Doesn’t seem relevant. Could also be a “w” depending on how you look at it. The writing is pretty poor.You didn't comment on the "3" nor specifically say that it wasn't present on the other cup.
50+ years ditto.
I don’t quite understand why you prompted me to comment on the “3” when you already knew what it was…..?it is a "3", not a "W". It just wasn't put on most of the bearings. It means that the cup (or cone) had been inspected and meets or exceeds the ANSI/ABMA specs for Class 3. It was not put on most of the bearings. I guess that Atlas had a contract with Timken that required all spindle bearings for 9", 10" and 12" lathes to meet or exceed the specs for Class 3. One thing that we do not know is whether the inspections and inspection dates were done by Timken or by Atlas. But the practice stopped apparently in late 1951. And was never applied to the 6" lathes, mills or shapers.
I’ll have another, closer look at the way casting numbers.I don't know where my mind was when I wrote part of the above. Unlike for instance General Motors, Atlas at least up into the 60' didn't use different part numbers if the same part was used in a later model. There are for example a few parts with part numbers starting with M6, 9 and 10 on my 3996. The only question I would have would be the "8" in "842" since AFAIK Atlas never made an 8" lathe. The original part number of the Atlas beds was "9" plus the nominal bed length. The reported "842" is probably 942. Sand cast numbers can be difficult to read. Another thing that Atlas didn't do was to change the casting number just because the casting was later used to make a different part.