# Setting-up the PM 1236-T Lathe



## Titanium Knurler

I have now had my PM 1236-T lathe for about a year now.  I thought I would share my experience with setting-up and using the machine for anyone that is interested.  This is not meant to be a review, but I think at the end you will have a pretty good feel for this lathe.  I will give you the punch line up front: it is a very nice machine and I would definitely buy it again-thanks for the tip Mikey!

     As you can see from the outline in the photo I have quite a few topics I would like to share.  I will probably do one or two a week.  I will try to give a “kit view” of the supplies needed for each section and give part numbers for key elements. When appropriate, I will finish each section with what I would do differently and what I would hope PM or the manufacturer, Liang Dei, would do differently.  

     My hope is that not only will you become more familiar with the PM 1236-T lathe and the other PM lathes like it, but that these posts will also act as a springboard for discussing other topics important to all lathes such as: Does a lathe really need to be “level”?  Is a mobile base a good idea and, if so, how should one be constructed?  How large an error is introduced when there is a vertical misalignment of the lathe?  I have consulted a math professor, that earned a living working as a machinist while in graduate school, for a quantitative answer to the last question.  He has created a nomogram and formula that I will share with you in the upcoming posts.  Anyway,  I hope this will be helpful for anyone interested in the PM 1236-T.  I look forward to learning from all of you. I will post the first topic, “Unpacking” soon.


----------



## mikey

Really looking forward to seeing this.


----------



## john.k

A lathe does not need to be level in any axis............it makes no difference to the accuracy..................however being level  means an accurate level measurement tool can then be used to check for bending or twisting of the bed,and such corrected .......and later on used to check for wear.............mathematicians can do all the calculating they like,and not even suspect issues that do cause inaccuracy like unequal thermal expansion and tool and structural deflection caused by cutting forces and heat .


----------



## Titanium Knurler

John.k,  I wasn’t expecting to get feedback on this topic before I actually presented it but appreciate your thoughts and agree with you.  This is the type of discussion I was hoping for.  The Manual for the lathe indicates that vertical alignment is “nowhere near as critical” as alignment of the center-to-center axis with the lathe bed. I don’t doubt this, but thought it would be interesting to actually put a number on how vertical misalignment affects taper.  Just an academic exercise that will quantitate the theoretical taper for various diameters at various vertical misalignments.  I hope you will continue to follow and contribute to the discussion.  If you do, I think you will find that when possible I like to “put a number on things” when I can.  To me that is better than a statement such as, “it is nowhere near as critical”.  Thanks again for contributing!


----------



## Z2V

Nice setup there TK, watching with interest.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Thanks Z2V.  It is kind of tough these days to find the time to post but I will do so as frequently as I am able.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

I. Unpacking




The PM website reads: “Extremely High Quality Lathe, meant for very high precision work. Perfect for the user who is looking for a high quality lathe, at a lower cost – Great for the serious hobbiest, gunsmith, or lighter industrial user...”

I had wanted a lathe for a long time, this description was perfect; just what I wanted and it just fit the space I had set aside.  I pulled the trigger and about ten days later I was looking at the crates shown above.  The pallet was slightly damaged but except for minor scuffs and scratches of the paint the contents showed no damage.  The largest crate contained the lathe, chip tray, backsplash and stand front panel.  The smaller boxes contain the right and left cabinet supports which are fabricated from 3/16” steel plate. The cabinet supports are connected by a heavy, 16gauge sheet metal panel that bolts to angle iron welded to the side of the cabinets.  This is a substantial stand weighing in at about 250 lbs. but I was concerned that it’s configuration of two columns separated by sheet metal was not going to be rigid enough to prevent twisting with movement and I really wanted a mobile stand. The reasons for wanting a mobile stand and the design I came up with I will share with you later.  Shortly after ordering the lathe I noticed PM offered a cast iron stand but I have not seen it offered since then.  If that had been offered when I ordered the lathe I probably would have gone that route since I believe it would be much lest likely to twist with movement.  

The Manual from the manufacturer, Liang Dei(LD) is pretty cursory but it does give a bit of advice that is not in the much more complete and well written PM Manual: don’t move the carriage until the thick coat of cosmoline is removed.  If this is not followed one can damage the small wipers on the carriage that clean the ways when the carriage is moved.  The PM Manual recommends using WD40 or other light oil to clean off the cosmoline from the metal surfaces.  I used the product pictured below from Grizzly that works exceptionally well and is safe for  painted surfaces:




Unfortunately, the spindle Bore was note coated with cosmoline and was badly pitted from rust: 




The pitted spindle bore is not a functional problem but when you lay out 4K for a lathe you expect to not have any rust damage.

Here is an image of the cleaned-up lathe on the pallet:




The cabinets were pretty scuffed-up and the chip tray had quite a few scratches.  Unfortunately, PM does not have touch-up paint.  



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                         
	

		
			
		

		
	




However, I did find a very close match for the blue-grey cabinets with a Rustoleum product and the off white lathe/backsplash and chip tray at one of the big box stores.  I brought in a piece of the lathe and had it color matched.  Unfortunately, I now have a gallon of the damn stuff now.  I think it would be nice if PM had small quantities of touch-up paint available if there lathes are going to arrive scuffed or scratched.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	




Before and after:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	




When you assemble the cabinet door latch you will be scratching your head wondering if there is a piece missing.  There isn’t a piece missing it is just very poorly designed.  You have to bend a dog leg in the piece for it to work:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	




The labels on the cabinet were incorrect(1340GT), crooked and off center.  I know, I know, who cares?  Well, to me it seemed a bit incongruous and a bit humorous that a company with “Precision” and “Quality” in their name would have incorrect, crooked and off center stickers.  It is a bit like a surgeon that performs a complex surgery and closes with a poor skin incision.  Of course that’s all the patient sees and will naturally wonder what the hell went on inside. I contacted PM and spoke to Matt.  He seemed a bit embarrassed and sent me some new stickers right away.




I almost finished with this post on Unpacking but I am going to sign-off for a bit since it looks like my iPad is about to run out of power.  Be back in a bit to finish-up.


----------



## P. Waller

Place lathe on floor, place stock in lathe and make parts.
Is this short machine so thin that it can not support itself ?

I would find this difficult to believe, a 30" long machine is rigid enough not to need any leveling or other consideration.
If so send it back.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

I. Unpacking, cont’d

If you look at the photo of the stand in the last post you will see that the headstock side has four areas for support at the base for leveling mounts and four at the top to mount the lathe to the cabinet. Similarly, the tailstock end has two.  The PM Manual recommends that if one uses leveling mounts that they should be rated for 250 lb each.  Since I was planning on adding casters and machine mounts for the mobile base I wanted to get a pretty good idea of the weight of the headstock and tailstock ends.  I used a trailer tongue weight scale to determine the approximate weight while the lathe was on the pallet.  



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	





As you can see this is a pretty good recommendation:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	







	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	





If you fast forward to when the stand is complete and the lathe is mounted on the mobile base you can see that the 250 lb/mount recommendation is still pretty reasonable:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	







	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	




However, as you will see in the next section I used casters and mounts that are rated for at least fours times that amount.

Well, enough about Unpacking.  I promised at the beginning I would list what I(TK) would do differently and would make recommendations for the manufacturer,Liang Dei(LD) and PM. So here they are:

TK- none this time but there are plenty coming up

LD-better packing to avoid scuffs and scratches
     -better engineered latches or at least ones that do not need to be modified
     -COSMOLINE TO THE SPINDLE BORE

PM-get labels correct, straight and centered
      -make touch-up paint available

Pretty minor stuff.  Next I will discuss making the mobile base.  I am very interested in your feedback on this!


----------



## P. Waller

You complain a good deal.
Please explain why you did not buy a machine from a manufacturer that has a long history of placing the decals on their machines in the proper place and orientation, Haas at the bottom end and Mazak, Mori-Seiki, Tsugami and Hydromat at the high end.

Decal placement is nearly perfect on these machines, I would go out on a limb and suggest that the decals are placed on these machines by other machines, I may be wrong however.


----------



## Z2V

P. Waller said:


> You complain a good deal.
> Please explain why you did not buy a machine from a manufacturer that has a long history of placing the decals on their machines in the proper place and orientation, Haas at the bottom end and Mazak, Mori-Seiki, Tsugami and Hydromat at the high end.
> 
> Decal placement is nearly perfect on these machines, I would go out on a limb and suggest that the decals are placed on these machines by other machines, I may be wrong however.



Damn dude, back off. He bought a manual machine not a CNC for starters. It’s his thread, if you don’t like it you DON’T have to follow.


----------



## Z2V

Keep it rolling TK


----------



## hotrats

I went with the PM Chinese 12/36. It will be way more accurate than I, anyhows. Following your thread, looks interesting. Please keep going.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Thanks for the encouragement  Z2V and hotrats.  I think you will find the upcoming sections more useful and look forward to your input.

P. Waller, it is possible you are confusing complaining and constructive criticism.  In each case that I pointed out a shortcoming I provided a solution.  For example: scratched paint-provide touch-up paint; bad latches-redesign them; rusted spindle bore-coat with cosmoline; errors in Manual-correct them(btw, I sent corrections to Matt and he seemed quite appreciative).  If I were a manufacturer or distributor I would want feedback so that I could make improvements and keep my customers happy and sell more machines.  I think PM has great products and I would like to see them continue to succeed.  I feel I am helping them succeed by giving them user feedback not “complaining”.  BTW, please feel free to return to the thread; an antagonist is often useful and comic relief is always welcome.


----------



## vtcnc

Good morning all, thanks for getting this thread back on track and keeping it there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ashtrain

Good morning:  Thank you for this thread and comments.  I am considering (very seriously) this same machine.  I bought a PM935 mill last year and am very satisfied;  There have been a couple of glitches but the crew at PM was very good about getting things right.  Excellent customer service.  One thing you mentioned was the availability of touchup paint for the inevitable scratches and dings you will get just moving these machines in - would be nice.  Please keep on; I'm listening.
  Dick w.


----------



## Z2V

For touch up paint I’ve found Rustoleum Safety Blue 7524 to be a near dead match for the blue that PM uses. Yes, my 1236 also needed touch up in several places.


----------



## john.k

I think you will find the spindle inner surface is as supplied by the steelworks,and they are to blame for any poor finish........buy material to size and save one machining operation.....


----------



## Titanium Knurler

John.k, you may be correct, but only the lower, mid-portion of the uncoated  bore, where water would settle, was pitted.  Also, the remaining unpitted bore appears to have been nicely machined. Again, I don't believe it is of any functional significance but a bit disappointing to see pitting on your new "baby".  Also seems like it would be easy to rectify by swabbing the spindle bore with cosmoline before shipping.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

For the next few posts I would like to go over how I modified the three piece PM stand so that the lathe and stand can be easily moved without throwing the lathe out of adjustment.  It may look a little steampunk but it works; I wheeled the stand and lathe around the shop, even put some of the casters over a floor drain to try to throw it out of kilter but once put back in place it was found to have maintained its pre-abuse adjustment.  I will follow the description of the mobile base with mounting the lathe on the base, some vibration and sound measurements and finally a discussion of “leveling” and the effect of vertical misalignment on taper including a nomogram and formula that will allow one to determine the amount of taper created by a vertical misalignment.

Anyway, that’s what I have planned for the next few days.  By the way, this is my first thread on HM and it appears to work out well to post, wait a day or so to allow for discussion, then post the next topic.  So, that is what I am planning on doing until I make it through the topics listed in the outline at the beginning of this thread on setting-up the PM 1236-T.

Back to work for now.  I will begin the description/discussion of the mobile base tonight. I look forward to your input!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

First of all, why a mobile base?  For me it is primarily for access to those things behind the lathe: the electrical box, coolant system, stored spare parts, etc.  Also, it is nice to be able to pull the machine away from the wall and adjacent machines to allow long stock to extend from the spindle bore.  It was very nice to be able to easily roll the lathe away from the wall when I installed a taper attachment and the coolant and guard systems as well as my tool holding systems, and sometimes you just want to clean up back there.  So for me, there are a lot of reasons for a mobile base.  All of my equipment can be moved, even my mill, but none seem to be as touchy to movement as a lathe so I wanted a system that would allow me to move the lathe without needing to spend a bunch of time re-adjusting it.  It seemed like a pay-me-know-or-pay-me-later situation; spend the time now putting together a system that will allow me to move the lathe around without needing to re-adjust or spend the time later re-adjusting, or at least checking the adjustment, every time I moved it.  The mobile base that I put together has three components:

                        1.) Outriggers with casters
                        2.) Machine mounts
                        3.) Baseplate


----------



## Mitch Alsup

Titanium Knurler said:


> First of all, why a mobile base?



I agree with this question. Once you get an offset part dialed in in the 4-jaw chuck, the lathe will walk itself across the room unless there is no way for it to do so.
The casters provide that way.


----------



## mikey

Not if you're using Carrymaster leveling casters as I suspect TK is doing. The casters only hit the floor when he moves it.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Very good Mikey!!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Mitch Alsup, I have not tried an offset part in a 4JC but the set-up has been rock solid with everything else I have tried over the last year.


----------



## P. Waller

Z2V said:


> Damn dude, back off. He bought a manual machine not a CNC for starters. It’s his thread, if you don’t like it you DON’T have to follow.


It appears that you failed to understand the humor.
The quality or usefulness of a machine tool is not dependent on accurate decal placement.


----------



## vtcnc

@P.Waller - your hijacking of this thread is over. Your attempt to recast your prior posts as humor falls dead flat with this membership. This is your first and final warning to keep your abrasive comments to yourself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## RJSakowski

Perhaps the attachment of one of smilie icons would help to prevent misinterpretation of intent.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

1.) Outriggers with Casters

This is what comes with the lathe: a cast iron puck, a bolt and a nut.




Here is a configuration that I considered from a piece of equipment at work




That arrangement was appealing because it lowered the CG of the cabinet but I wanted casters that I could adjust the leveling foot with a wrench rather than a plastic wheel that most of the casters have, in addition the bent arrangement of the outrigger would get in the way of the cabinet doors.  I went with straight outriggers.  I used three 1/2”x 4”x23” pieces of 1018 cold finish steel flat.  The cabinet is 15” wide so this gave me a 4” x 4” area extending from the cabinet to attach the casters.  All the holes are 3/8” except the larger hole for the M16 leveling foot which is 3/4”. The outriggers were then painted and attached to the base. The holes on the base are a different size and offset a bit so you have to take that into consideration when measuring.  I used a spacer to account for the different diameters:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	




I used Carrymaster ALC1000 casters. The outriggers were attached to the cabinet and the casters attached to the outriggers using 3/8” x 1-3/4” bolts.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	




I used 2” fender washer and an M16 coupler nut that had been cut in half to act as a lock nut on the leveling foot.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	




I am then able to make fine adjustments of the leveling foot with a small wrench and then secure the position with a larger wrench on the coupling nut.  



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	




I added some equipment pads to help keep the lathe from walking but I think they are overkill.  The machine is very solidly in position without them.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	




This added about 5” to the cabinet height.  The PM puck-and-bolt is about 1-1/2” so there is a net gain of about 3-1/2” over the puck-and-bolt configuration.




That’s it for the outriggers.  Tomorrow I will try to do the equipment mounts and hopefully the day after the baseplate.


----------



## P. Waller

RJSakowski said:


> Perhaps the attachment of one of smilie icons would help to prevent misinterpretation of intent.


Sometimes I forget to indicate humor through the use of easily understood keyboard strokes (-:


----------



## Jester966

Titanium Knurler said:


> I wanted a system that would allow me to move the lathe without needing to spend a bunch of time re-adjusting it.



I agree this system would certainly make it much quicker to drop the lathe onto wheels to move it around.  But, wouldn't you still have to re-level the lathe every time you park it?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Quick correction: outriggers are 3/4" thick not 1/2" as stated above.  
Sorry about that, TK


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Jester966.  great question.  As John.k mentioned in the second post of this thread, "A lathe does not need to be level in any axis............it makes no difference to the accuracy..................however being level means an accurate level measurement tool can then be used to check for bending or twisting of the bed,and such corrected .......and later on used to check for wear..... "

What I do after I have moved the lathe is quickly level it with the leveling feet on the casters and the three spirit levels(one at the front, two at the side) that are on the underside of the plate supporting the lathe(more on this later).  I look up at the levels while I am adjusting the leveling feet on the casters.  I have adjusted them so they agree with the Starrett 199Z precision level.  That is all I do now that I know that movement is not affecting the lathe. This takes just a few minutes with the wrench on the casters but even this amount of leveling is not necessary.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Jester966,  think of it this way.  Say you are a machinist on a battle ship, your captain runs aground in choppy seas and bends the prop shaft.  The enemy is approaching and you need to turn a new prop shaft pronto!  Your lathe was adjusted on land to have no twist in the ways and then bolted to the battle ship.  But now you are at sea, the ship is pitching and rolling!  What do you do?  You turn a perfectly untapered shaft because the movement of the ship, even though it is creating a constantly unlevel lathe, has no affect on your lathe as long as the ways are untwisted.  You are promoted, retire with a huge pension and live happily ever after.  Think of the plate on the mobile base as the battle ship.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

2.) Machine Mounts




The PM stands is made of two very substantial vertical columns made of 3/16” steel plate and a heavyweight 16 gauge connecting panel that attaches to the columns by way of several small screws to a piece of angle iron welded to the side of each column.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	




The components are all heavy duty but when they are bolted together there is a fair amount of movement of the columns especially in the vertical axis.  In fact, when I was trying to carefully mark the positions of the mounting holes for the lathe on the top of the assembled cabinet I had to use a bar clamp, with the ends reversed, to counter the toe-in of the columns. I imagine when the cabinet is used as intended, as a stationary base with the lathe bolted directly to it, the stand is plenty rigid, however, I don’t think it is rigid enough to be used as a mobile base without a baseplate. Something more rigid, such as a cast iron base, might provide the rigidity needed for a mobile base without modification.

Because of the movement of the stand I used a baseplate to provide a stable mount for the lathe. The equipment mounts help mitigate the effects the movement of the stand on the plate; when the stand flexes and twists the rubber mounts will absorb this force. 




The above is a labeled mock-up view of a mount, it’s hardware and the relative positions of the cabinet top, baseplate and chip tray.   If you envision that this is just one corner of the mobile stand I think you can visualize how the mounts help reduce the forces of a moving stand on the baseplate.  If while moving the stand a corner drops, say it passes over a drain in the floor, the lower pad will compress and the upper pad will expand until the ability of the pads to compress or expand is exceeded then the force will be applied to the baseplate.  It is like you have a spring above and below to absorb the forces. I doubt this arrangement eliminates all forces on the baseplate from a moving and twisting stand but I do think it minimizes them and is better than mounting the baseplate directly to a shifting stand. This elevated arrangement also allowed me to easily access the jack screws for leveling that are on the tailstock end of the baseplate and to place a drawer under the baseplate.  You might be asking yourself if this elevated arrangement may cause increased vibration of the lathe? I will answer this question later with some vibration measurements once the lathe is attached to the stand.

To use the equipment mounts I had to enlarge the small oval holes to on the top of the stand to 1-1/4” so they would accept the equipment mounts.  If any of you have ever tried to use a hole saw to enlarge an existing hole that is larger than the pilot bit you know it can be tricky.  I clamped a board on the backside and used the drill press; this seemed to do the trick.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                    
	

		
			
		

		
	




This view shows the mounts in place ready for the hardware:




I used eight inch 1/2”-13, 316 stainless bolts and oversized locknuts And heavy duty fender washers:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	




Here is a mount that has been installed:




This last view show the stand columns leveled and the mounts installed and ready to accept the baseplate, chip tray and finally the lathe:




Well, that’s it for the equipment mounts.  Now on to the last component of the mobile stand, the baseplate.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

3.) The Baseplate




Of course the baseplate is the key element in creating a mobile base that will provide the stability needed to maintain the lathe adjustments. I used an 18”x75”x1/2” A36 steel plate.  I drew a sketch, had a CAD drawing made and sent this to a company called Precision Grinding, inc.(PGI) in Alabama.  You have to love a company whose logo is, “ We Grind”.  Their website is precisiongrinding.com, the phone number is 888 934-7463.  Ask for Jerry(jerry@precisiongrinding.com). I asked them to hang onto the CAD drawing in case someone from HM wanted to use it. They plasma cut, stress relieved and ground the plate.  It took about six weeks. If you would like to have a plate made locally and want a copy of the file let me know I will try to get it to you somehow. I have it in PDF, DXY, DWG, SLDPRT and SLDDRW.  I want to emphasize that I do not think you need a plate that has been stress relieved and ground.  It is overkill.  All that is needed is a good stable plate. It does not even need to be perfectly flat, just substantial and stable enough to allow you to adjust the lathe with jack screws or shims and maintain that adjustment.

Below is a screenshot of the PDF for the plate:




This shot shows the underside of the plate:




I will just briefly describe some of the things you may be wondering about on the plate and show you a few photos. The oval windows are just handles to move the machine around.  The round cut-out is for the Drain in the chip tray.  There are six oversized holes for the lathe mounting screws to pass through.  I oversized these to give me some leeway and just in case there is a difference in the thermal expansion of the steel and the cast iron of the lathe.  There are three spirit levels attached that I can watch while leveling the plate with the leveling feet.  This really makes it quick and easy to do this job even though, as I mentioned above, this is not something that must be done for lathe accuracy. There are four 1/2”-20 threaded holes on the tailstock end for jack screws.  I used screws for the Starrett mini equipment jack here.  I have four, you only need two. Finally, there are four screws to attach the drawer.

Let me show you some pictures:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	




Here is the stand with the chip tray ready for the lathe:







Well, that’s Pretty much it for the mobile base, just three components: outriggers/casters, equipment mounts and baseplate. It may look strange but it works.  Next is mounting and leveling the lathe.


----------



## mikey

I am not understanding something - what is the purpose of the jack screws? They are pointing down with nothing under them so I'm confused. 

I find it interesting that you have sought to isolate the lathe from the ground via the mounting plate and rubber isolation pads. Most set ups seek to make the connection to the ground as solid as possible to enhance rigidity. Can you expand on your thinking here? Not a criticism; mostly just curious.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

II. B. Mounting/Leveling




The stand is now ready to drop the lathe on it but there were a couple of things I wanted to do before I did.  The first thing is that the cast iron enclosure on the headstock that holds the motor control switch was very close to the mounting bolt and made it very difficult to get to the nut for the mounting bolt so I removed the box and milled out an area to accommodate the nut:






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                     
	

		
			
		

		
	







The second thing I wanted to do was to seal the base of the lathe to the chip tray.  The PM manual suggests using silicone but I was planning on using Hangsterfer’s CC22 cutting OIL as a coolant and silicone does not hold up well with oil.  I contacted 3M and they suggested Scotch-Weld Acrylic DP810 NS adhesive for oil and cast iron.  So I lowered the lathe temporarily onto the stand, outlined the area of the lathe then roughed it up with sandpaper.  I then applied a liberal amount of adhesive and lowered the lathe onto it:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                     
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                     
	

		
			
		

		
	







When I tightened the nuts on the nuts on the mounting bolts they demanded to bend because the lathe base is angled so I made some angled spacers to eliminate this:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                    
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                    
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                    
	

		
			
		

		
	







So there you have it, the lathe is now ready for leveling!




By the way, has anyone guessed what the vertical red thing is on the front panel?  A prize for whoever guesses correctly.


----------



## mikey

Nicely done. 

The red thing? Easy. Its the indicator for the built in Kool Aid dispenser's reservoir. Or the coolant tank, maybe?


----------



## P. Waller

Titanium Knurler said:


> So there you have it, the lathe is now ready for leveling!



I suspect that this will be wildly entertaining, I am 60 years old so will likely not live long enough to see the end of this "installation".


Good Luck


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mikey said:


> I am not understanding something - what is the purpose of the jack screws? They are pointing down with nothing under them so I'm confused.
> 
> I find it interesting that you have sought to isolate the lathe from the ground via the mounting plate and rubber isolation pads. Most set ups seek to make the connection to the ground as solid as possible to enhance rigidity. Can you expand on your thinking here? Not a criticism; mostly just curious.



Mikey, the baseplate is threaded and the jack screw goes into those threads.  When the screw is advanced upward it lifts that portion of the tailstock footing. For example, when I was leveling the lathe the side of the tailstock toward the operator was a bit low.  I loosened the nut on the anchor bolt, lifted that corner by advancing the jack screw then re-tightend the nut on the anchor bolt. I repeated this is small increments until the lathe was level, then I tightened the lock nut on the jack screw.  This took a total of about a quarter turn on the jack screw. The pointed end of the jack screw is not used.  I used jack screws because they have a nice fine 1/2-20 thread, they are hardened and I can use the small hardened rod that comes with them to make adjustments by hand.  Also, they are only $8 from Starrett.  I didn’t know Starrett made anything for $8.  I hope this helps.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mikey said:


> Nicely done.
> 
> The red thing? Easy. Its the indicator for the built in Kool Aid dispenser's reservoir. Or the coolant tank, maybe?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Cool aid, you got it!  You have won my admiration!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Titanium Knurler said:


> Mikey, the baseplate is threaded and the jack screw goes into those threads.  When the screw is advanced upward it lifts that portion of the tailstock footing. For example, when I was leveling the lathe the side of the tailstock toward the operator was a bit low.  I loosened the nut on the anchor bolt, lifted that corner by advancing the jack screw then re-tightend the nut on the anchor bolt. I repeated this is small increments until the lathe was level, then I tightened the lock nut on the jack screw.  This took a total of about a quarter turn on the jack screw. The pointed end of the jack screw is not used.  I used jack screws because they have a nice fine 1/2-20 thread, they are hardened and I can use the small hardened rod that comes with them to make adjustments by hand.  Also, they are only $8 from Starrett.  I didn’t know Starrett made anything for $8.  I hope this helps.



Mikey, with regards to your second question, this stand is constructed in such a way that I don’t think there is anything I can do to make it rigid so it will always twist when it is moved.  If it twists and is rigidly attached to the lathe it will twist as well requiring re-adjustment of the lathe.  I wanted to try to avoid this, so I isolated the two, somewhat, from one another.  The stand can twist when moved while the lathe stays rigidly attached to it’s baseplate. That’s the concept anyway and so far it appears to be working since I have not needed to re-adjust it yet. I hope that answers your question.


----------



## mikey

Okay, I get the idea. The jackscrews adjust the level relative to the baseplate, which is then isolated from the cabinet itself. Novel idea; you have to let us know if it provides enough rigidity in use. I have to admit that this is the first time I've seen this done.


