# Need help identifying this lathe please



## neanderthalhuck (Jun 11, 2014)

Hey everyone I just bought my first lathe a little bit ago.  Ive searched and searched for answers to what it is i have.  The ad said it was a craftsman.  Then when i went to check it out he kept calling it a logan.  To me it looks like a craftsman or atlas or even possible a montgomary wards.  Can anyone shed any light on this brand and model?  Id love to start buying the missing pieces so i can clean it up and give it a paint job.  And most importantly find a book for it. until then then ill keep searching and messing around with it.












thanks
-jake


----------



## JimDawson (Jun 11, 2014)

I think what you have there is an Atlas / Craftsman 10 x 24, Model D/F series  Sold in about 1950 or so


----------



## rafe (Jun 11, 2014)

Looks like it could be put into service pretty much as you have it ....Nice


----------



## pdentrem (Jun 11, 2014)

Jim gets the prize. Seems that are lots of extra parts in the box. Likely not missing anything.
Pierre


----------



## neanderthalhuck (Jun 11, 2014)

JimDawson said:


> I think what you have there is an Atlas / Craftsman 10 x 24, Model D/F series  Sold in about 1950 or so




Nailed it!   thanks a lot.   now i'll be able to start learning about this guy.  Where is a good place to source parts other than ebay?  Thanks agian!  I seem to see dark grey atlas' and blueish grey craftsmans. Is that one way to tell them apart?  Im assuming they are exactly the same, just a different logo stamp on it?  Hope i can find it's name badge, that'd be cool to have it on there. 




rafe said:


> Looks like it could be put into service pretty much as you have it ....Nice



Yeah it does work, but personally i'd just like to be complete and have the right pieces on it to make sure it's being serviced correctly.  I just bought an oil dripper that will fill a hole that was empty.  Now i know oil goes into it>  just want to fully understand the lathe and its parts purpose.  Now that i know its a craftsman i feel better about my buy too.  cost me 800.  what do you think?  its hard to come across a smaller american lathe in the nw.  everyone wants one it seems. (outside of portland)



pdentrem said:


> Jim gets the prize. Seems that are lots of extra parts in the box. Likely not missing anything.
> Pierre



Yeah its pretty complete.  Missing only a few items that i can tell.  It also has a few hand made items, such as the tailstock hand wheel.  I dont know, my head wants to see it a stock piece from 1950.  This thing is from the 1950's!  and it still works.  I think its time it gets to go back to the glory days!


----------



## SG51Buss (Jun 12, 2014)

Hey, neanderthal, your next step is to figure out what the Sears/Craftsman part number is.  Probably something like 101.xxxxx.  Then, you can lookup parts on SearsPartsDirect.com.

--- TwoMany


----------



## wa5cab (Jun 12, 2014)

Jake,

What you have is a 10" Atlas.  Discerning feature is the FWD-REV gear box on the left end of the lead screw.  The 12" Craftsman has a tumbler reverse and doesn't have the gearbox.  Plus the 12" headstock doesn't have the ribs running up the front at an angle. Yours has a two-piece carriage (separate saddle and apron) so it's a 10F and should have power cross feed.  It appears to have a vertical countershaft and has babbit spindle bearings so the model number is probably V42.  Atlas phased out the babbit bearings and the vertical countershaft shortly after WW-II so it was made before 1948.  It could have been made as early as late 1939.  The only way to pin it down any closer would be to find the serial number.  There was originally a nameplate on the back of the bed.  And most early Atlas (and Craftsman) lathes had the serial number stamped on top of the front way near the right end.  Probably 4-digits, maybe with a suffix letter no one knows the significance of.

For parts other than here or eBay, try Clausing.  800-323-0972.  Ask for old lathe parts or Atlas lathe parts.  Probably most of the parts they still stock are for the later Atlas 12" but a surprising number of parts were still the same through end of production in 1981.  I have a 3996 made in 1980 and a few small parts on it were first used on the 9" in 1932.  However, things like change gears and half nuts are still the same as on the 10F and comparable Craftsman 12".  Be prepared for some sticker shock, though, as although the part numbers are old, the parts they still have were made recently (past 10 years, anyway) and are priced accordingly.

Robert D.


----------



## neanderthalhuck (Jun 12, 2014)

wa5cab said:


> Jake,
> 
> What you have is a 10" Atlas.  Discerning feature is the FWD-REV gear box on the left end of the lead screw.  The 12" Craftsman has a tumbler reverse and doesn't have the gearbox.  Plus the 12" headstock doesn't have the ribs running up the front at an angle. Yours has a two-piece carriage (separate saddle and apron) so it's a 10F and should have power cross feed.  It appears to have a vertical countershaft and has babbit spindle bearings so the model number is probably V42.  Atlas phased out the babbit bearings and the vertical countershaft shortly after WW-II so it was made before 1948.  It could have been made as early as late 1939.  The only way to pin it down any closer would be to find the serial number.  There was originally a nameplate on the back of the bed.  And most early Atlas (and Craftsman) lathes had the serial number stamped on top of the front way near the right end.  Probably 4-digits, maybe with a suffix letter no one knows the significance of.
> 
> ...



