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

Re: [atlas_craftsman] Re: Headstock taper

Expand Messages
  • rondodge2@comcast.net
    Drifter: I am talking about a 6 piece of 2 stock chucked up in a 3 or 4 jaw chuck, not supported by the tail stock. If I turn stock between centers it is
    Message 1 of 25 , Mar 5, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Drifter: I am talking about a 6" piece of 2" stock chucked up in a 3 or 4 jaw chuck, not supported by the tail stock. If I turn stock between centers it is almost dead on.
      Thanks
      Ron

      -------------- Original message --------------
      From: "drifter1951" <drifter1951@...>

      > Are you saying that it cuts the taper in stock when you NOT using
      > the tailstock to support the end? As in a short piece of stock in a
      > 3 or 4 jaw chuck only with no centered end in the tail stock?
      >
      > Drifter
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
      > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
      > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
      >
      > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • rondodge2@comcast.net
      ... From: Jon Elson ... Thanks Ron ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 2 of 25 , Mar 5, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        -------------- Original message --------------
        From: Jon Elson <elson@...>

        > across the bed. Compare the
        > thickness near the headstock with the far end by the tailstock. That will
        > tell you how much vertical wear there is on the bed. I wouldn't get too
        > concerned until this wear is above .003" or so. Next, use a large
        > mike or a good caliper to measure the front-back measurement of the
        > vertical edges of the ways. These surfaces are what constrains the carriage
        > in the front/back direction. Again, take a measurement about 6" from the
        > headstock, and at the tailstock end. If there is more than .001" difference
        > here, you have a problem. arubaoregon wrote:
        >
        > >Hi Iam new to the forum and have a question.
        > > I have a 10" Atlas lathe #D5136S that I have had for a couple of
        > >years. Recently I have had to do some accurate machine work on some
        > >antique car parts and found that the lathe is cutting about a .001"
        > >taper per inch when stock is mounted in the chuck. This is what I have
        > >done to try to correct the problem. I have leveled the lathe with a 12"
        > >Starrett machinist level, checked bed straightness, all directions with
        > >a 36" machinists straight edge. The bed is in great shape for its age,
        > >with very little wear. Made sure that the carriage gibs were tight.
        > >Check the spindle bearings for tightness and tried different chucks. I
        > >have made a test bar for the spindle and used a dial indicator to test
        > >for the Headstock being parallel both vertical and horizontal with the
        > >ways. I have found that the Headstock is NOT parallel with ways on a
        > >horizontal plane, the dial indicator reading "mounted on the carriage"
        > >decreases as you move away from the Headstock, meaning that the
        > >diameter of your stock increases as you move away from the Headstock.
        > >Has anyone had this problem? and if so how did you correct it. Any help
        > >would be appreciated.
        > >
        > >
        > Sure, this is a classic problem. Use a micrometer to measure the thickness
        > of the bed ways where the carriage sweeps
        >
        > If the differences in these measurements are quite small (and Atlas held
        > the tolerances to amazingly small limits on their custom grinder) then the
        > only thing left is twist in the bed.
        >
        > If you put a known straight bar (I find 1/2" diameter hardened and ground
        > shafting to be great for this purpose) in the chuck and swipe a dial
        > indicator
        > up and down the bar for 6" or so, you can adjust the tailstock end of the
        > lathe to reduce the error. First, you have to rotate the chuck and
        > watch the
        > reading at each end of the bar, so you know if the bar is crooked in the
        > chuck.
        > If the wobble of the bar is negligable, you don't have to worry about
        > it. If it
        > does wobble, then you need to find the min and max reading at each position
        > and average. Placing shims under one tailstock-end foot at a time will
        > twist the bed
        > quite easily. You won't need to add much shim there, either, probably
        > not more
        > than .010" will often do it.
        >
        > Jon
        >
        >
        > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
        > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
        > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
        >
        > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Thanks Jon: I will give the above information a try:
        Thanks Ron
        >

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • azbruno
        Sounds like deflection. The unsupported end can deflect from the tool more than the end closest to the chuck, leaving that diameter larger. You mentioned in
        Message 3 of 25 , Mar 5, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Sounds like deflection. The unsupported end can deflect from the tool
          more than the end closest to the chuck, leaving that diameter larger.

          You mentioned in the original post about making the test bar and then
          measured with the DI on the carriage. Is it this "test bar" with the
          taper?

          -Bruno

          --- In atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com, rondodge2@... wrote:
          >
          > Drifter: I am talking about a 6" piece of 2" stock chucked up in a
          3 or 4 jaw chuck, not supported by the tail stock. If I turn stock
          between centers it is almost dead on.
          > Thanks
          > Ron
          >
          > -------------- Original message --------------
          > From: "drifter1951" <drifter1951@...>
          >
          > > Are you saying that it cuts the taper in stock when you NOT using
          > > the tailstock to support the end? As in a short piece of stock in
          a
          > > 3 or 4 jaw chuck only with no centered end in the tail stock?
          > >
          > > Drifter
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
          > > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
          > > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > >
          > > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
          > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
          > >
          > > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or
          links
          > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
          > > Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Jon Elson
          ... 2 diameter stock shouldn t be deflecting. If it is, it most likely is loose bearings, not the stock itself. ... Jon
          Message 4 of 25 , Mar 5, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            azbruno wrote:

            >Sounds like deflection. The unsupported end can deflect from the tool
            >more than the end closest to the chuck, leaving that diameter larger.
            >
            >
            >
            2" diameter stock shouldn't be deflecting. If it is, it most likely is
            loose bearings,
            not the stock itself.

