Christopher Tidy wrote in
:

RAM³ wrote:
Christopher Tidy wrote in
:


But I'm really glad I had the foresight to get my feeler gauge set
out and measure a few screw heads in the electrical equipment and
clocks I intend to work on. Some slots turned out to be 20/1000",
perhaps half of the total. The rest were 25/1000". The feeler gauges
fitted the slots really closely, so I'm pretty sure they're intended
to be these sizes. The gauge fitted better than a taper ground
screwdriver bit. You could be absolutely sure when you had the right
size. I guess this is one of the disadvantages of a taper ground bit.

So I need a set with bits which are 20/1000" thick. The Brownells set
is increasingly looking like the best option. But I'm going to have
to steal myself to make the purchase, as the delivery and likely
import tax will be high.

I notice that Brownells offer two handles. A magnetic handle and a
"clip-tip" handle. Initially I was inclined to go for the magnetic
handle so that I could use it to hold steel screws. But now I'm not
sure as I think the "clip-tip" handle may hold the bit more tightly.
Some magnetic handles do not hold the bit tightly enough. Anyone have
an opinion on which handle is better?



Have you considered Cutting/grinding down feeler gauge blades to fit
into XACTO (or other hobby-type) knife handles?

While their blades may be the wrong thickness for you, the handles
use a collet to hold thin, flat blades.

For the larger sized screws, I think it would be difficult to exert
sufficient torque using an X-Acto handle.

Best wishes,

Chris



Are you thinking about the pen-thin handles or the HD one with the red
plastic handle?

The HD one will let you apply more torque than any .020"-thick material
(that I've ever heard of) can withstand.

The one I'm referring to is shown he
http://www.xacto.com/ProductDetail.asp?id=170

RAM³ wrote:
Christopher Tidy wrote in
:


RAM³ wrote:

Christopher Tidy wrote in
:



But I'm really glad I had the foresight to get my feeler gauge set
out and measure a few screw heads in the electrical equipment and
clocks I intend to work on. Some slots turned out to be 20/1000",
perhaps half of the total. The rest were 25/1000". The feeler gauges
fitted the slots really closely, so I'm pretty sure they're intended
to be these sizes. The gauge fitted better than a taper ground
screwdriver bit. You could be absolutely sure when you had the right
size. I guess this is one of the disadvantages of a taper ground bit.

So I need a set with bits which are 20/1000" thick. The Brownells set
is increasingly looking like the best option. But I'm going to have
to steal myself to make the purchase, as the delivery and likely
import tax will be high.

I notice that Brownells offer two handles. A magnetic handle and a
"clip-tip" handle. Initially I was inclined to go for the magnetic
handle so that I could use it to hold steel screws. But now I'm not
sure as I think the "clip-tip" handle may hold the bit more tightly.
Some magnetic handles do not hold the bit tightly enough. Anyone have
an opinion on which handle is better?



Have you considered Cutting/grinding down feeler gauge blades to fit
into XACTO (or other hobby-type) knife handles?

While their blades may be the wrong thickness for you, the handles
use a collet to hold thin, flat blades.

For the larger sized screws, I think it would be difficult to exert
sufficient torque using an X-Acto handle.

Best wishes,

Chris




Are you thinking about the pen-thin handles or the HD one with the red
plastic handle?

The HD one will let you apply more torque than any .020"-thick material
(that I've ever heard of) can withstand.

The one I'm referring to is shown he
http://www.xacto.com/ProductDetail.asp?id=170

No, I've got the middle one in that picture.

Best wishes,

Chris

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:21:27 +0000, Christopher Tidy
wrote:

DoN. Nichols wrote:

But I'm really glad I had the foresight to get my feeler gauge set out
and measure a few screw heads in the electrical equipment and clocks I
intend to work on. Some slots turned out to be 20/1000", perhaps half of
the total. The rest were 25/1000".


More commonly written 0.020" and 0.025"

From the point of view of consistency, I feel a bit bad describing a
screwdriver tip as 3/8" x 0.025". I was using fractions for the larger
dimension earlier, so I decided to be consistent. Using fractions and
decimals together seems weird.