Thanks a lot for narrowing that down for me.  I know that from the late 30's to the late 50's the lathe had stayed about that same with some minor changes.  But now i have a more accurate date to this machine.  And i think the ways have been sanded down as there are no numbers stamped on it.  you say its a 10 f, but a lot of the pieces have 10d - XXX stamped on them, did them share the same pieces in that mater?


----------



## wa5cab (Jun 13, 2014)

Jake,

It isn't necessary to use Reply With Quote when the post you are replying to is right before yours.  Please use Reply to Thread, instead.

One thing that Atlas (unlike GM) was never guilty of was assigning new part numbers to otherwise identical parts just because they were going to be used on a different or newer or more expensive model.  The first Atlas lathe was a 9".  All of the custom (as opposed to common hardware) parts had part numbers with a "9" prefix, a hyphen, and a sequence or suffix number beginning at "1".  When they built the first 10", they used a lot of "9" parts, all of which remained 9-nn.  New parts began with "10" but if the equivalent but not identical part had existed in the 9", the suffix number remained the same.  For example, suffix "-31" is the main spindle in all of the lathes and even in the Atlas mill.  10-nn parts were used in 10A, B and C.  If a part was revised in some manner during production, it got an "A" suffix (then "B", then "C", etc.).  Some or maybe most most "ABC" suffix parts are backwards compatible.  Then there was the 10D, and finally the 10F lathes (10E was a Unit Plan machine based on the 10D).  If you look at the parts list of the 10F, you will find a mix of all of the prefixes, "9-" through "10F-".  For some reason, when they came out with the 6" (612 and 618), the prefix used was "M6" instead of just "6".  And for the 12" that they started building for Sears, instead of "12", they used "L1", "L2", and so on prefix for the new parts.  Although the suffix rule was still followed.  No one knows why.  But there were many 9 through 10F parts used, too.    

But as I wrote earlier, all the way through to the final production in 1981 if a part first used on an earlier model was used, it still had its original part number.

The part number rule for accessories was different, but I won't go into that here.

On the serial number question, most examples all the way up through 1957 have the serial number stamped on the bed.  But every once in a while, an example turns up that doesn't.  We don't know whether for brief periods they stopped doing it or whether these are all examples of replacement beds ordered as a repair part.  If I had to flip a coin, I'd probably go with the latter case.  But there's no proof either way.

Robert D.
Robert D


----------



## neanderthalhuck (Jun 13, 2014)

Hey sorry about that Robert, that is how i've done it for years when there are more than one post towards me that i haven't responded to. (yours and Twomany) Also it helps me responded to everything in your post and ask any questions that i may have.  Ill try to remember that as to not flood up a thread.

Again thanks for that info on the lathe, because there are a few pieces that do have a 9 on them.  Im going to just read all the atlas/craftsman info on this site and see if i can narrow it down to a particular year(s) and learn the do's and dont's with a lathe.  thanks again Robert youve been very helpful on putting me in the right path.

-jake


----------



## wa5cab (Jun 14, 2014)

Jake,

OK.  When that happens to me, I answer the most recent one first and then do Reply with Quote for the earlier one(s) (and delete anything I'm not going to comment on).  

Without a serial number, or the original invoice, I'm afraid that you're not going to pin it down to the closest year because the same machines were usually made for several years.  I did just notice one thing, though.  Photos of the early machines all show an oval ON-OFF switch bezel and matching mount in the headstock casting.  Later the bezel and the casting changed to rectangular (like yours).  The 1947 catalog shows only the rectangular one and only Timken bearings.  The 1945 shows mostly rectangular but a couple of photos have the oval, although they are not of complete lathes.  The 1941 shows only the oval.  I have an L43 somewhere around here.  When I locate it, I'll see what it shows.

Robert D.


----------



## neanderthalhuck (Jun 15, 2014)

Hey Robert,

As far as the serial number goes thats what i kind of figured. I noticed that too on power switch, but wasnt sure what that told me as far as years.  figured oval meant earlier, as it seems to be a thing of the period.  Now i dont know if this is just a silly thought, and sorry if it is because im new to this.  But when my eyes need a brake from reading i sift though photos.  one thing i noticed is that it looks a lot like a TH54 lathe.  im attaching two photos with my hand in one.  those as you can tell look a little off in color and also doesnt seem to fit the contour that it is resting on. May both be factory paint, but might be off a hair?  not sure how precise they were with matching color from the factory.  I know other elemets can mess with the paint color, but this does tell me that maybe they arent original to eachother? this machine does have the grayish blue color, but also has some green pieces as well.  Im sure this thing has been brought back to life at one point.  also i noticed that the pulley motor engage lever on the 10x24 uses a straight arm whereas in the photos of the th54 have a curved arm as in the photo attached which is my lathe.  am i way off on this or could there be something to it? Somethings i see tell me its not a th54. What are your thoughts?
-jake

*

*


----------



## neanderthalhuck (Jun 15, 2014)

nevermind that thought.  i now longer think its a th54.