            >You mentioned in the original post about making the test bar and then
            >measured with the DI on the carriage. Is it this "test bar" with the
            >taper?
            >
            >-Bruno
            >
            >--- In atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com, rondodge2@... wrote:
            >
            >
            >>Drifter: I am talking about a 6" piece of 2" stock chucked up in a
            >>
            >>
            >3 or 4 jaw chuck, not supported by the tail stock. If I turn stock
            >between centers it is almost dead on.
            >
            >

            Jon
          • Chris M
            whether or not a 6 inch piece of whatever will deflect, thats too long a piece to be unsupported. In all likelihood its coming out of the jaws. I once had
            Message 5 of 25 , Mar 5, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              whether or not a 6 inch piece of whatever will
              deflect, thats too long a piece to be unsupported. In
              all likelihood its coming out of the jaws. I once had
              maybe a 4 inch long piece of 2 inch diameter naval
              brass LEAVE the chuck on my 6 inch Atlas and hit me in
              thd chest! Lets get back to basics folks. And if your
              lathe is turning accurately between centers, that
              should tell you something right there. Fancy shmancy
              indicators and setups can be deceiving.
              --- atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com
              <elson@...> wrote:
              > azbruno wrote:
              >
              > >Sounds like deflection. The unsupported end can
              deflect from the tool
              > >more than the end closest to the chuck, leaving
              that diameter larger.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > 2" diameter stock shouldn't be deflecting. If it
              is, it most likely is
              > loose bearings,
              > not the stock itself.
              >
              > >You mentioned in the original post about making the
              test bar and then
              > >measured with the DI on the carriage. Is it this
              "test bar" with the
              > >taper?
              > >
              > >-Bruno
              > >
              > >--- In atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com,
              rondodge2@... wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > >>Drifter: I am talking about a 6" piece of 2" stock
              chucked up in a
              > >>
              > >>
              > >3 or 4 jaw chuck, not supported by the tail stock.
              If I turn stock
              > >between centers it is almost dead on.
              > >
              > >
              >
              > Jon
              >
              >
              > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
              > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
              > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
              >
              > To see or edit your personal settings, view the
              photos, files or links
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              >
              >
              >


              __________________________________________________
              Do You Yahoo!?
              Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
              http://mail.yahoo.com
            • Ian Porter
              Ron, Have you verified that the two bolts holding down the back of the headstock are tightened correctly? they can make a difference Ian arubaoregon
              Message 6 of 25 , Mar 6, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Ron,

                Have you verified that the two bolts holding down the back of the headstock are tightened correctly?

                they can make a difference


                Ian

                arubaoregon <rondodge2@...> wrote:
                Hi Iam new to the forum and have a question.
                I have a 10" Atlas lathe #D5136S that I have had for a couple of
                years. Recently I have had to do some accurate machine work on some
                antique car parts and found that the lathe is cutting about a .001"
                taper per inch when stock is mounted in the chuck. This is what I have
                done to try to correct the problem. I have leveled the lathe with a 12"
                Starrett machinist level, checked bed straightness, all directions with
                a 36" machinists straight edge. The bed is in great shape for its age,
                with very little wear. Made sure that the carriage gibs were tight.
                Check the spindle bearings for tightness and tried different chucks. I
                have made a test bar for the spindle and used a dial indicator to test
                for the Headstock being parallel both vertical and horizontal with the
                ways. I have found that the Headstock is NOT parallel with ways on a
                horizontal plane, the dial indicator reading "mounted on the carriage"
                decreases as you move away from the Headstock, meaning that the
                diameter of your stock increases as you move away from the Headstock.
                Has anyone had this problem? and if so how did you correct it. Any help
                would be appreciated.
                Thanks in advance
                Ron Polglase





                TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/

                To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                Yahoo! Groups Links









                Ian Porter



                Sabre Computer Services Limited.

                Tel (029) 20768301
                Fax (029) 20768348

                email ian@... and/or i_porter@...

                ---------------------------------
                Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • rondodge2@comcast.net
                Hi Ian: What do you mean by correctly, is there a torque setting for these screws? Thanks Ron ... From: Ian Porter ... [Non-text
                Message 7 of 25 , Mar 6, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Ian: What do you mean by correctly, is there a torque setting for these screws?
                  Thanks Ron

                  -------------- Original message --------------
                  From: Ian Porter <i_porter@...>