----------



## mikey

P. Waller said:


> I suspect that this will be wildly entertaining, I am 60 years old so will likely not live long enough to see the end of this "installation".
> 
> 
> Good Luck



I dunno', I'm just enjoying the journey. This guy is relatively new to the hobby and is sharing his unique approach to setting up his lathe. I'm finding it interesting; it shows that he actually thought about stuff before doing it. He is also answering my stupid questions about why he is doing this or that, and somewhere in here is an idea that will help some other new hobby guy. 

So, TK, bring it on. I, for one, am enjoying this well-documented process.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mikey said:


> Okay, I get the idea. The jackscrews adjust the level relative to the baseplate, which is then isolated from the cabinet itself. Novel idea; you have to let us know if it provides enough rigidity in use. I have to admit that this is the first time I've seen this done.


 
Mikey, you got it!  

As far as rigidity is concerned let me show you some vibration and sound measurements I gathered on the lathe and stand.  First I will describe the set-up then the results.

I used a vibration meter at the at the headstock, carriage and stand to measure velocity in mm/s; measured the sound at .6 meters from the headstock(my head position) and rpm using a mechanical rpm meter:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	




Here are the results:




Here is an ISO vibration table(the PM 1236-T is considered a Class I small machine):




I think you can see that the vibration readings are excellent at the headstock until you get up over a thousand RPM but even these are considered satisfactory. Vibration is very low, almost unmeasurable, at the carriage and stand at all RPM.  The readings are similar with various chucks but I have not tried an unbalanced 4JC as Mitch Alsup suggested early on in this thread.  This is not what I usually do with the lathe but I will give it a try and let you know.

Now for the sound.  The lathe goes from “piano practice”  to a “garbage disposal” as the RPM increases. Not sure how this compares to other lathes but now that we have “numbers” and test parameters someone with a dB meter can compare.




The reason I bothered to take these measurements was that I was concerned that since this was “novel” set-up I feared that there might be an RPM setting that matched the harmonic of the machine and the damn thing would fly out the window.  Fortunately, this did not happen.

I hope this helps.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mikey said:


> I dunno', I'm just enjoying the journey. This guy is relatively new to the hobby and is sharing his unique approach to setting up his lathe. I'm finding it interesting; it shows that he actually thought about stuff before doing it. He is also answering my stupid questions about why he is doing this or that, and somewhere in here is an idea that will help some other new hobby guy.
> 
> So, TK, bring it on. I, for one, am enjoying this well-documented process.




Mikey, you are correct, I am new to this.  I am still in the period of magical thinking where almost anything is possible and I am unincumbered by dogma.  It is also about the journey for me.  I derive a great deal of pleasure thinking about these things; It can be a wonderful distraction and stress reliever.  It is not about the fish, it’s about the fishing. Although I get pretty ****** off when I don’t catch any fish. Seriously, I thoroughly enjoy the challenges of the hobby and the discussions that ensue, even yours P. Waller if you are still alive!


----------



## Tozguy

WOW, just WOW, Mr. Knurler thanks for sharing. I absolutely love your attitude.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Thanks Tozguy!


----------



## BGHansen

Really enjoying the details of your set up. It's refreshing to see an obviously detail oriented individual with no preconceived conceptions of "what's right" go through the process. I'm largely self taught and probably do a lot of things "wrong", but they work for me.  At my place of work we are encouraged to take new approaches and not get stuck in old paradigms.

PLEASE keep the string going and remember that machinist's can be very opinionated. Just like A-holes, everyone has one.

Bruce


----------



## ashtrain

thoroughly enjoying this - please keep on, I'm with you
     Dick w


----------



## mikey

TK, your vibration and dB tests confirm that the isolation set up really works, although it should, right? You completely decoupled the lathe from the stand. However, what I am curious about is what happens when you turn a work piece. Nominal stock is not round so it will vibrate. No chuck is perfectly balanced so that will add to it. Then the cutter induces side loads that impact on vibration in some fashion. 

The currently accepted practice is to have the lathe be as rigidly coupled to the ground as possible to resist and dampen these vibrations. You have isolated these vibrations to the mounting plate and they have to go somewhere. I would imagine that some of that energy will be converted to heat so those anti-vibration pucks will warm up but the key thing I am interested in is what happens to the work piece. I realize that the only way to really tell is to turn a variety of identical work pieces with the lathe rigidly mounted and decoupled as yours is and compare the results. I'm not suggesting you do that but that is what it would take to demonstrate the difference. In the end, if your set up works well for you then that is what matters.

I really like that you're showing what you did and confirmed with tests that it did what you intended. Your unorthodox approach is very refreshing, TK - good for you!!


----------



## mikey

Titanium Knurler said:


> Mikey, you are correct, I am new to this.  I am still in the period of magical thinking where almost anything is possible and I am unincumbered by dogma.  It is also about the journey for me.  I derive a great deal of pleasure thinking about these things; It can be a wonderful distraction and stress reliever.  It is not about the fish, it’s about the fishing. Although I get pretty ****** off when I don’t catch any fish. Seriously, I thoroughly enjoy the challenges of the hobby and the discussions that ensue, even yours P. Waller if you are still alive!



Your post reminded me of an experience I had recently. I took my wife to the Bay area this past summer for a medical thing and we stayed near my son. He works for NASA and I had the wonderful opportunity to tour the Ames campus with him. I met a number of interesting folks and in our discussions, I learned the difference between the thinking of a "normal" guy, me, and these amazing innovators. Where I tend to ask why, these guys ask, "why not?" There is a world of difference between these approaches. I saw some awesome things on my visit but what I really got was this difference in thinking - THAT changed me. 

You, TK, would fit right in with those guys.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Mikey, thank you for the praise and support, it means a great deal coming from you.  

I will play around with some unbalanced set-ups.  One way to couple the lathe and stand together temporarily would be to put equipment jacks between the top of the stand and the baseplate.

Should mention though that the equipment mounts are really robust.  They have a capacity of 1,100 pounds each and are quite firm.  They are similar to my sons as teenagers; they are operating at about 20-25% of their capacity.


----------



## mikey

Titanium Knurler said:


> I will play around with some unbalanced set-ups.  One way to couple the lathe and stand together temporarily would be to put equipment jacks between the top of the stand and the baseplate.



This would be good. Then you can see what the differences are and either prove or modify your approach.



Titanium Knurler said:


> They are similar to my sons as teenagers; they are operating at about 20-25% of their capacity.



Yeah, my son was like that. He is fortunate that I allowed him to live until he became human at around 23 years old. He is now 39 and is a wonderful, intelligent young man and I am very proud of him.


----------



## GL

As with others, I am watching with interest at how this build goes.  My 1340GT headstock base had a crown that allowed it to flex - bump the lathe and it would wiggle for awhile.  I welded a 3/8" plate inside, with vertical reinforceing ribs to tie everything together.  Obviously, I was in the "tie it to the ground " camp - based on where I work.  My questions have been asked and answered, the proof will be known soon.  As Bruce said, you didn't know better and came up with a thoughtful alternative.  As I think about this, you look at old lathes with their elegant, but relatively unsubstantial, legs, this solution isn't that far out there.  One cool feature is you have not really changed anything if issues arise - the rubber isolation system could be replaced with something more solid, and your ground plate gives you a fairly flat plane to work off of.  Or maybe the headstock goes solid and the tail stays like it is.  From designing Diesel engine mounts, I know that the amount of preload on the bushings affects how they isolate - could be something useful while tuning things.

If this is what you come up with for a base, can't wait to see what you come up with on a real machining project.  You seem to think enough and detail oriented enough that you will fit right in.  Nice job,  thanks.


----------



## Firstgear

I have been following your approach and I am considering going down the same path.  What I dont know or understand is how that caster/leveling works. 

How does this work?  Do you have to level each time you move it?  Sorry if I have a blind spot, but that happens sometimes to me.  Help?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

“Leveling” and a Discussion on Vertical Miasalignment




First of all, my favorite work shirt is pictured above. I will explain this picture more fully later but for now let me just say that I might possibly be the only man alive that has set himself on fire leveling a lathe. More on this later.

For a newbie like myself the term leveling creates a lot of confusion; it really is an untwisting of the lathe ways that uses a level to accomplish the untwisting. I am going to quote John.K again from the beginning of this thread because he said it so well:

A lathe does not need to be level in any axis............it makes no difference to the accuracy..................however being level means an accurate level measurement tool can then be used to check for bending or twisting of the bed,and such corrected .......and later on used to check for wear...........

The untwisting ended up being much more straight forward than I anticipated but I would recommend a time when you are not in a hurry.  Also make your changes in very small increments.  Although I think I mentioned earlier that it took a quarter turn of the jack screw, my notes indicate that it was only a one eighth turn; so be patient.  It’s pretty satisfying when you get it just right.  

I did the alignment a couple of different ways. Many sources say to put a precision level directly on the ways.  Well, this does not work with the PM 1236-T because the v-ways are a different height and the level is too far out of level to be useful. I think you can see this with this picture:




I decided to take the compound off the carriage and place the level on the carriage.  I liked this approach because you are not repositioning the level, which can produce errors and since the carriage is what holds the tool in position and is ultimately what determines the height of the cutting tool.  I placed tape on the the lathe at four evenly spaced intervals and took readings with the Starrett precision level by moving the carriage to each position using the carriage. I was careful not to let the level change position.  It really is surprising how exquisitely sensitive the machine level is.  These are the steps I took: 

1.) level precision level using the leveler on the casters at the headstock end
2.) take readings at positions 1,2, and 3
3.) adjust the jack screw at the tailstock end
4.) back to step 1

Here is my set-up and my results:













You can see that it took eight tries to get it to where I felt I couldn’t get it any better, which was under 0.0005”/foot for the length of the bed. I am going to stop here for a bit.  I have a very important date with a three year old to go to “Little Mermaid”.  I will tell you about the shirt later today but just let me say that it is a lesson in “the enemy of good is better” .


----------



## Firstgear

now I understand, you level the lathe to the base and the base has the casters that you lift off the ground with the outrigger jack screws when you park it.  I was missing the rest of the story but I see it now.  All is good!


----------



## Firstgear

Thinking about the differences in our lathes, I have the 1440GS from PM got me wondering why I couldnt do something very similar yet a bit different.  I thought about getting a couple of plates made up, 1" thick (I have a friend that has a fabrication shop and they can cut up to 3" thick steel among their many toys).  Not sure why I couldnt use a similar approach where I put the PM leveling pads that I got with my lathe on the 1" steel plates with 4 casters each.  The 1440GS weighs 1800 pounds.  I put a carpenters level down on the floor and the floor forward and backwards (to the wall and away from the wall) is fairly consistent in terms of levelness.  I think I would be concerned about the lathe "walking off the steel plates" if the floor wasnt fairly sloped the same.  Your thoughts on my thoughts and my approach?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Firstgear said:


> now I understand, you level the lathe to the base and the base has the casters that you lift off the ground with the outrigger jack screws when you park it.  I was missing the rest of the story but I see it now.  All is good!



Firstgear, it sounds like you have it correct but I want to make sure. One point I don’t think I made clear is that the baseplate does not need to be level to the stand.  Let me just briefly go over the leveling process:

1.) place the precision level, or whatever level you have access to, on the ways at the headstock end.  Use the leveling foot of the caster to center the bubble on the level.  The stand does not need to be particularly level, only the precision level needs to be level.

2.) move the level toward the tailstock at marked intervals recording the position of the bubble on the marks of the level as you go.

3.) once you reach the last mark at the tailstock end decide whether the tailstock is a bit high or a bit low toward the operator and make the appropriate adjustment of the jack screws to raise or lower the appropriate side of the tailstock. Use very small changes here. Minute changes are all that are needed.  Sometimes just tightening or loosening the nut on the anchor bolts is enough to make the difference you need.

4.) go back to the starting point and check the level.  It most likely will not be in the middle any longer.  Even though the change was made at the tailstock end it will almost certainly affect the reading near the headstock, so you need to re-zero the precision level again using the leveling foot of the caster, then work your way down toward the tailstock taking readings again, make and adjustment with the tailstock jack screw and start all over until you are satisfied. It took me eight times to get it where I wanted it.

I hope this helps


----------



## mikey

Have you done or do you plan to do a 2-collar test to finalize your settings?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Firstgear said:


> Thinking about the differences in our lathes, I have the 1440GS from PM got me wondering why I couldnt do something very similar yet a bit different.  I thought about getting a couple of plates made up, 1" thick (I have a friend that has a fabrication shop and they can cut up to 3" thick steel among their many toys).  Not sure why I couldnt use a similar approach where I put the PM leveling pads that I got with my lathe on the 1" steel plates with 4 casters each.  The 1440GS weighs 1800 pounds.  I put a carpenters level down on the floor and the floor forward and backwards (to the wall and away from the wall) is fairly consistent in terms of levelness.  I think I would be concerned about the lathe "walking off the steel plates" if the floor wasnt fairly sloped the same.  Your thoughts on my thoughts and my approach?



Firstgear,  I am not sure what you have in mind.  It sounds like you are thinking of having one plate under the base of each pedestal of your stand?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mikey said:


> Have you done or do you plan to do a 2-collar test to finalize your settings?



Hi Mikey.  I have not done that yet but I have Thomson shafting and drill rod ready to go!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

GL said:


> As with others, I am watching with interest at how this build goes.  My 1340GT headstock base had a crown that allowed it to flex - bump the lathe and it would wiggle for awhile.  I welded a 3/8" plate inside, with vertical reinforceing ribs to tie everything together.  Obviously, I was in the "tie it to the ground " camp - based on where I work.  My questions have been asked and answered, the proof will be known soon.  As Bruce said, you didn't know better and came up with a thoughtful alternative.  As I think about this, you look at old lathes with their elegant, but relatively unsubstantial, legs, this solution isn't that far out there.  One cool feature is you have not really changed anything if issues arise - the rubber isolation system could be replaced with something more solid, and your ground plate gives you a fairly flat plane to work off of.  Or maybe the headstock goes solid and the tail stays like it is.  From designing Diesel engine mounts, I know that the amount of preload on the bushings affects how they isolate - could be something useful while tuning things.
> 
> If this is what you come up with for a base, can't wait to see what you come up with on a real machining project.  You seem to think enough and detail oriented enough that you will fit right in.  Nice job,  thanks.



GL, it sounds like you came up with a good solution for your base problem.  All the projects listed on the initial outline of the post have been completed except for the last one on tolerances and adjustments. I have a lot planned for that so hopefully I can update you soon on how well the lathe performs.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

“The enemy of good is better”




So, I used the precision lathe on the carriage to adjust the twist in the lathe to slightly less than 0.0005”/foot.  But, oh no, that wasn’t good enough, so I thought I would try using a precision ground 2-4-6 block directly on the ways with the precision level.  I had a cheap set so I thought I would just mill out a groove so it would straddle the v-way.  Well those blocks I found out are ground and HARDENED so I ruined an end mill finding that out.  But I really wanted to try the block as well, so I put it in a vice, got the grinder out and went to work until I felt kind of warm, saw smoke, and when I looked down I saw favorite sweatshirt on fire. I think I may have my avatar for HM.

BTW, the results were the same.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                         
	

		
			
		

		
	




Tomorrow I am going to try to find some time to present some thoughts on vertical misalignment and it’s affects on taper to finish-up this section on leveling.


----------



## Firstgear

Titanium Knurler said:


> Firstgear,  I am not sure what you have in mind.  It sounds like you are thinking of having one plate under the base of each pedestal of your stand?


Yes, one plate with 4 casters each, the 4 casters under each pedestal means that the plates don’t have to be attached to the lathe.  The lathe only has to be level in the machining position on those plates, at least that is how I understand your approach.  The lathe sits on the plates with the PM levelers.  Am I simplifying this in my case?


----------



## Dabbler

Knurler, I really like your idea of a solid plate to mount your lathe to...   I'm always looking for a better way to do something!

When I built my lathe stand 38 odd years ago, I couldn't afford a big plate, nor did I have the equipment to move or lift it...  So I built a stand with two small 3/4" thick plates around 10" X 12", with 3" X 3/8 angle iron connecting them,  The whole thing has to be leveled together - not much of a burden, and has worked well all these years.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Firstgear,  are you about something like equipment dollies with casters instead of wheels under each column of your stand?




If so, that will certainly allow you to move the lathe but they will not keep the stand from twisting and affecting the lathe adjustment.  You would need to check and re-adjust with each move.  I hope that helps.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Dabbler said:


> Knurler, I really like your idea of a solid plate to mount your lathe to...   I'm always looking for a better way to do something!
> 
> When I built my lathe stand 38 odd years ago, I couldn't afford a big plate, nor did I have the equipment to move or lift it...  So I built a stand with two small 3/4" thick plates around 10" X 12", with 3" X 3/8 angle iron connecting them,  The whole thing has to be leveled together - not much of a burden, and has worked well all these years.



Dabbler, sounds like a lightweight version of a solid plate to me or what the airplane and boat guys would probably say was a plate with a lightening hole.  Sounds like it has served you well for many years.


----------



## Dabbler

well it has, but it isn't nearly as rigid as your plate.  I was in a hurry to get my lathe off the concrete, so I went with the money I had at the time.

My legs were also 3/8 3" angle splaying forward and back - the diagonals were 3/4 X 3/16 angle.  Not pretty but later I found that all that space under would work for storage:

here's a pic or 2:


----------



## Firstgear

Titanium Knurler said:


> Firstgear,  are you about something like equipment dollies with casters instead of wheels under each column of your stand?
> 
> View attachment 285878
> 
> 
> If so, that will certainly allow you to move the lathe but they will not keep the stand from twisting and affecting the lathe adjustment.  You would need to check and re-adjust with each move.  I hope that helps.


Hmmmm, I know I am missing something, but what makes that different than yours?  You have your ”leveled” lathe sitting on a base that moves.  I would have a leveled lathe sitting on a base that moves.  If yours comes back to level when you put it back why wouldn’t this come back to level when put back to the starting point on the floor where the lathe was initially leveled?  What am I missing?


----------



## Firstgear

I basically want to easily move the lathe from the wall to get behind it, cleaning, into the electrical box, into the area where the coolant is added etc.


----------



## mikey

@Firstgear, that is an 1800# lathe. 4 casters might work but 6 would probably work better. I should think that 4 under the headstock end and 2 at the tailstock end would work well, and you could attach them directly to the cabinet instead of a plate. This would simplify things, keep costs down and give you the mobility for moving and solidity when the wheels are raised. Many a lathe is configured this way and it is known to work well.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Dabbler said:


> well it has, but it isn't nearly as rigid as your plate.  I was in a hurry to get my lathe off the concrete, so I went with the money I had at the time.
> 
> My legs were also 3/8 3" angle splaying forward and back - the diagonals were 3/4 X 3/16 angle.  Not pretty but later I found that all that space under would work for storage:
> 
> here's a pic or 2:



Ah, yes, I think I see the angled leg just under your chuck wrenches.  It looks like you have probably had many happy hours at your lathe.  Your chuck wrench holder reminded me of a slightly different design for my plate.  It incorporates a couple areas for tools.  If I had it to do over I would do it this way; always nice to have plenty of space for tools.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Firstgear said:


> Hmmmm, I know I am missing something, but what makes that different than yours?  You have your ”leveled” lathe sitting on a base that moves.  I would have a leveled lathe sitting on a base that moves.  If yours comes back to level when you put it back why wouldn’t this come back to level when put back to the starting point on the floor where the lathe was initially leveled?  What am I missing?



I think I may not be fully understanding your set-up.  It seems to me that you plan on making TWO 1” thick plates that will fit under the headstock AND tailstock columns of your cabinet.  If that is the case, the difference between your set-up and mine is that the when you move your lathe the two independent columns can move, well, independent of one another and will transmit that movement to the lathe bed.  In my set-up that independent movement is eliminated or at least dampened by the equipment mounts so the SINGLE LONG PLATE ,that the entire lathe sits on, is not distorted. 

I agree with Mikey, if you are going to rarely move the lathe put some casters with leveling feet directly on your cast iron columns or make some outriggers to attach them to and re-level the base and re-adjust after moving the lathe.  If you want to try to eliminate twist with movement you would need to have a plate that runs the whole length of the lathe.  I hope this makes sense. To look at Carrymaster casters go to Zambia.com for their catalogue. I hope this helps and good luck, you have a beautiful lathe!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Vertical Misalignment and Taper

This is a brief discussion of how taper can be induced by a vertically misaligned lathe as the cutting tool travels up or down relative to the center-of-rotation(COR) as one moves longitudinally along the workpiece.  There is a bit of math, but not much.  

I guess one advantage of being a newbie is that you question just about everything.  So, when I read in the PM manual that vertical alignment was not “nearly as critical as Center-to-Center alignment” I wasn’t exactly sure what that meant.  Was it something that was a little bit non-critical and should be evaluated and adjusted or a lot non-critical and could be ignored?  

I wasn’t able to find any information on this but surely it should be easy to figure out.  I made some sketches and I was pretty sure that using the Pythagorean Theorem would be the key to solving the problem.  As some of you may recall the Pythagorean Theorem just says that if you have a triangle that has a right angle in it and you know the length of two of the sides you can calculate the length of the third.  I knew two of the sides of the triangle(the drop of the tool was one, and the radius of the work piece the other) I should be able to find the third side(the new radius of the workpiece).  This will make more sense in a little bit when you see some diagrams. It seemed to work, but eventually I realized that the change of the depth of the cut depended on the radius of what I was cutting. For example, if you are turning a piece that is 12” in diameter and the tool drops down an eighth of an inch as you travel along the workpiece that will have much less of an impact on the depth of cut than if the workpiece was 1” in diameter.  As the tool travels down the lathe longitudinally and the tool descends, the 1” workpiece surface will “move away” from the tool faster and the depth of cut will be less because of its greater curvature. Makes sense, but how do I account for this in the calculations?  Well, I needed someone smarter than myself so I consulted Dr Craig Jackson, the Chairman of the Dept. of Mathematics at Ohio Wesleyan University and told him what I was after.  Fortunately, he worked as a machinist while in graduate school and got to work on it and solved it in no time. This is his note to me(I wouldn’t spend a lot of time trying to figure it out):




Here is my translation:




The bottom line is that the change in depth of the cut is equal to the distance the tool descends(or ascends) squared divided by two times the radius.  

He also created a nomogram!




To use the nomogram go to the right side vertical axis and select the radius of the workpiece and follow the curved line down to where it intersects a line extended upward from the horizontal axis that represents the vertical error(wear), then follow that line over to the left vertical axis to get depth of cut error.  For example, for a 1” radius piece with a vertical error of .03 gives you a depth of cut error of 0.0004. Pretty neat, thanks Dr Jackson.  Now I know that the vertical error of my lathe, which is somewhere near 0.0005 is nothing to worry about. Will I use this often, I doubt it but now I can read the statement, ”vertical error is not nearly as critical as center-to-center alignment” with new understanding.

How does a descending or ascending tool effect taper? I think I will just attach a couple of drawings and let you think about it a bit.  In the drawings the tool travels from a to b(the result is the same if you go from b to a), COR is the center of rotation and the “x” marks where the tool is at the level of the COG:







Well, that’s it for leveling.


----------



## mikey

I assume by vertical misalignment, you mean the vertical misalignment at the tailstock? If so, and given that most lathes that are in decent shape will have very small amounts of vertical tailstock variance , maybe 0.010" or less, then the impact of this on work pieces of a practical size that will fit in most hobby lathes is essentially nil, with nil meaning a tenth or two. If this is so, and also given that scraping a tailstock so it is even front to back while also taking it down to compensate for said 0.010" of misalignment would be difficult, then the point is that we shouldn't worry about it at this level of error, correct?

My Emco lathe has under 0.0002" of vertical tailstock misalignment. Haven't worried about it before and I'll worry about it even less now.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Mikey, what I mean by vertical misalignment is what one would see if the lathe bed was not leveled or badly worn.  As the carriage moves longitudinally along the workpiece it, and the tool holder, descend(or ascend depending on the direction of the twist in the lathe bed), changing the depth of cut.  It is what I assumed we are trying to eliminate when we “level” a lathe.


----------



## mikey

Okay, my misunderstanding. I think it's cool that you were able to model it but truth be told, if I can get the lathe level enough to turn identical collars over a 10-12" run then that is good enough for me.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Yes, I had fun finding an answer but am afraid I went into the weeds there a bit.  Will do some more useful stuff next.




Quick question for you, is there a to time/length limit to a thread on HM?


----------



## Z2V

Titanium Knurler said:


> Quick question for you, is there a to time/length limit to a thread on HM?



Nope TK, keep it rolling. I’m finding you ideas very interesting


----------



## Titanium Knurler

OK, Z2V, as long as I know someone is out there I will keep going.  

What I plan on doing next is a couple of short sections(minor electrical stuff and then building a platform).  I also forgot to take time to indicate what I would do differently if I were to do these things again and to make recommendations to PM and LD so I thought I would briefly catch up on that then proceed with the outline.


----------



## BGHansen

Hi Titanium Knurler,

Still really interested in your string.  You brought up some math I hadn't through about since around spring term of 1980 . . .  Wow, have I forgotten a lot!  Makes me feel bad that I haven't checked my lathes' leveling in a few years (I haven't moved them during that time).  Great work you're doing here.

Bruce


----------



## Titanium Knurler

II. Set-up
   C.) Elecrical

Short section here. Three items: 220v single phase outlet, power cord and light.  I will show the wiring of the coolant system under that section.

I did not have a 220v, single phase outlet at the lathe location but I did have a wiremold raceway that I had installed for 110v.  I ran about thirty feet of AWG 12 wire.  This gave a voltage drop of slightly less than one volt. I installed a 220v GFCI breaker at the service panel.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	




My lathe did not come with a power cord so that needed to be wired. I used AWG12 harsh environment cable from Mcmaster-Carr industrial supply which is where I get the majority of my supplies. A really great company to deal with; they are just down the road in Chicago and often if I order in the morning I will usually get the item the same day.  Some more pictures:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	




The light is supposed to attach to the splash guard by the headstock but I was planning on installing a coolant and guard system and it was in the way there. Also, I didn’t want it to get splashed so I moved it over to the electrical box behind the headstock. The bracket that holds the light was a different color than the back lathe/splash so I painted it with some of the extra touch up paint I had.  More pictures:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	







That’s it for electrical, except for the coolant system, and there was no math!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

BGHansen said:


> Hi Titanium Knurler,
> 
> Still really interested in your string.  You brought up some math I hadn't through about since around spring term of 1980 . . .  Wow, have I forgotten a lot!  Makes me feel bad that I haven't checked my lathes' leveling in a few years (I haven't moved them during that time).  Great work you're doing here.
> 
> Bruce



Thanks Bruce, very happy you are interested in the string. Sorry about the math but I was curious and thought I would pass the result along.   Really a coincidence that I found a math professor that was a machinist.  I wouldn’t feel too badly about not leveling your lathes recently.  I bet you are getting good results and this really does seem to introduce only a very small error.  When I used Dr Jackson’s formula for my lathe I get an error of 0.00000025”.  I am not even sure what you call that number? Twenty five ten millionths? Whatever it is, it is good enough for what I do.

