Going To Buy A Lathe... Thoughts, Input Solicited By Inexperienced Dufus

Taper attachment?? Ho humm. Yawn. Of course, nice to have. Really not something that gets used very much (an opinion pole comes out every year or two). The reason I'd advise you not to worry about that is because: 1. you can usually work around the issue some how, 2. the range of application is pretty limited (for how steep the angle and how long the run). Definitely, if you cut quite a few tapers that are within the capabilities of the taper attachment, then it is awesome to have. However, don't pass on an otherwise nice machine, just because it does not have a taper attachment.

I have two lathes, both have taper attachments that are straight forward and easy to use. I have used both of them. On my 15" lathe I have used it once in the 33 years I have had the machine. On my 11" lathe I have used it once in the 4 years I have had the machine (and I could have used the other lathe but I wanted to be able to say I had used the TTA).

I hear you. On the other hand, if you plan on making a some things that you will make a large number of, and you know you'll want a consistent taper, the taper attachment really improves repeatable results, doesn't it? Just my observation that if want to make something with the exact same taper 3 dozen copies, a taper attachment should help me make efficient work of that. I'm hoping anyway. On the other hand, I see your point. I suppose it would be possible to make a template and figure out how to use it as a guide and do the same thing, kinda sorta, if I'm catching your drift. I've done that with a wood lathe and some table legs I turned once upon a time. Table would have looked odd with four completely different legs, and those weren't a simple linear taper either. Still my coffee table 20-odd years later.
 
Last edited:
Thanks to everyone who's welcomed me and responded to this thread. I very much appreciate all of your input!

Okay Jim, so let me ask you, because you seemed to be supportive early on of something I said about a lathe I'm currently considering(and hope to inspect this weekend.) It's pretty clear from what I can gather that the machine in question is missing some electrical components, maybe a stepdown transformer of some sort that handles control circuits, and maybe some other odds and ends, and the motor might be toast(or not.) Rather than getting into the weeds of the specific lathe just now, let me ask some hopefully sensible questions:

I want to inspect it mechanically, but as Splat suggested up above, my experience for that chore is limited to the fact that I'm able to see things that are obviously broken, chipped, damaged, and worn. More subtle things will be more troublesome. For instance, I can tear the lid off the gearbox and see if there are broken/chipped/damaged gears, or if there is an unusually large amount of ground metal particles in the oil, and at least theoretically, I should be able to make some rudimentary assessment of how much lash there is between matching gears and so on. Knowing what is too much is another matter. I mean, I've worked with a lot of equipment for a long time, and while I'm a novice machinist(at best,) I can take measurements and find obvious mechanical problems quite well. What scares me more is the subtle things, the things I don't know that I don't know, so to speak. For instance, I imagine a lathe of the age I'm looking at right now could well have some spindle bearing issues. I imagine there are all sorts of things like that I'll have more trouble spotting. (And a worn bearing isn't a deal-breaker either if I can source a replacement.) Of course, the idea is if the totality of the wear and tear on the machine is such that I'm going to spend more fixing it than it would ever be worth, or that it's going to take me years to afford to get it up and running, then probably very foolish to buy.

Another area where my inexperience will harm me is in inspecting the ways and so on. Obviously, if you want any hope of making even reasonably precise parts, the condition and wear of the ways and the lead screw and so on will be important. How much free play exists here and there will also affect my ability to make parts.

Given all of this, do you have a checklist or could you help me construct one that would help a newbie like me not miss something big and ugly(though subtle to my eyes?) And here, I direct this not specifically to you Jim, but to any and everybody. Even if I can't have experienced machinists' eyes on the lathe, what I know is that machinists' eyes are only the sensor for a much more powerful asset which is their minds. I have decent eyes, and I can communicate, so knowing what to look for and where to look for it will help me, and may give me the opportunity to ask a question of the more experienced minds here.

I will try to have more particulars put together, and I will take a bazillion pictures when I go to inspect it. A good idea might be what tools I ought to take on my inspection trip. I already have a fair idea of what I'll need(I think!!!) but you folk will know much better than I. I've got about a 3 hour drive to get there, maybe 2-1/2 if I don't run into traffic and don't dawdle. The machine is not under power. This limits things I can check, obviously. I do need to look at the mechanical aspects of the machine closely, particularly because I won't be able to operate it under power.