                  > Ron,
                  >
                  > Have you verified that the two bolts holding down the back of the headstock
                  > are tightened correctly?
                  >
                  > they can make a difference
                  >
                  >
                  > Ian
                  >
                  > arubaoregon wrote:
                  > Hi Iam new to the forum and have a question.
                  > I have a 10" Atlas lathe #D5136S that I have had for a couple of
                  > years. Recently I have had to do some accurate machine work on some
                  > antique car parts and found that the lathe is cutting about a .001"
                  > taper per inch when stock is mounted in the chuck. This is what I have
                  > done to try to correct the problem. I have leveled the lathe with a 12"
                  > Starrett machinist level, checked bed straightness, all directions with
                  > a 36" machinists straight edge. The bed is in great shape for its age,
                  > with very little wear. Made sure that the carriage gibs were tight.
                  > Check the spindle bearings for tightness and tried different chucks. I
                  > have made a test bar for the spindle and used a dial indicator to test
                  > for the Headstock being parallel both vertical and horizontal with the
                  > ways. I have found that the Headstock is NOT parallel with ways on a
                  > horizontal plane, the dial indicator reading "mounted on the carriage"
                  > decreases as you move away from the Headstock, meaning that the
                  > diameter of your stock increases as you move away from the Headstock.
                  > Has anyone had this problem? and if so how did you correct it. Any help
                  > would be appreciated.
                  > Thanks in advance
                  > Ron Polglase
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                  > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                  > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                  >
                  > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Ian Porter
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Sabre Computer Services Limited.
                  >
                  > Tel (029) 20768301
                  > Fax (029) 20768348
                  >
                  > email ian@... and/or i_porter@...
                  >
                  > ---------------------------------
                  > Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                  > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                  > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                  >
                  > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Bob May
                  By doing that method, you get a lathe which cuts perfectly with no taper in the work. Leveling a lathe is only an approximation to get you close to what may
                  Message 8 of 25 , Mar 6, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    By doing that method, you get a lathe which cuts perfectly with
                    no taper in the work. "Leveling" a lathe is only an
                    approximation to get you close to what may be right.
                    Bob May
                    bobmay at nethere.com
                    http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay
                    http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net
                    Replace the obvious words with the proper character.
                  • Ian Porter
                    Hi Ron, what I found with my 10f when I noticed a similar problem is that the tighening the bolts made a difference when using a mt3 taper test bar installed
                    Message 9 of 25 , Mar 6, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi Ron,

                      what I found with my 10f when I noticed a similar problem is that the tighening the bolts made a difference when using a mt3 taper test bar installed in the spindle and measuring with a dial indicator off the cross slide

                      Ian

                      rondodge2@... wrote:
                      Hi Ian: What do you mean by correctly, is there a torque setting for these screws?
                      Thanks Ron

                      -------------- Original message --------------
                      From: Ian Porter

                      > Ron,
                      >
                      > Have you verified that the two bolts holding down the back of the headstock
                      > are tightened correctly?
                      >
                      > they can make a difference
                      >
                      >
                      > Ian
                      >
                      > arubaoregon wrote:
                      > Hi Iam new to the forum and have a question.
                      > I have a 10" Atlas lathe #D5136S that I have had for a couple of
                      > years. Recently I have had to do some accurate machine work on some
                      > antique car parts and found that the lathe is cutting about a .001"
                      > taper per inch when stock is mounted in the chuck. This is what I have
                      > done to try to correct the problem. I have leveled the lathe with a 12"
                      > Starrett machinist level, checked bed straightness, all directions with
                      > a 36" machinists straight edge. The bed is in great shape for its age,
                      > with very little wear. Made sure that the carriage gibs were tight.
                      > Check the spindle bearings for tightness and tried different chucks. I
                      > have made a test bar for the spindle and used a dial indicator to test
                      > for the Headstock being parallel both vertical and horizontal with the
                      > ways. I have found that the Headstock is NOT parallel with ways on a
                      > horizontal plane, the dial indicator reading "mounted on the carriage"
                      > decreases as you move away from the Headstock, meaning that the
                      > diameter of your stock increases as you move away from the Headstock.
                      > Has anyone had this problem? and if so how did you correct it. Any help
                      > would be appreciated.
                      > Thanks in advance
                      > Ron Polglase
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                      > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                      > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      >
                      > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                      >
                      > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Ian Porter
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Sabre Computer Services Limited.
                      >
                      > Tel (029) 20768301
                      > Fax (029) 20768348
                      >
                      > email ian@... and/or i_porter@...
                      >
                      > ---------------------------------
                      > Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                      > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                      > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      >
                      > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                      >
                      > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                      TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                      You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                      atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                      Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/

                      To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                      Yahoo! Groups Links









                      Ian Porter



                      Sabre Computer Services Limited.

                      Tel (029) 20768301
                      Fax (029) 20768348

                      email ian@... and/or i_porter@...

                      ---------------------------------
                      Yahoo! Mail
                      Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • rondodge2@comcast.net
                      Thanks Ian: I will give that a try. ... From: Ian Porter ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      Message 10 of 25 , Mar 6, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Thanks Ian: I will give that a try.

