This is just one of some 80 files about machining and metalworking and useful workshop subjects that can be read at: http://www.janellestudio.com/metal/index.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ This file contains many users' tips for using a Myford metal lathe as well as effecting repairs or tuning it for optimum operation. Some subjects discussed in the Myford groups actually are generic and are more properly placed into more appropriate files. For example, a discussion of lathe bits (cutters) should really go into the file here called "Cutters, Bits, and Arbors" as the information is actually applicable to many lathes. Similarly, a Myford lathe owner would do well to see the file "Metal Shaper Bits and Toolholders" as metal shapers use lathe style cutters; and sharpening methods and grind shapes there can be applied to lathe bits. Since the MyFord files here are latecomers, I will be a bit more flexible and leave some discussions here that I would normally place in generic files. But if a Myford owner wants to learn about lots of toolholders, including Myford lathe specific discussions, do read the "Toolholders for the Lathe" and other generic files listed on my home page: http://www.janellestudio.com/metal/index.html Myford owners will certainly wish to read the file here titled "Myford Lathe Lubrication". Repainting your machine, read the file "Finish for Tools". And so on. There is a fair amount of discussion here about motors and variable speed conversions for a Myford lathe. Actually a lot of similar information is in the file here called "Atlas Motors and Switches" in the Lathes section so anyone considering a different motor would benefit from reading that. I only acquired my Super 7 in late 2011, but had been collecting information on Myford operations and tuning and repairs for several years in the hopes of finding a Myford at an affordable price in Canada. (They're fairly rare in Canada, especially in this remote area.) I actually saved many email digests from the old Yahoo group MyMyford in the last years before it disbanded, and then every digest from the newer myfordlathes group. The posts from the discontinued MyMyford group occasionally contain references to its group files or group photos, which obviously no longer exist. Sometimes they may still be found in the new Yahoo myfordlathes group. If not, chances are the message identifies the originator and his/her email address. They may be able to provide you the reference file or photo directly if you email them. Because at that time I did not yet have a Myford, I mainly saved the digests as is (intact emails) rather than taking the time and work necessary to extract the conversations with information gems, as I had already done for many years for Atlas lathes, as well as Sherline and Taig lathes and mills, and various metal shapers. There I was motivated by actually using those machines. There was, after all, no point in making all that extra work for myself if I never found a Myford. And it truly is a lot of work to clean up original messages, removing redundancies and overquoting and serious grammatical and spelling errors that can compromise the sense of the information. Many readers do not have English as their primary language; so spelling and grammar become important to understanding this info. As of July 2015, I finally caught up by adding many messages from earlier years in the MyMyford and myfordlathes groups. Issues about lubrication and belts and bits and lathe operations are often not unique to a Myford lathe; so read other likely files. In fact some information that came from a Myford group, but was generically applicable to other machines or metalworking practices, has already been put into other subject files here. If you got to this file directly from my HOME PAGE, return there by using your browser's back button. BUT if you came to this file as the result of a web search engine, see many additional files on my home page Machining and Metalworking at Home http://www.janellestudio.com/metal/index.html SAFETY WARNING BEWARE: DO NOT ASSUME that any subject matter or procedure or process is safe or correct or appropriate just because it was mentioned in a news/user group or was included in these files or on this site or on any other web site or was published in a magazine or book or video. Working with metals and machinery and chemicals and electrical equipment is inherently dangerous. Wear safety devices and clothing as appropriate. Remove watches, rings, and jewellery -- and secure or remove loose clothing -- before operating any machine. Read, understand and follow the latest operating procedures and safety instructions provided by the manufacturer of your machine or tool or product. If you do not have those most recent official instructions, acquire a copy through the manufacturer before operating or using their product. Where the company no longer exists, use the appropriate news or user group to locate an official copy. Be careful -- original instructions may not meet current safety standards. Updated safety information and operating instructions may also be available through a local club, a local professional in the trade, a local business, or an appropriate government agency. In every case, use your common sense before beginning or taking the next step; and do not proceed if you have any questions or doubts about any procedure, or the safety of any procedure. Follow all laws and codes, and employ certified or licenced professionals as required by those laws or codes. Hazardous tasks beyond your competence or expertise should also be contracted to professionals. Let's be really careful out there. (c) Copyright 2003 - 2016 Machining and Metalworking at Home The form of the collected work in this text file (including editing, additions, and notes) is copyrighted and this file is not to be reproduced by any means, including electronic, without written permission except for strictly personal use. ========================================================================== Moving My Myford Lathe -- A Cautionary Tale, Not A Recommendation. NOTE TO FILE: I'm putting this note here at the start, out of date order. I'm writing this in 2013 but want it to appear at the start of this file. It deals with my first task, moving my Myford lathe, when I acquired it. How I carried out the move was my choice and my personal responsibility. What you do, and how you do it, is entirely your responsibility. You have other probably safer choices including using professional movers/fitters or perhaps heavy duty lifting equipment, like automotive engine lift devices. Moving a lathe or any heavy object is dangerous and it is wise to err on the side of caution. I had finally found the Myford lathe that I dreamed about for years. The first problem was getting it safely to my workshop. (I wanted safety for me and my helpers, as well as safety for the machine itself.) It is far heavier than you might think. I've seen an internet thread where someone claimed he could alone lift the entire lathe and carry it up/down stairs. Not me, and probably not you. Perhaps there are some extremely fit folks who could, but even they would be better advised to take some precautions to reduce lathe weight, and have some friends help. Man I wish I had a workshop in a building at ground level. Those folks can likely hire a moving truck with hydraulic lift tailgate to deliver the lathe and set it down and then roll it into say a garage workshop. But even they may have to first get it out of the vendor's basement. In my case, I had to do both the out-of-basement and into-basement tasks. So I did a lot of poking about the internet for other folks' experiences and tips. Two such conversations: http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/general-archive/my ford-super-7-a-94096/ http://www.diybanter.com/metalworking/149857-moving-myford-lathe.html I settled on reducing the lathe weight and then using a heavy duty hand truck. Mine is all-welded construction and rated for 800 pound loads, and is far stronger than those dangerously flimsy folding versions. First came removal of the easiest heavy bits from the lathe. The motor was removed as it is both very heavy and sticks out from the lathe far enough that it would have interfered with going through some narrow doorways. It also badly upsets the balance for carrying upright. Off too came the chuck and toolposts and tailstock. The carriage was moved near the headstock and locked against movement. It was further roped to the headstock to ensure it stayed in place. The hand truck was prepared by securing several layers of very heavy cardboard flat against the slats between the tubes of the handle portion, where the bottom of the lathe would later rest. (Thin plywood would have been better but I had none at the time.) The cardboard was duct taped in place so that it would not slide about when the lathe was set on it. The platform part was covered with an inch of rigid Styrofoam taped to it. The headstock of the lathe would be snug against this end of the hand truck during the move, the foam preventing metal-on-metal stress on its gear cover. The hand truck was sited flat on the floor in a location near the lathe, but not in the way of our foot movements. My friend and I rehearsed our proposed steps of swivelling the lathe on its stand to a position where it could be picked up securely, then carried over to the hand truck without tripping on anything. Once happy with the rehearsal, we picked up the lathe. One person was on the lathe front and one was on the lathe rear. That way we could carry the lathe and also could straddle both sides of the hand truck. Once we were in position over the hand truck, we carefully (bending at the knees while keeping our backs straight) lowered the lathe onto it. The lathe was then secured to the hand truck with locking straps and doubly secured from movement with even more rope lashings. Attached to the hand truck, the lathe was easily wheeled to the bottom of the basement stairs and rolled/lifted one step at a time. I have a pickup truck that could have made for an awkward lift for this situation. So I had gone to the hardware store and acquired a set of ramps that could be secured to the tailgate. It was easy to roll the lathe/truck combo up and into the truck bed, and the ramps would be very useful in future for loading other stuff. And yes the hand truck was roped so it could not roll about the pickup truck bed. Same steps in reverse at the destination, except for removal of the lathe from the hand truck and lifting it onto a new stand. The fellow that had owned the lathe described his method to me, but I did not like it and won't repeat it here. Lowering the lathe manually onto the hand truck had been relatively easy. But lifting it up and onto its new stand would likely require more physical exertion, and risk of our balance being lost, or something going wrong. My new stand was a reinforced metal cabinet/workbench on casters, so it can be rolled about, and the wheels then locked, wherever needed. My basement has a section with a suspended tile ceiling, so a ceiling tile was removed giving clear access to a heavy joist above. I drilled a hole horizontally in the center of the side of one joist, and inserted a very heavy threaded eyebolt (rated at more than 4 times the weight of the lathe) through the joist, and secured it with large washer and nut. To this I attached a heavy duty block and tackle (also rated at more than 4 times the weight of the lathe). Using this device, the force (and my strength) needed to lift the lathe was greatly reduced to a fraction of the lathe's weight. The hand truck, flat on the floor, lathe horizontal, was situated under the pulley system. The straps and ropes securing the lathe to the hand truck were removed. Heavy straps were placed around the lathe so that their lift point would be at the Center of Gravity of the lathe -- so that when lifted, the lathe would stay close to horizontal. This CG point was determined by experiment, sliding the strap-lathe positions until a slight lift (only a couple of inches) of the lathe was accomplished with the lathe remaining fairly horizontal. I found I needed to move the carriage further from the headstock in order to get a balance closer to horizontal and have a secure location for the lifting straps. The carriage again needed to be securely locked to prevent accidental sliding along the ways. Once happy with the balance, the strap positions where they contacted the lathe were themselves secured from accidental movement with lots of duct tape and rope. The lathe was lifted straight up, the hand truck removed, and the new stand wheeled under the lathe. The lathe was gently lowered onto the stand. At no time did we ever position our bodies under the suspended lathe. We planned so that if something had gone wrong, only the lathe was going to get hurt. Then, using the pulleys to raise the lathe less than an inch above the stand, the lathe/stand relationship was tweaked until the lathe was perfectly aligned with the bolt holes in the stand (which locations had been determined by using a Myford under-lathe drip tray to accurately place the holes beforehand). There were definitely some moments of holding my breath, but as we used to say in the military, time spent in planning is seldom wasted. Whatever YOU do, be careful! If you are not fully capable of safely moving a lathe or other equipment, don't. Use a safer alternative. Spending a few dollars on professional movers is far wiser than risking any injury to people, or damage to the equipment or buildings. I know that if I ever get a larger lathe or milling machine or whatever, I will definitely contract the move and installation. ------- Re: Tool post suggestions ? [MyMyford] Posted by: "grampys2002" d.wainx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Wed May 23, 2007 3:29 pm ((PDT)) "David Morrow" wrote: > I searched the archives as I assumed that this had been discussed many > times already but couldn't quite find the answers that I need. > I'm just setting up my new to me Myford Super 7. It has the original > tool holder which I can't get very excited about. It looks like the > only way to adjust the height of the cutter is with a shim. I'd like > some sort of adjustable tool holder. I'm not too keen on making my own > just yet. In high school, we learned on a South Bend 9 and it had what > I think is called a "lantern post" which I really like. I have the > tool holders that would fit one of those. > I think I fall into the category of just enough knowledge to be > dangerous so I'd like to sort this issue out first before the machine > or I get hurt :) > Any suggestions ? Hi, seems the quick change tool post is the most recommended, can any one suggest a supplier that sells a quality tool. Here in Canada we have a supplier called Busy Bee who sell off shore manufactured tools. This month they have a QCTP on sale for $29.99 including one tool holder whch are on sale for $10.00 each. Seems cheap but are they any good? Has any one bought from BB. Dave ------- Re: Tool post suggestions ? Posted by: "Jim Pike" jimpikex~xxshaw.ca Date: Wed May 23, 2007 5:37 pm ((PDT)) I've bought (Workshop Practices series books and odds and sods) from Busy Bee in Vancouver and they are fine to deal with. Don't know about the QCTP tool post though. I'm thinking along the lines of the clones of the Myford -Dixon (sp?) QCTP sold by RDG and others on e-Bay. I'm guessing a $29.99 tool post can't be the same or similar design to that one, but without looking at it, who knows? I'm inclined to think it's guilty until proven innocent. Jim ------- Re: Tool post suggestions ? Posted by: "IAN BARKER" ian.barkerx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Fri May 25, 2007 10:28 pm ((PDT)) The tool post that you are looking at is a clone but it's not in the same family!( it may be related to Bill Gates but it's from the poor end of the family).The tool holder are much smaller and to release them you have use an Allan key to release the clamp bolt on the side. Once set up they work well but do not hold the tool with the same vigour as Dixson. I have one of the cheaper ones on my S7B which have given good service for the light work it is used for and the bigger one on my Colchester but with this one I found it had to be space lifted to get the height right. But the old adage must still apply YOU GETS WHAT YOU PAYS FOR the Dixson ain't cheap and with second hand you may find the snails have been over pulled. Ian barker ------- Re: Tool post suggestions ? Posted by: "simondaykin2005" simonx~xxbyte-sized.com Date: Sat May 26, 2007 7:07 am ((PDT)) I am using the RDG Quick-Change Toolpost and am impressed with the quality of the body and holders. I did change out the cap-head screws that came with it for some decent ones. The ones that came with it were *very* poor quality. ------- tool size for Super 7 (4 way tool post) [MyMyford] Posted by: "steven.shand" stevenx~xxstevenshand.com Date: Wed May 30, 2007 10:35 am ((PDT)) Hey, excuse the dumb question...... I have recently aquired a Super7 with a 4 way tool post and need to buy some tooling (blank or pre-ground) but I'm puzzled by what size I should be buying. The 4-way is not an original Myford (I don't think). The slot for the tool measues a wee bit more than 12mm from bottom to top tool post. Bottom of slot to centre of lathe looks like it's a little over 6mm. Spoke to one dealer who says if it's an original Myford I should use 8mm tools. If it's not (how do I tell?) then I'd be better buying 6mm tools. Any input on this would be a great help. There's a pic of the toolpost and lathe here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/shandcycles/520433034/ Many thanks. Steven Shand ------- Re: tool size for Super 7 (4 way tool post) Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Thu May 31, 2007 12:31 am ((PDT)) Possibly 6.35mm ? otherwise known as 1/4 inch If you're going to grind your own, go with the 8mm and grind down to center height. That way you get an overall stiffer tool. That said, I'm happy with my 6mm tools, though I do have a 8mm or two, the 6mm works just fine in my quick set toolposts. What size is the tool in the picture? Is it correctly centered? David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: tool size for Super 7 (4 way tool post) Posted by: "steven.shand" stevenx~xxstevenshand.com Date: Thu May 31, 2007 1:09 am ((PDT)) Thanks for the info. I guess the thing that I don't really understand is if you buy a tool (for argument's sake, say a pre-ground tool or one with a replaceable tip) that says it's 6mm, does that mean that the shank is 6mm or does it mean that from the bottom of the tool to the cutting point is 6mm? I'm really feeling kinda dumb asking this. But if I'm buying pre-ground tools I don't really want to have to shim them up to centre height when I could have bought the right size to begin with! > what size is the tool in the picture? is it correctly centered? That's a good question! The shank is about 5mm but it has a small step up at the cutting point just to confuse things. Yes it's centred correctly. Cheers. Steven ------- Re: tool size for Super 7 (4 way tool post) Posted by: "David Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Thu May 31, 2007 11:26 am ((PDT)) I don't know for sure. I think it will depend on the makers idea of measurement. Some will give shank size, others will give cutting tip height. If you buy them big you can cut them down to size by holding the shank in the 4 jaw and reducing the shank thickness. My father in law did this with an 3/4" shank insert tooling holder, making it fit his 9x20 lathe. Lay it flat on a table and measure the tip height and then you will know what to look for. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: tool size for Super 7 (4 way tool post) Posted by: "steven.shand" stevenx~xxstevenshand.com Date: Thu May 31, 2007 11:39 am ((PDT)) > lay it flat on a table and measure the tip height and then you will know > what to look for. Well that's the problem. I know what the centre height is, it's 1/4" (6mm ish) but the shank is only 5mm. It still doesn't help when I see a tool listed as being 6mm. Is that the shank size or tool height? Steven ------- Super 7 tumbler gear [MyMyford] Posted by: "Willem van Biljon" willemx~xxhillwood.co.za Date: Thu May 31, 2007 10:08 am ((PDT)) Hi, I have just received a 28T Tufnol tumbler gear from Myford to replace the one with a tooth broken on the S7 I just acquired. However, I can't figure out how to do this (seemingly) simple task. Can someone please help on how these tumbler reverse gears are attached. Thanks Willem ------- Re: Super 7 tumbler gear Posted by: "Pat Martindale" patx~xxcrayke.demon.co.uk Date: Thu May 31, 2007 11:26 am ((PDT)) The tumbler cluster is secured into the machine with an screw acting in a groove on the pivot shaft. It is a bit difficult to see at first but easy to remove once you spot it. You have to drive the bearing pins out of the tumbler lever from the reverse (non-gear) side - I used very gentle heat and a brass punch. After changing the gear, I pressed the pin back in to the lever. Not an ideal set-up in my opinion... Pat Martindale ------- Re: Super 7 tumbler gear Posted by: "Willem van Biljon" willemx~xxhillwood.co.za Date: Fri Jun 1, 2007 3:49 am ((PDT)) Thanks - done. The new gear is quite a tight fit on the pin, but I presume that will loosen with time. Willem ------- Questions from a Myford newbie [MyMyford] Posted by: "christophermhicks" cmh21x~xxcam.ac.uk Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 4:19 am ((PDT)) Dear All, Having looked in depth at the Chinese lathes from Warco, Chester etc, I have all but decided to buy an ML10-series lathe, and am currently looking around for "the one". I have a couple of questions which I hope you might be able to help with. If it makes any difference I expect to turn mostly aluminium and brass, but also some plastics (acetal, acrylic etc) and some steel. 1) What are the pros and cons of the plain-bearing versus roller-bearing headstock? 2) If I buy a machine without the vertical slide, am I likely to be able to get a suitable vertical slide separately? 3) One of the machines I have seen has a 3-phase motor which I would have to replace with a single-phase one. What are the practicalities and costs of doing so? 4) What are the pros and cons of the additional speeds available on the Speed 10? In particular I think the lowest speed on the plain ML10 is 24rpm, whereas on the Speed 10 it is 48 rpm. I expect to be doing some faceplate work at near the maximum swing capacity of the lathe and, while I realise this should be good reason to get a (gap-bed) Series 7, I simply haven't got the space for that just now. Many thanks for your time. I can't wait to get a lathe, but it's a lot of money so I want to be sure I choose the right one. Regards, Christopher Hicks ------- Re: Questions from a Myford newbie Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 4:47 am ((PDT)) Regarding your question 3: Why not keep the 3-phase motor? Inverters (VFD) are now inexpensively available at about us $120. Using a VFD would give you the advantages of controlled soft motor start/stop, variable speed and no need to replace the motor. I'm assuming that your chosen lathe has a 240 volt 3-phase motor. If it has a 550 volt or other industrial voltage motor then the expense would be considerably more. ------- Re: Questions from a Myford newbie Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 5:00 am ((PDT)) Christopher I have a late model Speed 10 (as well as a Super 7), so I have to admit to some bias towards Myford products. Good hunting Mike My comments for what they are worth are added below. The roller bearing headstock is better. Unlike the plain bearing version it has virtually no clearance, so no play. The plain bearing has to have some clearance (a thou or so) to give room for oil. The roller bearing headstock also needs minimal maintenance, unlike the plain bearing which needs drip-feed oiling. Finally, the roller bearing headstock will run at higher speed than the plain bearing version. > If I buy a machine without the vertical slide, am I likely to be > able to get a suitable vertical slide separately? No problem. The plain or double swivel Myford vertical slides fit the Speed 10 as well as the 7 series machines. Both versions are readily available new or secondhand. Easy to swap to a single phase motor, but why not buy an inverter and get the benefits of fully variable speed. About £100 new, but If you watch eBay you will get one (eventually for £30-40). I've bought 3 on eBay for this price range. > What are the pros and cons of the additional speeds available on > the Speed 10? The very low speed might occasionally be useful. Best compromise is is to get that inverter, then you can go down to less than 20 rpm on the Speed 10. ------- Re: Questions from a Myford newbie Posted by: "Jim Guthrie" jimx~xxsprockets.co.uk Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 5:53 am ((PDT)) Christopher, My ML10 is one of the original plain bearing ones and is about 35 years old. The bearings have survived very well and it's only now that I can detect a barely perceptible play in them. But that will be a fairly simple matter to adjust. The main drawback is the lack of top speed on the machine which can be a bit of a problem if you want to do a lot of small diameter turning work. Also, if it's an older original version, look at getting one with the long cross-slide. The original cross-slide was OK until you wanted to fit a back tool post, then things got quite cramped with very little space between the front and back tool faces and normally required the back tool post to be left off until actually required. The longer cross-slide gives an extra inch or so and an extra slot and the back tool post can almost live permanently in place. Myford do an upgrade kit if you happen to get a lathe with the shorter cross-slide. Buy it as an upgrade kit since it is a lot cheaper than sourcing the bits individually. The vertical slide you would normally use is the standard Myford product so you should be able to get one new, or secondhand quite easily. There are also a fair number of slots on the cross-slide which could accommodate other makes of vertical slide. Single phase motors are quite expensive and it might be better looking at a three phase inverter or converter as a alternative to use a three phase motor from a single phase supply. The current edition of the ME (No.4301) has an article on Inverters and converters which might help. See above - more higher speeds for small diameter work. I would think that the 48rpm could be OK for anything you might throw at it, even at the maximum diameter you could accommodate. I don't think I've ever used the 24rpm speed on my lathe - about 2.5 seconds per rev :-) Also, a lead screw clutch is invaluable when the lathe has no tumbler, although it's not too expensive an accessory if the lathe you are chasing hasn't got one. Jim ------- Re: Questions from a Myford newbie Posted by: "Christopher Hicks" cmh21x~xxcam.ac.uk Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 4:40 am ((PDT)) Dear All, Many thanks for the advice. I'm going to see a few ML10s over coming days, and I'll let you know how I get on. Christopher Hicks ------- Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly [MyMyford] Posted by: "Steve" sblakex~xxexemail.com.au Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 7:18 pm ((PDT)) Does anybody know what the bolt size/thread should be to secure the travelling steady to the threaded hole in the 'front' (or should that be the 'left') of the carriage on an ML7 (I presume same as S7)? I lost the bolt that was with the travelling steady. I've checked all the usual places (manual etc) but there's no mention of the threaded hole spec. Cheers Steve ------- Re: Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 8:00 pm ((PDT)) Steve, My S7 uses a 1/4-26 Whit. The seat is on the saddle to the left of the cross slide. RichD ------- Re: Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly Posted by: "Steve" sblakex~xxexemail.com.au Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 8:31 pm ((PDT)) Thanks RichD - I'll go hunt one down. Steve ------- Re: Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 7:21 am ((PDT)) TEL, Steve, the threaded hole in question is most definitely 1/4 - 26 BSF. I'm not sure if you call the fine thread version Whitworth, however. RichD ------- Re: Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly Posted by: "David Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 10:46 am ((PDT)) Yeah, 1/4 BSF just all the other holes on the ML7 (-: I made a 'blocker' to close that hole to keep swarf out using a cut down M6 bolt. About 6mm of thread, and thinned the head down to about 1.5mm. DO NOT tighten an M6 in a 1/4BSF hole, you will rip the threads out. There is a slight mismatch in the thread pitch which overloads one thread at a time, allowing you to easily pull them out. When I made my travelling steady I made a bolt to match, cutting down an M8 bolt and rethreading it. This gave me a quick head that fits a spanner, I didn't feel like trying to cut my own hex head... ------- Re: Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly Posted by: "TEL" telx~xxlisp.com.au Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 1:07 pm ((PDT)) Interesting Rich, 'cos the one in my ML7 is definitely the coarser thread. ------- Re: Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 1:17 pm ((PDT)) David, since I had a lathe and threading is so easy (for me:-) and there is 26 TPI on the quick change.....I took a long socket head 1/4" screw that had about 3/4" of unthreaded and made a 1/4 BSF screw for that hole. The reason for all this trouble was to have a screw for a swarf guard for the saddle/crosslide interface area that is so prone get damage from fine metal dust working under the flat way. With a 6" length of 3/4" leg ali [aluminium] angle, cut one leg to 3/8 width. Drill a matching hole or the subject BSF screw. Machine a shallow slot in the outside face to accept a strip of the narrow fuzzy sliding door seal material from a DIY shop. This rubs on the side of the crosslide forming a swarf seal. Under the ali angle long leg goes a 6 x 6" neoprene rubber sheet that covers the long ways. I can do a picture if anyone would like. RichD, Atlanta (building a "Wren") ------- Re: Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 1:23 pm ((PDT)) Tel, I did mention my lathe is an S7. Steve was assuming they were the same. Apparently not. RichD ------- Re: Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly Posted by: "Karen Gallagher" karengx~xxa1.com.au Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 3:53 pm ((PDT)) > on an ML7 (I presume same as S7) 1/4" BSF Karen ------- Re: Travelling Steady Bolt hole in Carriage Assembly Posted by: "Steve" sblakex~xxexemail.com.au Date: Fri Jun 15, 2007 12:31 am ((PDT)) I asked the folks at Myford to clarify. Their answer is "hex head set screw 1/4" BSF x 1"." Steve ------- Re: Questions from a Myford newbie [MyMyford] Posted by: "Christopher Hicks" cmh21x~xxcam.ac.uk Date: Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:13 am ((PDT)) Dear All, Well, I got an ML10 on Sunday and my wife has hardly seen me since... Needless to say I have a few questions: 1) What is the recommended way of removing the chuck? I remember doing this 20 years ago (on a bigger lathe) by putting the chuck key in and giving it a sharp tap with a mallet, but the Myford doesn't seem to put up enough resistance to make this work. 2) What is the recommended way of removing the centre (or anything else) from the tailstock barrel? The MT2 taper on my pillar drill has a slot into which you can tap a wedge to disengage the taper. The tailstock on the Myford doesn't seem to have this (or at least I can't see it if it does). 3) Some of the change-gears are missing. I haven't checked with the vendor whether he has these but assuming not, is it best to contact Myford about getting replacements, or are they readily available elsewhere? Does anybody know what the standard set supplied with the lathe would have been? (It's an imperial machine.) Thanks again, Christopher ------- Re: Questions from a Myford newbie Posted by: "brihol46" brihol46x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:45 am ((PDT)) Re changewheels, RDG do the wheels also at: http://www.rdgtools.co.uk/acatalog/MYFORD_LATHE_USERS_NEW1.html Brian ------- Toolpost [MyMyford] Posted by: "Christopher Hicks" cmh21x~xxcam.ac.uk Date: Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:19 am ((PDT)) Dear All, One of the items I got with my lathe is a brand new, genuine Myford 4-way indexed toolpost. It looks to be identical to the one sold by Chronos. Last night I discovered why I suspect it has never been used... When it is mounted on the ML10, the cutting tip of even a 6mm shank tool comes way, way above the centre height. So I wondered whether this toolpost is actually for an ML7 and not suitable for my machine. However, this doesn't quite ring true, because as far as I know the slides and centre height etc are almost identical on the two machines. Can anyone shed any light? Anyway, I cut some metal yesterday evening and I have to say the lathe is a joy to use. I am very pleased! Christopher Hicks ------- Re: Toolpost Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Thu Jun 14, 2007 6:40 am ((PDT)) Chris: Your 4 way toolpost is almost certainly for an ML7 - check the part number stamped on it if you want to confirm. The version for an ML10 is thinner, with lower tool clamping slots. Don't forget that the ML10 centre height is 3.25 inches, as against 3.5 on the 7 series lathes, so this alone makes for a 1/4 inch tool height difference. Enjoy mike ------- Replace 3 Phase with Single Phase Motor ? [MyMyford] Posted by: "keiths_super7" keithhigginsx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Jun 23, 2007 5:05 am ((PDT)) I have just been offered a Myford Super 7 with a load of accessories as a replacement for my ML4 but it has a 3 phase motor. Are there any recommendations for replacement single phase? I had a quick look at inverters but they don't appear to be cost effective. ------- Re: Replace 3 Phase with Single Phase Motor ? Posted by: "IAN BARKER" ian.barkerx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Jun 23, 2007 7:05 am ((PDT)) I would stay with the 3 phase if you can run to it, as the power is much better and smoother. I run one on my Colchster; you get 1 rpm to 33% overdrive without changing belts; just turn the pot. Fantastic for parting off -- speed up as you feed in and ramp down if you reverse stop and ramp back up to speed in one move of the lever. ian barker ------- Re: Replace 3 Phase with Single Phase Motor ? Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sat Jun 23, 2007 8:51 am ((PDT)) Agreed. An inverter (VFD) is similar in cost to a decent quality single-phase motor. As Ian mentions there are several advantages to the 3-phase motor and no real disadvantages. Plus, you save the effort of finding and fitting a replacement motor. ------- Re: Replace 3 Phase with Single Phase Motor ? Posted by: "Keith Higgins" keithhigginsx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Jun 24, 2007 2:54 am ((PDT)) Thanks Ken & Ian for your thoughts, I'll follow your advice and start having a look for a suitable inverter. Keith ------- Myford ML7 Pulley block question [MyMyford] Posted by: "Ross" ross_rlx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Mon Jun 25, 2007 12:36 pm ((PDT)) Hello, A quick question. I noticed that the pulley block on my lathe spindle has quite a lot of sideways float. Does anyone know if this is correct or should it be a tight fit on the spindle? If it should be a tight fit does anyone know how to fix it? Thanks in advance. Ross ------- Re: Myford ML7 Pulley block question Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Mon Jun 25, 2007 11:40 pm ((PDT)) Mine does too. I cannot see a way to adjust it without removing the spindle, which I cannot do because the screw that holds the gear on the end is mushed and cannot be removed. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Myford ML7 cross/top slide backlash adjustment [MyMyford] Posted by: "m0xuk" m0xukx~xxhighworth.org Date: Mon Jul 2, 2007 2:16 pm ((PDT)) Hello all. Seems like many here I'm a newcomer and have just bought a Myford ML7. Wow! Eye opener after my little 'desktop' lathe. However, can anybody tell me how to adjust for backlash on the slides (cross slide is a long type). The guy I bought it off quickly adjusted them while I was there just to prove they weren't actually worn out, but I'd like to improve on that and have them bang on, and would like to know the correct procedure. If anyone can point me at an article or explain I'd be very grateful. Thanks in advance. David ------- Re: Myford ML7 cross/top slide backlash adjustment Posted by: "mcnally_simon" simon.mcnallyx~xxsky.com Date: Thu Jul 5, 2007 12:35 am ((PDT)) Hi David, Do you mean the backlash in the feed nut (forward and backwards) or in the slide itself (side to side). If it's the feed nut, then a small bit of adjustment is avalable by adjusting the dial and handle; but if it's in the nut itself, then the only real option is to buy a new nut from myford (about a tenner i think). Adjusting the Gibs is detailed in the manual (Page 29 in my one) which if you don't have one, i think can be downloaded from the files section. Regards Simon ------- Re: Myford ML7 cross/top slide backlash adjustment Posted by: "m0xuk" m0xukx~xxhighworth.org Date: Thu Jul 5, 2007 8:35 am ((PDT)) Thanks Simon, your reply much appreciated. I mean the feed nut, but I'm sure there must be a 'correct' way of adjusting it - seems you have to somehow hold the screw while adjusting it? Sorry if this sounds a bit lame, but I've damaged things before by just jumping in with both feet! David ------- Re: Myford ML7 cross/top slide backlash adjustment Posted by: "mcnally_simon" simon.mcnallyx~xxsky.com Date: Thu Jul 5, 2007 12:18 pm ((PDT)) David, You can remove some of the backlash by adjusting the handle. On mine, (but this has a super 7 cross slide) there is a screwed round adjusting nut behind the aluminum end plate that has a small grub screw in it. I just slaken the grubscrew, tweek up the adjuster nut and then retighten the grubscrew. I think the standard ML7 is the same as my vertical head where there is a couple of spanner flats on the fixed dial. Grip the flats with a suitable spanner and keeping the dial still unscrew the handle a turn or so to unlock them. Then you should be able to hold the feedscrew (use pliers with cloth or something to avoid marking the feedscrew if the dial is stiff) and tighten the dial just enough that the feedscrew can still be turned without any stiffness but there is minimum play. Then keeping the dial still with the spanner, tighten the handle back down to lock them together. That's about all you can do, any more play is wear in the nut and it will need to be replaced. The above makes me seem like a fountain of knowledge but it is only because i adjusted mine the other day. Simon ------- Re: Myford ML7 cross/top slide backlash adjustment Posted by: "m0xuk" m0xukx~xxhighworth.org Date: Sat Jul 7, 2007 2:09 am ((PDT)) Many thanks Simon - that did the trick. I thought there might be some other way of holding the screw, but in the end it didn't need a huge amount of pressure on the pliers/rag to hold it. David ------- Re: Myford ML7 cross/top slide backlash adjustment Posted by: "David Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Sat Jul 7, 2007 11:18 am ((PDT)) Or, split the nut in 2 after threading the outside something finer than 10 tpi. then you can fit a collar onto the fixed portion, and thread the loose piece into the collar, adjusting to remove end play. Well, that's my plan anyway. (-: David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Myford ML7 cross/top slide backlash adjustment Posted by: "mcnally_simon" simon.mcnallyx~xxsky.com Date: Sat Jul 7, 2007 2:49 pm ((PDT)) GTH in his article about the improved topslide wrote about a similar thing to eliminate all the backlash. I have the aricle in PDF If you want me to forward it on. I managed to download it before the current publishers of ME decided that they did not want that stuff on the net. Simon ------- ML7 belt conversion? [MyMyford] Posted by: "mcnally_simon" mcnally_simonx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Jul 4, 2007 4:45 am ((PDT)) Has any body done a poly belt conversion on an ML7? I know kits are available for the Super 7 from Hemmingway but i believe these are unsuitable for the ML7. Looking at the myford price lists the normal V belt for the ML7 and the super 7 come under different part numbers. Does this mean that the centre distance between the spindle and countershaft are different? This would also mean its pointless to even get the hemmingway drawing and belt as the belt would be the wrong size. So looking at my ML7 there should be enough room for 4 speeds. Being cheap( Limited funds! ), i was wondering if there are drawings on the net or does anybody have the sizes of the poly V pullys (OD and sheave width) and the bore of the spindle pully so i dont have to pull mine apart to get the measurements? The standard pully size's on the countershaft on an ML7 are 2 3/16", 3 1/4" and 4" and the same on the spindle giving me speeds of 273,487 and 870 (without back gear and with a 2 1/2" motor pully). What are the sizes of the super 7 ones? A 4" pully would seem to be the maximum size that can fit into the headstock. I was also hoping to aim for a top speed of about 1200 - 1500rpm. To do this would it be better to just fit a bigger pully on the motor? The spindle bearings are in good condition and myford does state in the green handbook that the spindle bearings are safe at 1070rpm so my conservative overspeeding should(!) be ok. Regards Simon ------- Re: ML7 belt conversion? Posted by: "David Clark" david.anthony.clarkx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Jul 4, 2007 6:08 am ((PDT)) Hi There On my old ML7, I fitted a 2900 rev motor. This doubled the speed. Worked a treat but keep plenty of oil in the bearing. regards david ------- Re: ML7 belt conversion? Posted by: "mcnally_simon" simon.mcnallyx~xxsky.com Date: Thu Jul 5, 2007 12:42 am ((PDT)) Hi David. I did think of that, and it's good to know that your bearings are holding out ok, that was one of my worries. I also was thinking about having twin pulleys between the countershaft and motor like the super 7 but as my ML7 is fitted with a clutch this makes it awkward. However the next motor swap is going to be to a 3 phase one with a VFD. I was given a motor the other day but have only this afternoon thought of using it. I have just looked it over and it is in good condition and will fit with no modification. I just have to look out for a cheap VFD. I think the main reason for the belt conversion is that it gives a smoother drive or so I have read. That coupled with the VFD will give me a nice smooth drive hopefully along with a greater selection of speeds. Also this afternoon I decided that I would cast my own pulleys from aluminium so that I can machine them up with the lathe working. It would be difficult to do that if I modified the original pulleys!! I just need some sizes so I can start designing. Like I said in the earlier post the I don't really want to take my lathe down to measure things up as I am in the middle of making a ER collet chuck. too many jobs, not enough time as usual. Simon ------- Re: ML7 belt conversion? Posted by: "David Clark" david.anthony.clarkx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Jul 5, 2007 4:06 am ((PDT)) Hi There Drives Direct sell inverters and converters on Ebay UK. Very reasonable price. regards David ------ Re: ML7 belt conversion? Posted by: "John Stevenson" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk Date: Wed Jul 4, 2007 2:40 pm ((PDT)) Yes did this as an exercise a few years ago. You can get 4 speeds in using a J6 poly vee belt. Let me dig around in some old files to get the correct pulley sizes so the centre distance remains constant. John S. ------- Re: ML7 belt conversion? Posted by: "mcnally_simon" simon.mcnallyx~xxsky.com Date: Thu Jul 5, 2007 12:43 am ((PDT)) Hi john. Thanks for that, It was what I was hoping for and what makes these groups so useful, as there is no point in reinventing the wheel as they say! IIRC was it you who recommended using an 11 tpi chaser for the sheaves in one of the groups? That looks like a real time saver as I think I have one! Looking through The messages and the files of this group I have also noticed some other mods that members have done and have added them to the list of thing to do, such as the modifications hayjay12000 has done like the gearbox and 60T bull wheel mod. I also want to fit some larger re-settable ball bearing dials to the cross, and top slides and the leadscrew handwheel. In fact as more of reminder to myself what needs to be done here is a list (In order of me remembering them). Finish the ER25 collet chuck. Finish the Hemmingway rear tool post. Poly belt conversion. Fit a VFD. Build cross slide stop. Build the Hemmingway Graduating tool and boring bars. Build an automatic feed knock off Build a Hobbing attachment for the horizontal mill. Build Hayjay's Gearbox. Bull Wheel Modification Build Headstock Dividing attachment. Add proper locks to the slides. Fit ball bearings and larger dial such as GHT's ones and maybe his retracting topslide. Probably a whole host of other things.. So as you can see a lot to do but I am still reasonably young at 34 so I may be finished by the time I'm 60. Simon ------- Re: ML7 belt conversion? Posted by: "Brian Holroyd" brihol46x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Jul 5, 2007 3:16 am ((PDT)) Is it me or are you concentrating on the wrong thing? Sorry to sound so negative but I fear you have fallen into an all too attractive trap ie spending the time that you have in just modifying the lathe rather than focusing on what you want to make and getting on with it. The V-belt drive is perfect for your lathe and provides the degree of slip without damage that is required if something goes wrong. I have an older Super 7 and have been caught out several times with engaging backgear and not realising the next time I came to do something. V-belts transfer power quite well but not superbly and that is their advantage. Brian ------- Re: ML7 belt conversion? Posted by: "mcnally_simon" simon.mcnallyx~xxsky.com Date: Fri Jul 6, 2007 2:30 am ((PDT)) Hi Brian, You are probably right i am normally concentrating on the wrong things, but who doesn't to some degree. I find making and improving thing for the workshop as enjoyable and challenging as building small models. Also as i see it much of this hobby is producing a means to an end, with limited resorces. Most of the modifications for the lathe i have in mind have been decided upon by looking though this and various other forums by posts, usually with the heading 'I wish i had done this years ago..'. The way i look at it is as long as i am out in the workshop using it and the tools then the expense of putting it there in the first place is justified. If i'm out there using it AND using tooling which i have improved or made then all the better... Don't get me wrong, I do like to see both sides of the coin before making a decision, that way you get to see the negative sides of things and strive to find way round them. Thanks for the information on the v belt slipping if things go wrong, i am still a relative begginer and have found that out for myself (yesterday in fact, fortunately no damage!)! I take it a Poly V belt will not do this then, I was not something i had thought about, but i think the ability to select more spindle speeds along with the smoother power delivery would outweigh this disadvantage. I could re-adjust the clutch to provide the emergency slip when needed in that case? Sorry for the long post, over enthuthiasm.. Simon ------- Re: ML7 belt conversion? Posted by: "Daniel" em325x~xxncf.ca Date: Fri Jul 6, 2007 4:46 pm ((PDT)) Simon, If you fit your 3-phase with a VFD, you can save yourself the work of converting to a poly vee belt. You will have variable speed without having to shift the belt and can install a link belt in lieu of a regular v-belt. I use a link belt (the red Powertwist type) on my S7B and it is very smooth. If I were you, I would make the GH Thomas zeroing dials for the top and cross slides sooner because you can profit from their advantages in making the other tools, accessories and models. Daniel Ottawa, Canada ------- Saddle fix [MyMyford] Posted by: "mcnally_simon" simon.mcnallyx~xxsky.com Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:20 am ((PDT)) Whilst making my collet chuck i found that my lathe was turning convex again. Now i had done a quick fix (read bodge) when i installed it by putting a bit of brass sheet on the rear saddle shear to use that rather than the inner one, which was worn. At the time when i did this the lathe then turned very slightly concave and was pleased that i had 'fixed' it. But i had left the brass soft, so it did not last very long. Over the last few days i have replaced the brass with a piece of 1/16" Gauge plate. After a bit of clean up to remove the excess epoxy and a bit of scraping the lathe now turns concave. I measured it at 2/10's on four inches of cross feed travel. But more importatly the saddle will now traverse the whole lathe without getting tight at the tailstock end. The only hard work was making sure the Gib fitted as all the clearences had been taken up, and that the leadscrew was not deflected by the now moved apron and split nuts. To say that i am pleased is an extreme understatement, i had started to think i was going to have to fork out for a regrind. This hopefully has now been delayed for a good few years. Yours Simon ------- ML7 to ML$ topslide [MyMyford] Posted by: "keithmyford" keithmyfordx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:50 am ((PDT)) I keep on seeing ml7 top slides on ebay. Will they fit my ml4 or will they need modifying at all? thanks. keith ------- ML7 to ML4 topslide Posted by: "John Quirke" jjquirkex~xxeircom.net Date: Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:48 pm ((PDT)) Hi Keith & all I could see no reason why the ML7 could not be fitted to the ML4, and to prove it this evening I did just that. Photo 1 shows the ML4 crosslide and photo 2 shows the ML7 crosslide. Photo 3 is a picture of the underside of the ML7 topslide and the spigot which engages with the hole in the ML7 crosslide is clearly shown. This spigot can be driven out easily to enable the ML7 topslide sit on the ML4 crosslide, a light tap of a hammer is all it took. To secure it to the ML4 crosslide all that is required is one of the original front ML4 securing bolts and a T slot bolt for the T slot at the rear. The only disadvantage is that the protractor graduations are of no use as there is no defined axis pivot. Both the ML4 and ML7 topslides are the same height and in the next e-mail I will include photos of the complete set-up. So now you know, have fun. Yours in the workshop John (who added two more photos later) [Following the demise of the MyMyford group, the pix may be at the new group myfordlathes but I don't know for sure. Possibly the original poster John Quirke could be contacted if you need to see the pix.] ------- Lathe tool holders for ML7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "m0xuk" m0xukx~xxhighworth.org Date: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:42 pm ((PDT)) I've been looking at a bewildering array of cutting tool holders (eg by Sandvik, Iscar and the like) on eBay and can see the benefit of replaceable cutters. However as a complete novice I've no idea whether these are 'a good thing' or not, and even whether they're made small enough for an ML7. The way they are advertised is not user friendly to the inexperienced! Can anyone offer any advice re above, and, if they are a good thing, what make/type/size I should be looking for for general cutting (you know, the sort of stuff a beginner gets up to!). Many thanks in advance. David ------- Re: Lathe tool holders for ML7 Posted by: "Daniel" em325x~xxncf.ca Date: Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:35 am ((PDT)) David, I can only provide non-professional advice but my experience is that for a small lathe like the Myfords, HSS tools require less power, give a better finish and are cheaper than inserts for mild steel, aluminium and brass turning. I do however use a few carbide brazed tip tools for machining iron castings, especially to break through the outside crust. The carbide inserts do not "cut" as well as a sharp HSS tool, they rather rip material. Carbide inserts also do not allow a fine feed as well. To work properly, inserts need to take off .010 or so whereas I can take off .0005 with a HSS tool. Now, for shaping HSS tools, you do need a common grinder with the proper Aluminium Oxide wheels and an improved tool rest. Ian Bradley and Martin Cleeve have good and easy improvements to the grinder tool rests in their books. If you insist on trying inserts, I would recommend sourcing them directly from Myford, Chronos, RDG tools, etc. which cater to the small lathe owners and will be the smaller sizes. I agree that there are a lot on eBay but most if for bigger lathes and mills so be careful when shopping. You might be luckier if you add "Myford" to your eBay search for inserts. Daniel ------- Re: Lathe tool holders for ML7 Posted by: "Tony" taimerx~xxzanet.co.za Date: Sun Jul 22, 2007 5:25 am ((PDT)) Daniel, I am also an amateur but I make the following observations. The inserts have a minimum depth of cut associated with them. You will find these values in the manufacturers catalogues. Page I-111 in my Iscar turnplus catalogue gives a minimum of 0,5mm or 20 thou. These minimum values are larger than taking off that last "thou" and the tools seem to rub rather than cut at very small depths of cut. When one looks at the cutting edge under a microscope, it is actually rounded in the vertical plane which explains the above comment. I use inserts at smaller depths of cut than 20 thou but use HSS when I am going all out for a good finish. I believe the difference between industry and the hobbyist lies in the fact that industry relies on grinding to a very large extent and so surface finish off the tool is not as important. We don't generally have this kind of equipment on hand and a good finish off an HSS tool plus some 600 grit wet and dry is our solution. I hope this is of some help. I would appreciate if the wise and expert would crit these comments of mine as I am also a beginner starting down the machining road (for fun!). Tony Aimer Johannesburg ------- Re: Lathe tool holders for ML7 Posted by: "m0xuk" m0xukx~xxhighworth.org Date: Mon Jul 23, 2007 11:42 am ((PDT)) Thanks Daniel, and Tony - most informative. Think I'll stick to HSS for the time being, especially as I do really need to learn how to grind/sharpen my own tooling. Which of Ian Bradley's books was that article in please? David ------- Re: Lathe tool holders for ML7 Posted by: "David Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:53 am ((PDT)) you can make them..... http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe I am very happy with mine. Many others use the Dixon type, or the dovetailed AXA type. And there are others. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Lathe tool holders for ML7 Posted by: "Daniel" em325x~xxncf.ca Date: Sat Jul 28, 2007 9:34 am ((PDT)) Martin Cleeve's Screwcuting in the Lathe, Workshop Practice Series #3 Ian Bradley's The Amateur's Workshop and The Beginner's Workshop both contain these info. Good luck! ------- Re: Lathe tool holders for ML7 Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Sat Jul 28, 2007 10:26 am ((PDT)) I have Bradley's Shaping Machine and Lathe Tools MAP and also The Grinding Machine also MAP. However. Bradley gave details in other of his books. There is a lot of repetition! How to sharpen lathe tools is contained in many other books. Sparey also gave a lot and perhaps Tubal Cain's little handbook is more useful. However, provided the tools are honed and I mean honed, the precise angles are less important. Today, most workers hone HSS with fine diamond laps which were not available at the time of most of these books. You aim at seeing your finger nail reflected in the rounded edge or the ability to manicure your nail or both! Apart from a long diatribe on tool and cutter grinders, that is the best advice that I can offer. Cheers Norman ------- Re: Lathe tool holders for ML7 Posted by: "m0xuk" m0xukx~xxhighworth.org Date: Sat Jul 28, 2007 11:02 am ((PDT)) Many thanks for the advice, and I've produced a couple of cutters from some HSS, following the advice in Sparey's 'The Amateur's Lathe'. I made a small round nosed, and a knife tool. The round nosed worked straight off the grinder, and cut some MS like butter compared to my other tools. The knife needed a lot more attention to detail, and it certainly did need some work on the stone. After I did that it worked a treat and I'm very pleased with my simple efforts! David ------- NOTE TO FILE: When it comes to choice of cutters, and how to sharpen them, such is a generic subject applicable to many brands of lathes and milling machines and even metal shapers. I left this discussion in the Myford Lathe Gems file, but you really should consult the other files here called Cutters, Bits, and Arbors and Metal Shaper Bits and Toolholders for an incredible amount of info applicable to cutters for a Myford lathe. ------- Mounting a digital caliper on a ML10 [MyMyford] Posted by: "svenalferink" sven.alferinkx~xxwur.nl Date: Thu Jul 26, 2007 3:09 am ((PDT)) I've got an imperial threaded ML10 and because I live in The Netherlands and i'm not that familiar with the imperial measuring system. It would be convenient for me to be able to read cross and top-slide movement in metric. I thought of mounting a digital caliper (that reads metric as well as imperial) on the cross and topslides to achieve this. Does anyone have experience with the mounting of digital calipers on lathes, and could you describe or better send me some pics of how you mounted them? I found a lot of info on the net about DRO (DigitalReadOut) but that's too costly for me now. I also considered buying new spindles and dials from Myford but that's costly as well, and less flexible because I cannot change easily from metric to imperial and back as is possible with the calipers. Like to hear your opinion and experience. Thanks, Sven ------- Re: Mounting a digital caliper on a ML10 Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Thu Jul 26, 2007 1:30 pm ((PDT)) Sven, Last month's Model Engineers Workshop contained an article on fitting a DRO etc onto a ML7- or was it Super 7? What seems to be happening now is that cheap digital calipers are available for 13 or 14 Euros from places like Lidl and Aldi. I am quite sure that such places will exist near you. The trick is is to cut the jaw off a 6" or 100mm one to do the x and y axis and this should work OK as the readings can go Metric or Imperial at the touch of a button. At ArcEuroTrade who advertises in MEW, they sell single 'DRO' units for about 45Euros plus postage. I have no other connection apart from buying Chinese scales for my mill and knowing John Stevenson who attends or helps out at Shows. Presently, I am trying to build up a Shumatech 350 with scales on my mill and have the two single 'DRO's to go on my Super 7 plus a pair of cheap Lidl verniers when they come on offer next week. This should give you some ideas on what must be difficult to work in Imperial fractions. I suspect, however, that you could possibly re-engrave dials as quite a few lathes have both metric and imperial scales i=on each dial. I was having a few thoughts about leadscrews which are 8TPI. Here, I would suggest that you buy 'Screwcutting in the Lathe' by Martin Cleeve. He did all sorts of metric screwcutting on a ML7. You would need a 127 or 63 gear to do metric stuff. Probably the same John Stevenson who is MaryPoppinsBag on E-Bay would do you a gear. John had a ML7 until recently and is a nice guy. I would even expect him to be a member here. Enough to help? Norman ------- Re: Mounting a digital caliper on a ML10 Posted by: "svenalferink" sven.alferinkx~xxwur.nl Date: Sat Jul 28, 2007 3:14 am ((PDT)) Thanks for the info Norman, I guess I'll order a copy of the MEW issue with the article you mentioned from the publisher. Do you know which issue? The June issue? Or I'll just ask when I phone them. I'm especially interested in how to mount the caliper on the topslide as the space to mount there is very limited. The link to ArcEuroTrade is nice as well as they seem to offer a remote display for the calipers, which might save me form dangerously leaning over the lathe to read the display. Would you have any pictures or drawing of the mounting brackets you used to mount the scales, that would be helpful. Thanks, Sven ------- Re: Mounting a digital caliper on a ML10 Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Sat Jul 28, 2007 5:14 am ((PDT)) Sven, I can only suspect that the issue is June but a word or two of advice is to have a look at the files and photos sections here. Remember that you are going to have to think carefully because you are on your own- not with being non Brit but because you are probably going to the only ML10 user who is going this way. Again, you are going to use a caliper rather than the Chinese scale and will have to cut off the jaws. The end result will be the same but you will have to drill both ends or make clamps to fit your brackets. It might be worth your while to E-Mail John Stevenson to ask where he published his cutting down a caliper etc. Again, ArcEuroTrade supplies single read outs and you may have to cut the plastic connection end to the cable at the vernier end. Again, you might want to fit longer Chinese scales. At this stage, I am fitting brackets to a small Warco mill drill to take the Shumatech DRO. My Myford comes next but it will all take time because I have a webcam to go in as well. Recall, I am an oldie of 77 and a bit slow now. Do keep in touch, please. Norman ------- Re: Mounting a digital caliper on a ML10 Posted by: "David Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Sat Jul 28, 2007 10:40 am ((PDT)) Maybe I'm different but I manage fine with just a pocket calculator (the cheapest workshop tool you will ever buy). My vernier caliper is metric, lathe is imperial. So, to achieve a specific diameter: take a skim cut under fine feed, measure diameter X in mm and put into calcumalator subtract desired diameter D divide by 2 divide by 25.4 result is the number of thou to take off add number on crosslide dial, and result is the crossslide reading to stop at. (X-D)/ 2 / 25.4 + CS Do exactly the same for internals bores, you get a negative result which subtracts itself from the crossslide dial reading. I usually do this a few times since my lathe is old. So on the first calc I take it to within 5 thou of the desired size, then carefully take just a thou or two off under power, measure and recalculate, then do the final few cuts to sneak up on the final diameter, with a level of care according to the accuracy needed. Sharp HSS tools can take off .25 of a thou quite easily. > cannot change easily form metric to imperial and back like is possible > with the calipers. Remember that your lathe lends itself to imperial threading, so the better you know the system the better you can make threads. Also, the better you know the system, the fewer mistakes you will make. The dial are in thou, thousandths of an inch. A nice metric number (-: David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Mounting a digital caliper on a ML10 Posted by: "Thomas Staubo" thstaubox~xxonline.no Date: Sat Jul 28, 2007 11:40 am ((PDT)) Here is a link to one who mounted some cheap digital calipers as a poor-mans-DRO on a 7x10 mini lathe: http://www.gadgetbuilder.com/DRO.html I can't see much point in mounting them on an angle. I'm planning on doing the same thing, even though I have a metric ML7. I'm too easily confused when I'm calculating the infeed, because the pitch of the cross slide leadscrew is 2mm but the graduations on the dial is from 0-100. That means that when reducing the diameter from lets say 5.2mm to 5.0mm, I have to advance the cross slide 0.1mm. And to do that the dial must be moved from 0 to 5. All I have to do is divide by 4 to get the result, but it's not always easy to think clearly. The dial should instead be divided in 200, really. Or 400 if direct measurement was desired. I don't think I will add a DRO to the top slide (cumbersome, and not used in the same extent), I will just use DRO on the cross slide and saddle movements. Here is a picture of another setup: http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/9153/caliperdro1mt7.jpg I can't remember whose setup it is, I saved the picture from The Home Shop Machinist forum. I'm sure there are many other solutions, just google for "poor mans dro". I think I will buy ready made cheap digital readouts (like calipers, but without the jaws), they come with some brackets, and are also available in a vertical version. If you don't want to spend money on a separate readout panel, I think it's smart to use the vertical one on the cross slide for easier reading (even though it might be a bit larger). Thomas ------- Re: Mounting a digital caliper on a ML10 Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Sat Jul 28, 2007 1:51 pm ((PDT)) Only in the past few minutes John Stevenson has republished his fitting of a digital scale to a TOS lathe tailstock. Look at it on Google Groups uk.rec.models.engineering Norm ------- Re: Mounting a digital caliper on a ML10 Posted by: "Jim Guthrie" jimx~xxsprok01.plus.com Date: Sat Jul 28, 2007 3:26 pm ((PDT)) Sven, A quick and dirty way I work with metric dimensions on my Imperial ML10 is to assume that 1mm = 40 thou and convert the metric dimensions to thous using that conversion factor. This is good enough for 'close enough' dimensions. For very accurate results, the calculator comes out :-) Jim ------- Re: Power Feed ML7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:20 am ((PDT)) On 30 Jul 2007 at 19:39, Ross murmured decisively: > This is probably a ridiculus question, but I wondered whether my fellow > ML7 owners use the power feed when doing basic turning? Yup, I often use a fine feed for finish cuts, and sometimes for large roughing cuts. I have the extra 95 tooth wheel and can get to 1.Something thou per rev. However, if it is not setup I might just handfeed with the apron wheel. I can get the same result, but am not willing to do it for a long piece (-: > I played around using the power feed when I first had my lathe but I > found even the lowest feedrate gave a poor finish. That is due to tool geometry, not power feed rate. A large radius round nosed tool will give best finish at fine feed. I swim against the current and pocess NO round tools at all. Instead I use a very sharp pointed tool, set at a small angle... Another factor is lubricant and the metal being cut. Cutting lubricants abound, but I found the best (cheap) option for steel is ordinary chicken fat resulting from roasting a chicken. Dab it on with a brush. Also, the alloy of steel or whatever makes a huge difference. Some steel is very hard to cut with a nice finish, others are a dream come true. If you are turning 'rebar', you will have trouble. If you are cutting 12L14, a free cutting leaded alloy, you should have no trouble. Try some shafts out of an old printer/fax/copier. They are all free cutting steels as they are made on cnc lathes. Very nice to work with. On aluminum, I use kerosene (liquid paraffin). Brass, cut dry. It squeaks no matter what you do. No 'oil' is not a cutting lubricant. A cutting lubricant has the property that it will lubricate to a point, and then break down so that cutting can occur. Ordinary car oil does not do this, it tries to lubricate forever, severly affecting the cut. (I know because I've tried it.) > get best results engaging the clasp nut on the leadscrew and advancing > the tool using the leadscrew handwheel. > Also, can anyone advise why my tools end up blunt when I try to hone > them using a fine oil stone? The problem is YOU (-: unless one is very careful, one tends to let the angle change as one hones, thus reducing the clearance angle to zero or less than zero (VERY BLUNT in that condition, even though the edge may feel sharp). You need to make sure the tool stays at the correct angle to the stone. Maybe a jig? If you hone the front edge, you do not need to hone the top surface in my experience. And vice versa. Now, go to the workshop and experiment. (-: David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Power Feed ML7 Posted by: "ROSS LONGMORE" ross_rlx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:25 am ((PDT)) David, Thanks for your comprehensive reply - I will do as you say and go to the workshop and experiment. Cheers, Ross ------- How to remove the barrel key from tailstock [MyMyford] Posted by: "chinleybrewer" martinx~xxberriman.co.uk Date: Thu Aug 2, 2007 12:40 am ((PDT)) The barrel of the tailstock on my M-Type rocks back and forth because the key that steadies the barrel is worn. I have dismantled the tailstock but it is not obvious how the key comes out for replacement. Does anyone have any suggestions? - is it just brute force or am I missing something? Here are a couple of photos of the key from outside and inside the barrel: http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i126/eskimobob_2006/tailstock1.jpg http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i126/eskimobob_2006/tailstock2.jpg Regards Martin ------- Re: How to remove the barrel key from tailstock Posted by: "Allyn Thompson" athompson4x~xxsatx.rr.com Date: Thu Aug 2, 2007 4:51 pm ((PDT)) Hi Martin, you have a very good problem ahead. There is no easy way but if I had to do it, I would center punch it and drill it out. Do not use a tiny drill as it may wander. You have to drill all the way through it and keep enlarging your drill bit until you can twist it up with a pair of pliers. No use trying to knock it out you will do more damage that way. That is what I would do. You can make a new pin. Until you get it out there is no way to tell if it is tapered or not. AL T ------- Re: How to remove the barrel key from tailstock Posted by: "chinleybrewer" martinx~xxberriman.co.uk Date: Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:06 pm ((PDT)) Following Allyn's advice, I drilled through the pin several times using increasing drill sizes until I had it freed up and was able to remove it. It appears to be 3/8" and I now have a piece of 3/8" silver steel ready to put back in the hole. I am planning on making a T shaped key from a piece of 1/8" gauge plate which I intend fitting from inside the barrel into a hole drilled into the end of the silver steel rod -- that way, if I need to replace it again in future, it should be a matter or extracting the barrel then just replacing the T shaped key. ------- Re: How to remove the barrel key from tailstock Posted by: "John Middleton" beehivex~xxgotadsl.co.uk Date: Tue Sep 4, 2007 2:10 pm ((PDT)) This might be a bit late, but my barrel key was loose (M7 K10834) and it just fell out. I do have the original tailstock - no oil nipple on the barrel so this might be irrelevant to those with newer machines. I drilled the end of the key by about 3/32" and tapped it 4BA then silver soldered a piece of 4BA threaded bar into the hole. I then made up a thumbscrew and fitted that to the 4BA thread and tightened it up - not too tight, finger tight or so. The barrel does not move at all now. This is all preparation to fitting a 4" digital scale to help with some detailed drilling. Cheers John M Clutch slipping Super 7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "Paul Marais" pamaraisx~xxbluebottle.com Date: Fri Aug 3, 2007 4:03 am ((PDT)) Clutch slipping Super 7 Anyone have a clever solution to a slipping clutch. I have variable speed so don't necessarily need the clutch I think? so could presumably lock it in some way. Or do I have to replace the brass clutch? thanks Paul ------- Re: Clutch slipping Super 7 Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Fri Aug 3, 2007 7:41 am ((PDT)) Paul, under the big cover see the brass disc clutch plate. In the center is a hex nut on a slotted screw. Loosen the nut and turn the screw CCW 1/2 turn. The lever handle should have some freeplay now. Lock the nut. If it still slips, diassembly and cleaning the clutch faces is in order. Oil lightly before use. Rich ------- Oil Leak [MyMyford] Posted by: "piedrj" otebgnx~xxcore.com Date: Tue Aug 7, 2007 6:42 am ((PDT)) Hi. This is my first post as I have just joined. I went through all the posts looking for some information on a problem I have had with my Super 7. Mine is from about 1982; it has the power crossfeed on it. I purchased it and a crate of accessories in 1983 from the original owner who decided he did not want it. Ever since I had the lathe it has leaked oil from somewhere around the quick change box. It almost looks like it comes from the back of the QC. After several months of looking I just gave up and caught as much as I could in a tray and added oil now and then to he QC. I recall trying to call Myford on this but got no useful information. I have recently retired and moved to new place with a new shop. As I am setting up my machines and cleaning them up I have decided it is time to figure this oil leak out. Before I start taking things apart I thought I would ask this group for some help. Any and all suggestions welcome, after I figure it out I will post the solution for others. Thanks Bob ------- Re: Oil Leak Posted by: "David Clark" david.anthony.clarkx~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Aug 7, 2007 7:42 am ((PDT)) Hi There. I think they may be a couple of rubber grommets that the fitting screws go through. Maybe they are missing. regards David ------- Re: Oil Leak Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Tue Aug 7, 2007 8:08 am ((PDT)) Bob, Oil is very hard to contain. Perhaps the seal washer is defective under the QCGB drain plug. Is the box overfilled? RichD ------- Re: Oil Leak Posted by: "oegleston" oeglestonx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Aug 7, 2007 5:43 pm ((PDT)) Bob, I too have a slow drip of oil from the same region of my super 7B (made about 1994). From the manual of how to install the quick change gear box, I gather there are some seals around the fastners that go through the box. My assumption as of now is that the leak is likely from one of those seals. My lathe does not appear to have had much use and only one previous owner. The leak is slow, so I am thinking that living with it is easier than taking things apart and trying to get new seals from England and aligning everything again. I'll be interested to hear from others who know more about it than I. Oliver ------- Re: Oil Leak Posted by: "piedrj" otebgnx~xxcore.com Date: Wed Aug 8, 2007 8:58 pm ((PDT)) Thanks to all for the responses. David - the seals sound like they might very well be the issue given where I see the oil. Rich - yes I know how oil seems to find its way out. In addition to model building I like machines and have had about 14 lathes over 30 years. Took them apart, fixed them used them awhile and sold them for the next one. I have three now and no more will be purchased just use them to crank out projects. The only reason I never took the Myford apart was it was brand new, the guy only used it for a week or so and then let it sit for about 8 months before I got it. It still had packing grease on some part of the ways. I just did not want to pull apart a perfectly good running machine other than the oil leak. I did suspect the the seal washer and watched that area, it never showed any oil. Oliver - thanks for the tip on the QC installation manual, I will need to locate that. After the move a lot of stuff is still in boxes. Again, when I get to taking it apart this fall I will let everyone know what I find. Bob ------- Super 7 - fine feed tumbler gear [MyMyford] Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 4:15 am ((PDT)) Hi. Myfords make a special optional extra item for plain ML7 lathes (without gearbox). The purpose is to drive the changewheel geartrain at a slower rate than the standard smallest 20T changeweel allows. A special fine feed rate of 0.0018" per rev results, against the normal minimum of 0.0035". It consists of 2 gears machined from a single piece of steel, the larger gear being 25T which is the same as the last gear of the standard ML7 tumbler cluster which it replaces, and the small gear being 12T (ref Bradley ML7 Lathe Manual p 86). It appears that at one time Myfords made a corresponding item for the Super 7 (in which the larger gear would be 30T, and the smaller 12T). However, they do not list such an item in their price list for the Super 7, only for the ML7. This is odd, given that they still make the Super 7 but stopped production of the ML7 quarter of a century ago. I'm in the process of quitting an ML7 in favour of a Super 7. I've always had the ML7 fine feed item, and found it useful. Can anyone report having successfully purchased the fine feed gear-pair for a Super 7 from Myfords (either England or Australia - I'm in NZ), and if so, how long ago? Thanks in anticipation Andrew ------- Re: Super 7 - fine feed tumbler gear Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:09 am ((PDT)) Andrew, just to confirm, I have the compound gear 12/30 for the S7 and use it from time to time. It halves all feeds and doubles all pitches. Bought mine many years ago. Part No. 1974A/1 RichD, Atlanta ------- Re: Super 7 - fine feed tumbler gear Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:28 pm ((PDT)) Rich, That will save considerable time versus getting the info out of Myford by snail mail -- brilliant, thanks very much indeed. Andrew ------- Re: Super 7 - fine feed tumbler gear Posted by: "piedrj" otebgnx~xxcore.com Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:19 pm ((PDT)) Rich, Help me understand this compound gear. My lathe has a gear now that I flip for feeds vs threading. Does this gear replace that one or fit in the train elsewhere and I still flip the one I have? Based on what you said with this gear my current .002 feed would become a .001 and a 32 thread would become a 64. Do I have that correct? Thanks Bob ------- Re: Super 7 - fine feed tumbler gear Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:47 pm ((PDT)) Bob, The optional fine feed 12/30 gear replaces the normal 24/30 stud gear driven by the reversing tumbler gears. The quadrant bracket is adjusted for correct mesh. All other gears are not bothered. The 19/57 feed/threading gear is used as before. Rich ------- Re: Super 7 - fine feed tumbler gear Posted by: "piedrj" otebgnx~xxcore.com Date: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:59 am ((PDT)) Well I ordered one of these from Blue Ridge this morning, kind of expensive $52 but I have not purchased a "present" for the lathe in a long time. Bob ------- Re: Super 7 - fine feed tumbler gear Posted by: "piedrj" otebgnx~xxcore.com Date: Thu Oct 18, 2007 9:10 pm ((PDT)) Hi. Thought I would let everyone know how things worked out when I ordered the fine feed gear last August. Due to some confusion about part numbers I ended up first with a 12x25T which is not for the Super 7 but for the ML7. After some email back and forth the gear finally arrived this week, fits up just fine. The folks at Myford and Blue Ridge took care of everything just fine. I can see where the confusion comes in. The ML7 gear is number A1974/1. The ML7R and Super 7 is A1974A/1. It appears the wrong gear was in the wrong package or it is easy to miss the second "A" in the order number and pick the wrong package. One thing you should be aware of is that the bore on this fine feed gear is an exact match to the shaft from which you are taking the 24 x 30T gear from. That shaft appears to be hardened and ground. The original gear has a needle bearing pressed into the 30T which runs directly on the shaft and a bronze bushing in 24T area, the 24T is actually separate gear that slides on. Point is the fine feed gear has no bearings, it will be a metal to metal running fit. I can see that it would be impossible to fit the bushing in the 12T area as the diameter of the gear is too small -- no metal at all for a bushing. You also cannot put a needle bearing in the 30T because in doing so there would be no metal left to hold the 12T on the 30T. Point here is you probably would not want this on all the time and you will want to keep it well lubricated. Bob ------- Re: Super 7 - fine feed tumbler gear Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:47 pm ((PDT)) Hi Bob, This gear is used very little. In fact there was a "heated" discussion on another list about the need for this gear. It was turned down as totally unnecessary. I have used mine on occasion. Fie on them! However, looking at the gear you can see that adding a bushing in the small gear bore would not be possible. The root is too small. So, keep it well oiled via the supplied oil nipple in the retaining screw if you are going to use it for many hours in a stretch. RichD ------- Re: Super 7 - fine feed tumbler gear Posted by: "piedrj" otebgnx~xxcore.com Date: Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:50 pm ((PDT)) Hi Rich, Yes I made the same observation about a bushing, no way, just lots of lubricant. I found your info on the heated discussion on the "need" for this gear on another site (another myford site?) hit a pet issue of mine. As most folks who own Myfords are hobby types like me. The issue of "need" is - in my opinion of course -- irrelevant. Like I said in my first email on this I had not purchased a present for the Myford in a long time and it deserved one -- actually it got two I found a nice set of collets, and closer system this month also. Back to "need". In a hobby I do not "need" anything. I "want" something, I do not "need" it. I sure do not need the four lathes, two mills, three drill presses, hydraulic surface grinder, etc. and untold drawers full of chucks, bits, indicators, etc. I sure do not need all that just to build some model engines. Actually on one level I do not need any of it. I just plain want the stuff. So I usually tell folks who see my shop or ask why I need a this or a that -- that it is simple -- it makes me happy and allows me to enjoy life a little more. And I do not like TV or the movies so the shop is where I spend most of the hours that many of my acquaintances spend in front of a TV. It's whatever makes you happy. So much for that, now off to see what that little gear will really do and do those collets really hold something concentric better than my chuck. Bob ------- New here with ML7 [MyMyford] [Changing the ML7 belt] Posted by: "Alan Paterson" alan.paterson5x~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:19 pm ((PDT)) Hi, I recently bought an ML7 which hails from 1952. Everything seems mechanically sound so I'm giving it a coat of paint. One problem I have is that the Headstock belt (a Brammer type) rubs against the metal holding frame when I put it on the biggest pulley wheel, so I've bought a 23 inch belt to replace it. I've been warned about taking the bearing holders apart to fit it and there might be a problem realigning the gears afterwards. Has anyone fitted a headstock belt who can give me a few pointers -- or is there an instruction sheet available? Any help gratefully received. Regards Alan ------- Re: New here with ML7 Posted by: "dr_nicholson" dr_nicholsonx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Aug 22, 2007 2:24 am ((PDT)) Alan, I've got an ML7 too, and did some restoration work on it. I was apprehensive about removing the main shaft too. In the end (based on advice from the forums) I simply unscrewed the bearing caps and carefully lifted them off. Just be careful to keep any shims that are under the caps in the same orientation. When you refit the caps, tighten the bolts gradually, and keep checking that the shaft turns freely. I had no problem doing this. Maybe the complication comes when fitting new bearings? Regards, Garth ------- Re: New here with ML7 Posted by: "Chris Godward" chris.godwardx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:07 pm ((PDT)) I didn't have any problem with mine just keep bearings, caps & shims in the same orientation; tighren the caps down evenly. The caps may need a tap with a soft hammer to locate them down. Regards Chris ------- How to re-align the headstock? [MyMyford] Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:10 am ((PDT)) After a long period I finally got my ML 7 lathe back together. It had been completely stripped to the very last screw. This also included the removal of the headstock which now has to be re-aligned with the bed. Myford says to level the bed first, than make a test bar and correct the horizontal axis of the head stock with the two pressure screws until it has a -.ooo8" ??? taper at approx 8" away from the headstock to ensure it is turning concave. My problem is how do I level the bed in such a way so it becomes the reference for re-aligning the HS? Remember the bed is likely to be worn to some degree so levelling it with a machine level already introduces twist in the bed which will introduce some error. I do not believe I have that much of wear in the shears as there is not any binding if I tighten up the front gib and run it towards the TS. I still might be tempted to do the 'wide guide' conversion suggested by Norman if there is any benefit in that prior to any significant wear. The only 'pristine' section of the bed is underneath the HS. I could make assumptions that the TS end of the bed is not considered to be worn either so I could level against those two surfaces but that would mean I have the take the HS off again which I do not like to do, but... So how do I determine what the error margin is from the bed and what is caused by the HS misallignment if I do not opt to remove the HS?? Am I seeing problems that are not really there?? Kind regards, Piet ------- Re: How to re-align the headstock? Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:38 am ((PDT)) Piet, assume that it was lined up. How do you confirm that it is correct? Machine test parts. Face a disc to see that the cut is indeed very slightly concave. Machine a test bar, held in the chuck, about 6" length protruding to test the alignment. Both tests include the accuracy of the slides as well, but that is how the machine is used. If all is well, it's good. You must use very sharp, properly ground tools to minimize any deflection. RichD ------- Re: How to re-align the headstock? Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:37 am ((PDT)) Rich, thank you for your quick response. I understand what you're saying but I cannot assume that it is lined up right at this moment. If the HS is out of alignment either to the front or the back I will have to introduce more bed twist that neccessarely required if it was 'just' to correct for some bed wear. If been thinking of the following as well: - mount the bed to the bench without any leveling; - turn a test piece 1x8" bar; - mike the results, adjust the HS untill the best results possible are achived; - then adjust the bed to check if results can be bettered. If I've read well thru previous posts, the concave in facing is achieved by a very slight intended facory induced 'misallignment' of the saddle so the top slide always slightly faces toward the HS. Just thinking out loud here could be a load of rubbish. Regards, Piet ------- Re: How to re-align the headstock? Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Thu Aug 23, 2007 11:21 am ((PDT)) Piet, my point was, that you should reassemble the head and do the tests. This will tell what to do. Either way, you will have to machine test parts to confirm it is in fact correct. RichD ------- Re: How to re-align the headstock? Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:44 pm ((PDT)) Piet, It seems to me that what you are (rightly) concerned about is how to separate the issue of headstock alignment from the issue of bed twist. The traditional way of taking the latter out of the equation is to use a precision level, but that confuses a bunch of people because, while 'level' is a sufficient condition for 'flat', it is not a necessary condition. (As in the oft quoted example of a machine tool on board a ship.) It occurs to me that (particularly due to design peculiarities of the Myford) there are other ways to establish headlock alignment which require no special resources. Those peculiarities are the flat bed, and the unused shear. You need to establish which of the rear shears is used for carriage guidance. Prior to about 1972 it was the rear face of the operator side guideway, subsequently the rear face of the far guideway. However for an older pre-owned lathe, it needs to be verified (in case a previous owner has upgraded things), e.g. by trying to insert a feeler gauge blade (max 0.25mm x 12mm for the rear shear) between the vertical face of the saddle and both of the above mentioned shears in turn. Whichever one it slides into is the unused one for guidance, and the one to use for this exercise. If the lathe's really old and worn AND a previous owner has done the mod somewhere near mid-term, you might have a problem finding a useful datum -- a tell tale sign would be if no semicircular machining marks were left on either of the rear shears. I'm sorry if I'm spelling out information universally known or recently traversed on this forum, I'm a newcomer... Once you know which shear is likely to have remained faithful to the builder's original datum for the turning axis, it's a simple matter to check whether the headstock is in line with that axis. For instance (by way of preparation) by chucking about a 250mm long chunk of freemachining steel 25mm diameter (say 20 x 200 min) or other easily turned material, relieving most of the diameter one or two mm, leaving collars each end (OK to use tailstock support at this stage). Now hone up a knife tool to a scarily sharp condition, and remove the tail centre support. By taking very light cuts, turn the collars as near as you can to the exact same diameter, as measured by the best mike you can lay your hands on. Make the collars narrow, similar to the anvil diameter of a mike, and aim for a good finish off the tool (no files or abrasives). Treat each collar as a separate exercise: ie Don't get hung up on whether the cross-slide index stops at the same figure for each collar, because that's influenced by bed twist as well as which way the headstock is pointing. {The object is to produce a low cost precision test bar for our particular lathe, which does not rely on a true chuck or an undamaged Morse taper. The minor inconvenience we pay is that every time it comes out of the chuck we'll need to repeat the last step to return it to precision status. So if you need the lathe for something else in the meantime, take the whole thing off, chuck and all, without disturbing the bar, and put it carefully aside.} Now that we have a deadly accurate physical manifestation of the turning axis, it's a relatively simple matter to check whether it's parallel to the original intention as portrayed by the unused shear. UNLESS, that is, the top of the bed is really badly worn, or the bed is REALLY seriously twisted. We can probably eliminate twist by loosening off the mounting bolts, but you won't need to do this if the bench is the usual lightweight wooden job. To invalidate this test, the top of your bed would have to be worn or twisted into a seriously warped plane. You can check for this with a small surface plate or a piece of plate glass: does it rock on the bed when you alternate light finger pressure on diagonally opposite corners? Unless it's enough to make an audible clonk, it's not enough to matter outside of a toolroom. If it's worn enough to need modifications to the procedure I describe, you'll arguably be wasting time trying to get the headstock dead in line. Set a DTI rigidly up on a plate with a flat underside and couple of pins projecting from it (in the manner of an old fashioned scribing block) to engage with the datum shear as you slide the DTI from one collar to the other (or something functionally equivalent: a big V block would work). Adjust the headstock until the DTI, with the plunger horizontal at centre height, gives the same reading on the two collars. Whew! It's not as hard to do as it is to describe. I'm about to swap a Super 7 headstock onto an ML7 bed, so I'll need to do it -- if I come up with any improvements or simplifications to the procedure, I'll mention them here. ------- Re: How to re-align the headstock? Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Fri Aug 24, 2007 4:33 am ((PDT)) Drookle, I believe I get what you are mentioning. The no.4 (rear) shear is stil in pristine condition. Mine is one of the earlier ML-7 with the 'narrow guide' principle that only uses no. 1 & 2 shears. Nothing has been modified,yet, to either saddle or ways. I think the ways may have been ground or so as the way thickness under the HS measures .001 higher than the rest of the ways. The thickness of the ways falls within a couple of tenths of thou along its entire length. The width of the ways falls within the same. I will try the route that you suggested and will report back. Thanks, Piet ------- Re: How to re-align the headstock? Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:29 am ((PDT)) Drookle, RichD, and all that are interested / challenged on HS alignment after a complete rebuild, there is an interesting thread on PM Headstock Alignment: http://www.practicalmachinist.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/1/8042.html I believe that the combination of two different methods descibed by Winfiled and Toolmaker Jim are the possible key to quantify one over the other. (bed wear vs HS alignment error) I intend to do as follows: 1. Adjust (twist) the bed to minimize the effect of bedwear by placing a precision level on the saddle, run it up and down the bed and adjust it until the smallest error is reached. This will adjust the ways to be as flat as possible given their condition. 2. Mount the face plate onto the spindle and use a DTI to confirm it is flat. 3. Loosen the head stock bolts. 4. Mount a DTI in the toolholder and run it over the face plate and adjust until the error is the smallest achievable including a very slight convex. (what was Myford's criteria for that??? .xxx" over ??") 5. Tighten up the HS bolts. 6. Mount a chuck and cut and measure a test bar as per 'standard' practice and adust bed twist if necessary. Maybe not ideal but I will use it and check the results. If I'm really unhappy I still may have the bed re-ground to get a genuinly good datum but I believe that if I can keep .0005" ??? over 6", plus still being either dead straight or slightly convex along its length, that would make my day just fine. Your comments are highly appreciated Regards, Piet ------- Re: How to re-align the headstock? Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:41 pm ((PDT)) Piet Re your query: what was Myford's criteria for that??? .xxx" over ??" 0.001" in 12" Re your proposed method 1) "Using the DTI to check the faceplate is flat" - surely this requires an external reference perpendicular to the spindle axis, which you won't have until you're done setting the lathe up? For instance, you can't really use the cross-slide movement, because the perpendicularity is what you're about to check, is affected by numerous variables, and in any case it may not even move in a dead straight line. If you are intending to move the base of the DTI about on the faceplate itself, bear in mind that this will not pick up sphericity. Provided there's no significant runout, I'd just use a good straightedge with a strong light behind it to verify flatness. Compare the light intensity through any gaps, with the corresponding situation between the jaws of a good vernier to see if it's enough to worry about. If there is runout, the faceplate is not going to be a helpful aid, whether or not it is flat. If the lathe is worn, you have to import reliable datums somehow, or you will be chasing ephemera. A flat faceplate, a straightedge, a precision level are examples. 2) I personally think it's a shame to overlook the unworn shear, which doesn't have to be imported, and gives a unique snapshot of the original datum. As well as checking the headstock spindle axis against it, you could clamp a precision square to it and run a DTI along the blade to set up your cross-slide. Otherwise it strikes me your method is vulnerable to being hijacked by the cross-slide. You are proposing to set the headstock perpendicular to the cross slide, then, if the spindle turns out to be not parallel to the ways, twist the bed to try and minimise the fallout. This falls into the same trap as "Rollie's Dad's Method", in which it is tacitly assumed the headstock is aligned with the ways. If this is not the case, you end up with two "wrongs" which cannot properly cancel out. If the headstock is not pointing down the bed, twisting the bed is not the way to fix it, you need to swivel the headstock. My recommendation would be to do this (if indeed it needs it; in reality unless someone has interfered with it, it should be OK) before worrying about the cross-slide, provided the top of your bed can be set up reasonably flat to start with. The cross-slide is affected by many factors, such as the carriage, and the fundamental datums should ideally not be moveable feasts... If you set up to the unused shear, you will be in good shape if you follow the future option open of stoning the other shear faces parallel. If you can borrow big micrometers, and use an unworn diamond hone, (perhaps with a jig to hold it square) this is not particularly arduous. Make sure you use repeated applications of sticky adhesive tape to rip the abrasive out of the matrix before you run the carriage back across the parts you've stoned. Just my musings, probably worth roughly as much as it has cost to bring them up on your screen! ------- Re: How to re-align the headstock? Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:45 am ((PDT)) Piet Just to make sure - you do realise that the headstock can be adjusted relative to the bed? As you will have observed, the headstock is a separate item from the bed, and it can get out of line with it through shipping trauma or disassembly. Re-reading your earlier post, it sounds as though you thought you had to twist the bed to correct things if the headstock was out of line. This is a fallacy perpetuated by "Rollie's Dad's Method", which has achieved wide currency through the www. RDM works well if the headstock is already in line with the long axis of the bed. It lets you achieve a compromise, correcting as well as possible for wear on the top of the bed, short of a regrind. Bed wear will usually cause the carriage to spiral anticlockwise, viewed from the chuck, as it approaches the chuck. This is the likely pattern until it gets really close, at which point it may spiral back. A diamond stone can deal with this glitch if your bed has it. However the wear you describe in your earlier post is so minimal I don't think you will need any drastic measures of this type. Your original post suggested you had reason to believe your headstock was misaligned, and if you have a basis for this belief, you should ideally check it directly against the bed, without reference to any impedimenta such as carriage, cross slide or tailstock. ------- Re: How to re-align the headstock? Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:34 am ((PDT)) Drookle, yes I know that the HS can be adjusted. That was my reason for asking for procedures in my original post. The headstock had been removed for a re-paint / build job so now needs proper alignment. Usually, with a unworn bed, the ways would be levelled with a precision level and HS adjustment would be straightforward. Mount a MT-2 testbar in the spindle and put a DTI on the saddle and 'dial' the head in until parallel with the ways. Then turn a test bar and adjust, when required by jacking the bed feet. Since the lathe is worn to some extent I cannot just jack in the ways to be level as I have to assume that the front way is more worn theb the rear one. Even though shear 4 is pristine, I think I cannot use that as a datum for sure as the bed could be in some twist. For the moment I think I proceed as mentioned before and see what results I get. Will come back on that, but not soon as we are going on holidays first. Kind regards, Piet ------- Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there [MyMyford] Posted by: "Alan Paterson" alan.paterson5x~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Aug 26, 2007 6:18 am ((PDT)) While sane people are enjoying the sunshine, I'm having fun getting the countershaft out so that I can slip the new belt over the cone pulley. I've taken the locking thick washer off the right hand end of the countershaft, so it now moves about half an inch to the left. I've also removed the two grub screws in the cone pulley itself. The pulley will now rotate (stiffly) on the shaft but not move either right or left. There can't be a woodruff key inside it as the pulley rotates on the shaft and I can't see a circlip that would stop it from moving. I've given it a few squirts of WD40 but it refuses to budge. I don't want to try forcing it in case I do damage. Anyone had this problem before? Any help or advice gratefully received. Kind regards Alan ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "gerry waclawiak" gerrywacx~xxhotmail.co.uk Date: Sun Aug 26, 2007 6:46 am ((PDT)) Do you know if the shaft is drilled to take the grub screws from the pulley? Tightening a grub screw will raise a slight burr that may be sufficient to prevent the parts from separating easily. Assuming that there is no other way that the pulley is retained (I do not hve a MYford so don't know the details but lock-nuts and grub-screws suggest there is nothing else) you should be able to remove it easily with a puller or a little persuasion from a soft hammer or mallet to avoid damage. Gerry Leeds UK ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "Alan Paterson" alan.paterson5x~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Aug 26, 2007 8:49 am ((PDT)) I've been trying the tap with rubber hammer approach with no luck. The gap is too big for my biggest G clamp to act as a puller. It really feels like it's being held in position by something like a circlip but I can't see one. One of life's little frustrations. Alan ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sun Aug 26, 2007 12:04 pm ((PDT)) After reading the comments on the difficulty of changing the belts I'm curious. Has anyone tried one of the link belts which would eliminate the need to disassemble the headstock? Do they result in a poorer finish or other difficulties? ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "Alan Paterson" alan.paterson5x~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Aug 26, 2007 2:48 pm ((PDT)) It's a Link type belt that's on my ML7 at the moment. When I put the belt on the biggest pulley, the metal pins that hold the belt together rattle off the supporting frame and probably cause a loss of speed due to friction. That's why I want to fit a continuous belt. I didn't expect problems with this part of the change. Alan ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sun Aug 26, 2007 4:33 pm ((PDT)) I meant a belt like the one shown here: http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=1&p=30051&cat=1,240,41067 There are no metal parts to cause noise or wear. I put that kind of belt on my 6x26 knee mill with a great improvement in noise and vibration. ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sun Aug 26, 2007 6:19 pm ((PDT)) I couldn't get Ken's link to show me a picture, but I presume it's along the lines of the photo on this page? http://www.woodcraft.com/family.aspx?FamilyID=20051 Seems counterintuitive that such a gnarly looking item could deliver a smoother drive than the conventional smooth looker, but I've read the same from many respected authorities on small lathes, so it must be cosher. With regard to your question about the countershaft step pulley, when I loosen my grubscrews, it freely moves to the left, but not to the right. It's a long time since I had it off, so I'm not sure if that will be due to a burr but I expect so. Certainly there are no circlips. You might need to remove the entire bracket from the rear of the lathe to get better access, if you haven't already. I wonder if you could face off or grind the end of a grubscrew to a smooth flat, right out to a sharp junction with the periphery, left unchamfered, then reinsert that in one of your tapped holes, run it down flush with the nominal shaft diameter (ie touching the shaft elsewhere than one of the original dimples) and use it as a cutter (like the inverse of a boring bar HSS inserted cutter) to judiciously (by hand) trim off the burr? If you want to get a good grip on the shaft in order to do this, a lathe chuck (sans lathe) might work if you don't have anything nicer than vicegrips, and a length of cord wound round a V groove a few times, tied back to itself, and a shortish bit of dowel or what have you inserted through one loop and wound tight... Long shot, and you'd probably have to resharpen the grubscrew several times, but I guess you're keen to get it off other than by the use of successively larger hammers. ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Mon Aug 27, 2007 12:02 am ((PDT)) Further to my last post, I just talked to a friend who just replaced the belt on his ML7: he had the devil of a job driving the countershaft through the step pulley, had to use a brass drift and a big hammer ... and when he'd finished he found the two bush housings of the bracket were no longer in line (he's a farmer so he wasn't too worried, just put a long bar through each in turn and twisted until the bar pointed at the other bush). The problem turned out to be, as you suspected, large burrs, thrown up in his case by the screw having been loose and the step pulley spinning on the countershaft. Hope this helps ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:16 am ((PDT)) >After reading the comments on the difficulty of changing the belts I'm >curious. Has anyone tried one of the link belts which would eliminate the >need to disassemble the headstock? Do they result in a poorer finish or >other difficulties? Three or four years ago I fitted a link belt supplied by Tony Griffiths http://www.lathes.co.uk/ Well known site, highly recommended. Tell Tony which lathe and which belt and he'll send you the correct length (plus a couple of inches extra in my case). Fitting is just a total non-event, a routine maintenance job. The belt was a bit squeeky for the first few minutes running, but after that there was no difference from the original that I could detect, in either noise or power transmission, and no vibration. I didn't waste time comparing prices to maybe save a few pence, life's too short for that, and anyway Tony sells you the length you need, not by the yard/metre. Totally satisfied, usual disclaimer. Kevin NW England, UK ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "Christopher Hicks" cmh21x~xxcam.ac.uk Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:06 am ((PDT)) I've been strongly recommended them (for the pillar drill, too), but I've not tried yet. I think even Myford recommend them if vibration in the drive train is a problem. Christopher ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - Completed! Posted by: "Alan Paterson" alan.paterson5x~xxntlworld.com Date: Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:09 am ((PDT)) Thanks for the advice guys. I cut a piece of 12mm steel bar to use as a drift and hammered out the countershaft. It was the same problem as the Farmer had. A big burr had been raised by the grub screws in the cone pulley and there's a channel worn there too. This took about 2 hours to knock out. It's now back together again with the new headstock belt fitted and it's running nicely. The only problem is I now have a rather sore left hand from missing the drift with my big hammer a couple of times. It's on such occasions that pressure builds up through watching one's language due to young children being in the vicinity. But it's done now and I hope I won't have to do it again for some time. The lower shaft with the gears and pulley just dropped back in place with no problems. I can now get on with making my lens bracket to hold a cinemascope lens in front of the projector lens. Yippee! Alan ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:48 am ((PDT)) The two pulley set screws sit on two milled flats on the drive shaft. So they should do at least, unless someone has been there before and did not tighten them in the correct spot. That could have raised a burr which may prevent or hamper the removal of the shaft. The flats are reasonably wide to allow proper vertical alignment of the belt / pulley's Regards, Piet ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:53 pm ((PDT)) In the case of my rural friend's WW2 ML7, the grub screws had both come loose over time, allowing them to plough circumferential trenches right around the countershaft, bounded on either side by decent burrs. Unlike the Super 7, the ML7 countershaft is not hardened. ------- Re: Changing the ML7 headstock belt - half way there Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Sun Sep 2, 2007 4:01 am ((PDT)) Drookle, sad to hear that. Must have shot his bushings as well. Will double-check mine on a regular basis. Regards, Piet ------- Super 7 topslide clamping slugs, dogs, pushers.... WARNING [MyMyford] Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sun Sep 2, 2007 8:23 am ((PDT)) The design of the offset pushers acting on the conical dovetail spigot is a sheer delight, functionally and ergonomically, after the frankly mediocre approach adopted on the ML7. As well as being a magnet for swarf, the base flange often gets in the way of the workpiece, and it's a real pain not being able to set the slide to steep or perpendicular angles. I don't know, for instance, how you'd apply the cut with a factory taper turning attachment with an ML7, other than loosening off the nut and tapping the cross-slide. The Super 7 design is sheer brilliance, in the context of a small lathe whose versatility is its defining characteristic, as opposed to ability to hog off chips like suspension springs. However, new Super 7 guardians should note that the hardened steel clamping dogs are NOT interchangeable: the left one should not be fitted in the right hand tunnel, or vice versa. It took me a while to persuade myself in theory that they must be 'handed', for which my excuse is I still haven't got over the shock (and joy) of discovering that if you slice a cone off at any angle, you get an ellipse, just as you do from a cylinder. To me it's one of the most surprising results in all of mathemagics, that something as lopsided as a cone could give rise to a symmetrical sectional profile. Getting back to the topic: To find out which pusher belongs on which side, take them and the topslide out. Offer one pusher up in the approximate relativity suggested by the tip shape, hold it up to the light and see if you can manipulate it to a decent conformity. Then swap the same pusher to the other side of the topslide base and try again. It will be obvious which is correct, and as a double check, the machining 'lay' on the conically cut section of the pusher should lie horizontally. I bring this up because my pushers had been put in the wrong way round under previous ownership, which had chewed the dovetail up. Fitting them to the wrong hand means they bear only on the tip and the heel, and the cast iron spigot doesn't put up much of a fight. The resulting damage makes the slide hard to set to a precise angle, because tightening the pushers can cause a slight rotation of the compound. I can now report a couple of wee ruses to help with setting this job up to remachine it, if anyone else strikes the same problem. ------- Long slide [MyMyford] Posted by: "slangbela" csjohnsonx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Sep 8, 2007 5:28 am ((PDT)) I have just bought a long slide for my ML7. It came with 10 gib grub screws in the side, three of which have cylindrical ends, the other six have rounded ends. I understand that the rounded ends fit into the rounded dimples in the gib strip. There are only four dimples in the gib strip all rounded, and all towards the front of the slide. No dimples in the last four inches. Can anyone tell me what the cylindrical ended screws are for and should I drill dimples for the rest of the screws? Colin ------- Long slide Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Sun Sep 9, 2007 5:40 am ((PDT)) Greetings, Colin, As far as I am aware it doesn't matter a hoot about the other screws being fitted with dimples or not. All that the dimples are for is to keep the gib in place from shooting out whilst adjusting the slide on re-assembly. Once the play has been taken up on the dimpled bits, you then progres- sively take up the fine adjusment-- with the feed screw removed. You will be pushing the whole gubbins in and out. With the shorter slide there is less tendency to have to go to these lengths. Comment, you should have the George Thomas Book and should have the 2BA locks on the saddle slide and the top slide. This effectively pins the gibs with 1/8th pins anyway. As you will be aware the Super 7 has a different gib and this is in 2 halves anyway. I'm still on 2268654 if you get stuck or whatever. Just getting older. Cheers Norman ------- Re: Long slide Posted by: "C.S.Johnson" csjohnsonx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Sep 9, 2007 4:27 pm ((PDT)) Thanks Norman, Yes I have G T's book and have fitted a lock on my old slide, including the dowel pin to stop any movement. I was curious why some of the pins supplied had cylindrical ends and other rounded ends. Colin ------- Long slide Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:31 am ((PDT)) Hi Colin, As you have George Thomas's Model Engineers Workshop manual, it is worth having a look at Top-slide locks again. Suffice to mention that my two myfords are hardly good examples of round, pointed and whatever screws. I simply got on with what came. Err, including the sawdust in the empty gear box! Norman ------- S7 bed wear [MyMyford] Posted by: "tetramachine" Tetrawheelsx~xxhotmail.com Date: Sat Sep 8, 2007 5:49 pm ((PDT)) I've begun disassembly of an S7 given to my by a friend. The bed has serious wear, like .012". Since I have a BP my idea is to set the bed on the BP and mill the bed edges with an endmill, and a final cut with a stone, for finish. the bed is 25" long and the BP cuts 22, so a second setup would be needed, not my perferred setup but doable. Anyone else done a bed this way? Sure wish my buddy or his dad used oil every now and then, over the last 50 years. ------- Re: S7 bed wear Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sat Sep 8, 2007 7:18 pm ((PDT)) I just wrote a l-o-n-g post on a couple of ways around this, and then lost it due to a computer glitch Briefly, you could flycut the top in one setup, and possibly machine the sides only (again, in one setup) for the long carriage ways. The headstock edges of course don't wear. (Top neither, but it's not worth the grief of having the top of the ways at a different level to the top of the bed under the headstock.) Different edges not such a drama, it seems to me. Or make up a repositionable 'sled' (which could be used subsequently as a sub-base to greatly stiffen up the bed) I'm doing the latter for an S7 literally as I write. Come back to me if you'd be interested in further musings on either of these options, or both... ------- Re: S7 bed wear Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Sun Sep 9, 2007 12:08 am ((PDT)) I suspect that I have given the answer before a couple of times but I did write it up in Model Engineers Workshop earlier. The old vertical grinders such as the Lumsden will perform something called 'Blancharding' which means sticking a lathe bed on a gigantic electromagnet and grinding the feet and then carefully skinmming the top surface of the bed to remove what is usually only a small few thous. Having said all that, you don't get the shears done but the price of perhaps £35 or $50 US means that a tremendous amount of work can got so that edges and whatever can be scraped to the new bed. as a reference. I have done this three times- once for an old S7, once for a friend and once for a ML7. ------- Knocking sound [MyMyford] Posted by: "p_ioannidis" pioannidisx~xxtpg.com.au Date: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:13 pm ((PDT)) Hi to all, I have done a search on this and come up blank. I have just steped into the world of Myford with the purchase of a very early model ML7 at a cost of Au$1850.00 but the fact that it had been previously mistreated was well disguised with lots of grease in all the right places. The first things that went were the countershaft & bushes; upon checking to see where the extra vibrations are coming from I found that the motor was also shot! $1000.00 later I have a new counter shaft & bushes, and converted the motor to a 1/2Hp 3Ph with a Phase inverter & speed controller; also took the opportunity to increase the speeds attainable as high as mid 2000 rpm via new pulley sizes. I have also picked up a proximity sensor and led counter to measure R.P.M. at the spindle end (not yet connected). Having replaced all of the above + new belts as carefully as possible, I am getting a knocking sound from the head stock with no visible signs of contact or damage to any moving parts. Would anyone have any clues as to what I may have broken or forgotten to do? Thanks in advance, Peter ------- Re: Knocking sound Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:48 pm ((PDT)) Peter, I have an S7, but on the off chance that your "knocking sound" comes from the same source, look to see if the bull gear lever/pin is bumping the head casting as it goes round. I had to file a good bit off the lever to clear. RichD ------- Re: Knocking sound Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:52 pm ((PDT)) If you look at the picture at http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe/backgear.html The pulley cluster (3) is loose on the shaft and is fixed to it in direct drive mode by moving the lock (1) down into the teeth. If that lock is not firmly down, it will rattle a bit during cuts. On my lathe, that whole cluster will move from side to side about 2 mm, producing the occasional clunk. Since I cannot get the gear off the end of the spindle, I cannot fit a spacer to fix this so just live with it. I used to have a clunk coming from the lay shaft because the pulley cluster there was loose. Tightening the set screw that is down in the groove of one of the pulleys fixed that. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Knocking sound Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Wed Sep 12, 2007 1:28 am ((PDT)) On 12 Sep 2007, p_ioannidis murmured decisively: > Thanks David, > You hit the nail on the head. > But man put the pulley on & man can get the pulley off. > Question is, "how"? > I beleve that I am limited only by my tools, (don't remember where > that quote is from) but I like it. > Is your pulley jammed and will not come off? Or are they just not > removable full stop. I know how, I just cannot get the set screw out. This is the setscrew that holds the gear on the left end of the spindle. The slot is toast. So, one day when it is absolutely vital, I'll attempt it again, like when I need to adjust the end float... David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Knocking sound Posted by: "p_ioannidis" pioannidisx~xxtpg.com.au Date: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:01 am ((PDT)) Thanks Rich, No sign of scraping anyware, I decided to take out the spindle for a better look. It turns out that there is a wobble in the vee cone pulley assembly unnoticeable with the spindle mounted. Further tests: With the belt in position 1 high speed the noise is obvious! With the belt in position 2 med speed the noise is less, With the belt in position 3 low speed the noise is gone (totally taken up by the pulley). So this brings me to a new question. Is there a fix for this loose or sloppy pulley? Thanks again, Peter ------- Myford badge [MyMyford] Posted by: "p_ioannidis" pioannidisx~xxtpg.com.au Date: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:28 am ((PDT)) I was just browsing through the photos and came across Photo 9 by Thomas Staubo. Nice work on the badge! I only wished my ML7 looked half as good as yours. Does anyone know are the badges screen printed, painted on or of the stick-on variety? As I am looking at eventualy restoring my mistreated baby to its former beauty with exeption of some superior modifications. It would be great to be able to buy the decal and just stick it on. ------- Re: Myford badge Posted by: "metal2micky" metal2mickyx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 12, 2007 5:10 am ((PDT)) The original transfers are still available from Myford at a current cost of £5.17 inc. VAT. :-) ------- cross-slide backlash etc [MyMyford] Posted by: "chardinej" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Thu Sep 13, 2007 7:36 pm ((PDT)) I have taken possession of a Super 7 so am in rapid learning mode. So far the only obvious things that I might like to fix are: 1. The apron handwheel is pretty sloppy and I think the bushing holding it in is worn. Is this a tricky job to replace? 2. There is some backlash in the cross-slide -- not much but it's there. I've adjusted the gibs on the cross-slide but there doesn't appear to be a way of adjusting out the backlash. Am I missing something? Thanks in advance John ------- Re: cross-slide backlash etc Posted by: "p_ioannidis" pioannidisx~xxtpg.com.au Date: Thu Sep 13, 2007 7:55 pm ((PDT)) Hi John, I don't know how far you would go to achieve perfection? But there is a site offering free plans for a modification. It is offered by "Arc Euro Trade Ltd". It is called "Myford ML7 Cross Slide Leadscrew Thrust Bearing Modifi- cation". I do not recall the address, I had Googled "ML7 thrust bearings" and stumbled on to it about a week ago. If you have trouble finding it, I can email you a word .doc & a .pdf on the mod. Peter ------- Re: cross-slide backlash etc Posted by: "p_ioannidis" pioannidisx~xxtpg.com.au Date: Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:12 pm ((PDT)) To save you some trouble, here's the link. The shop = http://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/default.aspx The mod page = http://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/projects/MYF001/index.html good luck. Peter ------- Re: cross-slide backlash etc Posted by: "Steve Pudney" stevepudneyx~xxaol.com Date: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:42 pm ((PDT)) Contact Myford, they have all the replacement parts you need to bring it all back to i's former glory. I called them and spoke to the man in the parts Dept who was very helpful, I used one of their cross slide nuts/leadscrews to restore my Pools Major cross slide. Good Luck Steve ------- Re: cross-slide backlash etc Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Fri Sep 14, 2007 1:41 am ((PDT)) Not quite as easy as all that! It is not a question of going to the shop with a roll of notes and heigh ho! Myfords are not alone in having slides which are sloppy but Myfords have nuts which are made of zinc alloy, which wears rapidly. Numerous suggestions have appeared over the years but the majority of owners simply put up with the problem. In the past, there have been things like locks, which was part of the correspondence between Colin Johnson (Slangbela) and myself. In the George Thomas Model Engineers Workshop Manual there are details but GHT addressed various other stops and went on to describe making a nut to fir his retracting top slide. You can, however, be brave or foolish and nip up the wear in your own nuts. I could, perhaps, re-phrase this! Norm ------- Re: cross-slide backlash etc Posted by: "gerry waclawiak" gerrywacx~xxhotmail.co.uk Date: Fri Sep 14, 2007 3:13 am ((PDT)) Arc Euro site is www.arceurotrade.co.uk Good company to deal with (satisfied customer). A big part of their business is bearing supply (I think they started that way and moved into tool supply etc) so they can provide the bearings. Gerry Leeds UK ------- Re: cross-slide backlash etc Posted by: "Thomas Staubo" thstaubox~xxonline.no Date: Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:04 am ((PDT)) You didn't say if you have tried to adjust the backlash at the outer end, where the feedscrew is mounted to the cross slide bracket/end plate. This is easy to adjust. But it will always be a bit of backlash between feed screw and feed nut, this is what some of the other replies here tried to answer. As STANDARD, it is not possible to adjust this feed nut. Thomas ------- Re: cross-slide backlash etc Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:59 pm ((PDT)) There are (as Thomas indicates) two sources of rotary free rotation in the feedscrew handle of a Super 7, assuming all nut and bracket mounting screws are tightened firmly. The gibs are a different issue and play no direct part. These sources are: 1) End play between the bracket which holds the feed screw to the cross slide and the two collars on the feed screw (Outer fixed, inner adjustable -- by loosening a grub screw and rotating the collar on its fine thread). 2) Endwise clearance between the flanks of the male and female acme threadforms. In the former case, almost all clearance can be removed by adjustment, but this may expose other issues: if the handle rotation becomes tight over part of the rotation, you may have to straighten the feedscrew (if the tightness is only apparent when the feedscrew is engaged); or skim the faces of the fixed and adjustable collar and/or the faces of the bracket mentioned in 1) so they are all parallel and perpendicular to the axis. Use a DTI to detect the collar faces out of square, and marking blue for the bracket faces. In my case, to get the motion smooth on a recently acquired Super 7, I had to remachine the mounting face of that bracket (where it attaches to the cross slide), which for some reason was not square to the feedscrew axis, and while I had it set up I took the opportunity to remachine both the bracket thrust faces and the collars on the feedscrew to allow for fitting a pair of needle thrust races of the same size as recommended by G H Thomas. The benefit of needle roller or ball thrust bearings is that they can be set up with a slight negative clearance, or preload, enabling the balls or rollers to penetrate through the oil film which is always present between plain collars. The absence of this cushioning film makes the positioning a little more crisp. Frankly it's a very subtle improvement; I wouldn't bother doing it unless there was another reason to machine the parts (such as wear on the collars, or the problem I had to rectify), or if the lathe was heavily used and likely to wear out the plain thrust collars. The second source of 'backlash' is not helped by adjustment or fitting thrust bearings. It will be the sum of two different wear amounts: wear of the screw, and wear of the nut. The former wears quite quickly on the Myford, because it is small and unhardened. The problem with feedscrew wear is that it is never even along the entire length, which means it can never be fully compensated, unless a fancy nut is built with a compliant element which takes up different amounts of play at different positions. The nut of a Myford also wears quickly, because as another post mentioned it is a soft diecast alloy. This does permit of a bodgy but effective 'fix' for flank wear: clamp it in a machine vice (one with smooth and strictly parallel jaws) and squash it endwise. Check and repeat. If you overdo it a little, provided you can get the screw started, you should be able to save the day because it will reform to suit and come free again with a bit of working, but use a thin lubricant of high lubricity (ie not CRC or WD40, more like Inox) and be careful not to bend the feedscrew which has a scrawny little neck. If it was really worn, this procedure will squash it into a barrel which no longer fits the hole in the apron, but it's no problem to skim it back to a cylinder. Having done this, you'll still have the problem of screw wear, so the backlash will only be eliminated at the unworn parts of the screw. I put some thought into how to eliminate backlash from my Super 7, including asking a mate with a commercial thread grinder if he could take a whisker off the flanks until they cleaned up all along, and I was going to modify a bronze nut I already had to make it adjustable. Two things stopped me: firstly he decided the screw was too spindly for success, and secondly I independently decided that it would be wasted effort, firstly because the screw would immediately start wearing unevenly again, and secondly I convinced myself (by experimental squashing of a spare, worn nut as above) that if there is ANY backlash, even 0.0005", you're better off having 0.005". I say this because tiny amounts of backlash cannot intentionally be 'taken up' by the operator at a known, crisply defined dial reading. You need to have a bit of a run up to be able to feel the clonk when all the clearances take up. As it happened, after all my other work, I have ended up with 0.005" all the way along, which is mystifying, given that the screw is unevenly worn. Part of me is keen to get the bottom of how this can be, but the machine tool is a means to an end, and the result is exactly suited to the way I work, so I've had to discipline myself and leave well enough alone. The mania for backlash elimination is largely cross-pollination from milling machines, where it can make or break a job. In a lathe, unless you have lots of top rake and slack gibs, this is not the case. The apron handwheel is held in a couple of oilite bushes. They are easy enough to replace; you don't need to pay Myford prices because people who sell ball and roller bearings can usually source these more economically, they will only need ID x OD x length info. You may need to use a pin punch with the end ground at a bit of an angle to chase in oil grooves in the bush bore -- I can't recall if they are standard, but if you plan to keep the lathe for a while it is a good idea, along with a hole or holes to get the oil to the bore of the bush (these bushes do seem to wear). Hope this helps, sorry to be long winded and probably tell you obvious stuff but there are quite a few factors, and someone may benefit someday from some of this info (thanks, Google). ------- Re: cross-slide backlash etc Posted by: "John Chardine" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:17 am ((PDT)) Many thanks for all the very helpful replies on this topic. John Chardine Sackville, New Brunswick Canada ------- Re: Parts Needed [MyMyford] Posted by: "Fred Roberts" fencingwirex~xxactiv8.net.au Date: Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:13 am ((PDT)) September 19, 2007 tetramachine wrote: > While going through my recently acquired S-7, the bull gear and compound backgears were found to be missing some teeth. Lathe Spares has provided parts in the past but not today. Myford list the needed parts along with prices, a bit above what I would like to pay. Anyone here have these parts and an interest in selling them? < Any reason why you don't repair it? http://home.iprimus.com.au/stevor/gearrepairs.htm Cheers Fred l or grease as a sealed unit. ------- Lead screw protection [MyMyford] Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Sep 24, 2007 9:37 am ((PDT)) I am overhauling my ML7 at the moment and would like to provide some protection against swarf for the leadscrew. It occurred to me that a rubber bellows type of cover might do the job. Has anybody tried this, and is there a suitable oil-proof bellows available? Cliff ------- Re: Lead screw protection Posted by: "gerry waclawiak" gerrywacx~xxhotmail.co.uk Date: Mon Sep 24, 2007 9:52 am ((PDT)) I have seen these featured on a machine at a show but can't remember any details. It is certainly feasible as the steering racks on many cars have expanding rubber gaiters fitted to accomodate the movement and these are filled with oi Gerry Leeds UK ------- Re: Lead screw protection Posted by: "Keith Higgins" keithhigginsx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Tue Sep 25, 2007 1:56 am ((PDT)) I have been using a length of cycle inner tube, not expanding I know but cheap and it does the job. Keith ------- Re: Lead screw protection Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:19 pm ((PDT)) Could be hard to find bellows with enough expansion range. If you don't have a screwcutting gearbox, you might get lucky and find one which will do the job. Another approach is the 'clock spring' -- check the lathes.co.uk website for the Myford 254 photos. Having no SC gearbox on my Myford (on which I'm in Martin Cleeves camp: I find them restrictive, particularly for alternating between imperial and metric). I made up a telescopic shroud out of aluminium tubes and had it anodised. However this was on a Super 7, which gives you a bit of a head start for any shroud system. If you'd like to pursue this option I could post some photos, given a bit of time. I think some sort of shroud is highly desirable for the leadscrew. Extending that thinking to the entire lathe, I'm currently puzzling out something to protect the ways, which I have just lovingly machined back to pristine flatness. In both cases, I think the benefits are as much about easy cleaning as they are about protection, and in this respect I think the rubber bellows option would not be my first choice. Against my better judgement, I'm currently spending hours grinding, sanding and filling my bed casting, kidding myself a smooth hard finish will mean I can just wipe it down. It's hard to strike a balance between looking after your tools and spending more time on pampering and indulging them (and me) than in using them. I navigate the balancing act by alternating between applying too little and too much TLC! ------- Re: Lead screw protection Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:19 am ((PDT)) Expansion range of bellows is a problem that occurred to me also. I might try the clock spring idea. It won't be perfect protection, but better than the nothing I have at the moment. (As a horologist I always have lots of old springs in the workshop.) The best idea though is your telescopic tube device. I would welcome photos (on or off list) and details of any particular points to be aware of in construction. Cliff ------- Re: Lead screw protection Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:17 am ((PDT)) Cliff, I would have thought the clock spring idea would work really well if the spring was long enough, and hence sufficient overlap ratio remained at full stretch? If I was a horologist, I would have done it that way... However, writing up the telescopic option is on my to-do list. (The lathe's in tiny bits at present.) What I'll probably do is post it on another forum which integrates graphics with text -- makes it easier to explain. I'll let you know on this forum when it's up. ------- loose apron handwheel [MyMyford] Posted by: "chardinej" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Tue Sep 25, 2007 5:01 pm ((PDT)) My Super 7 apron handwheel has a lot of side to side play and I assume the oilite bushing supporting it is worn. The machine is 1962 vintage so it's no wonder. I've ordered a bushing from Myford (ref. LA41). Can anyone advise on the best way to install the bushing. I assume it will involve removal of the apron itself but a quick look under the handwheel and a feel behind the apron does not reveal either end of the bushing so I'm wondering how it is removed. Thanks for any help in advance. John ------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "tetramachine" Tetrawheelsx~xxhotmail.com Date: Tue Sep 25, 2007 6:33 pm ((PDT)) The carriage needs to be removed to access the apron gearbox. Not difficult, a good time to clean the crud in the oil channels. ------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:12 am ((PDT)) John, the oilite bushings are press-fit. If read on some earlier post that you require them to 'ream to fit'. Not sure about that though, but it could be true as the shaft will wear as well. I had the same issue on mine ('50's vintage). The play on mine was not too bad so I've cheated by adding a fibre washer at the front of the apron, in addition to the one which is mounted on the apron shaft between the gear and the apron housing. Key is to mount the handwheel using slight (finger) pressure to make sure that both the gear and the handwheel contact the fibre washer. You will have to do this prior to mounting the apron back onto the lathe. My play completely disappeared and operation is real smooth. I know.... it is cheating a bit but I want to make chips somewhere soon. Regards, Piet ------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:16 am ((PDT)) John, just forgot to mention something. I thought the ML-7 of you vintage had the 'new' style apron without bushings. The manual shows two apron styles in relation to the serial numbers where they switched from one to the other. Just thought I would mention it. regards, Piet ------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "chardinej" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:31 am ((PDT)) I wonder if this applies to the Super 7 which is what I have? My s/n is around SK15000 (1962-ish). The only "manual" I have for the lathe is the Notes on Operation, installation, etc. with a No S.723W at the top right corner of the cover. The drawing only shows an oilite bushing version. John ------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "chardinej" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:27 am ((PDT)) I'll answer my own question. First I made a mistake with the s/n- mine is SK57375 which is from 1962. I removed the apron and found that mine has no bushing around the shaft of the apron handwheel. The wheel shaft simply runs in a hole in the cast iron apron. I removed the shaft and noticed that it is quite worn where it rubs against the cast iron bearing surface of the apron so I will replace. I'll also check wear in the receiving hole in the apron as well. John ------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "tetramachine" Tetrawheelsx~xxhotmail.com Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:00 pm ((PDT)) Mine is 1959 and has no bushing, I'm about to mount the apron on the BP and bore it to take a bushing. My 1944 SB16 surely did more work in its life than this S7 but has less wear. It's surprising the amount of wear overall on this machine. I'd posted about milling the bed of the S7, I have finished and am pleased with the result. The Bedways had over .008 taper which made the lathe almost useless to me. I milled them parallel then took off .0005 with a carbide trimmer, left an almost ground finish. Now to replace the back- gears, motor and add some paint. ------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:27 pm ((PDT)) What do you mean when you say "carbide trimmer"? ------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "tetramachine" Tetrawheelsx~xxhotmail.com Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:03 pm ((PDT)) This is a tool that looks like a burr, with ground flutes, about 15 rows on a 1/4 dia bit. Very little DOC. [Depth Of Cut] ------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "Allyn Thompson" athompson4x~xxsatx.rr.com Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:56 pm ((PDT)) I hope you realize that if you take off from the bed ways you must ADD that amount to the tailstock or you will have a taper on everything you turn. AL T -------- Re: loose apron handwheel Posted by: "tetramachine" Tetrawheelsx~xxhotmail.com Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:25 pm ((PDT)) I did not mill the surface of the bed, I milled the edges of the bedway. ------- Advice Needed re ML7 Clutch, etc. [MyMyford] Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:02 am ((PDT)) Hi. A few questions, don't know if I should post them separately or not so here goes. 1. Is it possible to repair an ML7 clutch that's seized solid probably through being not used for ages? 2. Can you replace the cast dials on the cross slide and topslide with the engraved ones as found on Super 7's? If so, is there anyone who supplies them? 3. How do you find out if a motor is reversible or not (240V single phase variety)? 4. What is the best system of collets to use on an ML7? I have been searching through Ebay etc. and am more confused than when I started. I primarily would use imperial collets as that is the size of bar available. Or would a 6 jaw self-centering chuck be nearly as good? Regards Keith New (Prospective Myford buyer) ------- Re: Advice Needed re ML7 Clutch, etc. Posted by: "Pat Martindale" patx~xxcrayke.demon.co.uk Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:40 am ((PDT)) >1. Is it possible to repair an ML7 clutch that's siezed solid > probably through being not used for ages? Sadly no one can answer that but yourself.. I'm not trying to be negative here but only you can answer if you have the tools/equipment/ability to take it apart, carry out repairs and reassemble it? If you can get it apart it would probably be fixable -- most things are.. >2. Can you replace the cast dials Yes. Myford supplies them. >3. How do you find out if a motor is reversible or not (240V single > phase variety)? You need to check in the connection box to see if both the start windings and the running windings are accessible. The motor would be reversed by switching over the feed to the start windings. >4. What is the best system of collets to use on an ML7? Depends on the quality of the 6-jaw chuck... and the quality of the collets..:-) Others will be better placed to answer "which system is best" -- I suspect that it is largely a matter of choice based around what you wish to do with your lathe. A decent 3-jaw Burnerd "Griptru" chuck can be set to around a ten-thousandth run-out given time and patience but the chucks are tremendously expensive. Before spending that sort of money I would question your need for it... same applies to collets.. Do you need that sort of accuracy in initial set-up? Hope this helps... Regards, Pat Martindale ------- Re: Advice Needed re ML7 Clutch, etc. Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:10 pm ((PDT)) The rationale for six jaw chucks is not increased accuracy, but mainly to minimise distortion of thin-walled workpieces. They also provide improved grip of solid or thick walled workpieces, provided the workpiece is uniformly round and parallel. Four jaw self centering chucks are an excellent compromise on all counts, and if you do a lot of square bar work, they save setup time. People shun them because they perceive they would not work for hex bar. In practice they grip hex bar as truly as and more firmly than a three jaw chuck. IF you want the ability to grip work more truly than a self centering chuck will permit, consider making up a backplate with an undersized spigot and drill and tap the chuck for three grubscrews bearing on the periphery. Poor man's Griptru, works nearly as well, not quite as convenient. You'll need to make sure you can access the main capscrews holding the backplate to the chuck as these have to be slightly loosened to adjust the workpiece true. To answer the collet question a lot more info (as well as accuracy, as raised by Pat) is needed about what sort of work you want to do, what maximum sizes, what raw materials you're starting from, and on and on. ------- Re: Advice Needed re ML7 Clutch, etc. Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:40 pm ((PDT)) [Seized clutch] probably just rusty. Open it up, get the rust off, reassemble. > 2. Can you replace the cast dials You can replace them. don't know of a supplier, but you can make them (if you have a lathe, you can make just about anything!). George Thomas describes making zero adjustabel ones in one of his many books. There were also similar articles in Model Engineer. > 3. How do you find out if a motor is reversible or not (240V single > phase variety)? If you can access both ends of the starting winding, you can reverse it. this is because the start direction is determined by the starting winding, he run windings can run it in either direction. > 4. What is the best system of collets to use on an ML7? ER25 or ER32 in a screw on holder. one supplier: http://www.chronos.ltd.uk/acatalog/Chronos_Catalogue_Collet_Hol ders_for_ER_Collets_132.html David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Advice Needed re ML7 Clutch, etc. Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:50 pm ((PDT)) Thanks for replying so quickly, chaps. I'll tell you where I am now and where I am going with this. For 20 years or so I have been the proud possessor of a Clockmaker's lathe of completely unknown vintage which is solid, reliable and can be used with the s/c 3 jaw or 4 jaw independent chucks in either the headstock or tailstock, or I can use collets instead. It only has about 2 1/2" swing over the 12" long bed, though so it can't handle anything but smallish stuff -- up to about 1 1/2" dia by 3-4" long brass bar. It baulks at the initial turning of 'O' gauge cast iron driving wheels for instance -- getting through the outer layer was interesting! It has no screwcutting facilities either. Where the collets came into their own was when I had mounted the semi- turned wheels onto 1/2 axles and were trueing them up as I could mount the 3/16" dia. 1/2 axle directly into the collet. Once I have used that method, I want to be able to do so again when (if) I get a Myford instead (no room for both). The 4 jaw self-centering chuck sounds a good idea as I use square bar for axleboxes and it is a long job setting up accurately in the independent 4 jaw. So I'm looking for a ML10 ML7 or super 7 with a clutch as my present lathe has one and I would so miss being able to stop and start the "new" lathe the same way. I have seen an ML7 advertised with a seized clutch as one of its 'features'. As retirement is getting within sight, I decided that a larger lathe was in order in order to perhaps widen my modelling horizons into a bit of model engineering as well. So any advice is very welcome! Regards Keith New ------- Re: Advice Needed re ML7 Clutch, etc. Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 1:28 am ((PDT)) Collets are a fairly pricey luxury item, if you want a range of sizes. If you go for cheap Asian items, you surrender some of the benefits, some are OK, but it's a pig in a poke. Others may have local knowledge of what's good and what's not on the UK scene. If you only need a few, there could be merit in going to Myford and buying their 2MT patent collets. While these are pricey at about 26 pounds each, you don't need a holder, just the collet nose piece Part # 1438 which is a relatively modest 20 pounds (you don't need the closing tube #1439: you should be able to roll the collets in and out with a sort of tilted orbital motion, failing which, turn something up from a bit of pipe. To see what the tool looks like, check out p61 of 'The Amateur's Lathe' by Ian Bradley. The current price list is at http://myford.com/pricelist/General%20Accessories/Section%204%20-% 20Collets.pdf The advantages of these patent collets, which fit directly into the Morse taper bore of the spindle, (which explains their requiring no holder, just a special nut), are: 1) virtually zero overhang from the spindle end, for rigidity; 2) accuracy (fewer interfaces, less overhang); 3) no limit on length of barstock (most other collet holders use a drawbolt). Frankly, having spent a big chunk of my limited means on machine tools and tooling, I've never felt collets would represent worthwhile value, even though I sometimes work to + or - 0.005 mm, sometimes for hire and reward. If I suddenly develop a severe case of collet envy, I'll probably buy the nose piece and one solitary Myford collet, then make my own copies. Soft ones are not too hard to make, hard ones really need to be ground, at least on the inside diameter, after hardening. For the amount I'd use them, I'd take the soft option. In practice, I expect I'll carry on doing do what modelmakers used to do before disposable income was invented. Chucking a piece of 1" free cutting MS round bar in the SC chuck (turn the OD first unless it's dead round) and drill and bore or ream a true running hole a close fit on the axles (or what have you) in question. Make a centre pop mark just in front of and central to the contact patch of #1 jaw. Chamfer the ends of the hole. Having removed from the chuck, use a hacksaw or junior hacksaw to make a single radial cut, all the way through from the OD to the ID opposite the #1 jaw. Debur the inner edges with a small triangular file. At any future date (unless the chuck has been abused meanwhile) when you put the split bush back in the same chuck in the same axial and rotational position, the hole will run plenty true enough for the finest O gauge loco. The grip of the chuck will be transferred to the workpiece, closing the slot infinitesimally. For really fussy work (eg gauges and other measuring equipment), or for a slightly larger grip range, the bush can be made more sophisticated, with multiple interwoven slots and possibly waisted OD, to more closely resemble, and perform more like, a real collet. The other relatively affordable option, if you're doing fussy, repetitious work in a variety of small sizes, is to purchase a small 3 jaw chuck (of East European origin, or better) new or as-new, and keep it pristine for fussy work. Either make an adjustable backplate as mentioned in a previous post, or hold the body of the small 3 jaw chuck in your 4 jaw independent chuck with the jaws inside out, and clock up the first item of each run to the desired degree of accuracy. What these workarounds capitalise on is the fact that a self centering chuck in reasonable nick has much better repeatability than accuracy, in other words any workpiece of a given diameter will be chucked in the same position within very close limits, although that position may vary from: a) the nominal central axis of the chuck, and b) the position of workpieces of other diameters. On big lathes where the 4 jaw requires a substantial crane to lift it, operators often leave it up all the time and simply pop the 3 jaw chuck into it as required. I've never owned an ML7 with a clutch, let alone a seized one, so I'll leave that to others. ------- Re: Advice Needed re ML7 Clutch, etc. Posted by: "p_ioannidis" pioannidisx~xxtpg.com.au Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 1:37 am ((PDT)) Re: Screw on chuck, The theads can be hit or miss in the acuracy department. Chronos sent me an er25 collet chuck all the way to Australia and I wish I could jump in my car, drive over there and hurl it through their window. They told me they are locally made? In China maybe! On the the other hand if there is no need to use long lengths of bar stock I would recomend a collet chuck with a 2M taper to be far more superior. And they have an agent in Holland, selling on ebay with exellent quality, (the goods are made in Taiwan). The following: 1x ER 25 2M taper collet chuck & nut, 15x metric / imperial collets, 1x spaner cost me only $165.00AU delivered to my door in 15 days. Plans for the screw on chuck are simple too, I will have to screw it on, set up my home made tool post grinder and regrind the collet seat. Hopefully this will the out of the box runout of +/- 0.10mm to +/- 0.03mm. ------- Re: Advice Needed re ML7 Clutch, etc. Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Mon Oct 8, 2007 1:28 am ((PDT)) [Seized clutch] Depends on what the cause is. Can you still move the Clutch Handle, and if so, does it move the brake lever? I had mine apart not so long ago and there are not too many parts that can actually seize up. Unless someone literally screwed too much with the adjusting screw, nothing can go wrong. If the brake pads are worn too far, the cam may not return to its release position, meaning that even with the lever in release position the pads stay engaged. If you can't move the shaft you have to determine wether is is mechanical or not. Some if these machines are covered in gunk both externally and internally, causing all sorts of problems. Depending on th state of the rest of the machine and the accessories and tools that come with it. If the price is reasonable, I would not blink an eye before buying a clutched Myford. > 2. Can you replace the cast dials > who supplies them? Myford, RDG & usual suspects. > 3. How do you find out if a motor is reversible Get rid of the 240 all together, get a 240 3 phase and get a VFD. Superior to anything else. I will be doing the same soon. Mine still has the 'original' washing machine motor and it does not have the umpf that a 3 phase puts out. > 4. What is the best system of collets to use on an ML7? If you have tons of cash, go and buy Myford original but I have heard that sometimes these are not as good as expected. Chronos sells ER adapters stah screw straight onto the spindle but also with very mixed results. If you can grind in the lathe you can true them up to be dead on though. ------- Re: Advice Needed re ML7 Clutch, etc. Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Mon Oct 8, 2007 6:15 pm ((PDT)) Thanks for your advice, people. I'm still looking for one I can afford, keep getting beat to the draw. I have noticed that the used machinery dealers seem to want an awful lot more than even the prices on Ebay. Will keep plugging away. Regards Keith New ------- Re: Screw-on collet holders for Myford Series 7 from Chronos [MyMyford] Posted by: "drookle" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:01 pm ((PDT)) Thanks for the heads up on the allegedly British-made collet holders from Chronos. 0.1mm runout is tragic, worse than any self centering chuck I own, and three times as bad as my most accurate (and least pretty!) one. I came across them as a result of this thread, and had been toying with the idea of getting a holder shipped out from them and buying decent collets as the need arose -- these are available locally at a pretty fair price. Armed with what you've said, I'd go for the cheap alternative, in the expectation of grinding it. (I do a fair amount of bar work, so the plug-in holders hold limited appeal.) ... at least the cheap ones from Chronos are branded, albeit a brand made in India. I think by exposing this on this forum, you've done something more significant and lasting than hiffing a collet holder through a window, although that would certainly have therapeutic value (and on the drive home you could get an Indian replacement from the source!) ------- Re: Screw-on collet holders for Myford Series 7 from Chronos Posted by: "Jim Guthrie" jimx~xxsprok01.plus.com Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:01 am ((PDT)) On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 00:01:16 -0000, you wrote: >Thanks for the heads up on the allegedly British-made collet holders >from Chronos. The screw on R25 collet holders from Chronos are actually made in the UK. I had a similar problem with one supplied a year or so ago and Chronos replaced it with one that was a bit better, but still giving about one thou run-out - which was still a bit too far out for me. Chronos actually offered to give me the phone number of the maker in the UK to discuss the matter. As far as I could see with both of the ones supplied, the problem was the fit on the register of the nose. This had a bit of play on both examples and I assume that fittings were adopting an eccentric position when screwed up tight. I had my register on my ML10 checked and it was spot on. The run-out on the two examples was proportional to the (lack of) fit on the register. The fittings themselves seemed to be concentric since the run-out was the same all at each end on the outer body and on the taper seat. I finally resolved the problem by getting a backplate fitting ER25 holder from Warco and machining up a backplate from Myford to suit and that has given me acceptable run-out. The fit of the backplate from Myford is good, but could be better and I assume that my source of run-out is from this. I've actually got a backplate on my four jaw which is a very tight fit on my register and I'm tempted to use it for a collet holder and put another backplate on the four jaw. I know at least one other person who had the same problem with the Chronos products - we exchanged experiences on the uk.rec.models.engineering newsgroup at the time. He also tried another UK made nose fitting holder with similar results. The actual collets are made by Vertex and have a reputation for being of good quality and accuracy. By the way, the reason I bought the ER25 collets was that some of my Myford MT2 collets showed run-outs of up to four thou. I had bought them years ago and never actually checked them until someone suggested that they were not too accurate. Jim ------- Old Super 7 Clutdh Adjustment [MyMyford] Posted by: "gtrodger" gtrodgerx~xxwestman.wave.ca Date: Fri Oct 5, 2007 12:31 pm ((PDT)) Gentlemen I have an older Super 7 (1952-1958) and I would like to find a set of instructions for adjusting the clutch. If anyone mcan explain it to me or send me in the right direction it would be appreciated. Thank you Gil ------- Re: Old Super 7 Clutdh Adjustment Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sat Oct 6, 2007 11:29 am ((PDT)) Gil The early Super 7 clutch consists of a one-piece cast-iron expanding ring, shaped like an internal circlip of heroically solid proportions. The split in the ring is wedge shaped, with the gap being greater at the inner end. The clutch is expanded by a wedge piece, internally threaded, which fits in this gap. See: http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc237/TrouPhoto/Super7clutchearly- simplified.gif In this view, the actuation shaft is shown rotated through 90 deg about a vertical axis, for schematic effect. To make the clutch grip harder, take out the screwed plug in the RH groove of the upper cone pulley. To adjust, the clutch actuation shaft must be in the position which expands the clutch (ie as far left as it will go under the influence of the handle), but first, line up the adjustment screws under the hole you took the plug out from. (When I say left, I mean in reality, not in the schematic.) Remove the grub screw (upper screw shown) and tighten the adjustment screw a little (lower). Re-tighten the adjustment screw, Take a heavy cut to test the clutch grip. Continue tightening as above until it ceases slipping. Replace everything in the reverse order to removal. For the complete words and pictures (including a comprehensive sectional assembly), I thoroughly recommend emailing Tony Griffiths and buying one of his Super 7 manuals. Tell him you need the one including the early clutch. He's a great guy, the quality of the manuals is extremely good, and he's a real machine tool afficionado. http://www.lathes.co.uk/manuals/ to find details and prices, manualsx~xxlathes.co.uk to order. I am not affiliated with Tony except as a happy customer and avid visitor to his extraordinary website. regards TR0UP ------- Re: Old Super 7 Clutdh Adjustment Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sat Oct 6, 2007 12:21 pm ((PDT)) Gil, Further to my last message. Because the web address to the diagram got split over two lines in my reply, it is difficult to make the link work. Here's a short alternative to take you to that schematic of the early Super 7 clutch adjustment: http://tinyurl.com/3bo88b ------- Re: Old Super 7 Clutdh Adjustment Posted by: "gtrodger" gtrodgerx~xxwestman.wave.ca Date: Sun Oct 7, 2007 9:46 am ((PDT)) Troup, Thank you very much for the well written instructions and also for the link to the literature. Your time and effort to this problem was greatly appreciated. Gil ------- Re: Old Super 7 Clutdh Adjustment Posted by: "gtrodger" gtrodgerx~xxwestman.wave.ca Date: Sun Oct 7, 2007 7:59 pm ((PDT)) "Helge Kyndbo" wrote: > Hi Gil, Could you make the link to the lit. public ? Sure just go to the link that tr0up gave me which is http://www.lathes.co.uk/manuals/ ------- Myford ML7 Cone type clutch. [MyMyford] Posted by: "philiptuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Oct 9, 2007 4:19 am ((PDT)) Hello. I am new to the group having just acquired an ML7. I have had previous lathes however so I'm reasonably 'fluent' in their use. My lathe has had a clutch added, built to a design in ME. I have the plans for it but no specific details in its construction. It consists of an internally tapered housing along with an externally tapered cone which is pulled by springs into the said housing. The inner cone has a leather strip glued to its edge where it makes contact with the housing. I am wondering what glue is used to secure this leather strip, as I am in the process of renewing it (the 4 jaw when loaded up tends to slip). Ordinary off the shelf 'super glue' has not been entirely succesful on a test piece I have just done. Thanks Phil ------- Re: Myford ML7 Cone type clutch. Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Tue Oct 9, 2007 5:10 am ((PDT)) Super glue sets glass hard and will crack since the leather is flexible and will expand/contract with the weather. I think you want a rubber contact glue, the kind where you put a layer on both peices and wait for it to dry before joining together. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Myford ML7 Cone type clutch. Posted by: "p_ioannidis" pioannidisx~xxtpg.com.au Date: Tue Oct 9, 2007 9:20 am ((PDT)) Plans for a cluch to siut ML-7 sounds interesting. How could one acquire such a gem? It would make for a great project. As for the glue, go with David on that one. Down under we call it Contact adhesive; once the adhesive is applied to both parts and is touch dry, you can achieve a better bond by heating both parts slightly with a heat gun or hair dryer prior to the merger. Peter ------- Re: Myford ML7 Cone type clutch. Posted by: "philiptuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:19 pm ((PDT)) H. Thanks for the replies. (Peter- I can photograph the plans zip them and send to you if you wish.) I was considering the contact adhesive, but flat leather is a real pig to position on a conical surface, and I was hoping for some movement to position things initially. In the end I opted for Araldite Epoxy adhesive for metal. It's like the normal two tube adhesive, but especially for metal and is grey in color. I reasoned virtually anything that's an epoxy resin would stick to a roughened leather surface, and as the other surface is brass, a metal epoxy adhesive would be ok. It's held so far without making the leather brittle and I have got the lathe up and running now. I think I'll make a larger cone for it though, to get more contact surface area as the present cone is only 3 & 7/8 inches diameter with 0.675 inch sides at 12.5 degrees taper and seems a bit flimsy for a half horse motor. Phil ------- Re: Myford ML7 Cone type clutch. Posted by: "bob_kellock" bobx~xxchainganger.co.uk Date: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:30 pm ((PDT)) The surface area is only significant in respect of the maximum pressure on the leather which shouldn't exceed 8 psi. There's a formula in Machinery's Handbook for a non-slipping clutch which (when rearranged) reads HP = f*r*N*P/(63025*(sinA + (f*cosA))) where: f is the coefficient of friction - typically 0.25 for dry leather r is the mean radius (inches) N is RPM P is the closing force (lbf) A is the angle between the surface of the cone and the axis (NOT the included angle) That works out to 0.017 HP per pound of spring pressure for a clutch of 2" mean radius with A = 12.5 degrees running at 1000 RPM so; if your spring force is at least 39 pounds and the countershaft is running at 1000 rpm, then it will cope with the full load torque of a 1/2 HP motor. Bob ------- Re: Myford ML7 Cone type clutch. Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Oct 11, 2007 2:22 am ((PDT)) Hello Bob. Thanks you for that; it is very interesting. I will hold back on re-constructing things for the moment. I presume the 'mean' radius is the radius of a line around the middle point of the tapered cone surface? Obviously the surface area is important, you say it should be such that it does not exceed 8psi in relation to the spring pressure; this is presumably to avoid the leather tearing itself apart? How is this 8psi figured obtained? Does it vary with different types of leather? I see that a lot of fifties American cars used a cone clutch lined with leather (although they were not that successful it seems) and the torque from some of those must have struggled at 8psi I would have thought unless their surface area was unreasonably large. Phil ------- Re: Myford ML7 Cone type clutch. Posted by: "bob_kellock" bobx~xxchainganger.co.uk Date: Thu Oct 11, 2007 4:50 am ((PDT)) > I presume the 'mean' radius is the radius of a line around the > middle point of the tapered cone surface? Yes. > Obviously the surface area is important, you say it should be > such that it does not exceed 8psi in relation to the spring pressure, > this is presumably to avoid the leather tearing itself apart? Yes - presumably > How is this 8psi figured obtained does it vary with different > types of leather? The figure came from Machinery's Handbook. Incidentally I noticed that the section titled "Formulae for cone clutches" in my modern (1996) MH is identical to that of the 1908 edition -- even the illustration! I'm sure it must vary considerably and would be dependent on the animal, the part of the skin and how it has been processed. If you Google "leather research" you will find a lot of entries. I've found that you can often get very useful information, particularly from universities, if you are lucky enough to happen on a helpful person. Phone is much better than email. MH gives a formula for calculating the total force on the leather (lbf) which is the spring force divided by (sinA + (f*cosA)). If you divide the result by the surface area (square inches) of the leather you get the psi. i.e. you firstly calculate the mean radius and spring force to handle the required HP and then calculate the width of leather required to ensure that you don't exceed 8 psi. > I see that a lot of fifties American cars used a cone clutch > lined with leather Cone clutches were commonplace in vehicles from their earlest days until the end of the vintage period (1931) and even used on some aero-engined specials. The 1908 edition of MH states "The cone clutch is generally considered to be the best type for automobile transmission". Bob ------- Re: Myford ML7 Cone type clutch. Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:02 am ((PDT)) Thank you Bob, that's very handy information, should I need to change things I will measure my spring pressure next time and get the exact figures. I have been cutting 1.25 inch diam steel bar today with the saddle feed running as well and it has handled that Ok, so hopefully -- fingers crossed/touch wood -- it will suffice. Phil ------- Re: Myford ML7 Cone type clutch. Posted by: "philiptuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:42 am ((PDT)) "p_ioannidis" wrote: > Plans for a cluch to siut ML-7 sounds interesting. How could one > aquire such a gem? It would make for a great project. Peter, As promised I have photographed the plans along with a couple of pics of the finished thing with an explanation. You can download it (2.8 megs) at http://homepage.ntlworld.com/follies/clutch.zip Phil ------- Super 7 clutch adjustment [MyMyford] Posted by: "chardinej" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Tue Oct 9, 2007 2:08 pm ((PDT)) My Super 7 instruction book says that there should be 0.005" to 0.010" clearance between the push bar and the larger flat on the cam shaft lever assembly with the clutch engaged. Then it talks about the clearance translating into 45° to 90° rotation of the push rod from the no clearance setting. I admit I don't understand what this last bit means. Can someone explain how the correct clearance is set. I have a 1962 model with the cone clutch. Thanks, John ------- Re: Super 7 clutch adjustment Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Tue Oct 9, 2007 2:22 pm ((PDT)) John, I have a 70's vintage Super7 lathe. There is a nut locking the adjuster screw on the iron clutch disc. Loosen that and turn the screw. What you are looking for is the engaging lever on the right end should have just a little free play before pushing the internal rod to the left thus opening the clutch. The lever goes right as the rod goes left. Normally there is no drag when disengaged. If the lever has no free play, there is pressure trying to hold the clutch open. RichD ------- Re: Super 7 question [MyMyford] Posted by: "Larry Heyda" larryedax~xxembarqmail.com Date: Thu Oct 18, 2007 9:27 pm ((PDT)) Hi, I just bought a Super 7 with no gear box, but it has power feed. I'm thinking of putting in an AC or DC variable speed motor. Is this a good idea? I'm new to Myfords and new to the group. Kind regards, Larry ------- Re: Super 7 question Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:53 pm ((PDT)) Larry, Variable speed is OK. I have the makings for it but have not taken the time to work it in. Of course this not a substitute for a missing Quick Change Gear Box. I have variable DC motor speed motors on my Clausing 15" drill press and a small Bridgeport V mill. I like them that way :-)) RichD ------- Re: Veriable speed addition [was Re: Super 7 question] [MyMyford] Posted by: "Larry Heyda" larryedax~xxembarqmail.com tendergoodman Date: Sat Oct 20, 2007 12:30 pm ((PDT)) Hi Rich, Sorry it took so long to get back to you. What sort of motor would you use for variable speed? A DC motor? How much HP? What kind of controller? Any other tips? Much appreciated. Larry ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:21 pm ((PDT)) I replaced the original Myford motor with a 3-phase motor and VFD. The VFD came from http://www.factorymation.com/s.nl/it.A/id.193/.f (a Teco FM50-1HP). If you get a 56-frame motor the standard pulley and motor mounting bracket fit perfectly. I found a new TEFC (Totally Enclosed Fan Cooled) 220/440 volt motor on Craigslist for $50; most used machinery places will probably have something similar. The FM50 VFD will convert 110 volt input to 220 volt out. Typically, 220 volt 3-phase motors cost considerably less than 110 volt motors. ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "Larry Heyda" larryedax~xxembarqmail.com Date: Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:05 pm ((PDT)) Hi Ken, Thanks again for your valuble advice! I looked at the Teco. Question: I already have 3ph power in my shop. Is there another less expensive variable system that readily uses existing 3ph, or should I just go with the Teco? Re: Craigslist. Did you find that motor in your area? As far as I know, one can't access the whole country's Craigslist, right? It's not like Ebay, where you can search all over the US, and even the world..right? Larry ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:46 pm ((PDT)) Many of the higher power VFDs *require* 3-phase input but I don't see the advantage with a smaller unit. Teco has a 1HP 3-phase input one at http://www.factorymation.com/s.nl/it.A/id.199/.f?category=33 but it is considerably more expensive that their single-phase input unit with almost identical specifications. Certainly $120 doesn't seem too expensive. Insofar as I know Craigslist searching is entirely local although the Toronto list covers a semicircular area (one side is bounded by Lake Ontario) perhaps 75-100 miles across. I prefer to drive to a local supplier and exchange money for the item -- there is no fear that the description is misleading and you don't pay for shipping. Plus, I know where the seller lives! ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "Larry Heyda" larryedax~xxembarqmail.com Date: Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:09 pm ((PDT)) True, $120 is not much at all. I was just curious whether it was redundant to convert to 3ph if I already had it. I think I'll go with the unit you suggested. Many thanks. Yes, I, too, like to buy directly from a real person. Kind regards, Larry ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:17 pm ((PDT)) Depending on your electrical/electronics abilities you may want to also purchase their remote control box for about $70 which will give you a remote start, remote speed control and emergency stop. There are connections for all of the above on the basic unit. All you need is a box with two switches and a 10K pot. Remember to keep the leads between the VFD and motor reasonably short, turn the motor on/off with a switch connected to the VFD and don't remove power to the VFD except at the end of day (don't power cycle the VFD to control the motor). All that said, I am an electrical engineer by education but haven't yet bothered with a remote and just use the digital controls on the actual VFD. Laziness is a bad thing... Download the PDF manual from their website. The one that comes with the VFD is printed on 3x4 inch paper and is unreadable with my old eyes. ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "Larry Heyda" larryedax~xxembarqmail.com Date: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:59 am ((PDT)) Hi Ken, Thanks. Well there is a 3hp 3ph motor in excellnt condition on my local Craigslist for only $50. A bit of overkill, n'est pas? I think I'll buy it anyway. That's quite a nice price. I might be able to do the electrics, though I'm not an electrical engineer by any stretch of the imagination. I was a ham operator when I was in high school, and built my own transmitter. Larry ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:10 pm ((PDT)) Yeah, 3hp is a little much for a Myford but would fit my vertical mill.. Before buying any motor, check the voltage since many are 550v or other voltages that will be a problem getting power for. The factory installed 3-phase is 1/2 hp I believe. If you can find a NEMA 56-frame motor then it is just a matter of bolting the motor on. The manual for the VFD is pretty good. Just connect the wires to the right places and select the desired parameters via the keypad + display on the VFD. ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "Larry Heyda" larryedax~xxembarqmail.com Date: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:42 pm ((PDT)) Hi Ken, well, I got the 3 hp motor. Like new. ALSO, he just happened to have a 1hp stored away in one corner of his beautiful woodshop. Also looked new. Sold it to me for $75. Of course I forgot all about your advice to find a NEMA-56-frame. I just checked this one, and it is a Robbins and Myers Motor, type 1 frame M563 220/440 3ph 1725 rpm. Will this work?? Larry ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sun Oct 21, 2007 7:24 pm ((PDT)) The RPM rating is fine but the shaft and mounting holes may pose a problem; I don't immediately see a reference to that motor size. There is a pretty good explanation of frame sizes at http://abbdrives.com/cowern/motorterms2.html and linked pages. ------- Re: Veriable speed addition Posted by: "tetramachine" Tetrawheelsx~xxhotmail.com Date: Sun Oct 21, 2007 7:32 pm ((PDT)) It may be a real squeeze putting that 3 hp on the 7. If I recall, the motor shaft will be 1", that's larger than the ID of the slow speed pulley on my S7. Now the mount to shaft dimension is larger than the belt cover will allow, so a new cover is needed. And it still drives a single 3V belt. Looks like more work for little or no return. IMHO ------- Re: Variable speed addition (Tetramachine) Posted by: "Larry Heyda" larryedax~xxembarqmail.com Date: Sun Oct 21, 2007 7:49 pm ((PDT)) Hi, Thanks for your input! The 3hp is out. Today I bought a nice 1hp from the same guy, so I'll adapt that. Ken's been a super great help at setting me up with the right syatem for variable speed. Larry ------- Re: Veriable speed addition (Ken) Posted by: "Larry Heyda" larryedax~xxembarqmail.com Date: Sun Oct 21, 2007 8:07 pm ((PDT)) Hi Ken, I see what you mean. I went to that ABBDRIVES site and couldn't find any "M" frames at all. Maybe it's a special pump motor, as I see from Google that Robbins and Meyers makes a lot of pumps. I just wonder if the speed controller will work with it. I'm sure I can deal with mounting holes and shaft size differences. Larry ------- Re: Veriable speed addition (Ken) Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sun Oct 21, 2007 8:28 pm ((PDT)) The VFD should work with almost any 3-phase motor of the appropriate voltage and HP rating. A possible problem is cooling. For a TEFC motor the amount of cooling air is drastically reduced if the motor runs at low speed since the fan is on the motor shaft. I've read of others using a computer fan ("muffin fan") to produce additional airflow. I believe that the abbdrives site has the dimensions for a 56-frame so it should be easy to compare your motor to the original Myford motor. ------- Myford thingies. [MyMyford] Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:27 am ((PDT)) So I finally have got it back together, mnust have been almast a year now since I started the project. The lathe ran for the first time yesterday and was running very quietly, even with the gear train engaged. The spindle clutch works very fine as well. So I'm happy till now. There are still a 'few' things left, such as cutting a testbar and do some final adjustments to get it as good as it gets. Still have to re-align the headstock so I'm in the process of buying all required measuring equipment etc. I bought a DTI form an older gentlemen in our village who also had a Myford ML-7 that looked like it was cannibalized. The motor was fitted via a V-belt directly to the spindle pulley as the entire 'top' drive was missing. I looked at the bearing caps and they had grease cups on them instead of oilers. After asking a bit further, the guy had build all the missing stuff himself, feed screws, dials etc, and the most 'shocking' news was that he had machined his own spindle bearings from bronze bar. I questioned the guy saying that bronze on non hardened steel do not go together very well he just said that it had been like that for the past 10 years and since the bearing were greased rather than oiled, ran a bit stiff in winter until the grease warmed up by the heating of the bearings and everything would just spin fine. I could not detect any spindle play and and the finish on some of the things he had turned looked pretty good. The 'guy' had been working in machine maintenance for most of his life and knows a lot about machine re-conditioning, scraping, you name it. So you guess, I may take the opportunity and ask him to teach me scraping and machine re-conditioning. Maybe the best 20 Euro's ever spent on a DTI and free-bee handwheel. Regards, Piet ------- Re: Myford thingies. Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Oct 22, 2007 3:55 pm ((PDT)) Piet, Congratulations! Sounds like a good situation to be in. All the best with your rejuvenated machine. As far as bronze bearings on non-hardened spindles: provided the lubrication doesn't go dry, this works fine. They're just not forgiving like babbit, and the clearance on the ML7, unlike the Super 7, is not self regulating with temperature. (As we both know, but for the benefit of others reading this, the Super 7 spindle is hardened, in any case.) Are you running babbit, or bronze? ------- Re: Myford thingies. Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:14 am ((PDT)) Hey Troup, good to 'hear' you again. I still run babbit and have a little adjustment left so I think I will be fine for a while but I still have to do the spindle bearing clearance test. Also I may have found a local source for babbit bearing material or to have bearings cast. Still have to figure our what babbit material Myford has been using. So as soon as the machine is properly aligned I can start on the spindle nut for the Arboga. Kind regards, Piet ------- Re: Myford ML4 [MyMyford] Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:14 am ((PDT)) "Mick" wrote: > Just a simple question; what colour should an ML4 be painted in? Grey. Used RAL 6002 (Navy Grey) on mine but if you want to be historically correct you should contact Myford. Piet ------- Re: Myford ML4 Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:51 am ((PDT)) The nearest standard shade is RAL 7011 which is Iron Grey. ------- Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Oct 28, 2007 12:38 am ((PDT)) I've just noticed the most obvious clue: the 'narrow guide' is betrayed by a way wiper which has a central downwards extension to wipe the #2 shear (the back of the operator-side bedway). The wide guide lacks this extension, but does wipe the #4 (rearmost) shear. Interestingly, the saddle of the wide guide still has the 'keel' which originally engaged with the #2 shear, a bit like the human tailbone, I suppose. It has simply been machined slightly to clear, which would be a puzzle for anyone dismantling it who knew nothing of the evolution of the design. Regardless of the story the wiper tells, in the case of a lathe of unknown history, it still pays to take an 0.25 feeler or shim and try to insert it between #2 and #4 shears and the saddle, as the carriage may have been modified by a previous owner, and the wiper may not have been changed to suit. On a slightly different but related note: It seems to me unfortunate that there are no wipers fitted to the tailstock side of the carriage. Having just remachined my bed, I'm of a mind to fit better wiping provision to both ends of the carriage, at the same time improving the oilway provision- McMaster Carr list a stock wiper, with a polyurethane wiper element and a stainless hosing, which can be cut to length and fitted. Anyone tried it, or anything similar? ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:51 am ((PDT)) Troup. I believe all ML-7 are narrow guide and ML-7R's adn S-7's are wide guide. Norman Atkinson, a regular poster on this forum, sent me an article he wrote on converting a narrow guide to a wide guide that he published in MEW. It sounds all quite logical and I still have to judge whether I require to do the same on mine as my measuring stuff will come in this week. My number 4 shear is still as good as the day it was made so it will be a perfect datum point to do the measurements to assess the overall condition of the parallelism of the ways. I have nothing much to comment about your rear carriage way wipers but there are not too many lathes that have them. Regards, Piet ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Oct 29, 2007 1:37 pm ((PDT)) Piet, there are few things in life I'm sure of, but in my shop at the moment I have a wide-guide ML7 and a narrow-guide Super 7 ! The ML7 actually went to wide guide slightly earlier than the Super 7. Quoting from the Myford spare parts document for the ML7, "In May, 1972, from serial No K107657, the existing carriage was converted from the narrow guide to the wide guide principle" whereas for the Super 7 "In August, 1972, from machine No SK 108891B, the broad guide bed and saddle were introduced ..." The misconception arises from the fact that the ML7 continued in production only a few years from that date, so most ML7s are indeed narrow guide. As we all know, the Super 7 continues to be made, with relatively few changes, until the present day, so the better examples tend to be wide guide. As far as I know, no other lathe designed 55 years ago continues in production to this day. In fact, it's hard to think of other products with such a long production span. > Norman Atkinson....sent me an article he wrote on converting a > narrow guide to a wide guide that he published in MEW. Could I trouble you to forward it to me, if it's in electronic format? > I have nothing much to comment about your rear carriage way wipers > but there are not too many lathes that have them. I agree, and it's mainly drilling chips that tend to find their way onto the ways on that side of the carriage, but they can on occasion be fine enough to insinuate themselves into places which rarely see the light of day... ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:31 am ((PDT)) Apologies if this has been mentioned before, but there is an excellent description of converting a narrow guide Myford 7 to wide guide in J A Radford's excellent little book "Improvements and Accessories For Your Lathe". Mike ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "HG" hgx~xxallthemunros.com Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:50 am ((PDT)) Mike, I didn't know about the Radford book (though I knew about him) so that's very useful, thanks. I have the Radford topslide (now kitted by Hemingway) which is a delight to use instead of the standard S7 one. I think that description was also published in the ME. Henry ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:24 am ((PDT)) There is some excellent stuff in Radford's book, and I would recommend it to any Myford owner. As an aside, JAR seems to have been overshadowed these days by GHT (who I also greatly admire). He is often not given credit for some very well designed tools, such as the headstock dividing head, and the ball turning attachment so often credited to GHT. Mike ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:47 am ((PDT)) Mike, I was indirectly aware of my fellow countryman's contributions to ME, but I'd forgotten about the book, which I've now ordered, thanks to your reminder -- and of course the marvellous new-fangled electrified interweb. I like the way people in those days seemed to give themselves a lot of licence to think laterally, and get stuck into elevating any inherent constraints, rather than simply accept a highly regarded product as being as good as it could get. I'm particularly struck by Martin Cleeves' thoughts on better ways of arranging screwcutting and feeds, and am planning to follow a mash-up of his thinking with the Hardinge approach in re-engineering my Super 7, which doesn't have a QC box. I totally agree with him that if it is released from having to handle feeds as well, a changewheel setup is almost as convenient and rather more versatile than a QC, especially when cutting a 'wrong language' thread (ie metric in the case of a Myford). I've sidestepped the need to upgrade my S7 to wide-guide by simply swapping the bed and carriage with my much more recent ML7. I've got a 1.5 hp DC motor from an otherwise defunct treadmill, which I plan to drive with a massive Variac through a rectifier. (I have no luck with fancy electronics, although I know the latest DC drives perform superbly.) One advantage of doing it this way is that I can run several smaller DC geared motors off the same supply, for longitudinal and cross feed. That way, they will change in rough proportion to the spindle speed, and I can fine tune the speeds with rheostats. (If that screws up the regulation too much, I could split off a supply for them on the AC side and use a multitap transformer or baby Variac to do the tuning.) ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:53 am ((PDT)) Regarding the Radford book, I was amazed on Googling to find a copy that it featured in websites in Polish, Dutch, German and Arabic... A case of a minor prophet virtually forgotten in his own land... ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "HG" hgx~xxallthemunros.com Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:06 am ((PDT)) You're right, although GHT himself acknowledges his debt to JAR a number of times in his articles, I think. Henry ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:08 am ((PDT)) Another book unknown to me which popped into my ken while Googling around: Know Your Lathe: A Screw Cutting Lathe Handbook, by Denfords Engineering Does anyone know this, and if so, do you recommend it, and why? ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:51 am ((PDT)) As an admirer of both Thomas and Jack Radford, could I explain that GHT and JHT were great friends? Again, GHT visited him in NZ and brought his designs back to the UK. GHT acknowledged his old friend's work in his writings. Again, Martin Cleeve features. Somehow, Kenneth Hart and the rest of the contributors did not seem to see eye to eye. Cleeve/Hart wrote in ME, then Thomas came in and went out(ill?) and Cleeve came in again. Then Cleeve moved over to Engineering in Miniature. His book came out after he died! Sometime back, I felt the need to avoid Cleeve being lost and with the assistance of a lot of nice folks, started to extract his stuff. Unfortunately, Magicalia came in and the Cleeve stuff was removed from here. That is my personal view! Regarding the worn guiding stuff, it was Cleeve's earlier ideas that I used. JAR had written on it and GHT had ducked the issue by buying another Myford. Myford seems to have copied the Cleeve idea as well. That is probably as far as I can go. I am now over 77 and find all sorts of delays now. Probably what someone should do is re-write the Cleeve saga. After all, Cleeve used standard steel and his own bolts in his construction. This was Imperial stuff. Today, it is all Metric. With the audacity of age and tongue in cheek, it is an entirely different situation! ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Wed Oct 31, 2007 2:14 am ((PDT)) Troup, Norman, since I have 'just' a humble ML-7 are there any books that I should have concerning that model specifically. I have the feeling that most stuff is about S-7 instead of ML-7's. I looked at H-way kits as well for some stuff such as the QCG and an improved topslide. The QCG I'm not really sure about yet,it is more 'nice to have' than a 'need to have' as it will mainly be used for feeding rather than the occasional screw cutting, so I can change gears manually. So I'm thinking about doing that by fixing a DC drive to the Leadscrew so it is continuously variable. Alternatively I will wait, have been doing quite a while now, until the Yahoo ELS Group (Electronic Lead Screw) come up with a commercialized product for around $150 US. For that price you can cut any thread you like and for a few more $$ you can add taper turning and possibly convex, concave as well. It's a poor man's DRO without having to need a PC and writing G-codes. Regards, Piet ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Oct 31, 2007 5:30 am ((PDT)) > I have the feeling that most stuff is about S-7 instead of ML-7's. Piet, GHT's Workshop Manual specifically covers the ML7 in situations where it differs from the S7. He did own at least one ML7, and always duplicated his designs to cover both models, and (when it mattered) often the major evolutionary changes within each model. I'd say the Workshop Manual is a DEFINITE must have for any Myford owner -- the clarity of his reasoning, and of his drawings, and the beautiful sense of proportion and form which runs through his designs, are inspirational to anyone with an engineering bent. His other book(s) are mainly on dividing and graduating (and making your own bench drill cum pillar tool) Other ML7 notable books include Ian Bradley's "The Amateur's Lathe" (not to be confused with other books with the same title) which has a few little tips and tricks I've seen nowhere else and is very much ML7 based. Just as one example, there's a particularly neat dodge for using a Myford fixed steady on aluminium, which is not normally an option. He also wrote a "Myford Series 7 Manual" which for some reason gets a very bad rap on the interwobble. I don't understand why: I think it covers quite a lot of ground competently and once again throws light on a few things which hardly ever get mentioned elsewhere (like explaining the optional fine feed cluster). Lawrence H Sparey wrote some really good stuff. "The Amateur's Lathe -- L H Sparey" made a big impression on me as a teenager, before I even had access to a lathe. My only reservation is that at that impressionable age he convinced me that getting better finish always inevitably required slowing down the spindle speed, an oversimplification and partial misconception it took me some time to dismantle. I haven't yet read "A man and his lathe", also by Sparey but the blurb sounds highly relevant to your quest: "Based round the Myford ML7 lathe, chapters in this book are Suggested Improvements for Your ML7 Lathe, Home-Made Accessories, Useful Myford Accessories, Aids to better Results and Notes on Maintenance." Cleeve's book on screwcutting deals with the question at a level of commitment which would leave 90% of us struggling to relate to his concerns, but he's probably the most original thinker of the lot. He's not a fan of QC boxes, for reasons I completely agree with, and which brings me to your next point: > The QCG I'm not really sure about yet, it is more 'nice to have' > [snip] by fixing a DC drive to the Leadscrew... My sentiments precisely. Let me know if you proceed further down that path, I think there are better ways to approach it than direct drive, which entails either dismantling the geartrain or putting up with driving it as an idle step-up train, which is not ideal. > Alternatively I will wait, have been doing quite a while now, until > the Yahoo ELS Group(Electronic Lead Screw) come up with a > commercialized product for around 150 US $. That sounds really neat. I wasn't aware of such an endeavour, but I'll make a point of checking it out. I too would rate dozens of things higher than a QC box, but digital threading really appeals. My only reservation is that sophisticated electronics have always treated my as though I carried a sickle and wore a hood. Hope the notes on recommended reading help - there must be many others who could add to this. Also bear in mind that 90% of what is written for the Super 7 applies with almost equal force to the ML7 -- most of the differences are either ergonomic, or involve parts of the lathe which tend not to be modified by the user (unless your nom de plume is Cleeve). ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "Alan Lythaby" alanx~xxabstrakt.org.uk Date: Wed Oct 31, 2007 5:51 am ((PDT)) I'm also thinking of doing this... But in a similar way to Cleeve... My intention is to remake the change gear quadrant (ME 3312, 6/1/67), and to relax it down onto a variable speed DC motor driving from under the main motor mounting. This would give variable feeds easily, without needing to change the gearing setup for threading, as well as the major advantage of not needing to get spanners into release the gear studs, or the quadrant. There are, of course, many ways to achieve the same end.... my other thoughts are to use a stepper motor to drive the leadscrew for feeds, which MIGHT also be able to be synchronised to the mandrel for screwcutting.... Alan ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:09 am ((PDT)) I think that I had better 'come clean' GHT's excellent book and now his combined book Workshop Techniques were edited by Bill Bennett. Bill got his BDS (Dunelm) when my wife got hers. Yonks ago, I discussed the possibilty of a Cleeve book with him. I have both books and also the earlier UPT and Dividing and Graduating ones. I am quite 'house trained'. ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "Thomas Staubo" thstaubox~xxonline.no Date: Thu Nov 1, 2007 2:18 pm ((PDT)) In MyMyfordx~xxyahoogroups.com, "tr0up" wrote: > Other ML7 notable books include Ian Bradley's "The Amateur's Lathe" > (not to be confused with other books with the same title) which has a > few little tips and tricks I've seen nowhere else and is very much > ML7 based. (Shortened for clarity) I am sure that you mean that the title of Ian Bradley's book is: "The Amateur's WORKSHOP" ;) As you have correctly stated, "The Amateur's Lathe" was written by L.H. Sparey. Thomas PS. Thanks for all the great book recommendations, folks! I already have one or two of them in my bookshelf, and more are on their way. ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Thu Nov 1, 2007 3:09 pm ((PDT)) To confuse further, I have to mention that Ian Bradley and Norman F. Hallows also wrote as 'Duplex'in Model Engineer. Ned Westbury, the then Editor of ME wrote under many names. Ned, Exactus, Artificer, Geometer and many more. Tom Walshaw wrote as Tubal Cain. I hope that our friend will forgive me but one day he might possess old ME's and wonder who was what. ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Nov 1, 2007 4:20 pm ((PDT)) "Thomas Staubo" wrote: > I am sure that you mean that the title of Ian Bradley's book is: "The > Amateur's WORKSHOP" ;) You are exactly correct. Thanks ! ------- Re: Identifying maker's intention re guidance of carriage Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 2:20 am ((PDT)) Well, you ask for 'some' advise and you get a lot. Our St. Nicholas celebration (Dec-5) is lurking around the corner so I think I put in a quick order with whowever can supply quickest. Process seem all relatively the same everywhere. Thanks for all your tips. Troup, sorry we went OT here. Regards, Piet ------- Painting, way covers [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Oct 28, 2007 1:00 am ((PDT)) Further to my ramblings about wipers, I'm also toying with the idea of telescopic way covers. I know I promised to post photos of the telescopic leadscrew shroud -- unfortunately life has intervened and I still don't have the lathe even part-assembled yet. Will post these when I do. I'm feeling overprotective of my newly machined bedways (which I was lucky enough to be given the opportunity to mill, myself, on a large NC mill of impeccable accuracy, at no charge !) I know that the machine will last the rest of my life if I take care of it, having owned an ML7 Myford, from new, since I was a boy. (In theory it was Dad's, but he never once got to use it.) I've been trying to get a nice paint finish on the Super 7 tailstock. I've always thought all the Myford Seven series tailstocks were beautiful, almost sculptural statements, and was disappointed on buying my sight-unseen Super 7 from the local equivalent of eBay, to find that the tailstock had been roughly repainted, and (surprisingly) badly fettled in the first place. The rear end of the housing was well eccentric with the barrel, and the casting generally had an uncharacteristically heavy-set look at both ends. (I say surprisingly, as this is about a 1954 lathe, and at this time the Super 7's were reputedly superbly finished.) So I improvised a pair of centers in front of my big bench grinder with a wide wheel freshly dressed, and reprofiled the casting to be concentric and of the correct slimness at the ends, then lovingly faired and blended the contours by hand. My first attempt at spray painting, after multiple primer and primer- surfacer applications, and lots of hand sanding, gave a spectacularly good finish, but I wanted a few layers of topcoat colour, given the amount of wear a tailstock endures. The finish quality has been all downhill since, every coat getting worse, for one reason or another. The weather hasn't helped, with lots of wind (I'm forced to spray outside). This morning, however, the forecast sounded perfect for the first time in weeks, and being dawn on a Sunday I was confident of no traffic down the shared driveway. Just as I was getting the finish to somewhere near what I knew I could achieve, a procession of vehicles went past trailing clouds of dust. I know it won't make a skerrick of difference to how the lathe performs, but I just wanted to celebrate this one symbol of desirable unafford- ability, having spent my life to day just a little like a boy from the poor side of town making noseprints on the window of the local patisserie. ------- Re: Painting, way covers Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:39 am ((PDT)) Troup, what adn how are you spraying?? Are you using spray can Hard Hat or something similar?? If so you have to apply consecutive coats within 20 minutes otherwise you end up with crackling. Learned the hard way; had to remove everything start all over. About the weather, thought you were going into spring?? Regards, Piet ------- Re: Painting, way covers Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Oct 29, 2007 1:53 pm ((PDT)) Piet, I've recently built a compressor by marrying a derelict pump to a remodelled LPG tank (shhh !), and I purchased a touch-up spray gun (cheap Chinese copy of a deVilbiss). I went for the touch-up style because it has a small pot, which wastes a lot less paint and thinners at the end of a job. Most of my painting jobs are small. The paints I used are conventional: an etch primer (I was using PA10, but it has been reformulated in this part of the world and is now rubbish -- it turns to tadpole eggs in an unopened tin in a matter of a year or so -- so I now use Resene's equivalent, called "vinyl Etch Adhesion Primer), then a premium primer filler (Dulon 1k, which uses lacquer thinners) which I thicken with WEST spherical microballoons if there are deep pits or sandcast profiles to fill. The topcoat is a premium gloss enamel, which I catalyse with an activator to make it harder. I had them start from Aircraft grey (which is a bit light) and custom tint it to match a sample Myford diecast leadscrew bracket. I don't like cyanoacrylates, so I steered clear of any fancy 2-pot formulations. > About the weather, thought you were going into spring?? Yes, gets very windy here around the equinox. Also the weather is often too hot - the paint kicks off too quickly, so it won't level unless you thin it so much it runs. ------- correct way to lock a slide [MyMyford] Posted by: "Steven Shand" stevenx~xxstevenshand.com Date: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:00 am ((PDT)) Hello, I'm pretty much a novice at all this but I do use my Super 7 quite a lot without really having had any training or instruction so most of what I know is picked up from reading the interweb thing and in a few books I've picked up along the way. Anyhoo, when doing some work today I had a bit of a problem with the top slide moving when it really should have been fixed in place. Is there a standard way of doing this. I seems like the only way to do this is to pinch up the gib (sp) adjusters, Is this the case? It seems pretty strange as once you go to the trouble of adjusting any play and ensuring smooth travel that you then have to mess about with the adjusters. Any help gratefully accepted. Steven Shand ------- Re: correct way to lock a slide Posted by: "HG" hgx~xxallthemunros.com Date: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:19 am ((PDT)) There's an excellent design for a topslide lock by George Thomas in the Model Engineers Workshop Manual p 181 et seq. Quite simple and effective. No, don't mess with the gib once you have it adjusted properly. Henry ------- Re: correct way to lock a slide Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sun Oct 28, 2007 1:05 pm ((PDT)) Hi Steven, A couple of things to check. -always turn the feedscrew CW to keep the lash minimised. -topslide gibs usually should be adjusted tighter than the cross slide to avoid shifting while cutting. If you are doing mostly taper turning, loosen it up a tad. -temporarilly lock the top slide with one of the gib screws. RichD ------- Re: correct way to lock a slide Posted by: "Charlie Stone" cestonex~xxbigpond.com Date: Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:12 am ((PDT)) I have to agree with Henry that the way to go is to follow George Thomas' design for a topslide lock. It works perfectly when needed and doesn't affect the gib adjustment when it isn't. I have made this change to my S7 and also on the vertical milling slide as well. Like all of George's designs, it is sensible and well described for the beginner to carry out. Charlie ------- Replace Feedscrew on Myford Super 7 Cross slide [MyMyford] Posted by: "les_steamtrain" les_steamtrainx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:48 am ((PDT)) Hi, I have just purchased a new feedscrew and feednut for the cross slide on my Myford Super 7 (power feed). What I am after is some advice on the correct method of replacing it. I have made a couple of dry runs but cannot seem to get it adjusted correctly without binding. THanks Les ------- Re: Replace Feedscrew on Myford Super 7 Cross slide Posted by: "HG" hgx~xxallthemunros.com Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 12:10 pm ((PDT)) Can you say more? What is it that binds, and where? Do you mean you can't get the feedscrew to go in all the way? It goes easily for a bit and then hits a stop? If it's that there's an easy way to proceed. Henry ------- Re: Replace Feedscrew on Myford Super 7 Cross slide Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:41 pm ((PDT)) If it gets progressively tighter when you wind the cross slide fully in, it's probably telling you you need to leave the feedscrew bracket screws loose until the screw is fully in, which lets the nut dictate the position of the bracket. If the binding is consistent all the way, you may have adjusted the thrust collar too tightly. Alternatively, if it's a pre-owned lathe, the feedscrew bracket mounting face may not be truly square to the bore. (This is very unlikely, but I mention it because it happened to me.) I can post a photo of the setup to machine it true if this turns out to be your problem. If the binding is periodic, once per rev, check the feedscrew has not got bent, in storage or in transit. They're prone to bending at the thin (some would say scrawny) neck. Easy enough to straighten: wrap the thread in a single turn of brass shim and chuck it in the 3 jaw (or 4 jaw if 3 jaw is not flash) with the neck just outboard of the chuck; if it's much of a bend, work out what plane the bend is in using the DTI, push it slightly past straight in that plane, and then bend it back (once only!) to as near dead on as an ordinary DTI can show. If it's a problem specific to the power cross feed, I'm afraid I can't help you as I've never played with one. ------- Re: Replace Feedscrew on Myford Super 7 Cross slide Posted by: "Les Engineer" les_steamtrainx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Oct 31, 2007 1:42 am ((PDT)) Thank you for your replies, I shall be having another go and let you know how I get on. Les ------- Re: Replace Feedscrew on Myford Super 7 Cross slide Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Wed Oct 31, 2007 1:51 am ((PDT)) This seems to covered in George Thomas's Model Engineers Workshop Manual pages 281 and 282. Here we have the classic restrictions on copyright -- sorry. ------- Re: Replace Feedscrew on Myford Super 7 Cross slide Posted by: "HG" hgx~xxallthemunros.com Date: Wed Oct 31, 2007 2:15 am ((PDT)) More GHT! We should form a GHT appreciation society -- or is this it? Henry ------- Re: Replace Feedscrew on Myford Super 7 Cross slide Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Wed Oct 31, 2007 3:41 am ((PDT)) Henry and Piet! Not the GHT Appreciation Society but one which does recognise the capabilities of not only the late and much lamented guru but Tubal Cain and Chaddock and a bunch of worthies who had the Myfords -- and improved them. I have prattled many times about 'Martin Cleeve' AKA Kenneth Cleeve Hart and it is there where Piet will find the specific stuff for his ML7. I did try to get most of his stuff here but you know the result -- copyright came in. I even got the situation of the Editor trying to find the next of kin of the various writers. I replied and got sod all back! So Piet you should now try to E-Bay ME's from 1950 for stuff from 'Martin Cleeve' and also Engineering in Miniature. Here is where the differences between GHT and Cleeve arise. GHT was able to buy castings. So was Jack Radford and Tubal Cain and Dennis Chaddock. Cleeve, I suspect, could not. I have a note of him actually getting part of a new ML7 and making the rest! Again, Cleeve had a 3 jaw chuck but no 4 jaw. Putting two and two together, there can only be one conclusion -- he was hard up. Consequently, he made a fancy face plate as a substitute for the 4 jaw. He made a quick change from the spindle and went on to making a simple gear box and a fabricated steady and a milling steady. Here he had no milling machine. He made a vertical slide and a vice and so on. Out of work -- he started to make nuts and bolts on his ML7 and made a machine to make socket head screws. The development work to all this was done on a ML2 or 4! Does this go someway to answer the questions? Believe me, I simply don't have enough life left to put it all into a volume -- even if I was permitted. Regards Norman ------- Replace Feedscrew on Myford Super 7 Cross slide Posted by: "les_steamtrain" les_steamtrainx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:43 am ((PDT)) Hi all, Bingo it's all fitted and works great with no undue backlash. I left the bracket screws loose until I had wound the feedscrew all the way in, and then tightened the bracket screws and hey presto it now works great. My thanks to the group. Les ------- Myford Factory Acceptence Test [MyMyford] Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 2:38 am ((PDT)) Does anyone know whether Myfords are delivered with a FAT sheet? If so can anyone post a copy in the file section or send it by e-mail? I'm currently using a Colchester one which I copied from lathes.co.uk. Just wonder if the criteria are equal as part of some industry standard. What I have measured so far does not seem bad at all for a lathe that 'celebrates'it's 50th anniversary in a fresh coat of paint and a bunch of new parts. Maybe the whole exercise seems to be an overkill but I would like to measure what contributes to any kind of deflection when cutting the first test bar, instead of turning the test bar first and start twisting the bed until it is right. Kind regards, Piet ------- Re: Myford Factory Acceptence Test Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 4:44 am ((PDT)) The only new Myford I've taken delivery of was an ML7 in nineteen seventy mumble and it certainly didn't have an FAT -- I've not seen one for a Myford. I think their approach to accuracy was a bit less formal than the more muscular toolroom contenders, but they often achieved surprisingly good results. I would urge you to treat twisting the bed as a last resort -- I think it has been oversold and oversimplified on the www. The advice from lathe manufacturers is aimed at removing, rather than inducing, twist. If the spindle is not in line with the unworn (#4 in your case) shear edge when the bed is flat (see below), then you should look to correct it by scraping the reference edge of the headstock base, rather than compounding the problems by introducing a twist. (Check the former with a test bar, DTI, and a mag base on an improvised "L" section slider wide enough to span the whole bed, and the latter with a rectangle of thick glass and four cigarette papers.) Just my 2c worth, but that's all you get, these days, for free ! ------- Re: Myford Factory Acceptence Test Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 4:57 am ((PDT)) > I would urge you to treat twisting the bed as a last resort - I think > it has been oversold and oversimplified on the www. The advice from > lathe manufacturers is aimed at removing, rather than inducing, twist. Hi, I think you will find that with the motor hung from the back of the headstock end you will inevitably have a torsional load on the bed. If you bolt the lathe down to something which is either not completely flat or moves with humidity or temperature then you will also induce some twisting. By using the mounting points with adjustable raising blocks, you can remove the twisting caused as above. I agree that if the bed itself is twisted then you shouldn't be trying to untwist it with the mounting but you would need to check the bed only, with everything removed, to find out. I got Myford to re-grind my 1955 Super 7 bed -- a well worthwhile exercise. With that and the age and hence 'seasoning' of the cast iron I am reasonably sure that any inherent bed twist was removed. Tim ------- Re: Myford Factory Acceptence Test Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 7:17 am ((PDT)) Kind of expected that. They must have some QA/QC passing system prior to release you would think. Even some Chinese import stuff comes with that nowadays. Troup, you are right that twisting it right should be avoided or at least kept to a minimum. I do not expect my lathe to pass the Colchester standards but I'll record all measurements in the same way so I understand where any problems may come from. So far all measurements have passed the test or are very slightly above. I agree that the most accurate way of aligning the HS with the ways is to mount an MT-2 test bar in the spindle and take a reference against no. 4 shear. Had an attempt yesterday trying to measure alignment against the 7" face plate but that did not work out as the face plate has quite a bit of a wobble, which can be easily fixed as soon as I have the HS Square with the ways. Kind regards, Piet ------- Re: Myford Factory Acceptence Test Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 11:57 am ((PDT)) Hello. I have seen numerious referances to number 1-4 shear? Is the shear the flat vertical part that goes up to the top bed, the part that the jib strip for the saddle runs against? If so then -- is the front number one, and the back number 4? Sorry to ask what may seem to others an obvious question. Phil ------- Re: Myford Factory Acceptence Test Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 12:25 pm ((PDT)) Phil, you are correct in your assumpions. I had to learn as well as people mentioned in some cases the No. 4 shear as a reference point to check shear parallelism while others referred to it as the No. 2 shear. The difference is whether you have a 'narrow' or 'wide' guide. In the narrow version the no. 4 slide is always unused and therefore can act as the reference point. In the wide version no. 2 shear is considered to be unused and therfore becomes the reference point. In my opinion this is not entirely true as the no. 2 and 3 shears are subject to tailstock travel over a certain length of the bed, whether the expected wear as a result of that is considerable or not depends on various factors. I now that G. Howe uses his no. 2 or R shear, as he names it, as annual datum point to check his lathe. you will notice that he names his rear shear X-1. That caused my confusion the first time someone (Norman) mentioned to use X-4 as the reference point to check the shear to run parallel. See http://www.homepages.mcb.net/howe/NewsLatheMaintenance.htm If we all want to have our conventions right let's assume that N0. 1, X-1 etc is always counted from front to back. Kind regards, Piet ------- Re: Myford Factory Acceptence Test Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 12:39 pm ((PDT)) Phil, Yes, Possibly Yes and Yes. This is where you have really to spend money on getting a few reference books. It is no use whatsoever expecting a forum to fully answer many questions. As it stands, there is recent correspondence about narrow and wide guided Myfords. There has been much prattle about Radford and Cleeve. All good stuff but I know that I have written a lot about my experiences earlier. You must arm yourself with a Handbook with a parts List. Whilst the front shear is obviously no 1, it contains two gibs plus shims and not one as you think. In a narrow guided lathe, this would pull up the cast iron guide in the saddle -- against No2 shear -- and the No1 shear would be adjusted to the underside of No 1 shear. It is a bit like a three sided box, However, the cast iron guide or tongue wears into a bow and the whole thing becomes impossible to adjust to face work. It does a lot of other things but let's miss all that out. So the tongue has to be built up or scraped or something else thought up. You have a choice but the best plan is to use the unworn no 4 shear -- the last one and run the saddle between no's 1 and 4. But No4 fits where it touches -- or doesn't. The trick is to make another gib so that the old tongue or guide becomes the fresh air fit. The new gib is then adjusted with gib screws. Of course, you will probably find that the No1 gib is worn 6" from the chuck end of the lathe -- and the lathe will still turn bananas! Well, you did ask. ------- Re: Myford Factory Acceptence Test Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 1:02 pm ((PDT)) Norman & Piet, Thanks both of you for that, I've just taken some paracetomal and the head's clearing Mine is a wide it seems (ML7), and until the recent thread I had assumed all were the same! Phil ------- Re: Myford Factory Acceptence Test Posted by: "gordon_frnch" gordon-frenchx~xxnetzero.net Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 2:01 pm ((PDT)) I must admit that I'm confused over the FAT reference. My Lathe came with a sheet dated 9/7/1998 Machine No. SKL170008 QC170419 The sheet is divided into Bed Headstock Carriage Tailstock and Leadscrew. The figure for the Permissible error in inches is in one column and the Actual error in inches is in another column. The sheet is signed by inspector C (or L) Parker. Now if there is any information that I can give to the requestor from that is given on this sheet, I'd be glad to oblige, but I'm not sure that this is what is wanted. Gordon, in Roseburg Oregon ------- Re: Myford Factory Acceptence Test Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Fri Nov 2, 2007 2:07 pm ((PDT)) Phil, Actually, I tried to delete my 'missive' when I found that Piet had covered so much -- typing quicker -- and in English. Way back, I wrote in MEW on how I overhauled or made better a pair of ML7's. Piet and I had a lively discussion on the subject. What you have to remember is that wear does not follow two axes but goes to the third dimension. Consequently, one is dealing with assorted chunks of metal which are heading from linear to circular or rounded edges that the lathe finds to travel along -- to get 'bananas'. Drop me a note and I will try to send you my Gospel according to Norman. No Ibuprofens, they are mine for when I run out of alcohol ------- Which to go for? 100 or 125mm 3 jaw chuck? [MyMyford] Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 10:00 am ((PST)) Hi. I have just become the proud (?) owner of a Super 7. Only thing is, it came with nothing much in the way of equipment. No tools, no chucks, centres or anything like that. Now I have sorted out a 4 jaw 150mm (6") chuck and need to purchase a 3 jaw chuck as well. Advice please, whether to go for a 100mm (4") or a 125mm (5") one. Will I have enough clearance over the bed with a 125mm version? I am inclined to go for a TOS brand one from Chronos as I have had a TOS chuck on my previous lathe and it was well made and accurate. Or do I go for an HBM one from RDG with a backplate already fitted? The Toolmex 100mm with Myford threaded back from Chronos at £179.00 would be nice, but it is a lot of money and I can't justify spending that amount. What do others think? Regards Keith New ------- Re: Which to go for? 100 or 125mm 3 jaw chuck? Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 10:14 am ((PST)) Chronos and a faceplate. You know the answer to the first remark but the face plate can be a substitute for a 4 jaw chuck. I was prattling on about 'Martin Cleeve' in other posts. He had a good 3 jaw and fabricated tee slots to use it as 4 jaw. He made all his ML7 tooling with them. My records show that when he was made redundant, he earned his living with the ML7. ------- Re: Which to go for? 100 or 125mm 3 jaw chuck? Posted by: "Eddy Fontaine" eddy.fontainex~xxpandora.be Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 11:27 am ((PST)) Hi. Do not mix good old "Made in England" equipment with China stuff ... ;-) !!! I think that Toolmex-Bison is coming from Poland, TOS from Czechoslovakia, while most of the HBM (Herman Buitelaar Machienenfabriek) is coming from China :-( For those who do not know the site of "HBM", here it is (in Dutch of course!): www.buitelaar.nl Cheers, Eddy ------- Re: Which to go for? 100 or 125mm 3 jaw chuck? Posted by: "peter104223" p.neillx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 11:43 am ((PST)) Alternatively, G & M tools have new Toolmex/Bison chucks with Myford backplate a little chaper than Chronos at £125 http://www.gandmtools.com/cat_leaf.php?id=70. I have a couple of 100mm 3-jaws, a worn Pratt and a new Bison. The Bison is very accurate, TIR is about 0.0015" but I think most of that is from the fit of the backplate on the spindle nose. The Pratt has a runout of 0.012" (not a typo) but I used it for over a year before I got the new one. The Pratt does have a slightly larger bore than the Bison, but it's not really a problem. As to size? Well I can happily hold 4" bar in either of my 3-jaw chucks (with the outside jaws) and 4" is the maximum size you can swing over the cross slide, so I don't see the advantage of going for a 5"/125mm chuck, as you already have the 6" 4 jaw. Peter ------- [MyMyford] how thread metric with an lead screw, an imperial gearbox and a set Posted by: "ilfaitvraimentbeau" ilfaitvraimentbeaux~xxyahoo.fr Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 10:31 am ((PST)) Hello, I am not used writing english... I own a super 7 myford lathe with an imperial leadscrew, an imperial gearbox and a lot of wheels. Can someone tell me how to thread metric with this? Are there any internet pages giving details or pictures? Thank you for your help, Michel (from France) ------- Re: how thread metric with an lead screw, an imperial gearbox and a Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 11:00 am ((PST)) Michel, pleased to meet you. For a imperial (inch) lathe, Myford sells a kit of gears no. 1481. The parts and gears from this convert inch to metric pitches. Are these gears (wheels) you have part of that kit? There is a manual describing their use with the kit. I have the set. Tell us what metric pitch you wish to machine. RichD, Atlanta USA ------- Re: how thread metric with an lead screw, an imperial gearbox and a Posted by: "ilfaitvraimentbeau" ilfaitvraimentbeaux~xxyahoo.fr Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 11:17 am ((PST)) Thank you Rich for your answer. I want to thread pitch 0.75mm. regards ------- Re: how thread metric with an lead screw, an imperial gearbox and a Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 11:35 am ((PST)) I purchased a used set of metric gears and banjo but, alas, no manual. Is an electronic version of the manual available? ------- Re: how thread metric with an lead screw, an imperial gearbox and a Posted by: "peter104223" p.neillx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 11:52 am ((PST)) Copies of gear train setup pages for both imperial & metric screwcutting here: Michel, regardez ici pour une explication: http://www.btinternet.com/~p.neill/Myford_Changewheels1.jpeg et aussi http://www.btinternet.com/~p.neill/Myford_Changewheels2.jpeg Bon chance Peter ------- Re: how thread metric with an lead screw, an imperial gearbox and a Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sun Nov 4, 2007 11:54 am ((PST)) Michel, Ok. Looking at my manual, you will need to replace the normal gear quadrant (that carries all intermediate gears) with the one provided in the 1481 conversion set. It has 2 slots. Without this new quadrant, there is no way to add the correct gears. The stud gear (outer gear below the tumbler) is changed to 45T. Two compound gear sets must be made up. A 60T and 63T gear set is placed on a new stud with the60T running on the stud gear. A 50T and 45T gear set is placed on a stud with the 50T running on the previous 63T. On the gear box input shaft is placed a 60T gear which runs on the previous 45T gear. Now set the gear box to selector position "6" and the lever selector to position "B". You will now feed at the rate of .75mm per revolution. I will scan this manual (1 page) and email it direct to you at your address (ilfaitvraimentbeau(at)yahoo.fr). Will that be a good place? All the best, RichD ------- Re: how thread metric with an lead screw, an imperial gearbox and a Posted by: "durnfjm" durnfjmx~xxaol.com Date: Mon Nov 5, 2007 2:29 am ((PST)) I think this may be an appropriate time to remind the group that many common metric threads can be cut perfectly satisfactorily on the imperial S7B simply by changing the 24 tooth gear on the top of the quadrent with a 34 tooth one. Lots more metric threads can also be cut using other size gears. Mike D ------- Myford ML10 Lathe [MyMyford] Posted by: "Doreen Davis" davisbrandapsx~xxaol.com Date: Mon Nov 5, 2007 12:57 pm ((PST)) Hello All I am as new to this group as I am to using a lathe, I have a secondhand ML10 and just downloaded the manual to get the installation section. First questions, does anyone know where I can get a pair of riser blocks? Are they the same as the ML7 ones? Oh yes and a chip tray? I'm sure I'll have more inane questions once I am mangling metal. Regards Bruce Davis ------- Re: Myford ML10 Lathe Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Nov 5, 2007 4:23 pm ((PST)) Bruce, The riser blocks for the ML10 were quite specialised (refer to lathes.co.uk). In normal practice, they serve two functions. For larger lathes on solid benches or other foundations, they incorporate jacking screws to ensure the bed is not twisted to conform to an out-of-plane foundation surface. On smaller lathes on less-than-rigid workbenches (eg ones which don't have a steel frame), their main function is to allow room for clearing away swarf from under the bed. In the latter situation, especially with a short and relatively torsionally stiff lathe bed like the ML10, hard well-seasoned wooden blocks are OK, preferably at least 3cm thick, 4 or 5cm is more convenient. Or you can make them from steel or aluminium plate offcuts. If the bench is rigid (which ideally it should be), you need to pay close attention to the effect of bolting the lathe down as it can induce a twist. In this case jacking screws are ideal but sheetmetal shims are OK provided you put them between the raiser blocks and the bench (or in your case, the swarf tray). A local sheetmetal shop can make up a swarf tray out of galvanised steel, maybe 1.2mm (speckle finish is good as it doesn't look old so soon). In a home workshop you are unlikely to use flood coolant, so it's more convenient to have them roll the edges around a wire rather than making a deep rim - it makes it a lot easier to get the swarf out. ------- Re: Myford ML10 Lathe Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Mon Nov 5, 2007 6:08 pm ((PST)) If you have a tray made by the local sheet metal basher you might want to consider making it of stainless. It doesn't add much to the cost and looks a bit nicer with no rust. ------- Re: Myford ML10 Lathe Posted by: "findus_75" m.dierkerx~xxgmx.de Date: Tue Nov 6, 2007 12:03 pm ((PST)) Some weeks ago i bought a used ML10. Not in perfect condition, but absolutely ok for me and what i want to do with it. My ML10 came with the original riser blocks. If i had to install the lathe without the riser blocks, i would prefer installing with the "mounting strips" as mentioned in the manual. All dimensions needed are shown in the manual. I'm not sure if a tray would be better than no tray. Without tray it is easier to clean the chips away with a brush, with a tray most of the chips would stay where they fall down. I think i will stay without a tray. Regards Martin (from Germany, so excuse me for my bad english) ------- Headstock alignment? [MyMyford] Posted by: "John Mandell" jmandell2x~xxpointech.com Date: Thu Nov 8, 2007 8:26 am ((PST)) I'm looking for some direction. I have a ML7 (1950s era) that has served me very well for over 15 years -- great machine! Recently, I needed to face a 7" disk of cast iron on the face plate. After I faced it and got a nice finish, I discovered it was not flat -- yikes. I turned a cone! The error is about 10-20 thou, quite noticeable with a straight edge. So, I need to trouble shoot/fix this problem. I suspect my headstock may have gotten out of alignment (I admit to an occasional "crash" in past years.) Is there an accepted procedure for aligning the headstock? Alternate suggestions appreciated! Cheers, John Austin, TX ------- Re: Headstock alignment? Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Thu Nov 8, 2007 9:44 am ((PST)) John, that's a severe error. I can't imagine the headstock being turned that far out of alignment. A common problem, however, is wear in the saddle ways allowing the saddle to turn, that is, pivot about the center. It may not be noticeable, but your extreme case (0.02) represents barely 1/3 of a degree. .02/3.5=.0057 (-tan=.33*). There is a preventive measure for the saddle described years ago where the saddle vertical bearing surface is relieved in the center area preventing the pivoting syndrome. Of course normal uneven wear can still cause your problem as well as bed wear that favors the noted error. RichD, Atlanta ------- Re: Headstock alignment? Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Thu Nov 8, 2007 11:06 am ((PST)) I seem to be beating my head against a brick wall. It is only in the past few days that I have written on the subject. Your saddle guide -- if it is the narrow guide one is now an arc. If it is running on no's 1 and 4 shears, the saddle is out of alignment! Even if hit by a cruise missile, the headstock will be OK. ------- Re: Headstock alignment? Posted by: "John Mandell" jmandell2x~xxpointech.com Date: Thu Nov 8, 2007 12:14 pm ((PST)) Sincerest apologies -- all! I read most of that thread on the saddle guide & thought -- "gee, that doesn't apply to me!" Unfortunately, being on the "Texas side" of the pond, I regret to say that I don't know anyone locally with Myford knowledge -- I do rely on this list for help. How might I discover if I have the "narrow guide?" I'll go back & re-read the recent posts on this topic -- I'm certain that will be of good value! THANKS! Cheers, John ------- Re: Headstock alignment? Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Thu Nov 8, 2007 6:16 pm ((PST)) I hesitate but some things must be asked... Did you lock the carriage while facing the cast iron? ------- Re: Headstock alignment? Posted by: "John Mandell" jmandell2x~xxpointech.com Date: Thu Nov 8, 2007 7:24 pm ((PST)) I can't say for sure, but it's likely I had the saddle locked, esp for the final cut. If not, I would have had the half nuts engaged and I keep a dial indicator on the saddle. I'm certain the saddle would not have moved along the bed any more than 0.001 during the cuts. The final cut would have been quite light (~0.005) Why do you ask? Actually, from the comments, I'm now less concerned by the headstock and much more concerned with 1) the saddle-bed alignment and 2) perhaps the cross slide-saddle alignment. I had never suspected I had wear to this extent! I rarely face a piece this large. I'm certain I would have detected an error by now if the headstock had been so far out. I really do appreciate the comments and criticism. I have some diagnosis & reading to do! Cheers, John ------- Re: Headstock alignment? Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Thu Nov 8, 2007 7:34 pm ((PST)) Please don't be offended; I only asked to ensure that the obvious was not overlooked. On another group a poster had a problem similar to yours that none could solve after numerous suggestions. It turned out that the newbie was using the top slide instead of the crossfeed when facing. ------- Re: Headstock alignment? Posted by: "John Mandell" jmandell2x~xxpointech.com Date: Thu Nov 8, 2007 7:53 pm ((PST)) No worries! (I don't offend too easily, especially when asking for help!) The top slide was definitely locked & not in use! :-)) Cheers, John ------- Re: Headstock alignment? Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:41 pm ((PST)) If you search within this group on the following, you should throw up enough to fell a tree or two.... wide guide narrow guide headstock alignment scraping test bar gib In order to prevent lurching around fairly aimlessly (in the famous words of Rowan Atkinson: "Like a blind man, in a dark room, looking for a black cat [ long pause ] ........ which isn't there !) I would recommend thinking carefully to come up with a train of questions, the answers to which would lead you to the quickest possible resolution. They might include questions like: "How much twisting oscillation, about a vertical axis, can I induce in the carriage, in terms of (say) thousandths of an inch at a distance of one foot -- with the carriage at various places on the bed" (The carriage lock must NOT be applied for this test.) If the answer is, lots, at all points on the bed, you need to adjust the carriage gibs before going any further. If you get lots at the chuck end and virtually none at the tailstock end, you need to scrape, stone, mill or grind 2 of the vertical edges of the ways (which too is governed by the wide guide vs narrow guide search). There's plenty more suggestions of potential questions you need to discover answers for, but I'm travelling at the moment so I'm unable to be more forthcoming; feel free to publish your proposed line of enquiry here for comment. ------- ML4 spindle bearings [MyMyford] Posted by: "Dennis Cook" dennis.cookx~xxzen.co.uk Date: Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:58 pm ((PST)) Thanks to the group I have identified my lathe as an ML4. The thrust bearing on the spindle rumbles under normal boring pressures and both split main bearings can be adjusted up, just, but the spindle is well grooved and probably needs attention. The bed and slides are good enough for my requirements. Can I ask the group some advice as to what to do to recondition the spindle? Do I strip it down and have it re-ground and new phoshor bronze bearings and thrust bearing supplied and fit them myself (ream phosphor bronze to new spindle size) or is it beyond my capability as a newbie? If so, where do I take it to (I live near Birmingham), and would the engineers require the whole lathe. If the headstock casting remains bolted to the bed would there be any major implications in a DIY solution or would it be unuseable due to lack of precision on my part. Has anyone been there/done that recently and can offer advice on where to get the thrust bearing and main bearings (what specific material to ask for etc). I assume Auto engineers would carry out the shaft re-grind. It looks quite straightforward and an interesting job to do, but am I being a little naive? Any help or advice appreciated. Regards, Dennis ------- Re: ML4 spindle bearings Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:42 am ((PST)) Dennis, You are asking a series of questions and, without having sight of your lathe, none of us can give a full answer. Trying to avoid a waffle, I can say that Martin Cleeve aka Kenneth C Hart 'knocked out' the PB bearings in the headstock regularly. It was described in Model Engineer. If, and I say 'if' your spindle is knackered then it is more than possible that the lathe will be uneconomical to repair. If the spindle is OK, you stand a chance of replacing Imperial bearings -- if you can get or make them. Maybe some other person who is au fait can add a bit more. I can say, however, that unless the lathe itself is broken, it can be restored by a reasonably competent person. A full write up was was done in Model Engineer by David Lammas. The restoration included feed nuts and scraping ways. Going off completely at a tangent, learning to scrape etc is a worthwhile task. Completing the circle, what does one do next? Frankly, I would have someone who is on the spot to add his verdict. If it is repairable, all is well. If not? Surprisingly, I would say keep it and perhaps make it into a tool and cutter grinder or something else. It is worth pronouncing that a lathe is something which lies horizontally whilst a lathe which stands vertically might be a drill or a mill or both etc etc. I hope this starts you thinking Norman ------- Super 7 clutch [MyMyford] Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxzweb.co.za Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 1:55 am ((PST)) Hi, Am doing a refurb on a Super 7. It was badly rusted and everything is stripped and being cleaned. I cannot figure how to disassemble the clutch unit though. Anybody done this and can give some pointers? Thanks ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:14 am ((PST)) Phil, You'll have to either tell us the serial number stamped on the bed, or the location of the clutch: is it inside the four-step cone pulley (input to the final stage of the drive) on the countershaft, or the two-step pulley cantilevered off the left end of the countershaft? The two different clutches have very different configurations. ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxzweb.co.za Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:30 am ((PST)) The serial number is SK150562M and it is the 2 step pulley on the left end of the countershaft. ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:25 am ((PST)) Phil, if yours has the nut locking a slot ended screw at the left end -- put the lever at the right end in the engaged position, left. Unlock, remove the nut and carefully screw IN the slotted screw which is actually a push rod. At some point it will drop out of the thread inside and now carefully pick out the external cone/pulley unit. At the right end the black cap can be removed by forcing a sharp blade under the lip to pry it off. Under the boss you took the cap off is a cap that retains the lever shaft. Remove the cap head screw. Pull out the pull rod and spring. Don't lose the steel ball. The rest should be obvious. RichD ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxzweb.co.za Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:32 pm ((PST)) Rich, Thanks can see what you mean. Mine has 2 csk screws holding the slotted bit in place. Removed them. Engaged the lever but it does not move the shaft enough for the slots to clear and be able to turn. Will have to make some sort of other compressor arrangement to get the slot clear. Unless I am missing something else. Phil ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:25 am ((PST)) Phil, WHOA!! Don't take off the round plate yet. Set the lever to the RIGHT. After removing the nut, take a flat ended screwdriver and turn the slotted rod end sticking out clockwise until you see the bronze clutch cone start to withdraw. At some point you will be able to spin the cone off the rod. The rod is under a lot of tension. Go easy and don't slip. Remove the cone assembly. Now, put a washer on the end of the rod and thread the nut back on. Do NOT forget the washer! Hold the nut with a spanner and spin the counter shaft by pulling the belt to screw the nut on and pull the rod out further. At some point the lever assembly will be free (remove the screw and keeper washer on it) allowing you to pull it out of the bearing boss. It will spin round 360* when free. Don't lose the bearing ball in the short push rod behind the lever assy. Now unscrew the rod nut in reverse with the belt. The long push rod and spring with now be free to come out. All of the internal parts should be well greased. RichD ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxzweb.co.za Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 3:25 am ((PST)) Hi Rich, I think my problem is a machine that has been badly abused and I do not see what you are describing. I do not have a nut and slotted rod end that you describe but the shaft looks like it has been sheared off inside the driver plate (name from the exploded diagram -- which is held on by the 2 csk cap screws). I could post some pics on Photobucket or elsewhere if it would help to get this problem sorted out. Phil ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 8:18 am ((PST)) Phil, Uh-Oh! It does sound like a disaster. Shoot a pic of it for the files & I'll look see. This is what I have on my S7: The small steel round plate is 1.5" diameter on the boss of the bronze cone disc of 3.3/4" diameter with a 1/4" BSF stud (rod) sticking thru. One thing to try. Push the lever harder than normal. It will drive the push rod deeper than normal and cam over onto the full round part. Maybe this will allow the bronze cone to spin free from the keys. RichD ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 10:12 pm ((PST)) Phil, I saw your Super7 pics on the group site. Unfortunately that is a different model than mine. Different clutch operating mechanism from what I can see. Refer to the manual for that type as there should be a parts breakdown that may help. All the best, Richd ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxzweb.co.za Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:02 am ((PST)) Rich, Haven't posted any pics yet so there must be another Phil around. Today I drilled into the broken off piece, tapped it and put in a set screw. On tightening this unscrewed the push rod and I was able to get the thing apart. Will now have to make a new rod which is longer so I can put on the lock nut and cut a slot. Thanks for taking the time to explain what should happen. Without that I think something would have broken. Cheers ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:13 am ((PST)) Phil, good to hear that. The pushrod on mine is hardened steel, at least on the threaded end. This thing is really tricky to take apart without damaging something. Do you need the length dimension? Send me a pic of your headstock just to confirm we are on the same page. Rich ------- Re: Super 7 clutch Posted by: "tetramachine" Tetrawheelsx~xxhotmail.com Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:46 pm ((PST)) Just caught your posts, mine had a similar problem. For the price of the pushrod just order a new one from Myford about $20 as well as a nut, remember these are BSF threads. ------- Pulley Lock Assembly - What does it do? [MyMyford] Posted by: "keatinglaurie" lawrence.keatingx~xxgems2.gov.bc.ca Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:21 am ((PST)) Another newbie question: On the parts list for the Super 7 headstock assembly, there is an item called the Pulley Lock Asssembly (Drg. Ref. H32, Part No A2751). I'm wondering what this does? Do you use this to lock the spindle so you can remove the chuck? If so, what is the best way to remove a chuck? Can you unscrew it by hand or do you need some mecahnical help ie. a piece of bar held in the chuck jaws for leverage? Thanks ------- Re: Pulley Lock Assembly - What does it do? Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:45 am ((PST)) laurie, I've completely forgotten about that. It's sort of hidden from view. Yes, it locks the spindle via the belt pulley as long as you have the bull gear lock in place. This would be better than engaging the back gear without unlocking the bull gear to remove a chuck. I usually pull on the chuck key if the chuck is not too tight. If it's too tight I put a wood block on the rear shear and bump a chuck jaw against it. RichD ------- Re: Pulley Lock Assembly - What does it do? Posted by: "keatinglaurie" lawrence.keatingx~xxgems2.gov.bc.ca Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 12:32 pm ((PST)) Thanks Rich. I'm really having fun as I clean up the lathe and find all these little pieces. Just came across the saddle lock last night. Checked the pasts list to be sure and there it was. Sure wish all machine manuals came with such comprehensive parts break down and exploded parts diagrams. ------- Re: Pulley Lock Assembly - What does it do? Posted by: "tobybishopx~xxaol.com" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:06 pm ((PST)) Rich, Laurie, I've assumed that it was to lock the pulley in place while it was dosed with oil in preparation for using the back gear. On my S7, the lock holds the pulley in exactly the right place to align the oil nipple on the pulley with a 'cast-in' cut out which allows the oil gun to reach the nipple. The pulley needs good lubrication when back gear is used. I'm not sure how I'm going to remove my chuck as it hasn't been taken off in probably 10 years -- this current lathe is new to me. I'm doubtful about using any form of lock pin or engaging back gear for this, but I do like the idea of bumping a chuck jaw against a block of wood, repeated small bumps will eventually release it. cheers Toby ------- What is the Knock Off Peg for? [MyMyford] Posted by: "keatinglaurie" lawrence.keatingx~xxgems2.gov.bc.ca Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:51 pm ((PST)) Another newbie question: On the Myford Carriage Assembly parts diagram for the Super 7, they show part # 33 as a Knock Off Peg. It's located under the cross slide end bracket just to the front of the adjusting collar. Anybody know what the purpose is for this peg? Thanks ------- Re: What is the Knock Off Peg for? Posted by: "tobybishopx~xxaol.com" tobybishopx~xxaol.com Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:25 pm ((PST)) Hi Lawrence, the knock off peg pushes the power cross feed engaging knob back in, preventing it from power feeding too far inwards and reaching the end of the feedscrew. Outward power cross feed just unwinds the feedscrew from its nut and so no damage is done. If your machine has power cross feed, I'd really appreciate a favour. Mine is missing the 2 bevel gears and the first spur gear. I'm trying to find out how many teeth I need to cut on the replacements. It's items No.27 and No.52 on the Apron Assembly drawings, where No.27 has a bevel gear and a spur gear. These bits can be seen with a mirror and a torch, up behind the apron. If you can try to count the teeth numbers (or anyone else reading this) I'd be most grateful. Myford want £150 for the few parts that are missing, and won't answer my emails on the subject of teeth numbers. If anyone can confirm that these gears are 24DP and the pressure angle too, that would be even better! Thanks in anticipation Toby, Fareham, Hants ------- Re: What is the Knock Off Peg for? Posted by: "keatinglaurie" lawrence.keatingx~xxgems2.gov.bc.ca Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 3:19 pm ((PST)) Thanks Toby. Makes perfect sense now that I think of it. I've still got some work to do before I can make any chips with my new/old lathe but am looking forward to seeing what his baby will do. I've got 12 3/4" thick x 5" dia. steel discs that will become locomotive drivers. I believe that power cross feed will be VERY nice indeed for that job! Don't know if I have a proper mirror to look up under the apron (sounds rude!!) but if I do, I'll see what I can find. ------- Replace cross slide lead screw and nut [MyMyford] Posted by: "keatinglaurie" lawrence.keatingx~xxgems2.gov.bc.ca Date: Wed Nov 21, 2007 10:03 am ((PST)) I have about 0.030" backlash on the cross slide lead screw/nut on my power cross slide S7. Looks like I'll have to replace both. My under- standing is that Myford no longer supplies the nut alone (mine is the older bronze nut) but supplies a matched hardened steel nut and leads- crew instead. Looking in the owners manual and parts breakdown, this doesn't "appear" to be a big job -- just wondering if there are any things I should watch out for. Thanks ------- Re: Replace cross slide lead screw and nut Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:25 pm ((PST)) Laurie, Please forgive this if I'm seeming to presume your conclusion to be deficient in any respect: I've no way of knowing your level of expertise and/or experience, but it's a shame to hang back on the opposite assumption when a simpler alternative might be worth investigating 1) Have you narrowed down the backlash to the fit of the feedscrew in the nut? I've seen a few cases where a new feedscrew has been fitted when the problem was elsewhere -- usually free play between the thrust faces. 2) Presuming the problem is the fit of the feedscrew in the nut, you could consider (since you have a bronze nut) cutting off a slice at the inboard end of the nut and reattaching it in such a way as to eliminate most of the backlash. Before ballscrews, classy brands such as DSG often did this from new. Whether this is worth it depends largely on whether and how much uneven wear there is on the feedscrew (as opposed to within the nut) You could check this with the following procedure: CHECK FOR AXIAL BACKLASH OF A FEEDSCREW / NUT PAIR With the nut gripped in the lathe spindle chuck, and the feedscrew held in the drill chuck: run the screw into the nut with the tailstock unclamped, and check the axial play at various positions by pulling and pushing the tailstock, with the DTI touching (say) the back of the drill chuck. [The purpose of doing it this way is to eliminate tilting slop, which would muddy the waters.] If the measurement is consistent, either the screw is not worn, or (much less likely) the wear is uniform: in either case, splitting the nut in two as described above is worth consideration, particularly if you will be keeping the lathe for a long time, as you will be able to continue adjusting out future wear. ------- Re: Replace cross slide lead screw and nut Posted by: "Lawrence Keating" lawrence.keatingx~xxgems2.gov.bc.ca Date: Thu Nov 22, 2007 10:18 am ((PST)) Thanks for the info trOup. I tore down the cross slide enough last night so the nut was free of the slide and only supported by the feed screw. It was VERY sloppy in all planes -- I would say its definitely worn out and time to replace it. Mind you -- it's had 30 years of service so I'm not overly surprised :-) I've already received a quote from Myford and hope to place an order in the next few days. ------- Leadscrew Half Nut Adjustment [MyMyford] Posted by: "Lawrence Keating" lawrence.keatingx~xxgems2.gov.bc.ca Date: Thu Nov 22, 2007 12:53 pm ((PST)) Still being new to a Myford, does anybody know what the proper procedure is for adjusting the backlash on the Super 7 leadscrew half nuts? (I'm finding the Myford manual lacks a lot of detail on how you're actually supposed to use the lathe.) Last night I discovered a spring loaded screw on the bottom of the carriage that affects how much the half nuts close on the lead screw. If I screwed it in far enough, the half nuts would not even engage. However, I don't want them to close too tightly and cause drag or excessive wear. How much backlash should there be? Thanks ------- Re: Leadscrew Half Nut Adjustment Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:41 am ((PST)) Laurie, It's not really feasible to use backlash as a criterion for adjustment, of the travel limiting screw of which you write, because there's also clearance in the dovetail guide for the half nuts, potentially also some end float in the leadscrew (in practice these should both be adjusted to be minimal). The criterion I use is frictional torque, as felt on the handwheel at the right hand end of the bed (disengage the screwcutting gearbox or changewheel train first, so you're not driving any gear pairs whatsoever). Starting from having the screw wound in far enough to create a perceptible condition of free play, check how hard the handwheel is to turn (say, clockwise), starting from an arbitrary but marked position of the carriage along the bed. Gradually back off the adjustment screw until there is a perceptible increase in frictional torque on that handwheel WHEN YOU APPLY DOWNWARDS PRESSURE TO THE HALF-NUT ENGAGEMENT LEVER, from the fully engaged position. The ideal situation is when this adjustment is just at the point where this increase can first be detected; however it's not a critical setting. Its purpose is really only to protect the leadscrew from over-muscular closing efforts by the sort of people whose handshake causes physical injury. ------- Re: Leadscrew Half Nut Adjustment Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Sun Nov 25, 2007 5:31 pm ((PST)) Laurie, Wow, strange coincidence, this is just what I was fettling this morning. I have just replaced an ML7 apron, topslide and crosslide on an ancient Super 7 with a proper Super 7 version. Once I had got it all fitted, tried the feedscrew lever to find no activity at all. The problem turned out to be that whoever owned the Super 7 one originally had been over enthusiastic in his use of the feedscrew engagement lever. With the result that both actuating pins under the lever pointed outwards. The feedscrew nuts were of the mazak variety and the pins had been pushed too hard and were no longer at 90 degrees, more like 80 degrees. Fortunately, the ML7 apron had phosphor-bronze half nuts fitted and the actuating pins were still at 90 degrees. Cleaned up the phosphor-bronze ones (there was a lot of debris in the threads) and fitted them in the Super 7 assembly, problem solved. So, check the actuating pins aren't damaged or out of alignment, that the two slots on the reverse side of the lever aren't damaged either, and that the threads on the 1/2 nuts aren't choked up with hardened oil and swarf. All three can stop the 1/2 nuts from engaging properly. After I had fettled mine, there is very little play when engaged as they are seating correctly. Keith ------- Myford ML7 question [MyMyford] Posted by: "legrangp" pierrelgx~xxtelkomsa.net Date: Sat Nov 24, 2007 2:47 am ((PST)) I have recently bought a 1956 model ML7. After a thorough cleaning job it is working well. The problem that I have is that after studying the manual they mention with the figure that there is a back gear lever as well as the screw for the back gear key. Up to now my engineering knowledge has left me in the dark as to what the purpose of this is. If I enable the gears it locks the headstock in such a way that I can use it to remove the headstock. Any help on how to use this will be appreciated. The second question ties in with the first. In the manual they mention the speeds and then they also mention a geared and ungeared speed. My original thought was that the back gear key might be the geared speed but, as mentioned above, that locked the headstock. If the back gear then does not form part of the geared speed how do I get to that? Pierre ------- Re: Myford ML7 question Posted by: "Cliff oggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Sat Nov 24, 2007 3:18 am ((PST)) Pierre. To use back gear (which gives a lower speed and higher power) you need to use the lever that you have found to engage the gear and also disengage the key, which is a steel peg with two teeth fitted by an Allen screw to the side of the bull gear. Loosen the screw, slide the key out from the bronze gear, and tighten it in the disengaged position. To return to normal drive you should reverse that procedure, i.e. disengage back gear and engage the key. What you are trying to do at the moment is to drive the spindle at two different speeds which effectively locks it. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: Myford ML7 question Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sat Nov 24, 2007 3:25 am ((PST)) Pierre, You're half way there: Engaging back gear on an ML7 is a two step process. The first step is to disengage a little sliding dog with teeth, which locks the rotation of the 65T bull gear by engaging with a few teeth of the smaller gear which lies immediately to the right of the three- step aluminium V belt pulley on the spindle. The lathe comes from the factory with a short-ended allen key, 5/32" AF, the short end being about 1/4" long and with an interior angle of about 120 degrees instead of the usual 90 degrees. This is used to undo the cap screw you'll find if you turn the bull gear and inspect its right hand face. Slide the dog out of mesh, then nip the screw up again. Now you can reposition the lever which you've already discovered, and the chuck will now revolve slower in relation to the spindle pulley, giving access to the three 'geared' speeds referred to in the manual. ------- Re: Myford ML7 question Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sat Nov 24, 2007 9:13 am ((PST)) Hello. Obviously to restore 'normal' gearing you do the reverse action, that is undoing the cap screw and then pushing the detent home (or inwards) towards the spindle's centre. I often find that after I have pushed it fully home, if I then twist the chuck slightly before tightning the cap screw, and whilst still pushing down on the detent, it goes home a little more. If you don't get it fully home it makes a bit of a rattling noise in the normal mode of operation. By the way when you are using the backgear it is normal for it to make quite a noise compared to 'normal' running. That is because the gear wheels which are normally locked up, are now turning in the headstock. Phil ------- Re: Myford ML7 question Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sat Nov 24, 2007 3:36 pm ((PST)) Pierre, One other thing which is not entirely obvious: Whenever you're running in backgear, there are a couple of sites which need lubrication (if you never use it, these never need attention). As well as smearing a bit of gear lubricant on the two pairs of gears -- preferably some gear-specific compound, of about the consistency of petroleum jelly (so it doesn't fly off and get on the belts) you should give a few pumps of oil to the nipple in the three-step pulley on the main spindle, because when the back gear is in use, this pulley turns on the spindle. I'll talk a bit about lubrication nipples and oil pumps in a separate post. ------- Re: Myford ML7 question Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:17 am ((PST)) http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe/backgear.html all the answers, with handy colour pictures etc.... David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- remove tailstock lever [MyMyford] Posted by: "chardinej" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:17 am ((PST)) I have a Super 7, 1962 vintage. On mine the barrel locking lever on the tailstock is on the same side (back side) as the eccentric and lever assembly. In a parts drawing I have, the barrel locking lever is on top of the tailstock so my operation book must be from a different year. I would like to remove the eccentric and lever assembly so that I can adjust the barrel locking lever to lock earlier, thus preventing the lever from fouling the saddle as it does now. I will probably do this by adding a thin shim washer. However, I can't undo the barrel locking lever until I remove the eccentric and lever assemble. Could someone advise how to do this. Thanks, John Chardine Sackville, New Brunswick Canada ------- Re: remove tailstock lever Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:03 pm ((PST)) John, Remove the self-locking nut from the end of the eye bolt. Dropping the clamp plate off will reveal a grub screw (not shown in the manual on this site, which -- as you describe -- shows the handle on top, which I have never spotted on a Super 7 in the wild). This screw is vertically disposed inside the operator side of the casting, entering into a circumferential groove in -- so as to retain -- the eccentric and lever assembly. With this backed off, the latter item can be withdrawn enabling the barrel clamp screw to be removed. ------- Re: remove tailstock lever Posted by: "chardinej" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:00 am ((PST)) Many thanks. I'll try that tonight. John ------ Re: remove tailstock lever Posted by: "chardinej" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:25 am ((PST)) Just had a quick look at mine and no grub screw is revealed. I wonder if it is hidden under the sole plate? John ------- Re: remove tailstock lever Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:21 am ((PST)) Sorry about that -- I should have thought it through more clearly. The sole plate is dropped off after the clamp plate, by loosening the set over screws, and inserting a wide screwdriver blade into the gap above the tenon and gently levering up on alternate sides. ------- Original Super 7 Clutch - overhaul [MyMyford] Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Sun Nov 25, 2007 5:42 pm ((PST)) Hi. Has anyone on this group ever taken apart the original Super 7 clutch as part of an overhaul? The clutch is part of the 4 way top pulley wheel and not the later outboard one on the 2 way pulley wheel. Mine's locked up solid! First indications are that at some time in the past, the clutch has started slipping and the resultant heat has distorted the right hand part that fits on the drive shaft. The pulley itself seems to have escaped damage. I don't want to start stripping it down to find some highly-compressed spring or ball bearing flies out at me or gets lost in the further recesses of the workshop, never to be seen again. Replacements are not available. I have a diagram of the clutch from Myford which will help once I have persuaded the clutch apart. regards Keith ------- Re: Original Super 7 Clutch - overhaul Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Nov 25, 2007 10:47 pm ((PST)) Keith, Yes, I recently acquired a 1954 Super 7, which I am partway through overhauling, including the clutch. When you say <> I'm not entirely sure which part you mean. Can you clarify with reference to the item numbers on the Myford diagram, and also explain the observa- tions which lead you to the conclusions you (tentatively) advance? (Regarding both this, and your feeling that the pulley is OK.) My untutored hunch would be that prolonged slipping would most likely lead to the outside diameter of the "Split metal clutch ring" (which is cast iron) and the corresponding bore of the 4-step pulley (also cast iron) ploughing furrows in each other to the point where they became semi-inseparable. (Maybe this is what you mean by "distorted", which I would personally save for the case where a part does not return to its original shape, on cooling from thermal expansion at temperatures high enough to change the internal stress distribution -- I think the V belt would be starting to melt if things got that hot.) Is it possible that the clutch is simply adjusted too tight? Try removing the plug screw (#7) and see if the locking grub screw (#6) is lined up underneath it. If so, remove it and see if you can unscrew the underlying screw (#5). Either of these, or both, may be very tight: if so, make sure you use a new allen key of superior quality (eg Unbrako) for the locking screw, and a conventional screwdriver of the right size to exactly fit the slot of screw #5, and apply some heat and penetrating oil some time before attempting. If it is not discovered under the plug screw, the position of the locking grub screw can be inferred by turning the countershaft until the two grub screws #11 are uppermost, at which point the locking grub screw, and the wedge-shaped push rod etc, will line up in the same plane with the furthermost screw #11, from the operator's point of view. If it doesn't line up, given that being seized you can't rectify this, things are a bit more serious, get back to us and we'll see what we can dream up. ------- Re: Original Super 7 Clutch - overhaul Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:53 am ((PST)) Dear Keith, Yes I have taken an original clutch apart on my 1955 Super 7. However it was over 10 years ago! I don't remember any nasty springs or ball bearings flying around. I will need to strip it down again soon because of wear in the countershaft bearings but was not worried about doing so. I do remember the clutch being a bit of a so and so to adjust but unfortunately I can't remember the details. If you do have problems, contact me and at least I can look at mine and see how it really fits! Best Regards Tim ------- Re: Original Super 7 Clutch - overhaul Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:29 pm ((PST)) tr0up. The part is down as Part No 20 on the Motorising Assembly diagram. Myford part A2016. It is certainly not looking too healthy as when the shaft rotates, it is not parallel around its circumference when compared to the cone pulley which it seems to abut to. Instead, it is bent in and out in a couple of places and has a crack in it as well. It could possibly have previously been coerced away from the cone pulley by use of a screwdriver or lever. I can get the capscrew off inside the countershaft cone pulley but the holes below are not lined-up. So I'll have to strip it down by taking out the shafts first. The actuating shaft still moves in or out fairly well, but does not disengage the clutch. What is the best order to strip down the parts, do you think? Regards Keith ------- Re: Original Super 7 Clutch - overhaul Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:10 pm ((PST)) Sorry, Keith, the diagram I have from Myford of the series 1 clutch is a different one from yours (so the item numbers differ). Mine is just a sectional view of the assembled item. My copy of the manual (with the exploded Motorising Assembly) actually shows the later model clutch. I'll post a scan of mine some time soon and let you know where to find it, so we're talking the same language. Any chance you could post yours, which might also assist sorting things out? If necessary, I can measure up the undamaged bits and post dimensioned drawings if you need to remake them. ------- Re: Original Super 7 Clutch - overhaul Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:27 pm ((PST)) Tr0up, Success! See below My S7 seems to be one of the very early ones destined for Germany as the screwcutting ratio plate and the belt speed plate are both in German. But the screwcutting changewheel ratios are the same as for an English model. This lathe is a conundrum. Part of the reason for going for the Super 7 rather than an ML7 was the clutch. Last night, I thought I would "just try one or two things", you know how you do? So I decided to "try" just undoing the grubscrews from afore- mentioned part no 20, there's two at 90 deg. to each other. Things moved! By now I was getting cavalier with the allen keys so slackened off the split oilite ring from the L H end. This gave me just enough slack to gently persuade the cone pulley to move left, and part 20 to move right a bit. Some of the clutch itself hove into sight and gave me enough leeway to rotate part 20 and the clutch adjusting screw hole to align with the corresponding hole on the pulley and push the two parts back in again. Now I could get at the grubscrew, which I managed evetually to remove; it had been tightened hard down. It was very high in the hole, nearly flush with the top of the hole it sits in. Underneath was the actual adjustment screw which I screwed down towards the drive shaft as far as it would go. It went in a long way and I fully expected it to run out of thread and fall into the clutch mechanism's nether regions. It didn't. Tried the clutch operating lever and found it engaged the clutch when pushed in. It released fully when pulled out. Oh joy. Bolted everything back together, tried the clutch again a few times. It worked on hand power pulling the drive belt, so I tried again with the motor running. Deep joy, as Stanley Unwin might have said. It works perfectly well, with the adjustment turned right back to minimum. So it appears the setting before was way over the top so it was likely binding even when the clutch was fully disengaged. I'll scan the relevant pages which show the clutch when I can get at the scanner. It's not that clear what's lurking underneath, but hpefully others can make good use of the info. Noticed the spindle drive belt is in less than A1 condition, so will probably need to replace it before too long. Humm. Tr0up, thanks for the offer of help, I thought 'if he can just dive in and have a go at stripping down his clutch, so can I'. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Result! All this fettling is getting me very well acquainted with the workings of the beast, as I do so, I get more and more impressed with the way the thing is put together. No wonder it's got a fan club. Keith ------- Re: Original Super 7 Clutch - overhaul Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:55 pm ((PST)) > Success! Hooray, and Yay, etc. Let joy be unconfined ! If you do get around to putting up the diagram, I think it would help a lot of people. Prior info on this model of clutch on the internet is sparse indeed, and some is inaccurate. I've posted an edited version of the simpler diagram (which is mainly aimed at those who wish to adjust their clutch) at: http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc237/TrouPhoto/Super7clutchearly- simplified.gif I wrote up a detailed adjustment procedure in a post a few months ago -- I won't search for it and put the post number up here 'cos my dialup has reverted to the sorts of speeds normally associated with tin cans and string. There is a search facility on yahoo groups but it only seems to be available from one particular sort of window, and I always have to blunder through the site, muttering incoherently for some time before stumbling on it. ------- NOTE TO FILE: Painting a Myford A question came up now [November 2007] about repainting a Myford lathe. That particular MyMyford conversation, along with an extremely detailed how-to reply has been placed in the generic file here called "Finish for Tools" as most of this topic is applicable to other lathes and machines. See the article "Painting [MyMyford]" there dated Nov 26, 2007. Sometimes I'll leave the odd reference to painting here in this file, when it's buried in another conversation, but most painting discussions will go solely to that "Finish for Tools" file. ------- Sight glass in old super 7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "lamestllama2000" ericx~xxeparsonage.com Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:43 pm ((PST)) Hi, whilst preparing to paint my ML7 I thought it might be a good idea to get my very old super 7 back to its original colour. Can anybody tell me how to remove the sight glass for the oiler on the head casting (it is the super 7 with the drip oiler / not wick type)? Does the bezel just unscrew? Should I just leave it in there and mask around? I don't see the parts listed under myford spares so I am just concened I might not be able to get another if I break it. Regards Eric ------- Re: Sight glass in old super 7 Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:27 pm ((PST)) Eric, The oiler sight glass on the original S7 seems to be a one-piece plastic cylindrical tank with a clear front. It has a large hole in the top rear for the reduced tip of the brass needle valve housing, and a small hole at the bottom rear for the accumulated oil to flow out into the oiler passageway for the front bearing. In my case I can rotate the entire tank somewhat and pull it part way out, within the limits of the fit of the large hole around the small brass tip. My hunch is that the brass needle valve housing is a firm press fit in the headstock casting, and that if you use a screw with the correct thread acting on top of a spacer bush to winch it out, the plastic tank will simply pull right out. However if your tank will not move at all at present, you may still not be out of the woods. If you decide to mask in place, make sure you do a really thorough job, (and perhaps get advice) because the solvents in the paints, which can seep through a single layer of tape, may do no favours to the plastic. It's not going to be easy to mask the bezel due to the knurled-style rim. It's clearly not impossible because that is very evidently how mine was painted by the previous owner. However he brush painted it, which minimises the risk of intrusion, because you can avoid painting over the masking tape. You might be advised to cut narrow strips of self- amalgamating rubber electrical tape for the bezel, at least. One more thing about my previous suggestions: there may be merit in talking to someone who knows a lot about paint systems for different metals about suitable pre-treatment for the diecast covers (I suspect they're Zamac, or some other zinc/alu/magnesium alloy) to ensure adhesion. Do you realise the original Super 7 was 'Dove grey' (presumably a lighter shade than the later, more familiar grey) ? ------- Re: Sight glass in old super 7 Posted by: "Eric Parsonage" ericx~xxeparsonage.com Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:57 pm ((PST)) Hi. I did not know that but I did know the hammertone silver it is in at the moment was not the right colour :) Eric ------- Re: Sight glass in old super 7 Posted by: "Eric Parsonage" ericx~xxeparsonage.com Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:16 pm ((PST)) Hi. I can't get my bezel to undo more than about 1/8 of a turn. I was wondering if it was possible that the reduced tip of the brass needle valve housing passes through it also. Or if just more force is required. If I can get a spare sight glass and bezel I would be tempted to break the old one out and then cut a slot into the new one so that it could be replaced without pulling out the needle valve housing. I have written to Myford about new sight glasses and bezels. Regards Eric ------- Re: Sight glass in old super 7 Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:26 pm ((PST)) Eric: I think the sight glass, reservoir and bezel is all of a piece. One eighth of a turn is all I get, but the whole reservoir turns at the same time. I wouldn't try more force. Peer through the 'glass' and you should be able to see the hole at the top back. Does it move sideways relative to the tip of the brass housing as you turn the bezel? I seriously doubt Myfords would hold stocks for this 50 years on, given that they stopped carrying clutch parts for the same model quite some time ago. But I wish you luck with your quest, I'd be delighted to be wrong on this... Keith, if you're reading this, you evidently have a manual for the original series 1 Super 7: could you check the drawing for the drip feed oiler and see if the bezel and/or glass is a separate part from the reservoir? ------- Re: Sight glass in old super 7 Posted by: "Eric Parsonage" ericx~xxeparsonage.com Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:00 am ((PST)) On 28/11/2007, tr0up wrote: > mmmm ... hammertone silver ... tasty ! What is worse is that he stripped it back to bare metal to do that. But having done that he did not bother using any filler. Given that he took it to bare metal he could have done a really good job with not a lot more effort. Also he ripped out the switch gear from the Mk 1 industrial stand and made a flat aluminium door (flat sheet) to go over that opening. He discarded the door below the switch panel as it did not match his new creation and put in another piece of flat aluminium in its place. Then mounted a domestic light switch as the motor switch. It has taken me a lot of time on ebay to get the various bits to get the switching arrangements looking like the original. I could still do with the door to go over the lower opening. I do have a set of drawings for the part (infact for the whole cabinet) from myford. Unfortunately I don't have the neccessary sheetmetal bending/cutting and welding equipment to make a new one. Regards Eric ------- Myford do have parts for Sight glass in old super 7 Posted by: "Eric Parsonage" ericx~xxeparsonage.com Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:56 pm ((PST)) > I seriously doubt Myfords would hold stocks for this 50 years on, I thought the same to but tried them anyway..... > Dear Sir, > On this model you have to remove the plastic insert completely and > refit with a new type oil site window, which is a press in type > secured with an 'O' ring. Part no. 650541-7/8 dia. > £8.22 plus p.p. and VAT Regards Malcolm Townsend So I have just ordered the parts. I still have not got the old arrangement out yet and would appreciate any thoughts about how to do this. I cannot undo the bezel holding the sight glass in by more than 1/8 turn. I could use more force but not knowing if the bezel is stuck to the sight glass or not is stopping me at the moment. Regards Eric ------- Re: Sight glass in old super 7 Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:40 pm ((PST)) Tr0up and Eric No, I don't have that bit of the manual, sorry. Malcolm at Myford very kindly sent me photocopies covering the clutch components, which is what I will make available to the rest of the group. (Malcolm, if you read this, is that OK by you? I don't want to abuse any copyright). Thanks for the info by the way, I could see enough to give me a clue as to how the clutch goes together -- see appropriate thread. But, back to sight glasses. I needed to overhaul the sight glass on my super 7 as well as it was practically opaque. You could not see anything through it, much less whether there was any oil flowing so it was essential it was cleaned- up before I started using the lathe in anger. I found that the bezel turned without any difficulty when I tried it (I must be lucky this time) and extracted same OK. What's revealed below when you remove the bezel and glass is that it is the white plastic tube's end that is threaded and this threaded part seems to be a slightly larger diameter than the hole that the rest of the tube fits in. Meaning the bezel is just screwed onto the plastic tube's end. The tube itself seems to be a tight push fit in it's mounting hole and so stays where it is, or should do. The glass is just held in place on the end of the tube by the bezel, there is no recess to hold the glass in the tube itself. So it could well just drop out once the bezel is removed. There is a hole at the top back of the plastic tube and is a fair bit bigger than the brass tube passing through it, which feeds the oil in from above. So, if you can't get more than 1/8th of a turn on the bezel, it suggests that the whole tube is free to rotate in it's hole and stopping turning once the top back hole touches the brass feed tube. If you try to persuade it to turn further either one of four things might happen. 1. the plastic tube distorts or cracks against the brass tube. 2. the brass tube gets bent 3. the plastic tube snaps off at the threaded end 4. the bezel starts turning ok I noted when refurbishing the sight glass that it could be very easy to cross-thread the bezel when replacing it. That might be what's happened to yours. Hopefully, you might be able to persuade it to start to come loose if you hold it with the aid of a piece of cloth in order to increase your finger's grip on it. Also, the glass itself is very delicate and could so easily be lost or damaged when not in place on it's tube. It appeared to be like thin circular slide glass as used on microscopes -- it did not appear to be plastic but very thin proper glass. So take care. If finger pressure and cloth still don't shift it, perhaps gentle gripping in a pair of pliers with cloth to pad the jaws and so avoid damage to the bezel might just do the trick. Keep an eye on what's happening down the bottom end of the tube whilst you do this, though. So if possible, keep the cloth clear of the glass so you can still see down the tube. Hope it works out all right. Keith ------- Re: Sight glass in old super 7 Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:46 pm ((PST)) > mmmm ... hammertone silver ... tasty ! Mine's in what can only be described as battleship grey. The paint appears to be original though. Does anyone know what shade of cream was used between the bed slideways, or was it just undercoat? There's very little of the original paint still there. Keith ------- Re: Sight glass in old super 7 Posted by: "Eric Parsonage" ericx~xxeparsonage.com Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:56 pm ((PST)) Keith, Thanks for the information. Hopefully I will get to give your suggestions a go tonight. Eric ------- Setting Up Super 7 Saddle/Apron [MyMyford] Posted by: "les_steamtrain" les_steamtrainx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:59 am ((PST)) Hi, Having stripped down my Myford Super 7 power crossfeed model and replaced several items, I am now in the position of setting up the saddle and apron. Does anyone have any tips on the easiest method of doing this? Thanks Les ------- Re: Setting Up Super 7 Saddle/Apron Posted by: "Lawrence Keating" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:09 am ((PST)) I'd be interested in how you actually remove the apron on a Super 7. I've just purchased a very well cared for 33 year old Super 7. I've cleaned it from top to bottom and the only thing that needs replacing is the power cross feed leadscrew and nut. But I'd like to check and clean the leadscrew half nuts as well and it looks like you have to remove the apron to do so? Thanks ------- Re: Setting Up Super 7 Saddle/Apron Posted by: "Les Engineer" les_steamtrainx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:04 pm ((PST)) Dismantling the Apron is quite straighforward. The Super 7 manual has been posted to this group, so it's quite easy to see how the parts are dismantled. In a nut shell, remove the top slide, cross slide, and the saddle (having removed the gib strips) then drop the lead screw and the apron will slide off. Les ------- Re: Setting Up Super 7 Saddle/Apron Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:18 pm ((PST)) How much harder is it to drop the leadscrew if the lathe has the QC gearbox? steamcat ------- Re: Setting Up Super 7 Saddle/Apron Posted by: "Les Engineer" les_steamtrainx~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 1:03 am ((PST)) My S7 isn't fitted with a QC gearbox, however I don't think it makes any difference, I just removed the hand wheel, knocked out a pin from the leadscrew, removed the bracket at the tailstock end, then a collet; the apron was then able to be slid off. (I don't know if this is the correct method but it worked for me.) Les ------- Myford Replacement Bronze for ML7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "philiptuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:06 pm ((PST)) Hello. Are the bearings of Myford's ML7 headstock replacement 'kit' (hardened spindle and bronze bearings) adjustable for future wear, the same as the existing white metal ones are, or are they machined to fit their new spindle in the belief that they will never wear? If they are adjustable is it the same method as the original white metal ones -- shims under the bearing caps? Phil ------- Re: Myford Replacement Bronze for ML7 Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Sat Dec 1, 2007 11:22 am ((PST)) Phil, as far as I know the replacement spindle is hardened and the Bronze bearings have the same layout as the WM ones and are adjustable. You will have to scrape them for good surface contact. 333 GBP sounds a bit steep to me though. I thought my bearings were gone as well but so far there is stil some life left in them and I wonder if I ever will wear them out given the fact that they gave the previous owner almost 50 years of service. A pensioned machine builder in my village has a ML-7 that was totally gutted and he made one-piece bronze bearings (non adjustable) himself without any ill effects it seems. He even has them lubricated with grease instead of oil. Only complaint is that they run a bit stiff at initial start up under winter conditions. Others have advised to have the bearing surfaces hard chromed and ground. Don't know the economics of that solution. If your bearings are totally gone you may consider to make your own bronze bearings and see how they hold up. If not, you can still spend the money and go the Myford solution. Kind regards, Piet ------- Re: Myford Replacement Bronze for ML7 Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sat Dec 1, 2007 1:56 pm ((PST)) Piet, Mine are still serviceable -- thankfully. What prompted me to ask was that I had the spindle out (for the 1st time actually) to change the drive belt. The spindle was 'as new' but the back bearing had some marks where it appears the surface has picked up. I am pretty certain my efforts today with some careful scraping / shims/ and engineers blue (I am typing with blue fingers) will have sorted it out though. But I had recently gone 3 phase with a VFD so the higher speeds of the bronze (for odd bit of wood turning) made me think about them if the back bearing remedial work did not work out. However if with Bronze you still have to mess around with shims and scraping them (surprised at that aspect actually) then I would not consider them unless forced to. I removed the headstock to do the above work as the back gear, which is hopefully redundant now, was caked in grease/oil/*hit etc. And needed a good de-grease to keep the new belt clean. Now I have to align it....been reading your recent threads on that very subject.....fun....fun...fun. I have a no 2 Morse test bar and an engineer's level so it will make things easier -- hopefully. Phil ------- Re: Myford Replacement Bronze for ML7 Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Sun Dec 2, 2007 2:48 am ((PST)) Phil, good to hear there's still life in your bearings as well. I had started a discussion a long while ago on raising spindle speeds with just the standard WM Bearings. I had found some WM bearing data and calculations that showed that the WM bearings could be run to about 1,200 RPM max. That was a result of contact area, WM base material etc. I can look it back up if you want me to. If you look at the Myford Chart for dia/speed ratio's the Ml-& could not even turn 3 mm brass as it requires a lot higher RPM / Surface Speed than the ML-7 can handle. I believe that Norman and I agreed that the speed of the ML-7 could be easily raised over a 1,000 RPM for the odd job. Norman also mentioned that Martin Cleeve used to run his lathe on higher RPM's as well. Norman, please chime in if I'm terribly wrong. As far as the alignment is concerned, I envy you for having a test bar. I wish I had one as it will be the only true reference, in additon to the no. 4 shear that wouls allow me to do a proper job. I've seen them on E-bay but are a bit pricey; hey I'm Dutch, so you will have to make allowances. The headstock alignment is still not done but what I figured so far is that little action can be expected from the two screws. I believe the HS was never meant to be 'adjustable'; the two screws, in my opionion, are just there to force the, scraped rear tongue of the HS against the no. 3 shear. If it was there for adjustment purposes I would think that the HS tongue would be scraped in a slight bow to rotate the HS by use of the two screws. Just my opinion though, no legal .. blah...bla [:)] Kind regards, Piet ------- Re: Myford Replacement Bronze for ML7 Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Dec 2, 2007 5:23 am ((PST)) Piet, I was aware of previous threads (I think by you) on the PM site about the rated speeds of WM bearings and higher speeds being possible - occasionally. I was just thinking that if the rear bearing was 'dodgy' and I was undecided on whether to go for bronze or not, then the higher speeds attainable, could possibly be a deciding factor for me. I am still messing around with the HS at the moment so cannot say how the bearing will be (I feel its ok though now) >>>> I envy you for having a test bar. The test bar is really only a useful aid if the shears are all in good order (mine aren't ) I have to say that I get VERY confused reading about this subject - it's much easier, to me at least, to work practically with the problem in front of me, rather than written down on a page. Having said that... my test bar, it is only about 6 inches long disregarding the taper part, has no run out when in the mandrel so I at least know the spindle is revolving 'true', I'm just unsure where the line of axis is pointing at the moment. Even with a DTI mounted on a block, a commercial made one with two pins that can project downwards to rub against a known good shear edge, any variation of the reading simply means the spindle axis is mis-aligned horizontally or vertically as in the latter case with the bar pointing 'upwards' or 'downwards', the foot of the DTI will rest on a different part of the bars circumference over that 6 inch length. If all the shears were OK however (new bed/regrind) and I do the same test on #4 and then also on #1 using logic I (should?) be able to sort things out. I know the shears are not twisted (courtesy of an 18 inch machine level) so I will just do the normal test bar later and dependant on the results take it from there. As long as I remember I cannot expect new accuracy on a worn bed /saddle / slides etc I won't get unduly concerned over the issue. I can, and will, do various things to try to reduce the effects of the wear over time, like Normans saddle 'fix' etc, until I can either get a newer example or have the bed re-ground. >>>> I believe the HS was never meant to be 'adjustable' the two screws, in my opinion, are just there to force the scraped rear tongue of the HS against the n0. 3 shear <<<< The two screws you mention intrigue me, because in addition to those, in the headstock's two central projections on its underside that locate it between the shears, I have two grub screws in each one which when screwed outwards would bear against the number 3 shear. I presume you screw these out until by trial and error, the HS drops in between its shears with no fore and aft play. But if no fore or aft play is then possible, what is the point of the two screws you refer to on the front of the headstock? Anyone know the answer to this? Phil ------- Re: Myford Replacement Bronze for ML7 Posted by: "pietbutter" ehmbutter-deruyterx~xxorange.nl Date: Sun Dec 2, 2007 7:11 am ((PST)) Phil, points taken. Maybe you can build an adapter that keeps the DTI always on the center- line when travelling across. I am in the proces of re-drawing / modifying a Colchester FAT test sheet and hope to get it into the file section for everyone to use. It goes in a systematic sequence and will help you to 'troubleshoot' your lathe. Test Bar: If you have no use for the MT test bar I'l be glad to take it off you [:)] Six inches for a lathe this size is good enough. My 'test bar' was .01 to .015mm out over 6", (smaller at Tail Stock end) in both between chuck & center and chuck only. Test was not really good as material used was some kind of stainless that caused some chatter at the far end. Will look for either brass or FMS as that is a lot softer. Will repeat the test with softer material and will also do the between center test for a more accurate evaluation. If results stay the same, I don't believe I will 'screw' around with the lathe too much. If I put a spanner to one of the bed jacking screws the DTI moves like there ain't no tomorrow. Now about the HS: Does yours have threaded holes thru the tongue that allow for headless allan screws to contact the N03 shear for adjustment?? Was yours a ML or a R or S?? Any other members with the same feature on theirs?? Interesting fact. Kind regards, Piet. ------- Re: Myford Replacement Bronze for ML7 Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Dec 2, 2007 8:01 am ((PST)) Piet, I have made a new thread and put a link to a photo. Mine is a standard ML7. Phil ------- Re: Myford Replacement Bronze for ML7 Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Dec 2, 2007 10:12 pm ((PST)) Phil, WHat you need is a pad for the dial gauge, commonly known as an "elephant's foot". For a more complete dissertation, go to: http://www.kansai.anesth.or.jp/gijutu/kousaku/easyweb.easynet.co.uk/chri sh/t-mark.htm then do "Find" for "elephants" THese are not difficult to make, and are very useful for setting up the compound slide to match, and hence replicate, an existing (male) taper. (The error due to the tip of the indicator not being at exact centre height is significant only when dialing along a taper.) For the amount you would use it, it won't need to be hardened. ------- Headstock Tongue Query [MyMyford] Posted by: "philiptuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Dec 2, 2007 7:59 am ((PST)) Anyone know the purpose of the screws that are in the tongues of the headstock, the manual does not show them. A photo can be seen here http://homepage.ntlworld.com/follies/headstock.jpg They would press against the number 3 shear when tightened - however you can't access them with the headstock in place! There also 2 long screws that are in the front of the number 1 shear that are shown in the manual, one can be seen in the picture just above where the lead screw enters the gearbox, and these at least can be accessed with the HS in place. Phil ------- Re: Headstock Tongue Query Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Dec 2, 2007 4:02 pm ((PST)) Phil. Neither the early model S7 nor the late model ML7 I've stripped down had provision for such screws through the tongue. My surmise would be that some previous owner has (rightly or wrongly) inferred that the headstock was not pointing straight along the bed. In order to allow the headstock to be slewed through a controlled angle, and then clamped (by the long pusher screws) my guess is that this person has added adjustment screws. It's hard to imagine such a misalignment making it past the ex factory checks - I guess it's conceivable that a bad burr or piece of swarf went undetected, but it would have to have been present both when the bearing housings were bored and when the headstock was fitted to the bed. Or it's possible human error meant the check was simply overlooked. It's even harder to imagine a post-manufacture scenario which could result in significant misalignment, but an inadequately seasoned casting could result in a measurable mismatch. I did find that the top of my ML7 headstock bedways were sloping down towards the changewheel end, relative to the main guideways. As this is opposite to the misalignment which would result from wear to the latter ways (and which in comparison was minimal), it can only be the result of post-check warping. I remachined the entire top surface, and the outer under-ways, to correct this. The gap on the series 7 beds is such a large proportion of the section that it does create a significant discontinuity, making it possible for the headstock and the main guideways to remain relatively straight within their own lengths, while developing a significant divergence from truth between each other. However this is more likely in the vertical plane (as I found) than in the horizontal (which your lathe appears to have been modified to correct). It may be that the previous owner had very high standards, and discovered that the lathe did not meet them. It would be tedious, but not impossible, to achieve alignment using the 'secret' screws. A bit of calculation would tell you how much angle to apply to one of the screws to correct a given misalignment angle, which might cut down the total iterations to two or three. At least it's a preferable strategy to the "twist the bed" kludge (sometimes called "Rollie's Dad's Method") which has spread across the internet as a cure-all for misalignment between headstock and carriage travel. My feeling is that test bars should only be used to ensure the bed is NOT twisted, not to apply twist in the attempt to cancel out some -- unidentified, unspecified and unremedied -- other source of error. ------- Using Leadscrew Handwheel [MyMyford] Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Wed Dec 5, 2007 10:12 am ((PST)) I have a question about using the leadscrew handwheel (and probably a very newbie question at that). Is there a way of disengaging the gearbox so there's not so much drag when trying to turn the handwheel? I found if I lifted up the gear change plunger and just let it sit on the edge of the gearbox housing, that it was much easier to rotate the hand- wheel. But I'm not sure if this is the best (or only) way of disengaging the gearbox from the leadscrew. The ability to use the leadscrew to accurately locate the saddle is a plus - but it's a "drag" when you have the whole gearbox involved as well. Thanks steamcat ------ Re: Using Leadscrew Handwheel Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Dec 5, 2007 11:05 am ((PST)) hello. I have a non Myford gearbox and that is what I also do. I know on mine that with the lever resting out of the way the internal wheels can't engage accidently unless I move the lever quiet a distance, so I'm happy doing it. That might be differant on yours though. Phil ------- Re: Using Leadscrew Handwheel Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Wed Dec 5, 2007 11:18 am ((PST)) steamcat, My S7 has one too. Never use it. The dial isn't resettable. What I do use all the time for longitute depth is a dial indicator on a clamp on bracket that straddles the rear shear. This is resettable and very precise. I'm building a digital version (6") to fit the front shear by modifying a digital caliper. RichD ------- Re: Using Leadscrew Handwheel Posted by: "Jim Guthrie" jimx~xxsprok01.plus.com Date: Wed Dec 5, 2007 11:45 am ((PST)) On Wed, 05 Dec 2007, you wrote: >The ability to use the leadscrew to accurately locate the saddle is a >plus - but it's a "drag" when you have the whole gearbox involved as >well. If the ML10 and the 7 series leadscrews are the same diameter, you could look at fitting the leadscrew dog clutch that is supplied for the ML10. It would mean cutting the leadscrew close to the left hand end and drilling and tapping two holes to take the pegs/dogs. I use a calibrated leadscrew hand wheel on my ML10 and the dog clutch makes it useable :-) Jim. ------- Re: Using Leadscrew Handwheel Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Wed Dec 5, 2007 12:31 pm ((PST)) Hey - I like that idea Rich. Some of the inexpensive digital calipers would work just fine. Hope you post some photos when you've got it finished. ------- Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? [MyMyford] Posted by: "heathgloucester" ebs7x~xxovb.org.uk Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:56 am ((PST)) I have an early Super 7, and an Amolco milling head. In order to improve rigidity when milling and boring I would like to add an easy-to-use cross slide lock. Can anyone point me to a proven design? The rigid gib strips of the long cross slide do not appear to lend them- selves to the same approach as some top-slide lock modifications, where a small screw handle is added to flex a portion of the gib strip, so something more sophisticated may be required. Edward ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:25 am ((PST)) Again. I am going to be accused and guilty of making a old reference to an old worker. Somehow, I am getting to unrepentent ideas. Go buy George Thomas's Model Engineers Workshop Manual, Tee Publishing. The Chapter is Crossslide locks. Having found the basic concept, there is a further article on stops which you should find worthwhile especially with an Amolco head. These were worked out for the Super 7. Perhaps, you could go the whole hog and buy his Workshop Techniques which shows how to divide in your lathe head. Again, with only an Amolco, it would add immeasureably to your work. Cheers N ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "heathgloucester" ebs7x~xxovb.org.uk Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 6:01 am ((PST)) Thank you to Norman for the prompt response. I already have recent editions of both of the George Thomas books mentioned. Whilst there is, in Model Engineers Workshop Manual, a chapter (16) entitled "Topslide Locks", I cannot find one entitled "Crosslide locks". The topslide lock designed by Thomas relies on being able to temporarily distort the more flexible gib strips of the top slide to take a firmer grip on the dovetail. The much heavier, inflexible, and screw-retained gib strips in the cross slide do not seem (to me at least) to be suitable for that type of design. Regards Edward ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:04 am ((PST)) Apologies -- it was Crossslide Locks as you state. Nevertheless, others have locked the saddle down with the gibs. It is a very small distortion on a Super7 whereas those with a ML7 might think more carefully with the thin flat gib rather than a two piece triangular one. No one has to my knowledge come up with a modification other than the gib. You could put a tapped hole and a peg clearing the gib altogether or through the front. It seems quite practical but you would need a copper end on the lock screw to avoid damage. Maybe another reader has further ideas. I have both machines! Norman [and in another message Norman wrote:] As a sort of addendum, friend Cleeve did lock his stuff to the lathe bed with a similar 'pull up' as the tailstock. One was a milling attachment, another was a fabricated fixed steady and another was a milling arbour. Going to get flamed for digging out the past- heigh ho! ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:36 am ((PST)) Since we seem to be talking about crosslide locks :-) I have been using one for years on my S7. It's positioned near the first T slot to the rear of the top slide. I made a miniature double ball handle with a 2BA stud and this presses on the gib just as the gib adjuster screws do. Works very well. Highly reccomended. RichD ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "David Clark" david.anthony.clarkx~xxntlworld.com Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 11:54 am ((PST)) Hi There. What about a round bar mounted at the front of the cross slide, you could then lock it with a block mounted on the travelling steady hole. regards David ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:32 pm ((PST)) Rich. The original poster's contention was that while a thin strip -- as the ML7 gibs are -- can be safely deflected (staying within the elastic limit of the material and hence not causing permanent deformation, or "yield" of the gib strip) it does not appear desirable to apply the same method to the Super 7, whose gibs are very much wider, and hence (intentionally) immensely stiffer. The salient difference which causes me similar but not identical reservations is that the Super 7 gib is not floating, as in the ML7 case. As you will know, but some who read these posts may not, each of the two gibs is designed to be clamped solidly under the cross slide by a vertically disposed screw at each end of the gib. The main purpose is to render very small movements of the cross-slide, such as very small adjustments to depth of cut, as crisp as possible, by ensuring that the gib cannot briefly "stay put" relative to the wrong partner. Inferring the original poster's supposition, which mirrors mine, a thruster for the Super 7 (unless it 'reached through' the gib as Norman suggests) would preferably be positioned midway between the clamp screws. This would permit the gib's elastic return to its original eased position on easing the thruster, provided the yield point was not reached (which in practice it would not be). However you seem to have positioned your thruster adjacent to a clamp screw. Clearly from what you say it works very well in practice. But (as macro- economists are reputed to be fond of saying) does it work in theory ? (!) In order to move sideways, presumably the gib overcomes the clamping influence of the rear vertical screw, and creeps across. Does this require the clamp screw to be less than fully tight, and does the gib happily return when the thruster is slackened (so that the cross slide movement reverts immediately to free sliding), and if so, how? ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 6:14 pm ((PST)) How thin is thin? I understand that the S7 gibs are beefy, but my South Bend has 1/8" thick gibs. Same setup. Gibs are in close contact with the slide dovetail. Where does the flex come in?? The gibs are floating in any case. A little pressure from a small locking screw does no harm. It takes very little pressure to lock the slide for most purposes. Now, if you are doing milling, that's a whole nother ball of wax! RichD ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:25 pm ((PST)) Rich. How thin is thin? The ML7 gibs are only 1/8", like the topslide gibs on both 7 series lathes. <> That's true for an ML7, but (the crux of my last post) it shouldn't be true for a Super 7, unless the vertical screws which are counterbored into the boring table (not the horizontal adjustment screws) are loose or missing. When you write "this presses on the gib just as the gib adjuster screws do", bear in mind that the aforementioned vertical screws need to be slackened before fiddling with the adjusters. If they're not subsequently tightened, and the gibs remain floating, the screws can't perform their function, and might as well not be fitted. Is it possible your cross slide ('boring table') is not the standard Super 7 item? Does it have the counterbored row of 4 vertical capscrews in the table? On pulling out my cross slide from storage (I'm still working on bits and pieces of my Super 7 -- it's been a long work in progress in the odd spare moment) I'm reminded that I've actually tapped a hole for a clamp like yours, but bearing almost midway along the rear gib. As you point out, the gib is already in contact (almost -- there has to be running clearance) with the dovetail, so little movement is required. However, there has to be movement -- pressure has to be transmitted, which is (in engineering terms) stress, and you cannot have stress without strain, which is movement. If your clamping screws are present and tight, I guess what's happening is that the whole gib is "leaning" on the dovetail, while the friction face (where the vertical clamping screw clamps the narrowest face of the gib to the cross slide) stays put. That clamp screw would also lean, but of course the tiny amount would not cause 'plastic strain' (permanent deformation), but 'elastic strain' (which is entirely reversible). The more I think about it, the less I think it actually matters (even "in theory") if the pusher is alongside a clamp screw, provided it's quite low down, and you do keep the gibs adjusted to a fine running clearance. My only reservation is that, in causing that much distortion (forcing the gib to 'lean over' locally) a similar distortion will inevitably be induced in the opposite direction of the shear of the cross slide, which is only cast iron (same stiffness as the steel gib, bu nowhere near as strong in tension and shear). I would recommend to anyone adding a clamping pusher from scratch to add it midway between the second and third T slot from the rearmost slot on a standard Super 7 table. This is near the middle of the gib, which is what an engineer would call a "beam with built-in ends". It's also a relatively strong part of the casting. Although the gib is a stiff beam, and built-in ends make it stiffer still, there should be no problem deflecting it sufficiently to provide clamping at this point, and less of the force will be 'wasted' fighting with the gib clamp screw. However, although I've done this myself, I can't say how successful it is, as I have yet to use it in anger (or sorrow !). (Stiffness of beams goes up with the cube of depth, so if the Super 7 gib averaged about three times the thickness of the ML7's, it would be nearly thirty times as stiff.) ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:20 pm ((PST)) Who says the vertical screws have to be so tight that the gib is absolutley imoveable? I keep them snug. No more. The added locking screw with a handle has to remain near the T slot just behind the topslide base. Otherwise it will foul with the carriage locking screw head. (Mine has a ball handle fitted over the hex.) RichD ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:01 am ((PST)) I can understand Troup's comments about gibs but many, many Myfords are not in the same pristine condition in which they left Beeston. OK, I did flog the point with Piet only a short while back but unless the vee ways are reconditioned, there will be an unexpected 'rocking' and difficult adjustment. Of course, I am a heretic and your MyFord is damned near perfect and God's gift to owners in wooden sheds. Let me assure you that neither of mine are, nor are any that I have seen -- in well, two milenniums. It's cold in that ther'shed and the watery stuff that substitutes for hot blood ain't good. What did the older generation say about their- far newer machines? Thomas flogged a succession of Myfords because of wear. Radford had gib trouble and Cleeve would not touch cast iron because he was scared shitless about wear. So what about Worshipful Brother 'Tubal Cain'? Walshaw wrote page after page on his duo which were falling down a hill in the English Lake District! Ok, I hope that Andrew will forgive but that is well established history. Yonks back in the history book -- well, MEW, I wrote in similar vein. Since then, I know of no Myfords that have ceased to wear or -- be improved. Let's face it, there are only two ways to improve the problem. One is to scrape or machine new 'edges' or alternatively, put in Moglice or Turcite and then refit as before. Now, the fire for burning heretics is just beginning to warm me nicely! Talk amongst yourselves. Norm ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:41 am ((PST)) In MyMyfordx~xxyahoogroups.com, Rich Dean wrote: > Who says the vertical screws have to be so tight that the gib is > absolutley imoveable? OK, first a confession (I'm starting to feel like a professional penitent !) I was wrong to suggest that if the screws were not tight, they might as well not be there. If I'd engaged my brain, it would have been obvious that they simply HAVE to be there. We've been accepting Myford's description of this item as a gib, but that's misleading: it's more properly one side of a dovetail way. Gibs are substantially parallel-sided: rectangular section (like the carriage gibs) or parallelogram (like the topslide.) Their primary purpose is to eliminate clearance: they're a glorified shim. In the case of the Super 7 so-called gib, it probably goes without saying why it's essential that the screws be fitted; they're the only items remotely adequate to the important task of stopping that side of the cross slide from lifting, which it will try to do whenever the tool is overhung leftwards and exposed to downforce. Any other advantages of the "gib" being rendered immovable by the vertical screws, such as the one I touched on in a previous post to do with dialing up tiny cut increments, are minor by comparison. (For anyone who hasn't seen one, a Super 7 "gib" starts off as a 15mm wide x 9mm high rectangle, then one side only is machined away at 60 degrees leaving it thinner on top. As soon as the horizontal adjustment screws are tightened against the vertical face and it's trapped against the male dovetail, it's trying to escape downwards like an orange pip, and the vertical screws prevent that.) There is no gib in the usual sense, or need for one, because this entire side of the dovetail is adjustable sideways. To restate from an earlier post what constitutes a gib, it's an item whose sole purpose is to take up clearance so the opposite reference faces are forced together. In this case, that's just a secondary function. Given that they're exposed to cutting forces, I would personally be less than enthusiastic about leaving my vertical screws merely 'snug', if for no other reason than that a screw exposed to combined vibration and tension cannot be guaranteed to remain tight unless torqued to a figure close to its rated limit. There's a more compelling reason, I think. Would you happily leave the right hand mounting bolt of the topslide merely snug (if you had an ML7 pattern item)? Admittedly it would see a substantial proportion of the force, in roughly the same character, as all four of the screws under discussion, but they're effectively part of the fundamental fabric of the lathe. Similarly a machine vice with a dovetail with one removable side: I for one wouldn't dream of bolting it on any less than immovably. Now that you've explained why you put the clamp screw where you did, I can see the sense in how you've optimised that area for your mode of operation. It does however seem to me that you could tighten the other three screws, and I can see no disadvantage in doing so. It would be interesting to set up a long, stiff boring bar, establish what depth of cut (say, facing, for simplicity) was at the lower threshold of chatter, then tighten those screws and attack a fresh surface at the same diameter, and see if there was any improvement. I confess I would not be in the least surprised either way it went. 'Snug', in practice, might turn out to be plenty enough. ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:57 am ((PST)) It is difficult to put ideas into words- and I appreciate all too well how much Andrew Troup has tried. However, putting all that has been written about Myfords, the triangular gib actually needs either shimming to adjust or surface grinding. There should not be two wobbly bits -- well, not in myfords! I cannot recall whether this concept is described in Connolly but I did something similar to my Pools to minimise the rock of the well worn gibs. At the risk of further doubts, there is a time when ML7 gibs should be replaced with thicker ones thus elimininating what can be scurrilously described as 'Fresh Air fits'. In a distant almost forgotten world, I recall doing something with negative torroidal seams which are probably out of this level of argument. For those who are students of Euclid, there ain't no straight lines in a worn Myford! Cheers ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "heathgloucester" ebs7x~xxovb.org.uk Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:41 am ((PST)) Thank you to Norman, Rich, tr0up, and David for their interest and erudition. When I posed the question I did not expect quite such an active and rewarding discussion. The shared thoughts and ideas of everyone involved has helped clarify what I need to do and how I might go about it. However, I am not as yet entirely clear about David's suggestion -- perhaps, David, you could show us a rough sketch of your proposal? I find it interesting that, in all the books and articles on the subject of milling in the lathe, none of the authors, to my knowledge, has addressed the issue of locking the cross slide. For those of us who do not (yet) have the luxury of a proper milling machine, and struggle with a slightly tired feedscrew, there is an undoubted need for this facility. I found this out to my cost in my early attempts to use vertical end mills, slot cutters, and slitting saws on the S7! Any further ideas or thoughts on the subject will, of course, be most welcome. Thanks again Edward ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" normanx~xxn-atkinson.wanadoo.co.uk Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:09 am ((PST)) It does happen eventually! The December Issue No 132 MEW has a set of -- stops -- on the front page. For a Stent Tool and Cutter grinder but it is a saddle! So Edward- there you go. Simple- and to think that I had used one and my own half built one is under the bench. Oh, well, it does take a lot of training to be---- an idiot. Cheers Norm ------- Re: Super 7 Cross Slide Lock? Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:15 am ((PST)) Thanks, Edward, for the gracious acknowledgement of our efforts. I quite agree that it's an interesting question, and (as you suggest) particularly interesting that little seems to have been written on this specific issue in the 'literature'. Having reflected some more, I also think that Rich is probably right to say that his solution (and probably even more so mine) would not hold up to the rigours of milling.They're really just ways of firming up the slide movement temporarily, rather than clamping it as you require. I had another look at my cross slide, which is currently stripped down, and I do have a suggestion which I think would be more appropriate for milling. It's conceptually similar to the saddle lock at the rear of both Super 7 and ML7 carriages. There is an extra section of adjustable dovetail (or 'gib') hanging out behind the tapped hole for the rear vertical screw of the front 'gib' strip. This could be sliced off, and have a tapped hole added, a lick machined off the top (see note *), and moved back a little to centralise it in the gap in the dovetail, which would also more or less centre it under the front T slot of the main group of four. There is no meat under the T slot for a tapped hole, so the clamp screw for this little vertically acting dovetail clamp would have to pull via a T nut, locally filling the slot between the two closedly spaced counterbores. This T nut would slightly impact on clamping options for horizontal milling or boring, but there would be room outboard of it for a T nut or bolt, and it shouldn't pose any problem for the vertical slide. Note * : If anyone does follow this up, I'd be inclined to leave a shallow, narrowish upstand on the right hand side of the short clamp, so it acts like a toe clamp on a milling setup. The amount machined off would have to be established, to compensate for the lack of pusher screws. Some feeler gauges and a bit of trig should serve. If necessary, a shim could be added outboard for fine tuning. I would also point out that the clamping face of the short dovetail section would need to be 'crowned' or washed away a few hundredths at each end to save marking the mating (male) dovetail. ------- Help with a Super 7 (novice question) [MyMyford] Posted by: "richiesurrey" richard.brakex~xxntlworld.com Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:41 pm ((PST)) I have a 4" mild steel bar held in a 4 jaw chuck. I am trying to machine the face and this is not coming out very smooth (more rings than a crater on the moon!). What sort of speed and coolent/cutting fluid should I use. I think the crossslide feed screw is bent and I have a replacement due from Myford. Sorry if I'm asking silly questions. ------- Re: Help with a Super 7 (novice question) Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 6:08 pm ((PST)) richie, We need more info. What type of steel? Mild steel (1018) is very hard to get a consistant smooth cut with. What type/shape of cutter? A HSS or carbide brazed tool bit with a small radiused nose is best. Keep it at a low angle to the surface. Do the rough cut toward center and a final scrape from center out. I always use dark sulferized cutting oil. Apply constantly with a small brush following the cut. Sharp tool edges and at least a little top rake for steel. RichD ------- Re: Help with a Super 7 (novice question) Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:04 pm ((PST)) Richie Everything Rich said - Plus: A bent feed screw will certainly lead to a ridgy finish, mainly by making it hard to wind at a steady rate, and also by inducing a slight snakiness in the movement, but you can usually straighten them quite successfully: they normally bend at the thin neck just inboard of the support bearing. Strip the support bracket off the cross slide and remove the feed screw, chuck it thread first (wrapped in a bit less than one circumference of brass shim or similar) in an SC chuck if you have a reasonable one, in the lathe. By moving it in and out of the chuck you should be able to determine where it is bent. With the apex of the bend just outside the jaws, turn it till the dogleg is towards the front, then use a block of wood clamped in the toolpost against the handwheel end of the screw to push it past midposition. Naturally it will spring back, and ideally you should push it (in as few 'tries' as possible) till it springs back to just the other side of straight from where it began, then spin it 180 degrees and nudge it just enough to bring it straight. Check with a DTI. If you've never done this sort of thing before, practice with a piece of round bar the same diameter as the location of the bend, which you've intentionally bent in a vice beforehand to about the same angle at the same distance from the end. It won't behave the same, particularly if the bend is at the thin neck, but the necking makes it a lot easier, because the original bend and the corrective bend will both be localised by the influence of the neck. Local bends are very easy to straighten in comparison with long curves. Once it's straight, you need to practice the hand techniques needed to apply (as nearly as possible) a 'pure couple' to the feedscrew handles. If you just crank away on the 'spinner' handle with a lightly built lathe like a Myford (especially on big work like this) the crosslide will deflect left then right with every revolution of the handles, again leading to ridges on the face of the work. To avoid this, you have to turn the handles in a pure turning mode. This means pushing with the thumb on (say) the big ball and the index finger on the spinner for half a turn, then doing the opposite with the other hand for the remaining half turn, smoothly swapping from hand to hand, and keeping the rotational speed constant throughout, as near as you can. Try to apply the same amount of force to each handle, so these cancel out, and no nett lateral force is applied. Try (as a dry run exercise) winding the slide right out, then doing this slick move for say the first inch of infeed with a DTI bearing on the side of the cross slide near the outboard end. Aim to minimise cyclical deflection of the needle. Eventually it will become automatic. Before you refitted the feed screw, with the DTI set up like this, you should have checked for sideways play of the cross slide, and adjusted the gibs if necessary to eliminate as much play as you could while introducing the minimum amount of friction. This is MUCH easier to do with the feed screw not fitted. Other salient points: Minimise overhang of the work and the tool, always a guiding principle on any lathe. Re the first: for smaller diameter work, put it as deep into the chuck as possible. Of course that's not an option for 4" mild steel bar, which I'd have to say is REALLY big for a Myford - how long is it? (or how thick - hopefully it's a thin biscuit?) If it sticks out more than say 80mm from the chuck jaws it should be supported on the tail centre. You're definitely flirting with wrenching it out of the chuck if it's a whole lot more than this, and not supported. The other option is a steady rest, but it's WAY too big for a standard fixed steady, which maxes out at 2" diameter, and that's only if you reverse the jaws (I'm not sure how many people have thought to do that, but it gains you about 8mm or 5/16in on diameter). If it's quite long, you definitely need tail centre support, and you should ideally drill the centre hole using a drill press before offering it up to the lathe. If you need to face right to the centre hole, you need a tail centre which is almost half cut away to clear the tool tip. If you need to face RIGHT to the centre, no centre hole, you can cheat by making a smaller biscuit with a centre hole, about the size of a checker-piece (from the game of checkers). VERY CAREFULLY face the central patch with a really sharp tool following Rich's instructions, then breathe a sigh of relief you got away with it and use the tail centre to clamp and sandwich the checkerpiece in place while you face the remainder to blend. You really need a live centre for this method (one which spins freely at high end thrust loads, on built-in bearings). Speedwise, I'd probably be in top back gear - at most - for the outer portion. When you're pushing the envelope to this extent, you just keep changing down until the horrible vibration sounds disappear. You should be able to come back up about one speed for the very fine finish cut. (Say 0.001" depth of cut max) Polish the radius and the top face of the tooltip immediately prior to taking that finish cut, and test the portion of the cutting edge which will contact the work by seeing if it takes a shaving off the surface of your thumbnail with minimal pressure. (This assumes HSS- carbide cannot be got this sharp by any viable home workshop method, which is a good reason not to use if for really high finishes on light lathes.) One more random tip (just trying to guess what you might not already know): particularly with nasty mild steel, getting a nice finish on a light lathe requires progressively reducing the depth of cut of the roughing cuts as you get near to finished size. The roughing cuts disturb the equanimity of the underlying metal left behind, a bit like big ocean waves stirring up sand on the (shallow) sea floor. The bigger the cut (and blunter the tool), the deeper the influence, so you need to make a transition from full depth cutting to shallow finishing. If you still have problems after doing all these things, you may need to check the spindle for end float. This can be adjusted out, but it doesn't often arise, so not much point describing unless you report back. Good luck ! This is not an easy project for a novice, but definitely doable, and you're bound to learn heaps. ------- Re: Help with a Super 7 (novice question) Posted by: "richiesurrey" richard.brakex~xxntlworld.com Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 5:37 am ((PST)) I should have said; it's 1" thick, so there is minimal overhang. I need to do some work to both faces and then drill and tap the holes. I thought I was being so clever getting 4" bar so it was already at the diameter I wanted :) I'm holding it in a 6" 4 jaw chuck with the jaws reversed. I have adjusted the bearing endfloat as per Myfords instructions (about 1/2 thou now). I'm using a Glanze indexable 10 x 10 x 100 mm tool with a TCMT tip. I'll slow the speed down as per suggestions and check for sideways play before fitting the New Feed Screw. Maybe using the power feed would help? I'll have to get some coolent I was doing this dry as well. Thanks for everybodys help, I'll try again... Richard ------- Re: Help with a Super 7 (novice question) Posted by: "David Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:27 pm ((PST)) richiesurrey wrote: > would help? I'll have to get some coolent I was doing this dry as well. Facing steel dry is bad. if you want to buy commercial stuff, that is fine, they work well. If your budget is a bit stretched, try chicken fat, the runoff from a roasting pan. This is all I ever use on steel. Just dab it on with a small brush before each cut. The other thing is to make absolutely sure your tool is sharp, or if it is one of the 'blunt' tc insert types, bury it properly in the work as they are seldom able to take a skim cut and will produce a much better surface if cutting heavily. I prefer honed sharp hss but am probably going to try some brazed carbide this week just for some new skills. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Spindle Bore on ML7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "dmac_dexter" dmac_dexterx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 2:14 am ((PST)) Has anyone ever heard of anyone boring/reaming out the headstock spindle on a ML7 so 5/8" stock could be passed through. Is there enough thickness to increase the size without ruining the existing spindle? The bore would need to be increased by 1mm in diameter to accommodate to larger stock. Any thoughts ? ------- Re: Spindle Bore on ML7 Posted by: "Stephen Collins" jostecal1x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 2:50 am ((PST)) Hello, I used to own a Super 7 that had a spindle bore that would pass 16 mm and 5/8" bar. It must have been bored out by a previous owner. I didn't realise it had a larger bore at the time I bought the lathe but I found it invaluable as some years later I was doing a lot of production work on 16 mm brass. I never found it to be detrimental in any way. I sold the lathe mindful of the fact that the other S7 I have has the standard spindle bore that can be restrictive for bar work. ------- Re: Re: Spindle Bore on ML7 Posted by: "John Stevenson" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:25 am ((PST)) Only thing I can see is that you will lose part of the MT2 taper but as many lathes have a short spindle taper I can't see this being a problem. John S. ------- Re: Spindle Bore on ML7 Posted by: "David Clark" david.anthony.clarkx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:36 am ((PST)) Hi There. Are you sure you need to remove 1mm? I thought Myfords cleared 5/8in. which is only about 4 thou smaller than 1/8in. Some Myfords have hardened mandrels so beware. Possibly the easiest way is to find someone with a honing machine. Much less chance of damage then. regards David ------- Re: Spindle Bore on ML7 Posted by: "dmac_dexter" dmac_dexterx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 3:41 am ((PST)) The manual says the bore is 19/32" (.593") or 15mm. I have tried 5/8" stock and it will not fit. Increasing the bore to 16 mm will give me .629" or .004" over 5/8". ------- Re: Re: Spindle Bore on ML7 Posted by: "John Stevenson" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:39 am ((PST)) The reason the bore is 0.593 is that a No 2 morse is 0.572 at the small end. Large end is 0.700, length is 2-1/2" so in the Myford this length is reduced to 1.326" if opened out to 16 mm or just a tad over half the taper is left, which in my opinion is enough to do the job that it was designed for, i.e. hold a centre. John S. ------- VFD comments [MyMyford] Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxmailbox.co.za Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 7:39 am ((PST)) I have been hearing a lot about VFD's and how good they are. Got me interested. Went to the nearest large town a few days ago and did some searching. After a lot of blank stares found an outlet for such devices. Here they are called VSD's. One of the directors gave me a complete breakdown and demo on their show unit. Very impressive. In his opinion this is the way to go (for some of my other machines as well). Compact, smaller motor, less to go wrong (motor-wise), more torque. A .75Kw unit came to about $342 or 159 UKP (cannot find a pound symbol) and motors are easily found. As I am refurbishing a Super 7 and need to get a motor I think this is the way to go - 3 phase. Would 1Hp (.75Kw) be overkill or .75Hp (.56Kw) be fine? Thanks ------- Re: VFD comments Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 11:33 am ((PST)) Phil, There are two main types of VFD. Both types, as you no doubt know, vary the frequency supplied to the 3 phase motor. The cheaper types suffer from the torque dropping of as the revs drop, where as the better type, are supposed to give a more even torque figure throughout the rev range. So far mine seems to, and I have avoided using the backgear on one job. So if you're going for the cheaper option then more HP at the outset would be better I would imagine. Whether in 'normal' use you would need 1HP on a Myford I don't know -- I'll leave that to more experienced members to answer. If you go for the dearer constant torque unit ("constant vector" is one name that's used) then if you don't need 1HP normally, you won't need to worry about getting it for a VFD either, in which case I'd get the 0.75 HP. Some units have the variable speed control as push buttons, to ramp the speed up or down by pressing the relevant button, where as others have a volume control type knob on the units facia, which is MUCH easier to use. Mine has the option of fitting an adjustable rheostat some distance from the unit, so I have a nice big 2 inch diameter Bakelite knob, which points to a nice big speed scale marked around the knobs back plate. This way you just dial in your speed, as it sits right by the lathe within easy reach. Phil (T) ------- Re: VFD comments Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxmailbox.co.za Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 8:49 pm ((PST)) Phil(T) Thanks for the comments. I was only shown one type. (Allen Bradley) It must be the more expensive one as it has extreme torque at low revs, a dial for speed control and allows an remote pot and remote forward reverse switch, a jog button to move the motor a part of a turn. Point taken about the .75Hp. Thought it would be enough but nice to get other opinions. Cheers Phil(H) ------- Re: VFD comments Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:13 am ((PST)) Hello. VFD's are much like Power Assisted Steering, or Electric Windows on a car. You don't need them -- but once you have them, you're glad you have. BUT there is of course more to go wrong, and unless you have a degree in electronics it means you may have to pay out for something that in the past would have been a simple DIY repair. I've taken that chance and I'm glad I have, but I still have the old single phase sitting quietly under the bench. Phil (T) ------- Re: VFD comments Posted by: "IAN BARKER" ian.barkerx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:58 am ((PST)) Never looked back since I got mine. It stopped woking once; sent it back to Dave at Direct drives and he fixed it for a small cost; nice chap. Ian Barker ------- Re: VFD comments Posted by: "David Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:40 am ((PST)) Keith New wrote: > Threading, I can see, will be a doddle. No need to disengage the > feedscrew, hit stop and just back off the cross slide a little and > shove her in reverse. Apply full throttle backwards and you are > quickly at the start of the thread with everything in synch. Press > stop when you are at the r h end, lower the speed again and put her > back in forward mode. Off you go again for the second cut. No need > for a feedscrew indicator as you are in mesh automatically. There has > got to be a problem with this but I am only trying screwcutting for > the first time as my previous lathe of 25+ years did not have a > screwcutting facility. So there's probably something against this I > haven't thought of yet. Keep in mind that the chuck unscrews when run in reverse. My lathe isn't even wired to run in reverse. For those few occasions when i've had to cut a metric thread (which requires that the leadscrew not be disengaged at any time), I have used a spindle crank handle to do the cut and the back off. (Ok, the biggest job done like this was a 0.75mm pitch thread that was about 2 turns long for a camera filter adapter, though I have cut other metric threads the same way.) For imperial threads, disengaging and re-engaging is a doddle, there is no reason not to do it. I don't bother to remember all the rules, I just re-engage at the same number I started with on the dial. Works every time. Even worked when I cut a double start thread for a sewing machine part. I have even managed to realign a part after removing it from the chuck, and disengaging the gear tumbler, before putting it back in the chuck and taking a skim off the thread. Nothing is impossible, David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: VFD comments Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:28 pm ((PST)) Eddy. I run mine up to 70HZ. I rang the company up 'Direct Drives' and the chap said that the motor I use normally runs at twice the 50 hz speed anyway when run at 440 volts. Not sure on where the motors torque curve is at its highest though - 50 Hz or higher? My reasoning is that I'm aiming to use just the one pulley. Therefore I want the motor running at a reasonable pace when the spindle is at its slowest (equivalent of lowest back gear speed, or lower) and the highes speed will give around 1200 rpm as an occasional max (I know the arguments for even higher speeds still) I'm in the process of going to an 'A' section link belt (from Chronos) and new pulleys at the moment, so I have no final rpm / pulley figures at the present. Going down to the other end of speed I've had the motor running at 30% revs (400 odd) and it parts off steel bar ok. My old setup had a clutch from an ME design that had a tendency to slip and the countershaft wheel had a lot of run-out giving vibration, so a new pulley was on the cards anyway. Going to A section was dictated by the pulleys I could get hold of. The VFD with a nice big knob close to hand, that instantly drops the revs down to zero, has meant I have dispensed with the clutch when I put the new A section countershaft pulley on as well. So if someone lacks a clutch a VFD also helps to some extent. Phil ------- Re: VFD comments Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 12:50 am ((PST)) Phil - My setup is one of the early Newton Tesla ones - they provided the whole thing as a plug-and-play package of VFD and 3-phase Brooke Compton motor - see http://www.newton-tesla.com/machinist/index.htm Absolutely not the cheapest way to do it, but only about an hour to install and be up & running. I got them to change the frequency range to 0-120 Hz as a special - I believe as standard they set the drive for 0-60 Hz. With my setup, you effectively get the Super 7 speed range on an ML7. Myford don't recommend doing this with the standard ML7 spindle and bearings (soft spindle, white metal bearings) so I chose to replace them with a new hardened spindle and bronze bearings from Myford so there would be no issues at the higher running speeds. Having said that, so far I have never found the need to use anything higher than the middle speed range, and I can't remember when I last needed to switch to a lower or higher speed, so I would have got away with using the original spindle & bearings in all probability. The Newton-Tesla documentation says that from 0-50 Hz, the operation is constant torque, and from 50 Hz upwards, it is constant power (i.e., torque X RPM is constant). So the answer to your question is that torque is highest at 50 Hz or lower (at least, with this setup - to some extent it will depend on your choice of VFD). If I was doing it again I would have gone for a bigger motor/VFD - mine is a 1/2HP motor, and I can get the overload light on the box to come on when putting on heavy cuts at high speeds. However, apart from that it works very well indeed and you don't have to think about how to package it all up. Regards, Tony ------- Tension of motor belt ? [MyMyford] Posted by: "Eddy Fontaine" eddy.fontainex~xxpandora.be Date: Wed Dec 26, 2007 11:38 am ((PST)) Hi, My ML7 is vibrating a little bit when running. Vibration decreases with belt tension. How do I adjust the belt tension, and/or is a small vibration acceptable ? [:-/] Thanks, Eddy ------- Re: Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Dec 26, 2007 12:11 pm ((PST)) Not sure how the ML7 tensions but the Super 7(& 7R) headstock has two set screws on the counter shaft bearing holders to adjust the spindle belt. The motor belt is tensioned by moving the motor. No need to be any tighter than enough to stop slipping. Excess tension is only going to add strain and increase wear. If the belts have been under tension for a long time without use, they can become distorted. Cheap to replace but quite a lot of effort for the spindle belt change unless you use the segmented belts. I'm assuming there is no other reason for the vibration like distorted pulleys. Bob ------- Re: Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:54 am ((PST)) Hello. I just replaced my motor belt with this new, but expensive, 'PowerTwist'belt (See Chronos usual disclaimers etc.) The reduction in vibration is noticeable. Before I had to run the belt loose and put anti-slip spray stuff on it, but now that is a thing of the past. I do have 'A' section belts/pulleys mind you - so I do not know if that affects the situation as well. Phil ------- Re: Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "Don Rutherford" donx~xxd-rutherford.demon.co.uk Date: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:54 am ((PST)) Hi. What is the difference between A section and Z section? Regards Don ------- Re: Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:04 am ((PST)) "A" is 1/2 inch, "Z" is 3/8 inch. If you choose to install link belts (I did) then be certain to install with the arrows on the belts pointing in the direction of normal movement. ------- Re: Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "Phil Tuck" folliesx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:22 pm ((PST)) Type 'A' for the short belt (the 'other one' - the one you alter when changing speeds). Type 'Z' for the motor ------- Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "oegleston" oeglestonx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Dec 31, 2007 6:57 am ((PST)) "tr0up" wrote: > Does the vibration persist if you declutch? Yes the vibration persists when the clutch is not engaged (spindle not turning). I set the belt tension with the belt on the smaller motor pulley by letting the weight of the motor tension the belt (which is a little more tension than the manual describes). It runs fine. But when I put it on the larger motor pulley, there was vibration. The belt is quite loose in this position and causes the vibration. The belt tensioner is in the engaged position in both cases. One solution would be to re-position the motor every time I change speeds, but it certainly was not designed to require this. I have not tried just tensioning it for the higher speed pulleys thinking that it may be too tight on the lower speed and thinking also that I may be missing something not obvious to me. I expected that the pulleys are sized so that the belt will be at the same tension in both positions, but that does not seem to be the case. Wrong belt? Wrong pulley? All suggestions are welcome. Oliver ------- Re: Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Mon Dec 31, 2007 7:08 am ((PST)) If you take the belt off and lay it on a horizontal surface, does it naturally fall into a circle? If not the belt might have hardened and have taken on a set in the shape of the lathe drive pulley layout. Try a new one - very cheap to buy from a local industrial supplier. HTH Bob ------- Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:32 pm ((PST)) Oliver, Check there is no portion of the offending pulley groove which is running out (use a DTI or a felt tipped pen) If there's a grub screw in the floor of the groove, make sure it doesn't protrude enough to touch the underside of the belt Another possibility (other than the permanent 'set' referred to by another poster) is that the butt join on the belt has become stiff or misshapen. Sometimes they start to delaminate inside. The outside diameters of the flanges for the S7 motor pulley have been published on this forum in the last few days as 110.5 & 47.5 mm. The countershaft pulley flange ODs are 178.0 and 125.3 mm. A good belt on true-running pulleys should not induce vibration, even when loose, unless there's some sort of resonance effect happening. If you can't get around it any other way, try a link belt, which is a cross between a chain and a belt. It's counter-intuitive that it would run smoother than a smooth belt, as it looks like a very rough, agricultural expedient. However it is universally acknowledged to run smoother than even the best quality conventional V-belt, presumably because the multiplicity of identical 'hinged' joints mean that no individual join can cause a perturbation at a low enough frequency to excite a resonant vibration. If this sounds like gobbledygook, it's because it pretty much is ! Personally I'd go for the Nu-T-Link style for the motor to countershaft belt, especially if there's any prospect you might fit a variable speed drive at some future date. This style of link belt has metal pins joining adjacent short sections of tough synthetic flat belting material. You buy it by the metre and remove extra links until it just fits. Rather than getting it from a machine tool supplier, it's much cheaper to buy it from an industrial transmission supply house, the sort of place which often also sells bearings and gearboxes. If they haven't heard of "M" profile, tell them it's the same as "Z" There is another sort of modern link belt, often referred to as "Powertwist" or "Tab Link", which doesn't use metal pins, but I'm not convinced it would quite adequate to the task for this first stage. It does have the advantage of being a bit stretchier if your pulley sizes are not quite right. It's a little cheaper than Nu-T-Link (Google also for nut-Link and nutlink), and works fine for the A-section belt in the headstock (although a little tricky, I find, to shift onto top speed) Keep us posted ------- Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Dec 31, 2007 8:30 pm ((PST)) Oliver regarding the pulley diameters quoted in my last email, I'm just working out a drive upgrade for my Super 7 and in the process I cross- checked whether pulleys made to those diameters would theoretically result in the same tension in low and high range. Short answer: they would. If your pulley ODs match, the only possible explanations for the difference in tension are: 1) the motor shaft is not parallel to the countershaft (it would have to be out by quite a lot to yield a noticeable variation in tension) Check this with a straightedge across the faces of the pulleys 2) one or more grooves are the wrong depth or width, either as the result of wear, or incorrect manufacture. This can be checked by measuring how high the crown of the belt rides above the OD of the flanges. It should be about 1.5mm in all cases. If one or two of the four cases measure significantly less than the others, this may be the explanation ------- Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "oegleston" oeglestonx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Jan 1, 2008 12:55 pm ((PST)) Thanks for your detailed advice and thanks, too, to Bob. I found that the belt is not quite round when off the machine. I also measured the size of the pulleys and found that they are right on spec. Then I checked the runout of the motor shaft which turned out to be about .025mm. This shows up in the runout of the large motor pulley - .177mm. and less so in the small one - .050mm. I think that this is what causes the vibration and that the condition of the belt contributes. I put on another belt that came with the machine that is round and that helped. I increased the tension some and that also reduced the vibration although the tension is still greater on the low speed side. The motor axis is a trifle out of alignment with the countershaft and I have not attempted to fix that yet. The belt rides about the same way in the pulleys at both settings. On the inside of the pulley grooves for the high speed side there is a thin coat of black material - maybe rubber from the belt or dressing used by the previous owner. This machine was built in 1994, but does not have a lot of time on it. My next move it to try new belts, both conventional and link type. I can't think how to fix the runout of the motor shaft, but I can try to jigger the alignment. Oliver Boston ------- Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Jan 1, 2008 6:45 pm ((PST)) Oliver. It appears your problem might be one which I hadn't thought to enumerate. It sounds as though either a) the motor pulley is bored eccentric, or (more likely) b) it's bored bigger than the motor shaft, and consequently the grub screws are pushing it off centre. c) another possibility, which you'll have to clean off all the rubber (try acetone, AKA methyl ketone, failing that toluene or MEK (methyl ethyl ketone) (usu health warnings apply) to verify, is that one flange of the pulley has cracked partway through and yielded away from the proper profile envelope. This is quite common with the aluminium alloy S7 motor pulleys, and Myford changed to cast iron in the 1980s. d) or it may simply be that the buildup of rubber is sufficiently uneven as to cause the belt to oscillate. The runout you quote for the motor shaft (unless it's a typo) is perfectly OK at 0.025mm. Fixing a) is a bit tricky without access to another lathe, or a spare motor pulley. You could try a local second hand machinery dealer for a single step pulley of any diameter within (or even slightly outside) the range of the large and small pulley, and it doesn't have to be M or Z section; A section is fine - in fact any V pulley in which the belt doesn't bottom out in the groove will be fine. If the problem is b), I'd be inclined to try a Mickey Mouse repair with shim (probably stainless steel for stiffness cos it'll be rather thin) You could sacrifice a feeler gauge blade if you have an old set; cut into several lengths a bit shorter than the circumference of the motor shaft and wrapped around it. If you can't get them to stay in place while you slide the pulley on, you could try superglue, but make sure not to glue the pulley on! (Acetone dissolves superglue.) If it's c), you'll need to make a replacement pulley. At least you can use the old one to drive the lathe. I wouldn't bother going to cast iron unless you're planning to do LOTS of heavy turning (not ideal on a Myford 7) Aluminium bar stock, 6000 series (ie designated 6xxx) and preferably in condition (aka temper) T6 is much stronger than the original diecast alloy, and will be much easier to turn than cast iron. The included angle of the V grooves is preferably 34 degrees for small pulleys (in relation to the belt size); if you want to be fussy you could go to 35 or 36 degrees for the larger groove; the other dimensions you can just copy what you have, once the rubber is off! ------- Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "mrudin99" mrudinx~xxcix.co.uk Date: Wed Jan 2, 2008 2:24 am ((PST)) I found the motor pulley on my recently acquired 1972 ML7 to be a bit uneven, and as I have no second lathe I fixed it as follows. Unbolt the motor and clamp it to the bed - there was enough slack in the cabling to avoid the need for any re-wiring. Then just spin the pulley using the motor and true up the sheave using a sharp narrow tool, setting the topslide angle to fairly closely match the tapers. The cutting speed is rather high, but it worked fine for me. Mike ------- Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Jan 2, 2008 3:05 am ((PST)) Mike. What a fiendishly cunning plan - talk about necessity being the mother of invention ! ------- Tension of motor belt ? Posted by: "oegleston" oeglestonx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Jan 4, 2008 7:02 am ((PST)) Thanks again for your continued attention and advice. I don't think the pulley bore is over-sized - it is a slip fit on the shaft and I can't feel any play when the grub screw is loosened. It is cast iron, but I have not inspected it closely for cracks. If there are any, they are not obvious. I tried some of my nastiest solvents on the black matter and found that they are not very effective. But I also satisfied myself that the black coating is very thin - more like a discoloration of the cast iron. I will work on that further. I can and will check the pulley bore to see if it is concentric. Much as I would like to think about using Mike's approach, I will pass. I admire his courage. I will order new belts both traditional and cogged and see about the rest after trying these. Again many thanks for your help. Oliver Boston, MA ------- Difference between cogged and link belts Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Jan 4, 2008 3:55 pm ((PST)) Oliver, Thanks for your kind words > I will order new belts both traditional and cogged and see about the > rest after trying these. There may be a terminology disconnect happening here. Cogged belts will help a little, but link belts are much smoother in operation than either traditional or cogged, in situations inducing vibration. You can see what link belts look like at http://www.fennerdrives.com/high_performance_composite_vbelts/nut_supt _home.asp (Nu-T-Link -this has metal joining pins, which I would recommend for the first stage belt) or http://www.fennerdrives.com/high_performance_composite_vbelts/powertwi st_home.htm (Powertwist, other brands have different names, like "Tab Link"- these are even smoother in operation, but cannot be tensioned sufficiently to transmit as much power, which could be a problem in the 7 series first stage, especially at low belt speeds) A cogged belt is a one-piece profile, with triangular (trapezoidal, actually) cutouts along the inside face. ------- Re: Difference between cogged and link belts Posted by: "entofficex~xxaol.com" Date: Fri Jan 4, 2008 5:24 pm ((PST)) Excuse my ignorance but can you please explain what you mean by the series 7 first stage. Thank you ------- Difference between cogged and link belts Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Jan 4, 2008 8:42 pm ((PST)) Sorry, that was me referring back in shorthand to something I'd gone into more fully in a recent post. By series 7, I mean any of the ML7 and Super 7 family of lathes. By first stage I mean the first stage of the reduction train from the motor, in other words the belt which runs from the motor pulley to the countershaft pulley. HTH ------- Re: checking headstock alignment with a 'virtual faceplate' [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com tr0up Date: Tue Jan 1, 2008 1:00 am ((PST)) Earlier this year, Piet Butter wrote: > Had an attempt yesterday trying to measure alignment against the 7" > face plate but that did not work out as the face plate has quite a > bit of a wobble, which can be easily fixed as soon as I have the > headstock square with the ways. I came across this looking for a different matter, but I wish I'd spotted it at the time. Piet doesn't seem to be within reach of a computer at present, but for the sake of anyone who might grapple with this topic: The best way to simulate a dead flat faceplate, dead square to the spindle axis, is to use the 4 jaw chuck and a straightedge and a DTI. As well as being cheap (or free), it gets away from one of the limitations of the (expensive) test bar when you need to check the bedways vs headstock alignment: being round, the test bar is problematic if the top of the bed dips towards the chuck. In this scenario, the probe of the DTI will travel below centre height on the bar, a spurious deflection of the needle will result, and confusion ensue. The basic idea is to grip the straightedge sideways in the chuck (using a crafty dodge described below), clock the face (the narrow face which faces towards the tailstock) at (say) the far end, near the motor, and repeatedly tap it more square in the jaws so that when the chuck is spun half a turn, the other end converges on the same reading on the DTI. Now you effectively have a datum face, square to the spindle axis, and true to the limits of the resolution of your DTI. 'Fabelhaft', to coin an archaic German expression of satisfaction. Clamp a machinist's square to the bed lying flat, pack up one end of the thin blade to keep it level if it's that sort of square (personally I like the simple, rugged one-piece toolmaker's pattern which are made from flat gauge plate) Now run a DTI (on a surface gauge, with the dowels pushed down) across the square to get one face parallel to your datum in the chuck, then tighten the clamps and run the same gauge along the long blade of the square, indicating against whichever shear is not used to guide the carriage (if this is not obvious, Search recent posts for "wide guide" or "narrow guide"). This will tell you if the headstock needs to be swivelled. The correct answer is "no". (There's almost nothing you could do to a Myford, without rendering it unfit for further service, which would require such drastic measures) The other shears can now be clocked up, and a diagram drawn on graph paper exaggerating the x scale by say a factor of 100 or more, depending how much deviation you've measured, to give you a picture of the shape the shears are in. Now that you know if the bed is true, and if so, where, you can also check the front face of the cross slide, with reference either to the 'virtual faceplate' or the square on the bed. Then if you're really keen, take off the cross slide and check the front dovetail on the carriage. Use a piece of ground silver steel or similar under the overhang of the dovetail, then butt up a ground parallel or what have you to make a flat surface for the indicator probe. A ground parallel will also serve as the straightedge in the chuck - ideally it wants to be thicker than a steel rule, but the rule out of a decent combination square will do at a pinch. Aternatively, use a piece of high quality keysteel (sold at most engineering supply houses), preferably at least 12mm square, and definitely one that has been wrapped in a bunch in an oily wrapper rather than kicking around the shelves getting bent. * * * * Some who are new to lathes, and a few who are not, may not have realised that a 4 jaw chuck, because the jaws are ground at 45 degrees so they can almost meet in the middle, can be used to grip any rectangular or square section workpiece whose length is the maximum which can swing in the gap - 250mm, in the case of the 7 series. The trick is to open the jaws quite wide, turn the chuck so the 4 jaws, viewed from the tailstock, look like a X rather than a + , and place the bar horizontally so it lies on (say) jaws 3 & 4, on those 45 degree faces. Then use the chuck like a vice, where jaws 3 & 4 are moved together as though they were a single vice jaw, and ditto with 1 & 2, to centre the workpiece (for this exercise, by eye using the engraved rings against a feature of the jaws is plenty). Leave the final tightening until you've squared the bar across the bed as described above. If you're doing this with a view to machining the bar, you may have to include packers between the jaws and the workpiece, if it is of low sectional height, so that the jaws will be further apart. If you have a 4 jaw SC chuck (wonderful things) this is a really quick dodge. What's more, such a chuck, clamped lying on its back on the table of a drill press or (drill) mill in X rather than + configuration, will self-centre work, and hold it either across or along the bed in the case of the mill, without moving anything. ------- Re: checking headstock alignment with a 'virtual faceplate' Posted by: "Eric Parsonage" ericx~xxeparsonage.com Date: Tue Jan 1, 2008 3:08 am ((PST)) Troup, Thanks so much for this. I was wondering how I would be able to check if the cross slide was setup up correctly; now with this straight edge in the 4 jaw that becomes trivial. Regards Eric ------- Re: checking headstock alignment with a 'virtual faceplate' Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Jan 4, 2008 8:53 pm ((PST)) Thanks for the recognition, Eric. I often wonder whether to post unsolicited snippets, on the off chance someone might benefit, so it's great to know that occasionally one is of immediate use. The main reason I do this is to repay in small measure the immense debt I owe former contributors to various internet sites (sometimes years before I discovered them), not to mention Google... I must say I'm also particularly enjoying the 'local culture' on this site at present, as it seems marvellously free of nay-sayers and trolls, and to be sticking pretty closely to the purpose for which Shaun established it, namely "comradery and support" ------- Tips on using the ML7 cross-slide [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Jan 4, 2008 9:51 pm ((PST)) 1) This concerns the kidney shaped slot in the swivelling base of the topslide. After over 30 years of fairly constant use of my ML7, it's not until now, when I'm about to sell it in favour of the Super 7 I've been restoring, that I realise I've misunderstood the purpose of the 'layby' position in the kidney slot. (If you have an early ML7 it may not have this - if you think of the kidney slot as the letter "C" the later ML7s have a short extra stroke converting it to an "E". If you don't have one, it would be easy to add) What I now realise is that it is there to assist when swivelling the compound slide to other side. Its presence enables the T nuts to be cajoled from the left to right end of their Tee slots, and vice versa, with the bolts slightly loosened. I may be the only idiot who didn't realise this, but just in case I'm not, I hereby share this tidbit with the other one! As a callow youth, I assumed the purpose of this 'belly button' (thinking of the curved slot as an early term fetus!) was for bolting down the cross slide when there was no intention to swivel it in either direction. I tried to use it for this, and in my youthful exuberance, overtightened the hold-down bolt, whose washer took on a permanent set as a result, and deformed the casting around the 'belly button'. I decided it was stupid design and resolved never to use this feature again. In my laughable defence, the manual gives no guidance on these -- or many other -- points, and despite my voracious reading, I've never seen it in print, presumably because it's so flaming obvious! I rapidly became tired of the work involved in changing from leftward to rightward swivelling, because I was doing this by lifting the topslide, removing the T nuts from their slots, cleaning away all the chips from everything, then reassembling with the T nuts on the other side. I improved this to a degree by milling up T section to entirely fill the two slots in the boring table, and tapping two holes in each, so there was no need to move any nuts. To prevent chips getting in the currently unused holes, I cut strips of 0.8mm thick zintec sheet steel 90 mm long x a whisker over 9mm wide, and folded 26mm at one end down through 90 degrees to make a handle for insertion and removal. (The "handle" ends up flush against the side of the boring table.) My T sections were a smidgen over 0.8mm shy of being flush with the boring table top surface, so these strips slid into place with the bolts loose but stayed there with them tight, nicely closing off any opportunity for chips to accumulate. However it was still a chore removing these, shifting the bolts, and refitting the sheetmetal strips to the other side, in comparison with what I should have been doing from day one. If I were to keep the ML7 (with the resale here in NZ having collapsed, it's a possibility) I think I'd dispense with trying to prevent chips accumulating in the T slots: I keep a wet and dry shop vac handy, which has a small diameter clear plastic tubing spout, 'bushed' into the usual metal large nozzle by a piece of foam tubing such as pipe fitters use for insulating and protecting pipework. With lots of 'suck' and a small bore, it makes short work of getting most of the chips out before a reposition. 2) Someone recently raised a cogent question: when using Morse Taper collets, which enable, (nay, encourage) turning close to the end of the spindle nose, the carriage is hanging out over the gap to an alarming degree, unless the top-slide is wound much further left than prudence and the avoidance of chatter would normally dictate. If you have an ML7 (this is one of several times you can feel smug in reflecting that Super 7 "knobs" cannot do the same) one possibility is to shift the cross-slide leftwards. To support it, place a piece of 1" keysteel (or equivalent close-fitting, ground or milled square steel bar) maybe 60mm long on the machined strip on top of the carriage to the left of the boring table. Check that it cannot easily be moved when the topslide is bolted down. This will permit the topslide to shift left at least 25mm, maybe as much as 40mm (a bit of overhang here is preferable to having the carriage hanging over the gap). NOTE that this is only applicable if you have the 'belly button' (either ex-factory, or provided by your good self, with drill and file). Those who are paying attention will either be saying "what about the central spigot pin?", or be saying "So what you're suggesting is, knock the spigot pin out?" If the latter, award yourself a star and take the rest of the day off. The pin knocks out quite easily (with the whole thing off the lathe) by moving the topslide far enough to expose the top of it. When the swivel base is repositioned, the topslide can then be wound leftwards to a moderate overhang, proportioning this with the overhang of the carriage over the gap so the cantilevered volumes are roughly in line (imagine digging an overhanging bank into clay to make a rude shelter: you wouldn't want to go in particularly far at any level, in relation to the general slope). The third tip has already been posted here, when I recently suggested that the ML7 topslide could be temporarily repositioned at the rear of the boring table (in cases where the cross-slide cannot be wound in far enough). ------- Re: Early ML7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "Tony Griffiths" tonyx~xxlathes.co.uk Date: Mon Jan 7, 2008 2:33 am ((PST)) For ML7 Serial Number data look at: http://www.lathes.co.uk/myford/page23.html and other information: http://www.lathes.co.uk/myford etc. My best wishes, Tony ------- Re: Early ML7 Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Jan 8, 2008 11:20 am ((PST)) Tony. Thanks for that, and thanks for the website as a whole. The depth and breadth of information on machine tools is truly mind boggling, and the effort just to maintain it must be appreciable. I can't imagine how long it took to set it up! I know that some people who share huge amounts of information at no cost get a hard time when they make a charge for further information in (say) hard copy form. Those who think information should be free seem to think that other peoples' effort and expense in collating and adding value to that infor- mation should somehow also be devalued to zero. They also conveniently overlook that the more people access your website for free, the more you have to pony up for bandwidth. The manuals you've supplied to me have been far and away more valuable than their cost. The pages were enlarged, beautifully scanned and printed on excellent, durable and thick paper, nicely bound. They were of considerably higher quality than (for example) the original ML7 manual I still have from the factory which, having got damp at some point, was quickly rendered largely unusable. I sometimes wonder whether the internet has reached a high water mark, and will degenerate as more and more people realise that they cannot derive remuneration which is even remotely proportional to their effort, and I hope that you have found that balance. It would be a tragedy if your site fell into disrepair or you could no longer afford to have it hosted, not to mention buying the bandwidth. All the best Tony with your magnum opus: honour where honour is due ! ------- ML7 headstock bearing fitting [MyMyford] Posted by: "signs_of_fatigue" william.mctaggartx~xxnestortech.co.uk Date: Wed Jan 9, 2008 2:35 pm ((PST)) After 40+ years of use I have come to the conclusion that my ML7 needs some attention to the headstock bearings, which have never previously been touched. The more obvious symptoms are an increased tendency to chatter and poorer surface finish. The work also shows a tendencency to move away from the tool slightly on taking a cut, and this is not due to work deflection. I checked spindle runout and this is very small in a no load condition, just rotating the spindle by hand and checking against the spindle register. However when I chuck up a 12 inch long bar and apply heavy hand pressure at the end of it, I get .002 - .003 TIR both horizontally and vertically measured at the spindle. The movement is roughly equal in both directions. The radial play in the rear headstock bearing is detectable but rather less. End (axial)play is fine. I guess that I need to take out shims and scrape the bearings in. I think I can manage the scraping, but I need some advice on the general strategy. I would guess that equal shims must be taken out from all four cap gaps, and that in my case this might be one layer if I am lucky. Then the bearing halves will need scraping on the horizontal faces to bring the halves into full contact with the spindle. I assume roughly equal amounts from all faces. Then the bearing bores will require scraping to get a good fit, blued up against the spindle. Comments and guidance on this sequence would be very helpful from those who have done this bit successfully. The concern I have is that the bearing bores must remain absolutely concentric with each other and this could be quite difficult to achieve whilst scraping in the bearing bores. Also if the wear is uneven in the bearing bores, the spindle could end up slightly out of alignment rather than parallel to the ways. The alignment is currently good and I don't want to lose this. I would really appreciate some guidance from the experts on the best way of maintaining the alignment whilst scraping the bearings in. Thanks in anticipation. ------- Re: ML7 headstock bearing fitting Posted by: "mrudin99" mrudinx~xxcix.co.uk Date: Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:31 pm ((PST)) When I bought my ML7 a couple of months ago, the headstock bearings were pretty sloppy. There was over 5 thou vertical movement on applying the belt tension. I've now got them working well, as follows. With everything dismantled and cleaned of oil (and parts marked for orientation...) I held then main (chuck end) bearing shells around the spindle by hand and could feel some rattling. No need to scrape the bores, I just lapped the flat mating faces by rubbing each shell on some 600-grit paper (after wearing down the paper to make it finer) laid on a surface plate. Beware, this takes material off at a high rate and you may have something more sophisticated. I did this until when held on the spindle there was a no-rattle fit, that would increase in friction if squeezed hard. I had already taken a 2 thou layer off all the shims, and when I reassembled the fit was too tight, so I had to put some new bits of shim back in, and I think I might have had to add a little more (perhaps I lapped too much off the shells). I'm guessing that in the as-bought state before I did all this, the bearing cap had been tightened down onto the shells, with the shims not taking much of the load. The smaller (changewheel end) bearings needed much less adjustment, i.e. had worn less. I suppose this means that the spindle axis is now pointing slightly downhill, but I think it's a pretty small effect. Closing up the shells vertically also reduces the sloppiness horizontally, and it seems pretty good now. I guess the only complete solution to the resulting oval bore is replacement. One note on re-fitting the top bearing shell and cap: it's worth paying attention to the axial and radial position. Make sure the two shell end faces are in the same vertical plane. Give the spindle a good fore-and-aft wiggle while tightening down to make sure the shells are evenly distributed around the spindle and the top shell is not twisted relative to the axis. Mike ------- Re: ML7 headstock bearing fitting Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Wed Jan 9, 2008 11:09 pm ((PST)) On 10 Jan 2008 at 0:31, mrudin99 murmured decisively: > The smaller (changewheel end) bearings needed much less adjustment, > i.e. had worn less. I suppose this means that the spindle axis is > now pointing slightly downhill, but I think it's a pretty small > effect. If it is indeed not parallel to the bed, you will have fun trying to turn something held in the threejaw and supported by the tailstock. The misaligment will work the workpiece out of the chuck. > Closing up the shells vertically also reduces the sloppiness > horizontally, and it seems pretty good now. I guess the only > complete solution to the resulting oval bore is replacement. The complete solution is scraping the bearings to fit, as is done in the factory, and then adjusting the tailstock to match the newly aligned headstock. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- ML7 headstock bearing fitting Posted by: "signs_of_fatigue" william.mctaggartx~xxnestortech.co.uk Date: Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:04 pm ((PST)) If the headstock bearings are not aligned to the bed and or the tailstock then I would certainly expect that chucked material supported by the tailstock will tend to work its way out of the chuck. This is exactly the same effect as using a steady with work that is a little out of line with the spindle. However, the big question is how to scrape in the headstock bearings so that they remain aligned to the ways. If the spindle does not point straight down the bed then adjusting the tailstock alignment won't help a great deal. Or maybe you are suggesting scraping in the bearings, accepting that the spindle will not then align with the ways and then adjusting the headstock position on the bed to bring it back in alignment. In this case how do you do that? I don't want to go from a sloppy spindle to a lathe that has a multitude of small alignment problems, so would really appreciate advice on the right way to do all of this. ------- Re: ML7 headstock bearing fitting Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:42 pm ((PST)) As I remember from the article in MEW, Myford uses a spindle with a morse taper test bar in it, or some such, so align the headstock. How exactly they scrape the bearings in and retain (or achieve) alignment I don't know, because the picture of Malcolm scraping the bearings shows the head off the bed at the time. Alternate idea is to go the Gingery route. In his instructions for building a lathe, he advocates using a temporary 'headstock' to bore the bearing seats in the real headstock. Thus they come out the right size AND aligned in one operation. http://www.backyardmetalcasting.com/lathe5.html However, I think that would require new whitemetal shells in the headstock so there is space to bore them. > I don't want to go from a sloppy spindle to a lathe that has a > multitude of small alignment problems, so would really appreciate > advice on the right way to do all of this. The cost of it all freaks me out too, but possiblly the BEST way to do all this is send it to Myford and let them do it. They have the skills, and the jigs, and the spares, all under one roof. (-: phone them and see what it involves. I believe if you partially strip the lathe it will be cheaper. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- NOTE TO FILE: Obviously with the original Myford company sold and their expert machinists gone, anyone will have to do a bit of searching to find someone competent to do this for them. ------- Re: ML7 headstock bearing fitting Posted by: "signs_of_fatigue" william.mctaggartx~xxnestortech.co.uk Date: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:50 am ((PST)) I would really prefer to do this myself. I have a test bar and could probably indicate the headstock spindle in against the bed using an appropriate foot on the indicator, but where does the headstock adjustment come from? I guess there may be some possibility of shifting the headstock sideways after loosening the clamping bolts but vertical adjustment implies either shimming or scraping, neither of which raise much enthusiasm and shimmming would also reduce the contact of the headstock with the bed. There must be a 'good' way of refitting these bearings that will retain as much accuracy as possible? ------- Re: ML7 headstock bearing fitting Posted by: "Roy Vaughn" roy.vaughnx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Fri Jan 11, 2008 4:21 am ((PST)) Hi, I am a recent joiner of this group and it's very interesting stuff. I looked at replacing the bearings on my ML7 with the hardened mandrel and bronze shells at one time. These too have to be scraped in. I enquired of Myford as to how to go about it. There are no written instructions available but Malcolm kindly offered to talk me through it so I recommend you contact him. I chickened out by the way. ------- Re: ML7 headstock bearing fitting Posted by: "signs_of_fatigue" william.mctaggartx~xxnestortech.co.uk Date: Sat Jan 12, 2008 8:15 am ((PST)) I guess that some advice is the least that Myford could do if you are buying a new spindle and bronze bearings (at a significant cost). I am not buying a new spindle (I hope) but may try Malcolm if I can't find someone who has already done this successfully. There surely must be an expert who visits this group and who has achieved the desired result and can provide a definitive guide to scraping in and re-alignment? ------- To tap or not to tap [MyMyford] Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Wed Jan 9, 2008 3:12 pm ((PST)) I've discovered that the tapped hole for attaching the travelling steady to the cross slide of my Super 7 is almost stripped out. I'm almost certain it's a 1/4-26 BSF thread. The few 1/4" BSF bolts I have seem to fit correctly. However, only the last few threads really hold. Any bolt inserted into the top half of the hole is a VERY sloppy fit. My first thought was to drill out the hole and insert a Helicoil. However, living in Canada, the cost of getting the proper BSF Helicoil kit is outrageous. Now, I could easily drill it out and just go to the next size UNC, UNF or metric thread. However, I'd like to keep all the fasteners in the same spirit as the original lathe. I know this is not a great pressing technical question but I'm curious how others might approach this problem. Personally, I'm tempted to go metric since there are already a few metric pieces on the lathe. Then again, using a UNC or UNF fastener would mean I wouldn't require that one oddball metric wrench to attach anything using that hole. Comments? Suggestions?? Regards steamcat ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Wed Jan 9, 2008 5:22 pm ((PST)) steamcat, Having lots of experience with metric/inch fasteners, I looked that situation over and see your only viable choices are from 1/4 BSF to M7 (may be an oddball size there) or M8-1.25 (or .75) or 5/16-24 (**very** close to M8 on diameter). M7-1.0 would be a perfect oversize rethread as the pitches are so close. RichD ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Wed Jan 9, 2008 11:05 pm ((PST)) steamcat: When I fitted a crossslide clamp to my ml7 I absentmindedly drilled the hole I intended to tap m6 to 6mm. Oops. So I drilled it to 8mm and fitted a 'previously tapped m6' steel plug into the hole, using loctite 603 to hold it there. No problems so far. http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe/crossclamp.html Btw putting an m6 bolt into a 1/4"-26 bsf hole will strip the threads quite easily due to the thread pitch difference, which overloads one thread at a time. A normal bolt needs at least 3 turns of thread in contact to achieve designed strength. (Yes, I've stripped certain threads on my ML7 by using M6 in 1/4BSF holes.) RichD wrote: >M7-1.0 would be a perfect oversize rethread as the pitches are so close. M7 is not one of the recommended sizes. It exists, but is almost never used. Certainly around here you cannot get an M7 anything for love nor money. If you don't want to plug it, I'd go with M8. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:26 pm ((PST)) > Btw putting an m6 bolt into a 1/4"-26 bsf hole will strip the threads David - I almost discovered this the hard way last night. I had a couple of socket head cap screws from Myford that I was sure were 1/4- 26 BSF. They even threaded into a couple of 1/4-26 holes without any effort. Fortunately I didn't tighten them down because they felt a bit sloppy. So I put the calipers to them and compared them to a known 1/4-26 BSF screw and - surprise - not the same thing at all. That's when I remembered your note above and did some checking. Yep - M6. It's becoming quite an education with 3 different thread systems floating around my shop - British, Metric and American !! You learn something new every day ;-) Thank goodness for this forum and its knowledgable people. steamcat ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "bob_kellock" bobx~xxchainganger.co.uk Date: Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:12 pm ((PST)) > It's becoming quite an education with 3 different thread systems > floating around my shop - British, Metric and American !! There's also BA (British Association Standard Screw Thread). 0BA is pretty close to 1/4 BSF. 6mm major diameter and 25.4 TPI so pretty difficult to spot the difference by eye. Bob ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:11 am ((PST)) I'll have a look at my supply of metric and UNC/UNF taps and see what fits closest to one size over 1/4-26 BSF. If I remember correctly, it's actually recommended to use a coarse thread in cast iron??? Just had a thought too - I'll have to check the clearance hole in the travelling steady. It may have to be drilled out to suit whatever I use on the cross slide. Thanks for all the comments. Glad to see I'm not the only one who's had to take drill in hand and have a go at the Myford castings. ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "Richard Brake" richard.brakex~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:37 am ((PST)) I'd keep an eye on ebay for a S/H Helicoil Tap. They do appear there. Richard ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "C.S.Johnson" csjohnsonx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:23 pm ((PST)) Hi Steamcat, Would suggest using M8 or 5/16" UNC. They are both the same tapping size, a few thou over 1/4". If the thread is damaged, don't try and fiddle a near size, just drill out and tap a new full thread. For cast iron use a coarse thread. As you have found out, the fine thread easily strips in CI. Regards Colin ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:04 pm ((PST)) Thanks Colin. That's pretty much where my own thinking was heading. Odd that the factory would use fine threads for this particular location. It's a fairly thick section and there's no problem getting a sufficient number of threads for good strength. I guess the previous owner just got a little carried away cinching down the steady rest. ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Mon Jan 14, 2008 3:18 pm ((PST)) I had another idea to correct this. Drill and tap a larger hole, then thread in a steel plug with an internal 1/4-26 BSF thread. The outside thread of the plug could be any metric or UNC size that works since it will be permanently installed (using Loctite to make sure). This approach keeps the original Myford thread size and uses stronger steel threads to boot - less chance of stripping out. I've ordered a 1/4-26 BSF tap with this idea in mind. Call it a poor man's Heli Coil. steamcat ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Mon Jan 14, 2008 4:50 pm ((PST)) Hey steamcat, That's the ticket!! An excellent way to do it. I'll put that idea in my noggin file. In the event the thread gets buggered again, its easy to change for a new one. Cheers, RichD ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:07 pm ((PST)) steamcat, RichD That's a technique I've quite often used, and I was thinking of suggesting it in this connection, but the only snag is that, compared with a helicoil, it does use more radial space. When tossing up whether to raise it in this connection, I went and had a look at the tapped hole for the travelling steady, and thought it was a bit close to the edge of the carriage for this to be a method I'd recommend as a first line of defence. To be honest, I'd probably be quite happy to do it myself, but I tend to be more conservative when it comes to proferring advice. It's not particularly relevant here, but I've also seen a few Myfords where that part of the carriage has run foul of the jaws of the 6" 4 jaw chuck, further eating into the reserves. This is something to be wary of, for anyone new to Myfords reading this: it's easy to be focussed on the tool and not notice the chuck jaws (which at the periphery are not particularly visible when spinning) coming into flagrante delicto with the wiper housing, which being brass and thin and soft and packed with felt, neither puts up much of a fight nor makes much warning noise. Don't ask me how I know this ! ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:37 pm ((PST)) Teoup, regarding the flagrante delicto, I have a neoprene rubber sheet swarf guard held in place with the subject screw and a bit of ali angle. This gives ample warning of the flagrante bit as it approaches the 4 jaw chuck. A secondary function helps keep fine chips out of the cross slide way surfaces. RichD, Atlanta USA ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:35 am ((PST)) Thanks for that, Rich, nice move. I'm currently pondering my best options, and that has several attractive features. ------- Re: To tap or not to tap Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:20 am ((PST)) Fixing the tapped hole in the carriage for the travelling steady is my next project. Last night I had another idea based on my earlier suggestion. Take a standard bolt of appropriate size (I'm thinking of using a 3/8" UNC), trim to length, drill and tap a 1/4-26 BSF hole thru the middle, drill out and tap a 3/8" UNC hole in the saddle and install the threaded plug using Loctite thread locker. Alternate method - drill and ream the hole in the saddle and install a piece of round stock with the internal 1/4-26 BSF thread. Install this plug using appropriate Loctite. It's not threaded into the saddle but if you use the correct Loctite and make sure everything is clean, it should hold. As a matter of fact, if you ever needed to remove it, you'd probably have to drill it out. steamcat ------- British Threads [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:27 pm ((PST)) Particularly for those of you on the west side of the Atlantic, this single web page should give you all the data you could conceivably need on BSF and BA threads (also on BSW, although I'm not aware of any such threads on a Myford). http://mdmetric.com/tech/thddat8.htm#ba ------- Re: British Threads Posted by: "Tony Crowe" groupsx~xxbobcroweaircraft.com Date: Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:37 pm ((PST)) Myford use BA threads several places on the Super 7. Tony ------- Re: British Threads Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:12 pm ((PST)) Tony, Perhaps I did not make my meaning entirely clear. To my knowledge, Myford 7 series lathes used BSF and BA exclusively, and I'm not aware of any BSW threads on these lathes. I mentioned the latter threadform only because all three threads appear on the web page in question. A previous poster mentioned the similarity between the major diameter and pitch of 0BA and 6 x1.0 metric. In fact the diameter and pitch are identical between these threadforms. What is different is the included angle: BA threads have a uniquely steep angle at 47.5 degrees. All Whitworth threads (which, confusingly, includes BSF) are 55 degree included angle. Metric threads and Unified threads (UNF, UNC) have an included angle of 60 degrees. Naturally it is difficult to measure this in small sizes. However I think it's academic on a Myford: the confusion should not arise. I say this because I don't think there are any 0BA fasteners anywhere on these lathes - please advise if you know of any. Myford used 1/4" BSF for anything in this size range, and of course there are no ISO metric fasteners (BA is technically metric, but it's almost never intended for inclusion when anyone talks of "metric fasteners"; it's treated as a pre-metrication Imperial anomaly. ------- ML10 countershaft bearings. [MyMyford] Posted by: "youra_windsor" yourax~xxgloubiboulga.org Date: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:06 am ((PST)) Hi all. I took the pulleys off my countershaft the other evening, as I suspected there was some wobble from the countershaft. I found that there was some scoring on the shaft itself, but also that there appears to be no sign of the oilite bushes that the manual says should be in the bore of the mounting bracket - does anyone know if at some point in production these were plain bearings much like the headstock? Thanks, Youra ------- Re: ML10 countershaft bearings. Posted by: "Jim Guthrie" jimx~xxsprok01.plus.com Date: Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:21 pm ((PST)) On my original ML10, the steel countershaft was running in the cast iron of the countershaft casting - similar to the main spindle. However, early on I sinned and forgot to lubricate the countershaft and ruined the bearings. So I turned up a new shaft, bored the bearing holes in the casting to take oilite bearings, and that's the way it has survived up till now. The work was actually done on a Super7 in the fitters' workshop at my work. I've probably over-oiled the countershaft since, as is demonstrated by the vertical black lines down the wall behind the countershaft :-) Jim ------- Re: ML10 countershaft bearings. Posted by: "youra_windsor" yourax~xxgloubiboulga.org Date: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:07 am ((PST)) Jim, That's what I think has happened here - the shaft also wobbles a tad. I'll follow your example, I think - thanks for the suggestion - I have a colleague who'll lend me time on his Boxford to do the work. Youra ------- Myford ML4 ? [MyMyford] Posted by: "Tony Griffiths" tonyx~xxlathes.co.uk Date: Mon Feb 4, 2008 5:20 am ((PST)) Various Number and letter combinations were cast into the beds of early Myford lathes including "A4", "A2", "A1", B1, B2, etc., but these do not indicate model numbers - there never was an "A" or "B" Series machine. The numbers and letters were used by the company who made the castings to identify production batches passing through the works. lathes thus marked will almost certainly be a Myford ML1, ML2, ML3 or ML4 There are some notes about these early Myfords in the Archive at: http://www.lathes.co.uk/myford/page7.html - this latter section containing the bulk of the information about these machines. Headstock gearing (backgears) - see: http://www.lathes.co.uk/latheparts/page4.html My best wishes, Tony Griffiths ------- Sticky Topslide [MyMyford] Posted by: "taylor_pg" taylor_pgx~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Feb 5, 2008 4:01 am ((PST)) I have had my lathe, a Myford ML7, for a few years now and I use it every weekend and sometimes in the evenings, mostly for straight forward turning jobs. Whenever I need a screw thread I tend to get cold feet and use taps and dies. Over the years I have bought tooling to include the form tools for threading, the profile gauge and change wheels and I have watched several videos in which people make the process of internal and external threading look quite easy. I have always managed to control the urge to use the lathe for threading though. Recently, a friend sent me a copy of 'LBSC's book 'Maisie', which consists of step by step instructions on how to construct a three and a half inch gauge GNR 'Atlantic' 4-4-2 locomotive and this has spurred my desire to become proficient in thread cutting on the Myford. Last night, in a scenario familiar to most of us, I decided to do some milling on the lathe rather than using my milling machine. I have a Clarkson Autolock milling chuck with a #2 Morse taper but no drawbar. The internal thread in the chuck is 3/8" x 16 tpi (Whitworth) and I now have all the change wheels to produce that thread. I cut a length of 9/16" dia. MS rod, and turned it down to clear the spindle bore with smaller diameters of 0.375" at each end and machined relief grooves where the threads will end. I fitted the correct change wheels and sharpened and mounted the form tool using the gauge. I set the topslide to 27.5 degrees and recalled that the technique of threading calls for 'advancing the topslide and retracting the cross slide', and wound the topslide out to provide enough movement for the process. It was at this point that I realised that the topslide is rather stiff and needed adjusting. I loosened the gib strip nuts and took the grubscrews back a little but the stiffness didn't ease at all. I removed the topslide and stripped it down, cleaned it thoroughly, oiled it and reassembled it and still it was too stiff. The problem is not so much with advancing the topslide - it will screw in albeit reluctantly. The problem comes when trying to retract it. The crank unscrews and comes off. Then when I turn the squared part of the dial with a spanner, that also unscrews and comes off, leaving me with the threaded end of the topslide leadscrew and the challenge of removing it without damaging the thread. The topslide leadscrew appears perfectly straight but I'm wondering whether it has been assembled incorrectly before I bought the lathe. Should it be possible to screw the leadscrew out of the flange that is attached by two screws to the operator's side of the topslide? Has anyone else encountered this predicament? Peter ------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "J COLLINS" jostecal1x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Tue Feb 5, 2008 3:23 pm ((PST)) Hello. I cannot comment on the fact that the dismantled / re-assembled topslide is still stiff but from my own experience with a Super 7 it is possible to overtighten the centre clamping screw (if the standard Myford clamp plate is in use). This will in turn make the topslide stiff and uneven to move. However on the rare occasions this has happened, the topslide has returned to its usual smoothness as soon as the clamp is slackened off a litte. Presumably excessive pressure can start to distort the topslide body. Regards Stephen ------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "Peter" taylor_pgx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Feb 6, 2008 2:50 pm ((PST)) "...it is possible to overtighten the centre clamping screw... Thanks for the suggestion Stephen but I have now diagnosed the problem as a tightly fitting insert into which the topslide feedscrew fits. Peter ------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "taylor_pg" taylor_pgx~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Feb 5, 2008 5:53 pm ((PST)) Thanks Stephen, I think I may have discovered the problem this evening. After completely removing the gib strip to eliminate that as a factor, I replaced the slide on its dovetail and it was still stiff. The topslide leadscrew screws into a replaceable insert secured with two screws. The insert is made of... aluminium. I think the aluminium has oxidised and 'grown'. I removed the insert and tried to screw it on to the leadscrew by hand but it was too tight to screw it beyond a couple of threads. This has provided me with a nice little project, namely manufacturing a replacement insert using brass. One way or another I'm going to become proficient at threading... The good news is that the drawbar is finished and my Clarkson Autolock milling chuck is now useable. The bad news is that I hand threaded the ends of it and I have therefore not advanced my proficiency in using the lathe for cutting a thread. I did try though. This brings me to a question for you experts... Having discovered what I think is the problem with the stiffness in the topslide, I decided to carry on regardless with my exercise. I replaced the gib strip, mounted the topslide in place and angled it to 27.5 degrees, fitted a 55 degree thread form tool at centre height and checked that it was properly at 90 degrees to the workpiece using a thread template. I advanced the tool to just touch the workpiece, backed it off 20 thou. with the cross slide and advanced into the workpiece using the topslide. I engaged the half nut and off we went. When I reached the clearance gap I disengaged the half nuts, backed the tool off 10 thou using the cross slide, wound the carriage back to the start and repeated the process. I didn't need to refer to the thread indicator because it was a 16 tpi thread and the main leadscrew of the lathe is 8 tpi. Please correct me if I'm wrong but any multiple of the pitch of the leadscrew will always engage in the right place. Everything went well for the first three passes and then the fourth pass removed the newly cut thread and left me with a plain mandrel again. (Please stop laughing, you at the computer!) This is my question... I accept that the tool will always engage at the correct place if you only use the cross slide to move it directly out of the thread and back in again but how do you ensure that it does so when you use the topslide to advance it at 27.5 degrees to the axis of the workpiece? Am I winding the topslide in from too far away? Peter ------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "p_ioannidis" pioannidisx~xxtpg.com.au Date: Tue Feb 5, 2008 6:41 pm ((PST)) > Please correct me if I'm wrong but any multiple of the pitch of the > leadscrew will always engage in the right place. Not certain about that. > Everything went well for the first three passes and then the fourth > pass removed the newly cut thread and left me with a plain mandrel > again. (Please stop laughing, you at the computer!) Peter, this is why I still use Taps & Dies (need more practice) myself. > This is my question... I accept that the tool will always engage at > the correct place if you only use the cross slide to move it > directly out of the thread and back in again but how do you ensure > that it does so when you use the topslide to advance it at 27.5 > degrees to the axis of the workpiece? Am I winding the topslide in > from too far away? This is the problem I was having, I asked my neighbour (more experienced) than me to have a go on my ML7 and he found that the leadscrew brackets were loose on the bed and that the leadscrew had too much backlash on the Right hand side bracket. He checked this by moving the saddle to the center of the bed, engaged the half nuts and then locking the saddle down, then by attempting to move the apron handwheel left/right in a (wiggling mannor) was able to detect the cause of my problem. after some adjustments he went on to cut an excellent thead. But I am still not confident enough to try yet... Practice, Practice, Practice. I hope this helps. Peter -------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "Peter" taylor_pgx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Feb 6, 2008 2:56 pm ((PST)) "...he found that the leadscrew brackets were loose on the bed and that the leadscrew had too much backlash on the Right hand side bracket." Thank you for the tip Peter. That's something I hadn't considered. I shall give my saddle a wiggle tomorrow and check for backlash. You're right about Practice making Perfect. I'm confident that I will become proficient at thread cutting eventually. Peter ------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Tue Feb 5, 2008 11:03 pm ((PST)) > Please correct me if I'm wrong but any multiple of the pitch of the > leadscrew will always engage in the right place. Wrong. Otherwise what you say below would not have happened (-: > Everything went well for the first three passes and then the fourth > pass removed the newly cut thread and left me with a plain mandrel > again. (Please stop laughing, you at the computer!) I don't know the rules, though I have read them. I just always engage at the same number on the thread dial, no matter what thread I'm doing. And for fine feeds, I engage at a number, and then for the spring pass I engage at the number + 1/4 tick. I find it gives a smoother shinier, more HDTV ready finish, since previous experience cutting a dual start thread tells me that that 1/4 tick gives me a cut 'inbetween' the previous cut (for some values of thread pitch), thus reducing surface roughness. Or something - it just works for me (-: But to talk briefly about cutting threads..... I find this to be the easiest thing going. Hitting a precise diameter is much harder. So give it a go. I don't make a runout groove, rather letting the end of the thread become a runout groove simply by stopping the carriage and letting it run on before retracting. And one day when I make the auto carriage stop, I'll let it do it for me (-: In fact about the first thing I did when I got the lathe was cut a thread. All I had was a round nose tool and some rebar, but I did cut a thread with it, of no particular size. I think I still have that bit of rebar. David ------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "Peter" taylor_pgx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Feb 6, 2008 3:07 pm ((PST)) Thanks for the advice on using the thread indicator David. I agree that waiting a few moments for the same number to line up has the advantage of taking the guesswork out of it, for a modest investment of time. I shall apply that principle. Hitting the right diameter was also a problem I encountered. In fact I think you and discussed it a while back, after I machined a backplate for a 3-jaw chuck and ended up with too large a hole!!! I've worked on that particular problem and my success rate has improved, thankfully. Peter ------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Feb 5, 2008 11:13 pm ((PST)) Peter, Firstly as to the tight feed nut Unless it's not a factory-supplied nut, it is unlikely to have "grown", but one of three things I can think of might have happened: 1) It may have been squeezed by corrosion product building up between the outside of the nut and the bore it fits in. That's unlikely - it's not actually aluminium but a white-metal diecasting alloy - probably one of the "Zamak" family (see wikipedia), which is not corrosion-prone. Conceivably though, if a previous owned had smeared it with "Copper- Kote" or something similar, containing a metal high on the galvanic scale relative to zinc, this might cause galvanic corrosion. 