RE: [atlas_craftsman] Curiosity killed the cat.
The print date IS interesting .
Regarding the ‘XXX’ issue I agree it is of little relevance as far as machine tools are concerned , with the exception of one’s memory :>)
I can tell you as I type that my Maximat serial number is C74 something , meaning it was built in 1974 , but I can’t tell you the rest without going to have a look at it . So sometimes if it’s cold outside , or I’m lazy , or both , and there is a relevant question I’m answering I would just type the xxx for the bit I can’t remember !
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of wa5cab@...
Sent: 27 April 2013 05:23 PM
Subject: Re: [atlas_craftsman] Curiosity killed the cat.
About midway through writing that, I had exactly the same thought, and not for the first time. I've put it in the projects que.
There was one bit of information in the post that we don't usually get - the print date on the owners manual that seems to be known to have shipped new with the machine. Although it's conceivable Atlas may have used up remaining stock of the 12/74 edition into 1976 after the 12/75 I have was printed, the odds favor being correct in saying the machine was made in 1975.
I do understand the "XXX" subject on rare expensive collectables like some Collins radios, firearms and vehicles. But it doesn't apply with Atlas lathes. Sellers seldom even bother to list the Atlas or Craftsman serial numbers. About the only interest in serial numbers is to try to date a machine by its S/N. For which purpose one ending in "XXX" is of only marginal usefulness.
In a message dated 04/27/2013 01:07:20 AM Central Daylight Time, carvelw@... writes:
I notice that you go to a lot of trouble to comprehensively answer this recurring question , which is appreciated .
Would it not make sense to transcribe the essence of this reply into a slightly more ‘general’ format and record it in the Files or Database section to which one could refer , rather than writing it out every time ?
Regarding the serial number issue , there are a number of good reasons for going the xxx route – mostly fraud related . Probably not an issue with this group or the stuff we collect (lathes) , but ‘theft’ of a known genuine serial number for some sought after or rare collectibles in order to represent an item as a genuine and traceable original can be a significant problem.
I am dealing with one at the moment where a certain rare item with the same serial number appears in two places on opposite sides of the planet !
If you have access to a milling machine it is possible to carve a new compound-top slide from a block of steel. There was a neet magezine article about doing this work for a smaller Atlas 618 lathe in the July-August 2012 issue of "The Home Shop Machinist" by James Hornicek. He improved the strength of the slide greatly with his better design.
Gary in AZ
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:
> Carvel Webb wrote:
> > Another thing I forgot to mention is that when one is parting off it
> > is a good idea to clamp the carriage and snug up the gib adjustments
> > on the cross and top slides to minimise any slack in the whole assembly ,
> Another thing is to back up the compound slide so that the toolpost is as
> close to centered over the swivel as possible. The worst is to have the
> compound extended so that the toolpost is not over the swivel at all,
> this greatly increases the chances of breaking the top slide as well
> as making the lack of rigidity problem worse.