One other thing I'm tempted to hold off on discussing is the electrical aspects. I'm tempted to hold off because I don't want to muddy the waters. After all, even if I discover this lathe is just too bad a shape to consider, this should provide a good exercise in inspecting a lathe and a good learning opportunity for me. So basically, I would want to do this just to help me learn even if I knew in advance that I probably wouldn't buy the lathe. Of course, if it wasn't a possibility, I wouldn't want to waste the guy's time either. So let's make a momentary and huge assumption for the sake of argument/consideration:

Let's pretend for a moment that I do the inspection of the lathe and decide that I don't see anything so big and ugly to make me run for the hills, particularly after further consultation with folks here. If I decided to proceed with the purchase of this lathe, I know already there are going to be electrical issues. One of those issues is likely to be the motor. Would I be well-advised to consider putting a new motor on it, and if so, would it be advisable to go with a single-phase unit? I don't have native 3-phase power coming into my shop. I have single phase, and I'll never have more than 230v. That said, I've thought about a rotary phase converter many times because I've wanted a new compressor for the shop, and I often see bargains in 3 phase units because so few people can power them in their home workshops and garages. I also know I'll be looking for a milling machine pretty soon also. So 3 phase power may be a necessity anyway. I'm just soliciting some very premature and preliminary advice from people who know a heck of a lot better than I. I yield the floor... Thanks!
 
In general I look at overall condition. In other words has the machine been well cared for or has it been beat to death. Lack of lubrication on the ways is the biggie. Deep scratches or scoring on the ways is a dead giveaway that the lathe has had a rough life. Also look at the cross slide ways. Dirty doesn't bother me, but look under the dirt even if it requires some solvent (WD-40) and a rag.

Look for wear on the lead screw by visually comparing the threads on the headstock end with the threads on the tailstock end. If they look pretty much the same shape, then little wear is present.

Backlash in the cross slide is not a show stopper, 10-50 thousandths is reasonable. The less the better.

Since the lathe is not under power you can't test run it, but turn the spindle by hand and run it through all of the gears (assuming it's a gearhead), and work all of the levers on everything just to make sure everything ''feels'' somewhat normal. Pull the cover off of the back of the headstock and look at the gear train.

There is probably a lot more that I can't think of right now.
 
In general I look at overall condition. In other words has the machine been well cared for or has it been beat to death. Lack of lubrication on the ways is the biggie. Deep scratches or scoring on the ways is a dead giveaway that the lathe has had a rough life. Also look at the cross slide ways. Dirty doesn't bother me, but look under the dirt even if it requires some solvent (WD-40) and a rag.

Look for wear on the lead screw by visually comparing the threads on the headstock end with the threads on the tailstock end. If they look pretty much the same shape, then little wear is present.

Backlash in the cross slide is not a show stopper, 10-50 thousandths is reasonable. The less the better.

Since the lathe is not under power you can't test run it, but turn the spindle by hand and run it through all of the gears (assuming it's a gearhead), and work all of the levers on everything just to make sure everything ''feels'' somewhat normal. Pull the cover off of the back of the headstock and look at the gear train.

There is probably a lot more that I can't think of right now.

Thanks Jim, I had thought about that I should be able to carefully work the gears and so on. I already told the guy I'd be bringing some tools because I need to look in the gearbox. Nice thing about this one is that I should be able to run it through its gears and actually observe the gears, based on the layout of the headstock, the lid of the gearbox being on top. I'm hoping that will help me spot any trouble in the gearbox. The lead screw idea is a good one, because at the extreme end, it shouldn't get much wear at all. I should be able to compare at a few spots along its length to get an idea about wear. The ways are the thing that's harder to judge in my lack of experience. I mean yes, I can see gouges and pits and significant scoring. One lathe I had looked at probably suffered from a lack of lube over a long period and the same operation over the same short span (relatively) of the ways over and over, and there was a visible dip of which you could actually see a beginning and end. If I can SEE something like that in the ways, I consider it a "run, don't walk" situation. I have no ambition for the kind of restoration work a machine in that condition would require, if salvageable at all. If you(or others) think of more things between now and Saturday afternoon, list them here. I will check back often and make a list. Thanks!
 
