On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 11:24:09 -0700, "Harold & Susan Vordos"
wrote:

===
==="Roy" wrote in message
t...
=== On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 20:35:46 -0500, "Robert Swinney"
=== wrote:
===
=== ===Harold sez:
=== ===
=== ==="I guess you might say it's a personal judgment call."
=== ===
=== ===Yeah, Harold and a good call it is. The original designers had good
===reason
=== ===to include the pin and it should be left in. IMO, those that rant
===about the
=== ===pin not being really necessary are just looking for an excuse to
===justify
=== ===their sloppy procedures.
=== ===
=== ===Bob Swinney
=== snip
===
=== I think that is a pretty unfair statement. A persons desire to have or
=== not have the index pin is certainly not a reflection of the quality
=== of their work proceedures by any means. Its akin to saying those that
=== use a China made tool to make an item will produce an item that is
=== inferior to an item made with an American made machine. Simply not
=== true as to an index pin in or out reflects on work proceedures or
=== quality of work produced.
===snip----
===
===When you've spent as much time working in commercial shops as I have, you'll
===come to understand exactly what he mean. To the man, those that cut
===corners, be it in processes or how they approach machine tools, tend to be
===not great machinists. The problem is that when they're surrounded by people
===like themselves, there's no one to make them look as bad as they are.
===Those with the greatest skills and ability deal with the field of machining
===in a totally different way. If you've ever worked with someone that has
===that level of skill, you'd know and understand it quite well. They stand
===out. I've yet to see it any different, and I've been on machines since the
===late 50's commercially. The very idea that a feature of a machine is
===eliminated because a worker is incompetent (what else would you call it?)
===and screws up a machine because they're either in too much of a hurry to do
===it right, or don't know enough to do so, is a perfect example of sloppy
===procedure, regardless of the reason. Sorry, I agree with Bob. It does
===reflect on the work that is produced.
===
===Harold
===


Well its your opinion and your entitled to it, but I still dissagree.
Visit my website: http://www.frugalmachinist.com
Opinions expressed are those of my wifes,
I had no input whatsoever.
Remove "nospam" from email addy.