The feeler gauges fitted the slots
really closely, so I'm pretty sure they're intended to be these sizes.


What this really means is that the slots were cut by milling
cutters of those thicknesses. I've set up to make screws for English
system concertinas (I've settled on M3.5x0.45 since the original thread
matches no current standard), and among other operations, I made a block
which will hold 20 screws in four rows. I have four slotting cutters on
the horizontal mill's arbor so I can slot all of them in a single pass.
IIRC, the cutter thickness for these is 0.0156" (1/64th") -- selected to
match the slots of older concertina endbox screws. Once you are set up
with a single slitting saw size, you really don't want to change
frequently, so they used what they had for all the screws, instead of
making each to a dimension appropriate to the job.

Strange size. I thought the standard M3.5 pitches were 0.35 mm (fine)
and 0.6 mm (coarse).

Many modern screws are made by "heading" the stock which carried
the thread -- bashing it into a die which causes it to take on the
appropriate shape -- and often also drives the slot into it at the same
time, instead of cutting it. Given that, such modern screws are likely
to have slots which are a better fit to a taper-ground screwdriver than
to a parallel ground one. :-)

Good point. I imagine that if the slot is formed in a die, it will end
up being slightly tapered.

The gauge fitted better than a taper ground screwdriver bit. You could
be absolutely sure when you had the right size. I guess this is one of
the disadvantages of a taper ground bit.


It depends on how the screws were made. Clock screws will have
the slot cut by slitting saws in a milling machine (or a clockmaker's
lathe acting as a milling machine).


So I need a set with bits which are 20/1000" thick. The Brownells set is
increasingly looking like the best option. But I'm going to have to
steal myself to make the purchase,


You mean that you will have to illegally take other's property?
Or did you really mean "steel yourself"? :-)

You're right. I did mean "steel myself". Thanks for correcting me!

as the delivery and likely import tax
will be high.

I notice that Brownells offer two handles. A magnetic handle and a
"clip-tip" handle. Initially I was inclined to go for the magnetic
handle so that I could use it to hold steel screws. But now I'm not sure
as I think the "clip-tip" handle may hold the bit more tightly. Some
magnetic handles do not hold the bit tightly enough. Anyone have an
opinion on which handle is better?


I would avoid the magnetic style when working with clocks and
tape recorders, as both can be damaged by magnetic fields. In a clock
(or a watch) the magnetic field can cause alternate layers of the spiral
spring on the balance wheel to stick together. (Not a problem with
pendulum clocks, of course), and with tape recorders, the magnetic field
can magnetize the tape heads resulting in a serious increase in hiss.

I hadn't thought of this. Thanks for pointing it out. I'll probably go
with the "clip-tip" style of handle now.

But the selection really is normally a function of the bits
being purchased. The ones to be held magnetically are very short bits,
while those intended to be held by the "clip-tip" are longer, and have a
groove turned near the end into which a ball detent drops to keep the
tip from falling out. I tend to use the latter design most of the time,
but you can get magnetic holders which will fit into the "clip-tip"
style body when you need to handle less common bits. For example, I
have a set of bits which contains 100 pieces, of which all but 4 are
different sizes of bits. There are duplicates of the most frequently
used sizes and style -- 5 copies of then #2 Phllips, while only one each
of #0, #1 and #3. Same for the Pozidrive bits (Phillips with a extra
set of points in the inner folds of the socket).

It seems that the Brownells bits will fit either type of handle.

Many thanks for the advice.

Best wishes,

Chris

Gunsmith screwdriver bits like the Brownell's are usually hollow
ground so they bear only on the bottom of the slot. Much less likely
to cam out of the slot that way. Admittedly, that'd be hard to do
when working with 0.020" thick blades.

Pete Keillor

On 2008-10-28, Christopher Tidy wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:

But I'm really glad I had the foresight to get my feeler gauge set out
and measure a few screw heads in the electrical equipment and clocks I
intend to work on. Some slots turned out to be 20/1000", perhaps half of
the total. The rest were 25/1000".


