# Craftsman...what flavor?



## kopeck (Jun 7, 2018)

So this guy just showed up somewhat close to me:







It looks to me like one of the 9/10 - 12 versions I can't nail down which one though?  Looking at pictures I can't quite find one exactly like it.  It looks to me like a babbitt bearing head stock which would make it a earlier unit but it also has the belt guards so not to early.  The belt guard also looks different than most pictures I'm finding.

The thing that caught my eye is it's pretty well equipped.   In the picture I see:

3 jaw chuck
4 jaw chuck
Faceplate w/dog
Steady rest
Milling attachement
Set of change gears

I have asked if the tag is still on it but I haven't heard back.

I told my self when it came time to upgrade the Craftsman 6" I wanted to make a decent jump, just not a small one.  By that I mean power cross feed (which I don't see that this unit has) and a quick change gear box.  What makes me interested in this guy though is the fact that it comes with a steady rest which I would love on my 6" but can't justify the cost and a the milling attachment, which is the same deal as the steady rest.

The price is reasonable, I could probably double my money if I wanted to part it out but I really don't want to get into that.

Ugh...

K


----------



## markba633csi (Jun 7, 2018)

It's a 12" and it does have power cross feed but I would hold out for one with the roller bearing headstock


----------



## kopeck (Jun 7, 2018)

markba633csi said:


> It's a 12" and it does have power cross feed but I would hold out for one with the roller bearing headstock



It does?

Looking closer, is it the handle/button below the half nut lever?

The babbitt bearings were the other thing that bothered me a bit.  I think it if had rollers it would be a slam dunk.

K


----------



## markba633csi (Jun 7, 2018)

Ooops the picture is misleading- it doesn't have power cross.  My mistake


----------



## kopeck (Jun 7, 2018)

markba633csi said:


> Ooops the picture is misleading- it doesn't have power cross.  My mistake



I thought so. 

I wish the lathe a little bit newer/better.  It's not what I want but it's also tempting considering the gear it comes with and the price is reasonable.  I also just got my 6" in working shape...

K


----------



## markba633csi (Jun 7, 2018)

I would check the play in the head bearings/bushings with a test bar and an indicator so you know how much slop there is- could be quite a lot
on the other hand, it might be worth buying just for the parts alone


----------



## kopeck (Jun 7, 2018)

I suppose it doesn't hurt to look.  The lady did get back to be and said she would try and get me the model number.

I wonder if you could convert it to a timken head?  The gears and the cone pulley all look to be the same.  Housings and spindles look like they're readily available.  Then again it doesn't really stay a deal if you have to throw a bunch of money at it either and I wouldn't have a power cross slide.

K


----------



## wa5cab (Jun 7, 2018)

It isn't a 9" for many reasons, the first of which is that the 9" has no belt cover because it has a vertical countershaft with three belts running straight up out of the spindle.  It's a 12", not a 10" as it has tumbler reverse instead of a reversing gearbox at the left end of the lead screw.  The only two 10" with a tumbler both have a QCGB.  And the Craftsman badge is visible on the front of the headstock plus the belt tension rod is visible above the left end of the headstock.  It has babbit spindle bearings as the bearing caps and bolts are visible.  So it isn't one of the 101.0740x models.  It is either a 101.07363 or 101.07383 and not earler because it has a rectangular motor switch plate, which didn't appear until late 1941 or early 1942.  I think that I can just see the back gear lever's knob in the second photo, which would mean that it is a 101.07383.  If that isn't the knob and if it doesn't have back gears, then it would be a 101.07363.  But the number of 07363's sold was small compared to the number of 07383's so it's most likely a 101.07383.


----------



## wa5cab (Jun 7, 2018)

It is possible to convert a 101.07383 to a 101.07403 but you would just about have to find an otherwise good 101.07403 with a bad bed and no legs and tailstock in order to do it with the fewest parts left over.  You would still have two sets of back gears and spindle pulleys. In short, no longer a bargain.


----------



## pontiac428 (Jun 7, 2018)

Why the concern over babbit bearings?  I have one Timken head and one babbit head, and it might surprise you that the Timken head lives in my spares cabinet.  If the babbit bearings are in good shape, kept oiled, and are adjusted correctly, they run very true.  82 years of service and going strong.  Just sayin'.


----------



## kopeck (Jun 7, 2018)

You're pretty amazing Robert.  I guess I didn't mean it was a 9", more that it was from the linage.  Either way great info.

I did dig deep on the conversion parts but I'll take your word for it.