                        -------------- Original message --------------
                        From: Ian Porter <i_porter@...>

                        > Hi Ron,
                        >
                        > what I found with my 10f when I noticed a similar problem is that the
                        > tighening the bolts made a difference when using a mt3 taper test bar installed
                        > in the spindle and measuring with a dial indicator off the cross slide
                        >
                        > Ian
                        >
                        > rondodge2@... wrote:
                        > Hi Ian: What do you mean by correctly, is there a torque setting for these
                        > screws?
                        > Thanks Ron
                        >
                        > -------------- Original message --------------
                        > From: Ian Porter
                        >
                        > > Ron,
                        > >
                        > > Have you verified that the two bolts holding down the back of the headstock
                        > > are tightened correctly?
                        > >
                        > > they can make a difference
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > Ian
                        > >
                        > > arubaoregon wrote:
                        > > Hi Iam new to the forum and have a question.
                        > > I have a 10" Atlas lathe #D5136S that I have had for a couple of
                        > > years. Recently I have had to do some accurate machine work on some
                        > > antique car parts and found that the lathe is cutting about a .001"
                        > > taper per inch when stock is mounted in the chuck. This is what I have
                        > > done to try to correct the problem. I have leveled the lathe with a 12"
                        > > Starrett machinist level, checked bed straightness, all directions with
                        > > a 36" machinists straight edge. The bed is in great shape for its age,
                        > > with very little wear. Made sure that the carriage gibs were tight.
                        > > Check the spindle bearings for tightness and tried different chucks. I
                        > > have made a test bar for the spindle and used a dial indicator to test
                        > > for the Headstock being parallel both vertical and horizontal with the
                        > > ways. I have found that the Headstock is NOT parallel with ways on a
                        > > horizontal plane, the dial indicator reading "mounted on the carriage"
                        > > decreases as you move away from the Headstock, meaning that the
                        > > diameter of your stock increases as you move away from the Headstock.
                        > > Has anyone had this problem? and if so how did you correct it. Any help
                        > > would be appreciated.
                        > > Thanks in advance
                        > > Ron Polglase
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                        > > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                        > > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        > >
                        > > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                        > >
                        > > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > Ian Porter
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > Sabre Computer Services Limited.
                        > >
                        > > Tel (029) 20768301
                        > > Fax (029) 20768348
                        > >
                        > > email ian@... and/or i_porter@...
                        > >
                        > > ---------------------------------
                        > > Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!
                        > >
                        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                        > > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                        > > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        > >
                        > > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                        > >
                        > > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                        > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                        > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                        >
                        > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Ian Porter
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Sabre Computer Services Limited.
                        >
                        > Tel (029) 20768301
                        > Fax (029) 20768348
                        >
                        > email ian@... and/or i_porter@...
                        >
                        > ---------------------------------
                        > Yahoo! Mail
                        > Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                        > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                        > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                        >
                        > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • rondodge2@comcast.net
                        Hi Jon: Thanks for your input. I have taken measurments on the lathe and found that the vertical thickness of the bed is between .375 and .3735, so that should
                        Message 11 of 25 , Mar 6, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Hi Jon: Thanks for your input. I have taken measurments on the lathe and found that the vertical thickness of the bed is between .375 and .3735, so that should be ok, however the front to back measurments on the vertical sides are between 5.750 to 5.746, so it appears that the bed is worn more than I thought. I will still try your suggestion of twisting the bed a little and see if I can improve it some.
                          Thanks Ron

                          -------------- Original message --------------
                          From: Jon Elson <elson@...>

                          > arubaoregon wrote:
                          >
                          > >Hi Iam new to the forum and have a question.
                          > > I have a 10" Atlas lathe #D5136S that I have had for a couple of
                          > >years. Recently I have had to do some accurate machine work on some
                          > >antique car parts and found that the lathe is cutting about a .001"
                          > >taper per inch when stock is mounted in the chuck. This is what I have
                          > >done to try to correct the problem. I have leveled the lathe with a 12"
                          > >Starrett machinist level, checked bed straightness, all directions with
                          > >a 36" machinists straight edge. The bed is in great shape for its age,
                          > >with very little wear. Made sure that the carriage gibs were tight.
                          > >Check the spindle bearings for tightness and tried different chucks. I
                          > >have made a test bar for the spindle and used a dial indicator to test
                          > >for the Headstock being parallel both vertical and horizontal with the
                          > >ways. I have found that the Headstock is NOT parallel with ways on a
                          > >horizontal plane, the dial indicator reading "mounted on the carriage"
                          > >decreases as you move away from the Headstock, meaning that the
                          > >diameter of your stock increases as you move away from the Headstock.
                          > >Has anyone had this problem? and if so how did you correct it. Any help
                          > >would be appreciated.
                          > >
                          > >
                          > Sure, this is a classic problem. Use a micrometer to measure the thickness
                          > of the bed ways where the carriage sweeps across the bed. Compare the
                          > thickness near the headstock with the far end by the tailstock. That will
                          > tell you how much vertical wear there is on the bed. I wouldn't get too
                          > concerned until this wear is above .003" or so. Next, use a large
                          > mike or a good caliper to measure the front-back measurement of the
                          > vertical edges of the ways. These surfaces are what constrains the carriage
                          > in the front/back direction. Again, take a measurement about 6" from the
                          > headstock, and at the tailstock end. If there is more than .001" difference
                          > here, you have a problem.
                          >
                          > If the differences in these measurements are quite small (and Atlas held
                          > the tolerances to amazingly small limits on their custom grinder) then the
                          > only thing left is twist in the bed.
                          >
                          > If you put a known straight bar (I find 1/2" diameter hardened and ground
                          > shafting to be great for this purpose) in the chuck and swipe a dial
                          > indicator
                          > up and down the bar for 6" or so, you can adjust the tailstock end of the
                          > lathe to reduce the error. First, you have to rotate the chuck and
                          > watch the
                          > reading at each end of the bar, so you know if the bar is crooked in the
                          > chuck.
                          > If the wobble of the bar is negligable, you don't have to worry about
                          > it. If it
                          > does wobble, then you need to find the min and max reading at each position
                          > and average. Placing shims under one tailstock-end foot at a time will
                          > twist the bed
                          > quite easily. You won't need to add much shim there, either, probably
                          > not more
                          > than .010" will often do it.
                          >
                          > Jon
                          >
                          >
                          > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                          > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                          > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                          >
                          > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                          >
                          > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Jon Elson
                          ... OK, that is significant wear, then. You can t tighten up the rear gib too much, or the carriage will bind at the ends. If the wear on the way thickness
                          Message 12 of 25 , Mar 6, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            rondodge2@... wrote:

