# A case for Armstrong/Williams style toolholders.



## jwmay (Jan 18, 2018)

I was curious if anyone has a preference for the old style toolholders over quick change types. I seem to find myself fiddling with these quick change holders more than I imagined I would have to. I assume it’s just a matter of experience, but have, on occasion thought that a lantern toolholder would have been a solution to getting the cutter where I wanted it. In addition, I’m not happy with the current pricing, and compatibility issues between different qctp brands. Now of course I realize making holders is an option. But I find that job completely out of line with my interests. 

Do any of you prefer lantern tool holders over qctp types? If so, why?


----------



## Mitch Alsup (Jan 18, 2018)

I happen to like the QCTP and when I bought my lathe it came with 5 and I added another dozen.

THis lets me keep 2 sets of turning tools at the ready, 2 sets of facing tools at the ready, and 1 set of boring tools along with cutoffs,...
THis way, I basically never have to fiddle with nose height on the tools (except once).

I also had to disassemble my QCTP and modify the standing height of the press so that the tightening arm would not interfere with sliding tool holders in and out of the QCTP--yeah it should not have been needed, but there you have it.


----------



## pstemari (Jan 18, 2018)

Exactly so. I can walk up, chuck a piece of work in the lathe, and immediately start work. The slowest thing I do is swap drills in the tailstock chuck. I may make Morse taper tap followers and center drill holders to cut down on that.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Bob Korves (Jan 18, 2018)

jwmay said:


> I was curious if anyone has a preference for the old style toolholders over quick change types. I seem to find myself fiddling with these quick change holders more than I imagined I would have to. I assume it’s just a matter of experience, but have, on occasion thought that a lantern toolholder would have been a solution to getting the cutter where I wanted it. In addition, I’m not happy with the current pricing, and compatibility issues between different qctp brands. Now of course I realize making holders is an option. But I find that job completely out of line with my interests.
> 
> Do any of you prefer lantern tool holders over qctp types? If so, why?


The lantern tool post system has lots of problems, relatively slow and fussy to set up, not very rigid.  No repeatability.  For most work a QCTP beats them hands down.  However, there are times when a lantern tool post can get into tight places than no other common tooling can.  For that reason alone, I think it is worth having one.  When I find one with all the pieces that will fit my lathe, at a dirt cheap price, I will pick it up.  They certainly do work, and have done so for more than 100 years.  I will NOT be selling my QCTP...
Edit:  I did not mention the Armstrong/Williams tool holders.  They are used for all sorts of things, even today, and are still commonly seen in use on shapers and planers.  The difference in height do not allow them to fit in most QCTP tooling, so most of them collect dust in the bottom of a drawer.  Very high quality tool holders, just not compatible with what most of us are using.


----------



## middle.road (Jan 18, 2018)

I still have the lantern set that came with my Logan all those years ago.
I have however been running with a Hardinge L18 QC that an old-timer Very Kindly passed onto me when I got the lathe home and setup.
I've used that for most everything since. Buying extra holders for it though is a pain due to their high price even second-hand.
 I have though used the lantern for a parting tool frequently and once attempting to use the threading holder. (failed)

It is as Mitch states above, QCTP is very versatile and you end up buying more and more holders. 
Once you have it dialed in you'll be cooking.

What type of Post are you using? I wonder if there's something amiss with it that is causing you difficulties. 

I've got an AXA on my 1440 which I need to upgrade to a BXA. I personally have had no problems using the AXA QC and find it
immensely helpful. 
I've been toying with the idea of getting a Shars BXA, moving the AXA to the Logan and selling off the Hardinge. 
But as far as my vote goes it is for a QCTP hands down.


----------



## Eddyde (Jan 18, 2018)

I used the lantern for decades, I got pretty fast at tool changes. I upgraded to the QCTP and find it considerably faster, but there was a learning curve. For one thing, you really need to properly tighten up the height adjusting screws, once you get them set, particularly with Chinese made tool holders. Also, getting the tool post square to the axis for using the cutoff tool. However, I recently had to use the lantern to do an internal cut I couldn't readily do with the QCTP.