Take care


----------



## Jester966

Titanium Knurler said:


> Jester966,  think of it this way.  Say you are a machinist on a battle ship...Think of the plate on the mobile base as the battle ship.



I am well aware of the concepts of leveling a lathe, but didn't realize you had the "base plate" _between_ the lathe and the stand.



Titanium Knurler said:


> ...I don’t think there is anything I can do to make it rigid so it will always twist when it is moved.... so I isolated the two, somewhat, from one another.  The stand can twist when moved while the lathe stays rigidly attached to it’s baseplate...



This makes sense, and was good thinking.  I suspect the 1/2" base plate twists just as much (and likely more) than the lathe bed during the leveling process.  This isn't a necessarily problem though since once the lathe is leveled, it and the plate float independently of the stand.

Of course this setup will certainly not provide anywhere near the rigidity that a typical footing to the concrete floor does.  You're not going for rigid though - your going for mobile, and I think your solution is quite good.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

"I am well aware of the concepts of leveling a lathe, but didn't realize you had the "base plate" _between_ the lathe and the stand." 

Jester966, very much hope I did not offend you with my simplistic battle ship story.  If I did I apologize.

I think you are correct when you state that the plate probably twists with leveling. I considered this when thinking about the plate and decided that even if the plate did twist the two would reach a stable equilibrium.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

II. Set-up
    D.). Platform

The stand gained 3-1/2” with the outriggers and casters and another 3-1/2 inches with the machine mounts and plate.  I am not sure what a normal lathe height is but it seems like they are often pretty low.  The PM Manual lists the spindle height at 45” above the floor, I was at 51”, so I decided to build a platform. 

I built a framework using 2x4s, and covered it with 3/4” plywood, added some leveling feet and painted it. I sprinkled an anti-skid coating(like sand or pumice) on the fresh paint then painted it again to get a surface about equivalent to 50 grit sandpaper. I added handles on the side opposite the lathe, and rollers on the side of the lathe.  The rollers are normally not touching the floor.  However, when you lift the edge with the handles a few inches the rollers contact the floor and you can then easily pull the platform away from the lathe. Here is a kit view of the necessary hardware:




Some more pictures:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	




I got six inches back and now spindle height is back to spec.




That’s it for the Set-up section.  The next thing I will describe is the Coolant and Guard System.  Since my current project involves titanium I use this system frequently.  I did add a few twists to the stock system-stay tuned.


----------



## Larry42

I bought the PM1440HD 3 years ago. At about 2700# with the cast iron base I leveled it with a machinist level in both directions and both ends using the supplied mounts. When I turn using the face plate or doing odd shapes in the 4 jaw, I don't run fast enough to have any issues with vibration. My machine came with touch up paint. Service from PM was good. I've had a few issues with the machine but nothing major. Most annoying is the attachment of the cross slide to the taper attachment. I think I could fix that but haven't tried yet. The collet chuck I bought with the machine is very good. The 3 jaw chuck is OK but I've never used a high quality one. The noise level of the machine is quite low, probably due to all that cast iron.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Larry42, I just looked at the PM1440HD on PM’s website.  What a beast!  You don’t have to anchor it to earth, it is earth!  I love the heavy duty cast iron stand. What a ice machine. Thanks


----------



## Titanium Knurler

III.  Coolant/Guard System




I ordered the PM coolant system accessory for the 1236-T thinking it would be a nice thing to have in case I needed it.   Having never used one before it seemed a bit messy and probably uneccesary.  I was wrong.  Since I most often work with stainless, and more recently titanium, I tend to use it most of the time.  It is a very nice thing to have and I would certainly suggest it to someone that is considering it.  I did, of course, make some changes in the stock system from PM and I thought I would pass them along.

The kit from PM is composed of a tank, circulating pump, metal flexible hose, galvanized pipe with a valve and flexible plastic hose to direct the coolant onto the workpiece:




I replaced everything beyond the metal flexible hose with a combination irrigation and guard system that also attaches to the carriage, so it, like the stock coolant system from PM,  follows the carriage. When I researched this, it seemed like most guards that I saw were stationary and many could not be lifted up out of the way if you wanted.  I do not like looking through plexiglass, especially plexiglass coated with coolant, if I don’t have to, so it is nice to be able to lift it out of the way if you want.

I decided on a system made by Repar, an Italian company.  I found an amazing deal from Grainger industrial supply. Unfortunately, the item from Grainger does not have the combination support tube and irrigation system.  They sell only the guard and were unwilling to order from Repar. So I had to go to a Canadian company that is the sole North American distributor for Repar parts to order the irrigation tube(www.ferndalesafety.com) or KevinSlater(kevin@ferdalesafety.com, (514) 326-1243, ext.1224).  The part had to be ordered and it took several weeks to get it from Italy.  I honestly think they had to make one.  This is a photo of the Repar TC-1 that I used:




This project took quite a while but I think you will find it a very useful addition to your lathe. I will walk you through it quickly.  I will not burden the presentation 
with part numbers but if anyone is interested I am pretty sure I can track them down.

The first thing I did was to make a shelf to hold the coolant tank behind the lathe.  I did this for a couple of reasons. The first was to get the tank off the floor and on to the mobile base so they moved together.  The second reason was to make the stand more rigid since it was to be on casters.  Here is a kit view of the shelves I made from stainless angle:




The black material that you see is adhesive backed oil resistant Buna closed cell foam. It was added to reduce vibration of the tank:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	




Holes were drilled for the shelf about four inches from the bottom edge of the stand pedestals. This put the mounting bolts below the internal pedestal shelves.  The shelf was then bolted in place.  The oval holes in the shelf brackets allow for squaring-up and securing of the stand in the squared position:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	




Next was to modify the tank.  I took the original site gauge off and plugged the holes because I wasn’t going to use it and I could not get it to stop leaking. I used stainless o-ring bolts and oil resistant rubber washers. I did not want a leak behind the lathe that I could not easily access:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	




Next, I drilled a hole in the base for a drain with a barbed hose fitting. The hose that attaches to the barb fitting will go to the front panel gauge.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	




I attached an oil resistant seal to the edge of the tank, again to reduce vibration:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                         
	

		
			
		

		
	




I then secured the tank with the L-brackets on the shelf that use carriage bolts and wings nuts so they can be tightened by hand:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	




I temporarily attached the oil resistant hose to the barbed fitting and attached it to the front panel site gauge.  I then held the gauge with a ring stand and began to fill the tank with water.  I marked the “empty level”,  “full level” and “caution level”( where the coolant oil drops below the impeller on the circulating pump).  I then milled out a mark at the above levels and painted them red and yellow(caution level).  I also marked the front panel for drilling holes for the gauge:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	




I then drilled the holes on the panel and installed the gauge:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	




One of the things I liked about this site gauge is that it has a drain screw at the bottom.  I figured that I could change the coolant without moving the lathe.  Just drain it from the front and add coolant from the chip tray. I will show this on the next post since I just reached my limit on the photos that can be attached.


----------



## mikey

Very nicely done, TK! Love the detail. 

I joked about the Kool Aid but nailed the coolant level indicator - even a monkey can guess right sometimes!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mikey said:


> Very nicely done, TK! Love the detail.
> 
> I joked about the Kool Aid but nailed the coolant level indicator - even a monkey can guess right sometimes!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mikey said:


> Very nicely done, TK! Love the detail.
> 
> I joked about the Kool Aid but nailed the coolant level indicator - even a monkey can guess right sometimes!



Thanks Mikey.  I really liked the Koop Aid idea!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Here are the last couple of photos.  I will finish this up tomorrow.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Coolant and Guard System, cont’d

Next I will move on to what attaches to the lathe: the Repar TC-1 coolant and guard system and also the making and installing of some splash guards.

The Repar TC-1 coolant and guard system is nice because the vertical post that holds the hinged guard also acts as a conduit for the coolant. 

The first thing I did was to enlarge the holes on the new bracket to accept larger M8x1.25 screws, then I disassembled the system and painted it with some of the extra touch-up paint I had mixed earlier. The original color is a safety yellow that you see in the brochure.  I removed the stock PM irrigation tube then drilled and tapped the carriage to accept the new bracket. 

A couple before and after shots to show you where I am head:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                          
	

		
			
		

		
	




Pre, post enlarged holes, painting:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                          
	

		
			
		

		
	




Drilling and tapping carriage for the new bracket.  I wanted to make sur it did not interfere with the four holes to the right which are for the PM taper attachment.  Take your time with this:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                          
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                          
	

		
			
		

		
	




Now I can attach the tube and connect it to the hose.  There is an incredible mix of hose fittings here that took a while to sort out.  Not even the manufacturer or the distributor could tell me what they are so I ordered a pipe three ID kit from Parker and figured them out.  The fittings are stainless and are from McMaster-Carr.  Again, if you need part numbers let me know:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                          
	

		
			
		

		
	




In the second photo above I want to mention that the Repar guard came with a flimsy nylon screw on the bracket to tighten down the tube. I imagine they want to protect the tube but they just do not hold the tube at the correct height and allowed the tube to rotate, so I added a 1” collar with set screws and replaced the nylon screw with an M8x1.25 socket head cap screw.

I then added the guard to the tube.  The attachment point for the guard also had a flimsy nylon screw that I replaced with a stainless knob so that I can remove the guard without tools:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                         
	

		
			
		

		
	







I then made some splash guards; one for the front and one for the back to help contain the coolant.  I made them out of 14 gauge stainless. I first cut them to size, sanded them to give a matte finish. I did not want them acting like a mirror and giving me unwanted reflections.  The back guard I bent to 90 degrees and attached to the Repar guard.  The front splash guard attaches to the carriage. Some shots of the back splash guard:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                         
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                         
	

		
			
		

		
	







Now for the front splash guard.  Again 14 gauge stainless, sanded, then placed in a pinch roller to bend.  I inserted it into the pinch roller only in one direction so that a flat area was preserved.  I used this flat area to attach it to the carriage.  I drilled and tapped a couple holes on the carriage to hold it in place. Again, take your time here.  You might notice that the upper edge of the splash guard is outside the guard; this is so the dripping coolant fluid will fall onto the splash guard and run into the chip tray and return to the pump.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	







I used Hangsterfer’s CC 22 cutting oil.  I decided on this after a conversation with the people at Hangsterfer’s.  According to them it is a good all around cutting oil and coolant that works well with stainless, aluminum and titanium.  I did not want to go with a water based coolant because of corrosion issues and apparently it can develop a bad odor.   I just couldn’t see spraying my new lathe with water I would rather coat it with oil every time I use it.  Would like to hear what others think about this.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	







I am going to post this and finish up a little later with the electrical hook-up(easy) and maybe one or two loose ends.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Coolant and Guard System, finale

The electrical hookup for the coolant system is straight forward and the PM instructions are pretty good.  Coming from the electrical box on the motor are two cables.  One is pre-wired with the switch that goes to a knock-out on the control panel, the other cable has three pre-terminated wires labeled “R” and “S” that have ring terminals and a ground wire that has a fork terminal. They attach at the electrical box behind the headstock. I just ran the cable through an existing cable grip on one of the knockouts.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                          
	

		
			
		

		
	




The existing plastic cable clamps were not able to accommodate the extra cables so I added larger metal ones.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                          
	

		
			
		

		
	




Well, that about does it for the Coolant and Guard System.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

...except for this image that I forgot to include from the PM Manual:


----------



## mikey

That has to be the most elaborate guard system I've seen, TK. Very nicely done!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Thanks Mikey.  I really needed to have something to contain the coolant.  With Ti I am usually turning  >1,000 RPM and it gets messy.  This contains the cutting oil pretty well.  I use it a lot more than I anticipated.  I guess the guard did become a bit elaborate. When I design or modify something I try to keep it as simple as possible, sort of an Occams razor theory of design.  I believe simple is better because it is most often more reliable. Well, it works and I guess that is what counts.

GoIng to do some tool storage stuff next then some miscellaneous things including a headstock handwheel that uses a shrink fit to join two parts. First time doing this; looking forward to showing it to you.


----------



## mikey

Since you work a lot with Titanium and SS, coolant is a good idea and your system is nicely done. I chose not to use coolant because I don't want to deal with the mess but if I ever do I will remember yours.


----------



## mksj

Very nicely done and a lot of thought went into your build. A bit surprised you didn't go with 3 phase which can give a bit smoother finish. I would look into putting a pump oiler in the gearbox, a number of 1340GT owners have installed them to get more even oil distribution for the gears.

On the coolant, I switched to KOOLRite soluble oils years ago, mostly for my horizontal bandsaw. Prior to that the sump would start to stink after a few months, with the KOOLRite it went for over a year w/o problems and a marked improvement in decreasing rust. I did find the the unpainted  surfaces on my 1340GT would get surface rust very quickly, so would routinely wipe down the surfaces with oil. One concern that I would have with cutting oil with titanium is the risk of ignition/fire. I haven't machine Titanium, but coolant is pretty much required to draw the heat away, but I usually see recommendations for using water based soluble oils. The KOOLRite worked well, you also might check with David Best who had another water based coolant that he used and he thought highly of it, he does a lot of wok with SS 304. He also did extensive mods to his 1340GT.








						PM1340 - the Best & Jacobs Full Custom Edition
					

It’s been several months since I took delivery of, and posted about my PM1340 lathe.   It's time for an update since I’m nearing completion of what started as a straight forward VFD conversion project, and then took on a life of it’s own and led to a substantial customization of the stock PM1340...




					www.hobby-machinist.com
				








						Selection of Cutting Fluids| Cutting Fluid Selector Guide | KOOLRite
					

How to select metalworking coolants



					www.koolrite.com


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mksj said:


> Very nicely done and a lot of thought went into your build. A bit surprised you didn't go with 3 phase which can give a bit smoother finish. I would look into putting a pump oiler in the gearbox, a number of 1340GT owners have installed them to get more even oil distribution for the gears.
> 
> On the coolant, I switched to KOOLRite soluble oils years ago, mostly for my horizontal bandsaw. Prior to that the sump would start to stink after a few months, with the KOOLRite it went for over a year w/o problems and a marked improvement in decreasing rust. I did find the the unpainted  surfaces on my 1340GT would get surface rust very quickly, so would routinely wipe down the surfaces with oil. One concern that I would have with cutting oil with titanium is the risk of ignition/fire. I haven't machine Titanium, but coolant is pretty much required to draw the heat away, but I usually see recommendations for using water based soluble oils. The KOOLRite worked well, you also might check with David Best who had another water based coolant that he used and he thought highly of it, he does a lot of wok with SS 304. He also did extensive mods to his 1340GT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PM1340 - the Best & Jacobs Full Custom Edition
> 
> 
> It’s been several months since I took delivery of, and posted about my PM1340 lathe.   It's time for an update since I’m nearing completion of what started as a straight forward VFD conversion project, and then took on a life of it’s own and led to a substantial customization of the stock PM1340...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hobby-machinist.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Selection of Cutting Fluids| Cutting Fluid Selector Guide | KOOLRite
> 
> 
> How to select metalworking coolants
> 
> 
> 
> www.koolrite.com



mksj, thanks for your feedback, the most important of which is the Best link to his modifications to his 1340GT.  I thought I was going pretty far down the “modification rabbit hole” but I know realize there are people out there far crazier than I am.  What a beautiful job he did on his re-build. After reading his thread I realized that I have re-discovered the wheel in a couple of instances in my modifications(see upcoming adapter for headstock handwheel and oil change fittings).

As far as the three phase is concerned, I did not get that out of shear ignorance.  Would do it differently next time.  

The pump on the gearbox may be overkill for the way I use my lathe; I am not sure I use mine often enough and hard enough to make it worthwhile.  But thanks for the tip, I didn’t know such a thing was available.

Another good tip in your response is the possibility of igniting the cutting oil.  I think I will always have that possibility in mind and will move the fire extinguisher a bit closer.

Thanks, 
TK


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Well, I am sitting at the gate at the airport waiting to go somewhere warmer, which today is just about anywhere:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	




I thought I would start Section IV, on tool holding and storage. Included in this section is mounting a Huot drawer under the lathe, a Unistrut tool holder, collet racks and finally sliding chuck shelves.

A.) Huot Drawer-  I chose this drawer because it fit and it was nicely made.  It also happened to be very close to the same color as the stand.  Not much to mounting; just drilled and tapped holes for the mounting screws on the underside of the baseplate.  I lined the bottom of the drawer with Kennedy brown felt to protect my tools and keep them from sliding.  I wish I had room for another drawer but two just didn’t quite fit.  Here are some photos:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                         
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                         
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                         
	

		
			
		

		
	




The website seems to be acting-up since the update.  It was telling me I had over thirty images, which I did not, and then all of a sudden I lost three fourths of what I had written so I am going to sign-off before I lose this little bit that is left. Sorry, I don’t have the patience to redo it today, so I will try again tomorrow.


----------



## Dabbler

Sorry, a behind the scenes upgrade did not go well.  We have fixed most of it.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Dabbler said:


> Sorry, a behind the scenes upgrade did not go well.  We have fixed most of it.


Thanks for the update. I will try to post tomorrow.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Alright, I am going to give posting another try.  I thought I would post in small segments until I trust that I won’t lose a post in the middle of composing it.

B.) Unistrut Tool Holder- I imagine this idea has been around for a while.  I wonder who first came up with the it? Very handy. This is how I managed it on the PM 1236T.




I started with a 48” piece of non-perforated, 1-5/8” x 1-3/16” stainless Unistrut from Zoro.  When I cut it to length, I left a gap at the left side so the sliding tool holders could be removed without disassembling them.  On the right side I left 12” for a small tool shelf for my MT3 tools and chuck wrenches.  I drilled holes in the lower edge of the Unistrut for drainage. I then mounted it to the sloped, forward facing top edge of the splash guard. I then made a dozen or so moveable tool holders from 2”x 3/16” stainless angle.  I used button head head hex screws to secure the tool holders so I could easily tighten and loosen them with an Allen wrench.  Next, I made a 12”x 6” shelf from 1/8” stainless.  I drilled multiple 1-1/4” holes and placed oil resistant grommets in the holes to protect the MT surfaces and to minimize vibration. I made a second, slightly smaller shelf in a similar manner to mount below the first shelf.

Kit views:













	

		
			
		

		
	
.                        
	

		
			
		

		
	




Next, I made the tool holders out of 2” stainless angle.  They are 1-1/2” wide with a 7/8” tab that is bent downward to keep them from rotating in the channel. They remind me of deep sea fishing fighting chairs but just about everything reminds me of fishing.  There is a hole in the base for the button head screw that goes to a threaded square piece of stainless.  This configuration allows me to lock them in position.  There is a magnified view of a tool holder in the kit view above.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                             
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                             
	

		
			
		

		
	




Finished:



I am walking on eggshells here hoping the system is not going to crash so I will post this now and go on to the next tool holder on my lathe, the collet Rack.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Ok, i’m going to try another post.

C.) Collet Racks- this is probably the easiest modification I made to the lathe but somehow I managed to screw-up.  I ordered the 72 piece PM 5C collet set.  It comes with a nice rack composed of a panel and two supports:




Well, for some reason mine came with two panels.  Without thinking, I modified and mounted them on the lathe stand and then realized I had enough storage for 144 collets!  After laughing at myself for a bit, I removed them, cut them down and reattached the smaller panels.

To mount the cut-down panels I drilled a couple 1/4” holes in the folded edge of the panel that will be adjacent to the stand column.  You can see the folded edge that I am referring to under the magnifier in the above photo.  I used two 2x4’s as spacers to hold the panel in place while I marked the columns for drilling.  The 2x4’s hold the panels parallel to and the right distance from the angled stand panel. I then drilled some additional 1/4” holes in the face of the rack panel and the lathe panel.  I finished by attaching the racks with 1/4” screws on the side and 3-1/2”, 1/4” screws and 3” aluminum stand-offs.  

Kit view:






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                                
	

		
			
		

		
	







Finished:




Next, sliding chuck shelves.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Sorry, this is the Kit view with the cut down panel that I intended to insert:


----------



## Titanium Knurler

D.) Sliding Chuck Shelves- this is the last section on tool storage.




The lathe stand columns have two shelves welded in place.  I found this to be an inefficient use of space; you can only put things in as wide as the door opening and every time you need something in the back you have to take out everything in front of it.  So, I decided to use the left column for my chuck storage.  To do this I made some HDPE(high density polyethylene) shelves and mounted them to Accuride extra heavy duty full extension drawer slides. They hold up to four D1-4 chucks.

The first step was to make the HDPE plastic shelves.  I used HDPE because it would not mar the back surface of the chucks and would not rust. I used 3/4” black Starboard and cut them to 9-1/2”x15”.  I drilled and chamfered two sets of holes for my D1-4 chucks.  I added stainless steel angle transversely on the bottom side to increase rigidity.  These were attached with countersunk screws, again, to protect the back surface of the chucks.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                          
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                           
	

		
			
		

		
	







I then made longitudinal supports for each shelf to raise it to a level that would clear the door hinge.  This was taller for the lower shelf.  These supports are at the same width, and will attach to, the slides.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                              
	

		
			
		

		
	




I then made a jig out of plywood that was the same width as the door opening and would hold the glides perfectly parallel for marking the mounting holes on the stand shelves.  I took the time to do this since I did not want any toe-in with the slides which would limit the full extension of the slides.  I used a dado blade on a table saw to make the jig.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                             
	

		
			
		

		
	




Just a little bit about the slides.  They are 14” extra heavy duty full extension slides(model 9308E14) that have a lock-in and lock-out feature activated by a yellow lever on the front of the slide.  They are rated for 600lb in the usual vertical position however their rating drops to 180 lb in the flat mounting.  Plenty for my chucks. Also, the lock-out feature does not work in the flat mount position since it is gravity activated.  This was OK with me since I was really most concerned about the shelves being locked in place in the retracted position.  Since I move my lathe occasionally I didn’t want the door coming open and the shelves unexpectedly extending.




Finished:







Well, that finishes what I did for tool storage on the 1236-T.  Next is a Miscellaneous section.  The first item is something I use a lot and is my first experience with an interference or shrink fit of two parts.


----------



## Firstgear

The reason you got two panels is that they mount front to back and give a little depth to the racking such that the collets don’t wobble (if that is a term I can use, but you get the idea) when they are mounted as a stand-alone stand.  When you mounted it on your frame the second panel wasn’t needed to stabilize the rack.


----------



## Larry42

My set of 5C collets, also from PM, didn't come with the rack. I prefer to keep them in a clean location, a drawer. I've got a lot of Star board and UHMW from .75 to 3" thick left from jobs in the shop. That stuff comes in handy for a lot of things. My tool holder rack is also a pc. of Unistrut but I just beveled the  edge on the mill and hang the toolholders directly on that. I like your solution better since each holder takes up less space. I've now got 18 tool holders and need to make a more dense rack. I also need to get another roll around tool chest. 
We use a lot of Accuride slides. When they first moved manufacturing to Mexico there were a lot of quality problems but much better now. 
I'm considering buying an 8" rotary table for the mill, any experience with them?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Firstgear said:


> The reason you got two panels is that they mount front to back and give a little depth to the racking such that the collets don’t wobble (if that is a term I can use, but you get the idea) when they are mounted as a stand-alone stand.  When you mounted it on your frame the second panel wasn’t needed to stabilize the rack.



Thanks Firstgear! That makes sense.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Larry42 said:


> My set of 5C collets, also from PM, didn't come with the rack. I prefer to keep them in a clean location, a drawer. I've got a lot of Star board and UHMW from .75 to 3" thick left from jobs in the shop. That stuff comes in handy for a lot of things. My tool holder rack is also a pc. of Unistrut but I just beveled the  edge on the mill and hang the toolholders directly on that. I like your solution better since each holder takes up less space. I've now got 18 tool holders and need to make a more dense rack. I also need to get another roll around tool chest.
> We use a lot of Accuride slides. When they first moved manufacturing to Mexico there were a lot of quality problems but much better now.
> I'm considering buying an 8" rotary table for the mill, any experience with them?



Larry42,  I use Starboard frequently also.  It is nice that one can use woodworking tools with it but I am always surprised at how much it costs.  We have a plastics company in town that sells scraps from their big jobs.  I usually check there before I buy elsewhere.

I can’t quite picture what you do with your Unistrut.  If you have a chance send me a photo.

The Accuride was the only manufacturer that I could find that had very heavy duty full extension slides that weren’t incredibly expensive(hundreds of dollars).  The Accurides have worked very well and do not seem to sag at all even with the 8” 4JC and 6” 3JC on the same shelf.

Sorry, not much help with the rotary table. I bought a small, inexpensive rotary table from Grizzly for a project I was working on a while back but have not used it since.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

IV). Miscellaneous 
        A. Headstock Handwheel- this addition to the P 1236-T has been very useful.  I use it frequently, for example, when I am changing gears to help the gears mesh, when I am moving the chuck repeatedly when centering a work piece in the 4JC and, although it is probably considered bad practice, I use my hand on the handwheel to slow down the lathe at the end of an operation.  For me, it is better than doing these things by grabbing the chuck.  Although this is a pretty straightforward project it took me quite a while; it would be nice if PM had this as an option.

For this project I took a 10” aluminum wheel and balanced it, bored it out to match the ID of my spindle bore and then attached it to the spindle with an adapter sleeve. I attached the adapter with set screws on the spindle side and a shrink fit on the wheel side. The kit view below is deceptively simple; this project took me most of a weekend but I do like the result.  




The Wheel- I ordered several wheels from McMaster-Carr; the one that looked the best was a 10” spokeless aluminum handwheel with a 5/8” unthreaded through hole and 2-1/4” OD hub(MC 8515K53).  Unfortunately, all wheels from MC that I considered have a boss on them for attaching a handle, I would guess.  I was concerned that this would cause the wheel to be unbalanced and cause vibration on the lathe.  I put the wheel on a bicycle wheel balancer and not surprisingly found it to be unbalanced  To balance the wheel I drilled out the boss, checked it on the balancer, drilled out more and rechecked it until the wheel was balanced. 



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	




Each piece of tape marks where the wheel stopped.  The random arrangement indicates it is balanced.  I put it on a hand drill to test for balance.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	




Next I drilled, then bored the through hole of the wheel to match the diameter of the spindle bore. I didn’t want to lose any of the generous 1-9/16” spindle bore of the 1236-T.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	




Next, I enlarged the hole in the lathe cover.  The hole on the cover was eccentric and too small to accept the adapter collar that I was planning on making next so I enlarged the hole using a spindle sander.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	







So that finishes the modifications of the wheel, next is making the adapter sleeve.

