbreaker so there is back & side rake on hi speed bits
            ......the Q.C. precludes the built in back rake of the lantern toolpost holder .....&
            finessing to a tight tolerance/finish goes easier w/ HS..........also
            cheaper!.......these machines were not designed for high speed /high pressure
            carbide tooling .......u will have more residual spring left making finish cuts a
            pain w/ carbide....read that as .005 under , or putting on .010 & getting less
            , then adding more & getting the total after springing out , causing
            undersize parts .......

            best wishes
            docn8as

            best wishes
            docn8as


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.