More commonly written 0.020" and 0.025"

From the point of view of consistency, I feel a bit bad describing a
screwdriver tip as 3/8" x 0.025". I was using fractions for the larger
dimension earlier, so I decided to be consistent. Using fractions and
decimals together seems weird.

O.K. So go for 0.375" x 0.025". :-) But really -- one does not
expect to stick with fractions down as small as your thickness -- and if
they did, it would be more likely listed as 1/40th. But when looking for
tools (like the slotting saws), stick with the decimal format.

The feeler gauges fitted the slots
really closely, so I'm pretty sure they're intended to be these sizes.


What this really means is that the slots were cut by milling
cutters of those thicknesses. I've set up to make screws for English
system concertinas (I've settled on M3.5x0.45 since the original thread
matches no current standard), and among other operations, I made a block
which will hold 20 screws in four rows. I have four slotting cutters on
the horizontal mill's arbor so I can slot all of them in a single pass.
IIRC, the cutter thickness for these is 0.0156" (1/64th") -- selected to
match the slots of older concertina endbox screws. Once you are set up
with a single slitting saw size, you really don't want to change
frequently, so they used what they had for all the screws, instead of
making each to a dimension appropriate to the job.

Strange size. I thought the standard M3.5 pitches were 0.35 mm (fine)
and 0.6 mm (coarse).

Hmm ... I'll have to check it again -- but it is too late
tonight. Maybe it is M3x0.45 instead. Since it is cut by a set of
chasers in a Geometric die head in production, I don't have to remember
the figures -- just pick up my smallest die head, which normally has the
right chasers in it -- and all else that I have which will fit it are
Imperial sizes.

Many modern screws are made by "heading" the stock which carried
the thread -- bashing it into a die which causes it to take on the
appropriate shape -- and often also drives the slot into it at the same
time, instead of cutting it. Given that, such modern screws are likely
to have slots which are a better fit to a taper-ground screwdriver than
to a parallel ground one. :-)

Good point. I imagine that if the slot is formed in a die, it will end
up being slightly tapered.

Right. It would be really difficult to make them with vertical
walls by that technique.

[ ... ]

I would avoid the magnetic style when working with clocks and
tape recorders, as both can be damaged by magnetic fields. In a clock
(or a watch) the magnetic field can cause alternate layers of the spiral
spring on the balance wheel to stick together. (Not a problem with
pendulum clocks, of course), and with tape recorders, the magnetic field
can magnetize the tape heads resulting in a serious increase in hiss.

I hadn't thought of this. Thanks for pointing it out. I'll probably go
with the "clip-tip" style of handle now.

Magnets can be helpful -- or deadly. :-)

But the selection really is normally a function of the bits
being purchased. The ones to be held magnetically are very short bits,
while those intended to be held by the "clip-tip" are longer, and have a
groove turned near the end into which a ball detent drops to keep the
tip from falling out. I tend to use the latter design most of the time,
but you can get magnetic holders which will fit into the "clip-tip"
style body when you need to handle less common bits. For example, I
have a set of bits which contains 100 pieces, of which all but 4 are
different sizes of bits. There are duplicates of the most frequently
used sizes and style -- 5 copies of then #2 Phillips, while only one each
of #0, #1 and #3. Same for the Pozidrive bits (Phillips with a extra
set of points in the inner folds of the socket).

It seems that the Brownells bits will fit either type of handle.

O.K. That means that they are likely the longer ones (not
enough length to give a grip point for pulling it out with the groove and
tip and the shorter design for magnetic tips. And the longer ones are
more likely to fall out with the magnetic grip, since they weigh more.

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 ---

On 2008-10-28, Christopher Tidy wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:

[ ... ]

O.K. You still should *try* making a screwdriver of your own,
to see just how difficult is is (or isn't).

I will. I actually feel a bit bad not making the screwdrivers, but
there's always a point at which you have to decide what you're going to
make and what you're going to buy. Right now I have too many projects on
the go, and making screwdrivers seems less appealing than the other
projects I'm working on. But when I find a worn screwdriver that I no
longer want, I'll have a go at grinding it and see how neat it turns out.