Since I am still a bit concerned about losing the post due to the website problems I am going to post this and then go on to making the adapter sleeve in the next post.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

I usually start a section with an overall view of the finished project. I forgot to do that for this project so here is where I am headed:


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Now, on to the adapter sleeve. The adapter is just a stainless tube bored at either end to the diameters needed to fit over the spindle on one end and over the handwheel hub on the other end.  I left a shoulder internally to act as a stop for the spindle and hub. This was a real test for me as a newbie.  I really needed to nail the IDs of the adapter for the spindle and handwheel sides and I had very little experience boring.  All turned out well,  but I wish I had read Mikey’s Primer on Boring before this project. I WANTED a really close fit on the spindle side, where the adapter was attached by set screws, to eliminate any slop that might cause vibration but I HAD TO have the correct ID on the handwheel/shrink-fit side or I would have to start over. I started with a 3” length of 2-3/4”x1-1/2” 304 stainless tube from Speedy Metals.

The spindle end:  after I got the tube centered on the  4JC I faced the tube then put a scratch mark exactly where I wanted the set screws. I then bored the end of the tube, again, leaving a shoulder internally to act as a stop for when I slipped the tube over the spindle.  I was able to hit the diameter where I wanted but it was a bit tight, so rather than take my chances on getting the piece repositioned exactly the same on the 4JC I chose to very lightly file the OD of the spindle until there was a nice fit:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	




I blued the adapter for marking of the four holes that I would drill for the set screws at the position of the scratch mark made earlier.  I used four holes instead of three since I thought I would allow me to do some fine tuning of the adapter on the spindle using the set screws like a 4JC. Using a center drill followed by 1/4” drill I drilled them one at a time rather than drill across the piece on one pass.  I did this because I thought if I was off center with the first hole the error would be carried over and to the second hole.  It worked out well and I could easily pass a center punch through the holes indicating that they are lined up but if anyone has an easier way please let me know.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                      
	

		
			
		

		
	




I then put the adapter on the spindle and used all-thread rod (passing through the spindle), washers and nuts to hold it firmly in place while I used the holes in the adapter as guides for drilling flat bottom holes in the spindle. These flat bottom holes would act as recesses for the set screws. I put a witness mark on the spindle and adapter so that I would  be sure all lined up in the future, however they turned out that the holes line up in all positions.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                     
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                     
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                     
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                     
	

		
			
		

		
	







I then took the adapter off, threaded the holes to 3/8”-24 for the blunt tip set screws, and checked the TIR and was surprised to find it to be 0.0001-every dog has his day!



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                    
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                    
	

		
			
		

		
	




Will post this now and do the handwheel end of adapter and then the shrink interference fit of the handwheel to the adapter.


----------



## Larry42

Interesting that the end of your lathe's spindle is not threaded. The thru bore on my lathe is about the same diameter as yours, wish it was larger. 
I made a spider for the outboard end of mine to support long work. I failed to do it the correct way and it took me a long frustrating time. Lesson learned, maybe. I should have made a threaded piece the same as the end of the spindle that I could use as a test fit part while the spider was still chucked up. As it was I had to take the part out and test fit it to the spindle, TOO TIGIHT! Then I had to re-center it and get the thread to track the same. It's hard enough to do that on an external thread but this was a quite fine, internal. This project also required stopping a bore at the correct depth so it would butt against the end of the spindle when tightening the spider. Got to love those DROs.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Larry42, your project makes mine sound simple. Your idea of a test piece for fitting is a good one, I wish I had thought of that.  Also wish the spindle was longer and extended beyond the cover on my lathe. As you will see it would have made things easier for me.


----------



## Larry42

My lathe came with a built in coolant system. Have never used it. Didn't want to deal with the mess. I occasionally use some SS, have never used titanium. At my shop acid brushes are used for various things and bought by the gross, dirt cheap. They are my lube/"coolant pump." 
Todays project was turning some cypress balusters for my front porch. Was going OK until the hydraulic copy lathe tool refused to retract. Guess that will be tomorrows project, taking apart the valve system.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Shrink fitting the wheel hub to the adapter.  

This seemed like a good option to me.  It would put the pieces together tightly and permanently without fasteners to loosen or catch onto something while turning.  There are some complex formulas for determining the amount an alloy a certain size and configuration will expand on heating and shrink on cooling but I decided to take direct measurements instead.  I heated the adapter to 450 F and took multiple measurements and averaged them.  The ID of the adapter expanded by 0.005”.  I cooled the hub of the hand wheel in dry ice and isopropyl alcohol to the temperature of Milwaukee these days, -107 F.  It’s diameter contracted by 0.003”.  So there was a difference of 0.008” between their room temperature dimensions and their dimensions when heated and cooled.  Most sources that I read gave a rule of thumb of .001” difference in the two parts per inch of diameter so I bored the ID of the adapter to 0.004” smaller than the room temp diameter of the handwheel hub.  Remember the OD of the adapter is 2-3/4” so thIs should give me plenty of compression.  Too much and I could crack the pieces.  I then heated the adapter and cooled the handwheel hub.  I dropped the adapter on to the hub and almost instantly they were bound together; no time for repositioning. It was impressive.



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	







The next and final step was to create a way I could access the set screws to the adapter while the cover was in place.  To do this I made a new larger diameter, 5/8”, upper post for the cover with a hole in it and then drilled and tapped a hole in the top of the cover so an Allen wrench would then drop down through the hole, then through the hole in the new post and would be guided to the Allen screws on the adapter. When the hole was not being used it was cover with an Allen screw that uses the same size Allen wrench.  



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                       
	

		
			
		

		
	




That’s it for the headstock handwheel.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

I am going to skip ahead to part E under Miscellaneous which is installing Oil Drain Stopcocks.  I don’t have access to the information I need for the three short sections preceding this so I thought I would continue to move forward and then circle back around to do these skipped topics later.

V.  Miscellaneous
       E. Oil Drain Stopcocks- I have had the lathe for almost a year now and noticed a while ago that the original oil in the site gauge was getting dirty, so I decided to change the headstock oil and also the oil in the apron gearbox while I was at it.  The PM Manual suggests that to do this for the headstock gearbox you should remove the cover, take off the change gears, hold a paper channnel in place, remove the drain plug and let the oil run down the channel into a bucket on a stool. For the apron, it is a bit less involved and one is instructed to simply remove the drain plug, let the oil drain and then refill.  I guess the oil is to go into a shallow pan and then caried away to where you dispose of your waste oil. Not a big deal for either but I thought I would try to make it a bit easier and less messy so I would be more likely to change the oil regularly.  

This is how I changed the headstock oil the first time. The pipe is a bit of an improvement over holding a paper channel against the side of the gearbox while the oil drains but you can still see dirty oil pretty much everywhere:




I think it is an easier and cleaner process after the Stopcocks are installed:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.         
	

		
			
		

		
	




The Headstock Oil Drain Stopcock- First of all, be careful of the threads.  Like the coolant guard there are British, not metric, threads here. The drain plug is 3/8”-19 BSPT(aka R3/8-19) so at some point an adapter is need if you are going to go to US standard pipe thread such NPT or NPTF.

Here is the kit view of what you will need to start this job and a view of the location of the drain with the external change gears removed:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                 
	

		
			
		

		
	




The first thing to attach is the 90 degree elbow(3/8” BSPP F x BSPT M, MC 4860K428).  There is a very tight clearance here, in fact, I needed to reduce the diameter of the thread a bIt( I used a compressed die and re-threaded) to get the elbow to go in far enough that it would not hit the orange arm on the lathe:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	




Next, I attached a 6” stainless pipe(3/8” BSPT x 3/8” NPT, MC 2427K333),  3/8” NPT bronze shut-off valve(Canbraco(Appollo)78-250-10) and 45 degree 3/8” NPTF barbed fitting for a 3/8” ID drain hose(MC 53525K48).  I shortened the stainless handle so it would not hit the post that holds the cover.  I used pipe sealant on all joints:




I removed one of the feet on the valve, drilled the remaining foot out to 1/4”, drilled and tapped the lathe base to 1/4”-20 and fastened the valve with a socket head cap screw and 1” nylon stand-off:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	




This set-up allows me to easily drain the oil without taking the cover off which is especially nice for me since I have the headstock handwheel that I would need to remove first:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	







The valve on the apron gear box was also pretty straightforward.  I removed th M8 x 1.25 drain plug screw, drilled it out to 7/16” using a short drill bit and an angle drill.  I then tapped it to 1/4-18 NPT.  I then put in a stainless 1/4” NPT 90 degree adapter(MC 4452K472) and a 1/4” NPT on/off valve(MC 8179K74) with a hose barb for 3/8” ID tubing(like the headstock drain):



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	










That’s it.


----------



## Dabbler

very nice idea!  I was thinking along the same lines, but you have developed into a way better idea than I came up with!


----------



## Larry42

I wonder if the will make using the change gears slower. I'll bet you have figured out how to minimize the change over time. Most of the equipment in my shop is metric and I do repairs for them so need to use the change gears. Improving the oil drain has been on my todo list for quite some time. British pipe threads are standard on all my European equipment. Hadn't thought about it on Chinese. 
The oil fill and drains, on mine, are as awkwardly deigned as on yours. The head stock drain is partly behind the drive belts, the gear case fill is very close to the change gears. The apron drain is on the bottom like yours. Next time I have to do oil changes I'll fix them.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Dabbler said:


> very nice idea!  I was thinking along the same lines, but you have developed into a way better idea than I came up with!



Thanks Dabbler, I bet your idea works well also.  Fortunately, there are many ways to accomplish these things, that’s the fun of it!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Larry42 said:


> I wonder if the will make using the change gears slower. I'll bet you have figured out how to minimize the change over time. Most of the equipment in my shop is metric and I do repairs for them so need to use the change gears. Improving the oil drain has been on my todo list for quite some time. British pipe threads are standard on all my European equipment. Hadn't thought about it on Chinese.
> The oil fill and drains, on mine, are as awkwardly deigned as on yours. The head stock drain is partly behind the drive belts, the gear case fill is very close to the change gears. The apron drain is on the bottom like yours. Next time I have to do oil changes I'll fix them.



Larry42,  it seems like the drain systems are a bit of an afterthought for the manufacturers. It would be a nice thing if PM offered something like this as an accessory kit or even a standard feature on the 1236-T.

I went through the various gear configurations after installing the drain system and all was OK.

It’s funny how a small impediment to doing something, like taking the cover and change gears off and well, cleaning up a mess, can dramatically affect how often you do something.  I waited too long to change the oil the first time.  I think this set-up will help me keep up with the oil changes.

I hesitate to show you this, but before I changed the oil I ran the lathe for about ten minutes to warm-up the oil. This is the oil in the site glass just prior to the change:




Ugh


----------



## Firstgear

So how many run hours do you get to a change of oil?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Firstgear said:


> So how many run hours do you get to a change of oil?



Firstgear, this was the first oil change.  I got the lathe about a year ago, light use. Do you have any recommendations regarding oil change intervals.

This is what I used:


----------



## Firstgear

I don’t maybe somebody who has experience in this area can give some good ideas...


----------



## mikey

Emco recommends a gear oil change every 500 hours of use. The first oil change usually looks like that because all the crap that remains from manufacturing is still in there. The oil should stay cleaner for much longer this time.


----------



## Dabbler

My local distributor sells a compaible gear head lathe, and recommends first  change after 100 hours of use or sooner, with changes every year of 500 hours thereafter.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mikey said:


> Emco recommends a gear oil change every 500 hours of use. The first oil change usually looks like that because all the crap that remains from manufacturing is still in there. The oil should stay cleaner for much longer this time.



Mikey and Dabbler, thank you, that is very helpful.  I was a little concerned about the appearance of the oil, a bit like liquid graphite at the bottom of the headstock, but all else looked great.


----------



## Larry42

I don't have an hour meter on my lathe. Changed oil after the first couple of months of intermittent use. It still looked like new. I had opened the headstock gear case when I got it to check for crap. (I've heard all the horror stories about casting sand etc.) It was very clean, no oil either. The other two cases had oil. According to the manual you should change oil every year. Since I'm a hobbyist it would take a long time for me to match one year of production use. The oil still looks like new after two years.  The gear case that drives the feed shafts had a leak. I took it apart to replace the gasket, so it got changed. What a PIA it was to get back together. My manual recommends Mobil DTE Heavy Medium for all cases and the ways. Cost was $83 for 5 gallons locally. I ordered the lathe 6/26/16, $6999. Came with Steady & follow rests, 6" 3 jaw, 8" 4 jaw, 12" face plate, drill chuck, wedge QC with 5 holders, foot brake (works well,) coolant system, Easson DRO installed, Leveling pads, light. Got these options: Taper attachment $495, 5C adjustable collet chuck w/D-4 back plate (very nice) $299, 35pc. 5C collet set (.0005 TIR) $140. $160 discount on all for paying by check. It took until October to get it. It came with a MT4 keyed chuck but the lathe has a MT3 tailstock. Matt sent me a very nice keyless chuck to replace it. 
I checked the current price $7773 but doesn't have the DRO or drill chuck ($650 & 80)  so it has gone up $1504 in 2 1/2 years.


----------



## Firstgear

Dabbler said:


> My local distributor sells a compaible gear head lathe, and recommends first  change after 100 hours of use or sooner, with changes every year of 500 hours thereafter.


Makes sense, my Corvette Z06 came with oil change at 500 miles....


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Larry42 and Firstgear, looks like you both are driving deluxe machines although Firstgear’s look like it is more fun.

With my might light use, I think a reasonable approach would be to change the oil every few years unless I see in the site gauge that it is getting dirty.

Thanks guys!


----------



## Firstgear

Titanium Knurler said:


> Larry42 and Firstgear, looks like you both are driving deluxe machines although Firstgear’s look like it is more fun.
> 
> With my might light use, I think a reasonable approach would be to change the oil every few years unless I see in the site gauge that it is getting dirty.
> 
> Thanks guys!


That was my wife and I last September running in the 105 mph class at the Silver State Classic run in Nevada.  They close off 90 miles of two lane highway and your goal is to average your class speed over the 90 miles. Our target time was about 51 minutes and 25.714 seconds.  We won our class, we were slow by 0.0373 seconds.  She has two stop watches and every mile tells me if we are fast or slow and by how much.  With a half mile to go she figured we were 0.100 seconds slow, so By the time everything computed in my head, I pushed the speed up to 118 mph.  

We trailered the car from Ohio, 5,000 miles round trip.  My Corvette is a 2015 Z06 with some mods, it has 620hp and 635 ft-lbs at the rear wheels.  The record run over the 90 miles was in the unlimited class and that car averaged 217mph with a top speed of 242 mph.  That was done by a repurposed NASCAR car.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Happy to see you are both wearing hemuts!


----------



## Firstgear

Titanium Knurler said:


> Happy to see you are both wearing hemuts!


The event has very rigid safety requirements.  Driver and navigator have to have approved racing helmets, gloves, shoes and minimum cotton suit.  On the back of your helmet you have to have your blood type.  Your car goes through an inspection and tires can be no older than 5 years and rated for the speed you are running.  Additionally before you run, when you are in the queue, there are four tire inspectors with knee pads that as you roll your car slowly forward they look for a nail or anything in your tire.  If they find something you have two options.  Leave it in and you can’t run.  You can have them pull it but if the tire leaks air you can’t run.  Considering you have about $1,000 in event fees never mind getting the car there and home along with hotel and food.

There have been people killed in the event before and they are very serious about the requirements you and your car have to meet.


----------



## Z2V

Titanium Knurler said:


> Mikey and Dabbler, thank you, that is very helpful.  I was a little concerned about the appearance of the oil, a bit like liquid graphite at the bottom of the headstock, but all else looked great.



TK, my 1236 was the same. I drained it and wiped the gunk out and refilled it. All is well now. It was filthy though.
I’ll say again, thanks for the detailed write up of your build out. You have gone all out on this project, well done.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

I did the same with my headstock, hopefully it will stay pretty clear after this first oil change.  It certainly should be easier to change the oil next time around.

Thanks Z2V, I appreciate your feedback.  I have a few small items to go(QCTP, Taper Attachment, and Microstop Clutch Adjustment) then I will probably disappear for a while to complete the last section on Checking Specs and Adjustments.  Believe it or not, I am looking forward to this section and I want to play around with it for a while.  I know it has been a long slog,  I am happy you have been able to stick it out.


----------



## MWCurl

TK

We corresponded through this forum a week or two ago. I am still considering the1236T. Can you tell me how to PM on this site? If not, my email address is mcurl@sextonsinc.com. Please contact me.  Thanks.

Mike


----------



## Dabbler

Mike, hover your mouse over the blue "Tianium Knurler" (for example) in the left side of the thread.  A dialog will appear that includes a link to "Start Conversation".  This is the easiest way to start up a PM with somebody.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

V.  Miscellaneous 





       B. Quick Change Tool Post(QCTP)- what a great invention the QCTP is!  The last time I used a lathe was in high school when we had South Bend lathes and lantern style tool posts:




I am sure there are some of you that use the lantern style toolpost, and you probably use it better than I use my QCTP,  but remember I am a newbie easily impressed by these things.  But to be able to quickly change tools and have it rigidly held in exactly the same position as the last time you used it or to quickly make adjustments and quickly lock it in place is a wonderful thing.

I thought I would briefly go over how to measure the Lathe Center Height(LCH) and the minimum Tool Center Height(TCH) and why it is important in your selection of a tool post.  It turns out that just because you have a tool holder that will hold a 1” shank tool it does not mean that it will work with your lathe.  I found this out first hand.  I had my eye on a tool that only comes with a one inch square shank.  I thought if I ordered a tool holder that would accommodate a 1” shank it would work on my 1236-T,  however, I found out that I don’t have quite enough LCH and will have to have the shank ground down to 3/4” to make it work on my lathe. After going over Center Height I will go over the 4-way tool post that comes with the lathe, the PM QCTP and finally the Dorian QCTP that I use.

To measure the LCH, one just measures from the top of the compound to the lathe centerline.  The 1236-T measures just under 1-1/4”:




Here is how to calculate the minimum TCH.  It is just th height of the lower lip of the tool holder + the height of the tool that you want to use:




If the minimum TCH is greater than the LCH then the tool is too tall and will be above the center line of the lathe.  

Aside: American-style T-nut mounting vs. European-style threaded post. PM has accommodations for both:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	





The stock PM 4-way tool post- it is attached to the compound in the American-style using a post and T-nut and has an enormous 1-1/8” opening for tools but much of it is unusable since with this holder and lathe the maximum usable tool height is 5/8”.  To directly measure this I put a scribe in a collet chuck and marked it directly on the tool holders:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                
	

		
			
		

		
	




The scribed line shows the minimum TCH which is the largest tool height that can be used.  In this case it is 5/8”:




The PM QCTP- this is quite a bargain.  You get a QCTP and five tool holders for about a third of the price of the equivalent Aloris or Dorian tool holder alone.  Here are some photos of the QCTP, the tool holders and how it is attached:  



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	




There are two similar tool holders available for square shanked tools from PM: the 250-201 that will allow you to use up to 5/8” shanks and the 250-201-XL that will allow you to use a tool with a 3/4” shanked with the 1236-T.

The Dorian SDN30BXA QCTP-  this is a very nicely made piece of equipment.  I originally purchased it because it’s tool holder had a 1-1/16” opening which I thought would nicely accommodate the 1” shanked tool I had my eye on, however, once I measured the LCH and the minimum TCH, I discovered that only about 13/16” was available because of my LCH.   Did I return it when I found this out?  Well, no, I didn’t.  I will say that there is one disadvantage of the Dorian QCTP and that is that you need to machine some shoulders on the T-nut supplied.  I milled the shoulder so that the top of the nut fell .01” short of flush with the top of the compound and also left .01” space between the bottom of the T-nut and the bottom of the T-slot so it would easily slide into the slot.

Isn’t she a beauty?






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	









	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	




The last photo just shows the PM and Dorian QCTP side-by-side and the Dorian D30BXA-1, PM 250-201 XL and PM 250-201with there respective maximum tool heights that can be used with the 1236-T.




To summarize, I would get rid of the stock 4-way tool post(how do you change the height of the tool anyway? Shims?), get a good QCTP and pay attention to the lathe Center Height when shopping. I may have belabored the lathe Center Height a bit but it is an important thing to consider, especially if you have a nifty 1” shank tool in mind...ah, but that will be the topic of another HM thread.


----------



## mikey

Dorian posts are definitely prettier than an Aloris if you get a good one.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

V.  Miscellaneous 
       C. Taper attachment




Like most things we purchase for our shop I had a project in mind when I purchased it. The part that I wanted to make was to be made of titanium, was about 4” long, about 3/8” in diameter and had about a 1 degree taper.  My order of operations did not include turning between centers and I didn’t particularly want to offset my tailstock since I wasn’t keen about readjusting the lathe every time I wanted to create a taper.  I did a bit of reading and discovered that there are four ways, that I could find, to create a taper on a manual lathe.  The title of this sections tells you the end of the story but let me tell you how I got there.  

The four ways to create a taper on a manual lathe
       1. Using the compound
       2. Offsetting the tailstock
       3. Tailstock offsetting device
       4. Taper attachment

1. Using the compound is simple, just rotate the compound to half the angle required and cut:




This unfortunately would not work for me since it is only good for short lengths and relatively acute angles.

2. Offsetting the tailstock is much better than using the compound for longer pieces and small angles like I need but I was not planning on turning between centers and this technique requires re-adjusting the lathe every time you use this technique. So, this would not work for my purpose.

3. Tailstock offsetting device.  This was getting closer; it offsets the tailstock but does not require re-setting the ailstock when you are finished.  I knew I was not going to use this technique but during my research I found a beautifully made offsetting device made by Royal and purchased it.  The device has a micrometer for setting the offset, a ball-nosed live center and a spirit level for making sure the device is level:






	

		
			
		

		
	
. 

This one, unfortunately, is no longer manufactured but there are some others available new on eBay:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                  
	

		
			
		

		
	




Why the spirit level on the Royal unit?  Well, in every source that I read about turning a taper they all mention the importance of starting, and keeping, the cutting tool at the level of the axis of rotation or one will get inconsistent results.  

Using the table that came with the tailstock offset device and Dr Jackson’s formula for calculating the error in cutting depth created by a vertical error(in this case the rotation away from level of the tailstock offset device). Let me walk through how significant this is.  If you have an aversion to math just skip this and go to the next section.  Here is part of the table that came with the Royal device:




If you look at the blue oval it gives directions and an example for using the chart. So, for a 2 degree taper on a 5” workpiece one offsets the device .087”.  This is the reduction in the radius of the workpiece.  Easy enough, but what if the offset device is not level and it raises or lowers the workpiece, say 0.1” on a 0.25” radius workpiece.  Using Dr Jackson’s formula the change in depth of cut would be 0.02”((.1x.1)/(2x0.25)). So, at the end of the cut nearest the offset device you would not see the radius reduced by 0.087”, like you expected, but instead it would be reduced by only 0.067”.  That is a 23% reduction in your taper at the end of the workpiece.  What is even worse is that the elevation or depression of the workpiece will change as you go from the spindle, where there is minimal displacement, to the offset device, where it is maximal. Unfortunately, the Royal offset device does not work for my application because  I am not planning on working between centers for this project but it is a work of art and I now know I must be very careful to make sure it is level, and stays level, when I use it. 

4. Taper attachment- this turns out to be the tool that I need for my project.  It can create a taper of +/-10 degrees over a length of ten inches, I don’t have to change my order of operations to include turning between centers and I don’t have to re-calibrate the lathe once I am finished. The only disadvantage is that the cross slide lead screw needs to be disconnected and the drawplate needs to be reconnected when the taper attachment is in use.  The instructions in the PM Manual are very good so I will just show you a few photos from the Manual and of my installation on the 1236-T with the splash guard removed.  Basically you bolt it onto the four pre-drilled holes on the backside of the carriage and zero it.




Attaching to the carriage:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                
	

		
			
		

		
	




Removing the bolt to the cross slide leadscrew nut:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                
	

		
			
		

		
	




Clamp and tie rod as well as draw plate are attached:




Zeroing:




The attachment comes without a reference mark on the taper guide.  This is added once the taper attachment is zeroed:







That’s it for the PM taper attachment.


----------



## Tozguy

Titanium Knurler said:


> Why the spirit level on the Royal unit? Well, in every source that I read about turning a taper they all mention the importance of starting, and keeping, the cutting tool at the level of the axis of rotation or one will get inconsistent results.



That Royal tool is very nice, especially the round shape of the center tip. Curious as to why the scale goes from zero to 5 and back to zero.

Over the range of adjustment of the tool I would not be concerned at all about it slipping off level from vibration and cutting forces. The MT taper has plenty of hold to prevent that. After using a boring head a few times for offsetting the TS center to cut long slow tapers I can say that the Royal should not be very difficult to set up level and to keep it that way. It would be great to get your comments on using it since it looks like it would work like a charm.

The crux of cutting long slow tapers between centres regardless of the mechanical approach is to avoid chatter and patterning. If you ever come up with a practical follow rest for taper turning I am all ears and eyes.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Tozguy, here is a better picture of the scale on the Royal tool:  




As you can see, the zero on the left is where the tool is lined-up and the zero on the right represents a 10.

This is a photo from the box. I guess Emco Lux is a European Parts supplier.  I wonder what the 244 000 represents? Probably a part no., or maybe a price?




I am not sure how often you turn a long taper and how much you want to spend on a self adjusting follow-rest but it looks like gunsmiths use a hydraulic follow rest to self adjust the rest as the taper is formed.  Here is a thread that I found on the topic: 






						Is there a lathe that has a follower rest to allow taper turning
					

Do any of you have a lathe that will allow you to turn a 15 inch  long taper using a follower rest?   Markus



					www.practicalmachinist.com
				




I wonder if there is a cheaper spring-type available or could be made?  Sounds like a fun project to me.

TK


----------



## Titanium Knurler

For anyone interested in the PM Taper attachment I should have spent a little more time on zeroing it.  Here is a photo that shows how I did this:




After removing the Draw Plate I put a magnetic based indicator dial on the carriage with it’s tip on the Follower Carriage. I adjusted the angle of the Taper Guide by loosening and then re-tightening the screws holding the Taper Guide in place(no. 3 in the photo).  I then moved the Dove-tail slide back and forth, readjusted the Taper Guide, until I got zero movement on the indicator dial.  

Another small thing I should have mentioned is that when the Draw Plate is disconnected it leaves the threaded holes on the Carriage open to collect debris, so I put set screws in place to plug the holes.  I roughened the threads a bit before putting them in so they would not vibrate out of position and prevent the Draw Plate from moving freely and binding the crossfeed while the Taper Attachment is disconnected:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
.                   
	