K


----------



## kopeck (Jun 7, 2018)

pontiac428 said:


> Why the concern over babbit bearings?  I have one Timken head and one babbit head, and it might surprise you that the Timken head lives in my spares cabinet.  If the babbit bearings are in good shape, kept oiled, and are adjusted correctly, they run very true.  82 years of service and going strong.  Just sayin'.



I'm just thinking about the hoops I had to jump though to get my 6" running the way wanted.  That's a different setup but the basic idea is similar.  The way I see it if the bearings are worn and the shims are all out it's kind of game over.

Testing it with an indicator is a good plan, if you see some slop then it's gamble time.  If it has adjustment left you win, if it doesn't you loose.

K


----------



## kopeck (Jun 7, 2018)

I think the other "X Factor" here is what's not in the pictures.  If its just as it sits and it is in usable shape it's a good deal.  If there's a set of collets sitting somewhere out of the picture (it does have the milling attachment) then that changes things yet again.

K


----------



## markba633csi (Jun 7, 2018)

The tall compound is the tip-off that it's a twelve. The ten is shorter.
Babbit bearings are fine if they are in good shape, but if they're not it can be a pain. The roller head gives you zero runout without too much hassle, in my humble opinion it's the better setup, and the reason they command higher prices
Robert D's encyclopedic knowledge of all things Atlas is pretty impressive- He knows way more than me and I know a lot, and thanks to HM am learning more every day


----------



## wa5cab (Jun 8, 2018)

Atlas built and Sears sold 14 different models of the 3/8" bed 12".  6 have roller bearings but only 3 have power cross feed.  In order to change the 101.07383 to have power crossfeed, you have to change the carriage, the lead screw and the right lead screw bearing.  Which if you look at the "big picture" is a little strange.  When Atlas came out with the 10F, they continued to offer both roller and babbit bearings but both versions had power cross feed.  Sears, on the other hand, stuck with the 10D carriage on the 101.07383.  So it only has manual cross feed.


----------



## kopeck (Jun 8, 2018)

I'm going to take a look at it.  I can always walk away.  

Really this is just a king sized version of my 101.07301.  The larger capacity would be nice but I haven't had a project that the 6" couldn't handle.  I know that's not a good indicator though since the 6" is really small and that day is coming.  Also the 3/4" spindle hole on the 12" is kind of a bummer, I wonder why they stayed so small on a relatively large machine?

Converting it to a power cross feed doesn't seem all that economical, why not just take that money and look for a machine that already has it.  I've also found out how quickly "little" repairs can add up, my 6" works great but I'll never get my investment out of it.

What it comes down to is the extras.  If I wanted to get a milling attachment and a steady rest for my 6" it would cost about what this whole 12" is selling for.  If the underlying lathe is a worn out though those attachments are not going to do me any good.

K


----------



## kopeck (Jun 8, 2018)

Then I see this:

https://maine.craigslist.org/tls/d/atlas-metal-lathe-for-parts/6604329994.html

I see that power cross feed knob hiding. 

I'm second it line to look at the 12".  I suspect it will go as long as the first guy doesn't try to beat her up on the price.  I think I'm really OK with it, there are other lathes out there that have all the features I want. 

K


----------



## wa5cab (Jun 9, 2018)

K,

The rusty lathe in New Glouster is a 10F.  But it is not a TH42 because it has a vertical countershaft, not a horizontal.  Assuming that the rust isn't deep, it would supply the carriage and leadscrew bearing to convert the 101.07383 to power cross feed.  The leadscrew would have to be cut off and the left end turned down to 5/8" to match up to the left bearing on the 07383, which is doable.  But the headstock is a 10", so not a replacement for the one on the 07383.  

As to why the Atlas 10" and 12" lathes had 3/4" spindle bores, it was because anything larger would have required a larger spindle and a larger thread or different type of chuck mounting.  Plus larger bearings, larger gears, larger headstock casting, etc.  All of which equals more dollars.  The comparable Logan and Clausing 10" or 12" lathes of the period are mostly all the same.  Atlas never would have gotten into the lathe business and we wouldn't be having this conversation this afternoon.


----------



## kopeck (Jun 9, 2018)

The lathe found a home that wasn't mine.  It would have been interesting to get that 10F to see if the carriage was be sound enough to be transplanted.  Honestly if it was closer I would go check that 10F out just to see how much of it could be  salvaged as parts.

You know, I've looked at Logans and South Bends and they're all pretty much the same spindle hole size so you're right.

If nothing else I learned some stuff so the next time one comes up I'll be that much ahead of the game.

Thanks,

K


----------