O.K. After that, you may find yourself wondering why you waited
so long. :-)

[ ... ]

The electric screwdriver which I use was originally made by AEG,
and more recently Panasonic and Milwaukee -- same screwdriver, different
color plastic. :-)

I have a thing against electric screwdrivers. While they may be faster
and have an adjustable torque limit on some models, I find they give
poor control with slotted screws.


Put a sleeve over the head -- just large enough to cover the
diameter of the screw head. You can even get straight bits with a
spring-loaded collar for the purpose. The screwdriver which I made for
English system concertina endbox screws includes such a sleeve to keep
me from slipping and gouging the wood of the endbox. And I never use an
electric screwdriver with those, as the threads are fast enough and the
thread engagement is slow enough to be no problem.

Doesn't the sleeve prevent you from seeing if the bit is located in the
slot?

It guides the bit on center to the screw (ideally, the shank is
the same diameter as the width of the tip and the diameter of the screw
head), and you then rotate the screwdriver a bit to either feel the bit
drop into the slot, or feel the resistance because it is already in the
slot. Granted, a Phillips, or even more so a Torx, requires less turn
to drop in.

As it turns out, I don't often use slotted screws. When I am
building something from scratch, I tend to choose Allen head cap screws
and button head screws with Allen sockets for most things, with security
Torx used for a few things. And I often work on things fitted with a
lot of Phillips screws, but seldom slotted ones these days. And for
wood screws, I prefer the Robertson (square drive) screws.

Personally I think that sometimes a slotted screw head is needed for
appearance. On some devices, a Phillips or Allen head looks wrong.

I've never seen square drive wood screws. Must be an American thing.

Actually -- they were invented in Canada by Robertson (thus the
name) and are usually called "square drive" here. They are far better
than Phillips for the kind of torque needed by long wood screws. They
don't cam out, and can carry a reasonable length screw on the tip of the
driver.

I suspect that they will make their way to the UK soon enough.
They are that much better than the alternatives.

[ ... torque limiting screwdrivers ... ]

There are two intermediate clicks between (1) and (2) on the
electric screwdriver (and it goes up to (6)). I use the (2) setting
commonly on both the 6-32 screws and the fairly common 3mm ones used for
mounting tape and CD drives in computers.

I also have a set of two manual torque limiting screwdrivers by
Utica. 6-30 Lb-In, and 0-100 Oz-In. Both of these also accept 1/4" hex
shank bits (as well as adaptors to a 1/4" square drive for sockets.)
The most frequent use for these (aside from the spare of one which I
keep with my best English system concertina) is in removing and
replacing CPU modules in Sun Blade 1000/2000 systems and Sun Fire 280R
(same system board and CPU modules). Sun considers the torque important
enough here so they supply torque measuring screwdrivers with the
systems -- the one with the Sun Blade 2000 and the Sun Fire 280R is
better than the rather simple design in the Sun Blade 1000. (According
to the manuals, later systems were shipped without *any* torque driver,
but the torque drivers were supplied when you bought replacement or
upgrade CPUs. They also clearly spell out the needed torque (5 Lb-In)
for those who have a general purpose torque screwdriver such as mine.
The jackscrews take a Robertson (square) bit, and are marked with a
fluorescent green ring around the screw holes -- matching the color of
the torque screwdriver body, or the plastic carrier holding the earlier
design (a ring which closes at the proper torque) which slides between
the two disk drives in the system.

Sometime I might get a manual torque limiting screwdriver, but for the
time being I'm managing without.

It is a very good thing to have with expensive tape drives like
the Exabyte Mammoth ones which occasionally need to be opened up to swap
out a 50-pin SCSI interface for a 68-pin one, or for a fibre channel
interface.

They use tiny screws, and fairly thin and soft steel chassis, so
too much torque can strip out the threads in the chassis.