		
			
		

		
	




Next I plan on posting the Adjustment of the Carriage Stop Clutch.  I haven’t done this yet, so if all goes well I will post this soon.  Mikey, I know you are not a fan of this mechanism, I recall you saying something like it was a “Newbie assault on a lathe”.  I may find out why later today.


----------



## Tozguy

TK thanks for the link and reply re the scale, I need to have my eyeglasses tuned I guess.


----------



## MWCurl

TK

As you are aware, I am considering purchasing a PM 1236-T.  The description on the PM website states this lathe comes with a 6” Economy 3-jaw Chuck. How would you characterize this chuck? Do you know the difference in repeatability and run out between this chuck and a high precision 3-jaw or 4-jaw chuck?

Also, what is your typical depth of rough cut and depth of finish cut for stainless steel and titanium?

Mike


----------



## Titanium Knurler

MWCurl,  I am afraid I have not tested the stock “economy” chuck. Here is a photo of it on the top shelf of my stand.  Even though it is on my “top shelf” I probably unfairly labeled it less than top shelf and purchased a Bison Set-Tru for working on good stuff:




“Bottom Shelf”:




I use exactly what Seco recommends since I use their inserts for titanium and ss.  Here are their recommendations as well as a sample piece of titanium in which I tried their three recommended settings:







Hope that helps,
TK


----------



## Titanium Knurler

V. Miscellaneous 
       D. Microstop clutch adjustment-  Well, this went more smoothly than I anticipated but was caught off guard by the forces involved.  What do you think the “force”, in lbs, turned out to be for allowing the clutch to slip reproducibly but still have enough force not to trigger while turning?  100#?, 200#?, 300#?  More?

This is how I adjusted the clutch but please keep in mind that these settigs may need to be modified if I find the clutch is slipping prematurely.  I simply backed off on the two set screws one half turn at a time and had the carriage travel into the stop.  If the stop was pushed down the way, the clutch was not slipping soon enough, I then backed off some more.  I repeated this until I found that four half turns seemed to be correct.  On my 1236-T this put the top of the set screw just flush with the counter sunk holes.  Here are the pre-, post-adjustment photos of the clutch screws:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                 
	

		
			
		

		
	




I then placed a Force Meter between the carriage and the headstock and ran the carriage into the meter.  It began to sound it’s overrange warning at 154lbs so I had to stop the “experiment”. 



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                 
	

		
			
		

		
	




So I rigged up a scale that has a range of 20-2,000 lbs.  Surely it must be less than that!



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                 
	

		
			
		

		
	




Next, I tested reproducibility of the carriage to stop at the same position at the setting as shown in the photo below:



	

		
			
		

		
	
. 

I repeated it ten times and found the carriage to stop within 0.0001” of the original position, but you must really clamp down the stop very tightly or it will get pushed along the ways at this setting of the clutch. I set it this way because I did not want the clutch slipping prematurely while I was cutting.

I also tried the stop on either side of the carriage with similar results:



	

		
			
		

		
	
.                
	

		
			
		

		
	




Well, that’s about it for the clutch adjustment, somewhere around 350lbs of force seems about right.  I will update this in the future if for some reason it doesn’t work well.  I hope this helps and I hoped it puts to rest any thoughts that I might be crazy, now you know for sure.  Seriously, to me “367 lbs of force” is much better than “four half turns from the factory setting”.  Who knows for sure where those set screws started on your machine?


----------



## MWCurl

TK

Thanks for the prompt response.  Your comments were helpful.

Mike


----------



## mikey

I've only used the clutch when boring on one occasion and that was to test it to see if it works. It does. I happened to have my hand on the saddle feed at the time because I worried that I might have to emergently shut it off. The clutch worked but I could also feel the feed handle load up, which tells me the saddle feed mechanism is under strain. Given that I need my power feed much more than I need a stop for boring, I have personally decided that I won't use the clutch this way. Besides, I generally have my brain in gear when boring and it requires no significant effort to kick the saddle feed out of gear when approaching the carriage stop and then manually feeding gently into the stop.

Having done hundreds of blind bores without a clutch, I know I don't need it for this purpose. I need it in case I make a mistake and crash. It will slip until I can stop the lathe without stripping my saddle feed. I know PM lists using the stop for boring so I guess they intend for you to use it that way. For myself, I won't do that.

I noticed that your carriage stop is directly contacting the saddle body. My Emco lathe has a hardened dowel pin where the stop makes contact; this limits wear on the cast iron saddle, which seems like a good idea to me.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Mikey,  I intend to use it the same way.  As a beginner, I still stop for a moment and ask myself “ OK, what are you going to do if this goes wrong?”  I don’t have the experience or “muscle memory” yet to respond like I would like to. This is why I have changed the motor control lever knob to red like the e-stop button.

The hardened pin on your Emco is a very good idea.  If I was planning on using the clutch often I would do something to protect the casting; 370lbs is a lot, especially if you are contacting that area often.  

If your Emco is anything like the Royal tailstock offset device sold by Emco it must be a beauty.


----------



## mikey

My lathe is a beauty, at least to me. I pulled it apart (except for the headstock) to clean and lube it and was amazed at how precisely everything is designed and built. Everything fits, nothing needs to be forced, and the machining is top notch. Little touches, like that carriage stop dowel pin, are everywhere. Zero backlash on the cross slide and compound feeds result in reduced chatter and prolonged component life. Precision ground and hardened spindle running in FAG bearings results in zero spindle run out with little heat generated. Hardened and ground gear train with FAG bearings make it quieter at top speed than a Compact 8 running at low speed. Rohm-built lathe chucks and live centers, Llambrich or Rohm drill chucks, etc, etc.

At the time the Super 11 was built, it was their flagship. Built to a DIN tool room standard, they used top shelf components to assemble it. Those Austrians sure know how to build a lathe!


----------



## Larry42

Titanium Knurler said:


> V.  Miscellaneous
> 
> View attachment 287182
> 
> 
> 
> B. Quick Change Tool Post(QCTP)- what a great invention the QCTP is!  The last time I used a lathe was in high school when we had South Bend lathes and lantern style tool posts:
> 
> View attachment 287181
> 
> 
> I am sure there are some of you that use the lantern style toolpost, and you probably use it better than I use my QCTP,  but remember I am a newbie easily impressed by these things.  But to be able to quickly change tools and have it rigidly held in exactly the same position as the last time you used it or to quickly make adjustments and quickly lock it in place is a wonderful thing.
> 
> I thought I would briefly go over how to measure the Lathe Center Height(LCH) and the minimum Tool Center Height(TCH) and why it is important in your selection of a tool post.  It turns out that just because you have a tool holder that will hold a 1” shank tool it does not mean that it will work with your lathe.  I found this out first hand.  I had my eye on a tool that only comes with a one inch square shank.  I thought if I ordered a tool holder that would accommodate a 1” shank it would work on my 1236-T,  however, I found out that I don’t have quite enough LCH and will have to have the shank ground down to 3/4” to make it work on my lathe. After going over Center Height I will go over the 4-way tool post that comes with the lathe, the PM QCTP and finally the Dorian QCTP that I use.
> 
> To measure the LCH, one just measures from the top of the compound to the lathe centerline.  The 1236-T measures just under 1-1/4”:
> 
> View attachment 287183
> 
> 
> Here is how to calculate the minimum TCH.  It is just th height of the lower lip of the tool holder + the height of the tool that you want to use:
> 
> View attachment 287185
> 
> 
> If the minimum TCH is greater than the LCH then the tool is too tall and will be above the center line of the lathe.
> 
> Aside: American-style T-nut mounting vs. European-style threaded post. PM has accommodations for both:
> 
> View attachment 287188
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 287187
> 
> 
> 
> The stock PM 4-way tool post- it is attached to the compound in the American-style using a post and T-nut and has an enormous 1-1/8” opening for tools but much of it is unusable since with this holder and lathe the maximum usable tool height is 5/8”.  To directly measure this I put a scribe in a collet chuck and marked it directly on the tool holders:
> 
> View attachment 287191
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 287195
> 
> 
> View attachment 287192
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 287193
> 
> 
> The scribed line shows the minimum TCH which is the largest tool height that can be used.  In this case it is 5/8”:
> 
> View attachment 287194
> 
> 
> The PM QCTP- this is quite a bargain.  You get a QCTP and five tool holders for about a third of the price of the equivalent Aloris or Dorian tool holder alone.  Here are some photos of the QCTP, the tool holders and how it is attached:
> 
> View attachment 287199
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 287196
> 
> 
> View attachment 287197
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 287198
> 
> 
> There are two similar tool holders available for square shanked tools from PM: the 250-201 that will allow you to use up to 5/8” shanks and the 250-201-XL that will allow you to use a tool with a 3/4” shanked with the 1236-T.
> 
> The Dorian SDN30BXA QCTP-  this is a very nicely made piece of equipment.  I originally purchased it because it’s tool holder had a 1-1/16” opening which I thought would nicely accommodate the 1” shanked tool I had my eye on, however, once I measured the LCH and the minimum TCH, I discovered that only about 13/16” was available because of my LCH.   Did I return it when I found this out?  Well, no, I didn’t.  I will say that there is one disadvantage of the Dorian QCTP and that is that you need to machine some shoulders on the T-nut supplied.  I milled the shoulder so that the top of the nut fell .01” short of flush with the top of the compound and also left .01” space between the bottom of the T-nut and the bottom of the T-slot so it would easily slide into the slot.
> 
> Isn’t she a beauty?
> 
> View attachment 287200
> 
> 
> View attachment 287201
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 287202
> 
> 
> View attachment 287203
> 
> 
> View attachment 287204
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 287205
> 
> 
> The last photo just shows the PM and Dorian QCTP side-by-side and the Dorian D30BXA-1, PM 250-201 XL and PM 250-201with there respective maximum tool heights that can be used with the 1236-T.
> 
> View attachment 287206
> 
> 
> To summarize, I would get rid of the stock 4-way tool post(how do you change the height of the tool anyway? Shims?), get a good QCTP and pay attention to the lathe Center Height when shopping. I may have belabored the lathe Center Height a bit but it is an important thing to consider, especially if you have a nifty 1” shank tool in mind...ah, but that will be the topic of another HM thread.


My lathe came with the PM QCTP and 5 holders. All seem to work fine. I replaced the nut used for swiveling the tool post with a shop made lever so I don't need to keep another wrench near by. I want to get a scissors type knurling tool rather than the push in type that came with. One of the holders has a small V in the bottom for holding round tools. I've bought more tool holders mostly from Shars. The set screws are poor quality and need to be replaced but otherwise they seem fine. I can't believe anyone would want to use a lantern style tool post. I made a tool height gage similar to the one Oxtool made in one of his videos. Works well.


----------



## Dabbler

Hey, larry, I use my lantern regularly!  It just depends on the work you do and the tooling you have.  It is no better, nor a lot worse than other tool holders...  I use mine for turning wood with HSS bits, and to reach weird places for O ring grooves, etc.

-- It is a lot slower when You aren't familiar, or don't have a height setting gauge, and is then a real pain!  I was trained on Lantern tool posts, so I have some experience with them and know their weaknesses, and so I can avoid them.


----------



## Larry42

Dabbler, I guess I'm always in a hurray. I've never used a lantern.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

mikey said:


> My lathe is a beauty, at least to me. I pulled it apart (except for the headstock) to clean and lube it and was amazed at how precisely everything is designed and built. Everything fits, nothing needs to be forced, and the machining is top notch. Little touches, like that carriage stop dowel pin, are everywhere. Zero backlash on the cross slide and compound feeds result in reduced chatter and prolonged component life. Precision ground and hardened spindle running in FAG bearings results in zero spindle run out with little heat generated. Hardened and ground gear train with FAG bearings make it quieter at top speed than a Compact 8 running at low speed. Rohm-built lathe chucks and live centers, Llambrich or Rohm drill chucks, etc, etc.
> 
> At the time the Super 11 was built, it was their flagship. Built to a DIN tool room standard, they used top shelf components to assemble it. Those Austrians sure know how to build a lathe!



Mikey, she sounds beautiful.  You will have to send a photo sometime.  By the way, I ordered a spare cross slide leadscrew and nut for my lathe and will adjust to zero backlash as you recommended. No such adjustment available for my compound though.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Mikey,  I just calculated that the force of the carriage stop pin on the saddle body is almost exactly 750 lb/ sq. in. the way I have the clutch adjusted.  Quite a lot, I think.  I may put a plate there to spread out the force a bit.


----------



## mikey

Titanium Knurler said:


> Mikey, she sounds beautiful.  You will have to send a photo sometime.  By the way, I ordered a spare cross slide leadscrew and nut for my lathe and will adjust to zero backlash as you recommended. No such adjustment available for my compound though.



I don't have a good shot of it right now. Here is what it looks like:




Glad you bought a spare cross slide lead screw and nut. That takes the most wear because it is being constantly adjusted when we run the lathe and it sustains all the radial cutting forces when we cut. Minimizing backlash reduces the slamming of the flanks of threads for both the screw and nut, thereby prolonging their lives while also reducing chatter potential and improving finishes.


----------



## mikey

Titanium Knurler said:


> Mikey,  I just calculated that the force of the carriage stop pin on the saddle body is almost exactly 750 lb/ sq. in. the way I have the clutch adjusted.  Quite a lot, I think.  I may put a plate there to spread out the force a bit.



Or you can just drill and install a hardened pin. I have another one installed on the rear of the cross slide to prevent damage from the tailstock slamming into it when I'm not thinking. This was also Emco, not me.


----------



## Firstgear

Titanium Knurler said:


> Coolant and Guard System, cont’d
> 
> Next I will move on to what attaches to the lathe: the Repar TC-1 coolant and guard system and also the making and installing of some splash guards.
> 
> The Repar TC-1 coolant and guard system is nice because the vertical post that holds the hinged guard also acts as a conduit for the coolant.
> 
> The first thing I did was to enlarge the holes on the new bracket to accept larger M8x1.25 screws, then I disassembled the system and painted it with some of the extra touch-up paint I had mixed earlier. The original color is a safety yellow that you see in the brochure.  I removed the stock PM irrigation tube then drilled and tapped the carriage to accept the new bracket.
> 
> A couple before and after shots to show you where I am head:
> 
> View attachment 286299
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286300
> 
> 
> Pre, post enlarged holes, painting:
> 
> View attachment 286306
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286307
> 
> 
> Drilling and tapping carriage for the new bracket.  I wanted to make sur it did not interfere with the four holes to the right which are for the PM taper attachment.  Take your time with this:
> 
> View attachment 286308
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286309
> 
> 
> View attachment 286310
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286311
> 
> 
> Now I can attach the tube and connect it to the hose.  There is an incredible mix of hose fittings here that took a while to sort out.  Not even the manufacturer or the distributor could tell me what they are so I ordered a pipe three ID kit from Parker and figured them out.  The fittings are stainless and are from McMaster-Carr.  Again, if you need part numbers let me know:
> 
> View attachment 286312
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286313
> 
> 
> In the second photo above I want to mention that the Repar guard came with a flimsy nylon screw on the bracket to tighten down the tube. I imagine they want to protect the tube but they just do not hold the tube at the correct height and allowed the tube to rotate, so I added a 1” collar with set screws and replaced the nylon screw with an M8x1.25 socket head cap screw.
> 
> I then added the guard to the tube.  The attachment point for the guard also had a flimsy nylon screw that I replaced with a stainless knob so that I can remove the guard without tools:
> 
> View attachment 286314
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286315
> 
> 
> View attachment 286316
> 
> 
> I then made some splash guards; one for the front and one for the back to help contain the coolant.  I made them out of 14 gauge stainless. I first cut them to size, sanded them to give a matte finish. I did not want them acting like a mirror and giving me unwanted reflections.  The back guard I bent to 90 degrees and attached to the Repar guard.  The front splash guard attaches to the carriage. Some shots of the back splash guard:
> 
> View attachment 286318
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286319
> 
> 
> View attachment 286317
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286320
> 
> 
> View attachment 286321
> 
> 
> Now for the front splash guard.  Again 14 gauge stainless, sanded, then placed in a pinch roller to bend.  I inserted it into the pinch roller only in one direction so that a flat area was preserved.  I used this flat area to attach it to the carriage.  I drilled and tapped a couple holes on the carriage to hold it in place. Again, take your time here.  You might notice that the upper edge of the splash guard is outside the guard; this is so the dripping coolant fluid will fall onto the splash guard and run into the chip tray and return to the pump.
> 
> View attachment 286324
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286326
> 
> 
> View attachment 286325
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286323
> 
> 
> View attachment 286322
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286327
> 
> 
> View attachment 286328
> 
> 
> I used Hangsterfer’s CC 22 cutting oil.  I decided on this after a conversation with the people at Hangsterfer’s.  According to them it is a good all around cutting oil and coolant that works well with stainless, aluminum and titanium.  I did not want to go with a water based coolant because of corrosion issues and apparently it can develop a bad odor.   I just couldn’t see spraying my new lathe with water I would rather coat it with oil every time I use it.  Would like to hear what others think about this.
> 
> View attachment 286329
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286330
> 
> 
> View attachment 286331
> 
> 
> I am going to post this and finish up a little later with the electrical hook-up(easy) and maybe one or two loose ends.


Does Hangsterfer’s Sell through a distributor or did you have to buy direct?


----------



## Firstgear

How long have you had the cutting oil in your machine before you changed it out or doesn’t it need changing out?  I guess I am looking for your experience with Hangsterfer’s CC 22....


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Firstgear,  I have had the CC 22 for six to nine months.  I don’t believe you need to change it like a water based system which was part of the appeal for me.  I phoned Hangsterfer’s and talked with one of their engineers.  I told him that I often work on titanium, stainless and aluminum and he recommended CC22.  I have been happy with the choice and I like that I am spraying my machine with oil, instead of water, every time I use it.

I purchased it from Golden West.  Here is their link: 









						Buy GoldenWest Products Online. Find the best lubricants your money can buy!
					





					www.gwlinc.com
				




Hope that helps


----------



## Titanium Knurler

*V. Adjustments
       A. Aligning the Lathe
       B. Checking Specs*





*B. Aligning the Lathe- *Even though I am waiting for supplies to complete this section I thought I would push forward on what will probably be the last section of this thread on setting-up the PM1236-T.  I appologize up front to those with more experience than myself for the basic nature of this section but I wanted it to be useful to everyone, regardless of their lathe experience.  I believe aligning the lathe correctly is one of the the most important adjustments one can make as far as getting accurate and reproducible results, so I thought I would present each step, give my results for my PM1236-T and invite discussion from everyone, including the more experienced operators; maybe it is time to tune-up the old girl?

What gives with the railroad track photo? Well, this is the image I would like you to keep in mind as you align your lathe. This is the view you would see if you were sitting on the Headstock of a well aligned lathe,  legs straddling the spindle: straight, untwisted and perfectly parallel Ways that seem to extend to the horizon.

Of the several sources I consulted on aligning a lathe it was surprising to me that there was some disagreement on the order of the steps.  For example, even though the PM Manual section on aligning the lathe is well written it presents aligning the Headstock and Spindle Centers before aligning the Headstock with the Ways.  This approach does not make sense to me and I will tell you why in a bit.  I think in the case of aligning a lathe the order of operations can make a difference in the outcome.  

As far as alignment is concerned, the lathe has three parts: the Ways, the Headstock and the Tailstock.  One must first untwists the Ways, then align the Headstock with the untwisted Ways, then align the Headstock with the Tailstock. Then, they are all in alignment with one another. Here are the four basic steps I will go through:

         1. Leveling the Lathe and Stand
         2. Untwisting the Ways
         3. Aligning the Headstock with the Ways
         4. Aligning the Headstock with the Tailstock

For some of the steps there are multiple ways to accomplish them.  For example, for aligning the Headstock with the Ways there are cutting and non-cutting techniques and for aligning the Headstock with the Tailstock there are four ways that I was able to find.  You experienced guys may know of more. I will present all that I am aware of and you can decide what suits you best.

Step 1. Leveling the Lathe and Stand- this section is probably not what you are expecting.  It seems that often when I hear one say “leveling a lathe” they are really talking about Step 2, which is Untwisting the Ways.  Here, I am just talking about making the lathe and stand reasonabley level so that in the next step one can use a precision machine level, or the best one you can get your hands on, to untwist the Ways.  _As I am sure most, if not all of you, are aware a lathe does not need to be level to cut true; one makes the lathe level so that one can use of a leveling device as a tool for untwisting the Ways(and, perhaps more importantly, so your favorite beverage does not slide off the Headstock)_

In this step,  all you want to accomplish is to use whatever leveling mechanism you have on your stand(bolts and pucks as is stock for the PM 1236-T) to level the lathe from left-to-right(longitudinally) and from front-to-back(transversely) so that when you place the level on the Ways or Carriage it reads in the central part of the scale.  

Here is the stock PM puck and bolt system and your endpoint of the first step:





Use either a precision ground block with a notch to span the V-way or place the level directly on the carriage.  Surprisingly, the result was exactly the same:






With the way I have my 1236-T set up leveling is an easy matter: I just adjust the leveling feet while I watch the spirit levels on the bottom of the baseplate to get me in the ballpark, then I place the precision level on the Ways or Carriage and fine tune with the leveling feet then lock down with the caster lock nut. 










Either way, that is all there is to the first step, now you are now ready for the next step, Untwisting the Ways.




Step 2. Untwisting the Ways(AKA “Leveling”)- this obviously is not what you want to see when you are looking down the Ways from your Headstock.  I put this picture in because I want to make a point that I will discuss with my next post(probably tomorrow) on untwisting the Ways.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Post #170 was deleted because a drawing and photo did not appear in the post.  I thought it made the post confusing so I re-posted it with the drawing and photo in post #171.  Sorry for the confusion. TK


----------



## Titanium Knurler

I apologize, for some reason a diagram and a photo did not show up in the last post.  You can only see, “view attachment 288059” and “view attachment 288158”.  I will attempt to cut and post the last post and insert them.  Hope it works, sorry about that, pretty frustrating.

Why get rid of the twist in the Ways? One reason is that a twist in the lathe bed or Ways will cause the cutting tool to rise or fall from it’s starting height as the carriage travels down the Ways. Since the workpiece is round, as the tool rises or falls from the center of rotation(COR) the tool will remove less from the workpiece causing a taper, or if the cutting tool starts above or below the COR and then crosses the COR a spindle shape will occur with the thinnest spot, or waist, at the point the tool crosses the COR. So, not only might you have an undesirable uniform taper formed but you could also have a part whose diameter does not vary linearly along its length. Here are some diagrams I showed earlier that illustrate the effects of a rising or falling tool:














In the above diagrams the tool starts at height “a”(the COR) and descends along the Ways to point “b”, removing less stock as it travels resulting in a uniform taper. This is also true if you start at “b” and go to “a” or if the tool ascends or descends.

In the diagrams below the tool again starts at point “a” but this time it is above the COR, it descends as it travels down the Ways and crosses the COR at point “x” where it removes the most stock. This results in a spindle shape with the thinnest spot at point “x”:













So, the first reason for untwisting the Ways is to prevent taper and spindle formation.

The second reason for untwisting the Ways early-on in the alignment process is so that you can accurately adjust the Headstock and Tailstock. For example, if you try to align the Headstock or Tailstock before untwisting the Ways by using a dial indicator or performing a two collar test you might find taper that is attributable to twisted Ways and incorrectly assume it is from a misaligned Headstock or Tailstock and make unnecessary and incorrect adjustments of the direction of the Headstock or the position of the Tailstock. By the way, this is one of the reasons you will see in the upcoming sections that I used a dial indicator with a ground flat tip rather than a spherical tip. If there is any residual twist in the Ways the ground flat tip will minimize any error that might be introduced by a spherical tip riding up or down the test rod as you you move down the Ways indicating taper where there is none.




_So, to make a long story short, the reason for untwisting the lathe bed prior to aligning the Headstock and Tailstock is to get rid of any taper that could be mistakenly attributed to Headstock or Tailstock misalignment._

So how does one untwist the lathe bed? The first thing is to make sure you are in the right frame of mind; make sure you have plenty of time to carefully make repeat adjustments; often very small adjustments. If you have mounted your lathe in the conventional way, that is, directly to the stand, the steps are as follows:


Place a precision level on a ground block with a notch to clear the V-Ways or the carriage and zero the level at the spindle using the leveling feet of the base.
Carefully slide the level to half way down the Ways and take a reading, then slide all the way down to the tailstock end of the lathe and take another reading.
Loosen the bolts securing the tailstock footing, place a shim under the low side footing, tighten down the tailstock bolts and repeat the steps until you are satisfied with the results. What you do at the Tailstock end will almost certainly affect your reading at the Headstock so you may need to re-zero the bubble in the level if goes off the scale.

If you have mounted the lathe on a plate with jack screws, like I have done, then the process is similar except that it is a bit easier since one can make adjustments quickly with the jack screws, rather than using shims, and the adjustments made using the leveling bolts to re-level the stand at the Headstock will not affect the lathe twist. This is because the lathe/baseplate _unit_ is unaffected by the adjustments of the stand leveling bolts. Here are my results:




As you can see It took eight tries to get it where I wanted but I did go back later and was able to reduce the twist to zero according to the precision level. It is a tedious process but now I can proceed to the next steps confident that any taper I find is not due to twisted Ways.

Aside: since I am still waiting on supplies to complete the following sections I thought I would torture you with putting a finer point on Dr Jackson’s formula for determining the change in the depth of cut caused by a tool dropping or rising due to twisted Ways. If you recall he determined that:

Change in the depth of cut = (Distance the tool drops x Distance the tool drops)
(2 x Radius of the Workpiece)

Since (2 x Radius) = Diameter, the formula can be re-written to:


Change in the depth of cut = (Distance the tool drops x Distance the tool drops)
Diameter of the Workpiece

What kind of taper would I have found with the lathe prior to untwisting it? If you look at the chart above, the out-of-the-box twist for my 1236-T was 4.5 lines of twist on the precision level. Each line represents .0005”drop/ foot. So, 4.5 x .0005”=0.0023”drop/foot. The lathe bed is three feet long so the total drop in the tool height would be 3 x 0.0023”=0.0069” over the length of the bed. Now, if we use Dr Jackson’s formula the change in the depth of cut over three feet for a workpiece with a diameter of 1” will be: (0.0069”x 0.0069”)/ 1”=0.00048”. That is about a half a thousandth of taper over three feet. Not much, and I think it is probably even less than what Dr Jackson’s formula predicts. Why do I think it is less? Well, if you look at the photo of the twisted rails at the end of the last post you can see that when the right rail is lifted up not only does it go up but since it is tied to the other rail(as are the rails of the lathe) it moves to the left or toward the other rail as well. If the right rail is analogous to the front rail on the lathe then as the front rail is lifted it moves inward toward the workpiece and would decrease the loss of depth of cut that a tool that is simply moving upward would experience.