Okay, so where I stand... I am going to look at a lathe tomorrow morning. It's a 3 hour drive. The lathe meets all of my stated criteria, save one thing: It doesn't run. The problem seems to be electrical. There may be a few electrical components missing/bad. It will be things like some kind of a step-down transformer for the controls, and maybe some sort of starting relay. The motor's cover is missing, and there is missing wiring. The notion here is that if the mechanical aspects of the machine are sound, the lathe may be perfectly fix-able. Most of my inspection trip tomorrow will be spent inspecting as thoroughly as I am able all of the mechanical aspects of the machine. I will be looking at the gearbox in detail, I will be looking at the spindle, I will be examining the lead screw, and I will be looking very closely at the ways. I'm taking a toolbox and a bundle of rags and some WD-40 etc so I can look at things in depth. I'm going to look at such wiring as is there, and see if I can figure out what the electrical issues might be, and if that's all that prevents the lathe from running. If I can determine that the problems ARE all electrical, and that the machine is otherwise sound, as I said, I'll be making an offer. In fact, I've already made a provisional offer on that basis that the seller has accepted. I am not tied to this lathe in any way, other than it meets my criteria. If I see something that leads me to believe it's basically scrap-worthy, or at least beyond my reasonable repair capabilities/budget, I'm out of there. I don't intend to buy a heavy piece of scrap and transport it twice besides. Once I arrive on site, I am going to begin by taking a number of pictures. I'm going to remove panels and covers and so on, and begin to dig into the guts of the thing. I'm going to look at all the moving parts. I'm going to try to make some determination about lash and so on, for all the moving pieces where that matters, and naturally, I'm going to be looking very closely at the ways. As Jim said above, I'm going to be looking for significant and obvious issues. I'd like to figure out a way to ascertain at least in the most broad sense how badly the ways may be worn, if they're not grossly damaged.

Do any of you have substantial knowledge of push-button start machine wiring schemes? This series of machine seems to use some sort of step-down transformer for controls, probably down from main voltage to 120vac, and then (I think) you push a button to energize a relay coil circuit which then in turn close the circuit to start the motor. I'm not super familiar with 3 phase power, never having had it available to me at the farm or in the home, and when I worked in a shop with 3phase power, that was the responsibility of somebody else. So I'm only somewhat familiar with the way in which to wire it. To power it, I'm going to need to use a phase converter in any event. I will, to the degree possible, take pictures and make drawings of the wiring, hopefully constructing a decent schematic, at least of what is there. If you're very familiar with the electrical aspects of these, if I decide to purchase this lathe, I'll need your help. Should that eventuate, I'll find the appropriate sub forum here to post a thread and seek your input. Fortunately, there is at least one gentleman on this site who has a lathe of the same manufacture, and while I believe his to be somewhat older, many of the controls are similar, and I expect the core electrical setup will be quite similar if not identical. He's been quite kind in providing me a few pictures already, via the message system here, and I am grateful for his time. There appears to be a few more button on the one I'm considering, so there will be some learning involved there, but I would imagine that can be sorted out. I view it as an adventure whether I decide to buy the lathe or not. I will learn a great deal, and should be able to learn a few things about what to avoid if nothing else. The seller has assured me I can take my sweet time and be as invasive as I like so long as I don't damage anything and it all goes back like it was. He understands my position, and he's been very helpful and forthcoming in our interaction so far. I expect to spend no less than three hours, and as much as four are allocated. We'll see. Wish me luck. If I have time, I'll post from on site and get opinions and advice from all of you "on the fly." If I have time for that, it should be fun.

Thanks again to all who've contributed to this thread, and thank you for your patience with me!

Mark
 
Sounds like a well reasoned plan. :encourage: Don't worry about the electrical, we can start from scratch if needed. Pictures of what's there would be helpful after you get it home. Don't need them right now.

Best of luck.:)
 
Jim, Thanks! Even if I buy it, it won't be coming home tomorrow. I'm on call this weekend, so I've arranged with a co-worker to cover me for the length of the quick inspection trip. Ground's a little wet to move something heavy to the barn at the moment anyway. It'll be on concrete once there, but it's the here-to-there that will be problematic at the moment. Our ground here turns to absolute mush when it gets wet. This strip of Texas, running sort of parallel to I-35 on the East is known as the Blacklands. East of Austin, to our South, it's popularly known to residents as "the Black Gumbo." Fortunately, the seller has space to spare, and so he's already agreed that if I buy the lathe, it can sit right where it is until I can feasibly come get it. As I said, he's being perfectly reasonable and helpful. So I'll be taking pictures, particularly if I look at it and think it's a buy.