[ ... ]

It is also possible that in some cases narrow slots were intended to
signify that a high torque was not required (there are, of course, other
reasons for using a large diameter screw). But this is just my speculation.


Yes. Possible.

When were these made? And where? IIRC they are in clocks, but
from back in the period when most hardware was custom made by the
clockmaker, or from when production lines and supplies were more common?

Mostly on electrical equipment made between the 1930s and 1950s,
together with a few on clocks. You could certainly buy those big "cheese
head" screws in England up until recently.

Which are relatively rare in the US. The first ones which I
remember were holding together the fuel pumps for my MGAs. I've rebuilt
several of those. :-)

I bought some 0 BA screws in
that style a few years back, but when I went back for more, they were no
longer available.

O.K. Time for a specialty screw supply store. :-)

[ ... ]

It probably also
makes the handle plastic less likely to fail under torque at the
junction with the metal. But the Wera plastic is much less brittle than
that used on cheap screwdrivers, so there's an advantage to start with.


I've never had even a cheap screwdriver handle break on me.
Granted, I don't pound on the ends with a hammer. :-)

The ones I've had break were made from a clear yellow plastic. When the
plastic broke, it looked almost like glass. I didn't hammer them. It was
torque in normal use which caused them to break.

Hmm ... some plastics tend to react badly to certain solvents --
even to Freon TF (a pretty gentle solvent). Anywhere there is stress
(including tapped holes) and any solvent (including oil for lubricating
the tapping), you will develop cracks radiating from that point. I've
experienced this with Plexiglas (I think Perspex in the UK), and other
clear plastics. So it may be that oil from the toolbox worked its way
into the gap between the blade's shank and the handle, and started the
cracks -- and when torque was applied, it split.

The GSA screwdrivers used a softer gray plastic, and the really
good ones from Snap-On (with triangular handles for good torque grip)
were black. Later ones went to square instead of triangular, which I
rather regret.

Enjoy,
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 ---

Christopher Tidy wrote in
:

RAM³ wrote:
Christopher Tidy wrote in
:


RAM³ wrote:

Christopher Tidy wrote in
:



But I'm really glad I had the foresight to get my feeler gauge set
out and measure a few screw heads in the electrical equipment and
clocks I intend to work on. Some slots turned out to be 20/1000",
perhaps half of the total. The rest were 25/1000". The feeler gauges
fitted the slots really closely, so I'm pretty sure they're intended
to be these sizes. The gauge fitted better than a taper ground
screwdriver bit. You could be absolutely sure when you had the right
size. I guess this is one of the disadvantages of a taper ground
bit.

So I need a set with bits which are 20/1000" thick. The Brownells
set
is increasingly looking like the best option. But I'm going to have
to steal myself to make the purchase, as the delivery and likely
import tax will be high.

I notice that Brownells offer two handles. A magnetic handle and a
"clip-tip" handle. Initially I was inclined to go for the magnetic
handle so that I could use it to hold steel screws. But now I'm not
sure as I think the "clip-tip" handle may hold the bit more tightly.
Some magnetic handles do not hold the bit tightly enough. Anyone
have
an opinion on which handle is better?



Have you considered Cutting/grinding down feeler gauge blades to fit
into XACTO (or other hobby-type) knife handles?

While their blades may be the wrong thickness for you, the handles
use a collet to hold thin, flat blades.

For the larger sized screws, I think it would be difficult to exert
sufficient torque using an X-Acto handle.

Best wishes,

Chris




Are you thinking about the pen-thin handles or the HD one with the red
plastic handle?

The HD one will let you apply more torque than any .020"-thick
material
(that I've ever heard of) can withstand.

The one I'm referring to is shown he
http://www.xacto.com/ProductDetail.asp?id=170

No, I've got the middle one in that picture.

Best wishes,

Chris



They're cheap.

The large handle will let you apply as much torque as the "blade" will
handle.

It may be that the chisel blades might meet your criteria with only a
little bit of dulling on a stone.