Well, is all of this worth a half a thousandth over three feet? Is it all much ado about nothing? 0.00048” taper over three feet is not nothing but it’s darn close. I will let you decide if it is worth it. However, I can at least move to the next steps, Aligning the Headstock with the Ways and Aligning the Tailstock with the Headstock, knowing that any taper that I find is not due to a twisted lathe bed. Surely, that’s worth something.

Which step should be done next, Aligning the Headstock to the Ways or Aligning the Tailstock to the Headstock? I believe aligning the Headstock next makes the most sense and I will tell you why I think so in the next post.


----------



## Firstgear

I bought some aluminum strut channel from Zoro here recently as I ordered a bunch of stuff when they had their 25% off flash sale.  It came with free shipping.  I have to laugh, I bought a 5ft piece of strut and it arrived in a tube that was 9ft long!  I kid you not, 9' long!  I realize they get a discount for the volume of stuff they ship, but I wouldnt want to pay for a 9' long shipping tube!

Amazing!  Even my wife said if that was me I would have cut the tube down to 5'3" and saved on the shipping charges...amazing!


----------



## P. Waller

I was correct, at 60 my life expectancy is not long enough for this saga to end.

If you do not mind please answer a simple question.

If you desire such accuracy and build quality why did you not start with a Hardinge tool room lathe or similar?

This would be nearly what you want and likely take less then a decade to make "PERFECT"


----------



## Firstgear

P. Waller said:


> I was correct, at 60 my life expectancy is not long enough for this saga to end.
> 
> If you do not mind please answer a simple question.
> 
> If you desire such accuracy and build quality why did you not start with a Hardinge tool room lathe or similar?
> 
> This would be nearly what you want and likely take less then a decade to make "PERFECT"


Just for the record, I appreciate his documentation as I am new to machining.  I was always on the other side doing design work, but not making the pieces parts.  TK as well as others who spend the time documenting aren’t doing it for themselves, they are doing it for people such as myself.

I get that you already know all this stuff with your 30 years of machining, but those of us who are new to this hobby don’t know the details.  His information helps a lot of people.  I hate to say this, but if you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion, just move along.


----------



## P. Waller

Firstgear said:


> Just for the record, I appreciate his documentation as I am new to machining.  I was always on the other side doing design work, but not making the pieces parts.  TK as well as others who spend the time documenting aren’t doing it for themselves, they are doing it for people such as myself.
> 
> I get that you already know all this stuff with your 30 years of machining, but those of us who are new to this hobby don’t know the details.  His information helps a lot of people.  I hate to say this, but if you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion, just move along.


I appreciate the fact that someone takes the time and effort to explain how to do a particular operation or set up a machine for use.

However I find it disingenous to teach new people in the game that success is dependent on doing everything a particular way.

Do whatever job that needs to be done using a method that works, this may be the opposite of conventional wisdom at times.
The only way to learn this is to do a good deal of it, there in lies the experience part, it does not make one smarter merely less prone to doing something that does not work more then once.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

P. Waller said:


> I was correct, at 60 my life expectancy is not long enough for this saga to end.
> 
> If you do not mind please answer a simple question.
> 
> If you desire such accuracy and build quality why did you not start with a Hardinge tool room lathe or similar?
> 
> This would be nearly what you want and likely take less then a decade to make "PERFECT"



Hey, P. Waller, happy to see you are still “with us” and as curmudgeonly as always; things were starting to get a bit boring without you.

As far as your question, “...why not start with a Harding tool room lathe...this would be nearly what you want and likely to take less than a decade to make “PERFECT””.  Where is the challenge in that?!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

P. Waller said:


> I appreciate the fact that someone takes the time and effort to explain how to do a particular operation or set up a machine for use.
> 
> However I find it disingenous to teach new people in the game that success is dependent on doing everything a particular way.
> 
> Do whatever job that needs to be done using a method that works, this may be the opposite of conventional wisdom at times.
> The only way to learn this is to do a good deal of it, there in lies the experience part, it does not make one smarter merely less prone to doing something that does not work more then once.



P. Waller, to be honest, I don’t understand what you are trying to get across with your last post, so I won’t address it, but let me just say that the reason I put together this thread on setting-up the 1236-T is to help other HM members who have, or who are consdering, a similar lathe and to create a collegial dialogue with other like-minded individuals; experienced and inexperienced.  It appears as though you have many years of valuable machining experience from which we could all benefit.  I am sure you have created many chips over your thirty years of machining, however, it appears as though some of those chips have landed on your shoulders.  I believe it would benefit everyone if you could brush those off and contribute to this thread and the Forum in general in a positive way.  I would much prefer this because you seem to have a lot to offer, however, if this is not possible for you then just simply go elsewhere; you are damaging “The Friendly Machinist Forum”.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

*Step 3.  Aligning the Headstock with the Ways-*sorry so long between posts, sometimes real life interrupts; in this case her name is Grace, 6lbs, 12ozs, all doing well.

I thought I would start this section with my thoughts on why the Headstock should be aligned with the Ways before Aligning Centers.  Then follow with: how critical the Headstock alignment is;  some initial readings of the Headstock alignment; how to adjust the Headstock on the PM 1236-T; some non-cutting and cutting checks of alignment and then finish with interpreting the results, which, by the way, were not what I expected.

You may recall that in an earlier post I mentioned that the PM Manual lists aligning the Headstock with the Tailstock _before_ alignigning the Headstock with the Ways.  The Manual indicates that the Headstock can be “wildly out of square” and still machine parallel between centers; I do not doubt that this is true, but why align centers before aligning the Headstock with the bed?  To align centers with a Headstock that is out of alignment one has to move the Tailstock as indicted by the red arrow(added).  It seems to make more sense to align the Headstock to the Ways then align the centers so everything is lined-up and you can go from turning between centers to turning in the chuck without making adjustments.  Can you imagine what the taper would be with the Headstock at this angle if you were turning in a chuck!?




Well, I am glad you asked. Imagine we have the above misalignment of the Headstock.  Let’s say it’s 5 degrees.  What would the taper on a 36” piece of stock be if it were in a chuck rather than between centers.  I know you would never do this but let’s just see what it is:




Some of you may recall the formula:  sine of an angle=opposite side(red arrow, error) divided by the hypotenuse (yellow arrow, stock in chuck).  We can rearrange this formula to solve for the opposite side which would be half the taper, or opposite side= hypotenuse x sine of 5 degrees(opposite side=36” x .087=3.14”).  The taper would twice this or 6.3”!  And this is an underestimate of the taper since the hypotenuse is actually longer because it extends back to where the Headstock rotates.  Now, this isn’t a real-life example because I don’t think anyone would turn something 36” long in this way but it does illustrate how sensitive this system is to Headstock misalignment when turning in a chuck. It also illustrates that, unlike Dr Jackson’s formula for error with vertical misalignment, the longer the workpiece the worse the error. Let me give you an extreme example:  we live in Milwaukee, we like to boat, if I were to take our boat across Lake Michigan east to the beautiful shores of Michigan, about 100 miles, and my compass was five degrees off I would miss my destination by almost nine miles!  I will give you some real life machining numbers soon when I give you the initial Headstock numbers for 1236-T.  By the way, can anyone guess what I was trying to get across with the railroad picture at the beginning of this section?

The key to checking for Headstock alignment errors and making adjustments is to make sure your test rod is as concentric with the spindle axis.  Once this is accomplished one then runs the dial along the length of the rod looking for misalignment of the headstock. To do this you need a smooth, round, straight and untapered test rod(s), a good dial indicator and a large dose of patience.  If you have not done this before I think you will be surprised how sensitive this system is, so make your adjustments in very small increments. I used non-cutting and cutting techniques using a MT5 test rod, Thomson shafting and drill rod in my adjustments.

*MT5 Test Rod-* I purchased a couple of MT5 test rods from eBay; one for using just with the indicator, the other for cutting.  I started with the MT5 test rod because it takes out any pointing errors that could occur with a chuck:





After checking it for roundness, straightness and taper as well as I could, I carefully cleaned the MT5 end of the shaft and spindle, inserted it into the spindle and then gave it a good whack with a rubber mallet to seat it. I then marked it along its length at 0, 6 and 12 inches.  I also marked 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees around its base.  I then mounted a Starrett model 25-211 dial indicator with a flat footplate to the carriage with a magnetic base.  I then checked the TIR at 0, 6 and 12 inches. Next, I slid the dial indicator along the length of the bar to check for Headstock misalignment. I am going to call this LIR(longitudinal indicator runout).  I rotated the bar in 90 degree increments to check to make sure the LIR was the same.  If not, then the bar is not concentric with the spindle.




The drawing below shows the test bar in a chuck but it is otherwise similar to what I did with the MT5 test bar:





Here are the results from before and after I adjusted the Headstock:




You can see that the TIR ranged from .0002” to .0004” before and after the adjustment and that the LIR average improved from +.0016” to +.0003” over twelve inches.  The positive sign on the LIR indicates the bar was angled toward the front of the lathe so I rotated the Headstock counterclockwise to move the bar away from the front of the lathe.  To do this on the PM 1236-T one loosens the set screws on the Headstock and then you tighten the appropriate jack screw.  In this case screw “A”.  Be very careful with this.  I adjusted it the smallest amount I possibly could and even with that I almost overshot. This diagram shows my situation with the Tailstock end forward:




This is how you make the adjustments to screw “A” on the PM 1236-T:







I decided to stop there and this is why.  Using the formula above for determining the taper for a certain angle one can do the reverse, that is, find the angle of the Headstock error for a certain taper.   When this is done the starting Headstock error was .0076 degrees.  After the adjustment,  the headstock error is in the same direction but only .0014 degrees.  I felt that with any further adjustment I would overshoot, so I stopped.

Next I decided to do a cutting test on a MT5 test bar.  It is made of EN31 steel alloy.  I contacted Seco and got their recommendations for inserts and speed and feed data:






I used exactly their recommendations except the speed of 308 RPM seemed best for a smooth finish. Chips came off in nice, tightly coiled spring-like shavings as per Mikey’s chart. Interestingly, some of the shavings were many feet long.  I used CC22 cutting oil and a follower rest(more on this later):







Here are the results:




At six inches the diameter was +.0003” larger and at twelve inches the diameter was .0009” larger than at position zero. The taper is in the opposite direction than I anticipated since the Headstock is tilted slightly forward at the tailstock end.  Not sure why but I have an idea what might be happening; more on this later.  Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

I am going to stop here for now.  In the next post I will give my results for the 4JC and 5C collet chucks.  In addition I will make an attempt to explain the taper that seems to be in the opposite direction of the small Headstock rotation error.  Again, happy to hear any ideas on this.


----------



## Mitch Alsup

Titanium Knurler said:


> At six inches the diameter was +.0003” larger and at twelve inches the diameter was .0009” larger than at position zero. The taper is in the opposite direction than I anticipated since the Headstock is tilted slightly forward at the tailstock end.  Not sure why but I have an idea what might be happening; more on this later.  Does anyone have any thoughts on this?



I did not see where you measured the test rod for parallelism with respect to the ways. 
That is: the headstock could be pointing down towards the tailstock.
This, too, can cause taper.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Hmmm,  I had not not thought of that.  I will check it this weekend and let you know.  I am not sure what I can do about it (shims, maybe?) but it would be nice to know.  

As a Newbie this was a great exercise for me: it made me think and gave me the opportunity to spend lots of time in front of the lathe.  I learned a lot, but to be honest, I can see a person going crazy chasing down that last .0001".  To be honest, I am not sure what an acceptable taper is but .0003" at six inches is as good as it is going to get for me for now.  

Thanks again, Mitch Alsup


----------



## Dabbler

3 tenths is as good as any millwright will be able to obtain.  Well done!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Thanks Dabbler.  The 4JC and Collet Chuck did not fair as well, but pretty close.  It really is much better than I need for what I am doing but it's nice to "know" your machine.  Not in the Biblical sense, of course, although we are spending a lot of time together these days...


----------



## vtcnc

First...congrats on the new addition to your family! 

Second...don’t waste your time chasing a couple of tenths...that time is better spent with the family!

Third...great write up and well done in achieving the accuracy you worked hard for!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mikey

Congrats, TK, and a very hearty welcome to Grace!! Hope Mrs. TK is doing well.

First, I have no idea how your lead photo relates to whatever is going on inside your head but I have to say that if it was me, I would tell the forum to go to hell while I fell in love with my brand new daughter! Man, I would spoil that little girl - lucky she isn't mine.

For what it's worth, I agree that it makes more sense to align the headstock with the ways and then align the headstock to the tailstock. That's the way the rest of the world does it, at least to my knowledge. Maybe Matt knows something the rest of us don't.

As for why you got a reverse taper, I'm not sure. You've created a constrained system with a follow rest and are taking a healthy cut with a carbide insert tool on a hardish work piece so I have no idea what the results mean. If you had taken a 6-8" long, 1" OD piece of soft steel, like 12L14, and indicated it to zero in a 4 jaw, then used a well ground and really sharp HSS tool with a 1/64" nose radius( to minimize deflection) to take a 0.002" depth of cut with no other support or constraints on the rod then I would say the test would probably reflect your headstock alignment. 

You're right in that we can drive ourselves crazy chasing things down to tenths. Most of the time it just isn't necessary. However, in the case of headstock alignment, it isn't a bad idea to get it as close to zero as you can because you will use that to align the tailstock. 

Now, I have to ask you, why are you still reading this? Go kiss your daughter!!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Mikey, thanks for your well wishes regarding Grace.  She’s a cutie and our _grand_daughter.  If Mrs TK had given birth to her we would have named her Miracle.

Alright, I agree, the lead Photo is a bit cryptic. It is supposed to be like the other lead shots taken from the Headstock and show that this view from “Headstock” is a bit askew and looking slightly to the right and that if you follow it to the horizon(tailstock) you end up way over to the right by the sunset instead of where the tracks lead.  It’s a stretch, forget I mentioned it.

Happy the rest of the world aligns centers after the Headstock.  Makes sense to me.  

Going to try a couple things this weekend to try to figure out reverse taper but am not going to spend too much time on it.  I will keep you posted.

As always, I appreciate your input!


----------



## mikey

Okay, not knowing your age I assumed too much but congrats anyway! I loved it ... Miracle.

I have no grandchildren but if my son ever gives me a grandaughter she will be cherished and spoiled beyond belief.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Your future grandaughter’s first gift from you:




She’ll love it, it’s German!


----------



## mikey

Titanium Knurler said:


> Your future grandaughter’s first gift from you:
> 
> View attachment 289934
> 
> 
> She’ll love it, it’s German!



Hmmm, my daughter in law might just have something to say about that!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

All, I deleted post 189(cutting tests using the 4JC and collet chucks).  Using a 12” rod and a follow rest introduced too many variables and just isn’t the right way to do it-Newbie mistake.  I apologize to those of you that waded through it but I don’t want it to be a perennial source of confusion for people that may look at this thread in the future.   For now just look at post 178 for Headstock alignment using the MT5 test bar, it is accurate.  Sorry for the confusion.  TK


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Before I go on to the next section on Aligning Centers I would like to make a comment:  If I were to do the cutting tests again, and I probably will, I would suggest that one simply do the standard 6”, two collar test. I thought that using a 12” rod would give me more accuracy but I think just the opposite is true since it requires a follow rest to reduce vibration to get a smooth cut and it increases deflection; both of which introduce unwanted variables.

Lesson: a longer rod is not always better


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Titanium Knurler said:


> Before I go on to the next section on Aligning Centers I would like to make a comment:  If I were to do the cutting tests again, and I probably will, I would suggest that one simply do the standard 6”, two collar test. I thought that using a 12” rod would give me more accuracy but I think just the opposite is true since it requires a follow rest to reduce vibration to get a smooth cut and it increases deflection; both of which introduce unwanted variables.
> 
> Lesson: a longer rod is not always better



Thanks Mikey!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Titanium Knurler said:


> Shrink fitting the wheel hub to the adapter.
> 
> This seemed like a good option to me.  It would put the pieces together tightly and permanently without fasteners to loosen or catch onto something while turning.  There are some complex formulas for determining the amount an alloy a certain size and configuration will expand on heating and shrink on cooling but I decided to take direct measurements instead.  I heated the adapter to 450 F and took multiple measurements and averaged them.  The ID of the adapter expanded by 0.005”.  I cooled the hub of the hand wheel in dry ice and isopropyl alcohol to the temperature of Milwaukee these days, -107 F.  It’s diameter contracted by 0.003”.  So there was a difference of 0.008” between their room temperature dimensions and their dimensions when heated and cooled.  Most sources that I read gave a rule of thumb of .001” difference in the two parts per inch of diameter so I bored the ID of the adapter to 0.004” smaller than the room temp diameter of the handwheel hub.  Remember the OD of the adapter is 2-3/4” so thIs should give me plenty of compression.  Too much and I could crack the pieces.  I then heated the adapter and cooled the handwheel hub.  I dropped the adapter on to the hub and almost instantly they were bound together; no time for repositioning. It was impressive.
> 
> View attachment 286660
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286658
> 
> 
> View attachment 286659
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286661
> 
> 
> View attachment 286666
> 
> 
> The next and final step was to create a way I could access the set screws to the adapter while the cover was in place.  To do this I made a new larger diameter, 5/8”, upper post for the cover with a hole in it and then drilled and tapped a hole in the top of the cover so an Allen wrench would then drop down through the hole, then through the hole in the new post and would be guided to the Allen screws on the adapter. When the hole was not being used it was cover with an Allen screw that uses the same size Allen wrench.
> 
> View attachment 286674
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286675
> 
> 
> View attachment 286676
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286677
> 
> 
> That’s it for the headstock handwheel.



Well, I take that back, I guess I am not quite finished with the Headstock Handwheel.  Fast forward a few weeks, I am now at the point that I am aligning the lathe and feel that I need a Spider on the outboard side of the spindle to support longer stock that I am using.  I am going to post the alignment stuff soon but thought I would post this Spider stuff first.




I am not sure where this post is going to end up in the thread or whether anyone will see it but here it is: 

I started with some 3/8-24 brass tipped screws from Grizzly and some knurled thumb nuts and wave washers from McMaster-Carr. I removed the Handwheel from the lathe, secured it to a v-block on the milling machine, then drilled, tapped and milled a flat on the collar and then re-attached the hand wheel. I used shortened thumb nuts and wave washers as a locking mechanism. Pretty straightforward except that I needed a long drill bit, mill, and tap to reach the collar because of the attached wheel. Some pictures:

Supplies:





Drilling, tapping milling:









Shortening the thumb-nuts:





Assembled:










I have to say that I have really enjoyed having the handwheel, especially when I was centering a piece in the 4JC with the dial indicator and going back-and-forth and back-and-forth trying to get rid of that last tenth before I center drilled; pretty tedious but the Handwheel made it a bit easier  Also, I am planning on knurlIng  some long 3/8” pieces of titanium soon so the Spider should come in very handy for that too. The Handwheel and Spider have been a good addition for me.

That’s it.


----------



## mikey

Nice job, TK!


----------



## Firstgear

I like the thought of the handwheel!  Where did you get that from!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Herb, the handwheel is from McMaster-Carr.  I ordered two, a10” aluminum wheel and 9” iron wheel.  I used the aluminum one.  I still have the iron wheel.  You are welcome to have the iron wheel if you like.

I would set aside a fair amount of time to do this project.  Reading posts 117-123 might help. Also, it might not be a bad idea to read Mikey’s Primer on boring before you get started, especially if you are new to boring.

If you need help let me know.

Aluminum wheel:




Iron Wheel:


----------



## Firstgear

I looked back at some of your previous postings and saw that you got it from MC.  After looking at the wheels I decided to do something crazy and I found an 8” round, 1.13” thick piece of aluminum.   I decided that the diameter of my through hole on my lathe being 2” would be too much for an aluminum wheel.  The piece I found was $35 shipped.  

I thought what I could do, based on getting some more measurements (we are at our place in Maine now) that I could get a 3” or 4” diameter section of aluminum rod and put a hole in the big disc that would allow the 3 or 4” piece to be inserted in the center and welded together.  Once I had an uniform piece I could machine it it as an assembly.

I thought I could use a mill tool that puts round corners on a piece, do both sides and I could get the grip in place.  Just a matter of running the lathe further to get the center section thinned up.

I will have to look at my lathe as it already has 2” spindle bore along with a spider.  I will just need to see how I want to attach things and still be able to remove that end cover.

Thank you for the offer.....but another project for the lathe coupled with putting a digital readout on the tailstock quill travel.  I have the pieces to make the mounts, just need the time.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Firstgear said:


> I looked back at some of your previous postings and saw that you got it from MC.  After looking at the wheels I decided to do something crazy and I found an 8” round, 1.13” thick piece of aluminum.   I decided that the diameter of my through hole on my lathe being 2” would be too much for an aluminum wheel.  The piece I found was $35 shipped.
> 
> I thought what I could do, based on getting some more measurements (we are at our place in Maine now) that I could get a 3” or 4” diameter section of aluminum rod and put a hole in the big disc that would allow the 3 or 4” piece to be inserted in the center and welded together.  Once I had an uniform piece I could machine it it as an assembly.
> 
> I thought I could use a mill tool that puts round corners on a piece, do both sides and I could get the grip in place.  Just a matter of running the lathe further to get the center section thinned up.
> 
> I will have to look at my lathe as it already has 2” spindle bore along with a spider.  I will just need to see how I want to attach things and still be able to remove that end cover.
> 
> Thank you for the offer.....but another project for the lathe coupled with putting a digital readout on the tailstock quill travel.  I have the pieces to make the mounts, just need the time.




Herb, sounds like you’ve got a plan. Show us some pics when you’re finished!


----------



## Firstgear

Titanium Knurler said:


> Herb, sounds like you’ve got a plan. Show us some pics when you’re finished!


Well, I have a plan...we’ll see if it turns out or not!  I have to get the shelf made for the lathe as well as the mounting for the tool holders.  We’re home for a couple days next week then we head to see my 95 year old dad....


----------



## vtcnc

Titanium Knurler said:


> Well, I take that back, I guess I am not quite finished with the Headstock Handwheel. Fast forward a few weeks, I am now at the point that I am aligning the lathe and feel that I need a Spider on the outboard side of the spindle to support longer stock that I am using. I am going to post the alignment stuff soon but thought I would post this Spider stuff first.
> 
> View attachment 290954
> 
> 
> I am not sure where this post is going to end up in the thread or whether anyone will see it but here it is:
> 
> I started with some 3/8-24 brass tipped screws from Grizzly and some knurled thumb nuts and wave washers from McMaster-Carr. I removed the Handwheel from the lathe, secured it to a v-block on the milling machine, then drilled, tapped and milled a flat on the collar and then re-attached the hand wheel. I used shortened thumb nuts and wave washers as a locking mechanism. Pretty straightforward except that I needed a long drill bit, mill, and tap to reach the collar because of the attached wheel. Some pictures:
> 
> Supplies:
> 
> View attachment 290955
> View attachment 290956
> 
> 
> Drilling, tapping milling:
> 
> View attachment 290957
> View attachment 290958
> 
> 
> View attachment 290959
> View attachment 290960
> 
> 
> Shortening the thumb-nuts:
> 
> View attachment 290962
> View attachment 290964
> 
> 
> Assembled:
> 
> View attachment 290963
> View attachment 290961
> 
> 
> View attachment 290966
> 
> View attachment 290965
> 
> 
> I have to say that I have really enjoyed having the handwheel, especially when I was centering a piece in the 4JC with the dial indicator and going back-and-forth and back-and-forth trying to get rid of that last tenth before I center drilled; pretty tedious but the Handwheel made it a bit easier Also, I am planning on knurlIng some long 3/8” pieces of titanium soon so the Spider should come in very handy for that too. The Handwheel and Spider have been a good addition for me.
> 
> That’s it.



Nice job! Looks very useful. 

I’m not sure how much experience you have with turning, but if you are new to this, please make sure you have a solid understanding of the dangers in turning materials extending through the headstock. The immediate danger is “bar-whip” which you can find many factory surveillance style example videos of both here and elsewhere. This is man killer territory so please research, take the necessary precautions and be careful. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Titanium Knurler

vtcnc,  I am new to lathe work and greatly appreciate the heads-up!


----------



## vtcnc

Titanium Knurler said:


> vtcnc,  I am new to lathe work and greatly appreciate the heads-up!


I think your solution for the material extended a short distance through the headstock looks great and I'm sure will do the job safely. The stuff that will catch you off guard is proportionally longer and thinner. Here is an egregious example I posted some time ago that will give you a sense of what I'm referring to by using the term "bar-whip"

Bar Whip in a Lathe


----------



## Titanium Knurler

That video is frightening and is now permanently etched in my mind.  I am hoping to knurl some 3/8" titanium rod with a Dorian 3-wheel knurling tool soon; a perfect candidate for “bar whip” since I will be knurling long, thin rod:


I will definately keep the rod as short as possible after watching the video you linked in your last post

Sometimes the advantage of a Forum like H-M is not necessarily learning new techniques but learning from other’s mistakes.  Thanks-TK


----------



## TakeDeadAim

Titanium Knurler said:


> “Leveling” and a Discussion on Vertical Miasalignment
> 
> View attachment 285823
> 
> 
> First of all, my favorite work shirt is pictured above. I will explain this picture more fully later but for now let me just say that I might possibly be the only man alive that has set himself on fire leveling a lathe. More on this later.
> 
> For a newbie like myself the term leveling creates a lot of confusion; it really is an untwisting of the lathe ways that uses a level to accomplish the untwisting. I am going to quote John.K again from the beginning of this thread because he said it so well:
> 
> A lathe does not need to be level in any axis............it makes no difference to the accuracy..................however being level means an accurate level measurement tool can then be used to check for bending or twisting of the bed,and such corrected .......and later on used to check for wear...........
> 
> The untwisting ended up being much more straight forward than I anticipated but I would recommend a time when you are not in a hurry.  Also make your changes in very small increments.  Although I think I mentioned earlier that it took a quarter turn of the jack screw, my notes indicate that it was only a one eighth turn; so be patient.  It’s pretty satisfying when you get it just right.
> 
> I did the alignment a couple of different ways. Many sources say to put a precision level directly on the ways.  Well, this does not work with the PM 1236-T because the v-ways are a different height and the level is too far out of level to be useful. I think you can see this with this picture:
> 
> View attachment 285841
> 
> 
> I decided to take the compound off the carriage and place the level on the carriage.  I liked this approach because you are not repositioning the level, which can produce errors and since the carriage is what holds the tool in position and is ultimately what determines the height of the cutting tool.  I placed tape on the the lathe at four evenly spaced intervals and took readings with the Starrett precision level by moving the carriage to each position using the carriage. I was careful not to let the level change position.  It really is surprising how exquisitely sensitive the machine level is.  These are the steps I took:
> 
> 1.) level precision level using the leveler on the casters at the headstock end
> 2.) take readings at positions 1,2, and 3
> 3.) adjust the jack screw at the tailstock end
> 4.) back to step 1
> 
> Here is my set-up and my results:
> 
> View attachment 285842
> 
> 
> View attachment 285844
> 
> 
> View attachment 285845
> 
> 
> View attachment 285846
> 
> 
> You can see that it took eight tries to get it to where I felt I couldn’t get it any better, which was under 0.0005”/foot for the length of the bed. I am going to stop here for a bit.  I have a very important date with a three year old to go to “Little Mermaid”.  I will tell you about the shirt later today but just let me say that it is a lesson in “the enemy of good is better” .