As for the electrical, that's kind of how I was seeing it. To me, it's a motor turning machinery. Mankind has been figuring out ways to do this for quite some time, and I have no doubt if that's what's wrong, it can be fixed mostly with off the shelf stuff from somewhere, even if it means spending time looking at a bunch of datasheets on digikey, newark, and mouser, along with Ebay, etc... With some guidance from those like you, here in these fora, I have no doubt whatever that if it's solely an electrical problem, I can get a working lathe out of it somehow. We'll see tomorrow. Again, thanks!
 
Inspection results:

I arrived about 10:02 this morning at the appointed place in Victoria, Texas. I met the gentleman selling the lathe, and he took me to the shop where it's currently sitting(where they'd brought it to see if it could be powered up and discovered some significant electrical problems. Basically, I'm going to have to rewire this beast, and probably replace the motor. At least I know what I'll be getting, and I knew the electrics would need work going in. More on that later. For now, let's talk about my findings on the mechanical inspection.

The lathe in question is a 1979 model Martin DLZ502. It was made in Germany. It's a newer version of the same lathe another poster here on H-M has acquired. He's been helping me a bit by providing me some pictures of his machine. He's been a big help, and has my extreme gratitude. So, a little about the characteristics of this lathe. It is a gap-bed lathe, theoretically 2000mm between centers (or around 79") It has 500mm(almost 20 inches) of swing over the bed. It weighs probably between 6500-7500 lbs(unfortunately, the data plate and name badge were missing, so I don't have a precise weight figure.) It theoretically cuts metric, imperial, module, and dp threads. It has a taper attachment and its spinfle bore is.... 4.25 inches(quick and dirty steel rule...didn't pull out calipers... This picture should permit you to see and get some idea of the scale of this beast.

01.jpg
02.jpg
03.jpg
04.jpg
05.jpg
06.jpg

I decided apart from a beginning cursory walk-around, my next step would be to pull the lid off the gearbox. My think was that if it's junk in there, no point going on. I was 6'4" in youth(although I'm sure my spine has compressed some with age,) and the lid on the gearbox is at roughly base-of-breas tbone height for me. It's a good thing it wasn't taller. That cast lid weighs quite a bit. It would have to be around 90-100lbs. O pulled the 8 socket head screws that hold it in place. I had to be careful when sliding it off because there's a little sight gauge into which a small tube from the oil pump extends, I suppose to let you see that the pump is running, and there's oil in the gearbox being circulated. There's also a tray with a lip onto which that oil land and then, I believe, spreads and falls onto the shafts and gears. There are two small diameter tube that run from the pump to the spindle bearings to keep them happy. I did find a deficiency. It looked to be an ancient wound, but something the lathe has run with, probably for a long time: IF you look at the face of the gearbox, you'll note there's a longer handle that goes directly into the case(not the big dial-face spindle speed selector, but to the right of this.) If you look, you can see there is a small round red dot panel and a small round black dot panel, and these indicate the gear range. It translates into high and low range, effectively. So this shifts the machine between the speed ranges in black and red marked on the dial face. At the other end of the shaft operated by that handle is a pair of gears, one small, one large, and they mesh with a small and large gear each, (of course only one at a time) and that is controlled by this lever. Sometime in the history of this lathe, somebody attempted to shift this lever from low to high range without stopping the spindle first, and the edges of those two gears have some ground-off metal missing for about 60 degrees of a turn on the spindle gear and almost 3/4 of a turn on the mating gear, and only about 15% the width of the teeth on either. No other gears in the gearbox have any kind of damage I could detect. I inspected them all, visually, and by looking for sharp edges, missing chunks, and so forth. I couldn't see any damage or feel any damage anywhere else in the box apart from the two high range gears. After fooling around with it extensively, I don't think it will affect the lathe's operation. It had to have happened some time well in the past, because I couldn't find any grindings, chunks, or other gear metal in the gearbox, in the oil sump or anywhere else. The incident that caused the damage must have happened before its last oil change, and that would have been well before it ceased operation because the oil, while not "bad," certainly isn't new or fresh. Some newb like me grabbed a handful of lever while the spindle was still spinning at speed, is my best guess. It's a little ugly but I don't think it's a show-stopper. There's still about 80% of the width of the two gears that have no discernible damage, and as I said, I think it's been that way a long time, because it made no grinding, scraping, clacking noise once shifted over to high range. The low range gears have no such damage, so we know which way the newb had been shifting. Either somebody stopped him from trying to shift it back, or the collision slowed the spindle to abruptly with an awful racket and he wised up, refraining from forcing it further. So the pair of high range gears are a little ugly, but they seem to work, seem to mesh without difficulty, and it seems to have happened some time ago. All in all, the gearbox is in good shape with the deficiencies noted. It should work fine and last with proper lubrication AND operation.
07.jpg
08.jpg