----------



## benmychree (Jan 18, 2018)

If you do like Armstrong tool holders, look for holders made by the Clark Tool Co. formerly of Beverly Hills, Ca.  The holder that fits 16" lathes takes tool bits from 1/4" square up to 1/2"; the screw that binds the tool bit is on a 45deg. angle and carries a vee block follower, so it holds the bit much more securely than a comparable Armstrong or Williams tool holder, which in the same size accept only 3/8" square bits (only) and maximum.  Clark also made adjustable hole cutters with three tool bits; they are great for cutting holes in fairly thin metal, say up to 1/2" in the larger sizes; I found them on E Bay, after having been introduced to them in the shop where I apprenticed.
When I bought my 19" Regal lathe many years ago in the 1980s, It did not come with a round tool post, I bought an Aloris set at the time (they did not seem so expensive back then!) and never got around to making a round tool post for it, but it would be handy occasionally, I think.
I had Aloris tool holders on all the lathes in my shop, from the DA set on my 30 swing American, the CA 19" Regals and a smaller B size set for the 14" Monarch toolroom latheIf they make you money, they are worth the price; having said that, when I picked up my 10"Monarch from the teens or 20s, since I'm not making money, I bought a Chinese set after rediscovering what a pain it is to use the old Armstrong type.
If you have a shaper, the Armstrong or even better the Williams shaper holders are just the thing; they have a swivel head and hold rectangular tool bits for longer life with resharpenings and higher strength. the Armstrong will hold the tool straight, at 45 degrees and 90 degrees either side; the better Williams has a serrated ring under the tool bit and holds the tool in many more positions, both can be used turned forward or backwards, which when used backwards makes it in effect, a hook tool, lessening chatter when taking wide cuts.


----------



## benmychree (Jan 18, 2018)

Eddyde said:


> I used the lantern for decades, I got pretty fast at tool changes. I upgraded to the QCTP and find it considerably faster, but there was a learning curve. For one thing, you really need to properly tighten up the height adjusting screws, once you get them set, particularly with Chinese made tool holders. Also, getting the tool post square to the axis for using the cutoff tool. However, I recently had to use the lantern to do an internal cut I couldn't readily do with the QCTP.


To square the axis of the tool post, I put a holder on it on the side, and work it up between the chuck jaws against the face of the chuck and tighten it in place, and use a wrench with a 3 ft piece of pipe for a cheater; I have had them creep in use; bear in mind this is on a 19" lathe.


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 18, 2018)

I have a lantern type tool holder on my 12X37, along with a 4-way and an AXA QCTP.  

*4-way:  *I have tooled the 4 way for normal turning, parting and facing without any shims or mods.  For insert tooling, it is much faster than QCTP, but limited to the three basic functions. I use it surprisingly often. (I suppose I could put a chamfer tool in the 4th position, but never got around to it)  this is also the most rigid of the three tool holders.

*AXA QCTP:* I only bought it last year after over 30 years of machining.  I had heard bad things about QCTP from my mentor (he still only has 4 way).  All the things were untrue biases. That being said, I find QCTP enjoyable and functional.  If I had only one system, AXA QCTP would be _it_.  

*Lantern: *This is the black sheep, but surprisingly I come back to this quite often.  I am in the process of upgrading my lathe, and will miss this versatile (but flimsy) tool holder!!  It is boss for home ground 1/4" HSS turning tools, and lets me reach around things the others can't.  When I upgrade,  I will be sure to find a way to put a lantern tool post on the new lathe. BTW my parting tool in the lantern mount is just as secure as my AXA, go figure (!!). (that is, it chatters very little on normal parting)


----------



## Wreck™Wreck (Jan 18, 2018)

I loathe manual tool posts in a way that can't be easily expressed without profanity.
Ran a job last September, 750 parts that required 5 tools each, 3700 tool changes in sixty hours using a qctp. This was madness in a cnc lathe without an atc, small parts with short cycle times, the tool changes took longer then the spindle time.