The problem with leveling using the surfaces on top of the carriage is that there is no way to know their relationship to the precision surfaces that contact the bed ways.  The ways have two flats on them that are machined parallel to each other, placing something like 123 blocks on those flats and placing your precision level on them ensures that you are in fact leveling the working surface of the bed.  As with anything there are multiple ways to skin the preverbal cat.  You have obviously put a lot of thought and effort into how you are approaching the installation of your machine.  In the end how it cuts is the most important thing.


----------



## TakeDeadAim

Titanium Knurler said:


> Mikey, she sounds beautiful.  You will have to send a photo sometime.  By the way, I ordered a spare cross slide leadscrew and nut for my lathe and will adjust to zero backlash as you recommended. No such adjustment available for my compound though.



What I do on the compound, when I have it installed, is to keep it locked.  I have found the compound is the weak link in all small lathes, Since you have a taper attachment and tailstock offset device you may consider removing the compound and making a cast iron block the height of the compound and mounting your QCTP to that and using a hard dowel to lock it into position square to the spindle axis.  You would be amazed at the rigidity it adds


----------



## Titanium Knurler

TDA, I agree with you, but I think you may agree that when using a very sensitive precision level moving the precision block _and _level from one spot to another can introduce some errors.  When the level is on the carriage it is less likely to shift position slightly and affect your reading. As you read on, you will discover that I used a notched precision block to read directly from the ways.  I was fortunate, and I think it is a tribute to PM, that the readings from the top of the carriage and the Ways agreed.  You will see how it cuts later in the thread.  Thanks for your input!


----------



## TakeDeadAim

Titanium Knurler said:


> TDA, I agree with you, but I think you may agree that when using a very sensitive precision level moving the precision block _and _level from one spot to another can introduce some errors.  When the level is on the carriage it is less likely to shift position slightly and affect your reading. As you read on, you will discover that I used a notched precision block to read directly from the ways.  I was fortunate, and I think it is a tribute to PM, that the readings from the top of the carriage and the Ways agreed.  You will see how it cuts later in the thread.  Thanks for your input!



The plastic on the top of the precision level is there to insulate the level from changes due to heat from your hands.  You can breath on one and watch the bubble move so HVAC, lights all that stuff effects them.   Simply moving the level either by hand or by cranking the carriage causes the level to vibrate and it needs time to settle.  As with all precision instruments they are fussy.  As far as your notched block is concerned there are two issues.  A) cutting that notch out would alter the precision surfaces and render it inaccurate unless it was re-ground after being altered. B) Using two blocks, one on each flat increases the distance between the contact points and therefore the accuracy of the level, and yes those levels are structurally made to be supported that way, is increased.  Ive read the end and your lathe test cuts show it's well aligned, as I said earlier more than one way to skin the cat.  There are many ways to look at things, in the end the test cuts and performance in parts production that meets the users needs is the goal.  

I have a lathe that is made in the same factory as yours, (different importer), but essentially the same machine, but an earlier model. It cuts quite well with essentially the same accuracy you achieved.  My goal was to get it here, get it cleaned up, aligned and making parts.  Some mods were done but much less involved and much less expensive than what you did.  Truck to running was about 10 days, which included a DRO install but no coolant.   You enjoyed what you did and that's what matters, more than anything really; life is way too short to not make time for what we enjoy. 

I spent years repairing and rebuilding machines, I wanted something in the shop that let me make parts and not be a project itself and that made me happy.  Since then, I replaced the halogen light when I got tired of the heat on my hands,  As my eyesight has faded further I want more light so thats on the list, as is a 3 phase conversion and VFD.  Both dependent on the success of back surgery #7.  We are not far apart, if you are out my way or looking for a trip you are always welcome for a shop tour, what Im sure would be an enjoyable conversation, and a beverage or two.  In the mean time, enjoy your machine!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

TDA, all good points.  You are probably correct that the 2-4-6 block is no longer accurate but it was a very inexpensive block and as long as it gave me reproducible results I was OK with sacrificing it for the cause.

Thanks for the invite to Hartford, I may take you up on the offer and let me know if you are ever in Milwaukee,  I might be able to scrape-up a beverage or two also.

Good luck with your back surgery!


----------



## TakeDeadAim

Thanks, surgery is done its the long wait to see if it actually helps when all is healed and I get to give it a fair test drive.  My docs are all in Milwaukee so depending on where you are I'm there on a semi regular basis.    Let me know if I can help with anything and have fun with the lathe and the grand daughter.  Great thing about grandkids, nieces and nephews is you can spoil them and then send them home.


----------



## StevSmar

Thanks for the sound level information, @Titanium Knurler  that’s very helpful! I’m currently trying to decide between a variable speed lathe, or a geared head lathe.

Apart from the added weight of a geared head lathe, my concern is whether it’s significantly more noisy than a variable speed lathe. Your helpful measurements suggest not.


----------



## Dabbler

I'd take a somewhat louder gear head lathe over a quieter belt drive any day.... and I own one of each.


----------



## hman

Hah!  Guess I got you all beat.  My lathe has a VFD to drive the 3 phase motor, which drives the spindle through a series of two belts ... unless I put it in back gear, which then adds two pairs of (bevel) gears to the party


----------



## dfwilbanks

Hello all this is my 1st post. Titanium Knurler I enjoy your post on PM 1236T. However after seeing the photo of the pallet I'm thinking my plan to get a lathe into my home shop without the wife knowing will need more planning. I am almost ready to pull the trigger on the PM 1236. I was originally looking at the PM 1127VF-LB but really wanted a gear head machine. At some point one has to draw a line. That said, for a few dollars more.........

Tell me why I should get the PM 1236T.  What makes it more accurate? It's only about $500 more if I add all the extras to it so they have about the same stuff. Does it have a better gear head?

Looks like you have a collet chuck. I want one!!! What is the big wheel on the left end of the spindle shaft?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

First of all welcome to H-M!  I joined about a year and a half ago and have been very happy to be a part of the H-M community. There are just a whole bunch of friendly, helpful and humorous people here and the administrative-types, I believe, work hard behind the scenes to keep it that way.  As you may have gathered from my thread on the PM 1236-T  I am pretty new to machining but have learned a tremendous amount from the folks here. Again, welcome to H-M.

I am at work now and up to my ass in alligators, as they say, but here are just a few thoughts on your questions:

Hello all this is my 1st post. Titanium Knurler I enjoy your post on PM 1236T. However after seeing the photo of the pallet I'm thinking my plan to get a lathe into my home shop without the wife knowing will need more planning. Maybe you can do what Johnnie Cash did and bring it in "One Piece at a Time"?I am almost ready to pull the trigger on the PM 1236. I was originally looking at the PM 1127VF-LB but really wanted a gear head machine. At some point one has to draw a line. That said, for a few dollars more.........I was also considering a smaller lathe but am very happy I went up to the larger 1236-T.  

Tell me why I should get the PM 1236T. What makes it more accurate? I am not sure it is more accurate but it probably is.  It is described as "100% Tiawan" except for the spindle bearing which is Japanese and is described as having a run out of .0001".  I do not see a similar claim for the 1127VF-LB. It's only about $500 more if I add all the extras to it so they have about the same stuff. Does it have a better gear head?  Sorry, but I am not sure about the gear head or headstock differences but the 1236-T has the traditional Norton gearbox that has been around for many years so I assume it is a reliable design. The 1127VF-LB and 1236-T seem to have a lot of similarities: D1-4 camlock spindle mount, induction hardened ways and a large spindle bore.  The differences appear to be power(1 HP vs 1-1/2"), voltage(110 vs 220), slightly broader speed range and the VFD on the 1127VF-LB.  The 1236-T also has a removable gap in the bed and of course a longer bed so you can turn larger and longer stock and use a BXA rather than an AXA QCTP.  It looks like they are both very good machines,  the 1236-T is just a beefier(850# vs 575#) possibly more accurate machine.  I am very happy with mine.

Looks like you have a collet chuck. I want one!!! I have a 5C and now ER40 collet chuck.  They are not too expensive and I use them frequently.  I purchased the 5C first but have almost exclusively switched to the ER40.   What is the big wheel on the left end of the spindle shaft?  That is a headstock handwheel that I installed.  I use it all the time. I wish it was a stock feature. There is a description on how I installed it on the thread you were reading on the 1236-T.

Hope that helps a bit.  If you have any other questions let me know,
TK


----------



## dfwilbanks

hman said:


> Hah!  Guess I got you all beat.  My lathe has a VFD to drive the 3 phase motor, which drives the spindle through a series of two belts ... unless I put it in back gear, which then adds two pairs of (bevel) gears to the party


Screw the math. It was 1AM. The T cost $1200 more equally equiped.


----------



## dfwilbanks

Titanium Knurler said:


> First of all welcome to H-M!  I joined about a year and a half ago and have been very happy to be a part of the H-M community. There are just a whole bunch of friendly, helpful and humorous people here and the administrative-types, I believe, work hard behind the scenes to keep it that way.  As you may have gathered from my thread on the PM 1236-T  I am pretty new to machining but have learned a tremendous amount from the folks here. Again, welcome to H-M.
> 
> I am at work now and up to my ass in alligators, as they say, but here are just a few thoughts on your questions:
> 
> Hello all this is my 1st post. Titanium Knurler I enjoy your post on PM 1236T. However after seeing the photo of the pallet I'm thinking my plan to get a lathe into my home shop without the wife knowing will need more planning. Maybe you can do what Johnnie Cash did and bring it in "One Piece at a Time"?I am almost ready to pull the trigger on the PM 1236. I was originally looking at the PM 1127VF-LB but really wanted a gear head machine. At some point one has to draw a line. That said, for a few dollars more.........I was also considering a smaller lathe but am very happy I went up to the larger 1236-T.
> 
> Tell me why I should get the PM 1236T. What makes it more accurate? I am not sure it is more accurate but it probably is.  It is described as "100% Tiawan" except for the spindle bearing which is Japanese and is described as having a run out of .0001".  I do not see a similar claim for the 1127VF-LB. It's only about $500 more if I add all the extras to it so they have about the same stuff. Does it have a better gear head?  Sorry, but I am not sure about the gear head or headstock differences but the 1236-T has the traditional Norton gearbox that has been around for many years so I assume it is a reliable design. The 1127VF-LB and 1236-T seem to have a lot of similarities: D1-4 camlock spindle mount, induction hardened ways and a large spindle bore.  The differences appear to be power(1 HP vs 1-1/2"), voltage(110 vs 220), slightly broader speed range and the VFD on the 1127VF-LB.  The 1236-T also has a removable gap in the bed and of course a longer bed so you can turn larger and longer stock and use a BXA rather than an AXA QCTP.  It looks like they are both very good machines,  the 1236-T is just a beefier(850# vs 575#) possibly more accurate machine.  I am very happy with mine.
> 
> Looks like you have a collet chuck. I want one!!! I have a 5C and now ER40 collet chuck.  They are not too expensive and I use them frequently.  I purchased the 5C first but have almost exclusively switched to the ER40.   What is the big wheel on the left end of the spindle shaft?  That is a headstock handwheel that I installed.  I use it all the time. I wish it was a stock feature. There is a description on how I installed it on the thread you were reading on the 1236-T.
> 
> Hope that helps a bit.  If you have any other questions let me know,
> TK


Thank for the reply. I corrected the math, the T is $1200 more then the PM-1236 equally equipped. I have ruled out the 1127VF-LB. Decision time.


----------



## stioc

Have you looked at the Grizzly G4003G? It sounds similar to the 1236T with the upgraded spindle bearings etc but not sure if that's made in Taiwan or China. Lots of folks have bought them over the years and I have never seen a bad review. I'm leaning towards that due to the bang for the buck...but I'm not quite ready to upgrade from my 9x20 just yet.


----------



## dfwilbanks

stioc said:


> Have you looked at the Grizzly G4003G? It sounds similar to the 1236T with the upgraded spindle bearings etc but not sure if that's made in Taiwan or China. Lots of folks have bought them over the years and I have never seen a bad review. I'm leaning towards that due to the bang for the buck...but I'm not quite ready to upgrade from my 9x20 just yet.


I had not but did take a look after getting your post. At first look it looks like the same machine. Much less expensive. I will have to do some research.


----------



## mksj

The G4003G is made in China, there are both positive and negative reviews on it. Saying they look the same has no bases, other than the overall lathe designs are shared by multiple models, but says nothing of how they are built, how they work and how they will hold up over time. There is also service and parts to consider. If quality matters than the Taiwanese machines are much better built and have tighter specs/QC, better bearings, better castings, etc. As an example try to drill and tap Chinese machine castings, typically the cast iron is soft and almost gritty, on a Taiwanese machine the machine castings are much harder to drill and tap. You can't always go by the numbers and how many dodads are tacked onto the package, often they are not very high quality. My first mill was a higher end Chinese made under German supervision, and it had numerous serious problems and deficiencies and I eventually sold it. A lot of these problems I have seen in other cheaper machines. It is not that necessarily the origin of the machine, but the price point it is built too and the requested specifications. There is also a big difference between the brands and who you buy it form.


----------



## stioc

I was just mentioning another option since I too am in the same quest for the best bang-for-the-buck machine and it's unclear what the exact difference is between these two options. I even sent Matt an email about it and I got a very brief 'don't know...' sort of a response. Surely they must (and should) know more about their direct competitor's product?

Here's what I know:
The G4003G is the 'upgraded version' of the standard G4003 so it's not the run of the mill typical 12x36 lathe
It has upgraded spindle bearings like the PM1236T says in their information
The weight is pretty close to the 1236T (re: casting quality etc)
Has been a popular lathe with the gun crowds since before PM was even around

Also, keep in mind the Chinese tools of today are not the same as they were even 4yrs ago. Have you walked into Harbor Freight lately? They used to carry Taiwanese and Chinese tools and you could clearly see the difference between the two. Not so anymore, the Chinese tools have come a long way.

All that aside my question is what's the 'precision' difference between the two lathes, if we know that we can determine if we need the extra precision or not. Personally I won't be making aerospace parts nor doing needle work on swiss watches so I just need something with good power and decent enough precision to turn every day parts. My chinese 9x20 almost meets those needs but falls short on the oomph and precision by a little (for me).

Apologies to the OP for the sidebar!


----------



## dfwilbanks

Excuse me if I missed your reasoning for using outrigger. Do you think they are needed for stability while moving the lathe?

Also, please help out a new guy and tell me how to get out of a reply if I change my mind. Inappropriate question but I thank anyone who can help.


----------



## stioc

If you don't want to be notified of future replies to this thread you can just click 'Unwatch' towards the top of the page. I think that's what you're asking.


----------



## mikey

dfwilbanks said:


> Also, please help out a new guy and tell me how to get out of a reply if I change my mind. Inappropriate question but I thank anyone who can help.



In the reply window where you typed your thing that you want to delete, hit Ctrl+A to highlight everything and hit Delete. Then go up to the floppy disc icon at the top of the window, just to the left of the settings wheel, and click. It will give you the option to either save or delete your draft. Select Delete draft and close the reply window and that will do it.


----------



## mikey

@dfwilbanks, I wanted to say that choosing a lathe in this price category is not easy but, in general, a Taiwanese machine is usually going to be a better bet vs a Chinese one. Taiwanese build quality and castings are usually better, as is attention to detail. This holds for both lathes and mills and most other shop machines. When comparing machines with similar features the Taiwanese machine will almost always cost a bit more but typically will function better over time so if you can afford it, pick the Taiwanese machine.

If I was in the market for a lathe in this category, I would choose the PM1236T or possibly the PM 1340GT. There are better lathes out there but not at this price point. Plus, PM's support is said to be very good. I know they cost a fair amount but you won't be upgrading due to lack of features or build quality anytime soon. If you know lathes then you know that these lathes have all the features a good lathe needs. Both use a D1-4 camlock spindle so quality chucks are more readily available vs the less common D1-5 spindle and this is a bigger deal than you might think. Both machines have precision Nachi bearings, which should give good accuracy. 

The larger 1340GT has hardened and ground spindles and gears so it will tend to be more accurate over time and run quieter. My personal lathe, an Emco Super 11, also has ground shafts and gears and it runs between 65-70dB so I know this makes a difference in sound level. It also translates into better finishes.

To be honest, I find it amazing that PM is able to sell lathes of this quality and feature set at this price level. I could buy two PM1236 lathes for what my Emco lathe cost when fully tooled up. Personally, I think I could own either lathe and be happy with them.


----------



## stioc

@mikey, in all my reading (on some gun websites including) I see the D1-5 is said to be more robust than the D1-4 spindle hence part of the upgraded G4003G. It is true however that D1-4 chucks etc are slightly cheaper than the D1-5 but I see plenty of both available online including the backing plates (Shars and even Amazon)

@Titanium Knurler  said he'll do some testing and report back on the accuracy of the 1236T. I'd love for one of our G4003G owners like @epanzella to repeat the same testing and see how far off the two machines are from eachother. That would really help out the 12x36 community and prospect owners. I have no doubt that the 1236T will be better but the question is how much better and do I need that level of accuracy. I'm just a home gamer hack making garden variety dodads.


----------



## mikey

The thing to remember about camlock spindles is that the accuracy is determined by the accuracy of the spindle register; the pins don't do more than hold the chuck on that register. The number of pins might matter if you're doing a lot of heavy work pieces but most hobby guys don't. In addition, the cost for a D1-5 chuck is typically higher and the availability is comparatively lower and that also impacts on cost. My personal lathe's spindle can handle a 99# work piece by itself and up to 176# with live center support and it has a D1-4 camlock on it. That is more than enough for me.

The 12X and 13X lathes is a really popular size category because they are suitable for most of what a hobby guy will work on. My personal take on it is that if you're going to buy one of these lathes then be very clear on the features you want and then find the highest quality lathe you can afford with those features. Just based on the many, many comments on Chinese vs Taiwanese lathes and my personal experience with Taiwanese products, I would tend to favor the better quality of materials and machine work of a Taiwanese machine. Of course, this is just a personal opinion.


----------



## dfwilbanks

Firstgear said:


> I basically want to easily move the lathe from the wall to get behind it, cleaning, into the electrical box, into the area where the coolant is added etc.


OK, Im thinking 2 plates, 2 to 4 casters each and 4 small air bags. Hit it with air, casters come down, roll it out, clean and play with whatever’s back there, push it back to the same spot, bleed the air and whammy, no leveling needed.

OR, And my first choice:

4 small hydraulic cylinders with casters mounted on the moving part, mount one at each corner of the lathe. Hit the switch for the hydraulic pump and roll away.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

dfwilbanks said:


> Excuse me if I missed your reasoning for using outrigger. Do you think they are needed for stability while moving the lathe?
> 
> Yes, I used outriggers to broaden the base to help prevent tipping of the lathe.  The lathe moves easily and locks solidly in place with the caster-outrigger set-up.


----------



## mksj

The accuracy limits of most of these machine is mostly operator, not the lathe. Understanding the properties of the material you are cutting, what the cutter does based on the depth of cut and material dimensions, etc. Most of these machine (G4003, 1236T, 1340GT, etc.) will easily turn to better than 0.001" w/o much effort. With the 1340GT I easily hit 0.0005" tolerance, beyond that other factors come into play. The spindle runout on either machine is about the same, the likely hood of having some issues with the machine is more likely skewed against the G4003G. I have helped quite a few G4003 owners replace their motors and convert to 3 phase because of surface finish issues, and a number of motor failures.  If they work well out of the box, then you should be good, if you have QC issues they may persist.  It comes down to there is no free lunch, if a machine is cheaper, then they need to cut corners getting there. As I mentioned you can chase ones tail with the numbers and features, at the end of the day you want a good accurate machine that works. Either the G4003G, the PM-1236 or the 1236GT will fit the requirement, the Taiwanese machines are just put together nicer and work smoother in my opinion. They are all good machines.

A D1-5 spindle mount in a 1000lb machine is more marketing then function, a D1-4 will perform jut as well. As Mikey indicated, you might see a difference with a much heavier lathe and deeper cut, but it ain't going to happen with a 1000lb machine. The main reason for a larger spindle mount in these type of machines is to increase the spindle diameter, so you can see something like a 2.0" spindle diameter with a D1-5 and 2.5" on a D1-6. Get into heavier machines and it is a different story. If I recall the Monarch EE used a D1-3 mount, it was good enough for aerospace parts.

You will not want to be moving the lathe after it is setup and leveled, you are looking at using a precision level  to get the ways without any twist, you are not going to want to move the machine to clean up behind it. The practical solution is to give your self 1-2 feet behind the lathe to clean up, you should not need to get to the control box once the lathe is up and running. Giving some clearance behind the lathe, you can always pop open the control door enough to get in.  

People tend to overthink many things when the machine is not in front of them, get the machine and start using it and your perspectives will change (myself included when I bought my first lathe, a 1340GT). Loved the lathe, eventually moved up to a heavier machine because of an opportunity/move. The full time gunsmith that purchased it loves it, he doesn't use his other larger lathe much anymore. Buy once, cry once.


----------



## dfwilbanks

Titanium Knurler said:


> OK, Z2V, as long as I know someone is out there I will keep going.
> 
> What I plan on doing next is a couple of short sections(minor electrical stuff and then building a platform).  I also forgot to take time to indicate what I would do differently if I were to do these things again and to make recommendations to PM and LD so I thought I would briefly catch up on that then proceed with the outline.


I’m here TK, but it’s now almost July. I get to binge read the entire thread.


----------



## dfwilbanks

Titanium Knurler said:


> II. Set-up
> C.) Elecrical
> 
> Short section here. Three items: 220v single phase outlet, power cord and light.  I will show the wiring of the coolant system under that section.
> 
> I did not have a 220v, single phase outlet at the lathe location but I did have a wiremold raceway that I had installed for 110v.  I ran about thirty feet of AWG 12 wire.  This gave a voltage drop of slightly less than one volt. I installed a 220v GFCI breaker at the service panel.
> 
> View attachment 286035
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286036
> 
> 
> My lathe did not come with a power cord so that needed to be wired. I used AWG12 harsh environment cable from Mcmaster-Carr industrial supply which is where I get the majority of my supplies. A really great company to deal with; they are just down the road in Chicago and often if I order in the morning I will usually get the item the same day.  Some more pictures:
> 
> View attachment 286039
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286040
> 
> 
> View attachment 286041
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286042
> 
> 
> View attachment 286044
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286045
> 
> 
> The light is supposed to attach to the splash guard by the headstock but I was planning on installing a coolant and guard system and it was in the way there. Also, I didn’t want it to get splashed so I moved it over to the electrical box behind the headstock. The bracket that holds the light was a different color than the back lathe/splash so I painted it with some of the extra touch up paint I had.  More pictures:
> 
> View attachment 286046
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286047
> 
> 
> View attachment 286048
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286049
> 
> 
> View attachment 286050
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286051
> 
> 
> View attachment 286052
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 286053
> 
> 
> View attachment 286054


----------



## dfwilbanks

[QUOTE="
That’s it for electrical, except for the coolant system, and there was no math!
[/QUOTE]
I have no experience, except that I watched every YouTube video on machining, twice, but I have never seen anyone use a cooling system on a lathe like you would see on a mill. When would it be used?


----------



## dfwilbanks

Firstgear said:


> Makes sense, my Corvette Z06 came with oil change at 500 miles....


I looked through the manual on my Tesla, no reference to engine oil. And it will kick the ZO6’s butt.

I lied, I don’t have a Tesla. But I do have a Saturn Vue. Just doesn’t sound as cool. I am a huge fan of the Z06 but at 77 years old the Tesla would fit me better. Don’t expect the wife to get me either.

But I am getting a PM-1236T. I thing sex will be a lot better after the lathe arrives. Hold that...sex could kill me at my age and who will take care of the lathe.


----------



## dfwilbanks

[QUOTE="
I am sure there are some of you that use the lantern style toolpost
[/QUOTE]
Loved that thing. I took two years of Machine Shop in high school. 1958 and 1959. That was the last time I touched a lathe.


----------



## stioc

mksj said:


> The accuracy limits of most of these machine is mostly operator, not the lathe. Understanding the properties of the material you are cutting, what the cutter does based on the depth of cut and material dimensions, etc. Most of these machine (G4003, 1236T, 1340GT, etc.) will easily turn to better than 0.001" w/o much effort. With the 1340GT I easily hit 0.0005" tolerance, beyond that other factors come into play. The spindle runout on either machine is about the same, the likely hood of having some issues with the machine is more likely skewed against the G4003G. I have helped quite a few G4003 owners replace their motors and convert to 3 phase because of surface finish issues, and a number of motor failures.  If they work well out of the box, then you should be good, if you have QC issues they may persist.  It comes down to there is no free lunch, if a machine is cheaper, then they need to cut corners getting there. As I mentioned you can chase ones tail with the numbers and features, at the end of the day you want a good accurate machine that works. Either the G4003G, the PM-1236 or the 1236GT will fit the requirement, the Taiwanese machines are just put together nicer and work smoother in my opinion. They are all good machines.
> 
> A D1-5 spindle mount in a 1000lb machine is more marketing then function, a D1-4 will perform jut as well. As Mikey indicated, you might see a difference with a much heavier lathe and deeper cut, but it ain't going to happen with a 1000lb machine. The main reason for a larger spindle mount in these type of machines is to increase the spindle diameter, so you can see something like a 2.0" spindle diameter with a D1-5 and 2.5" on a D1-6. Get into heavier machines and it is a different story. If I recall the Monarch EE used a D1-3 mount, it was good enough for aerospace parts.
> 
> You will not want to be moving the lathe after it is setup and leveled, you are looking at using a precision level  to get the ways without any twist, you are not going to want to move the machine to clean up behind it. The practical solution is to give your self 1-2 feet behind the lathe to clean up, you should not need to get to the control box once the lathe is up and running. Giving some clearance behind the lathe, you can always pop open the control door enough to get in.
> 
> People tend to overthink many things when the machine is not in front of them, get the machine and start using it and your perspectives will change (myself included when I bought my first lathe, a 1340GT). Loved the lathe, eventually moved up to a heavier machine because of an opportunity/move. The full time gunsmith that purchased it loves it, he doesn't use his other larger lathe much anymore. Buy once, cry once.