You can even use it for its original purpose as well. G

DoN. Nichols wrote:

Magnets can be helpful -- or deadly. :-)

I'm going with the Clip-Tip style. I also notice that they describe the
Clip-Tip handle as minimising bit wobble. This is good, as bit wobble
has been one of my biggest complaints with interchangeable bit
screwdrivers in the past.

Sadly the exchange rate is poorer than it was a month or so ago. The
dollar is stronger. I might wait until next Wednesday and see if the
rate is better for me after the election.

Best wishes,

Chris

DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2008-10-28, Christopher Tidy wrote:

DoN. Nichols wrote:


[ ... ]


O.K. You still should *try* making a screwdriver of your own,
to see just how difficult is is (or isn't).

I will. I actually feel a bit bad not making the screwdrivers, but
there's always a point at which you have to decide what you're going to
make and what you're going to buy. Right now I have too many projects on
the go, and making screwdrivers seems less appealing than the other
projects I'm working on. But when I find a worn screwdriver that I no
longer want, I'll have a go at grinding it and see how neat it turns out.


O.K. After that, you may find yourself wondering why you waited
so long. :-)

Possibly so. I just feel like I've got a million and one projects on the
go right now.

Hmm ... some plastics tend to react badly to certain solvents --
even to Freon TF (a pretty gentle solvent). Anywhere there is stress
(including tapped holes) and any solvent (including oil for lubricating
the tapping), you will develop cracks radiating from that point. I've
experienced this with Plexiglas (I think Perspex in the UK), and other
clear plastics. So it may be that oil from the toolbox worked its way
into the gap between the blade's shank and the handle, and started the
cracks -- and when torque was applied, it split.

I think it was just the wrong kind of plastic. A bad design decision. It
looked like that brittle clear plastic used for the lenses of vehicle
lamps, etc.

Best wishes,

Chris

On 2008-10-29, Christopher Tidy wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:

Magnets can be helpful -- or deadly. :-)

I'm going with the Clip-Tip style. I also notice that they describe the
Clip-Tip handle as minimising bit wobble. This is good, as bit wobble
has been one of my biggest complaints with interchangeable bit
screwdrivers in the past.

O.K.

Sadly the exchange rate is poorer than it was a month or so ago. The
dollar is stronger. I might wait until next Wednesday and see if the
rate is better for me after the election.

Hmm ... so it is time for me to order something from the UK
instead? :-)

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 ---

DoN. Nichols wrote:


Hmm ... so it is time for me to order something from the UK
instead? :-)

Could be. It's $1.63 to £1 at the moment. Earlier in the year it was
$2.00 to £1. If you need anything and want someone in England to get it
for you and ship it across, I'm more than happy to do it.

Best wishes,

Chris

On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 03:13:37 +0000, DoN. Nichols wrote:

[...] For example, I
have a set of bits which contains 100 pieces, of which all but 4 are
different sizes of bits. There are duplicates of the most frequently
used sizes and style -- 5 copies of then #2 Phllips, while only one each
of #0, #1 and #3. Same for the Pozidrive bits (Phillips with a extra
set of points in the inner folds of the socket).

1 each of the four Robertson (square drive) bits #0 through #3.

9 slotted bits -- in metric widths. The 3mm width is 0.020"
thick. The 4mm and 4.5mm are 0.032" thick. going up to 0.058" for the
8mm one.

Then four slotted bits with split points.

9 Torx bits from T8 to T45 (The smallest is not small enough for
the Exabyte drives -- but I have those from other sources).

9 Security Tork bits covering the same range, but with a hole
in the end to clear a pin in the screw's socket.

#6, 8, and 10 offset Phillips (the wings are not true radii.

#1, 2, 3, and 4 tri-wing -- like the offset Phillips, but only
three blades.

Metric Allen from 1.5mm to 8mm

Imperial Allen from 1/16" to 1/4"

Three "clutch tip" bits, #1, 2, and 3

Three spline bits -- M5, M6, and M8

Metric Security Allen from 2mm to 6mm

Imperial Security Allen from 5/64 to 5/32 (in 64th).