----------



## benmychree (Jan 18, 2018)

Dabbler said:


> I have a lantern type tool holder on my 12X37, along with a 4-way and an AXA QCTP.
> 
> *4-way:  *I have tooled the 4 way for normal turning, parting and facing without any shims or mods.  For insert tooling, it is much faster than QCTP, but limited to the three basic functions. I use it surprisingly often. (I suppose I could put a chamfer tool in the 4th position, but never got around to it)  this is also the most rigid of the three tool holders.
> 
> ...


I have broken a lot of parting tools with the round rocker tool post, but cured the problem by making a solid ring under the parting tool that held it at the proper height; no more problem, no more breakage.


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 18, 2018)

Setting the height of the parting tool is easiest if you make a gauge to do it.  Since I made my gauge, I haven't had  any problems with parting.


----------



## Asm109 (Jan 19, 2018)

I have a KDK size 0 toolpost on my SB Heavy 10.  I love it. I have made extra holders for it from blocks of Cold rolled steel.
I don't have a knurling tool for that tool post so I drag out the lantern tool post for that.  I have also used it when I needed to turn the of a 10 inch diameter disc.  It was easier to get a tool into place with the lantern.  The other place I would probably use a lantern post is with the follower rest.
Ideally, you would have the cutting edge just to the tailstock side of the follow rest jaws.  The KDK puts the cutting edge a good 1 inch to the left of the follow rest.


----------



## chips&more (Jan 19, 2018)

I use an Aloris QCTP. I also have a lantern set-up somewhere, but have not seen the thing in decades. If I found it, I would probably sell it, I have absolutely no need for it.


----------



## benmychree (Jan 19, 2018)

Asm109 said:


> I have a KDK size 0 toolpost on my SB Heavy 10.  I love it. I have made extra holders for it from blocks of Cold rolled steel.
> I don't have a knurling tool for that tool post so I drag out the lantern tool post for that.  I have also used it when I needed to turn the of a 10 inch diameter disc.  It was easier to get a tool into place with the lantern.  The other place I would probably use a lantern post is with the follower rest.
> Ideally, you would have the cutting edge just to the tailstock side of the follow rest jaws.  The KDK puts the cutting edge a good 1 inch to the left of the follow rest.


Your comment about the QC tool holders not lining up with the lathe's follow rest is quite valid; I have found that I could turn my Aloris block 90 degrees around clockwise to place a tool holder in a position to line up with the follow rest, but its bulk and the bulk of the holders make it a bit difficult to do the work with adequate sight lines and being able to get very close to the chuck; I've done it, but it is not real handy, the Armstrong (or Williams, or Clark) holders would be more convenient for that sort of work.


----------



## gi_984 (Jan 19, 2018)

Same here.  Switched over to an Aloris years ago.  But I've got a nice boxed set of Armstrong holders.  Will always keep it for those strange set-ups or hard to reach spots.  You just never know what will come thru the shop.  I also have a 4-way but have never used it.


----------



## rock_breaker (Jan 19, 2018)

A newby here with respect to 4 way tool holder and absolutely no aloris exposure. My Enco 1440 lathe came with a 4 way and am learning (steady by jerks) how to use it. Working close to the chuck creates a few minutes delay in setting up, just used to the lantern post I guess. I store my Armstrong tool holders in an approximate 7" x 7" x 1.5" space in a drawer. Don't think I can do that with aloris equipment and space in my shop is somewhat at a premium. I do try to keep the set-up as close to the lantern post and no overhang on the cross slide if possible.
Have a good day
Ray


----------



## Mitch Alsup (Jan 19, 2018)

I built a QCT holder out of a 2×4 and some 1/4" plywood. 
Every 2 inches on the 2×4 I dadoed a slot to hold a 1.7*2 piece of 1/4.
I sawed a 15º angle on its base and mounted it on the back protector of the lathe with a couple of #6 wood screws.
This actually saves space in my shop and saves time, too.
It has room for 21 QC tool holders in arms reach of the saddle.


----------



## rock_breaker (Jan 19, 2018)

Mitch
Appreciate the storage information, will check out the clearances the next trip to the shop. I have rod storage (4" pvc pipe split lengthwise) behind my Clausing lathe. Your idea may work on the Enco. Thanks
Have a good day
Ray


----------