Thanks, this is kind of what I figured i.e the accuracy is pretty decent on the G4003Gs or else they wouldn't be so popular with the gun crowd. It's likely not as refined as the 1236T but it's also $1k cheaper (used to be even cheaper until the tariffs hit). $5500 for a 12x36 model is a bit hard to justify which is probably why people end up getting the 1340GT instead as that's a much more substantial lathe for another $1k so overall a better buy. After running the numbers and stuff in my head, in the end I do like the idea of buy once cry once so may be the 1340GT when the time comes.


----------



## Keizer

Very enjoyable thread!  Can't believe I just sat here and read the whole thing.  I am looking at buying the same PM 1236 T  so this was time well spent.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Keizer said:


> Very enjoyable thread!  Can't believe I just sat here and read the whole thing.  I am looking at buying the same PM 1236 T  so this was time well spent.


Welcome to HM!  I think you will really enjoy the folks here and learn a lot. I am happy you enjoyed the thread on the 1236-T.  I have been very happy with the machine and do not regret the investment.  If you have any questions about the lathe I am happy to try to answer them for you. Mike


----------



## Keizer

Titanium Knurler said:


> If you have any questions about the lathe I am happy to try to answer them for you. Mike



I see your lathe has the 220 single phase option instead of 220 three phase.  Have you had any of the issues that I have read about as far as single phase causing surface finish problems?  

Also, do you have any photos of some of the different parts you have machined?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Keizer, I have not had any issues with the single phase set-up but think the three phase is a nice idea and would strongly consider it if I were to buy again.  I have not had any issues with surface finish but, like you, I am new at this and am not sure I would recognize any surface issues related to single or three phase supply. It seems to me that if I play around with speed, feed and depth of cut I get a very nice finish.  I also have a coolant system that I believe helps as well.  Hope that helps


----------



## StevSmar

Titanium Knurler said:


> Keizer, I have not had any issues with the single phase set-up but think the three phase is a nice idea...


I wonder I’d there is much difference in torque pulses for single phase vs three phase (180 vs 120 degrees)?

(I’ve enjoyed your thread also!)


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Unfortunately, I can’t comment on torque pulses but there are some people on this Forum that have experience in this area. Hopefully one of them will see your comment and respond.

Thanks for your comment on the thread.  I am not quite finished with it yet.  I hope to finish it when work lightens up a bit and fishing season is over!


----------



## Keizer

Titanium Knurler said:


> Keizer, I have not had any issues with the single phase set-up but think the three phase is a nice idea and would strongly consider it if I were to buy again.  I have not had any issues with surface finish but, like you, I am new at this and am not sure I would recognize any surface issues related to single or three phase supply. It seems to me that if I play around with speed, feed and depth of cut I get a very nice finish.  I also have a coolant system that I believe helps as well.  Hope that helps



I actually worked as a journey level machinist for many years.  All the lathes, and milling machines in the shop were three phase.  So this single phase issue was something I never even had to think about until now.  I appreciate the info!


----------



## StevSmar

Titanium Knurler said:


> ...Thanks for your comment on the thread.  I am not quite finished with it yet.  I hope to finish it when work lightens up a bit and fishing season is over!


Thankfully my work has now slowed down. I won’t be doing anything until cottage season is over! I’m looking forward to winter.


----------



## dfwilbanks

stioc said:


> If you don't want to be notified of future replies to this thread you can just click 'Unwatch' towards the top of the page. I think that's what you're asking.


Was thinking more in the line of: I start a reply and don't want to post it. I'm stuck in it. It's probably so simple that no one can believe I ask such a question.


----------



## ArmyDoc

dfwilbanks said:


> Was thinking more in the line of: I start a reply and don't want to post it. I'm stuck in it. It's probably so simple that no one can believe I ask such a question.


Mikey answered this, in post 222.  Easy to miss, so I'll copy his response here:

"In the reply window where you typed your thing that you want to delete, hit Ctrl+A to highlight everything and hit Delete. Then go up to the floppy disc icon at the top of the window, just to the left of the settings wheel, and click. It will give you the option to either save or delete your draft. Select Delete draft and close the reply window and that will do it. "


----------



## TX COWDOC

Hey Titanium Knurler,
I’m doing a similar set up and am interested to know what you used for your equipment pads?
Please advise-
Thank you 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Hi COWDOC, I used pads from Mc!aster-Carr.


----------



## SteveStash

I am really late to this party, however I too trudged through the whole thread.  Very fun and lots of good Ideas.  One thing that concerned me from the beginning was floating the lathe essentially in mid air.  The 1/2" plate would do very little to resist twist in the ways.  I believe it is possible that simply making a cut could be introducing twist in this lathe. A lathe needs a stout column between the headstock and tailstock, or a solid anchor.  Anyway food for thought.  Tk, if you are still around, I hope you are enjoying the lathe and that little girl!  She's got to be over 2, about time for another one!


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Hi Steve,  

I admit the system is unusual but it works; the lathe has maintained it’s adjustment.  In fact, I just checked the tailstock alignment with the Edge alignment bar the other day and found it to be aligned within a tenth. However, I can’t say that I feel that it is the best set-up for everyone.  It does allow me to move the lathe easily without affecting adjustment but I have found I don’t move the lathe as much as I thought I would and the system was expensive and I am sure has more vibration than the traditional set-up.  

I would have to say the most useful modification has been the hand wheel and spider.  I realized how much I use the hand wheel when I took it off the other day to put a new belt on and kept reaching for it.  It’s just nice to grab the hand wheel instead of the chuck when checking runout or checking to make sure all is clear before turning the lathe on. 

I hope that helps,
TK


----------



## Ken226

mksj said:


> A D1-5 spindle mount in a 1000lb machine is more marketing then function, a D1-4 will perform jut as well. As Mikey indicated, you might see a difference with a much heavier lathe and deeper cut, but it ain't going to happen with a 1000lb machine. The main reason for a larger spindle mount in these type of machines is to increase the spindle diameter,



I realize I'm responding to something you mentioned in 2019, but I had a mostly useless, academic thought I wanted to run by you

When I read this part of your post, I wondered just how much more rigid would the d1-5 in the g4003g be than a d1-4 in a similar class of machine.

So, the point on the spindle that would be subject to the most deflection stress should be the main spindle bearing behind the spindle, right?

I looked up the specs on 2 similar machines, with each respective spindle.  The g4003g and the g4003.

The G4003g has a d1-5 spindle with a 1.57" spindle bore and, according to manual uses a 30212 (60mm Id, or 2.3622" ) bearing.   That would make the spindles wall thickness @ the main bearing 0.3961"

The G4003 has a d1-4 spindle, and according to the manual has a 1.417" spindle bore.  It also uses the 30212 bearing.    That would make the spindle wall thickness @ the main bearing  .4725".

So, regardless of the d1-5 spindle mount, the g4003g spindles OD @ the bearing boss is the same as that of the g4003 @ 60mm ( 2.3622").    But the 4003g has a significantly larger bore, and correspondingly less spindle wall thickness.

Taking that into consideration, I wonder just how much more rigid is the g4003g spindle?  May even be less rigid, perhaps?

A purely academic thought, since I own neither machine.


----------



## ArmyDoc

Ken226 said:


> I realize I'm responding to something you mentioned in 2019, but I had a mostly useless, academic thought I wanted to run by you
> 
> When I read this part of your post, I wondered just how much more rigid would the d1-5 in the g4003g be than a d1-4 in a similar class of machine.
> 
> So, the point on the spindle that would be subject to the most deflection stress should be the main spindle bearing behind the spindle, right?
> 
> I looked up the specs on 2 similar machines, with each respective spindle.  The g4003g and the g4003.
> 
> The G4003g has a d1-5 spindle with a 1.57" spindle bore and, according to manual uses a 30212 (60mm Id, or 2.3622" ) bearing.   That would make the spindles wall thickness @ the main bearing 0.3961"
> 
> The G4003 has a d1-4 spindle, and according to the manual has a 1.417" spindle bore.  It also uses the 30212 bearing.    That would make the spindle wall thickness @ the main bearing  .4725".
> 
> So, regardless of the d1-5 spindle mount, the g4003g spindles OD @ the bearing boss is the same as that of the g4003 @ 60mm ( 2.3622").    But the 4003g has a significantly larger bore, and correspondingly less spindle wall thickness.
> 
> Taking that into consideration, I wonder just how much more rigid is the g4003g spindle?  May even be less rigid, perhaps?
> 
> A purely academic thought, since I own neither machine.


So the outer spindle diameter is the same?  Wonder why they didn't just use the same spindle...


----------



## SteveStash

Yep, the hand wheel was very familiar to me.  I grew up playing on a Clausing  identical to the one in the attachment.  I am looking to purchase the 1236t in 1PH.  How do you like yours after using it for a few years now?


----------



## Ken226

ArmyDoc said:


> So the outer spindle diameter is the same?  Wonder why they didn't just use the same spindle...



The best I can do on that question is to guess.    


Grizzly told the factory in China they want a d1-5 spindle and 1.57 bore.     The factory did what was most economical,  adjusted the camlock to d1-5 dimensions and bored the inside bigger.

That's just a wild guess.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

SteveStash said:


> Yep, the hand wheel was very familiar to me.  I grew up playing on a Clausing  identical to the one in the attachment.  I am looking to purchase the 1236t in 1PH.  How do you like yours after using it for a few years now?



Hi Steve,  the lathe has not disappointed me.  It has been exceptionally reliable and accurate but take this with a grain of salt since I am a newbie and this is my first and likely my last lathe.  What has been interesting to me is that I use it much more than I thought I would.  I don’t know how I got along without a lathe and milling machine.

My only complaint is that PM uses a very poor quality belt.  I would have a replacement ready for when the stock belt fails or just replace it right away before your lathe is covered with black belt dust.

The only other point is that I would consider 3PH power if it is an option for you. 

Please feel free to ask me anything you like about the lathe, I am happy to help if I can.

Mike


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Ken226 said:


> I realize I'm responding to something you mentioned in 2019, but I had a mostly useless, academic thought I wanted to run by you
> 
> When I read this part of your post, I wondered just how much more rigid would the d1-5 in the g4003g be than a d1-4 in a similar class of machine.
> 
> So, the point on the spindle that would be subject to the most deflection stress should be the main spindle bearing behind the spindle, right?
> 
> I looked up the specs on 2 similar machines, with each respective spindle.  The g4003g and the g4003.
> 
> The G4003g has a d1-5 spindle with a 1.57" spindle bore and, according to manual uses a 30212 (60mm Id, or 2.3622" ) bearing.   That would make the spindles wall thickness @ the main bearing 0.3961"
> 
> The G4003 has a d1-4 spindle, and according to the manual has a 1.417" spindle bore.  It also uses the 30212 bearing.    That would make the spindle wall thickness @ the main bearing  .4725".
> 
> So, regardless of the d1-5 spindle mount, the g4003g spindles OD @ the bearing boss is the same as that of the g4003 @ 60mm ( 2.3622").    But the 4003g has a significantly larger bore, and correspondingly less spindle wall thickness.
> 
> Taking that into consideration, I wonder just how much more rigid is the g4003g spindle?  May even be less rigid, perhaps?
> 
> A purely academic thought, since I own neither machine.




Ken226, your reasoning makes sense to me. If I understand your description correctly, in this instance, the D1-5 spindle has the same OD and bearing as the D1-4 spindle but a thinner spindle wall because the spindle bore is minimally larger. I am not an engineer but I think it would be difficult to make a case for the D1-5 spindle being more rigid with it’s thinner wall. Also, I am not sure whether these two examples are representative of D1-4 and D1-5 spindles from other manufacturers and one has to wonder if, in this case, the manufacturer chose a similar part and simply enlarged the bore a bit since the consumer expects a larger spindle bore with a D1-5 machine.  

Now we have combined your “purely academic thought” with my pure conjecture and am afraid we may be entering into the realm of BS : ) but I have a feeling that most likely mksj and Mikey are correct that with machines this size the D1-4 vs D1-5 spindle probably doesn’t make much difference.


----------



## Ken226

Titanium Knurler said:


> Also, I am not sure whether these two examples are representative of D1-4 and D1-5 spindles from other manufacturers and one has to wonder if, in this case, the manufacturer chose a similar part and simply enlarged the bore a bit since the consumer expects a larger spindle bore with a D1-5 machine.



Just to see, I looked up Grizzlys biggest lathe equipped with a d1-5 spindle (that I spotted with a quick look).   The G0824 is their 14x40 gunsmith lathe. It has a a d1-5 spindle,  a 2" spindle bore and uses a 32015 bearing.

The 32015 bearing has an inner race ID of 75mm.    That puts the wall thickness @ .4765"

So, I guess the G4003g spindle is definitely  not representative of all d1-5 spindles.

My Birmingham 13x40 is a d1-4.   It's spindle specs are near identical to the Standard g4003.  It has a 1.437" bore, uses the same 30212 bearing,  So it has a wall thickness of .4625".

Now, I have little doubt that the G4003G spindle is plenty strong enough.  But I doubt it had a rigidity advantage over similar size D1-4 spindles.

The G0824 d1-5 spindle however,  is definitely, without a doubt more rigid.


----------



## szenieh

It is difficult for me to understand why you keep calling yourself a "newbie"! The level of understanding, analysis of the issues and the synthesis of the solution indicate a great deal of depth and experience. Not knowing what your background is, I would say that you had a great deal of mechanical design hands-on experience and a serious engineering education. 

I am learning a great deal from this thread. Thank you for sharing.

Salah


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Salah, I am very pleased that you have found this thread useful and appreciate your kind words.  I apologize for not responding sooner but an impromptu road trip to Utah and COVID intervened.

I feel this thread is unfinished and hope to add to it in the future now that I have many hours in front of the machine.

Regards,
TK


----------



## Just for fun

TK,  You have did an exceptional job putting your lathe together,  it looks great! 

Your documentation in this thread is also exceptional.

Thank You for all your efforts! 

Tim


----------



## Downunder Bob

Titanium Knurler said:


> Jester966,  think of it this way.  Say you are a machinist on a battle ship, your captain runs aground in choppy seas and bends the prop shaft.  The enemy is approaching and you need to turn a new prop shaft pronto!  Your lathe was adjusted on land to have no twist in the ways and then bolted to the battle ship.  But now you are at sea, the ship is pitching and rolling!  What do you do?  You turn a perfectly untapered shaft because the movement of the ship, even though it is creating a constantly unlevel lathe, has no affect on your lathe as long as the ways are untwisted.  You are promoted, retire with a huge pension and live happily ever after.  Think of the plate on the mobile base as the battle ship.


Absolutely correct, I spent a large part of my working life as an engineer on cargo ships. Most of those ships had a workshop that included a lathe, some also had other machines such as mills, one even had a shaper.
These machines were always bolted to a very stiff sub base which was welded to the ships frame. This was done in such a way that the machine could be set up square to itself, they would almost never be level, but within themself would always be square.
Machining to tight tolerances was never a problem.


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Just for fun said:


> TK,  You have did an exceptional job putting your lathe together,  it looks great!
> 
> Your documentation in this thread is also exceptional.
> 
> Thank You for all your efforts!
> 
> Tim


Thanks you and I appreciate your feedback!


----------



## StevSmar

@Titanium Knurler , how did your stand work out? Are you able to move it and not have the alignment of your lathe needing to be re-adjusted?


----------



## Titanium Knurler

StevSmar, I have only needed to move it a couple of times since I set it up but it moved easily and stayed aligned…I guess every dog has his day


----------



## StevSmar

Titanium Knurler said:


> …it moved easily and stayed aligned…


I tried aligning my PM-1224T for twist and it was hard to see any difference. I didn’t know if to put it down to bad technique or the more rigid 24” bed…


----------



## Titanium Knurler

StevSmar said:


> I tried aligning my PM-1224T for twist and it was hard to see any difference. I didn’t know if to put it down to bad technique or the more rigid 24” bed…



I am uncertain as to whether you didn’t see any change in the twist with adjustment or you didn’t see much effect(change of taper) from the adjustment.

If you didn’t see much change in the twist with your adjustment then it is possible that your level is not quite sensitive enough.  When I make adjustments I use a Starrett precision machine level(model 199Z) that is unbelievably sensitive and unfortunately pricey.  I got mine used from eBay.  It is almost too sensitive and will pick up very small changes(.0005”/foot).  I guess the other possibility is, as you mentioned, you have a really rigid bed and it just doesn’t change much with adjustment.

If you didn’t see much effect from the adjustment, I.e., no change of taper with a two collar test, this would not be entirely unexpected since the untwisting of the lathe has a pretty insignificant affect on taper unless there is a really large adjustment needed.  If you go back in this thread you will see Dr Jackson’s nomogram for vertical misalignment(twist) vs. taper vs. diameter of workpiece. It shows that one gets a surprisingly small amount of taper when a lathe is twisted or vertically misaligned especially with larger diameter workpieces.

I hope that is helpful I didn’t muddle things up for you.

Bottom Line:  If you don’t have much twist I wouldn’t worry about it unless you are getting an unacceptable amount of taper for your projects.


----------



## Just for fun

So, I'm getting around to really trying to align the lathe.  When I first got it, I leveled/took the twist out of the ways.  Now that I have had it for a while and spend a little time learning how to run a lathe.  I have decided it is time to re-address the alignment.  I have learned that when I thought I had it level I had performed the function incorrectly.  That being said I don't know if I ever had it correct.  I had laid my precision level across the V-Ways.

So, my one question before I get head deep into this alignment issue.  On the headstock end there are four feet, do they adjust the headstock up and down in relationship to the tailstock?  You may have covered it earlier in this thread, I'm back on page 18 still trying to absorb all the information.

Tim


----------



## Titanium Knurler

Just for fun said:


> So, I'm getting around to really trying to align the lathe.  When I first got it, I leveled/took the twist out of the ways.  Now that I have had it for a while and spend a little time learning how to run a lathe.  I have decided it is time to re-address the alignment.  I have learned that when I thought I had it level I had performed the function incorrectly.  That being said I don't know if I ever had it correct.  I had laid my precision level across the V-Ways.
> 
> So, my one question before I get head deep into this alignment issue.  On the headstock end there are four feet, do they adjust the headstock up and down in relationship to the tailstock?  You may have covered it earlier in this thread, I'm back on page 18 still trying to absorb all the information.
> 
> Tim


Hi Tim,

I think the answer to your question depends on your set-up and whether are you referring to the bolts that hold the headstock to the cabinet(red oval) or the leveling bolts(green oval) at the bottom of the cabinet:




 Maybe you could show us a photo of your setup?

There are several places that you can place your precision level when checking for twist in the bed but I prefer to place it right on the saddle and leave it in place.  My reasoning is that picking up the level and placing it in different positions can introduce some error.  In addition, your cutting tool will always run parallel to the path of the saddle.  I am sure others have a preferred method but that is my reasoning for placing it directly on the saddle and just leaving it there during the adjustment.


----------



## Just for fun

It's just the standard welded stand that I got from PM when I got my 1236T.  I was refering to leveling bolts on the stand.  I just adjusted them so all four had about the same tension when adjusting them.

It wasn't just you, I have read other articles that state using the flats on the saddle not the V ways.


----------



## cobraJack

Firstgear said:


> That was my wife and I last September running in the 105 mph class at the Silver State Classic run in Nevada.  They close off 90 miles of two lane highway and your goal is to average your class speed over the 90 miles. Our target time was about 51 minutes and 25.714 seconds.  We won our class, we were slow by 0.0373 seconds.  She has two stop watches and every mile tells me if we are fast or slow and by how much.  With a half mile to go she figured we were 0.100 seconds slow, so By the time everything computed in my head, I pushed the speed up to 118 mph.
> 
> We trailered the car from Ohio, 5,000 miles round trip.  My Corvette is a 2015 Z06 with some mods, it has 620hp and 635 ft-lbs at the rear wheels.  The record run over the 90 miles was in the unlimited class and that car averaged 217mph with a top speed of 242 mph.  That was done by a repurposed NASCAR car.


Firstgear- have you ever run the BBORR (Big Bend Open Road Race)? I've been running it since 2012. Started in 115 class and now run the 130. As you know, it's a blast!

JT


----------



## tredding

Titanium Knurler said:


> I. Unpacking, cont’d
> 
> If you look at the photo of the stand in the last post you will see that the headstock side has four areas for support at the base for leveling mounts and four at the top to mount the lathe to the cabinet. Similarly, the tailstock end has two.  The PM Manual recommends that if one uses leveling mounts that they should be rated for 250 lb each.  Since I was planning on adding casters and machine mounts for the mobile base I wanted to get a pretty good idea of the weight of the headstock and tailstock ends.  I used a trailer tongue weight scale to determine the approximate weight while the lathe was on the pallet.
> 
> View attachment 285417
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285418
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see this is a pretty good recommendation:
> 
> View attachment 285419
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285420
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285421
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285422
> 
> 
> 
> If you fast forward to when the stand is complete and the lathe is mounted on the mobile base you can see that the 250 lb/mount recommendation is still pretty reasonable:
> 
> View attachment 285423
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285424
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285425
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285426
> 
> 
> However, as you will see in the next section I used casters and mounts that are rated for at least fours times that amount.
> 
> Well, enough about Unpacking.  I promised at the beginning I would list what I(TK) would do differently and would make recommendations for the manufacturer,Liang Dei(LD) and PM. So here they are:
> 
> TK- none this time but there are plenty coming up
> 
> LD-better packing to avoid scuffs and scratches
> -better engineered latches or at least ones that do not need to be modified
> -COSMOLINE TO THE SPINDLE BORE
> 
> PM-get labels correct, straight and centered
> -make touch-up paint available
> 
> Pretty minor stuff.  Next I will discuss making the mobile base.  I am very interested in your feedback on this!


I am glad to see your solution included casters.  I put them on the PM-728VT and plan to use them with the TM-1236. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09V6GCLXN/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## Dabbler

@tredding i had a solution for my 12 X37 that you'd might appreciate.  I had to fabricate my own stand, and so I made some blocks under the headstock that would take 1" NF bolts,  I found some 4.25 inch phenolic wheels with a 1" bore.  When I have to move the lathe, all I do is lever up, put the wheels on, and then drive it across the shop like a shopping cart.  The tailstock end is easily light enough to lift and push/pull, even for an old guy like me.

-- if you are interested I could take a pic or 2 and post here.


----------



## tredding

Dabbler said:


> @tredding i had a solution for my 12 X37 that you'd might appreciate.  I had to fabricate my own stand, and so I made some blocks under the headstock that would take 1" NF bolts,  I found some 4.25 inch phenolic wheels with a 1" bore.  When I have to move the lathe, all I do is lever up, put the wheels on, and then drive it across the shop like a shopping cart.  The tailstock end is easily light enough to lift and push/pull, even for an old guy like me.
> 
> -- if you are interested I could take a pic or 2 and post here.


As I have read many times here, "we like pictures". Sure, if it is not too much of a bother, I would enjoy seeing the pictures.  Hopefully, I will not have to lift anything when moving my lathe. This forum has been a great source of information and will cause me to rethink the layout of my shop.  So, moving to improve operation will likely happen.  Hopefully, it will be an uncommon activity.


----------



## Dabbler

Here it is.  sorry for the low def.


----------



## tredding

Titanium Knurler said:


> 1.) Outriggers with Casters
> 
> This is what comes with the lathe: a cast iron puck, a bolt and a nut.
> 
> View attachment 285613
> 
> 
> Here is a configuration that I considered from a piece of equipment at work
> 
> View attachment 285617
> 
> 
> That arrangement was appealing because it lowered the CG of the cabinet but I wanted casters that I could adjust the leveling foot with a wrench rather than a plastic wheel that most of the casters have, in addition the bent arrangement of the outrigger would get in the way of the cabinet doors.  I went with straight outriggers.  I used three 1/2”x 4”x23” pieces of 1018 cold finish steel flat.  The cabinet is 15” wide so this gave me a 4” x 4” area extending from the cabinet to attach the casters.  All the holes are 3/8” except the larger hole for the M16 leveling foot which is 3/4”. The outriggers were then painted and attached to the base. The holes on the base are a different size and offset a bit so you have to take that into consideration when measuring.  I used a spacer to account for the different diameters:
> 
> View attachment 285618
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285619
> 
> 
> View attachment 285620
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285621
> 
> 
> I used Carrymaster ALC1000 casters. The outriggers were attached to the cabinet and the casters attached to the outriggers using 3/8” x 1-3/4” bolts.
> 
> View attachment 285622
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285623
> 
> 
> View attachment 285624
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285625
> 
> 
> I used 2” fender washer and an M16 coupler nut that had been cut in half to act as a lock nut on the leveling foot.
> 
> View attachment 285627
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285629
> 
> 
> I am then able to make fine adjustments of the leveling foot with a small wrench and then secure the position with a larger wrench on the coupling nut.
> 
> View attachment 285630
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285631
> 
> 
> I added some equipment pads to help keep the lathe from walking but I think they are overkill.  The machine is very solidly in position without them.
> 
> View attachment 285632
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 285633
> 
> 
> This added about 5” to the cabinet height.  The PM puck-and-bolt is about 1-1/2” so there is a net gain of about 3-1/2” over the puck-and-bolt configuration.
> 
> View attachment 285634
> 
> 
> That’s it for the outriggers.  Tomorrow I will try to do the equipment mounts and hopefully the day after the baseplate.


This is a great thread. This is the caster I installed on the PM-728VT stand and plan to install on the PM-1236 when it arrives in November 2022. Four for about $45 at Amazon. Four support 2200 pounds, so six should easily support the PM-1236 and stand. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09V6GCLXN/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&th=1


----------



## tredding

Titanium Knurler said:


> Mikey, the baseplate is threaded and the jack screw goes into those threads.  When the screw is advanced upward it lifts that portion of the tailstock footing. For example, when I was leveling the lathe the side of the tailstock toward the operator was a bit low.  I loosened the nut on the anchor bolt, lifted that corner by advancing the jack screw then re-tightend the nut on the anchor bolt. I repeated this is small increments until the lathe was level, then I tightened the lock nut on the jack screw.  This took a total of about a quarter turn on the jack screw. The pointed end of the jack screw is not used.  I used jack screws because they have a nice fine 1/2-20 thread, they are hardened and I can use the small hardened rod that comes with them to make adjustments by hand.  Also, they are only $8 from Starrett.  I didn’t know Starrett made anything for $8.  I hope this helps.


Is it leveling or combating twist? Terry - W6LMJ


----------

