-
Welcome back Guest! Did you know you can mentor other members here at H-M? If not, please check out our Relaunch of Hobby Machinist Mentoring Program!
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2015
- Messages
- 4
Looks shorter than 42, more like 36. Tool Room size
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 10,552
It cannot be a TH-36 if it has babbit bearings, because the "T" stands for Timken. It could be an H-36, although it looks more like an H-42 to me. And as I wrote earlier, it was most likely made between 1942 and 1945.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 10,552
The reason that I said earlier to pull the right bearing cap was three-fold. First, you can inspect the upper bearing half for scores and gouges. Second, you can determine how many shims out of the original pack are still present. If there are several on both sides (there is a pack under each bolt), it may be OK. And third, you can inspect the bearing area on the spindle for wear, both even and uneven. With a short straight edge and a narrow feeler gauge set you can get a pretty accurate measurement of the actual wear. If the wear is uniform and comfortably less than the remaining shim pack, it will probably outlive you.
It still depends upon what shape the bed is in. It really isn't that difficult to strip the bed and have it reground or replace it with a better one. The problems are that the grinding operation will likely cost more than the lathe. And although there are probably plenty of good beds around, generally no one is willing to pack and ship one. And/or the buyer isn't will to pay what proper shipping costs.
The lathe at http://lasvegas.craigslist.org/tls/5623178864.html is probably an Atlas/Craftsman 101.27430 or 101.27440 (made circa 1950-1957), depending upon bed length. The spindle belt cover is homemade. And I can't find the spindle belt tension rod. The second and third photos are only thumbnails, so worthless.
Thanks, folks! I just received an email from the Atlas seller. It'll be a 10F-28, so Schor was right when he said it looked too small to be a -42.
I'm going to meet the seller of that craftsman next week and take a look at his machine. If the only thing missing is the belt cover and everything else looks good, I'll likely take it home right then. Belt covers are only about $70 online as far as I can tell. What else should I try to inspect while I'm there?
I'm going to meet the seller of that craftsman next week and take a look at his machine. If the only thing missing is the belt cover and everything else looks good, I'll likely take it home right then. Belt covers are only about $70 online as far as I can tell. What else should I try to inspect while I'm there?
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2013
- Messages
- 1,050
Check if the gear shifters on the quick change box work.
Check out this advice from Nels:
http://hobby-machinist.com/threads/...the-and-a-milling-machine-by-dave-ficken.269/
Check out this advice from Nels:
http://hobby-machinist.com/threads/...the-and-a-milling-machine-by-dave-ficken.269/
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 10,552
As I agreed earlier, the 10" machine you first asked about might be a 10x18 instead of 10x24. But 10F-28 is not a valid model number. 10F is the series identifier.. Like 10D (and 10, 10A, 10B, 10C and 10E). If the lathe really has the shortest 36" bed, then the model number, which should be on the nameplate, is H-36. But it's I guess a moot point anyway.
On things to check on the 12", I'll add the comment that when you are checking the gear shifters, you'll probably have to rotate the spindle (with the tumbler in either FWD or REV) in order to mesh the gears as you shift them. You can sorta see what's going on if you stoop down and look up through the open bottom of the gear box. And it will probably make shifting easier if you carry along an oil can with long spout and squirt some on the shaft that the shifters slide along. And on the two gears in each shifter arm.
Of other things to look for, confirm that the tailstock slides along the bed (more oil here) and that the ram moves out and in freely (oil) as you rotate the tailstock handwheel. Before you try to move the carriage, also wipe off the ways and then oil the four felts, one at the end of each saddle arm.
Compare the width of the lead screw threads near the right bearing with those down toward the head stock. They should appear to be the same width. If you can tell an obvious difference, the lead screw is worn out.
Don't worry too much if the cross feed crank has a lot of back lash as at least part of that can be adjusted out.
Confirm that the belt tension rod is present. Should have a round black knob on the operator end. I couldn't find it in the photo but we've already determined that whomever took the photos didn't know what they were doing.
On things to check on the 12", I'll add the comment that when you are checking the gear shifters, you'll probably have to rotate the spindle (with the tumbler in either FWD or REV) in order to mesh the gears as you shift them. You can sorta see what's going on if you stoop down and look up through the open bottom of the gear box. And it will probably make shifting easier if you carry along an oil can with long spout and squirt some on the shaft that the shifters slide along. And on the two gears in each shifter arm.
Of other things to look for, confirm that the tailstock slides along the bed (more oil here) and that the ram moves out and in freely (oil) as you rotate the tailstock handwheel. Before you try to move the carriage, also wipe off the ways and then oil the four felts, one at the end of each saddle arm.
Compare the width of the lead screw threads near the right bearing with those down toward the head stock. They should appear to be the same width. If you can tell an obvious difference, the lead screw is worn out.
Don't worry too much if the cross feed crank has a lot of back lash as at least part of that can be adjusted out.
Confirm that the belt tension rod is present. Should have a round black knob on the operator end. I couldn't find it in the photo but we've already determined that whomever took the photos didn't know what they were doing.