                            >Hi Jon: Thanks for your input. I have taken measurments on the lathe and found that the vertical thickness of the bed is between .375 and .3735, so that should be ok, however the front to back measurments on the vertical sides are between 5.750 to 5.746, so it appears that the bed is worn more than I thought. I will still try your suggestion of twisting the bed a little and see if I can improve it some.
                            >
                            >
                            OK, that is significant wear, then. You can't tighten up the rear gib
                            too much,
                            or the carriage will bind at the ends. If the wear on the way thickness is
                            mostly on the front way only, that adds to the error. .0015" vertical wear
                            is not a whole lot, but it could contribute as much as .005" diameter error
                            as the carriage travels from the max to the min of this reading.

                            The front/back wear is .004", which would translate to .008" taper on the
                            diameter from the best to worst place. Usually the slope is gradual toward
                            the tailstock, but then reverses sharply right next to the headstock.
                            That's
                            probably where you are seeing your .001" taper per axial inch.

                            Jon
                          • rotootor2000
                            Has anyone put the bed on a surface grinder and evened out the width and thickness of the ways? I m thinking about doing this to the lathe that I just picked
                            Message 13 of 25 , Mar 6, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Has anyone put the bed on a surface grinder and evened out the width
                              and thickness of the ways? I'm thinking about doing this to the
                              lathe that I just picked up. The ways are .570 wide at the tailstock
                              end and goes down to .549 at about 20" from the headstock and than
                              down to .548 just before the headstock. The way surface thickness is
                              pretty even, but someone used a stop that they clamped down rather
                              hard on the forward way and it left a lot of dimples for about 8"
                              from the headstock. It also looks like the tailstock was moved with
                              it not being loosened up enough and looks like it wore the way
                              surface different than the saddle in spots. Can't feel a ridge, but
                              looks worn. Think that surface grinding would clean everything up a
                              little, only thinking about taking a few thousands off at most.


                              --- In atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > rondodge2@... wrote:
                              >
                              > >Hi Jon: Thanks for your input. I have taken measurments on the
                              lathe and found that the vertical thickness of the bed is
                              between .375 and .3735, so that should be ok, however the front to
                              back measurments on the vertical sides are between 5.750 to 5.746,
                              so it appears that the bed is worn more than I thought. I will still
                              try your suggestion of twisting the bed a little and see if I can
                              improve it some.
                              > >
                              > >
                              > OK, that is significant wear, then. You can't tighten up the rear
                              gib
                              > too much,
                              > or the carriage will bind at the ends. If the wear on the way
                              thickness is
                              > mostly on the front way only, that adds to the error. .0015"
                              vertical wear
                              > is not a whole lot, but it could contribute as much as .005"
                              diameter error
                              > as the carriage travels from the max to the min of this reading.
                              >
                              > The front/back wear is .004", which would translate to .008" taper
                              on the
                              > diameter from the best to worst place. Usually the slope is
                              gradual toward
                              > the tailstock, but then reverses sharply right next to the
                              headstock.
                              > That's
                              > probably where you are seeing your .001" taper per axial inch.
                              >
                              > Jon
                              >
                            • Jon Elson
                              ... Hmm, .570 ? This must be a 6 lathe? You need a big surface grinder, and there are a bunch of tricks to doing it right. The technique, I m told, is a s
                              Message 14 of 25 , Mar 7, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                rotootor2000 wrote:

                                >Has anyone put the bed on a surface grinder and evened out the width
                                >and thickness of the ways? I'm thinking about doing this to the
                                >lathe that I just picked up. The ways are .570 wide at the tailstock
                                >end and goes down to .549 at about 20" from the headstock and than
                                >down to .548 just before the headstock. The way surface thickness is
                                >pretty even, but someone used a stop that they clamped down rather
                                >hard on the forward way and it left a lot of dimples for about 8"
                                >from the headstock. It also looks like the tailstock was moved with
                                >it not being loosened up enough and looks like it wore the way
                                >surface different than the saddle in spots. Can't feel a ridge, but
                                >looks worn. Think that surface grinding would clean everything up a
                                >little, only thinking about taking a few thousands off at most.
                                >
                                >
                                Hmm, .570"? This must be a 6" lathe?