----------



## pdentrem (Jun 15, 2014)

neanderthalhuck said:


> Hey Robert,
> 
> As far as the serial number goes thats what i kind of figured. I noticed that too on power switch, but wasnt sure what that told me as far as years.  figured oval meant earlier, as it seems to be a thing of the period.  Now i dont know if this is just a silly thought, and sorry if it is because im new to this.  But when my eyes need a brake from reading i sift though photos.  one thing i noticed is that it looks a lot like a TH54 lathe.  im attaching two photos with my hand in one.  those as you can tell look a little off in color and also doesnt seem to fit the contour that it is resting on. May both be factory paint, but might be off a hair?  not sure how precise they were with matching color from the factory.  I know other elemets can mess with the paint color, but this does tell me that maybe they arent original to eachother? this machine does have the grayish blue color, but also has some green pieces as well.  Im sure this thing has been brought back to life at one point.  also i noticed that the pulley motor engage lever on the 10x24 uses a straight arm whereas in the photos of the th54 have a curved arm as in the photo attached which is my lathe.  am i way off on this or could there be something to it? Somethings i see tell me its not a th54. What are your thoughts?
> -jake



It is not a TH54. It has the vertical countershaft and it has babbit bearings so it is a V42? 
The casting number on the inside of the bed will be the clue on the length of the machine, ie- 9-42 or 9-54 so the bed length is 42 or 54 or whatever the number says. Per your first picture at the beginning of the thread, it appears to have a shorter bed than mine but maybe it is the angle that the picture was taken. It does not have a 54" bed that is for sure. I included a picture of my 10F24 for comparison.

The serial number plate on mine was long gone by the time I got the lathe. The serial number stamped on the bed had been ground away during a resurfacing job as well. 
Mine had the oval switch hole but the cover plate was square.
Mine was green and the old paint underneath was green as well.
The motor engage handle on mine was straight.
Pierre


----------



## neanderthalhuck (Jun 15, 2014)

Yeah i came to that conclusion too.  It is a 42 in bed.  Thanks for the photo, that helps me out a lot.

also found this link https://www.flickr.com/photos/45888076@N00/5114805478  you can use the arrows to scroll through.  there are a few detailed photos.


----------



## wa5cab (Jun 16, 2014)

Jake,

Atlas Model Numbers 101:

With the exception of the 6" (612 and 618) and one group of 9" (918A,B,C), Atlas didn't use the center-to-center distance in any model number.

In all others, the two digits at the right end of the model number were the bed length.  Up until 1948, this could be 36, 42, 48 or 54.  From 1948, only 42 or 54.

On the 10D and earlier, model numbers were swing plus bed length plus a letter from A through E (except that the 10D didn't have a letter).  So for example, 1042 or 1048B.

On the 10F, one or two letters plus bed length.  The letters were as follows:

V  Vertical countershaft (all models before the 10F only came with vertical countershafts)
H  Horizontal countershaft
T  Timken Bearings
If no "T", then it had babbit bearings.
QC  Quick Change Gear Box (I don't know whether all original QC's were Timken but that may have been the case - however, you could retrofit a QCGB to any 10")

Your machine has a vertical countershaft and babbit bearings (Timken bearing headstocks do not have removable bearing caps, hence no hex bolt heads visible).  If your machine has a 42" bed, it is a V42.  If 36" bed, then V36.

Paint color can't really be used to date a machine for so many different reasons I'm not going to attempt to list them.

All available parts lists/manuals show the countershaft handle/rod as being straight all the way back to the 9" on both vertical and horizontal countershafts.  Yours is bent.  I have no explanation other than that (a) there are undoubtedly some parts lists that no one has a copy of and/or some PO bent it.

The square switch bezel and cutout/mount cast into the headstock first appeared in Catalog L43 (if Atlas did a catalog in 1942, no copies have so far turned up) with the Pic-O-Matic, an early attempt at a QCGB.  The bottom of the mount (casting protrusion) is a little higher on the front of the headstock than is the oval one, so it probably had something to do with the Pic-O-Matic.  There is one photo in Catalog L47 that still shows the oval switch mounting but the photo is of just a loose headstock which may not mean anything.  And there are no listings that year for the babbit bearing models.  So you might be safe saying that your machine was built between 1943 and 1946.  However, I will point out that one must be careful about citing catalogs as gospel in cases like this.  First, the retouch artists sometimes got carried away.  Second, I know of at least one case (in a Craftsman catalog) where a photograph of a complete lathe was of a model that hadn't been built for 6 or 7 years.  And third, just because it isn't shown in the catalog doesn't always mean that someone couldn't have called the factory and gotten them to sell one more of a nominally discontinued model.

Robert D.


----------