In addition to these, there is a clip-tip to magnetic holder, A Y
driver -- intended to drive cup hooks and small eyes. a 1" long
and a
2" long adaptor from 1/4" hex to 1/4" square
drive.

And -- a coupler going the other way from 1/4" square to 1/4"
hex.

All in all -- a rather useful set to cover the strange ones
which I don't have otherwise. I already had the tri-wing and the offset
Phillips (as well as normal Torx, Allen and the security versions of
both. But the Clutch (once common in automobile assembly in the USA),
the spline bits, and the Metric Allen bits. [...]

Sounds much like
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/cta...emnumber=91310
which is often on sale at half price.

--
jiw

"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

There have been similar problems with drill bits from China --
marked as M2 HSS -- but being nothing of the sort. Some have caught
partway through the drilling and been turned into reverse spiral bits. :-)


So, the Chinese have caught up with what Japan was making in the
early '70s? I had that happen while drilling through 1/8" thick plastic
glovebox to install a stereo for a customer.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy.

On 2008-11-01, James Waldby wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 03:13:37 +0000, DoN. Nichols wrote:

[...] For example, I
have a set of bits which contains 100 pieces, of which all but 4 are
different sizes of bits. There are duplicates of the most frequently
used sizes and style -- 5 copies of then #2 Phllips, while only one each
of #0, #1 and #3. Same for the Pozidrive bits (Phillips with a extra
set of points in the inner folds of the socket).

[ ... ]

All in all -- a rather useful set to cover the strange ones
which I don't have otherwise. I already had the tri-wing and the offset
Phillips (as well as normal Torx, Allen and the security versions of
both. But the Clutch (once common in automobile assembly in the USA),
the spline bits, and the Metric Allen bits. [...]

Sounds much like
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/cta...emnumber=91310
which is often on sale at half price.

Yep -- that it exactly it -- except that mine is in green
plastic instead of red. (Red would be harder to misplace. :-)

I picked mine up at a closeout bin at the MicroCenter computer
chain.

Enjoy,
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 ---

On 2008-11-02, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

There have been similar problems with drill bits from China --
marked as M2 HSS -- but being nothing of the sort. Some have caught
partway through the drilling and been turned into reverse spiral bits. :-)


So, the Chinese have caught up with what Japan was making in the
early '70s? I had that happen while drilling through 1/8" thick plastic
glovebox to install a stereo for a customer.

Hmm ... I never had that happen with the set of fractional bits
(1/16-1/4") from Japan which I had about 1960. The surface finish was
terrible, but all in all, it held up through all of the use which I put
it to. And a lot of that was powered with an eggbeater drill, where I
could not have an electric drill.

Enjoy,
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 ---

On 3 Nov 2008 02:16:52 GMT, the infamous "DoN. Nichols"
scrawled the following:

On 2008-11-02, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

There have been similar problems with drill bits from China --
marked as M2 HSS -- but being nothing of the sort. Some have caught
partway through the drilling and been turned into reverse spiral bits. :-)


So, the Chinese have caught up with what Japan was making in the
early '70s? I had that happen while drilling through 1/8" thick plastic
glovebox to install a stereo for a customer.

Hmm ... I never had that happen with the set of fractional bits
(1/16-1/4") from Japan which I had about 1960. The surface finish was
terrible, but all in all, it held up through all of the use which I put
it to. And a lot of that was powered with an eggbeater drill, where I
could not have an electric drill.

Surprisingly enough, I believe eggbeater drills subject the bits to a
lot more odd-angled stresses than their equivalent electric or
air-powered counterparts. I've never had a reverse spiral, but I did
have that one 90-degree angle bit that one time.

When I went back to Phoenix in '74 to work one summer (oh, what a fool
I was...she hadn't even waited for me), I ended up putting auto air
conditioners in brand new trucks. I took my air drill inside the cab
and, with a standard 3/16" twist bit, drilled out all of the existing
louvers, using it as a saw. That was a thrill, drilling gaping holes
in brand new plastic dashboards.

--
Everything I did in my life that was worthwhile I caught hell for.
-- Earl Warren