The gear on the right side here is the one with the most damage. Unfortunately, I didn't get a picture of the damaged segment. Had I turned it a further 1/4 turn or so before I took this picture, you'd see it. The gear to which it mates on the spindle is the other slightly damaged gear. The smaller gear here mates with the large gear at top left to give the lower speed range, and the one at right has a mate just out of the picture(currently engaged here). These two in slide back and forth on that shaft as the lever on the bulkhead is thrown.
09.jpg

Next I moved on to an examination of the ways. This was the thing that turned out to be the debating point for me. There is significant wear on the ways at the head end. It's significant on both the back of the rear way and the front of the forward way. It's enough that there's an unworn ridge in the middle of the ways that it plainly visible from the first picture below. This ridge slowly disappears as you move tail-ward so that it seems to be a fairly uniform situation. It's not abnormal to have much more wear near the chuck end and much less at the tailstock end, from all the lathes I've looked at. Truth is, if not for the unworn ridge, you wouldn't otherwise realize how worn the ways are, because except for where the wear substantially begins in the gap-section of the bed, there's no "low spots". It's a long taper from the low spot in the gap section out toward the tail end. One of the wipers on the saddle has a broken mounting plate, with a broken-off screw, and the broken piece missing. I think I can drill and extract that screw and make a new plate without much trouble. The tailstock ways look fine, with the exception of at the extreme head end, where they have some gouges and chunks. Again, this is irrelevant because I don't imagine ever really using the tail stock way up there. Other than the gouges, from dropped metal items I'm certain, there's no wear at this end of the tailstock ways, so apparently, nobody else used it this far in either.
Front side of forward way.
13.jpg

Rear side of back way.
14.jpg
Near the tailstock end:
12.jpg
My biggest concern about the wear I see may be exaggerated by that perfectly straight, perfectly centered, unworn ridge that's about 3mm wide the whole length of the bed until you get to the tail-stock end. It's almost as if it's there for a reason, by virtue of a gap/slot in the saddle where no wear can occur. Could this be some kind of intentional wear indication? At it's worst spot, close to the headstock, it appears to be the thickness of about 2 sheets of paper, or a hair more.

That tailstock is a massive sucker. I would guess it must weigh at least 350 lbs, maybe more. It's huge. Sorry, back on task.

One of the things that happened during my inspection is that I received a call from one of our members, 4GSR, who lives in the vicinity, but was otherwise engaged, yet still made time to give me a call and coach me through some things. We'd been corresponding about this lathe, and he expressed an interest in helping me out, for which I am quite thankful. I had some questions about things I was seeing, and he helped me figure them out. While on the phone with him, I looked at what happens when one locks the carriage half-nut on the lead screw. Moving the handwheel, I found that it would travel (eyeballed, as I was holding the phone with the other hand) somewhere in the 1/32" to 1/16" despite being engaged on the lead screw. 4GSR suggested, and I'm in agreement, that the half-nut is probably worn. The threads on the leadscrew itself look pretty good, and while there's a wee bit more wear from the middle of the bed and in, it's not much. I think most of the wear is to be found in the half-nut. Weirdly, there may be a source for this half-nut, so maybe something I can tighten up. The cross-slide moved smoothly, and there was not a ton of lash in the feed crank. The compound had a half-turn of lash though, but 4GSR suggested that might be something simple, like the nut being loose or something. It seemed excessive, but probably something fixable.

The electrics need to be stripped out, to the degree they're there at all, and burned. Okay, maybe that's hyperbole, but let's just say that I'll have a time of it getting this running. There isn't much there. Probably needs a motor too. Of course, I knew that going in.