                                You need a big surface grinder, and there are a bunch of tricks to doing
                                it right. The technique, I'm told, is a s follows. First, you put the bed
                                face down on the magnetic chuck, and shim the worn places so the
                                chuck doesn't pull that down flat. Turn on the chuck, and grind the feet
                                perfectly flat and equal. Then, you turn it over, and grind the top until
                                it cleans up. Then, you have to make sure the inner sides of the ways
                                are parallel to the way travel of the grinder before grinding the outer
                                sides of the ways. It is very unlikely you would need to grind the
                                undersides
                                of the ways. There just is not much chance for wear there.

                                It sounds like the worst wear is on the front and back sides of the bed,
                                which
                                is what positions the carriage to control diameter. This is about the worst
                                wear I have heard of, with a .022" change in width!

                                You may need to scrape the underside of the carriage for a good fit to
                                the bed ways.

                                Now, you have the problem of how to get the entire lathe back into
                                alignment.
                                The carriage will ride lower on the bed, and this may misalign the leadscrew
                                and rack pinion. You can shave off a little material where the apron mounts
                                to the carriage, but this may make the power crossfeed gears bind. It
                                may be easier
                                to widen the holes and lower the leadscrew, but that won't fix the
                                carriage rack.

                                Jon
                              • Buckshot
                                If you look back through the archives you will find that many have done this. You will also find that it is too big a job for a surface grinder and it ends up
                                Message 15 of 25 , Mar 7, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  If you look back through the archives you will find that many have done
                                  this.

                                  You will also find that it is too big a job for a surface grinder and it
                                  ends up being done on a Blanchard Grinder when it is done.

                                  Doesn't seem to be to hard to get done, mostly just finding a shop with the
                                  machine, and doesn't seem too expensive, IIRC around $200.00.

                                  Buckshot

                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: "rotootor2000" <rotootor2000@...>
                                  To: <atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com>
                                  Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 1:52 AM
                                  Subject: [atlas_craftsman] Re: Headstock taper


                                  > Has anyone put the bed on a surface grinder and evened out the width
                                  > and thickness of the ways? I'm thinking about doing this to the
                                  > lathe that I just picked up. The ways are .570 wide at the tailstock
                                  > end and goes down to .549 at about 20" from the headstock and than
                                  > down to .548 just before the headstock. The way surface thickness is
                                  > pretty even, but someone used a stop that they clamped down rather
                                  > hard on the forward way and it left a lot of dimples for about 8"
                                  > from the headstock. It also looks like the tailstock was moved with
                                  > it not being loosened up enough and looks like it wore the way
                                  > surface different than the saddle in spots. Can't feel a ridge, but
                                  > looks worn. Think that surface grinding would clean everything up a
                                  > little, only thinking about taking a few thousands off at most.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > --- In atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > rondodge2@... wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > >Hi Jon: Thanks for your input. I have taken measurments on the
                                  > lathe and found that the vertical thickness of the bed is
                                  > between .375 and .3735, so that should be ok, however the front to
                                  > back measurments on the vertical sides are between 5.750 to 5.746,
                                  > so it appears that the bed is worn more than I thought. I will still
                                  > try your suggestion of twisting the bed a little and see if I can
                                  > improve it some.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > OK, that is significant wear, then. You can't tighten up the rear
                                  > gib
                                  > > too much,
                                  > > or the carriage will bind at the ends. If the wear on the way
                                  > thickness is
                                  > > mostly on the front way only, that adds to the error. .0015"
                                  > vertical wear
                                  > > is not a whole lot, but it could contribute as much as .005"
                                  > diameter error
                                  > > as the carriage travels from the max to the min of this reading.
                                  > >
                                  > > The front/back wear is .004", which would translate to .008" taper
                                  > on the
                                  > > diameter from the best to worst place. Usually the slope is
                                  > gradual toward
                                  > > the tailstock, but then reverses sharply right next to the
                                  > headstock.
                                  > > That's
                                  > > probably where you are seeing your .001" taper per axial inch.
                                  > >
                                  > > Jon
                                  > >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                                  > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                                  > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                  >
                                  > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                                  >
                                  > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or links
                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                • rotootor2000
                                  Numbers should have been 5.750 - 5.748 . Actually the widest seems to be 5.752 at the very ends. Thanks for the other info ... width ... tailstock ... than
                                  Message 16 of 25 , Mar 8, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Numbers should have been 5.750"- 5.748". Actually the widest seems
                                    to be 5.752" at the very ends.
                                    Thanks for the other info


