DoN posted:

" Hmmm ... why do you consider a rear drive more desirable? "

Don, my comment was specifically about the Atlas. The problem with the
pedestal drive is that it uses twin v-belts to transfer power to the
headstock. Based on all the reviews I have read, this configuration
produces excess vibration when the tension in the belts becomes
unequal. Evidently there is no mechanism provided to allow the
independent tensioning of each belt. In short, the problem is said to
be one of excess vibration.

Please realize that I don't own this model, so I can't speak from
personal experience. Still, prior to my purchase of the Atlas I had
carefully reviewed all of the published criticisms comparing the
pedestal drive Atlas to the rear drive model. From the roughly 10
reviews available at the time, all cited excess vibration as being a
problem with the pedestal drive 12" Atlas.

Like you, I would prefer having the drive mounted in the pedestal of
the lathe, however I am not ready to pay the price of excess vibration
in order to to obtain it. As an afterthought, the diameter of the
headstock pulleys in the pedestal mounted drive configuration are
considerably smaller that that in the rear drive version of the same
machine. This could be another design issue that contributes to the
excess vibration claims.

Then too, there may be no excess vibration to speak of, since I doubt
that any of the critics ever did a side by side performance comparison
of the two configurations.

Bottom line is that my 12" Atlas does everything I ask of it, including
some milling using the Atlas milling attachment. Since purchasing the
lathe, I've added a collet draw-bar and a collection of 3AT collets, a
milling attachment, face plate, 4-jaw chuck, steady rest, a cut-off
tool, a #2 Morse tailstock chuck with the traditional tang to keep it
from turning, an attachment that allows a Dremel to be used as a
toolpost grinder for small, ground shafts, and the list goes on. I'm
still watching for a good buy on a follower rest, a Jacobs 59B
headstock chuck, a threading toolholder, and possibly a top quality
quick-change toolholder like an Alorus (sp?).

I've already spent more money on tooling and accessories than I did for
the lathe itself, and expect to buy more in the future. One very nice
thing about the Atlas and Clausing lathes is that accessories and spare
parts are so readily available on eBay and other sources, unlike many
other brands.

One last comment about the age of a lathe. It doesn't matter. My Atlas
is about 30 years old, and both looks and runs like or better than a
new machine. The machine's history is far more important than its age,
and the wear and abuse it has seen thoughout its service life is what
really matters. When you chose to purchase a lathe because of price
alone, you are really asking for trouble. For example, you can pay
anwhere between $300 and $2,000 for a 12" Atlas, but don't expect a
$300 machine to be in the same condition as a $2,000 machine of the
very same model. The reputation of the firm that produced the machine
is another factor. Given reasonable care and the availability of
replacement parts, a South Bend, Clausing, Logan, or Atlas lathe should
last nearly forever. The same cannot be said of inexpensive offshore
produced brands, many of which have a useful lifetime of only a few
years. Pretty much the same thing can be said about mills and shapers,
where if you can handle their weight and size, a used Brigeport or
Cincinatti is arguably your best starting point for comparison
purposes. With reasonable care, either of these brands should last
nearly forever, at a price usually less than a miniature, offshore
produced model.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

Kindest regards, Harry C.