So decision time. I spoke with 4GSR at length about this because my worst concern is those ways. They're the thing that's going to throw off my accuracy and so on. Still, the degree of accuracy I need for most jobs here on the farm probably doesn't warrant the extent of my concern. Also, because I wound up negotiating a good price on the machine, and because I love fixing up old things, making them useful again, and because I need something that will leave me the money to buy tools with which I can actually use the machine, and with some reassurance from 4GSR that I could overcome most of these issues, and also reminding me that most of the things I'll make won't demand .001 accuracy(or anything real close to it) anyway, this machine should suffice as a learning platform, and to produce useful items for use here on the farm, and it's definitely in my price range, all things considered. I hemmed and hawed in my head for a bit, and then the seller showed back up and asked what I thought. I told him about the deficiencies I discovered, some known, some unknown to him, and I had to decide. I looked at the lathe, I thought about the work ahead of me, and said "Ah, what the Hell." "Sold!"

So I'm the proud owner of a pile of work. It'll be a couple weeks before I can go pick it up. The first thing I'll need is to clean the snot out of it. It's dirty, dirty, dirty. It's in need of much love. It's been repainted at least twice that I could tell from where paint is chipped off of it in spots. The original color is good old pale machine green. Here's an example spotted on google images:
engine-lathe-martin-dlz-503-p40709151_3.jpg
By the way, the image above is a '69 if memory serves. Though very similar, not exact.

Then it was painted with a kind of battleship/deck gray, as can be seen on the pedestal under the headstock. Then you notice the lighter gray, almost a primer gray, with which the headstock has been repainted. Time for a serious makeover. It's missing half the ball-knobs from handles, but I'm sure I can find them on ebay or even make them. The thread-table plate, and all the other plates around the machine are legible but filthy. (Except for the missing main data plate, which is, well, MISSING...LOL)

The steady rest is another big hunk of metal. I see a lot of work in my future.

Pickup is provisionally scheduled for the first Sunday in October, weather permitting.

Well, am I dead-bang nuts, or did I do "okay?" Apart from not running, I did get every feature on my shopping list. Oh, and there's something else a little interesting. There's an accessory socket that is mounted near the very bottom of the middle pedestal, in back:
17.jpg
I suspect this is for light and coolant pump, though neither accessory is present. I believe this because two buttons on the front panel seem to correspond to this, one with a light icon, and the other with a faucet/spigot icon. I could see where in 1979, that would have been a nice touch:
10.jpg

In the end, here was my reasoning on the ways. Tell me if I'm thinking wrong here. This wear on the ways affects the height of the tool in relation to the piece of the turning stock material. This means that as I move the tool from left to right, the tool will rise very slightly on its path because the ways are no longer parallel to the centerline of the stock. The longer the piece, the worse the built-in taper, right? Good so far?

This means that if I were trying to, let's imagine, turn a piece of 1.25" bar-stock into a 1.125 turning, There would be variance because I would either start at the tangent formed by the tool and the stock, or above it, or below it. As I moved the tool leftward, this would move the line of the cutter downward in relation to the centerline of the stock. The result would be a taper. If I started right at the tangent relation ship, my turning at its chuck end would be larger than the intended diameter because as we moved the tool left, it moved downward and no longer at a tangent to the stock, the turning would get progressively wider(I'd be removing less and less material.) If I started slightly above a tangent, my turning would get narrower as I moved from right to left, but once past the tangent(now below the centerline of the stock), it would begin to get wider and wider again. Am I tracking correctly? If this is the case, then, if I really, really, really needed something more precise, couldn't I make the first pass at the tangent, and then adjust the tool up in small increments and make repeated passes until while starting above the tangent line, I was now finishing right at it? Wouldn't this make my resulting turning the same diameter, end to end? Now, I also realize that the longer the piece, the more adjustments in tool height and passes I'd need to make, and this would get ridiculous, because there are infinite points on the line, so an infinite number of adjustments/passes would be required, but only to make it "perfect." To get it within .001" wouldn't require infinite passes, but definitely many more than two or three over say a 12" run. I'd have to work the geometry a bit more formally to figure out the number, but that calculation seems to be within the realm of feasibility.

Now I could see where this approach and external threading of stock would not work so well, but I could also then chase my thread with a hand tool, so maybe not so big a deal?

Okay, that's probably enough "outside-the-box" thinking. All my life, I've had to work with imperfect tools, and still gotten decent results, in part because I've always accepted my Dad's and Grand-dads' admonition: Only a poor musician blames his instrument.

Thanks all. Oh, and btw, now there are two Martin owners here. How many does it take to get your own manufacturer forum?

JUST KIDDING!

Thanks!

Mark
 
Mark,

I think those ways are in a tad better shape from the pictures above than what we spoke of over the phone this morning.

Ken
 
Back
Top