                                    --- In atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > rotootor2000 wrote:
                                    >
                                    > >Has anyone put the bed on a surface grinder and evened out the
                                    width
                                    > >and thickness of the ways? I'm thinking about doing this to the
                                    > >lathe that I just picked up. The ways are .570 wide at the
                                    tailstock
                                    > >end and goes down to .549 at about 20" from the headstock and
                                    than
                                    > >down to .548 just before the headstock. The way surface thickness
                                    is
                                    > >pretty even, but someone used a stop that they clamped down
                                    rather
                                    > >hard on the forward way and it left a lot of dimples for about 8"
                                    > >from the headstock. It also looks like the tailstock was moved
                                    with
                                    > >it not being loosened up enough and looks like it wore the way
                                    > >surface different than the saddle in spots. Can't feel a ridge,
                                    but
                                    > >looks worn. Think that surface grinding would clean everything up
                                    a
                                    > >little, only thinking about taking a few thousands off at most.
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > Hmm, .570"? This must be a 6" lathe?
                                    >
                                    > You need a big surface grinder, and there are a bunch of tricks to
                                    doing
                                    > it right. The technique, I'm told, is a s follows. First, you
                                    put the bed
                                    > face down on the magnetic chuck, and shim the worn places so the
                                    > chuck doesn't pull that down flat. Turn on the chuck, and grind
                                    the feet
                                    > perfectly flat and equal. Then, you turn it over, and grind the
                                    top until
                                    > it cleans up. Then, you have to make sure the inner sides of the
                                    ways
                                    > are parallel to the way travel of the grinder before grinding the
                                    outer
                                    > sides of the ways. It is very unlikely you would need to grind
                                    the
                                    > undersides
                                    > of the ways. There just is not much chance for wear there.
                                    >
                                    > It sounds like the worst wear is on the front and back sides of
                                    the bed,
                                    > which
                                    > is what positions the carriage to control diameter. This is about
                                    the worst
                                    > wear I have heard of, with a .022" change in width!
                                    >
                                    > You may need to scrape the underside of the carriage for a good
                                    fit to
                                    > the bed ways.
                                    >
                                    > Now, you have the problem of how to get the entire lathe back into
                                    > alignment.
                                    > The carriage will ride lower on the bed, and this may misalign the
                                    leadscrew
                                    > and rack pinion. You can shave off a little material where the
                                    apron mounts
                                    > to the carriage, but this may make the power crossfeed gears
                                    bind. It
                                    > may be easier
                                    > to widen the holes and lower the leadscrew, but that won't fix the
                                    > carriage rack.
                                    >
                                    > Jon
                                    >
                                  • rotootor2000
                                    Thanks for the machime info. Might be going to the local Tech. School/College if they have the proper machine. Cost a box of dounuts or so. Nephew is a
                                    Message 17 of 25 , Mar 8, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Thanks for the machime info. Might be going to the local Tech.
                                      School/College if they have the proper machine. Cost a box of
                                      dounuts or so. Nephew is a student. Have other options if needed.
                                      All should be low cost due to relations.

                                      --- In atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com, "Buckshot" <buckshot@...>
                                      wrote:
                                      >
                                      > If you look back through the archives you will find that many have
                                      done
                                      > this.
                                      >
                                      > You will also find that it is too big a job for a surface grinder
                                      and it
                                      > ends up being done on a Blanchard Grinder when it is done.
                                      >
                                      > Doesn't seem to be to hard to get done, mostly just finding a shop
                                      with the
                                      > machine, and doesn't seem too expensive, IIRC around $200.00.
                                      >
                                      > Buckshot
                                      >
                                      > ----- Original Message -----
                                      > From: "rotootor2000" <rotootor2000@...>
                                      > To: <atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com>
                                      > Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 1:52 AM
                                      > Subject: [atlas_craftsman] Re: Headstock taper
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > > Has anyone put the bed on a surface grinder and evened out the
                                      width
                                      > > and thickness of the ways? I'm thinking about doing this to the
                                      > > lathe that I just picked up. The ways are .570 wide at the
                                      tailstock
                                      > > end and goes down to .549 at about 20" from the headstock and
                                      than
                                      > > down to .548 just before the headstock. The way surface
                                      thickness is
                                      > > pretty even, but someone used a stop that they clamped down
                                      rather
                                      > > hard on the forward way and it left a lot of dimples for about 8"
                                      > > from the headstock. It also looks like the tailstock was moved
                                      with
                                      > > it not being loosened up enough and looks like it wore the way
                                      > > surface different than the saddle in spots. Can't feel a ridge,
                                      but
                                      > > looks worn. Think that surface grinding would clean everything
                                      up a
                                      > > little, only thinking about taking a few thousands off at most.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > --- In atlas_craftsman@yahoogroups.com, Jon Elson <elson@> wrote:
                                      > > >
                                      > > > rondodge2@ wrote:
                                      > > >
                                      > > > >Hi Jon: Thanks for your input. I have taken measurments on the
                                      > > lathe and found that the vertical thickness of the bed is
                                      > > between .375 and .3735, so that should be ok, however the front
                                      to
                                      > > back measurments on the vertical sides are between 5.750 to
                                      5.746,
                                      > > so it appears that the bed is worn more than I thought. I will
                                      still
                                      > > try your suggestion of twisting the bed a little and see if I can
                                      > > improve it some.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > OK, that is significant wear, then. You can't tighten up the
                                      rear
                                      > > gib
                                      > > > too much,
                                      > > > or the carriage will bind at the ends. If the wear on the way
                                      > > thickness is
                                      > > > mostly on the front way only, that adds to the error. .0015"
                                      > > vertical wear
                                      > > > is not a whole lot, but it could contribute as much as .005"
                                      > > diameter error
                                      > > > as the carriage travels from the max to the min of this
                                      reading.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > The front/back wear is .004", which would translate to .008"
                                      taper
                                      > > on the
                                      > > > diameter from the best to worst place. Usually the slope is
                                      > > gradual toward
                                      > > > the tailstock, but then reverses sharply right next to the
                                      > > headstock.
                                      > > > That's
                                      > > > probably where you are seeing your .001" taper per axial inch.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Jon
                                      > > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:
                                      > > You do this yourself by sending a message to:
                                      > > atlas_craftsman-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                      > >
                                      > > Atlas-Craftsman Projects list is at
                                      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman_projects/
                                      > >
                                      > > To see or edit your personal settings, view the photos, files or
                                      links
                                      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlas_craftsman/
                                      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      >
                                    • LouD31M066@aol.com
                                      Worth looking into moglice or something similar to build up bottom of carriage to compensate for reduction in height of bedway. Also a real good idea to
                                      Message 18 of 25 , Mar 8, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Worth looking into moglice or something similar to build up bottom of
                                        carriage to compensate for reduction in height of bedway. Also a real good idea to
                                        examine carriage saddle
                                        area for flat, square and plumb...mine was either bent, warped or defective.
                                        Without spending a great deal more time or money you can improve all
                                        working surfaces while you have it down and in hands of grinder.
                                        Louis


