On 2009-01-18, Michael Koblic wrote:
"ATP*" wrote in message
...
"Michael Koblic" wrote in message
...
This item just came up on Craig's list in town.
No information on it from the owners except the usual "one careful lady
owner" etc.
Looking at the net there is a paucity of info: All I gather is that it
was likely made in 1947 or thereabouts and is 9"x36".
A good size, actually.
[ ... ]
Thanks. I spent inordinate amount of time yesterday on the Southbendlathe
group as well as few others.
I went to see the beast today. In the end I passed. Here are the reasons, I
am open to critique of my reasoning:
1) The lather was stored in a Rent-a-container with no access to power. Even
if there were power, the wiring box was exposed with wires disconnected.
First minor critique -- it is a "lathe" not a "lahter". The
work done on it is called "turning" not "lathing".
Wiring status is fairly common on machines removed from
commercial shop service, as they were typically wired directly to the
power line (through the breaker box, of course), and thus did not have a
power cord with a plug.
Whether it would have been disconnected at the wall or at the
box on the back of the lathe is a tossup and does not signify much.
2) The owner knew nothing about the lathe except that he bought it some
years ago from a company that went out of business and "only used to turn
electrical copper armatures on it". He himself, apparently, never used it.
There was some confusion who actually owned the machine, he or his friend
who seemed to do most of the talking. No idea who the original owners were
(this machine is - guessing - 50 years old).
O.K. 50 years old is not a problem, if it is in good condition.
My Clausing (12x24") is now 52 years old and quite useful.
3) I was given a "manual" supposedly for this machine. it was clearly
labelled "Jet lathe".
Clueless -- or they expected you to be clueless. :-)
4) The machine was covered in chips and swarf, not copper either, a fact
somewhat at odds with (2).
So -- they lied. Were the chips aluminum or steel/iron?
5) After cleaning the ways, there was rust, chips and dents. The carriage
could be lifted off the ways near the headstock but not in the middle.
Tightening the carriage clamp to the ways near the headstock so I could
still move it and moving the carriage to the middle the passage became
progressively more difficult. I interpreted all this as evidence of
significant wear of the ways.
This is the significant thing of what you have said. That much
wear is probably too much.
6) The three way chuck
Three *jaw* chuck?
was lightly rusted.
Not a serious problem if the rust is not in the ways for the
jaws, or in the scroll. Light surface rust is not really a problem
there.
One jaw was loose and almost fell
out. I was able to replace it but trying to tighten the chuck the jaws did
not even come close to meeting.
The jaws need to be installed in a specific order (they should
be marked '1', '2', and '3'). If the chuck body has similar markings,
then the jaws should go into the slots with the same number.
You have to have them all fully out, then look in the slot for
'1', and turn the key clockwise until you see the outer end of the
scroll thread pass the slot. Then turn it back until it is just before
the slot, and slide in jaw '1', and turn the key clockwise to get the
first jaw captured by the thread. Then turn the chuck until you see the
'2' slot, and turn the key the same way until you again see the end of
the scroll thread. Again, back this up, insert the #2 jaw, and turn to
capture it, then go to slot 3 and repeat.
Now -- once the jaws are turned to the inmost position, they
should meet fairly closely and close to center.
Of course, if the jaws slide in very easily, they and the chuck
may well be worn enough to indicate that you would want a new chuck
anyway.
7) The gear box was exposed. There was grease on the gears with a liberal
helping of chips. I did not see any superficial damage to the gears.
You mean the one at the end of the headstock away from the ways,
or the quick-change gearbox (if any) on the front of the headstock?
Grease on the gears is *good*. Chips on the gears are not. But
if they are aluminum chips, are probably not a serious problem. Tough
steel chips which have been captured and squished by the chips between
teeth are bad news.
At this point I felt sufficiently uncomfortable about the whole thing and
passed. I suspect there are many here who would have seen this lathe as a
deal of the century at $650. Equally likely, many would have discovered
issues that I missed. Interestingly, when we parted amicably with the owner
he expressed his intention to change the pricing on the craigs list to $800.
At $650 -- *if* it did not have the worn bed, and if it *did*
have the quick-change gearbox (instead of having to change the gears on
the assembly at the left hand end for every change) it would be a good
price. Howeer, as it is, I think that you did well to skip it. If you
could have talked him down to $400 or so, it still might be worth it to
learn on, if not for precision work.
I don't think that they are going to get their $800.00 --
especially if they don't take the time to clean it up significantly and
lube the ways with Vactra No. 2.
The other issue with the machine was it size. When I checked the dimensions
in relations to the available space I would have been pushed to be able to
use some of my other tools, mainly due to its depth of almost 3 feet.
It is what I consider the minimum size of a useful lathe.
Figure out how to *make* room for a machine of this size.
Still, it was a useful experience. I am sure there will be next time...
Certainly. At which point, you will either continue to find
reasons to not buy, or you will dive in and start learning with an
inexpensive machine.
Good luck,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. |
http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---