Which is more common - cross slide depth of cut.

[Jmanb13]

I noticed that on my lathe the cross slide dial has 250 graduations for 0.250 inches. It actually removes .250" from the diameter. So the cross slide only moves .125".
I have not measured it, but am pretty sure the compound slide is the same.

I have heard that some lathes remove that amount from 1 side.

Which is more common a cross slide like mine which moves half of the indicated amount, or a cross slide that moves exactly the amount indicated?

 

[Tony Wells]

I believe that more lathes of later manufacture are graduated in total cut (amount of material removed) on the cross slide. I have never seen or heard of one that is graduated in that manner on the compound. They are always 1:1, direct reading for depth of cut. Which makes sense, since depending on the angle they are set, they could have different dial to depth of cut ratios, something we sometimes use to our advantage.

But like a gruff old toolmaker used to tell me when I said "I've never seen ________ before!", he would invariably reply: "Boy, there's a lot of thing you ain't never seen".

 

[BGHansen]

My circa 1963 Clausing 5418 dials read the radius. Circa 1964 Rockwell 10" reads the diameter. Grizzly G0709 14" x 40" reads diameter. I think my 1970's Atlas 12" read the radius (in case you start keeping a tally).

Bruce

 

[David S]

My circa 1949 Atlas 618 dial reads radius.

David

 

[brino]

My circa 1963 Clausing 5418 dials read the radius. Circa 1964 Rockwell 10" reads the diameter. Grizzly G0709 14" x 40" reads diameter. I think my 1970's Atlas 12" read the radius (in case you start keeping a tally). Bruce

Jeez, if I worked in your shop then fully half my lathe projects would be done wrong. The old brain couldn't take that.
-brino

 

[Jmanb13]

I believe that more lathes of later manufacture are graduated in total cut (amount of material removed) on the cross slide. I have never seen or heard of one that is graduated in that manner on the compound. They are always 1:1, direct reading for depth of cut. Which makes sense, since depending on the angle they are set, they could have different dial to depth of cut ratios, something we sometimes use to our advantage.

But like a gruff old toolmaker used to tell me when I said "I've never seen ________ before!", he would invariably reply: "Boy, there's a lot of thing you ain't never seen".

Good to know! I haven't measured the compound slide cutting yet, but it makes sense because if you are cutting thread depth or something like that you want to take off exactly what you dial in.

My circa 1963 Clausing 5418 dials read the radius. Circa 1964 Rockwell 10" reads the diameter. Grizzly G0709 14" x 40" reads diameter. I think my 1970's Atlas 12" read the radius (in case you start keeping a tally).

Bruce

Like Brino said, Brain Explosion. Do you keep a note on each one saying double this, half that so you can remember?

 

[Silverbullet]

Don't depend on dials , use indicators to make the depths on all of them . Then I know for sure , once I know the size at the start indicators keep me right. Worked on to many old machines to ever depend on there dials.

 

[Jmanb13]

Don't depend on dials , use indicators to make the depths on all of them . Then I know for sure , once I know the size at the start indicators keep me right. Worked on to many old machines to ever depend on there dials.

Thanks for the advice! I definitely do this, however I have been using the dials for getting down to around .010 of my final size and then doing light cuts and measuring from there.