                                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      • Michael Fagan
                                        In general local vocational schools or colleges with machine shops are great ways to get stuff done for reduced cost and it helps people get training at the
                                        Message 19 of 25 , Mar 8, 2006
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          In general local vocational schools or colleges with machine shops are great
                                          ways to get stuff done for reduced cost and it helps people get training at
                                          the same time. Our robotics team needed some parts CNC'd a while back and
                                          we have a good working relationship with the people at the local City
                                          College machine shop. The CNC class wrote the machine code and we proofed
                                          and ran the parts. And provided free labor. We mixed up 55 gallons of
                                          coolant for their CNC that they were too lazy to make.

                                          On 3/8/06, rotootor2000 <rotootor2000@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > Thanks for the machime info. Might be going to the local Tech.
                                          > School/College if they have the proper machine. Cost a box of
                                          > dounuts or so. Nephew is a student. Have other options if needed.
                                          > All should be low cost due to relations.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > --
                                          > "To go where no [sane] man has gone before"


                                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        • Jon Elson
                                          ... OK, that s a whole different world, then. You might check your instruments, and make sure there is no grime or varnish on the ends of the bed before
                                          Message 20 of 25 , Mar 9, 2006
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            rotootor2000 wrote:

                                            >Numbers should have been 5.750"- 5.748". Actually the widest seems
                                            >to be 5.752" at the very ends.
                                            >
                                            >
                                            OK, that's a whole different world, then. You might check your instruments,
                                            and make sure there is no grime or varnish on the ends of the bed before
                                            measuring. Usually, the Atlas beds are astoundingly accurate, and the
                                            thicknesses and widths come out to rational values like 0.375 or 0.500,
                                            and 5.750 +/- a couple tenths of a thousandth, even 50 years after they
                                            were cast.

                                            Well, with only .002" wear at the most worn spot (and I'm assuming your
                                            5.752" reading is either from tilting the caliper or grime on the ways, and
                                            it really would measure 5.7500 +/- .0002") unless there is a really STEEP
                                            slope to this right near the headstock, I don't think wear is the cause
                                            of your
                                            taper problems. The slope of this wear would have to be .002" over a length
                                            of 4" to produce .001" per inch of taper. Well, I suppose it really
                                            could be
                                            like that. You can measure across the bed at several inch intervals and get
                                            some idea of the nature of the wear pattern.

                                            Jon
                                          • Jon Elson
                                            ... The problem with Moglice is you are supposed to make it at least .050 thick. Unless your wear is in that range (REALLY doubtful) you have to mill away
                                            Message 21 of 25 , Mar 9, 2006
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              LouD31M066@... wrote:

                                              >Worth looking into moglice or something similar to build up bottom of
                                              >carriage to compensate for reduction in height of bedway. Also a real good idea to
                                              >examine carriage saddle
                                              >area for flat, square and plumb...mine was either bent, warped or defective.
                                              > Without spending a great deal more time or money you can improve all
                                              >working surfaces while you have it down and in hands of grinder.
                                              >
                                              >
                                              The problem with Moglice is you are supposed to make it at least .050"
                                              thick.
                                              Unless your wear is in that range (REALLY doubtful) you have to mill
                                              away part
                                              of the carriage to provide the clearance. Then, you have to make precision
                                              measurements so the carriage is aligned at a right angle to the spindle.
                                              If you don't do this right, it will make a mess that will be hard to
                                              correct.

                                              Jon
                                            • LouD31M066@aol.com
                                              not familiar personally with pros/cons of moglice. Carriage on mine was so bad it had to be ground and it was done correctly. Moglice had been mentioned
                                              Message 22 of 25 , Mar 9, 2006
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                not familiar personally with pros/cons of moglice. Carriage on mine was so
                                                bad it had to be
                                                ground and it was done correctly. Moglice had been mentioned previously for
                                                this purpose.
                                                I guess I missed the point it had to be a certain thickness.
                                                Louis


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