2) It may have seized due to lack of lubrication. Once again, unlikely, as it is a fairly 'greasy', somewhat self-lubricating alloy. 3) A previous owner may have attempted to remove the topslide backlash by taking the nut out and squeezing it axially in a milling vice or somesuch. I would think this unlikely, as the only way I know of this method is through independently dreaming it up and trying it. It does in fact work a treat, provided you don't overdo it (use a DTI, and squeeze only by the amount of backlash you're trying to remove, retry and remeasure until you get a feel for how much further you can take it). If there's too much backlash, the nut will become so barrel shaped in the mid-body as to require remachining to fit. I haven't done this on my cross slide, because the feedscrew itself is unevenly worn, and there's nothing worse than intermittent backlash. So I'm afraid I can only come up with unlikely scenarios, but given that I've never heard of (or read of) the problem you describe, it might be an uncommon problem, and these do tend to stem from unlikely causes. ------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Feb 5, 2008 11:54 pm ((PST)) > .... I set the topslide to 27.5 degrees and recalled that the > technique of threading calls for 'advancing the topslide and > retracting the cross slide', and wound the topslide out to provide > enough movement for the process. Peter, Setting over the topslide to half the thread angle is one way of achieving a better result, but when you are cutting your first threads, it may be introducing a potentially confusing factor. I'd be inclined keep things simple by leaving the topslide at 0 degrees for now, so that all depthing is done with the cross slide index. The disadvantage of this is that the V tool cuts on both flanks, which can limit the amount you can prudently take off in each cut, once you get to a substantial proportion of thread depth. Once you gain a bit of familiarity with the process (which doesn't take long if you keep things simple, you can alleviate the 'crowding' of the two chips into each other, by simply moving the tool sideways using the topslide, just a smignen with each new cut. Because the topslide is parallel to the work axis, this will not influence the depth. There is a mathematical way of working out how far to move it sideways (in proportion to depth of cut) but in practice you can actually get a feel for this by waiting until the cut begins and then simply winding the topslide leftwards until there is only one chip coming from the leading flank of the tool. Note how far you moved it, as a proportion of the depth of that cut, and this will be the amount for that pitch forevermore. Reduce the pro-rated amount slightly on the final cuts, so both flanks of the threadform will be cleaned up. These cuts will be shallower, and ultimately "spring cuts" (ie theoretically no depth of cut, in practice the work and the lathe will progressively surrender the accumulated deflection) This incidentally is how "Martin Cleeve" (actually Kenneth Hart) the all-time guru of Myford screwcutting -- who made a living cutting tricky threads on a production basis on his heavily self-improved Myford -- ended up handling the issue of how to cut the cleanest threads in the least time and fuss. (Except he calculated the offset, rather than my more empirical method) In the interests of keeping it simple, it is an excellent idea to practice initially cutting threads whose pitch is a multiple of 8 tpi. This means you don't need to use the threading dial at all - one less thing to watch. For a somewhat simplified set of rules for which threads can use which stations on the dial, refer to the Myford manual in the "Files" section. IF you can't be bothered, just always use the same number; as long as you're not cutting BA or other metric pitches, this will always work, and doesn't take much longer unless you're cutting really big threads. Remember that unless you stone the correct radius on the tip of the V tool (and who's going to do that afresh for every different pitch?) your tabulated or calculated depth of thread will be too shallow. If you don't have a female thread to use to check the fit at the end of the job before you call it finished, you'll need to do a calculation to account for the difference in penetration between a sharp V and the correct radius tip. ------- Re: Sticky Topslide Posted by: "Peter" taylor_pgx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Feb 6, 2008 3:17 pm ((PST)) Tr0up, Thank you very much for your comprehensive and informative response. You've given me exactly the information I was looking for, to enable me to move forward with this and have another go. I was wondering how critical it was to get the approach angle right. If I can achieve a working fit for a nut and bolt as a practice session I can worry about the approach angle later, for something that requires a more precise fit. Between all of you, you have given me the courage to persevere and I am extremely grateful for that. Peter ------- ML10 back gear noise [MyMyford] Posted by: "lars.frisen" lars.frisenx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:42 am ((PST)) Hi - What a wonderful store of knowledge there is in this forum! I would like to ask for help in diagnosing the source of an annoying noise that appears when engaging the back gears in my ML10. When running without a load, the back gears emit the same kind of faint rattling noise that comes from the change gears but when putting on a load, like parting- off, there appears a knocking-grinding sound, a bit like a knocking car engine filled with gravel. I cannot find any play in the mandrel or elsewhere and everything is properly lubed. The swarf comes off cleanly, leaving a fine cut surface, but the knocking drives me mad. Any suggestions? Thanks! Best regards Lars Frisen ------- Re: ML10 back gear noise Posted by: "joegib1946" joegib1946x~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Feb 26, 2008 8:37 am ((PST)) The spindle carrying the backgear assembly has a grubscrew in line with the flats that fit into the the slotted arm projecting from the headstock. Screwing the grubscrew in and out provides a crude way of adjusting the depth of engagement of the gears. The grinding noise you hear suggests that the gears are too tightly engaged. Try adjusting the grubscrew to see if you can eliminate the grinding noise. That said, in my experience backgear, even if properly adjusted, tends to be noisy when compared with direct drive. ------- Re: ML10 back gear noise Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Feb 28, 2008 9:51 pm ((PST)) Lars. I tried cleaning all the lubricant off the back gears on my ML7 and put on a load, and I got a horrible noise. Are you using a high viscosity 'open gear' lubricant, such as Rocol and Molybond make? If you can't get that, use an "Extreme Pressure" grease, liberally applied. I use Rocol 265 molybdenum gear Grease, which I bought a big container of a long time ago, but I don't think it still goes under that name. ------- Re: Noisy Gears [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" tr0upx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Feb 29, 2008 11:00 pm ((PST)) "keatinglaurie" wrote: > I was running my Super 7 using the back gear at one of its higher > speeds. What a racket !! Is it common for a Myford in backgear to > have a lot of gear noise? > I'm wondering if I need to adjust the back gear per the user manual > instructions? Only thing is - they don't specify how much clearance > is required. Or do you just shift the gear up until the engagement is > tight?? Regards; steamcat Laurie, Two things: Engagement of spur gears should NEVER be tight, even if they're ground, and run on machine-tool precision spindle bearings. My big P&W lathe, which has such bearings (to replace one would cost more than I paid for the whole lathe) and ground gears throughout the headstock, still has backlash by design. The gears were presumably ground on Pratt & Whitney's own gear grinders, which were legendary in their day. A couple of real world reasons why zero backlash for spur gears would not be a good thing: differential thermal expansion, and foreign bodies. The surface of the teeth would flake away in short order with the immense loadings, due to each tooth in succession being caught between a rock and a hard place, literally having nowhere to go. The "correct" amount of backlash is to some extent a factor of how fussy you want to get, how much you dislike noise, and how clean you keep the headstock inside the covers. It's hard to measure in the Seven series (especially the Super 7 because of the play in the natty "rotary switch" back-gear dog), because you need to immobilise one gear (more easily the larger of the left pair) and get a finger onto the teeth of the small gear of that pair and wiggle it. There's precious little room left for a dial indicator or feeler gauge, so you have to exercise judgement. The ideal amount of backlash to aim for is the dynamic film thickness of the gear lubricant you propose to use, or vice versa. If this is meaningless to you (as it would be to most people), another way would be to get a feel (using changewheels) for the smallest amount of backlash which you can detect (with the teeth rinsed with solvent), and then set the pair with about three times that much. If you can get a DTI tangentially onto a tooth, the lash should be in the 0.1 to 0.2mm range, to my way of thinking. Memorise the feel of the clonk, clean the left pair of back gears, and adjust the centre distance per the manual until you get the same perceived clearance. Which brings us to the second thing has to be checked: did you read the reply to the thread the other day on the ML10 backgear, regarding lubrication? Generally speaking, the thicker, the quieter. If you wanted to shell out megabucks for a high-tech synthetic semi-thixotropic gear lube such as is used on roll-formers, and install a sump, you could have silent gearing. The stuff wraps itself magically from wheel to wheel in a long geartrain, so that it looks much like a belt, only it writhes a bit more ! And the third thing (I promised to mention only two but I lied) Super 7 backgear should NOT be used in either of the top two speeds, which is the reason for the blank lines on the Myford speed chart. In other words, with the larger pulley driving from the motor, avoid the two larger cone pulleys. If the gear noise you are concerned about happens only in these two speeds, bear in mind they double up with the lowest two speeds in ungeared drive and are accordingly superfluous. ------- Re: Noisy Gears Posted by: "keatinglaurie" steamcatx~xxshaw.ca Date: Sun Mar 2, 2008 5:14 pm ((PST)) Thanks for all the info tr0up. Much appreciated. Now that I think of it, I probably was running in one of those 2 top speeds (said with embarassment!!). I've also got some moly grease that I may give a try and see if that quiets things done even more. Learn something new every day ;-) steamcat ------- Belt problems. [MyMyford] Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxgmail.com Date: Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:55 am ((PDT)) Had some time today to get back to assembling my Super 7 restoration. Got the drive assembly together, clutch working (thanks Rich) spindle in and adjusted. Fitted the guards and covers and nothing fits cleanly. One cover catches the belt tension lever and when tension is released the pulleys jam on the belt guard. Damnit When I got the machine it was not working and I used the belt that was on it - A750. After a bit of archive searching I find the belt should be a A780. This makes sense as with a longer belt all bits would move up out of the way and not catch. I am not in the mood to buy a new belt and strip everything again and as I have some old link belt at hand think cutting the short belt off and fitting the link belt is an easier way to go. Will sleep on it but am sure the link belt will win. ------- Re: Belt problems. Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:05 am ((PDT)) Hi Phil, The shaft centers on my S7 are 10.25" - Motor to Countershaft and 9.75" - Countershaft to Spindle. The numbers on the belts make no sense to me for length. RichD ------- Re: Belt problems. Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:43 am ((PDT)) There is no need to sleep! A link belt is a good decision. ------- Re: Belt problems. Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxgmail.com Date: Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:47 am ((PDT)) Hi Rich, I have 9" countershaft to spindle. That is why the countershaft is so far forward and catching on the covers (side and top). Need to fit a longer belt to move the shaft up. Motor side is fine. ------- Re: Belt problems. Posted by: "Rich Dean" cmsteamx~xxspeedfactory.net Date: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:32 am ((PDT)) Phil, when the countershaft is engaged (all the way back) the bearing hub should be about a 1/4" from touching the large support casting on the right side. Also, with the cover down, the hub will be centered in the cover cutout that surrounds the hub. Hoping that helps, RichD, Atlanta ------- Re: Belt problems. Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxgmail.com Date: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:51 am ((PDT)) Rich, Does help. Confirms that the belt is too short. Will put on a longer one tomorrow and let you know how it goes. ------- Re: Belt problems. Posted by: "Phil Hansen" skilphilx~xxgmail.com Date: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:59 pm ((PDT)) Put on a longer link belt this morning. Makes all the difference. Nothing catches or touches and all runs smoothly. Thanks for the advice. ------- RPM counter [MyMyford] Posted by: "johnstij" johnstijx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:29 am ((PDT)) i have now fitted my ML7R with a 3 phase motor & inverter. i have purchased a rev counter kit from :- http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/ it has the option to use either a reflective sensor or a slotted disc sensor. my question is has any one fitted a similair type of rev counter to a ML7R or super 7 & if so where have they mounted the reflective or slotted disc on the spindle. ------- Re: RPM counter Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:39 am ((PDT)) Hi - I fitted one to my ML7 (I designed the rev counter, so the prototype is still on my machine). What I did was to mount one of the reflective sensors on a bracket attached to the countershaft bracket at the back of the headstock, so that it reflected against the flat face of the largest headstock pulley. I then painted black and white sectors on the pulley face using Humbrol enamel, 6 of each, to give 6 pulses per rev. The text of my MEW write-up of the project is here - there's a pic of the sensor setup: http://www.jeffree.co.uk/pages/revmaster.htm Regards, Tony ------- 1950's colour..... [MyMyford] Posted by: "Gerry" gerry.mclaughlanx~xxlineone.net Date: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:26 am ((PDT)) Hi Folks, Any idea what the colour of my 1950's ML7 lathe should be?? Parts of it are currently greenish....Stuff on eBay says '75 - 2000 so I assume its different... Cheers Gerry ------- Re: 1950's colour..... Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:47 am ((PDT)) Dirty oil colour? Cliff Coggin ------- Re: 1950's colour..... Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Tue Mar 25, 2008 6:55 am ((PDT)) Gerry, The colour for my 1955 Super 7 is Myford Grey. I think if you look through the messages on this forum someone defined the colour - you can then get some mixed at your local paint supplier. Myford enamel is wonderful stuff but quite expensive - circa £15 a can. There is someone advertising enamel in Myford grey on ebay (it's a copy) but I have no idea how good or otherwise it is. Hope this helps. Tim ------- Re: 1950's colour..... Posted by: "GerryM" gerry.mclaughlanx~xxlineone.net Date: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:16 am ((PDT)) Hmmm.....The serial on the bed is K11925 which I thought was somewhere in the '50s.....I can see no sign of grey anywhere, even behind brackets etc...its a kinda drab olive. I got hold of a replacement tailstock and it was green as well, but nothing like the green on my bed! I guess it might have been repainted in the past. The lathe was in a bit of a mess and so needs repainted. A search indicated that Plasticoat medium grey was a close fit....can anyone confirm? Thanks! Gerry ------- Re: 1950's colour..... Posted by: "Frank Chadwick" fr4nk.chadwickx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:45 pm ((PDT)) Gerry, My early 1950s ML7 is a creamy yellow colour and just to confuse you I once bought some genuine Myford changewheels on a car boot sale and they had their centres painted a kind of pea green. What colour/serial number is your lathe? Now that's a subject for a group survey. Best, Frank C. ------- Re: 1950's colour..... Posted by: "GerryM" gerry.mclaughlanx~xxlineone.net Date: Tue Mar 25, 2008 3:02 pm ((PDT)) Hi Frank, it's K11925 I think its a drab green ....But it's in such a mess it could have been grey.... ------- Re: 1950's colour..... Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:10 pm ((PDT)) Not wanting to stamp on anyone's restoration parade, but this does remind me of one of those business studies books with a title like "What colour is your parachute?" FWIW my 7 is "chipped grey". There's oil on the chipped areas, from normal working. It might well get a strip-fill-rub down-repaint someday, but while I own it! Each to his own, just as it should be! Kevin NW England, UK ------- Re: 1950's colour..... Posted by: "GerryM" gerry.mclaughlanx~xxlineone.net Date: Tue Mar 25, 2008 3:05 pm ((PDT)) Well, the alternative was to leave it rust coloured....I thought since I was gonna clean off the rust I may as well throw some paint at it. I have no problem at all if it now gets stained with oil and chipped... As long as it's not rusty! Cheers Gerry ------- Re: 1950's colour..... Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:45 pm ((PDT)) Yes, of course, paint rather than rust, and good luck with your work. I was just musing on what sometimes, here, seems to be an obsession with getting the exact colour that was used fifty years ago, on something that lives in a workshop. Even if someone (not you, it seems) is trying to colour match, say, a refurbished tailstock with the rest of the machine, it's not likely that you'll do any better with a formula (RAL, Munsel, whatever) than you would by taking the changewheel cover along to a paint shop and getting a small batch mixed up. After all, paint does change over time. Whatever. Gerry, have fun (we all know you will!). For the rest, obsess as much as you want, after all, it's harmless. Kevin NW England, UK ------- PowerTwist belt [MyMyford] Posted by: "dewintondave" bouserx~xxgmail.com Date: Mon Apr 7, 2008 2:35 am ((PDT)) Hi folks, I've just received my Chronos order; Z-section PowerTwist belt and a couple of Dixon type tool holders. The tool holders seem good. The PowerTwist belt is for the primary drive - what an improvement! I can now run in the high range, with no more bad vibes. The original M-section V-belt appeared to be in good condition, but was a shocker for flapping around like goodness knows what. Dave ------- Re: PowerTwist belt Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Mon Apr 7, 2008 6:51 pm ((PDT)) Interesting to hear that, Dave. It's great to get rid of a nasty vibration like that, isn't it. Do you get a stripe of grease on your clothes, when it acquires escape velocity from the chuck spinning at 2000 rpm? I went to a Powertwist for the A-section final drive (countershaft > spindle) on my Super 7 and ended up ditching it for a premium Optibelt cogged belt (ie a V belt with interior corrugations) because I couldn't get enough power through it to take decent cuts at a large diameter, no matter how taut I stretched it with pre-tension. I was surprised by this, because there was not one opinion I came across from the internet community to suggest this would be a problem for a Myford 7. However, when I tried turning a 110 diameter steel V-pulley, the Powertwist belt was just a waste of space. The cogged belt shows no inclination to slip when the lathe is maxed out. My lathe is admittedly a little more rigid than usual, being bolted to a bedplate which weighs as much as I do, but I still don't see how people get away with a Powertwist on the final drive stage. ------- Re: PowerTwist belt Posted by: "dewintondave" bouserx~xxgmail.com Date: Tue Apr 8, 2008 3:24 am ((PDT)) Thank you for the info on the final drive belt. I would be loath to replace mine as it aint broke yet. I haven't had her up to top speed yet, just been dawdling in the mid- range. I'm sure to get striped though, as mine's a nit of a leaker. My new new drain on the lathe tray is doing a fine job of draining away the oil leaks. At least the bearings will be getting plenty of fresh oil, that ISO 32 grade is thin. Dave ------- Re: PowerTwist belt Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Sun Apr 27, 2008 3:17 pm ((PDT)) In MyMyfordx~xxyahoogroups.com, "dewintondave" wrote: > I've spotted in the September 2007 edition of Myford 7 Spare parts > .pdf that the PowerTwist belt is included as an option for the primary > drive. > "Power Twist Plus V Belt to fit the primary drive on all ML7-R and all > Small Bore Super 7 lathes. This belting is particularly useful for > eliminating inherent single phase motor vibration which can be > transmitted via the primary drive belt upto the countershaft." > Yesterday I was using the collet system to grip 1/8" brass, and the > lathe was "belting" along at 2105 RPM quite happily :-) > Dave. Dave I fitted some Powertwist belting to the final drive to replace a belt which had seen better days and was disintegrating bit by bit. With so many lumps flailing off it, vibration was getting to be quite marked. Powertwist seemed to be the answer as it meant I would not have to disassemble the headstock which seems to be in perfect adjustment. I followed the "if it aint broke, don't fix it" doctrine which powertwist allowed me to do easily. The improvement was marked, no more vibration but the belt slipped all too readily. As the belt was supplied as a headstock belt replacement, there was no spare links. Instead, I ended up taking a link out to get at least some grip back. The only problem with powertwist is that getting it onto the highest ratio pulleys nearest the spindle is a bit of a fiddle as there is very limited clearance behind the countershaft pulley (or maybe it's just my 60 year old model with the inboard clutch which has this problem?) As I have a three phase motor coupled with a variable speed inverter, I can (and have for a few minutes) had the motor on 60hz which gives a spindle speed of 2520RPM with no apparent problems. This with a fairly small dia. collet chuck mounted -- I would be loath to do anything like this speed with a 6" independent 4 jaw chuck on the spindle. So I would give Powertwist 9 1/2 out of 10. Regards Keith ------- Cutting change gear worm thread [MyMyford] Posted by: "Willem van Biljon" willemx~xxhillwood.co.za Date: Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:10 am ((PDT)) Hi All, I have a Super 7 fitted with a gearbox, but no metric conversion set. I would like to cut a worm thread that will drive a Myford change gear (i.e. DP20). This requires a pitch of .15708 inch, or about 6.366 TPI - which of course my gearbox can't do. I know there are some fiddles to allow a gearbox to cut a metric approximation (some info on this in the Files section), but I haven't seen anything for this pitch. Anyone know if it is possible without the conversion banjo? Thanks Willem ------- Re: Cutting change gear worm thread Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:29 am ((PDT)) this is the output from my change gear program CHANGE GEAR CALCULATIONS change /c /m tpi | /? V2.2.daf Number of change gears read = 14 Effective lead screw pitch = 8.000000 tpi Using pitch of 6.366 tpi Allowable thread pitch accuracy 0.020 Required gear ratio (leadscrew/spindle) = 1.256676 leadscrew turns FASTER than spindle Use gear set with lowest ratio count at left Data - unique gear combos in order found 7.833 :: Drivers 25 38 50 Driven 12 45 70 ratio 1.256614 error 0.004960% 4.167 :: Drivers 30 60 65 Driven 35 38 70 ratio 1.256713 error 0.002954% 3.625 :: Drivers 40 45 65 Driven 35 38 70 ratio 1.256713 error 0.002954% That is without a gearbox, so if you have the changewheels, just set the gearbox to 1:1). This program is based on Marvin Klotz's program and he has since extended his version to cater for gearboxes. Search the web for it.... David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Cutting change gear worm thread Posted by: "Willem van Biljon" willemx~xxhillwood.co.za Date: Mon Apr 14, 2008 10:44 pm ((PDT)) Thanks David. Unfortunately I can't fit any of the solutions onto the gearbox' banjo -- the two idler gear pins are fixed. Looks like I'm going to have to make or get a banjo similar to the metric conversion kit's. Willem ------- Re: British Threads [MyMyford] Posted by: "graham_pge" gbennettx~xxshaw.ca Date: Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:24 pm ((PDT)) In MyMyfordx~xxyahoogroups.com, "tr0up" wrote: "also on BSW, although I'm not aware of any such > threads on a Myford) Thanks for the pointer(s), I'm collecting all the information I can as my trail starts off in this new direction." Replying to an old post, just had to - as a newbe I might even have an answer. I hope it wasn't so obvious that no one wanted to post it. The die I just received from way over there (RDG UK) is a 1 1/8 x 12 BSW, which the web site said matches the spindle nose thread on my Super 7. So there is one BSW thread on the Myford. Cheers, Graham Victoria, BC Canada -------- Re: British Threads Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:53 am ((PDT)) Well not quite true actually. The thread is Whitworth form in terms of 55 degree angle and crest shape but that does not make it British Standard Whitworth which has specific pitches for given diameters. My tables only go up to 1" BSW and that is 8TPI so 1 1/8 BSW would be 8 or less TPI. Using your definiton, all imperial threads on the Myford (apart from the lead & feed screws) are Whitworth form. Bob ------- Re: British Threads Posted by: "David Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:29 am ((PDT)) graham_pge wrote: > The die I just received from way over there (RDG UK) is a 1 1/8 x 12 > BSW, which the web site said matches the spindle nose thread on my > Super 7. So there is one BSW thread on the Myford. All the smaller fasteners on my ML7 are BSF, the fine series of Whitworth threads. The oil nipples are BA threads though, probably because the supplier makes them that way and they're cheaper by the dozen. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: British Threads Posted by: "G Bennett" gbennettx~xxshaw.ca Date: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:17 pm ((PDT)) Hi Bob, Thank you for the correction - that's why I'm here. The BSW is 7 TPI for 1 1/8". What I included in my initial post was exactly the stamping on the die I bought to match the lathe spindle thread. So HMB (manufacturer) and RDG (vendor) are not correct in their information. Myford does list the thread as "1 1/8" x 12 tpi Whitworth form". FWIW these references provide comparisons (I think this is a UNF - maybe?) and the metric dimensions for the thread dimensions: http://www.anzor.co.nz/?t=36 http://mdmetric.com/tech/thddat8.htm Cheers, Graham ------- Re: British Threads Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:34 am ((PDT)) Graham I'm sorry to have to bag a kiwi website, but the Anzor webpage embodies several snares and delusions (they've an office just within minutes of my door, I call in quite often, must give them a rark up). They don't specify one of the key elements of thread form, notably included angle. If they did, you would not have hazarded the guess that the Myford spindle nose was a UNF thread: Unified National threads (like American National) are 60 degree. They also fail to note that BA is, peculiarly, 47.5 degree. They further muddy the waters by including the formula pitch = 1/tpi for every thread form, including BA whose pitches are metric ! (albeit strange metric sizes because they follow a theoretically pure geometric progression). It's rather a confusing convention that metric threads have no measure analogous to TPI. I haven't the time or inclination to check their formulae, but based on the apparent lack of grasp by whoever posted the page, I'd tread warily and seek corroboration before cutting any metal. FWIW The Whitworth family of threads includes BSW, BSF, and BSP (which is a pipe thread, and includes BSPT which is tapered). The word "Whitworth" appears in the full name of each of these, eg BSF is "Whitworth Fine Thread BS 84". There are better websites on all these threadforms listed earlier in this same thread, if memory serves. ------- Re: British Threads Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:51 am ((PDT)) --- In MyMyfordx~xxyahoogroups.com, G Bennett wrote: > What I included in my initial post was exactly the stamping on the die I bought to match the lathe spindle thread. So HMB (manufacturer) and RDG (vendor) are not correct in their information. < I'm not surprised. The worst thread I've yet encountered in a lifetime of engineering was on a so-called Myford spindle adapter included with an HBM rotary table from RDG purchased at the end of last year. The included angle was around 70 degrees, the threads were "drunken", and despite the OD being too large, it was only possible to get (incomplete) cleanup on one flank when I set it up to try to reclaim it. I'd been lulled into the belief, largely from believing what I read on the internet - which I confess is an odd thing to do - that the quality issues which used to dog items from India and China were largely resolved. So I placed a reasonably significant order. I'm cured for another ten years - I'll revert to choosing between making my own, or buy decent second hand (made in, not just badged from Europe, Japan or USA), or pay the extra for new, carefully selected Taiwanese stuff. In fairness, I got a partial refund for the rotary table, but it felt about as satisfactory as getting a partial refund for inedible food. There were only two items in a consignment totalling six pieces which were relatively defect free and required no rework. ------- Re: British Threads Posted by: "C.S.Johnson" csjohnsonx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:10 am ((PDT)) Hi Bob, 1 1/8" BSF is 9 tpi, 1 1/8" BSW is 7 tpi. The thread on the nose of a Myford is 1 1/8" 12 tpi whitworth form, i.e. 55 degree. Hope this helps. Colin ------- Mandrel Handle [MyMyford] Posted by: "rod.wilson56" rwilsonx~xxmaygurney.co.uk Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 7:08 am ((PDT)) Is there a better design for a mandrel handle than that in Ian Bradley's book. My oldish copy of his book refers to a drawing that I'm quite sure doesn't exist. As a matter of further interest when do you use a handle? I'm thinking I need to make the handle, to turn the 26 TPI thread in the chuck stop, to make washers, to make something else, to make the item I first thought of. ------- Re: Mandrel Handle Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 7:54 am ((PDT)) Dear Rod, Try the George Thomas design - shown in ME and a kit of materials etc available from Hemingway: www.hemingwaykits.com Best Regards Tim ------- Re: Mandrel Handle Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 8:46 am ((PDT)) I use mine for metric threading, esp short threads http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe For any imperial thread, just slow things down and powered is just fine. I've cut 26tpi at 200rpm no problem. Gives a nice finish too (-: David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Mandrel Handle Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 10:14 am ((PDT)) There are details of an excellent design to suit a Myford 7in G.H. Thomas' book The Model Engineers Workshop Manual. Like all GHT designs, it works superbly. Mike ------- SHIMS [MyMyford] Posted by: "brogdenalbert" brogdenalbertx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 9:04 am ((PDT)) I've bought shims for my ml7 front spindle. I believed you could split these up but I have not found this possible. I used a sharp edge and attempted to split it. It did split it but not properly and I ended up ruining it. I don't know if all these shims are splittable. Could someone please help. The thickness of the shim is 0.015 inch. ------- Re: SHIMS Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 12:42 am ((PDT)) I've not tried to dissect the shims for the headstock of an ML7, but the shims for the keepers at the back and front of my cross slide were stacks of 4 shims glued together, each layer 0.0025" thick. It's not easy to separate them: it's not at all obvious, even with a lens, that they are not a solid single thickness. I found it helped to flex them gently in alternate directions for a while, then by carefully stroking one end with a new scalpel blade held perpendicular, I eventually opened a crack which could be judiciously wiggled into a chasm. The adhesive was amazingly good, separating without leaving any uneven residue, considering the shims had been in situ for about 35 years. If your shims are new, it might be that they're defective. I'm assuming they adhere whole sheets together in stacks, then punch out the individual sizes of shim. If the blade of the guillotine or punch tool was not sharp, it would create a 'hanging burr' which might make it virtually impossible to separate them without damage. You should send them back to Myford for replacement if this seems to be the case Hope this helps. ------- Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts [MyMyford] Posted by: "swindlehurstguy" swindlehurstguyx~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:59 am ((PDT)) Hi all, was glossing through Blue Ridge machinery website and found a comment made about the super 7 short bed being 'induction hardened'! Can anyone tell me from when they were made so and to what extent having this option is better than having a bed of the standard variety. I don't know a lot about this and would like to know more. I have two beds, the one being from an ML7 and the shorter super 7 and would like to know what the most advantageous would be? thanks Brent ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:53 pm ((PDT)) AFAIK the induction hardened bed was never more than an option, available on both Super and ML 7s. They used a different paint shade from the usual cream between the ways to differentiate - I think it was off-white. (I'm hopeless with colours so don't take notice of anything I say) There's nothing much to pick between an ML7 bed and a Super 7. The latter has a stud to stabilise the headstock via the motor mounting bracket, but from the early seventies the beds were interchangeable. A hardened bed would be a nice touch, but to my way of thinking the main causes of bed wear are: careless use, and lack of rear wipers. Even a hardened bed will wear surprisingly much without a reliable film of oil. I recently rebuilt a very old Super 7 and swapped a newer (but still 36 year old) ML7 bed under it, which I remachined (like regrinding, but I used a very accurate milling machine). I also machined the rear of the carriage to allow for a wrap-around rear wiper shroud, which I made and fitted. I also machined much more comprehensive oil grooves under the carriage, and fitted proper hydraulic nipples to accomodate a high pressure oil gun. At the same time I replaced the felt for the front wiper. I may build a better shroud for that too, but for now the front wiper seems to work well - I think it's mainly a matter of keeping the felt in good nick (maybe washing it every few years and replacing every six or ten, depending on use) You can get generally get suitable felt from the people who make gaskets. It's 4mm thick, and industrial felt is typically white and rather coarse grained compared to (say) a felt hat. If anyone's keen to add a rear wiper I could write it up and post photos. I thoroughly recommend it - provided you upgrade the lubrication provisions. It's extremely satisfying to plug in the gun, give it a few highly effectual squeezes, and see clean oil forcing its way out around the entire periphery of the carriage pretty much simultaneously, bringing a small amount of fine debris out from the wiper junction. In the absence of the rear wiper, the oil simply takes the line of least resistance, and doesn't find its way to the furthest corners. Now whenever I start a session, after turning on the drip oiler to the headstock, I wipe the bed free of dust, then crank the carriage from end to end. Generally this leaves a glistening film of golden oil over all. If it starts to look thin, I reach for the gun. I'm pretty sure the bed will see me out, now. With any luck I've only got about thirty years of machining left in me. ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "Barry Kneller" bkba09515x~xxblueyonder.co.uk Date: Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:16 pm ((PDT)) Troup My S7 is in bits at the moment for a bit of re-furbishment - I too have to do some work on the underside of the saddle and I've been puzzling over how to add a rear wiper - any information about this and the mods to the oil ways would be greatly appreciated. I'm also considering adding some thin (about 1mm) ptfe sheet gasket material to the underside of the saddle to reduce friction - anyone tried this? Thanks & Regards Barry PS - I had a hell of a job getting hold of some replacement felt, finally managed to buy a couple of 6"x 4"x 0.125" pieces of good quality white felt from The States quite cheaply, I'll look out the guys Ebay id if anyone wants it. ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:18 am ((PDT)) I too would be interested to hear of Troup's modification. Barry. How did you cut holes in your new felt? I have tried hole punches with little success. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "Barry Kneller" bkba09515x~xxblueyonder.co.uk Date: Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:46 am ((PDT)) Haven't tried to cut it yet - probably a scalpel for the straight bits & one of those paper punches for the holes ... ? Cheers Barry ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:51 am ((PDT)) clamp it hard between 2 pieces of steel, and drill through the steel. I've done this on various soft materials like leather, but not yet on felt. only a matter of time though, since my carriage needs new wipers. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:39 am ((PDT)) I just poked holes for mounting screws in the right places with a sharp scriber (conical pattern, not knife pattern) after marking through the wiper carrier with a soft lead pencil (eg 2B) - worked just fine. I cut them (after marking out shapes with same pencil) with heavy duty kitchen snips. I'll try and document my approach to rear wiper additions and oil gallery mods this weekend. I don't think PTFE is very suitable- you really should get hold of some Turcite or equivalent (such as Rulon). It's quite a different formulation from virgin PTFE, for lots of plausible reasons none of which I can remember right now, but if you google "Turcite" and PTFE you might find some discussion. These purpose-formulated products are not cheap, but you might be able to score the tiny amount you require on a sample basis, if you can make a plausible pitch that you are planning a major installation. The other possibility would be to use a 'cast in place' compound like Moglice. This is available in reasonably small quantities, and you don't have to buy adhesive: it bonds directly to CI. In all these cases, conventional wisdom states that wipers need to be of a higher standard than usual: polymer way materials have much higher embeddability even than cast iron, so if any abrasive dust gets past the wipers, you end up 'lapping' your bedways forevermore. Usually machine tools with these modern carriage liner materials have fancy wipers, perhaps double lip configuration, say with a polyurethane elastomer inner lip and a stainless scraper outboard. It's highly desirable to fit a 'single shot' pressure lubrication system. However with attention to detail in upgrading the felt wipers and covering the ways carefully when machining cast iron or grinding in the lathe, and careful lubrication and maintenance, I would think the pitfalls could be negotiated. Personally I think the cast iron carriage is fine for manual machining (with mods such as I've made to improve the oil film) but a polymer could be worthwhile if you're fitting CNC, especially if you're doing it in style with ballscrews. I've not had experience of such conversions, but I'm not sure I'd pick a Myford as a starting point. Many of the virtues of the Myford make it a particularly nice manual lathe for fine work, and I suspect some of the vices would impinge somewhat unfavourably on its suitability for CNC. Further to my post about teflon: I came across the following post on PM forum, which makes it clear PTFE can be used, but one problem is it's not feasible to scrape it; you have to flycut it (and the tool would have to be 'scary' sharp) It is also quite resilient - I wonder if 1mm would be too compressible in comparison with the reduced thickness (0.011") discussed here: http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/showthread.php?t=159382 ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:42 am ((PDT)) OK, thanks for your patience, those who requested the skinny on my rear carriage wiper and lubrication mods This project had two primary aims: to - prevent chips getting under the carriage from the tailstock end - seal off the easy escape routes for oil - given that I was also fitting hydraulic grease nipples permitting high pressure lubrication. I also machined a more elaborate array of oilways under the carriage per the photo. I hoped this would force oil to routinely reach the furthest extents of the guideways, top, side and bottom. I also hoped that the pressurised oil being forced outwards from behind the felt wipers at regular intervals would help flush out the fine non ferrous chips and cast iron dust which can end up working their way into the felt. Over the years there's the potential for these to make a scouring pad 3M would be proud of. I've been more than happy with the realisation of these hopes. Lubricating the machine, once a frustrating and ineffectual trial, is now a real pleasure, and consequently gets done more regularly. A few incidental mods were aimed at making the carriage easier to clean. All the mods made to date are shown in the gallery http://s218.photobucket.com/albums/cc237/TrouPhoto/Myford%20Super% 207/Lubrication/ make sure you scroll down - the window appears to be empty but for some reason (at least when I browse them) the photos are initially out of sight below the visible page extent. Then click on the photo to bring it up to a more useful size, and bring up the description field, which tries to explain what you're seeing, or how it came about. Click again to zoom in to full size. It was not possible to make the longways wipers vertical, without losing undue area of the carriage wings, where they bear on top of the bedways at the tailstock end. I resolved to machine these wings away at an angle per the photo "milling to create room...", so that the clamping element could taper down to a knife edge. By this means the bearing surface can be kept within 1mm of the original width on each side of the tailstock (it is the need for the latter to fit into the "U" shaped space between the clamping members which creates the space problem) The fasteners through these longways clamping members are a hybrid: M3 capscrews would have been too deep for the metal available, given that they, too, have to clear the tailstock. I don't like countersunk socket screws, as the hex recesses are too small (especially in small sizes) and in this case their head diameter was excessive. I solved the dilemma by machining the underside of the heads of the M3 socket cap screws to a countersunk profile, and made a tiny hybrid counterbore/ countersink from silver steel to suit. (Well, to me it's tiny, to you modelling folk it's probably quite large.) One miscalculation I haven't yet fully resolved is that the clamping member for the central (crossways) wiper interferes with the original nuts, whose purpose is to lock off the grub screws adjusting the clearance of the loose dovetail element. Given that on the Super 7 (unlike on the ML7) the purpose of these pusher screws is to move the loose dovetail when its vertical screws (through the cross slide) are loosened, it has not mattered so far that they are not locked. Incidentally, there was a difference of opinion last year on this forum as to whether the vertical screws are supposed to be nipped up hard. I have since noticed in the S7 manual that Myford state explicitly that this should be done. On the ML7, the horizontal screws are the only thing locating the gib strip, and the nuts are indispensable. If fitting this design, the top flange of the clamping member could be locally relieved to permit the corners of the nut to clear it. I'll probably end up doing this to mine also - it's not desirable in the long term for the screws to be able to work loose, even though the operation of the lathe will not be affected. If anyone's interested I could email them the other construction drawings. All my drawings are dual dimensioned, because I design in metric but my machine dials are in inches. The ordinate dimensions are layed out for milling with the datum corner at top left as the component sits on the table. (Which suits the handing of my feed screws.) I'd be interested to hear from Mike about his tailstock wiper - it struck me that this would be another good addition. The most pronounced wear on my ML7 after 35 years was actually under the tailstock, on the front guideway. (Mainly - I think - from the ergonomics of moving it towards the headstock by hand - it's not feasible to apply a push in the correct line, so it gets pulled towards the operator as much as towards the headstock. So far all I've done is fit limit screws to keep the bottom keeper just clear of the underside of the shears when the clamp is off, so the tailstock can't rear up when pushed back, which would allow chips to migrate under it. I think that adding improvements to the lubrication and wiping would go a long way to remove the problem - the forces involved would certainly not be enough to get through a properly established oil film (and in any case the force would be much reduced vs a dry condition). Maybe an oil cup around the back of the sole plate, and galleries connecting with machined grooves per the carriage photo.... ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "Barry Kneller" bkba09515x~xxblueyonder.co.uk Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:05 am ((PDT)) Troup: Thanks for that information, much more detailed than I could have expected, it will be invaluable when I come to complete the re-build of my S7. Regards Barry ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:27 am ((PDT)) Hi, Really useful information. There is another good reason for putting a wiper on the tailstock (which I have not yet done). I am refurbishing a 1950's Portass S lathe for my Godson and had to re-make the feedscrews (they were 12 tpi and completely shot). This entailed some interesting turning. I needed to turn down the feedscrew from larger stock for reasons I won't go into. This meant turning 3/8" for about 5" - not normally a problem but for a feedscrew you need to maintain an accurate diameter over the entire length - I was aiming for less than a thou over this length. No problem I thought setting up between centres having aligned the tailstock. Wrong! A very small amount of dust / swarf had got under the tailstock on the S7 and had lifted the front of the tailstock a fraction so that the tailstock whilst aligned in the horizontal plane was not aligned in the vertical plane. This in turn meant that the lathe was turning slightly taper. I would not have noticed it for most of the turning I was doing normally where the length is usually no more that an inch or two but over 5", half a thou on an inch length becomes 2 1/2 thou - a bit more significant! The moral - keep the underside of the tailstock scrupulously clean since it is very easy when unclamping and sliding it for it to pick up tiny bits of swarf etc. A wiper would sigificantly reduce this possibility. Best Regards Tim ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:32 am ((PDT)) Tr0up Very impressive. A nice piece of work, which I hope to copy one day. In the meantime I've posted some pictures of the swarf guard/wiper I've fitted to my tailstock. Very simple compared to your saddle guards, but seems to work fine. Photos in: http://s325.photobucket.com/albums/k382/mikecb1_photos/swarf_guard/ Regards Mike ------- Re: Induction hardened bedways.... looking for the facts Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:45 pm ((PDT)) Mike Very smart! Elegant, simple, and Extremely 'Myford' looking - I was wondering how you made such a perfect job of flanging it out of sheetmetal until I spotted the machining marks - ah - hah! As the French say, "génial!" I can definitely see myself following your lead on this. I'm thinking possibly of adding oilways also (I'm currently doing this to the carriage on my Willson slant-bed lathe - a recent acquisition I haven't even run yet) I had thought next time I've got a bunch of bits for chemical blackening, I might include my wiper clamp pieces. After seeing how yours looks, I'm tempted to round over their corners to match the front felt carrier - I haven't quite decided yet whether to remake that, perhaps with an outer scraper lip, in which case I'd probably stick with the squarer look. It's nice having a lathe with 'good bones' . Seems to me a lot of the minor (but expensive, if done ex-factory) details are relatively easy to add, and because of the underlying quality, those additional touches are far from wasted. Tailstock wipers are an example you rarely find in the wild, but it really doesn't make sense to leave them off ------- Change Gears [MyMyford] Posted by: "Robert" robertleggex~xxymail.com Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 12:59 pm ((PDT)) Hi, wondering if anyone can help, I have an ML7 which I purchased recently, despite reading the hand book (many times) I can't find out which order the change gears go on for normal turning and finishing (not screw cutting). Thanks Robert ------- Re: Change Gears Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:15 pm ((PDT)) Robert The Myford info intentionally draws no clear borderline between screwcutting, and feeds for normal turning (roughing or finishing). The reasons are that, being designed for (among other uses) modelling, the screwcutting pitches at the fine end are perfectly suitable for roughing feeds, and secondly, there is no separate mechanism (as usual on larger industrial lathes) for feeding as distinct from screwcutting. The last few entries on the changegear chart are intended purely for fine feeds, and don't correspond to any TPI value (which is left blank). The very last one (0.0018" feed per rev) requires a special 12T tumbler cluster output gear obtainable from Myfords, where the 12T is integral with the shaft, being too small to be keyed onto it. ------- Re: Change Gears Posted by: "Robert" robertleggex~xxymail.com Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 2:01 pm ((PDT)) That's great, thanks. Presumably with standard gears I go for the 2nd to bottom. Thanks for your help. Robert ------- Re: Change Gears Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:00 pm ((PDT)) Correct, if you want fine feed. However it's not invariably the case that you get the best finish from the finest feed. Whereas it's almost axiomatic that you'll get the best finish from the sharpest tool (all other things being equal). Sometimes, particularly on long cuts, a feed which is too fine will mean that the tool has simply travelled too far, in tracing its helix along or across the workpiece, to be able to remain sharp throughout the cut. Moreover, some tricky materials punish the extreme tool tip too severely if you take thin chips, whether in the infeed or sidefeed direction. This tip immediately goes blunt, and the work responds to a tool which is now rubbing instead of cutting by 'work hardening', which spirals everything in a bad direction. Typically this happens when the metal contains fair amounts of nickel (eg stainless steels, monel), or manganese (such as the wicked steel used for railway rails). However on a relatively flimsy lathe like a Myford 7, you're generally limited in the extent you can employ the strategy which makes coarse feeds able to deliver good finish, namely increasing the nose radius (except in really free-cutting materials). The bottom line: if you're turning, say, brass or free-cutting mild steel, and want a nice finish, stay with the finest feed your changegears will permit. In other cases, a bit of experimentation on feed rates before you take the finish cut will be desirable. For this purpose, the carriage handwheel will be fine - just do a dry run, at whatever the changewheels are set at, to 'calibrate' your hand feeding rate. Some materials are almost impossible to get a good finish on, in a Myford 7. My feeling is that those who are starting out on turning should ideally avoid the confusing and demoralising feedback which stringy or inconsistent or simply unknown materials tend to provide. If you're unable to follow my advice, be assured I was neither able nor willing to follow it myself, starting out as a teenager. ------- Re: Change Gears Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:41 am ((PDT)) On 29 Jul 2008 at 19:59, Robert murmured decisively: > Hi, wondering if anyone can help, I have an ML7 which I purchased > recently, despite reading the hand book (many times) I can't find out > which order the change gears go on for normal turning and finishing > (not screw cutting). They're listed in the gear cover http://www.ru.ac.za/institutes/iwr/iwdf/lathe/arrive1/a07gearcov.jpg I can send you a better pic of that if you need it, but basically you want the smallest drivers and the biggest driven gears for a finish feed. or, you can visit http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe/change.html and use the program to find gear set that gives you the feed you want. say you want 5 thou per rev feed.... (which is 200 tpi) change 200 will spit out CHANGE GEAR CALCULATIONS change /c /m tpi | /? V2.2.daf Number of change gears read = 14 Effective lead screw pitch = 8.000000 tpi Using pitch of 200.000 tpi Allowable thread pitch accuracy 0.020 Required gear ratio (leadscrew/spindle) = 0.040000 leadscrew turns SLOWER than spindle Use gear set with lowest ratio count at left Data - unique gear combos in order found 3.958 :: Drivers 12 20 25 Driven 40 50 75 ratio 0.040000 error 0.000% 4.375 :: Drivers 12 20 30 Driven 40 60 75 ratio 0.040000 error 0.000% 4.792 :: Drivers 12 20 35 Driven 40 70 75 ratio 0.040000 error 0.000% 4.317 :: Drivers 12 20 35 Driven 50 60 70 ratio 0.040000 error 0.000% 4.000 :: Drivers 12 25 30 Driven 50 60 75 ratio 0.040000 error 0.000% 4.417 :: Drivers 12 25 35 Driven 50 70 75 ratio 0.040000 error 0.000% 4.167 :: Drivers 12 30 35 Driven 60 70 75 ratio 0.040000 error 0.000% Obviously if you don't have the 12 tooth driver you will need to remove it from the setup file as per the instructions. (With the extra gears I've got I can get 520 tpi, which is roughly 1.92 thou per rev.) David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Change Gears Posted by: "Robert" robertleggex~xxymail.com Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:19 pm ((PDT)) Thanks again, some good advise, I will be experimenting over the weekend. ------- Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not [MyMyford] Posted by: "pierrersa" pierrex~xxbassscene.co.za Date: Mon Aug 4, 2008 7:31 am ((PDT)) Hi. I am new to the forum and lathes altogether. Got the itch and found two Super 7 lathes at a good price. One has a gearbox and 3 phase motor, the other is in much better nick but only change wheel and 1 phase motor. People have recommended that I fit the gearbox on the better machine. This is purely a hobby and time is not critical, metric thread is mostly used here in South Africa. It appears that the best solution would be to move the gearbox and 3 phase motor to the better machine and then fit a VSD. My biggest concern is if I would still be able to cut metric threats with the gearbox fitted but no Metric conversion kit. I realize I would need to change gears but only have what came with the change wheel lathe. Then again all the above might be totally your wrong your advise and comments would be appreciated ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Mon Aug 4, 2008 8:19 am ((PDT)) In my personal opinion, the gearbox is a complete waste of time unless you are doing Imperial threads - that is what it was designed to be good at. When set up for Imperial threads you can select whatever TPI you need at the flick of a couple of levers, and switch between fine feed and screw cutting by flipping over a gear cluster on the input to the 'box. As soon as you fit the metric banjo, you lose the "instant" fine feed and for most Metric pitches it isn't just a question of fiddling with the levers; you have to change the changewheels as well. So actually, you might as well just use the changewheels and forget the 'box altogether. Regards, Tony ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "pierrersa" pierrex~xxbassscene.co.za Date: Mon Aug 4, 2008 9:25 am ((PDT)) Thanks a lot Tony. This is exactly the info I need. So in my case I will forfeit the ability to change feedspeed through the box. Regarding the 3 ph motor change it has a history. The other lathe does not have an original Myford motor on hence the thought to move the 3 ph onto it and add VSD. I only have 1 ph available. Cheers ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Mon Aug 4, 2008 9:28 am ((PDT)) I would definitely use the 3-phase motor. It is smoother than the single- phase and much nicer than constantly changing belts. ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "pierrersa" pierrex~xxbassscene.co.za Date: Mon Aug 4, 2008 11:43 am ((PDT)) Thanks for the good advise Ken. ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Mon Aug 4, 2008 1:03 pm ((PDT)) A word of caution to anyone new to Myford lathes fitting a VFD: while most of the advantages are available and highly worthwhile, it is necessary to be very circumspect if setting up 'braking'. Many if not most VFDs include enhanced braking (eg DC injection) and this will happily spin the chuck off a screwed spindle. I'm a little jumpy about this, as (for two different, non VFD-related reasons) I've spun the chuck off both my Myfords recently, after 35 years of never having done it. The reason for one of these is relevant to VFDs. I'd fitted a larger pulley to my ML7 motor, after realising from acquiring a Super 7 just how much I was missing out on through my relatively low top speed. (was about 450rpm, now about 700). This has led to the unexpected result that starting in reverse is now so abrupt, even with a single phase motor, that the chuck has to be very firmly engaged not to spin off. (My ML7 has no clutch.) The moral for VFDs: set a gentle acceleration parameter for reverse starting, in addition to the relatively gentle braking parameter recommended above for forward braking. Passing on a tip from a British fellow Myford and Willson owner: (who originally had it from the late Clifford Bower): an easy way to check the spindle speed of a lathe (eg to calibrate a tacho) is to set the screwcutting arrangements for a thread (say) one tenth of the pitch of the leadscrew, ie 80 tpi on a Myford, then count the turns revolved by the leadscrew in a minute and multiply by ten for spindle revs. ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "pierrersa" pierrex~xxbassscene.co.za Date: Mon Aug 4, 2008 10:23 pm ((PDT)) VSD/VFD advise is good, thank you. Right, I think one can get carried away when setting up the drive. Soft starting/stopping is the way to go and reduces stress on the lathe as well. ------ Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Tue Aug 5, 2008 2:30 am ((PDT)) Hi Pierre - The problem with the Myford box is that it is used both for setting screwcutting feeds and for fine feeds. If you use the Imperial setup, then there is no need to mess with changewheels at all - the standard Imperial pitches are available via the levers on the box, and by reversing a gear cluster on the input to the box you switch between a range of screwcutting ratios and a range of fine feed ratios. So you only have to change the gear train on the banjo if you need to cut a non-standard thread (BA for example, or you want to cut a thread that will engage with a spur gear, or whatever, where the pitch isn't a standard TPI). Once you fit the Metric conversion set, you lose the ability to change quickly to fine feeds - you set up the fine feeds just the same way you would set up a Metric thread, by choosing the right combination of lever positions *and* setting the right changewheels on the banjo. So the changewheels do affect both screwcutting and fine feeds (as do the levers on the box) - think of fine feed as just a terribly fine thread pitch. That is why I said earlier in this thread (pun intended) that with metric, there isn't any real advantage in using the box, because you still have to mess about with the gear train on the banjo when changing feeds *either* for screwcutting *or* for fine feed. Regards, Tony ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Aug 5, 2008 4:33 am ((PDT)) There is also the option with an imperial gearbox-equipped machine of cutting a number of metric threads by simply swapping a single gear in the standard train. I posted details several months ago, and the relevant material in in the Files section. The accuracy is not as good as using the metric conversion set, but it's fine for non-precision jobs, and a whole lot quicker and easier to set up. Mike ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "durnfjmx~xxaol.com" durnfjmx~xxaol.com Date: Tue Aug 5, 2008 5:02 am ((PDT)) I have used this method for cutting metric threads for many years, and never found any problem with the results. I'm sure that the purists find fault with a couple of parts in a thousand error, but to all practical intents and purposes, it really works fine. I also have a 3-phase motor with speed control - and would echo the previous comments about gentle acceleration and deceleration - having said that, variable speed is definitely the way to go. MikeD ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Gearbox or not Posted by: "anthrhodesx~xxaol.com" anthrhodesx~xxaol.com Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 7:03 pm ((PDT)) David, Installing a metric leadscrew and half nuts would make metric screwcutting easier but wouldn't help with the gearbox question. The Myford gearbox was designed for Imperial pitches and the built-in ratios are suited for the inch-based TPI system which uses division. The metric system uses multiplication of a standard pitch and the required reduction ratios are different from those of the Imperial system. I know that you use change gears and probably won't switch to a gearbox, but I thought I'd mention the difficulty in case others weren't aware of the snag. Anthony Berkeley, Calif. ------- Re: Tool post [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 6:07 pm ((PDT)) "the_iliad26" wrote: > Can some one tell me what the thread is on the the tool post main > stud. Thanks If anyone's thinking of making up a toolpost stud and/or nut, it's worth bearing in mind these get a really hard time, and it's worth using something fairly decent by way of material. When I did so I used 4140 for the nut and 4340 for the stud, and hardened and tempered them both. The fit of the thread remained virtually unaffected. The only thing I ground was the flats on the nut, mainly to make a nice looking job - I'm sure if I'd milled them to final size before hardening the functional result would have been just as good. If you're hardening medium-high alloy steel like this, make sure you take it right up to a temperature (fairly bright red) where shimmering pools can be seen on the surface as though it's about to melt (don't panic, it's not). Hold it for a few minutes at this temperature. Some say hold it longer so the transformation is complete, others say that the surface will absorb too much carbon if you don't quench immediately, so I try to steer a middle ground. To make a spanner which could be left permanently in place, I bought a fairly tall, rather nice looking black heavy-walled socket (Powerbuilt 18mm, hex rather than 12 point), and cross drilled it with a carbide drill, a very close fit for a sliding crossbar out of chromed rod, which was then flattened at the ends. Looks good, but more importantly works a treat: I normally leave the crossbar 'middled' unless in use. If it's in the way (hardly ever - it's only 125mm long total), it can be slid to one end; if it's still in the way I lift the socket and turn it 60 deg either way and drop it back on. ------- Super 7 Advice Needed. [MyMyford] Posted by: "alan4227" a.j.moorex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 7:43 am ((PDT)) Hi, First let me say how much I appreciate the comments from expert users posted on this group. They are of great benefit to new lathe owners like myself. I recently bought a Super 7 on Ebay (yes, I know, a dangerous pastime). I don't know exactly how old it is, as the previous owner had the bed reground and this removed the serial number. It has a quick change gearbox with the serial number QC87849, so I imagine it dates from the late 60s. It has been 'lubricated' with a fine paste of grease and swarf for some considerable period. I suppose that if people don't read the manual they see a grease nipple and assume they should pump grease in. I am in the process of stripping it down to clean all the muck out, but have come up against what could be a major problem. The carriage has been grinding this paste into the bed ways, and both bed and carriage are noticeably scored. I measured the front to back dimension between the vertical faces (1 and 4) at various points along the bed and was pleased to find that they all measured 4.487 or 4.488in. However I found that the carriage would not move freely the full length of the bed if the rear saddle strip bolts were tightened fully. Measuring the vertical thickness of the rear bed I got readings from 0.472in near the headstock to 0.477in near the tailstock. What I would appreciate advice on is whether this problem is fatal, ie. is the only answer a complete bed and saddle regrind, or can I soldier on for some time, saving pennies and gaining experience, before committing to a regrind? One other question. When I took the spindle out I was ready with my pin to stop the wick popping out as per the Myford instructions. But to my surprise there was no wick! There was, however, an oil nipple on the top of the front bearing housing and an oil passage drilled down through the phosphor bronze bearing. This does not appear in the pictures in my Myford manual. Was this a factory improvement or has it been done by a previous owner? Once again, many thanks for the advice - it is invaluable to people like me. Regards, Alan Moore ------- Re: Super 7 Advice Needed. Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 7:33 pm ((PDT)) Alan, Congratulations on joining the ranks! To address your question of "to soldier on, or not to soldier on" is a bit like giving advice on whether to marry: it all depends ! So take what I say with a dose of salt: it's worth as much as it costs. Vertical clearance at the rear shear is perhaps the second-to-least important consideration for ordinary turning (particularly if you don't fit a rear toolpost). The least important is arguably vertical clearance at the front shear, because under normal circumstances the cutting load will be keeping this snug. Unless you're doing really meticulous work (or unusual work like milling workpieces bolted to the cross slide) I'd say there's no need to regrind or remachine: I say remachine because in these days of affordable, very accurate CNC milling machines, and the superb finishes they can easily achieve with modern tooling, that's a very good, less spendy option - the Myford is particularly easy to deal with on such a machine. The vertical clearance at the rear shear on my old ML7 had got nearly to the amount you report before I discovered it, and the Myford factory reportedly aim at 0.04mm clearance when they build or rebuild. You may find you can remove one or more shims from the laminated stack if there is currently clearance (measured with no oil, or something at least as thin as kero) of more than say 0.08mm at the tailstock end. Each shim measures 0.06mm approx. If you find you are getting chatter, and placing a fingertip on the rear of the carriage while it's happening suggests it's leaping up and down, you could (provided it's a shortish cut), cheat by snugging up the carriage lock just enough to temporarily take out the play. The answer to your headstock oiler query depends somewhat on which model you have. The Mk1 (up to 1958) did not have a wick; it had very elaborate (an rather nice) setup: it can be identied by a porthole on the front of an intermediate reservoir, which was drip fed via a needle valve from a tank cast into the top bearing housing. Check lathes.co.uk for photos - I imagine yours is the Mk 2, from what you say about the gearbox, but I point this out in case the gearbox is a retrofit, which is not that unusual. AFAIK, no genuine Myford 7s had oiling via a nipple such as you describe - headstock bearings really need something more constant in the way of a supply, particularly the Super 7 because of the high speeds it's capable of - do you have any photos you could post? ------- Re: Super 7 Advice Needed. Posted by: "alan4227" a.j.moorex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:13 am ((PDT)) Dear Tr0up, Many thanks for the advice on bed wear. I'm not sure about the analogy to marriage, though. I hate to think what my wife would say if I told her I was planning to have her reground! From what you say it seems that I should see how it goes with the bed as it is, maybe tightening things up if I have some heavy duty machining to do. There are no shims left under the rear saddle strip and the saddle feels pretty good in the part of the bed where it will normally operate - it's just that it jams solid about 10 inches from the far end of the bed. As for the headstock, it definitely is a Mark 2 with the oil pot and wick - it just doesn't have a wick. I have posted a couple of pictures on the group (album Alan_M). You will see there is an oil nipple on top of the front bearing housing. There is also a grub screw on the front of the housing which is very tight. I haven't tried removing it yet, so I'm not quite sure what it does. As you will see from the pictures, someone has been busy with the Hammerite paint. Regards, Alan ------- Re: what to look for [MyMyford] Posted by: "jonsautos" jonsautosx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Aug 14, 2008 2:29 pm ((PDT)) "jonsautos" wrote: > Hi there > i am very keen in getting a old myford ml7,i am after a little advice > off you knowledgeable people,in what to look for when getting one. > as in bed condition > headstock bearing play > overall condition > just a few pointers to look for when getting one then it not costing > me the earth to get it fixed. > i will be stripping it down and repainting it though once i get it. > than k you for your comments > jon ok then i have tried looking at the threads but there is so many, can anyone point me in the right direction of a thread number please, thx for ANY advice ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:27 pm ((PDT)) I think the reason you've had no replies is that this is as big a topic as 'how do I buy a car', and this forum does not generally run to novels -- although when I look at the lengths of some my posts, it feels like the 'trottoirs' of Paris, when you see the huge piles of dog-waste, which can only have emanated from toy dogs, so minuscule you'd need a keen-eyed spotter to run one over ... One of the better tracts on the topic I've seen was at http://www.mermac.com/advicenew.html Specifics for the ML7, in addition to what he writes: Check the wiper casing, screwed to the headstock face of the carriage. If it has a 'keel' dropping down between the front and rear guideways, you're looking at a pre 1972 lathe, with the 'narrow guide' carriage, which does not use the rear guideway to resist twisting forces about a vertical axis. There is likely to be more wear and more ability to twist, partly because they're older, but mainly because the design is flawed. If possible, clamp a long boring bar or similar in the toolpost, sticking out towards both head and tailstocks, and see to what extent you can persuade the carriage to 'clonk clonk' by pulling towards you at one and and pushing away at the other. Ideally you need to check a number of lathes and develop a feel for what is and is not acceptable in the way of wear, and it's conceivable that in some cases the 'clonk' is partly a result of the gibs not being adjusted correctly, so it's very difficult to give authoritative guidance on how much is too much. While you're at it, run the tailstock barrel to both ends of its travel and do a similar check, using a drill chuck firmly inserted into the taper, holding a long bar (in this case you'll be pushing and pulling at one end only). You don't want to be able to see the crack between barrel and housing open and close, let alone feel a clonk, in this case. Clamp the tailstock base firmly to the bed before testing, but leave the barrel clamp loose. Testing the headstock spindle without a DTI on a magnetic base, and a compliant vendor, is next to impossible. As a guide, on my 35 year old ML7, the most vertical deflection I can persuade a DTI to indicate with the plunger on top of the chuck, and me trying to lift the chuck (without a lever, just putting my hand under the 3 jaw chuck, ie in the gap, and heaving mightily) is 0.005mm. This lathe has done a fair bit of work, but has been well cared for since new. The spindle has never been disturbed or adjusted, but the V belt is starting to delaminate, so I'll have to strip it out soon. It should be clear from this that the TI Glacier bushes used on the ML7 are capable of exceptional endurance if they are kept lubricated and the lathe is not abused. A lot also depends on how much you are willing and able to do to refurbish a lathe. If the answer is 'very little', and you want to do accurate work without a good deal of ingenious fiddling, you'll have to keep looking until you find one of those rare machines which has seen very little use, or been pampered, or been skilfully refurbished. Signs of wanton abuse which indicate the lathe may also bear hidden scars: evident hacksaw cuts to the bed in front of the chuck, serious damage to T slots on the cross slide, or any damage to the taper in the headstock spindle or to the threads or parallel register of the spindle thread for the chuck, hammer marks anywhere. (eg countershaft bracket, or axle). Also check for missing teeth on changegears. On that topic, it's worth taking an inventory of the tooth counts, stamped (and in some cases cast) on one side of each wheel. Check the handbook (under 'Files' on this site) for the list of standard items. If more than one or two are missing, you need to budget to replace them unless you plan to avoid screwcutting. If there are one or two 21T gears, you're in good shape for metric threads. (These were optional.) Signs of accidental crunchups, such as the chuck jaws clipping the wiper casing or topslide (or even the cross slide, if not serious), or the odd mark on the bed (perhaps from a chuck coming unscrewed or a workpiece leaping out of the chuck) are virtually inevitable and should not be taken as indications of criminal carelessness or neglect. To learn more about the ML7, if you haven't already, swat up on the lathes.co.uk site which is a goldmine of priceless (and yet free) information. Good luck ! p.s. I forgot to include in the 'unforgivable damage' list Missing teeth on any of the gears comprising the back-gear cluster. ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:44 am ((PDT)) tr0up: I was interested to read your wise comments, which I'm sure the OP will find very helpful. Just one point that surprised me was your measured ML7 spindle "lift". 0.005 mm corresponds to 0.2 thou, or an annular clearance of just 1/10 thou. This seems very small as a running clearance, with hardly any room for oil. My Machinery Handbook suggests a clearance in this application of 0.5 to 1 thou. Am I missing something? Regards Mike ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Aug 15, 2008 3:35 am ((PDT)) Mike, Thanks for that, well spotted, mea culpa, my bad ! In my haste to get a reply on the board and show how clever I am, I stupidly omitted to unload the spindle by releasing the final drive V belt tension. Consequently most of the clearance was being taken up , holding the spindle near the top of the available space. On rechecking with the spindle unloaded so that gravity is normally holding the spindle near the bottom of the space, I get as much as four times the previous figure, ie 0.02mm * * * All interested parties please disregard my previous figure * * * And anyone checking a Myford spindle, either loosen the belt, or check lateral rather than vertical play! (Usually vertical will be a little more, on an older lathe.) However even this does not, I expect, tell the full story, and I would always expect the actual clearance to be greater than the amount of play suggests. In a lathe which has done this much work, that is virtually inevitable. Firstly, geometry: the Glacier half-shells, superb though they undoubtedly are, would not be perfectly semi-cylindrical, even when new, and definitely not now. They were rolled from flat sheetmetal strip, which had been coated with a fancy concoction. They will have high spots, which will take up some of the clearance space. Secondly, lubrication. We all know that a mic cannot be accurately zeroed until the (usually invisible) film has been cleaned off - I usually close them onto a clean corner of white bond paper which I then slide out sideways, if I'm doing 'government work'... I just tried doing this with a good solid mic (Eastern European, strong enough to use as a welding earth clamp if I could only get the cable lug under that silly little screw), zeroing it and then smearing the anvil faces with the Tellus 32 I use for spindles. Even with the quite serious pressure such a mic can easily generate, and despite the lubricant being no further than 4mm from freedom, the oil film (at the frigid temperature prevailing in this southern location at this time) measured 0.012mm In inferring clearances by measuring slop, it is always necessary (unless the clearances are very large) to first strip the spindle and remove all traces of lubricant, reassembling with something like isopropyl alcohol. In my haste earlier today I assumed that this factor was taking up most of the clearance space, leading me to fail to scrutinise more closely the misleading figure I posted. Sorry about that folks. Putting that to one side, I'm delighted to have had this valuable learning opportunity, for which again my thanks to Mike Crossfield. ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "jonsautos" jonsautosx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Fri Aug 15, 2008 2:10 am ((PDT)) all i can say thank you so much for information given; i think i am armed with enough info and pointers to not really up set the seller if i'm looking at the lathe. i will let the forum know what i have bought in due course, thanks again ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Fri Aug 15, 2008 11:10 am ((PDT)) tr0up: Out of curiosity I measured the lift on the spindle of my 50-year old Super 7 after releasing the belt. I should say that the bearings on this lathe are adjustable of course, and were set up by me according to the Myford instructions about 7 years ago when I rebuilt the machine. Measured lift was 7/10 thou (about 0.018 mm, very similar to your figure for the ML7. Mike ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Aug 15, 2008 2:44 pm ((PDT)) Mike: OK, we've really started something here: I think maybe it's time you reset the axial position of your Super 7 spindle! Otherwise it might as well just be a common garden ML7.... I just checked my even older Super 7, very recently rebuilt. Despite the fact that it's been sitting in the sun, looking glorious (a rare break in the weather, and I've opened up the big roller door) and despite my remembering to loosen the final drive belt, I measured only one tenth of the slop that you report. I hasten to add that it is also set per the Myford procedure, but only a few months ago, and it is quite happy running at 2000 rpm for periods of time without the front housing temperature rising more than maybe 10-15 deg C above ambient. ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:30 am ((PDT)) tr0up: Thanks for making your measurements - I hope you find this kind of stuff as interesting as I do. If I may put your measurements aside for a moment, and look first at the geometry of the Super 7 taper bronze bearing: My measurents today show that the bearing bore has a large diameter of 1.725", a minor diameter of 1.25" (as far as I can tell - tricky to measure without dismantling), and a length of 2.125". Simple geometry shows that the taper half-angle must therefore be about 6.4 degrees. Or put another way, for every thou that the spindle moves away from the bearing, the total clearance will increase by 2 x tan 6.4 degrees, which is 0.22 thou. The bearing is adjusted by moving threaded collars that support the rear angular contact bearings. The collars are 2.0" diameter, but without major dismantling I am unable to identify the thread. From memory it's fairly fine, probably in the range 20-24 tpi. For the sake of an approximate calculation let's say the thread is 22 tpi. The Myford instructions say to adjust the collars until the front bearing comes into contact with the spindle, i.e. zero clearance, then to back off by 1/4 inch at the rim, which they say is 15 degree rotation. This is 0.042 of a turn, so with a thread of 22 tpi it corresponds to a lateral movement of 0.045 x 0.042 = 0.0019". From the above, this lateral movement will produce a total bearing clearance of 0.0019 x 0.00022" = 0.00042" i.e just over 0.4 thou. Turning to some reference literature, in Machinery Handbook, the closest class of running fit (Class Z) for "fine tool work" is stated as being in the range 0.00075" to 0015" for a diameter 1- 2 inches. In another section relating to plain bearings, an allowance of 1 thou per inch is stated. In another of my reference books a tighter tolerance for machine tool spindles of 0.5 thou for a 1 inch spindle is given (even the experts disagree it seems). Going back and redoing the measurements on my own Super 7 spindle, I find that the total clearance in the vertical plain is 0.7 thou, as previously reported. However, in the horizontal plane it's just under .5 thou. Considering the 50 year age of my machine, and the hard life it had (in a factory) until I rescued it 8 years ago, I'm not surprised that there is some wear in the bearing. Since my adjustment of the bearing would most likely have related to the smaller of the two clearances, I find my measurements to be entirely consistent with the theoretical design of the bearing, and its adjustment according to Myford procedures. The clearance is also consistent with the published recommendations referred to. All of this makes me very puzzled by your measured clearance of 0.07 thou. If this really is the clearance, it would indicate that the lateral displacement of the spindle from bearing contact is only about 0.3 thou, and in this case any significant axial load on the spindle, for example when drilling from the tailstock, would cause the bearing clearance to completely disappear and jamming to occur. It would also lead to overheating, which you say you don't get. As an aside, I have measured lateral displacement of the spindle under heavy drilling conditions, and 1 - 2 thou is not hard to achieve! This measurement has been repeated and verified by an acquaintance who also has a Super 7. Is it possible perhaps that residual oil in the bearing is affecting your measurement? Kind Regards Mike ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sat Aug 16, 2008 7:16 pm ((PDT)) It's more than possible, it's a certainty, as I argued in a previous post: slop is always less than theoretical clearance arrived at by diameter subtraction, sometimes considerably less. If we add twice the measured oil film thickness (when squeezed in a micrometer) to the slop I measured, the inferred diametral clearance would be over 1 thou. There's another point which may not be obvious. When looking at recommendations for clearance from the literature, it's worth bearing in mind that the spindle bearing design of the Super 7 (effectively the same as that used for the legendary FP1 Deckel toolroom mill) is specially arranged to enable running at clearance values significantly less than would normally be permissible. One reason is that thermal expansion of the spindle causes axial movement, automatically relieving the decrease in radial clearance which normally limits the smallest clearance which could be considered for a close running fit. Another is that the angular contact ball bearings at the rear of the spindle are preloaded against each other. Effectively this means there will be no appreciable axial displacement of the spindle until the thrust load exceeds the preload, hence the bearing clearance is safeguarded. This can be a difficult concept to grasp, and a lot of trainee professional engineers struggle with it (and some not-so-trainee! ) It helps to remember that the preloaded bearing pair is effectively behaving like a spring. Imagine a pogo stick, whose spring is preloaded such that the static load from a 200lb person would be just sufficient to cause the footpegs to move down. When a skinny soul like myself climbs on, there will be no movement in the footpegs, and furthermore the spring will not see any increase in load occasioned by my less than ponderous bulk. (There can be no increase in stress if there is no change in strain.) Hope this makes some sense. ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:17 am ((PDT)) Thanks for that. Interesting stuff. Mike ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "iainlockerbie" iain.lockerbiex~xxtalktalk.net Date: Fri Aug 15, 2008 7:31 am ((PDT)) My first post on here so be gentle with me......... I'm looking at buying either a pre-loved Super 7 or a ML7R. I've looked at quite a few, but to be honest I haven't seen any that haven't got some marks on the top of the bedways near the headstock, probably inflicted by a hacksaw. So my question is, how serious do these have to be before they cease being cosmetic and affect the accuracy of the machine? I understood (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that most of the loads from the machining process were taken by the shears. So if those are in good nick..., should I stop worrying about marks on the tops of the ways, and buy a machine that looks otherwise straight? As an aside, if I go for a ML7R rather than a full blown 7, I get (normally) no clutch, no power x feed, and a shorter cross slide. these standard on the Super 7 features would be nice to have, but are they worth the extra £1 to £1.5k premium that a good condition 7 commands over the more basic machine? (Here in the UK). I know you will tell me that only I can answer that based on the kinds of use to which I'm likely to put the machine, but... I might be missing something. I haven't used a lathe in anger since school over 40 years ago, so there are probably a lot of things I'm missing at the moment! ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Aug 15, 2008 3:11 pm ((PDT)) Iain: Welcome on board. Hopefully several people will respond, as the questions you put are mostly questions of style rather than substance, so answers will differ (and each will inform) without contradicting each other. Hacksaw marks, in and of themselves, have no direct impact on machine accuracy or operation. At worst, if deep, they might act as temporary pockets for chips, which might subsequently infiltrate the wiper and get under the carriage. This can be curtailed by cleaning them thoroughly and filling them with a mixture of epoxy resin and cast iron dust (eg from fine drilling a scrap of CI). Keep warm, leave to set for several days, scrape flush. Clutch: having only recently acquired a S7 after having an ML7 all my adult life, it's a nice feature, but certainly makes no difference to the quality of work coming off the lathe, and I'd swap it in a flash for a 3 phase variable frequency drive & motor to suit (which confers most of the benefits of a clutch and heaps more besides). Long cross slide: really only relevant if you're planning on repetition turning (or frequent and heavy parting off) using a rear toolpost (even then this can be done satisfactorarily with an ML7 cross slide) OR milling quite wide workpieces. Power cross feed: unless you're doing production turning involving facing large workpieces, my personal view is that this delivers the least bang for the most bucks of any enhancement I can think of, on such a small lathe. Achieving a constant feed rate by hand without applying sideforces to the cross slide (which on a light lathe can cause it to pursue a serpentine path) results from simple technique and minimal practice. It's nothing like as tricky as, say, screwcutting, let alone chasing screw threads by hand. Some folk have good results extending the radius of the handlever and applying a (smaller) force at one end of that extension; I prefer to use both fingertips, one at each end of the ball lever, so as to apply a pure torque (no net side force), alternating hands, but the moment of swapping hands takes a bit of practice. You can run a DTI against the faceplate for quantified feedback as to how well your technique works. The thing I would miss most from my Super7 cross slide is the topslide mounting arrangement, which I love, but it's neither as rigid nor as versatile as the ML7, so others will disagree. I'm not sure whether the 7R has the Super or the ML topslide. Anyway, condition trumps all other considerations, when it comes to machine tools, unless you have the skills, contacts, enthusiasm and facilities to refurbish. ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "Keith New" britfix70054x~xxwaitrose.com Date: Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:30 pm ((PDT)) Iain, Welcome, you are in the position I was about this time last year, umming and ah-ing about what to go for. Perhaps I was lucky, but I bought a Super 7 originally made in 1956 which is three years younger than I am but in better nick, generally. My previous lathe had a fault in that whatever I did to the tailstock, it was nowhere near centre so drilling using it was hit and miss at best. A replacement was not an option as they are not available. Due to the clamping arrangement, it could not be packed up back to centre height. It was also a plain lathe. However, due to the drive arrangements, Phosphor-bronze bearings and a very rigid bed, it had the ability if I wanted to, to run it at anything up to 10,000 rpm. It also had a clutch. The phosphor bronze bearings and clutch were the deciding factors when looking for a replacement and so I went for a Super 7. It had no "bits" with it so it was cheapish(!) Seeing what people had done to accessories offered with other lathes I looked at and the general condition of chucks, etc, (BAD) I decided to start afresh and buy what I wanted when I wanted it, new. So a new Bison 3-jaw, TOS 4 jaw and an RDG independent shallow depth 6" 4 jaw have been purchased since. The Bison is as good as a Pratt-Burnard. As is the TOS. The RDG is horrible but just about useable. My Super 7 is now fitted with a 3-phase 1/2 HP motor and a phase- converter with a remote speed control. Even though I can stop the lathe using the button on the remote, I use the clutch just as much. It depends what you are doing. If you are making a batch of doohickeys, the clutch gets used a lot as one dookickey is dismounted and another one is put in it's place. Changing cutting tools in the toolpost is invariably done whilst the motor is stopped, though. A clutch is also a handy thing to have "if things go wrong". Where the Super 7 wins over the ML7R are the top and cross slides on a Super 7 have the micrometer dials which I prefer to the mazak ones on an ML7. Plus you get the extra length cross-slide which is handy to have. Power cross feed is something you can do without quite easily, if you want to pay the premium though, it's up to you. The tailstock on the Super 7 is also easier to use as the screw thread does not protrude through the handle. A few minor dints in the bed is to be expected unless you wish to pay the price for a lathe which has been kossetted and hardly seen any action in earnest. More important is wear in the bed, with the saddle slack at the headstock end and tight at the tailstock end indicating the cost of a bed regrind and all that that entails. If you find the back gears are worn or teeth missing, the leadscrew 1/2 nuts are worn and the headstock bearings are slack or look damaged, walk away. Lots of accessories should be looked on as a bonus only if they are in good codition. It is the lathe itself you are buying first and foremost. The ephemera can be got as and when you need them. Good luck in your hunt. Keith ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "iainlockerbie" iain.lockerbiex~xxtalktalk.net Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:57 am ((PDT)) Keith, Troup, thanks for the replies. The lathe I'm looking at buying is an ML7-R. Basically this is a 'green' Super 7, but without a clutch, and it has the old, short ML7 type of cross-slide (and top slide) with no power cross feed. The ML7 top slide differs from the Super 7 one in that it doesn't rotate a full 360 degrees, but can only be rotated 63 degrees either side of square, and the cross slide is 1 and 7/8 inches shorter with one T slot less. As far as the top slide goes, I can't for the life of me see whether the lack of ability to rotate the thing as much as you can the Super 7 version makes any difference at all. The shorter cross slide is still plenty long enough for most of the things I can see me doing on this machine - the only advantage the long slide gives as far as I can tell is the ability to mount a rear tool post. If I have to do that I can always buy a long slide from Myford - the cost is £133, which is steep, but it is available. Keith you are right that the 'Mazak' non resettable dials are not as nice as the zeroable Super 7 ones, but again these can be retrofitted at a cost of £27 each, which seems a bit more reasonable price wise than the cross slide. As far as the clutch goes, well the particular machine I'm looking at doesn't have a motor or any switchgear, so the plan would be to buy a Newton Tesla motor and control box. This would mean I'd just use the motor stop/start variable speed switches as a proxy for a clutch, so the lack of a clutch, again I don't see as a major inconvenience. The tailstock is just the same as the Super 7 one, so no worries there. The only thing that I'm umming and ah-ing about is whether the lack of a power cross feed is something I will miss in the long term. Initially, my thoughts were that it was just another 'complication' and something else to wear out and go wrong, but talking to someone recently, they made the point that if I end up doing a lot of milling on the lathe - and I probably will because I'm not planning to buy a separate milling machine - then the power cross feed is useful for that. Anyway, it's decision time. I'll have to make my mind up over the Bank Holiday weekend! ------- Re: what to look for Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:23 am ((PDT)) It's a matter of personal taste, but (after owning both) I'd personally rate the Super 7 topslide way above the ML7 on all considerations other than theoretical rigidity, for a number of reasons, some are functional - like it has longer guideways, and a full length vertical machined face, true to the travel, for clocking up or setting off a sine plate for precision. Being able to set it to a squarer angle is indispensable for some jobs, like turning a V pulley groove, although there are kludge workarounds (such as removing the spigot under the ML7 topslide so it can be reclamped - but this is pretty tedious and the handles tend to interfere). Others are ergonomic: there are no swarf traps around the clamping, and it's much quicker to reset to a new angle (I do a lot of multi- angle stuff). Some users report that it can swivel autonomously, which the ML7 is unlikely to do. I haven't struck that yet, but I did remachine the conical spigot when I first received it. As for power cross feed for milling: your point is well taken, although on reflection, I don't even have power feed on my dedicated machine, which I absolutely relish using (a Swedish Arboga, very nice mill), but it can remove metal fast enough not to get me too jaded, whereas a Myford, used as a mill on anything tougher than aluminium or brass, is definitely going to keep you winding the crossfeed a long time per kilo of metal removed. In support of your musing about <>, I need to point out that there's definitely a price to pay, in both these respects, for power cross feed on a Myford: it relies on adding (or subtracting !) a keyway from the leadscrew. This is never done on serious industrial lathes in this day and age, and to my mind is a pretty major indignity to inflict on such a crucial element of any precision screwcutting lathe. A screw with a keyway is not a hundred miles away from a one-flute tap, considering that the load of the sliding bevel-gear pinion against one side of it risks eventually raising a hanging burr. Moreover that pinion is also wearing the crests of the leadscrew thread, for all movements of the carriage, not just when the power feed or threadcutting is in operation. I can't see there's any way the half nuts, or the screw, are going to retain their pristine accuracy as long as would otherwise be expected. Moreover they're hard to keep clean - plain leadscrews are bad enough. (I've posted details of a telescopic leadscrew shroud - usable only if your lathe is a changegear model, on the last page under Photos- in the folder "tr0up Myford photos", which would ease the problem of swarf lodging in the keyway.) Bear in mind it's relatively easy to fit a 12 or 24V DC motor with integrated gearbox directly to the feedscrew for infinitely variable power cross feed. These are very light, powerful, controllable and affordable, being produced (mainly in Italy) in huge quantities for garage door openers, car window winders etc etc. Ebay has them all the time; I bought a really nice 24V one last month (new, surplus, including an encoder of sorts) for US$30. Suitable DC drives are also available at reasonable cost, but an O gauge model train controller would be just as good in this application, or a small variac with a rectifier (my personal favourite, but I'm possibly a minority fan - I think they appeal particularly to mechanical engineers). The neatest place to mount them is at the back of the machine, hung on a bracket from the back of the cross slide, driving the feedscrew via a simple coupling. Ian Bradley's excellent book "The Amateur's Workshop", in the chapter "Milling in the Lathe", proposed this solution, which even with a slightly more bulky motorised reduction box looked remarkably serviceable and tidy by the standards of 1950, when the book was published. (The motor would have been war surplus.) As I say, these topics all come down to personal preference, and your priorities may be very different to mine. Nevertheless I hope that my points act as useful counterpoints to clarify your best course. ------- bull wheel removal [MyMyford] Posted by: "frank" frank.sleex~xxxtra.co.nz Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:58 am ((PDT)) hi this is my first time posting. ( be nice :) ) I have recently lost a few teeth off the bull wheel of my ml7 lathe and i would like some advise on on removing it from the spindle please. i have taken the spindle out and have managed to remove the gear, collars and bearing. But i am having trouble removing the distance sleeve (part no* 70/1240 or part 13 b in the diagram acording to the ml7 manual) which is on the left hand side of the pully next to the top speed belt position. Any advice on removing this would be lovely. regards Frank ------- Re: bull wheel removal Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:04 am ((PDT)) Frank: I had precisely that problem with the distance sleeve a couple of months ago when I was trying to find the source of a knocking sound. (Look at the June archives for the thread entitled "ML7 thrust bearing sleeve"). The sleeve is an unbelievably tight interference fit and brute force is the way to remove it. I didn't have access to a press so I had to use a club hammer. My method was as follows. Stand the face of the bull gear on two baulks of wood with the spindle nose downwards so that it has clearance below it, having first slackened the grub screw for the bull gear key. I turned a brass drift to loosely fit the drive end of the spindle so that I could bash it, (and I do mean bash it quite severely,) through the sleeve. I don't understand why it needs to be so tight but Malcolm at Myford confirmed that it should be so. Refitting is a doddle. Heat the sleeve to few hundred degrees and it will expand enough to fall into position. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: bull wheel removal Posted by: "rrh0001" mollygeorgiex~xxmac.com Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:30 am ((PDT)) Hi Frank Just a further note to Cliff's, the original of which I found quite useful when I first dismantled the spindle on my Tri-Leva. The degree of difficulty removing and reassembling the distance sleeve seems to vary with the spindle. On my original spindle I bashed the gear end pretty hard (after removing the gear) with a plastic dead blow hammer and the distance sleeve came free without anything being damaged. In the process of reassembling a used spindle (to replace my original) I found that the distance sleeve needed the reverse `bashing' treatment and quite vigorously, to go onto the shaft the necessary distance. For reasons that aren't germane to this thread I subsequently reverted to my original spindle and when I reassembled it the same distance sleeve (that needed a lot of bashing to remove) went on the necessary distance with just a few modest taps - no heating or bashing. Everything fits and works as it should but, like Cliff, I'm puzzled why the distance sleeve should need to be a very tight fit on the spindle. Regards Ramsay ------- Re: bull wheel removal Posted by: "frank" frank.sleex~xxxtra.co.nz Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:34 pm ((PDT)) thanks guys i will try to bash it of today and let you know how it goes. Regards Frank ------- Re: bull wheel removal Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:01 pm ((PDT)) Remember that the old engineer's saying "If it don't fit, don't force it, find a bigger hammer" holds a grain of truth: rather than whaling away with a carpenter's hammer or something of equivalent weight, it's much safer for the health of your spindle if you can coopt something really heavy and use it -- making sure you keep it in line -- with gentle taps. If it doesn't easily yield to this, I'd be inclined to get the sleeve quite hot, say with a hot air gun, and put a bead of penetrating oil around the ends when it's hot. ------- Re: bull wheel removal Posted by: "frank" frank.sleex~xxxtra.co.nz Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:52 pm ((PDT)) it came off after a few light blows and some oil, i must agree though about the old engineers saying, i tryed quite a few diferent ways to get it off including heating before i asked here, thanks again for the advise on removing it, i must say it would be hard for any one to remove it the first time if they haven't been told how to or seen how to. regards Frank ------- Re: bull wheel removal Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:59 pm ((PDT)) I could not find advice on how to remove the sleeve the first time I did it, so I was very reluctant to take a hammer to mine, however I could see no other way to dismantle it. In any case I had nothing to lose as the triple pulley had separated from the bronze gear so the lathe was useless unless I took some drastic action. Cliff ------- Removing play in Handles [MyMyford] Posted by: "Morgan Ramanauskas" Mogzieno1x~xxAol.com Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 9:44 am ((PDT)) Hi guys i aquired a Myford ML7 from an uncle of mine and there seems to be some play in the handles (cross feed etc.) when changing direction. Any ideas on how to fix this? And i can't seem to remove the tool from the tailstock :S Thanks Morgan ------- Re: Removing play in Handles Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:02 pm ((PDT)) There are 3 sources of play that come to mind. 1) Check the tightness of the two cheesehead screws either side of the feedscrew nut. 2) Grip the dial using the two flats and turn the ballhandle anti- clockwise. Remove any end float in the feedscrew bush by turning the dial clockwise and then locking it in position with the ball handle. 3) Renew the feednut and in extremis, the feedscrew with myford spare parts. The tailstock taper should be self ejecting when retracted. Sometimes a tool has been fitted without the full MT2 tang. In this case fully remove the tailstock barrel, insert a brass drift through the barrel nut and tap out the tool from the back. HTH Bob ------- Re: Removing play in Handles Posted by: "timperrin97" bobwozere12345x~xxaol.com Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 1:51 pm ((PDT)) Are you sure the play is in the handles as apposed to an inherent imperfection in the actual feed itself? I thought it was something that was in all machinery and you simply learn to work with it. I didn't think that the ML7 tailstock was supposed to be self ejecting, if so then mine is a bit squiffy. I usually just put a rod down the back and give it a good whack. Does the job for dead centres pretty well; but I have not yet used anything more delicate like a drill chuck. ------- Re: Removing play in Handles Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:19 pm ((PDT)) I think the original reference to 'play in the handles' was perhaps focussing on the location of the symptom, rather than the location of the cause. As Bob's reply indicated, the cause might be the bracket being loose relative to the cross slide, the feedscrew having excessive axial play relative to the bracket, or the feedscrew having excessive axial lash relative to the nut (which is the "inherent imperfection" I presume your post refers to). In lathes, backlash of ten or fifteen thou in the cross feed is no problem, and has no influence on accuracy. It needs to be watched if milling using the lathe though. It is certainly worth eliminating the other two causes for 'play in the handles' Tim is correct, ML7 tailstocks do not have any ejector. Bob's lathe must have a Super 7 tailstock, where the taper shank (provided it has a tang sticking out the end, or some suitable substitute) is automatically ejected by winding the barrel fully inwards. On an ML7, it's worth having a rod the right length and diameter which lives permanently in the barrel. Mine has a washer at the right hand end, which can be welded or screwed on, to prevent the rod travelling right into the barrel when the shank ejects. It also helps shield airborne dust and swarf gaining access. The rod should be just long enough, so the end does not get in the way of your hand as it winds the hand wheel. A rod of this diameter is heavy enough that if you partially withdraw it to the right and then slide it sufficiently smartly leftwards, the inertia will be enough to break the grip of the taper on the first or second try, ninety eight times per hundred. The left end of my rod is gently domed, but not hardened. The rod is bright MS 9/16" diameter x 6 3/4" long. I used a heavy washer of about 30mm OD x 3mm thick, plug welded flush, and then I turned the washer face and OD to remove all traces of the weld, to simulate a solid headed pin - looks quite tidy in situ. ------- Re: Removing play in Handles Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:49 am ((PDT)) Apologies regarding the tailstock part of my reply. Troup is correct, my lathe is a 7R which has a S7 tailstock. Bob ------- Re: Removing play in Handles Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:23 pm ((PDT)) I had a tommy bar welded to a socket for tightening the tool post nut. By chance it is the ideal size and weight for knocking out tools from the tailstock. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: Removing play in Handles Posted by: "John Chardine" chardinex~xxnbnet.nb.ca Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:13 pm ((PDT)) I renewed the feednut and screw on my Super 7 which eliminated backlash in the cross-slide. Both are a matched pair from Myford so I understand inadvisable to replace just the nut. ------- Re: Removing play in Handles Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:12 pm ((PDT)) I think I may have posted on this but in case not, here goes * * * Controversial Advice Warning * * * The cross slide is a difficult place to find a permanent solution to the backlash problem, if you do indeed find it to be a problem. (Personally, I don't, as long as it's not over say 0.015".) Particularly if you fit a DRO to the crossfeed, which I haven't, I can only imagine it presenting a problem if you want to do milling, and even then only if you're climb milling, and frankly I think the Myford's just too 'compliant' and lightly built for this to be a good idea. However backlash in the topslide feedscrew is something of a pain, particularly if you use it to take shavings off alternate sides of (say) an acme threadform, or grooves for O rings, circlips and such. Keeping track of it is another juggling act which is perfectly doable, but it's nice to have that bit of brain released for less menial duties. Luckily there are aspects of the natural history of the cross slide which do not apply to the topslide, permitting a different (also easy and cost-free) solution to topslide backlash. First the proposed solution: remove the nut, which is either Zamak or Masak (cf tomayto vs tomato), and squeeze it firmly, endwise, in a smooth jawed vice, such as a milling vice. Repeat judiciously, refitting and noting the backlash reduction each time, so as to converge at maybe 0.001" max (check over the whole travel) If you're tentative, you could rig a DTI on the moving jaw of the vice so you can get a feel for how much a given distance of squeeze delivers in terms of reduction in backlash. This is not applicable (in my view) to the cross slide because: 1) The result is a kludge, whereby the pitch of the nut is now finer than that of the screw. The cross slide comes in for much more use, and usually under heavier load, so the improvement will be short lived. Since I did it to the topslide some 6 months ago on my Super 7, there has been no change in the backlash. 2) The cross slide tends to wear the screw much more, and more unevenly, than the topslide. Any backlash solution which focusses on the nut, unless it can self adjust in real time, cannot accomodate itself to varying wear along the screw. 3) This 'fix' tends to make the motion a bit too tight for a cross slide, which we are continually having to wind long distances. OTOH, IMHO, a topslide is desirably tight, so it won't shift while taking a cut. Unlike the cross slide, the top slide dial is not usually continuously under surveillance, so self-shifting is particularly undesirable. The following applies mainly to milling machines, in my view, but I add it for completeness because it addresses the theoretical weakness of the solution I set out above. A better approach for removing backlash is to cut off half of the nut (making it half as long) and remount the offcut at a variable distance, or rotation angle, from the fixed half. This means that half the thread flanks will take wear in one direction and the other half-nut's flanks will take the other. (IF intent on applying this to a lathe cross slide, you could go two thirds on advance, one third on retract.) This solution really requires a bronze nut. However we still have the problem of the screw wearing. I would personally only bother doing this if the feedscrew was hardened and ground. The Myford feedscrew is frankly too skinny for this to be feasible, IMHO. ------- Re: Removing play in Handles Posted by: "Maritz, Johan" Johan.maritzx~xxarcelormittal.com Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:34 am ((PDT)) I have made the G.H. Thomas modification to my Super 7's top slide. This entails making a pin that pins the gib strip and a small screwed handle to lock the top slide. I would say this is a good modification to do. I have a photo in the photo section under "Johan Maritz's" showing how this looks on the top slide. Measurements and a description of the reason for "pinning" is described in his book " Model engineers workshop". Obviously this mod doesn't help for backlash in the feedscrew. This will rather be of more help for chatter. Johan Maritz ------- Cross and Top slide locks [MyMyford] Posted by: "timperrin97" bobwozere12345x~xxaol.com Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:25 am ((PDT)) Is there any way of locking the top and cross slide on an ML7 without adjusting the gib strips all the time? I have some difficulties when milling a hole that the cross slide moves side ways and thus gives an off round hole which is a bit of a pain. Any suggestions? ------- Re: Cross and Top slide locks Posted by: "Maritz, Johan" Johan.maritzx~xxarcelormittal.com Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:46 am ((PDT)) Hi, I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, but the "saddle" or "cross slide" does have a lock on the rear side of the saddle. It is a bolt and a off centre round nut that clamps the saddle to the bed. Sorry my description is not the best. It is my opinion to carefully adjust the gib strips once maybe a year (depends on use) and not fiddle with it again unless necessary. As for the topslide, adjust the gib strip rather stiff or do the lock "modification" as I have just mentioned in a previous mail. Regards Johan Maritz ------- Re: Cross and Top slide locks Posted by: "timperrin97" bobwozere12345x~xxaol.com Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:49 am ((PDT)) Am I not right in thinking that the cross slide is the one that goes away from you or towards you when you operate the machine? I have discovered the saddle lock but can't see any other kind of lock for anything. Could you just clarify exactly what Cross slide and top slide actually mean? I am not an expert by any length so it is entirely possible i am talking crap. ------- Re: Cross and Top slide locks Posted by: "Maritz, Johan" Johan.maritzx~xxarcelormittal.com Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:05 am ((PDT)) My apologies, you are right!! The lock I'm talking about does lock only the "saddle". The cross slide is indeed the one that goes away from you or towards you. You can try David's design http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe/crossclamp.html I haven't done it myself, but intend to do so in good time. I have however done the "pinning" and locking of the top slide as per G.H. Thomas's design. This at least works quite well. Regards Johan Maritz ------- Re: Cross and Top slide locks Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:14 am ((PDT)) It is also well worth while pinning the saddle gib strip, as recommended by J A Radford is his book "Improvements and Accessories for your Lathe". It allows you to set the gib really closely without making the saddle stiff to move. Mike ------- Re: Cross and Top slide locks Posted by: "mrudin" mrudinx~xxcix.co.uk Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:52 am ((PDT)) On my ML7 (long cross slide version), in addition to the six locking gib screws, there are two grub screws (positioned between gib screws 2-3 and 4-5) that will pinch the gib in tight when done up with an allen key. I'm not sure if this was an 'aftermarket' mod, or whether Myford did this as standard, but I've seen it referred to before as a simple approach. As has been said elsewhere, this ideally should be backed up with a pin through the gib to stop the slide and gib scraping along the grub screw heads, but that doesn't seem to be vital if there isn't too much force applied along the slide. The topslide doesn't have any lock. Mike ------- Re: Cross and Top slide locks Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:56 pm ((PDT)) Cliff Coggin wrote: > Would you elaborate please Mike, as I don't have that book. Cliff, J A Radford's excellent little book (still available) is a compilation of several articles published many years ago in Model Engineer, all relating to improvements and accessories for the Super 7 lathe. Some of the simpler designs are well-known partly because they were further developed and/or publicised by G H Thomas. Examples are a headstock dividing attachment, a ball turning tool, and a graduating tool, all of which went on to become kits sold by Hemingway. One minor article relates to problems JAR had with adjusting his Super 7 saddle. He identified the problem as being due to the gib strip riding up on the points of the adjusting screws when the saddle moved, causing sticking. His solution was to add a dowel pin to prevent longitudinal movement of the gib strip. I carried out this mod to my own Super 7, and found it very beneficial. HTH Mike ------- Re: Cross and Top slide locks Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:26 pm ((PDT)) It's worth noting that Jack Radford's heavily modified Super 7 was a 1962 vintage, and consequently there are minor differences from later production. The "wide guide" ML7s and Super 7s, from around 1973 on, do not require his excellent suggestion regarding the topslide gib (which for those who can't locate it, appears on p20 of the current edition), as Myford themselves have followed an adaptation of it. Jack was also instrumental in their decision to redesign the carriage along wide guide lines. In these later lathes, the second carriage gib adjuster screw from the right is a special item, whose tip is turned down to fit closely into a hole in the corresponding gib strip. No pinning of the carriage (aka saddle) is therefore needed if your front wiper housing does not have a 'keel' projecting down between the front and rear bedway. (Unless some former owner has fitted the wrong sort of wiper!) I too have pinned the topslide on my Super 7, but this is actually from a 1950s lathe*, so I don't know whether late model S7 topslides followed Jack's lead. * like most of my Super 7 - I cannibalised my later model ML7 to supply the wide-guide bed and carriage. The plan was to sell the ML7 but the prices here have collapsed, so I'll probably keep it for jobs I don't care to do in the Super 7, like toolpost grinding, machining skin off castings, etc. ------- Cross Slide locks [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:01 pm ((PDT)) I thought it might save confusion to start a new thread to deal with this topic in isolation. Someone asked if their ML7 had been customised, as it had a pair of extra grub screws for the purpose of locking the cross slide. My 1973 ML7 had these fitted from the factory. My 1952 Super 7 did not, although I fitted some on acquiring it. Whereas the Super 7 manual on this site, which pertains to one of the quite recent lathes with a vertical axis tailstock barrel clamp, shows 2 extra screws, designated "Slide Locking", positioned from the looks of it about where mine are, near the midpoint of what Myford refer to as 'gibs' but which, in the case of the S7, are technically movable dovetail guideways. Unlike gibs, which are free to be pushed into closer proximity, the movable dovetail element is constrained by being clamped by vertical screws (which the Myford manual emphasises must be pulled tight after the slide is adjusted). However there is plenty of flex to allow the clamp screws to act even through these relatively stiff elements. In reality, they work even if at the ends of the so-called "gibs", but positioning one near each midpoint seems to give the best range of options for locking the slide regardless of position, using just two screws. [I was surprised and a little shocked to find that the above-mentioned "Slide Locking" pusher screws listed in the late model S7 manual (as well as the "gib" adjuster screws,) are M5! So much for my fond delusion that all small screws on Myford Sevens were BA and all large ones (1/4" and up) were BSF, possibly with the occasional BSW on things like knobs, to keep us honest.] The other way of locking the cross slide of the Super 7 would be to adopt the slightly more elaborate approach I took about a week ago to fit a CS lock on my Willson slant-bed lathe, currently being refurbished in preparation for shouldering the jobs which are too big even for a Myford. (It has a 17" faceplate, hence not quite big enough to swing a Myford, but a Lorch would be a snip...) My Willson (unlike the ones featured in the manual) had a pair of removable dovetail elements very much like that of the Super 7, clamped by vertical cap screws through the top surface of the slide, except that instead of pusher screws, it simply butted against the inside wall of the cross slide. Presumably to adjust it, one was supposed to grind a lick off the top face of the removable elements. I redesigned it so the bottom face of the removable elements now bears on the flat part of the carriage guideway, where it was previously a 'fresh air fit'. I've added a couple more clamping screws and 6 adjusting screws where previously there were none (because of the big swing, the cross slide has a very long travel). These elements were proportionately much wider than those of the S7, so I thought it preferable to provide a separate, short piece dedicated to locking. I machined a little off the inner ends of the two elements to make room for a 10mm wide central 'brake shoe', of the same cross section as the elements. I made a deep, close fitting hole in this for the long pusher screw, so the brake shoe does not drop down when the slide is disengaged from the male dovetail. It works very well, but I think I would not have gone to these lengths were I not fitting a milling spindle to the rear of the cross slide. ------- Milling Slide, etc. [MyMyford] Posted by: "alan4227" a.j.moorex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 12:35 pm ((PDT)) When I bought my Super 7 recently it came with a vertical milling slide, which I believe is a Myford unit (double swivel type MA7109). This has a single clamping bolt per swivel. The base has two studs which locate it in a cross-slide slot and a single central mounting hole. There doesn't seem to be any way of mounting it apart from using a Tee bolt in the cross-slide slot. Is this correct? I am nervous of putting all the loads of milling onto a single Tee bolt. One other point, while my typing fingers are warmed up. Most of the parts of my lathe are somewhat magnetic, especially the cross-slide. I feel that this makes it harder to collect up all the ferrous swarf. Two questions:- 1. Does anyone else have this problem? 2. Has anyone done anything about it? (I have wild visions of a de- gaussing coil big enough to put a Super 7 through!) As always, many thanks for the valuable advice. Regards, Alan ------- Re: Milling Slide, etc. Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:23 pm ((PDT)) Hi Alan The early universal slides had only one bolt per axis, whereas the latter had two. (refer http://www.lathes.co.uk/myford/page3.html checking out the para on the dividing attachment near the foot of the page). I once owned one of the latter, but I'm not a model engineer, and found that even that with model, the whole setup was not sufficiently strong to do "full size models" (I'm a patient man, but there are limits). If you want to see a REALLY big milling job on an ML7, take a look at the photo with Mark Rand's post at http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/showthread.php? t=154835&highlight=rudder Note that the slide is not a Myford, but presumably something more industrial strength, while the vice is homebuilt, and EXTREMELY heavy A non-swivelling Myford slide would certainly be more rigid than either of the universals, and they have always had two T bolts. I can't categorically state that the two vertical bolts terminate in T heads, but looking at the photo on p 121 of Ian Bradley's ML7 manual (which shows a two-bolt-per-axis snivelling (woops ! typing fingers permanently unwarmed here down under) vertical slide No 68/2, no alternative explanation makes any sense. I haven't noticed parts of my lathe being magnetised, but I have demagnetised the cross slide of my Super 7, after I ground the top face on a neighbourly surface grinder. If you take your slide and toolpost round to any small toolmaker, I'm sure they'd pass it over their demag unit - takes only seconds. Not sure whether you could demag the bed piecewise, by bringing an AC coil polepiece up to it, turning it on, then withdrawing it slowly, repeating at various locations. I guess it would need to be a fairly grunty coil. ------- Re: Milling Slide, etc. Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:22 am ((PDT)) I do this with a modified 'hair clipper', works fine. I turn on, then approach slowly, move slowly the length of the object (bed, headstock, chuck, whatever) then slowly withdraw before switching off. All the stuck on swarf then falls off if not oily. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: Milling Slide, etc. Posted by: "Maritz, Johan" Johan.maritzx~xxarcelormittal.com Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:44 am ((PDT)) Yes I can confirm this. I have made myself such a demagnetizer from a "hair clipper". Cudos to David for this idea. I use it very often especially when machining cast iron. Mail me off list (Johan.maritzx~xxarcelormittal.com) and I can send you a word doc with some pics of it. Very simple indeed. Regards Johan Maritz ------- Re: Milling Slide, etc. Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:55 am ((PDT)) All you need is a cheap hair clipper.... http://iwr.Ru.Ac.Za/~iwdf/lathe/tips.Html Says there I did the 5" 3 jaw. Since then i've done the entire headstock and everything else that was faintly magnetic and annoyingly attracting swarf. Thing is, I use neodymium magnets for holding parallels in place, and catching swarf, and so on, so over time various things become more than usually magnetized (1). (1) Rotating machinery, especially when cutting, becomes magnetized without the presense of anything magnetic. Easily detectable with drill bits. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- New Super 7 Owner [MyMyford Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 10:25 am ((PDT)) Hello all, I am pleased to have joined the group. I have just taken ownership of a Super 7 with QC gearbox and stand - I am a novice really. I have a few initial questions and would really appreciate some help: 1- The serial number is SK1954 - so it seems to be one of the earliest examples, it has the early type clutch design and the early gearbox design - is this a major disadvantage? I realise the parts for these items are no longer available from Myford. I am hoping the build quality on the early units wasn't substandard. 2- I have started to clean up the lathe - i haven't really taken anything apart yet but cleaned externally. What are the recommendations for cleaning? I don't want to dismantle stuff that i then have difficulty putting back together again (already spent 10 minutes searching for the detent ball housed in the gearbox cover when it flew off while being removed). Should i use petrol as a cleaning agent? 3- How do I remove the topslide? Probably seems like a daft question but i cannot see how. 4- What's the best advice for levelling the lathe? The cabinet has no jackable feet present and sits on a concrete floor. There are no raiser blocks. 5- I need a new belt for the motor to countershaft - i have heard the linkable ones from Chronos are good - they stock A & Z section belts what should i go for? 6- Can the gearbox cut BA threads 'out of the box' or do i need to get different gears and if so are they easy to obtain - the manual is unclear on this? In general the lathe seems to be in good condition, with minor wear on the bedways (still see the original scraping marks on most of the surface), some paint chips and a couple of minor dings on the bedways and front of the cross-slide. I can see some slight wear on some of the gearbox gear teeth. Thanks in advance Andy ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "durnfjmx~xxaol.com" durnfjmx~xxaol.com Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 11:18 am ((PDT)) Hi Andy, and welcome to the group. Well, you'll get as many different answers to those questions as there are members of the group, but my 5 pennyworth... 1) Build quality has been consistantly good, although there have been a number of design changes to some details over the years. So there should be no disadvantage there per se. 2) Don't take anything to bits until you need to. A thorough clean and re-lube is well in order, and as you get some more experience you can start to dismantle. DO NOT USE PETROL (GASOLINE) AS A CLEANING FLUID. Apart from fire risks, there are serious carcinogens and other toxins that are volatile, and you really don't want them in your shop. Paraffin (Kero) is better, but IMHO, white spirit (Paint brush cleaner) works just fine, and has far less risks, although sensible precautions still have to be taken. 4) The lathe does not need to be level, although it is easier in some cases to set up things if it is. They work fine on board ships. But for accurate work, they do need to be supported in such a way that the bed is not under tension. Raising blocks are easy to make, and might be a good early project. With them you can level the bed, and remove any twist from it. The stand must be well seated on a firm surface, consider bolting it to the concrete. 5) Link belts are great, and quieter, as well as easier to install. 6) BA threads are basically metric, and can't be cut precisely with an imperial gearbox, HOWEVER there are a number of dodges available to make all BA and pretty well all Metric threads that are "near enough" for all practical purposes. IIRC there are a number of methods detailed in our "Files" section. Take it easy, and appreciate the basics of your fine tool before you start to try to modify or "improve" it. Stay safe, MikeD ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 1:24 pm ((PDT)) Hi Andy, congrats on the new purchase. I have a Super 7 the same age as yours, and the build quality is definitely better than my 1973 ML7. It's a superb lathe - according to Tony Griffiths at lathes.co.uk (which has lots of info on Myfords) the finish on the early production surpasses anything since, so I'm not alone in this impression. Mine has changegears rather than a gearbox, so I can't help you there, I'm afraid. And even metric gearboxes (unless very fancy small toolroom lathe) will not normally cut BA pitches apart from 0BA; the others are weird as they form a geometrical progression. This is where changegears come into their own - it has been written that the standard Myford gears can produce something like 750,000 different pitches, by virtue of not being 'locked up' in a QC box. However I can help if you need to work on the clutch. Many of the wearing parts can be replaced - if necessary - by standard bearings or oilite bushes (which are the recommended replacement for the original needle rollers). My sympathies about small parts flying about the place, I've just been playing that game with my big lathe. The topslide graduated collar is booby trapped, with three separate projectiles cocked and ready to fire in various random directions on dismantling, and a trained octopus required for reassembly. I would have saved a great deal of time had I pitched a small tent in the middle of the workshop to work inside. Re your point 3: The trick with removal of the topslide is to back the set screws right off, then wiggle the topslide upwards with a sort of orbital motion so as the gradually encourage the thrust rods to retract into their holes and allow the topslide to emerge. The thrust rod tips are machined to fit around a conical spigot - like a circular male dovetail - projecting from beneath the topslide base. These tips are handed, and it's not necessarily sufficient to replace them on the side they emerged from: they may have been fitted the wrong way round. To determine which way round they should go, offer them up to the cone at the correct offset and lying in the appropriate plane, with the topslide off the lathe, and hold it up to the light. If the cone is damaged, (as can happen if they're wrongly assembled) get back to us. This can be a little tricky to fix unless you can use another lathe or borrow a Myford topslide (an ML7 slide will do just fine). Have fun ! ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "furkaoberalp" a.websterx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 8:45 pm ((PDT)) Andy, First of all, congrats and you have got yourself a fine machine. You will find that this is a decent and helpful group devoid of the wankers who plague so many others and make you want to go postal. Kudos to our mysterous moderator who has vintage Myford equipment! I have a recent build S7 but they have always been primo machines. Tony G is right and the early build S7s had exemplary attention to detail. The recent ones are still splendid in terms of attention to detail. I propose that there are few parts moving that Myford dosen't supply that you could not manufacture today. It is to their credit that they stick with original spec BA and BSF etc parts which elsewhere would have gone metric. Even the current production gearbox can be retrofitted to an old lathe. This impresses me no end. My advise is to pick up the ML7 Lathe Manual now reprinted again and sold by Tony G. It also discusses the Super 7. Very informative. Good luck with your new baby, Andrew Webster ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 1:00 am ((PDT)) To clarify the most excellent post from Andrew Webster, I think he is recommending the Ian Bradley publication entitled* "Myford ML7 Lathe Manual" but published by MAP. * rather confusingly, as Myford do supply a manual for the ML7, and another for the Super 7 - both of which you will find here under "Files" - but you'll need to refer to the separate files kindly posted covering the Mk1 S7 There are some previous posts on this forum regarding the clutch on the Mk1 It is actually, I think, quite nicely designed - a few minor teething troubles appeared, and oilite bearings do seem to cure most of those, but I think the main reason it was discontinued was that, like the lubrication arrangement for the front spindle bearing, it cost a bundle to make. The bearing and oilites do not have to be sourced from Myford, but are commonly available from industrial bearing and transmission supply houses (at least in this, the most far-flung outpost of the former British Empire). I agree entirely with Andrew W that the culture on this forum at present is wonderfully and unusually civilised, informed and supportive. My thanks also to our self-effacing freund - sorry, - friend who helps to keep it that way, and to all the pleasant collaborators who post. Keep making those chips, everyone ! ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 1:33 am ((PDT)) Thanks for these helpful and in depth replies. I have removed the top-slide now - its easy when you know how. Did my first piece of machining last night on mild steel, finish was poor though - very ridged - even on a fine feed. To be fair i hadn't spent any time getting the tool at center height and the tool itself was something that came with the lathe and needs sharpening. Can anyone recommend a simple starter selection of cutting tools? - I don't have a bench grinder (and I might be treading on dangerous ground after spending so much money on the lathe if i went out and brought one now). There are lots of cutting tools that came with the lathe - but lots are blunt, broken or odd shapes and sizes. Andy ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "durnfjmx~xxaol.com" durnfjmx~xxaol.com Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 2:06 am ((PDT)) I think you'll HAVE to tread that dangerous ground very soon. Sharp tools are vital, as is setting to center height correctly. Cheepo offhand grinders are not expensive, often come up in Lidl and Aldi, although the tool rests are cr*p. It's easy to make a decentish tool rest, then shape the tool by eye. In my experience the actual angles are not as important as getting the edge really sharp. You should stone the edge when it's to shape, and don't forget to stone a small radius on the tip - if you don't do that, you will be bound to get ridges. Correct speed and feed rates are also quite important, and different grades of steel will require different ones. Some cutting fluid will probably be required for most applications. I use a neet cutting oil applied with a small paintbrush, but if you are doing lots of heavyish cutting, you might want to think about installing a suds pump, and using soluble oil. Lots of variables, I'm afraid, but with lots of practice you'll work 'em ut!!! Enjoy the process. MikeD ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 2:25 am ((PDT)) > Did my first piece of machining last night on mild steel, finish was > poor though - very ridged - even on a fine feed. To be fair i hadn't The finish depends a lot on the steel itself. Then comes the tool. Sharp is good. Scary sharp is better. Have you got an oilstone for sharpening woodworking chisels? You can use that to touch up the cutter end and see how it goes. Belt sander? You could sharpen on that too. If that bit of steel was anything like would be used for making security gates (black scale on the outside) then you will struggle mightily to get a nice finish on it, the stuff is really junk. Grab a couple of discarded printers, fax machine or photocopier, and strip them down. Try turning some of the steel rods you find within. They are 'free machining' alloys that make it seem easy (-: > spent any time getting the tool at center height and the tool itself > was somthing that came with the lathe and needs sharpening. Can > anyone reccomend a simple starter selection of cutting tools? - I hmm, center height is worth achieving. Here http://www.chronos.ltd.uk/acatalog/Chronos_Catalogue_Turning_Tools_76.html got to 'Set of 8 HSS Lathe Tools' The 8mm shank set will do you good as a starter and as a model for the basic shapes. Then go to http://www.sherline.com/grinding.htm for some lessons on grinding, because you will need to do that as they will get blunt. *I* prefer HSS tools. There are other here who like brazed carbide, and yet others who prefer carbide inserts. *I* believe a beginner should learn to grind HSS tools before moving to the carbides, because the time will come when you NEED that skill and don't have time to learn it, IOW you'll need the preknowledge. (And brazed carbides need special grinding wheels.) > don't have a bench grinder (and I might be treading on dangerous > ground after spending so much money on the lathe if i went out and > brought one now). Sorry, you're just going to have to get a grinder (-: The cheapest Ryobi or similar, with 6" wheels will do just fine. Plan to replace the wheels within a few months, the ex factory ones are junk. > There are lots of cutting tools that came with the > lathe - but lots are blunt, broken or odd shapes and sizes. Well, over time you will generate your own set of odd shaped cutters for making odd shaped things. There is no such thing as 'one tool fits all'. But, the only way to sharpen the things is with some sort of grinding wheel. If you have an electric hand drill a cheap grinding (or even sanding) wheel on it will get you going for a few months, but really the bench grinder is the thing to get. You can then build a guide for it so you can get repeatable angles and such. Articles in back issues of MEW will get you the plans. None of this is difficult really. I grew up with a bench grinder in my bedroom (there was no-where else to put it) so I've been grinding a long time, so it may seem too easy to me. But if you can measure and mark angles on a bit of HSS, and grind to the lines, you can do it. I find it helpful to have 2 of each tool (still getting there though), and sharpen both at the same time. Then I can quickly swap to the sharp one in the middle of a job instead of spending time grinding. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 2:48 am ((PDT)) On 3 Sep 2008 at 5:06, durnfjmx~xxaol.com murmured decisively: > are not as important as getting the edge really sharp. You should > stone the edge when it's to shape, and don't forget to stone a small > radius on the tip - if you don't do that, you will be bound to get > ridges. a) Be careful when stoning not to reduce the angle you have just ground. I have found it all too easy to remove the positive rake when honing. b) I disagree about making a radius on the tip. I seldom do it. Instead I use low trailing flank angles, which gives the same effect, but because the cutting edge has a sharp corner the chips come off easier because they are not being forced to curl, reducing the cutting forces noticably. > Correct speed and feed rates are also quite important, and different > grades of steel will require different ones. At this place there is a program for working out the speeds http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe/speed.html I made myself a chart which I suppose I should publish (-: It lists speed ranges for a bunch of materials, for all the speeds available on the ML7. So I just pick my material and diameter, and read off the speed. Of course, for small diameters one usually ends up at 'top speed' which is about 600rpm, but that works fine too. > Some cutting fluid will probably be required for most applications. I > use a neet cutting oil applied with a small paintbrush, but if you are > doing lots of heavyish cutting, you might want to think about > installing a suds pump, and using soluble oil. Or you can just use the oil/fat left over from roasting a chicken. Try it before you slam it. > Lots of variables, I'm afraid, but with lots of practice you'll work > 'em out!!! And, if your lathe has the standard Myford tool holderdown thingy, you'll want to make one of these http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe/toolpost.html before you go mad from swapping packing strips. (You can also get similar things from Chronos among others, but you said spending money might be a progblem.) David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "Ron" silverfoxccx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 3:53 am ((PDT)) Andy, Can I recommend the Greenwood tools site for cutters. These coupled with the myford tool kit, (comes with two tool holders) is ideal. 1) because once set at centre height you can change tools at will and not spend time resetting. 2) get the following (with toolholders as well): RH cutter LH cutter Round nose cutter Boring bar Parting off tool. Should cover every situation. I think mine are the 10mm sq tool bits but have a word with them, they are helpful, and find out if they are doing any talks in your area, you will save a packet on the night. Regards Ron ------- Re: New Super 7 Owner Posted by: "tomservo_9504" tomservo_9504x~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 8:39 pm ((PDT)) While I won't agree that it's the cheapest way to go, I recently finished putting a Phase II AXA series toolpost on my ML7, and it's really a joy to use. I'll post a bit of writeup and some pictures soon, I did have to mill down the bottom of the dovetails on the toolholders (and I milled one of the toolholders entire bottom down so I have one I can rotate the toolpost with). They're made of some sort of hardened steel, as I had to use a very heavy duty 1" carbide endmill to chunk them out. The Myford didn't complain, though. I just clamped the holders to my angle plate and had at it. Endmills don't like to stay in a 3 jaw chuck, though, when you try to be ambitious with your cuts. Congrats on the Myford, I think you'll like it. I LOVE mine, I upgraded from a chinese 7x12, and there is no comparison. The Myford is so much more rigid, and the backgear is a dream for tapping and threading operations. I picked up my late '49-early '50 ML7 for $500 here locally, and it's in very good working order. ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Sep 5, 2008 4:50 pm ((PDT)) "zitman2008" wrote: > Hi all, > Finally got round to checking the tailstock alignment of my ML7 last > night. I checked using a fixed centre in the haedstock and tailstock > with a 6" steel rule sandwiched between them. > It is out in the horizontal plane by a fair way I think (about 0.5 - > 1mm). The tailstock appears to be slightly closer to the front of > the lathe. How do i adjust the tailstock? Thanks In Advance (Hopefully) > Ian Ian: The procedure's in the manual, under "Files" on this forum A more accurate measure of the (doubled) error can be had by holding a DTI in or on the chuck and sweeping the barrel of the tailstock, turning the belts by hand. ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "furkaoberalp" a.websterx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sat Sep 6, 2008 7:51 am ((PDT)) Ian, The following assumes you have used a chucked test bar to take any twist out of the bed. You need to get a 12 inch length of 1 inch diameter rod of any kind of steel. Centre-drill both ends. Place between centres and drive with a carrier and faceplate. Good idea to spray paint the carrier orange or yellow for safety. Use a dead tailstock centre for accuracy. Grease it up well. Ensure the 2-MT sockets are totally clean of course. Use power traverse to true up the rod using a sharp HSS roughing-out tool for steel. Do NOT use carbide especially the Chinese cemented carbide tools with almost no cutting angles. Carbide is greatly over- employed to poor effect, and here you would need just the right type. If you are unfamiliar with lathe tools, the best and cheapest bet is to get six unground 3/8" HSS blanks and grind up the basic tools recommended in the Sparey book. Quite easy once you screw up the nerve. HSS takes a huge amount of heat during grinding. Your fingers will probably burn long before the tool does. Now cut the bar down, about 3/16" deep, so you have a collar standing proud about 3/4" wide near each end. Change to sharp knife tool. Now with fine feed, skim a thou or two off each collar with the same depth setting. Compare collars with a mike. Move the tailstock forward or back until subsequent passes reveal no size differences between the collars. The adjustment screws are on the side of the tailstock. This procedure will zero the tailstock absolutely. Finally, if you end up reducing the collars right down to the 3/16" deep roughed-out areas, and you need to do more zeroing, start with another length of rod. This is because it will be too small in diameter and will start to spring. Just use the first rod for some other project. Andrew ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Sat Sep 6, 2008 8:05 am ((PDT)) Andrew - The procedure you describe will zero the tailstock correctly *but only if the tailstock is accurately on center height*. If it is not (and my own is an example), then it will very accurately adjust the tailstock *off* center horizontally by the amount needed to correct the error in center height. So it is a smart move first to check whether the tailstock is accurately on center height. Regards, Tony ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "furkaoberalp" a.websterx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sat Sep 6, 2008 8:27 am ((PDT)) Absolutely right Tony, good point. Check the centre height of any old lathe first. I too have had this problem but with a non-Myford lathe. A good way to check is to put a 2-MT blank arbor with 1" diameter business end in each socket. Bring them together and compare vertical displacement with a mike. These arbors are pretty cheap and would soon find a use in some useful beginner's project e.g., female centre, saw arbor, etc. Tony is an example of somebody who found ways to work around a vertical error on a Myford. I have read there are various ways to correct these errors short of having Myford regrind the bed. All seem be time consuming ...I for one scraped out the headstock housing of a Portass in order to compensate for dropped mandrel nose, then I scraped the tailstock down to match. First time with the scraper. Cost nothing but took several days of nail-biting. Andrew ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "John Quirke" jjquirkex~xxeircom.net Date: Sat Sep 6, 2008 4:46 pm ((PDT)) Hi All. My S7 has a tailstock which is not the one supplied from the factory and today co-indecently I was aligning it and while I could set it in line with a vertical line through the headstock it was higher (luckily) horizontally by 4 thou. This I resolved tonight by putting the tailstock lower section (the part that slides on the bed) on the surface grinder and removing 4 thou. The result when assembled? Success. Obviously there have been variations over the years at Myford so not all parts over all years are interchangeable. So bear this in mind when fitting that second-hand tailstock from Ebay. Not every home workshop has a surface grinder and the file would test the best of us, and no machine can add the metal as original, although shimstock could provide a solution. Check those heights. Yours in the workshop John ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "furkaoberalp" a.websterx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sat Sep 6, 2008 5:19 pm ((PDT)) Luxury. Now when I wer't lad... Four thou oversize is nowt. The tailstock of my abortionate Chicom 7 x 10 mini-lathe' was several mm too high. I reduced the iron shoe with an Adept No. 1 hand shaper. Didn't have a surface grinder thingmy. I took off a thou too much and, as John says is possible, packed it up with shim stock. If a tailstock is just a wee bit high you can scrape down the top of the shoe with a flat hand scraper, using a mike and testing with blue against a surface plate. It took me half a day to scrape down a tiny Adept tailstock, so you are looking at a full weekend plus for a Myford. Scraping used to scare the bejeezus out of me, but in fact it is so slow you are unlikely to mess things up. Scraping is also basically free if the scraper is an old file. aw ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sun Sep 7, 2008 12:22 am ((PDT)) "furkaoberalp" wrote: > Luxury. Now when I wer't lad... Four thou oversize is nowt. This remark may have been partly in jest, but I think seriously it has more than a grain of truth. While there's no shame in making the lathe as good as it can be, I think you would need to have tizzied the rest of the lathe up to a fever pitch of accuracy before the benefits of this particular endeavour emerged from the 'noise', unless you're making working models of hydraulic cylinders at a scale of 1:48, or drilling teeny tiny holes. For turning at more normal diameters, the error introduced by the tailstock being a few thou high or low is surprisingly tiny. Lets take the example of a 4 thou height mismatch, which does sound quite a lot. For a workpiece diameter of say 3/8", the resulting diameter variation from end to end will in fact be 0.0001" (one tenth of a thou). It will be even less as the workpiece gets larger. This also applies to wear in the bed which causes the tool to drop below the height of the centres. Provided the saddle keepers are able to be kept relatively snug, and as long as the vertical faces of the shears are relatively true -- say by careful scraping, filing, or stoning, of the undersides of the shears at the unworn parts of the bed, and judicious stoning of the verticals -- bed wear, if it's evened up across both ways, will have negligeable effect on parallel turning (once again, provided we're not engaged in watchmaking or some other tiny diameter work). ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Sun Sep 7, 2008 1:17 am ((PDT)) Actually, I wasn't suggesting that you offset the tailstock to correct for a vertical alignment error as a practical option - it isn't, as the offset you would need depends on the diameter that you are turning and the distance from the headstock centre, so you would need the offset to change as you turn. So it would be impractical to use this as a correction method. Regards, Tony ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Sun Sep 7, 2008 1:22 am ((PDT)) > For turning at more normal diameters, the error introduced by the > tailstock being a few thou high or low is surprisingly tiny. That is very true; however, the time that it matters more is when you are drilling or reaming using a tailstock chuck. Particularly when reaming to final size, 4 thou misalignment of the reamer can be an issue. Regards, Tony ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Sun Sep 7, 2008 2:44 am ((PDT)) I also found it to be a problem when using a travelling steady on a long, small diameter, workpiece turned between centres. The steady jams on the work at one end or the other! In my case the difficulty was due to wear in the tailstock bore, which meant the barrel lifted when clamped up. Note that this only applies to elderly 7s like mine, which have the clamp cotter beneath the barrel. The solution was to have the bore honed and fitted with an oversize barrel by Myfords. Mike ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "John Quirke" jjquirkex~xxeircom.net Date: Sun Sep 7, 2008 3:09 am ((PDT)) Hi All. The difficulty I was having was I wished to make a main jet for an Amac carburettor for my motorcycle. The required jet hole would have been .028" (a number 27 jet) and while having a correct drill bit I knew something was wrong when the hole kept coming out as .033" ish (equal to a number 30 jet). For normal work the error would not have mattered but with this part the only other option was to drill it freehand on the pillar drill and live with the error on the lathe. Having corrected the error the confidence in the lathe has gone up a notch and the old Douglas runs as it should. Yours in the workshop and on a motorcycle John ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Sep 8, 2008 3:30 am ((PDT)) As a clockmaker I would drill an undersize hole then open it to the required size with a tapered 5-sided cutting broach. The finished hole would be much smoother and rounder that a drill can make. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: Tailstock Alignment Posted by: "zitman2008" imarshallx~xxrocketmail.com Date: Mon Sep 8, 2008 4:09 am ((PDT)) Thanks all, Once I had figured out what the manual was telling me. I didn't appreciate there was an adjuster on both the front and back (when standing in a position to operate the lathe) of the tailstock and it took me a few moments to figure out what was happening. But now the tailstock alignment is spot on horizontally and the lathe is much more accurate as a reault! Once again all help was appreciated. Z ------ Accurising the Tailstock - Cheating Method [MyMyford] Posted by: "furkaoberalp" a.websterx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Mon Sep 8, 2008 4:35 am ((PDT)) Good Morning, Several threads have been about tailstock alignment. If the problem persists after playing with the adjuster screws and turning a test bar, pinch an idea for a semi-permanent, non-toolmaking fix from Sherline. That firm makes a not-obscenely-expensive adaptor for 1/4-3/8" Jacob's chucks, collets, and slave-type workholding devices. It is adjustable in two axes so as to adjust out alignment error. I have just tried mine in a reducing sleeve and it works just fine on the Myford for light jobs. This simple gadget is also easy to make in larger 2-MT size. See Sherline's website for specs and instruction sheets. Sherline sell these ostensibly so their products can be adjusted to extreme accuracy. Yet contrary to popular opinion, the alignment of a new Sherline can be quite rotten, as I have discovered. I need the thing just to make the lathe work properly, although it is true that alignment error can be eliminated with it. Andrew ------- Re: Accurising the Tailstock - Cheating Method Posted by: "furkaoberalp" a.websterx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:21 pm ((PDT)) anthrhodes wrote: > Andrew, > Would you please post more specific links to the specific Sherline > accessories? Thanks. Anthony Berkeley, Calif. Anthony, It is an adjustable tailstock chuck holder, price $45 US, and the instruction sheet is here: http://www.sherline.com/1201inst.pdf I can confirm that it does work in a Myford using a 2-MT to 0-MT reducing sleeve. I am using such a thing on the Sherline, Portass baby lathe, and Pools 3 inch special. I think I wrote earlier that it's 1-MT which is a typo. These are quire effective and obviously a 2-MT version, for bigger tailstock tooling, would not be hard to produce without any fancy gadgets. Even if the tailstock is wonky! Andrew ------- ML7 trileva/backgear problems [MyMyford] Posted by: "rsoperuk" robincsoperx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Sat Sep 6, 2008 12:35 pm ((PDT)) Hi - another new boy I'm afraid. I have an ML7 with Tri-Leva and screw cutting gear box. Not been used in a couple of years so needed a good clean and oil but now working and looking pretty good. Anyway there are a couple of faults I would really appreciate some advice on. 1. Engaging the back gear (raising lever) seem to lock the spindle completely and it can be turned by hand or motor. By taking the tri- leva cover off I can see two gear wheels being enganed when the back gear lever is raised. These two gear wheels spin freely by hand when not engaged. I don't really understand how the back gears works (not removed enough bit to see it all) - is this a comon fault? any suggestions what it might be. 2. One of the tri-leva speed levers does not stay engaged, I think I can see why, there is wear on the catch mechanism. Has anyone else has this problem or could offer some advice? Thanks & Regards Rob ------- Re: ML7 trileva/backgear problems Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sat Sep 6, 2008 12:55 pm ((PDT)) Rob. Engaging backgear is a two stage process 1) Uncouple the "bull gear" (largest of the back gear quadruple set) from the small gear beside it, so the cone pulley set on the spindle plus the latter named gear are free-spinning. On the ML7 this is done with a shortened (ideally non 90 degree) allen key to fit the cap screw through a small toothed dog sliding in a recessed slot in the body of the bull gear. 2) Swing the eccentric arrangment which brings the remote pair of gears into mesh with the two on the spindle. This should be covered in the manual under "Files" on this site. p.s. I forgot to say I have no experience or knowledge of Trilevas; I hope someone else can address your other query ------- Re: ML7 trileva/backgear problems Posted by: "rsoperuk" robincsoperx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Sun Sep 7, 2008 2:41 am ((PDT)) Ah! It a case of RFTM for me then. Thanks for that info I had wrongly assumed something was broken and was getting ready to take everything to pieces (as if I don't already have enough stuff in pieces)! Regards Rob ------- Re: ML7 trileva/backgear problems Posted by: "timperrin97" bobwozere12345x~xxaol.com Date: Sun Sep 7, 2008 3:50 am ((PDT)) When you engage the backgear you need to disconnect the two gears on the spindle from each other. If you look at the big bullwheel closest to the spindle nose you will see an allen bolt which passes straight through the gear to a small piece of metal (brass?) which itself has teeth that mesh with the second gear. This needs to be released and moved out of the way. Personally I haven't yet worked out how to do it without removing the spindle, but i guess i just need a small allen key. I hope that is understandable. ------- Re: ML7 trileva/backgear problems Posted by: "Karen Gallagher" karengx~xxa1.com.au Date: Sun Sep 7, 2008 4:27 am ((PDT)) If you remove the front cover of the Tri-Leva you'll notice a screw by each lever. Adjust those till the catch holds correctly and there's enough tension on each belt to give you proper drive. I adjust mine every 5 years or so, or of course after belt changes. Karen ------- surface finish frustration [MyMyford] Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Thu Sep 11, 2008 5:51 am ((PDT)) Hello All I have been using my Super 7 for a week or so now but am getting frustrated - I am still not able to get a decent surface finish. I am test turning both BMS (3/8 and 1 inch) diameter and brass (5/8). I have set the cutting tool to exactly center height, i have tried sharp edged tools & round nose tools, tools with top rake and tools with no top-rake (all HSS - i got a job lot of them with the lathe). I have sharpened tools on the grinder and rounded the cutting tip slighlty. I have set the correct RPM speeds (according to the useful online chart posted on the forum) and tried a range of auto-feed speeds. I have tried light cuts and heavy cuts. When cutting steel the material comes off in a long steady chip. I have no specific cutting oil (not sure of a supplier and I haven't had a roast cheicken for a while) but have tried using 3-1 oil when cutting BMS as an interim - this smokes badly. Each time I am getting fine grooves (to a greater or lesser extent) on the workpiece. I also own a small Peatol / Taig lathe (which i am selling) which i can get better surface finishes on. The lathe is level and bolted securely to a level Myford bench on a concrete floor. The motor to countershaft belt is in poor condition (it flaps around on the higher speed pulleys and is delaminating), the countershaft to headstock belt is in ok condition. The lathe is 50 years old but is in good condition. Can anyone give any advice on potential issues here? I am getting concerned that the lathe itself is at fault rather than my lack of experience. What sort of finish should I be expecting? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Its a long shot but if anyone is York (UK) based and could spare an hour that would be amazing. Regards Andy ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:35 am ((PDT)) Ahem. 'Cutting oil' is a lot different from 'oil'. The difference is that lubricating oil is desired to not break down under pressure. Some are better than others. For example ep90 gearbox oil is for 'extended pressure' which you get between gears. Cutting oil has to have one major property. It must lubricate up to a point, then break down and stop lubricating so that cutting can occur, then as pressure drops it can begin to lubricate again. 3-in-1 cannot do that. > Each time I am getting fine grooves (to a greater or lesser extent) Photos? I think at this point we need to see this. Replace that belt pronto. > concerned that the lathe itself is at fault rather than my lack of > experience. What sort of finish should I be expecting? Depends on the steel, cutter and feed speed. I can get 'shiny' without much effort. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "entofficex~xxaol.com" entofficex~xxaol.com Date: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:56 am ((PDT)) If you are running correct speeds and feeds the poor finish may represent vibrations from your belt and or motor. I would start off with replacing the belt with one of those link belts which are terrific. ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "timperrin97" bobwozere12345x~xxaol.com Date: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:22 am ((PDT)) I had a similar issue and when I tried milling on the cross slide I actually found out that the headstock was very slightly loose. If you remove the spindle by removing the 4 allen bolts (unplug machine first, just in case) you should be able to see part of the bed and the inside of the headstock. There are 4 further allen bolts inside there which are the ones that hold the headstock still. For me these were a bit loose which causes the headstock to rattle and produce a really crap cut. Be careful not to mix up the 4 bolts cos one is different to the rest methinks. Good luck [and in a later message Tim wrote] A quick modification to my previous post. My lathe is an ML7 so things may be set out a little differently but I guess the principle is the same. ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "lioneltedder" lionel.tedderx~xxvirgin.net Date: Thu Sep 11, 2008 12:08 pm ((PDT)) Hello, Here are some suggestions, based on my experience, for solving your problem with poor finish. If the lathe motor is single phase, it should be of the resilient mounted type. Single phase motors "cog" and the resultant vibration can be transmitted to the work and cause poor finish. I had this problem with both my Myford and Colchester lathes. Mounting the motors on rubber blocks cured the trouble. The damaged belt could also cause vibration. Worn or slack fitting chuck jaws tend to grip only at the rear, allowing the work to move during the cut. A lathe tool cannot produce a better finish on the work than it possesses itself. After grinding I always stone the edges with a fine Arkansas stone and at the same time impart a small radius to the tip. Some types of mild steel are next to impossible to get a good finish on. I always try to use free-cutting types which contain lead, such as EN1A. Tools which come to a sharp point tend to produce a fine "thread" on the work. The tool should have a small radius or flat which is slightly longer than twice the feed rate per rev. Too large a radius or flat will cause chatter, however. Lubricating oils are not good for cutting, I find that chlorinated oils usually give good results. I assume that the spindle bearings are well adjusted? I hope you find these suggestions helpful. ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:17 pm ((PDT)) The fact that you're unable to achieve a decent finish with brass suggests that cutting oil is not the issue. Similarly if free-cutting mild steel is used (you don't specify, but when tracking down 'lathe' causes for poor finish, other grades of mild steel are unhelpful): it is not necessary to use cutting oil to get a superior finish Are your front and side clearances sufficient? This is one thing occasionally overlooked - the rake angles are not hugely important to finishing cuts, for easy materials as above, if the tool is honed sharp and the radius is shiny. Checking the headstock hold-downs is a good suggestion: you don't need to remove the spindle, but you will need a long-reach allen key in 7/32" AF - I recommend shopping around for a top quality key which is bent into T handle configuration - you can put a flat-bar lever through these bends to achieve the necessary rather high torque. I think you need to run a series of 'free play' checks with a DTI over not just the spindle as suggested but the topslide, cross slide and saddle. IN each case, use a lever (suitably padded where necessary) so you can apply an reversing overhung load, in a suitable place to exploit potential free play so as to promote the maximum possible movement, checking in two mutually perpendicular planes for each item. For the saddle check at both ends of the bed. The least critical place for play is upwards movement of the saddle, as long as when it's loaded downwards at the four corners in turn, there is no 'rocking'. However upwards free play should be minimised if you plan on doing any milling or boring on the cross slide. It's hard to quote figures: the spindle play should definitely be less than 0.001" when the lathe is warmed up, preferably well less. Check end play: there should be none, as the angular contact bearings are preloaded against each other. For the slides, you should adjust the play to the minimum which still lets the slides move through their entire range without binding. The procedure requires temporary removal of the feed screws If the slides are badly worn, a temporary expedient which will help finishes is to use a heavier than usual oil on the slides, maybe as heavy as ISO130 diff or gear oil or similar. However you will need to consider remachining or scraping or stoning the dovetails or shears for a more permanent cure. ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Thu Sep 11, 2008 2:48 pm ((PDT)) Many thanks for all this great advice. I checked vibration on the machine this evening by placing a DTI with the plunger touching the bed. I could get the needle to shake when i ran the motor but this seemed to improve as i ran the lathe for a few minutes. I got more vibration with the tumbler gears engaged. This did not seem excessive - needle fluctuating less than 0.001". The spindle play was tested with the DTI on the upper surface of a chuck and then I tried to lift the chuck - i could get needle movement but less than 0.001" - I could get 2 or 3 thou with a 6 " bar in the chuck and a hefty pull - is that bad? The chuck is pretty new - a TOS 3 jaw. I will definitely need to tighten the saddle at the headstock end i think - it is slightly harder to move at the extreme tailstock end. I will try out the other suggestions tomorrow. I am determined to get past this stage as there are so many things i want to do with the lathe. Thanks again Andy ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "Anthony Psaila" antpsaix~xxhotmail.com Date: Fri Sep 12, 2008 12:39 am ((PDT)) Hi, I had a similar problem. In my case the aluminum pulley on the motor shaft wobbled too much. I machined one out of steel and vibration is much less now - though this is a single step pulley so I lost some speed ranges - still I tend to use my lathe on low speeds so this is not such an issue. I have also mounted the motor (original single phase) on rubber. I tend to machine without using any lube or cutting fluids. I keep thinking that some day I will replace the v-belt with a link belt, but I am concerned that these are no good for reverse direction - can somebody with experience comment on this? Note, for brass the tool should have negative rake. And in general, tool overhang should be kept to a minimum. I also tend to get much better finish when the tool is drawn in the opposite direction. I do most of feeding by hand. In my short experience the finish depends greatly on the material. I get best finish with aluminum, brass and stainless. Mild steel usually gives a fibrous surface that I brighten up with emery paper. Hope this helps. Tony ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:22 am ((PDT)) Thanks Tony I decided to reduce spindle play this morning (after worrying about it all night). I followed the manual's instructions; I had no C spanner to move the locking rings so made a simple one out of brass bar. I moved the spindle to the right with the locking rings until I could feel significant play on the nose. I then tried to tighten the end play locking collar but could not get it to budge - It seems to be locked to the gear (on the right) by 2 grub screws. I presumed that this should not be changed. Anyway, I moved the spindle back to the left as far as i could and then moved it back again by turning 15 degress (as per manual). THis has removed a lot of the play, the spindle can still be rotated but is stiffer than before. Can anyone advise on how to tell if the clearance is set too tightly - I don't want to destroy the bearings? ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:07 am ((PDT)) It would be easier to follow what you have done if you would use the same terminology as the manual, and preferably mention the numbers as a cross check. Presuming that the 'end play locking collar' you were unable to move is the 'adjusting collar No. 4" from fig 34 and 35, did you first slacken the "screw 3" ? The holes which you seem to assume contain grub screws should in fact be plain blind holes for the pins of a 2-pin face wrench, which can be made by drilling holes near one end of a 300mm length of say 65x6 (or some other suitable size) MS flat, at the same centres and diameters as the holes, equispaced about a hole large enough to clear the tips of the thread the collar fits on, and fitting short pins. Make sure not to overtighten using this wrench: the object is to load the two angular contact ball races just enough so that no END (axial) play is felt (for this to be determined, the outer races of said bearings must be clamped between the "locking rings Nos 1 & 2", with the spindle advanced towards the tailstock). Note that in this position there will be side (radial) play. If Myford's directions are followed carefully, the spindle will not come to any harm. If they are not perfectly clear, please check back here, clearly stating which parts of the procedure don't make sense, and why. I say this because following them incorrectly could cause damage. The spindle should never be 'stiff' to the extent you could not turn the 3 jaw chuck with gentle tangential pressure from an oily finger tip in one of the square key holes (assuming you slacken the belt change lever), and if it is that stiff, the lathe should not be run. ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:24 am ((PDT)) OK thanks. Yes I am talking about adjusting collar (num 4) and I did loosen screw 3. Yes, I did mistake the blind holes for grub screws - there was crud at the end which masked the view. I will have a go at that wrench. One other question that the manual doesn't cover is: When the spindle has been correctly adjusted should the locking rings be moved together as much as possible. Thanks again for this help. Cheers Andy ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Sep 12, 2008 5:08 am ((PDT)) Yes, the manual is unclear on this: they do mention at the beginning of the procedure that "both outer rings and spacer ... are intended ... to be locked solid together by screwed rings Nos 1 & 2" In practice this means that, having achieved the desired position using the rear screwed ring (furthest from the spindle nose), the other screwed ring should be hand tightened firmly, and then the C spanner given a smart smack with a mallet. I hope I'm wrong, but I suspect from the clearance figures you posted earlier that this adjustment will probably not provide a complete solution to your finish problem. Other posters have reported spindle radial free play getting on for 1 thou, on S7 lathes which were achieving good finishes. And ML7 lathes routinely have clearance in excess of this. I'm assuming that your "2 to 3 thou" figure was elastic deflection under bending, rather than free play. Free play on an indicator looks like very rapid pointer movement which comes to a sudden stop. To achieve further pointer movement (which represents elastic deflection) requires a major increase in force. ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Fri Sep 12, 2008 7:02 am ((PDT)) OK thanks. Yes the maximum play of 3 thou was elastic, less than 1 thou freeplay. I am taking this as a good result though - i am happy that the poor finish is not purely due to bearing wear. I will do some more work tonight and report back. Andy ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "Henry Sutherland" bunillidh2002x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Fri Sep 12, 2008 7:13 am ((PDT)) I am glad you sent this question in Andy as I was just about to pose the same question. In fact I have given up using the lathe as I just cannot get a decent finish no matter what I do. My lathe which I bought second hand is of about the same vintage. The best finish I have had to date looks like a piece of rod with a fine thread on it!! Regards, Henry ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:19 am ((PDT)) You have my sympathies. I am determined to rule out causes one by one though until I solve the issue. I guess it's a combination of problems. Andy ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sat Sep 13, 2008 2:44 am ((PDT)) Gentlemen Remember, when working through a diagnosis by a process of elimination: 1) Start with the most probable causes for the most serious problems you are seeing. 2) Causes investigated should be plausible for the exact problem, not just the broad class the problem belongs to * ( 3) Make sure you truly eliminate each cause before ticking it off and moving on. It could be worth drawing a herringbone diagram if you're really keen to put problems with finish permanently to bed. If you look carefully at your finish, you might find several different problems. However, I wouldn't recommend tackling too much just yet, so I propose you might want to adopt a more focussed and prioritised approach. You've both identified finish that looks like a miniature thread, ie problem is of a helical form. There may also be other problems when you look closely through a lens, like tearing, rippling, intermittent quality changes along the workpiece, patchiness, outcropping, moire patterns, etc, but let's just stay with the helical form, as being the most serious problem, which narrows the field of probable cause considerably. A helical form defect, if that is what we are really talking about, (rather than, say, irregular ridging) means we can put many of the issues raised in this thread to one side: vibration, for instance, and probably many of the questions of loose slides. It won't be anything to do with the chuck, and probably not the spindle. It's almost certainly caused by the tooltip, but there are a couple of related issues. Helical form defects generally imply that the geometry of the cut surface (which is not necessarily the reverse duplicate of the geometry of the tool surface) is not suitable when considered in conjunction with the rate of advance of the tool. The most likely causes are: a) cutting edge geometry not suitable, or b) cutting edge geometry not being faithfully replicated (in reverse) on the workpiece, and/or c) rate of advance too rapid for the geometry being produced. a) It only matters what the geometry is IN THE PART OF THE TOOL WHICH YOU BURY IN THE WORKPIECE, and the part of the top surface which contacts the chip. For the geometry to be correct at the very tip, this means that not only are the angles OK (and frankly, for light cuts, there is lots of latitude in some of these angles) but much more importantly the faces meet at crisp edges, ie the tool is sharp. Even a freshly ground tool with the correct angles may not be sharp. It takes much grinding to establish angles, and only a single moment of inattention or clumsiness to ruin them at the only place they matter, at which point the process needs to begin afresh. It is not possible without a lens and a bright light to see if a tool is sharp, but a HSS tool can (and should incessantly) easily be tested for sharpness by presenting the tip of the tool to your thumbnail at the correct cutting angle (ie with the mounting and clamping surfaces perpendicular to your nail). Without applying pressure, run the nail down it, as though it were a small patch on a workpiece of large diameter. The tool needs to take a shaving, if you want to get a decent finish. Such a tool should be saved for the final two cuts; use a less sublime tool for roughing, with a more rugged shape. Carbide tips will not shave your thumbnail; they work on a different principle where the chip splits apart from the parent material further upstream from the tooltip than can be achieved with HSS. This requires industrial rigidity and horsepower a Myford cannot contemplate, which makes it hard to get for us to get really good finish with them. It is usual to wipe the radius and the top face with a hone or oilstone just before taking the last cut - this must be done in such a way the cutting angles are preserved all the way to the very tip, and with the aim of producing mirror-like surfaces on the front and top of the tool at that tip, including around the cylindrical face of the radius. In order that the helical form or the cut should look smooth, either or both of two tooltip conditions must apply: 1 - the edge where the front face meets the (cutting) side face must be radiused - essentially to the largest radius you can get away with, given that larger radii are more prone to promote chatter. On the other hand, on very light cuts, (and with a 'scary sharp' tooltip) chatter is inherently much less problematic. and/or 2 - the tool must be presented so the front face is almost as close to the work at the 'heel' as at the tip. Once again, chatter being the limiting element. b) The most likely reason for the shape of the tooltip not being replicated as the 'thread form' on the job, provided it is sharp, is what's known as a 'built up edge' of the metal from the workpiece, overlaying the tool tip on the top face right to the cutting edge, and spoiling its ability to slice the workpiece. This can mean that the tool digs a deeper, pointier trench in the workpiece than its geometry would imply. However, although this is common with mild steel and almost inevitable with all but the hardest aluminium alloys, it does not happen (AFAIK, and certainly never in my experience) with brass, so it's not the root cause of your problem if you get a similar 'thread-like' finish in brass. [[Avoiding it is one of the more difficult things with a Myford, unless we avoid the materials which are prone to it when seeking a high finish, or arrange things so the cut is interrupted, or resort to a lathe file or some form of abrasive finishing after the last cut. The other fruitful avenue is judicious cutting oil selection and application: personally I hardly bother with cutting oil on the Myford, or my little mill, unless a built-up edge is possible, or when machining materials prone to severe work hardening (eg alloys with lots of nickel, such as stainless or monel, or ferrous alloys with lots of manganese).]] If you want to keep it really simple, just use RTD (a pasty substance in a tin) for all dodgy materials: it's never the best performer, but it's always tolerably good, where other options tend to be fussier. c) The feedrate needs to be appropriate, and this means suitably fine given the form of the tooltip, but does not necessarily mean as fine as possible. If you are using a large radius, say 3mm, or a very fine trailing angle, the tool may chatter more at very fine feedrates. These will in any case not be required, as these geometries can produce a relatively smooth finish without needing ultrafine feeds. Furthermore, the finer the feed, the more 'cutting miles' the tool clocks up, as the helix contains many more turns, and it may run out of sharpness even in the course of a single cut. *this is a problem when seeking advice on the internet: you tend to get generic advice which may be inapplicable to your exact situation; like any advice, but perhaps somewhat more often than in other settings, it may also be plain wrong! I hope I haven't muddied the waters, in fact I was hoping to do the opposite, because on reflecting on what you had reported, it seemed to me the investigation was taking on a broadness of scope which risked ending up like taking to a mosquito with a shotgun! However I hasten to add that this is just one opinionated person's opinion, and probably worth about as much as it costs. ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:16 am ((PDT)) gerry waclawiak wrote: > Andy, > I have posted one response, this is more an afterthought. > What sort of "mild steel" are you using, is it something you got from a known source as this can make a big difference to machining and finish. A lot of steel acquired from unknown sources can be a real PITA. > It helps considerably in set up and diagnosis if you get a leaded steel for turning practice, EN1A here in the UK > Gerry Leeds UK I definitely second Gerry's suggestion: it is just as he says: many grades of mild steel defy consistent achievement of good turned finish at any pay grade, certainly on a Myford. Do yourself a favour and get some offcuts in a range of sizes (aka freecutting mild steel). Even shop-bought HSS tools will perform much better if given a careful lick with a hand-held oilstone or diamond hone. Interpose a piece of paper and take a few practice strokes to 'hone' your technique first: you have to train your wrist and arm to follow a straight line. When honing the actual faces, grip the tool in a vice, angled for ease, sit comfortably, and try to keep your 'favoured' hand and arm in the same 'geometry' throughout. Use the other hand (preferably with dirty fingers) to wipe the face of the tool between strokes, so you can see where the shiny patches are, and make minute adjustments to the angle of your stroke so you are preserving the flatness of each face. In some situations it would be easier to grip the stone in the vice and hold the tool, but if you train yourself this way, you can lick a tool while it's still in the lathe, for that finish cut. Put a sheet of paper under it, both for better visibility, and to catch the abrasive debris. The last job is to turn the stone through 90 degrees and wipe it carefully a few strokes around the essential radius where the side face meets the front face. It is crucial that this be mirror smooth, and it may be that the tool, as sold, has no radius whatsoever. ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "youra_windsor" yourax~xxgloubiboulga.org Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:16 am ((PDT)) "andyevans_2000" wrote: > To rule out tool sharpness / geometry issues can anyone recommend a > source for a ready made simple turning tool (suitable for mild steel) > that i would then know the tool is not causing the finishing problem. > I have a bench grinder but making my own tool seems to be yet another. > variable that would be good to rule out. > Thanks in advance Andy Hi Andy. For such a case, I can heartily recommend a tangential tool holder and tool, for example such as the one sold by Eccentric Engineering in Australia: http://www.eccentricengineering.com.au/ In particular the use of a jig to get all the tool angles exactly right has proved quite an eye-opener for me - I have an ML10, as well as a rather more rigid Lorch, and the surface finish on both was significantly improved by using a tool that had the 'right' angles ready-ground for me - particularly on steel - my free-hand grinding leaves MUCH to be desired. There is also a short video of this tool in use at: http://www.bay-commedia.com/dth If you google for either 'Diamond tool holder' or 'Tangential tool holder' you will find non-commercial examples which you may prefer - I went ready made though, and I'm very happy with it indeed As normal though, YMMV... Cheers, Youra ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "Christopher Hicks" cmh21x~xxcam.ac.uk Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 12:25 am ((PDT)) "andyevans_2000" wrote: > I am still having problems with steel though. The turned surface is > very rough, almost fibrous looking with fine chips still partially > sticking to the surface. Make sure you really are trying a piece of EN1A/Pb. When I first got my lathe, I had a very frustrating time trying to get a good finish having bought a chunk of BMS from a local metal merchant, and assuming that any BMS is pretty much like any other. And the aluminium rod I bought from B&Q was truly shocking to machine. Rather like trying to turn cheddar cheese. Christopher ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:42 am ((PDT)) OK I will try that. I spent most of yesterday and have now achieved a much better finish (although not great) by spending time sharpening tools and experimenting. The finish is now OK - but every so often the chip breaks off and that leaves a slight ridge on the surface or a slight tear. I will investigate the tool holder suggestion. The steel I have is all purchased from Metal Supermarket and the metal guy who comes to York autojumble every month - I had assumed all mild steel was of the same grade. I see that Chronos stock EN1A grade steel - does anyone know of a cheaper source? Thanks to everyone for giving so much help and advice - I hope this sort of beginner type questions are not too annoying. Cheers Andy ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:09 am ((PDT)) On 15 Sep 2008 at 8:42, andyevans_2000 murmured decisively: > I see that Chronos stock EN1A grade steel - does anyone know of a > cheaper source? Dumpsters. grab any fax machines, printers, copiers. Bigger the better. Full of machined shafts, all free machining (else the CNC machines that make them would have to run slower). I turned a bit of 12mm shafting down on Saturday, to make a buffer holder for my dremel clone. Drilled the end for a M3 thread, and turned down a section to 3.2mm to fit the collet. I could feed 40 to 60 thou and feed till it limited against the tool relief, no chatter, and reasonable finish. Reduce feed rate and it in went shiny for a final pass. All lubed by chicken fat of course. David http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/ ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "grampys2002" d.wainx~xxxplornet.com Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:47 pm ((PDT)) This is a really detailed reply that mirrors a lot of my own observations and frustrations. I shall pay more attention to grinding angles in the future. A decent off hand grinder is essential and a home made rest that is adjustable is also necessary for good tool sharpening IMO. Even so I am unable to produce a finish for a bearing without resorting to emery cloth. Using a hone can dull a sharp edge unless one is very skilled or uses a jig. I take the tool to the lathe straight from a fine stone which is then finished on a green stone. One thing i would like to bring up is that in the July issue of Model Engineering Workshop there is an article on a quick release tool post. On page 36 is a photo of the tool holder with a tool described as a finishing tool. The tool is round, sharpened across the front face with front and top clearance. The tool is rotated so that it is presented at 45degrees to the work in a manner that reminds me of a skew chisel used on a wood lathe. Has anyone used such a tool and is it used to produce a fine finish on steel or I am I completely confused? Regards David ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "e4erchie" archie.mcneex~xxblueyonder.co.uk Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:26 pm ((PDT)) There is a good document here that described the tool - Finish Tool.pdf http://groups.yahoo.com/group/7x12minilathe/files/ Archie ------- Re: surface finish frustration Posted by: "Malcolm Parker-Lisberg" mparkerlisbergx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:46 am ((PDT)) I have used one for over 12 months; would not be without it; superb little tool; swarf is interesting -- a bit like wire wool. Finish off with emery cloth and the surface shines like a mirror. The only problem is it won't machine tight up to a shoulder; still we can't have everything. ------- surface finish frustration Posted by: "c j.s" callinicus1953x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:02 am ((PDT)) Nice video, but they are wrong to say or imply that the idea is in any way NEW. The earliest reference to a tool-holder of this design, that I can find so far, is 1885! Does not stop it being a wonderful idea, though. CJS ------- Surface Finish - good progress at last !!!! Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Tue Sep 23, 2008 3:03 pm ((PDT)) Thanks to all who have responded with help to my problem of poor surface finish. I have now made good progress - got some free cutting steel from Chronos which is definitely better and I am using proper neat cutting oil. Also ground an HSS knife tool from scratch rather than trying to use the old tools that came with the lathe. I did this without measuring angles just by eye so this is something I need to improve on. Surface finish on steel is now reasonable (smooth to the touch but can see a very fine thread with a magnifying glass) and I am confident I can improve this with better tool geometry. So - anyone who has lost heart - don't give up. I have spent hours messing about but it seems worth it now. Andy ------- Early style Super 7 clutch [MyMyford] Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:28 am ((PDT)) Hello. I have the early style Super 7 clutch unit. This works well, but every few hours starts slipping badly and I have to tighten the adjusting grub screw. This is buried under another grub screw in the large countershaft pulley. My question is is the slipping caused by wear in the clutch or by the adjusting screw coming loose under vibration? I am not pushing the lathe - just taking light cuts. I believe Myford don't supply parts for this clutch unit anymore - if the problem is excessive wear what are the options? Can the later clutch be used as a replacement? Thanks in advance. Andy ------- Re: Early style Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Phil Joseph" philx~xxthejosephfamily.co.uk Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 6:23 am ((PDT)) I also wondered this. Have seen the later clutch assembly etc on ebay for £150 (although not on there at present). Mine had a chunk missing out of the plate that fixes against the pulleys. best Phil ------- Re: Early style Super 7 clutch Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 6:44 am ((PDT)) Dear Andy, I also have the old style clutch and occasionally get the same problem (usually after a couple of hours though). I think it is the grub screw loosening. Since the two screws are the same pitch it is possible for the outer one to rotate with the inner. My thoughts are to set the inner correctly and then engage the clutch before tightening the outer. This might make a difference but I haven't tried it yet - I will next time I reset the clutch. I suppose a blob of paint or some such on the outer head might also work. Hope this helps. Tim ------- Re: Early style Super 7 clutch Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 6:54 am ((PDT)) I will try some thread lock on the outer screw. The manual makes a mention of a plug that fits in over both scews - mine is missing that feature though. Andy ------- Cross-slide end play [MyMyford] Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Sat Sep 20, 2008 3:45 pm ((PDT)) I have an issue with the cross-slide on my Super 7. It has some end-play - specifically I can rock it back and forth sightly with relation to the saddle but not side to side. When I do this I can see the cross-slide handle moving in and out Is this caused by cross slide feed screw wear or something else? Can anyone give advice on how to remedy this issue? Thanks Andy ------- Re: Cross-slide end play Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:36 am ((PDT)) No, this is a simple adjustment issue; refer to fig 40 on page 29 of the manual. Briefly there's a threaded adjusting collar you need to snug up. It's possible that when you do this there will be a cyclical binding when you turn the handwheel. If so, get back to us. ------- Re: Cross-slide end play Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Sun Sep 21, 2008 2:54 pm ((PDT)) Thanks for this advice. I have adjusted the collar but still get some end-play in the cross-slide. This is only in evidence when the top-slide is near to the lathe axis, which is why i am guessing localised wear in the cross-slide feedscrew from turning small diameter pieces. When turning this causes a problem: when the cutting tool is traversed along the work-piece the tool occasionally seems to get 'pulled in' and takes a deeper cut (2 or 3 thou deeper) for a while before moving out again. Andy ------- Re: Tangential tools [MyMyford] Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:59 am ((PDT)) > Hi Andy. > > For such a case, I can heartily recommend a tangential tool holder and > tool, for example such as the one sold by Eccentric Engineering in > Australia: > http://www.eccentricengineering.com.au/ > In particular the use of a jg to get all the tool angles exactly right > has proved quite an eye-opener for me - I have an ML10, as well as a > rather more rigid Lorch, and the surface finish on both was > significantly improved by using a tool that had the 'right' angles > ready-ground for me - particularly on steel - my free-hand grinding > leaves MUCH to be desired.... There is also a short video of this tool > in use at: > http://www.bay-commedia.com/dth > If you google for either 'Diamond tool holder' or 'Tangential tool > holder' you will find non-commercial examples which you may prefer - I > went ready made though, and I'm very happy with it indeed I have read of the tangential tool before and on the face of it, it sounds too good to be true, so why aren't they more frequently seen? I suppose there must be some disadvantages that I haven't spotted. Would anybody care to enlighten me? Is there a British supplier to save having to import from Australia? Cliff Coggin ------- Re: Tangential tools Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 2:40 pm ((PDT)) This product was a new one on me, although I now use the (similar but more elaborate) Ifanger system on my Myford and am a total convert. My Super 7 (purchased pre-loved) came with a couple of their holders and tips, and I was so impressed I purchased extra holders and tips (specialised for various roles) and use them for most external turning on the Myford. The tips are pretty pricey, though, being individually shaped for RH, LH turning, grooving, and threading. In the latter case, the tool can be tilted to the exact helix angle, and carbide or cobalt tips are available in 55 deg and 60 deg). However for my Willson lathe, which I just finally commissioned this weekend, I need something more substantial (and affordable!) for the occasions when carbide won't cut the mustard, and was so impressed with this product I immediately ordered it, in the biggest size (the lathe swings 17"). I'll try to remember to report back. Thanks for alerting me to this ingenious and simple system. One extra advantage of the tangential idea, particularly for woosy lathes like the 7, is that it's very easy to place a mild steel wedge under the foot of the tool to brace it directly to the cross slide. As the line of cutting force is directed mainly down the resulting column, this achieves a major improvement in rigidity (however you lost the safety overload feature which they - with some justification - tout as being beneficial for beginners). ------- Re: Tangential tools Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:47 pm ((PDT)) Cliff - There are a number of DIY designs around - for example: http://www.gadgetbuilder.com/ToolHolders.html#Tangent Do a Google search & you will no doubt find more. It isn't rocket science to figure out how to make a version that would fit a standard tool holder. Regards, Tony ------- [MyMyford] Reporting back on the Diamond toolholder system [was "Tangential tools"] Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com tr0up Date: Sun Sep 21, 2008 11:57 pm ((PDT)) As I mentioned in the previous thread, I was sufficiently impressed to order one of these. Generally speaking I remain impressed, having used it, but I have had one reservation confirmed and another is fresh. Firstly, I inferred from the dimensions given that the toolholders are smaller than I would consider appropriate for the sizes of lathes for which they are recommended: the toolholder I received was the largest they offer, and they recommend it for a 17" swing (which corresponds to the dimension of my big lathe). I normally use 25x25mm shank toolholders for this lathe; the shank on the tool I ordered and received is 14x14. It's about the same size as the smallest (series 1) Ifanger tangential toolholders I use in my Myford, for which they are exactly the right size, IMHO. Second reservation: the design has a minimum overhang (in this size) of 33mm from the edge of the topslide to the cutting tip. This is over twice the corresponding dimension for the Ifanger holder, whose shank is virtually the same size. The overhang would be fine for a big lathe, provided the shank was a more appropriately muscular in dimensions. But I'm happy to have it; it's another option which should work for some duties on the Myford, and having forked out for it I feel OK about making an improved version, with 25mm shank and using 10mm HSS toolbits, for my big lathe. The Ifanger holders are actually considerably cheaper than the Diamond (Eccentric Engineering) items of comparable dimensions, but the tips for the former are VERY pricey, especially in the big sizes. I don't mind forking out for a once-only, long lasting item like a holder, but HSS tips don't last long on a big lathe, and I like the idea of using standard square toolbits..... Returning to the Myford: I personally find both QC and 4 tool turret holders pretty frustrating, flimsy, bulky, inconvenient and inflexible on such a small lathe: I prefer to stick to individual tangential or conventional toolholders which allow the tool to be presented at centre height. I may be the only person in the world who actually likes the ex-factory Myford tool clamp, but having tried everything else I eventually found my way back to it. Apart from tangential toolholders, there's one other thing which makes this work: For custom or boring tools, I have a stack of MS packers which I have ground in 0.1mm increments (they are also graduated in length, about 1mm longer for each increment, making them easy to sort) and the thickness is number-punched on each. When I regrind a tool I measure the tip height with a height gauge, and write the necessary packer size on the top of the shank with an indelible pen. It's actually a very satisfactory and satisfying system: it's simple, everything about it is easy to keep clear of swarf; toolchanges are quick, and I can present any tool at any angle I wish with no fussing about reversing or swapping or removing tools in holders. I made a close-fitting socket with a sliding (captive) crossbar which lives on the clamping nut; prior to this, the solution was less ergonomically satisfying. ------- Question about Super 7 operation with in-spindle collets [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com tr0up Date: Sun Sep 21, 2008 11:16 pm ((PDT)) A problem with the MT2 collets on the Myford is a Faustian bargain of sorts: when you take advantage of the minimal overhang of the workpiece from the spindle, you find that the carriage is now overhanging the gap in the bed to an alarming degree. There was a thread about this some months ago, but from memory the kludge that I posted was suitable only for the ML7 (only fair, as Super 7 owners get by far the best of most Myford compromises) It involved knocking the stub spigot out of the bottom of the topslide swivel, in order to reposition the topslide leftwards, underposing an offcut of 1" square bright bar to brace the topslide base to the left wing of the carriage (the mounting surface for the travelling steady). Do any Super 7 owners have something worked out for this situation? (The topslide spigot is immovable and indispensable.) ------- Re: powertwist belt question [MyMyford] Posted by: "Ian Grimwood" grimwoodix~xxrogers.com Date: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:33 pm ((PDT)) andyevans_2000 wrote: > I am just trying to fit a z section power twist belt to the drive -> > countershaft pulleys of my Super 7. There are no fitting instructions > with the belt - I am guessing that the tails go on the inside but I am > not sure which way round the belt should go or if it matters. Can > anyone advise on this? Hello Andy.. A quick check of the Fenner Drives (makers of powertwist plus vbelts) website yields the following installation instructions: http://www.fennerdrives.com/high_performance_composite_vbelts/power twist_installation.asp which suggest tabs in. While on the subject of powerlink belts. I need to replace the belt on my Super 7 as well. Is the power twist worth the extra dollars over a regular belt? Is there an advantage to replacing both belts or does just the motor belt need to be replaced? Anyone have first hand experience? Thanks in advance Ian ------- Re: powertwist belt question Posted by: "entofficex~xxaol.com" entofficex~xxaol.com Date: Wed Sep 24, 2008 6:38 am ((PDT)) I replaced my countershaft belt with one because I had a slight wobble due to an irregularity in the belt. It completely eliminated it! I did not want to go through all the fuss of taking the countershaft apart. I then replaced the motor belt and have to say it runs smoother. Make sure you get the right size belt as they are not the same; also stay with the twist, not the link belt. ------- Re: powertwist belt question Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com tr0up Date: Wed Sep 24, 2008 2:03 pm ((PDT)) Ian. I fitted a powertwist belt for the final drive of my Super 7 and while it was very smooth running, I was unhappy with the torque transmission: because of the inherent stretchiness of the belt I couldn't take heavy cuts on large diameter work without first applying so much static tension on the belt that I was concerned at the level of constant load on the spindle bearings. I replaced it with a high quality (Optibelt) moulded-notch V belt, which is very nearly as smooth and conveys the full motor torque at much lower static tensions. Any of the top brands (eg Gates, Mitsuboshi, Fenner) would be as good, if you go for the premium product with the internal notches, and make sure it's the correct section. If you don't do heavy turning, you'd likely be perfectly happy with the powertwist product. ------- Re: powertwist belt question Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Wed Sep 24, 2008 2:42 pm ((PDT)) I got the z-section belt from Chronos and have come to the conclusion it is too wide for the motor/countershaft pulleys. It seems right for the headstock pulleys though. Either the info on www.lathes.co.uk is wrong or Chronos sent me the wrong belt section. Andy ------- bed/ways wear [MyMyford] Posted by: "rsoperuk" robincsoperx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:45 am ((PDT)) Hi All, What is a good way to quantify the wear of an ML7 bed (ways)? Mine does not have much in the way of visible wear (although don't know what it looked like originally) but on winding the saddle all the way along it gets noticeably stiffer towards the tail stock end. How much effect would the setup of the lathe (level base, careful installation bolting down etc) have on this? I know nothing about the previous life of my lathe as previous owner has been out lived by his lathe, the only observation I can make is he liked his brass - brass swarf has been removed in abundance. I'm new to this so excuse my ignorance. Regards Robin ------- Re: bed/ways wear Posted by: "furkaoberalp" a.websterx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:17 pm ((PDT)) Robin, The cause of the stiffness could be wear (always greatest near the gap), gunge, little raised burrs on the critical surfaces, or indeed twist. I suspect you would have to twist the bed a hell of a lot however. I have seen lathes with a permanently torqued bed from years bolted down to an uneven bench. Fortunately you can correct it by correct installation. Have you installed the machine and done the levelling and alignment tests yet, i.e., with the test bars? Andrew ------- Re: bed/ways wear Posted by: "John Quirke" jjquirkex~xxeircom.net Date: Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:46 pm ((PDT)) Hi All. Myford have told me that the best way to measure wear is at the front of the front shear in front of the chuck and then at the tailstock end and ideally there should be only half a thou and at most one thou. A micrometer is the preferred tool for the job and anything outside these measurements is looking for trouble. (Sometimes we must live with trouble mustn't we?) Yours in the workshop John ------- Re: bed/ways wear Posted by: "furkaoberalp" a.websterx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Wed Sep 24, 2008 6:56 pm ((PDT)) What John says sounds exactly right. Unlikely there will be any sigificant wear on the top of the shears. The sides are where the business takes place. I have not scraped a Myford bed but have scraped others to remove a thou or so from the sides. It should not be difficult if comes to that, but the process is slow because you take off just a smidgin and inspect it the next day, and repeat etc. This curbs overzealous application of the scraper. It recently worked for me when scraping down a prismatic box bed on a Cowan bench lathe. Remember that Myford can fix anything up to 15 thou which is an awful lot. I expect any wear in this case is minimal, because if the gib strip is set correctly, only one thou difference will make it bind noticeably. aw ------- Martin Cleeve Myford Lathe Mods [MyMyford] Posted by: "Garry" garrymacdonald998x~xxhotmail.com Date: Sat Oct 4, 2008 7:31 pm ((PDT)) I have been reading Martin Cleeve's book "Screwcutting in the Lathe - Workshop Practice Series #3" in which he shows several mods to the Myford lathe. At the headstock end these include backgear/tumbler reverse, gear quadrant,etc shown on pages 43 and 44. My question pertains to the drives and gear reductions behind the quadrant and tumbler reverse mechanisms (anything in the upper left quadrant of the photo shown on page 44). These I assume are some type of reduction for powering the 1/10th speed spindle (lower left of the photo on page 44) for gearcutting.....or?? I don't understand why the tumbler reverse/quadrant isn't used for gearcutting and the 1/10th speed spindle and quadrant would be. Any insight would be appreciated. I don't have a Myford but have been looking at these mods with an eye to adapting the layout to my Taig lathe. Yah I know...but it's all I've got!! Thanks Garry British Columbia Canada ------- Re: Martin Cleeve Myford Lathe Mods Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com tr0up Date: Sun Oct 5, 2008 12:13 pm ((PDT)) Garry, I think you may have misread "screwcutting" as "gearcutting". The modifications have no direct link with gearcutting; they are intended to eliminate the need to change gears on the quadrant when switching between screwcutting and ordinary turning feeds. The purpose of the slow (1/10th speed) pinion is to act as an alternative driver for the changewheels on the quadrant, when the quadrant is pivoted away from the usual driver to mesh with the slow driver. The idea is that the usual driver is used for screwcutting (fast traverse) and the slow driver is used for turning feeds (slow traverse, for which the author uses the now-archaic term 'self-act'). ------- Re: Martin Cleeve Myford Lathe Mods Posted by: "Garry" garrymacdonald998x~xxhotmail.com Date: Sun Oct 5, 2008 7:28 pm ((PDT)) OOppps! You're right - where I've written gearcutting should read as screwcutting. I'd been researching gearcutting prior to posting here and had a bit of brain fade. You've helped clarify the "two drive issue" - now if I can understand how that 1/10th drive is achieved I'll be good. The photos show a belt or o-ring drive off the Lhs of the headstock spindle and, I assume, gear reduction down to the 1/10th drive pinion. However; the photos don't show how that gear reduction is done, it's obscured by a vertical plate. Adding confusion is a gear pair located physically between the belt drive pulleys but they don't engage anything obvious. Thanks for the assist! Garry ------- Re: Martin Cleeve Myford Lathe Mods Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com tr0up Date: Mon Oct 6, 2008 1:39 am ((PDT)) Garry, I think it would be a brave home workshop guy who set out to duplicate "Cleeves'" reduction geartrain for the 1/10th speed spindle. He was a seriously gifted professional engineer who made a decent living from his heavily modified - in fact almost unrecognisable - Myford. Luckily in these times there are much easier and more affordable ways of achieving a slow speed driver. One would be to buy a DC motor with integrated reduction box, similar to those used for electric windows, wipers etc, (usually of Italian origin) and which are readily available (generally new surplus stock) on web auction sites. The going rate here is the equivalent of about 15 pounds. This has the advantage that the speed can be tuned by simply changing the voltage to the motor. I'm planning to do this when I fit a DC motor (ex treadmill) as the main drive on my Super 7; I'm using a big variac to vary the speed of this motor, and will derive an unrectified feed from this variac to feed through a small variac for the `self act' feed motor. This way, the feed (once set) will stay in rough proportion to the spindle speed, but can still be varied at will. If the `self act' feed motor is relatively powerful (it doesn't take much to drive a small lathe carriage) it can be used at fairly low voltages and hence armature speeds, which means the reduction ratio need not be huge. The two gears you point out which appear not to mesh with anything: the larger gear does in fact mesh with the first driven gear on the banjo, if you look carefully. It may be that this has some purpose related to the single tooth clutch which he designed and built for more efficient screwcutting, described in the text. Normally (on the high-class toolroom lathes on which such mechanisms were fitted) there was an arrangement which allowed reversing the carriage back to the start of the thread. He makes no mention of such an arrangement in the text, but I would not be at all surprised to find he had incorporated one. The alternative would be to reposition the carriage by hand. The single tooth clutch ensures the threading tool will `pick up' the thread in the same groove without needing to use the threading dial, and this is true even if the thread is metric and the leadscrew is imperial. David I'd like to post a photo of Cleeves' cunning arrangement, but that would put me in breach of copyright - you may find a copy of his book in a library; here in NZ it can be found in the main centres. The book is chock full of great info and ideas, so I wouldn't rule out buying a copy, perhaps second hand via the www. ------- Re: Martin Cleeve Myford Lathe Mods Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com tr0up Date: Mon Oct 6, 2008 1:58 am ((PDT)) Garry. On re-reading your first post and the caption to the Cleeves photo I think there is an ambiguity in the latter which needs clarification When he writes "the pinion ... drives any geartrain used for screwcutting when brought into mesh by lowering the quadrant" he means that the geartrain used for screwcutting can be left intact when 'self act' feedrates are needed, rather than reconfigured (usually in a more complex arrangement) to provide a deeper reduction ratio. One way of reading what he wrote would be that the train is used for screwcutting when the quadrant is lowered: in fact this is not the case; the quadrant needs to be raised for screwcutting and lowered for (turning, 'self act') feeds. He designed a quick-release clamp for the banjo to assist with speeding this up. His central premise (which I find entirely convincing) is that the main advantage of QC gearboxes is the ease of switching between turning feeds and screwcutting. However the price paid (as well as up front cost of the plant) is that the number of pitches available is hugely reduced, for a given number of gears, by "locking them up" in a gearbox as opposed to retaining the ability to freely rearrange them on a banjo. He also makes the point that (for common pitches of the same 'language' as the leadscrew) there is little time taken in setting up the simple geartrains, which will often involve only minor changes from the previous setup. It is the highly compounded geartrains needed for 'self act' feeds which take time to set up and break down. ------- Re: Martin Cleeve Myford Lathe Mods Posted by: "Garry" garrymacdonald998x~xxhotmail.com Date: Tue Oct 7, 2008 8:41 pm ((PDT)) Can't say how greatful I am to have received all this insight! More than I'd hoped for. I'll scratch my head over this info for a while but at first blush I'm tempted to revise my plans for the Taig - simply build a version of Cleeve's tumbler-reverse and change gear quadrant, maybe the dog clutch mechanism, add a leadscrew indicator, then address the 1/10th speed issue by purchasing a very slow speed motor and a few gears to strap onto the tailstock end of the leadscrew as a fine feed mechanism. Save time and money too purchase a bigger lathe....sound rational? Perhaps just cheap! I take it you're in NZ(?)- hello from your cousin in Canada - thanks again. Garry ------- Re: Martin Cleeve Myford Lathe Mods Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com tr0up Date: Wed Oct 8, 2008 12:04 am ((PDT)) Garry, Thanks for the kind words, I am as you guessed a colonial boy from down under.... Just a thought - part of the genius of Cleeve's technique of swinging the banjo to engage with the slow speed drive is that this takes care of two issues: 1) disengaging the spindle drive from the changegear train (a minor issue, since the tumbler cluster can handle this; 2) avoiding the need to drive the changewheels from the 'wrong' ie driven end, which is more important: particularly if the train happens to be set for a fine pitch, it will take a lot of force to drive it as a 'step up' rather than step down. If you can possibly arrange room, I would put your slow speed drive in a similar position to that shown in Cleeve's layout. ------- Re: tailstock setover [MyMyford] Posted by: "Karen Gallagher" karengx~xxa1.com.au Date: Wed Oct 8, 2008 2:56 pm ((PDT)) "andyevans_2000" wrote: > I am a bit puzzled on how to setover the tailstock on my Super 7. Do i > need to adjust both screws (front and back of tailstock body) at the > same time or just adjust 1? Regards Andy Both screws. You slacken one side, tighten the other to move the body over. When you're finished, make sure both screws are tight else the body will still be able to move. Don't offset it by too much, or all sorts of problems come into play, like the job walking out of the chuck. For serious taper turning I find you can't beat the correct taper turning attachment. It's a bit of a pain to reset back to centre too - not hard, just tedious. Karen ------- Re: tailstock setover Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com tr0up Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 12:01 am ((PDT)) Just one thing I'd take issue with, Karen: traditionally it has not been the practice to offset the tailstock when a chuck (or collet) is in use. For small offsets, the work can run between conventional centres - for larger offsets it was traditional to use 'ball centres'. These are rare and expensive, but a good solution is to make a pair of 'female centres' which are basically Morse Taper arbors, centre drilled (the beauty of this approach is that neither need be hard). Then select a pair of bearing balls of suitable size, which can be trapped between the female centres in the lathe and the centres drilled into the ends of the workpiece. Apply some anti-scuffing paste when assembling and you're golden. Check as the temperature rises that the engagement pressure is still OK. To hold one end of the workpiece parallel to the spindle axis when the tailstock is offset would be asking for trouble, even possibly springing the chuck or collet, unless the work is really flexible. Even in this case, the result will not be truly conical, particularly near the headstock. Furthermore if the work IS that flexible, it'll be a nightmare getting it to stand up to the cutter. It's an interesting idea though, for producing a transition from parallel to tapered, (provided the nature of the transition is not dimensionally critical), perhaps using a toolpost grinder to keep the cutting force down. One way to avoid having to fiddle with tailstock adjusters is to fit a boring head into the tailstock with the dovetail lying horizontally, if you have one with a suitable MT shank. You can fit a simple, purpose- built female centre in it, and proceed as above. ------- Re: tailstock setover Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:56 am ((PDT)) Thanks for this advice. I am trying to turn a small taper of 0.010" per foot and am turning between centres. I have tried setting over the tailstock by placing a DTI against the barrel and locking the tailstock slide and barrel -- I tried to move the tailstock backwards (away from the front) by loosening the rear screw and tightening the front screw. However, the results were confusing - the tailstock actually moved forwards. Do the screws push the tailstock away or pull it when tightened? Is there a simpler way to tackle it? I don't want to invest in a taper turning attachment at this stage. Regards Andy ------- Re: tailstock setover Posted by: "Frank Chadwick" fr4nk.chadwickx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:41 am ((PDT)) Andy, It works as you found it does. The lower tailstock base is fixed relative to the bed. You are moving the upper tailstock body in and out sideways. So when you tighten the front screw it pushes the upper body of the t/stock out towards you. Imagine the 2 screws each pushing against a central immovable web. When both screws are tight nothing moves. To move back, loosen the front screw and tighten the rear one and vice versa. Frank C. ------- topslide/cross slide play [MyMyford] Posted by: "rsoperuk" robincsoperx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:30 pm ((PDT)) Hi - this should be a simple one to answer (but not for me!) My (ML7) top and cross slide ball handles have about 1/4 turn of play in them. By this I mean if you change direction you are rotating the ball handles there is a about 1/4 turn or free play before any movement of the slide takes place. Is this normal? If not how is it adjusted out? Have to admit that so far it has not caused me any problems but I've only done really basic stuff. Thanks & Regards Rob ------- Re: topslide/cross slide play Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:37 pm ((PDT)) Hold the dial still with an open ended spanner and turn the ball handle anti clockwise. Turn the dial whilst holding the feedscrew stationary until the endfloat is minimal. Hold the dial still and lock with the ball handle. You might need to repeat this until you get the feel of how much endfloat is acceptable to give a free turning screw without noticeable backlash. Typically 1 thou is achievable. hth Bob ------- Re: topslide/cross slide play Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:42 pm ((PDT)) You can adjust the end float -- the ball handles act as a locknut, and the graduated dial has a couple of spanner flats. You hold the dial still with a spanner & unscrew the ball handles; you can then take up the slack and re-tighten the ball handles to lock. Not as easy as it sounds because as you lock the ball handles, you tend to also lock up the bearings, so getting it "just right" is a royal pain in the rear. A better solution is to fit the thrust bearing set sold by Arc Eurotrade, see: http://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/Catalogue/Machines-Accessories/Lathe-Ac cessories/Myford-ML7-Cross-Slide-Bearings-Set It needs a minimal amount of machining to the bearing bracket, but the result is zero backlash (the bearings are much more tolerant of adjustment) and silky smooth operation. A couple of hours very much worth spending for the improvement in the way the cross slide works. Regards, Tony ------- Re: topslide/cross slide play Posted by: "rsoperuk" robincsoperx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:53 am ((PDT)) Thanks for the replies on this, I had a look last night. I can see what you mean about it being difficult to adjust. How so you suggest holding the feedscrews, as the dials seem quite snug and don't rotate freely on the screw? Is using a block of wood to jam the slide movement and so screw movement (in the appropriate direction) the way to go? Just a little concerned this may end up bending something. I might look at replacing the dials as they are difficult to read and look to be a little frilly round the edges. Thanks & Regards Rob ------- Re: topslide/cross slide play Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:22 am ((PDT)) I wouldn't jam the linear movement -- the feed nut is not bronze, but a soft alloy (see below). You can take the screw subassembly right out, complete with thrust bracket, feed handle, etc., just by removing the two csk screws holding the feed nut to the carriage, as well as the two capscrews holding the bracket. The screw can then be held in soft jaws in a vice for adjustment of the end play. Note that while the 0.001" mentioned in another post is certainly achievable for the play in the thrust bracket (as measured by a DTI), there will be considerably more total backlash when reassembled because of clearance of the feedscrew in the Mazak (magnesium, zinc aluminium and kupfer, ie copper - diecast) nut. If you want to save some dosh, you can tidy up the ML7 dials by turning a skim off the back to remove the frilliness, and by judicious application of contrasting paint colors to the background and to the raised graduations and numerals. ------- Re: topslide/cross slide play Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:50 am ((PDT)) I'd agree -- removing the bracket/screw assembly is a better option than jamming the screw. With the Arc Eurotrade thrust bearing conversion I mentioned earlier in this thread, you can achieve zero end float on the bearing, because the roller thrust bearings will tolerate a bit of pre-load while maintaining free operation, whereas the original plain bearing will not. I treated my ML7 to a new feedscrew and feed nut at the same time as I fitted the thrust bearings, and the combination gives minimal backlash. The old style "frilly" cast dials are rubbish and are hard to read at the best of times -- well worth even the inflated Myford price for one of the new-style cylindrical steel dials. Regards, Tony ------- Re: topslide/cross slide play Posted by: "andyevans_2000" andyevans_2000x~xxyahoo.ie Date: Fri Oct 17, 2008 6:29 am ((PDT)) Does this advice apply to the Super 7 as well as the ML7? Regards Andy ------- Re: topslide/cross slide play Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:04 pm ((PDT)) Andy. The Super 7 is a different design, much easier to adjust. There's a threaded collar inside the thrust bracket which has a grub screw to lock it: loosen this and use the allen key to turn the collar until the endplay is suitably minimal, then lock the grubscrew again. I incorporated a couple of needle roller thrusts in my Super 7 cross feed bracket and a swarf shroud (the whole thing loosely based on GHT's design) and it certainly makes it even more of a delight than the Super 7 -- in my case I was remachining the bracket in any case because it had been butchered by a previous owner (in contrast with the rest of the lathe which was in very good shape). I don't know that I would put this modification high on a priority list in a practical sense: I don't think you'll notice any difference in the accuracy of work you turn, or the time it takes, but if you enjoy the feel of a finely tuned machine movement, it's definitely worthwhile. Needle roller thrusts and the washers which go with them are highly affordable, if you buy them from a wholesale bearing supplier. ------- Re: topslide/cross slide play Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Sat Oct 18, 2008 1:37 pm ((PDT)) Peter wrote: > Hi TrOup, > I was waiting for Arc Euro Trade to bring out a kit for the Super 7 > but it seems a lost cause, so I am interested in your solution. > Where did you get the needle rollers from and what size do they need > to be? Forgive my ignorance but who is GHT and where do I find his > design? GHT = Geo H Thomas, who wrote for Model Engineer magazine. Most of his best writings about his Myford 7 series mods are gathered together into the masterly 'Model Engineer's Workshop Manual' which is crammed full of gorgeous drawings of superbly conceived and executed modifications, including the subject of this query. I'm away from home base so I can't tell you what needle roller thrusts I used, but GHT recommendations (part nos are probably out of date bu the suppliers should have historic cross references -- INA is the brand) are Old (pre power cross feed) Super 7s: use INA TC815 with 2 washers TWA818 package dimensions: 1/2" bore, 0.927" OD, 0.140" thick New Super 7s: use INA AXK1528 with 2 washers AS1528 package dimensions: 15mm ID, 28 OD, 4 thick I would have just sourced whatever I could find locally which fitted the ID and OD constraints. As I'm in New Zealand, it may not be helpful to know which industrial bearing wholesaler I dealt with; a hunt through the yellow pages should throw up some local options. Failing, that, I would try Hemingway kits if you're in the UK: GHT had an arrangement with them to stock these items. ------- Backgear allen key size. [MyMyford] Posted by: "zitman2008" imarshallx~xxrocketmail.com Date: Fri Oct 24, 2008 5:11 am ((PDT)) I have tried to search for this answer but haven't found anything. What size allen key do I need to undo the backgear thingy? Ta Z ------- Re: Backgear allen key size. Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Fri Oct 24, 2008 2:31 pm ((PDT)) The AF hex size is 5/32" (4mm will work also). The key supplied with the lathe has an included angle at the bend of 115 degrees, rather than the usual 90. This makes it somewhat easier to use but would be very difficult to achieve in the home shop, and is not necessary. The short leg is very short, about 7mm (measured back to the virtual sharp intersection of the central axis of the hex of the long leg). This modification is essential. The following instructions do not imply any assumptions about your level of experience but are appended for the benefit of anyone who might come across this thread: One of the relatively new and miraculously useful (slightly flexible) 1mm thick cutoff wheels (whether in an angle grinder or bench grinder or pneumatic tool) will take care of shortening the short leg, failing which, grind a notch a few mm further away, taking care not to get so hot as to draw the temper (let it cool whenever it starts to sizzle spit). Make the notch deeper until you can snap off the unneeded piece when it is gripped in a vice. Grind back to a squared off and deburred end. ------- Re: Backgear allen key size. Posted by: "peterscott147" peterx~xxpjscott.freeserve.co.uk Date: Sat Oct 25, 2008 12:18 am ((PDT)) I found that an excellent tool for cutting an allen key to length is a mini-drill fittted with a diamond slitting saw. After cutting the working end of the allen key to length I then fitted a some 'rubber' tubing over the handle end of the key. This makes it much easier to hold and use. Peter ------- Thread Cutting [MyMyford] Posted by: "james.frankland" james.franklandx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Oct 27, 2008 6:23 am ((PDT)) Hi Guys. Can anyone give me some advice on thread cutting and how to set up my ML7 for this. I do have the manual, but im a bit confused as to which gears to put where. For example, it says "In the third column under the heading DRIVER is listed a number of teeth in the change wheel which should be placed on teh tumbler reverse stud". I assume this means it goes onto part number 4 on fig 35 p25. ? And also what about the actual speed of the chuck or does that not make any difference, as long as it's quite slow? I need to cut a BSP pipe thread to a piece of stainless steel bar. Also, i need to use the power feed very slow at 640rpm. It's set up at the moment but it runs along too fast at this speed. Is their a "beginners guide to thread cutting" anywhere? Many thanks James ------- Re: Thread Cutting Posted by: "Pierre EHLY" pierreehlyx~xxorange.fr Date: Mon Oct 27, 2008 8:45 am ((PDT)) Hi James, That's simple eg: 14-Tpi 1_ remove all wheels & studs 2_ from the table select 14-Tpi (20, ID-70, 35_(LS), fig-1 ( 3 wheels) 3- install 35 wheel on the Lead-Screw (fig-1 item 4) use a smaler gear as sapcer behind the 35 gear 4- install 70 wheel on the stud & the stud in the upper part of the change gear quadrant (Y) use a smaler gear as sapcer behind the 70 gear slide the stud & gears assy to the 35 gear & lock it 5- install 20 wheel on the tumbler cluster gear (item 4-fig35 /item 2 fig 1); rotate the change gear quadrant up to contact the 20 gear; lock the quadrant 6- slect the lowest speed (back-gear) available 7- rotate the top slide to the half (1/2) of the thread angle 8- intall the tool a center & Perpendicular to work check also work installation (overhang & chuck, tail stock ...) work diameter is idealy 0,01"/0,02" lower as required 9- Lubricate the work (WD40 is a water displacer not a good lubricant) 10- with the cross slide set the tool tip just touching the rotating work Zero the dial or chalk mark it 11- zero also the top slide 12- move the saddle on the work end 13- Is will be necessary to take several cut with the top slide, say 0,01" and the remaning as finish cut So take a cut of 0,01" 14- by reaching the end withdraw the tool with your rh hand and switch the power off with the lh hand 15- KEEP THE LEAD_SCREW ENGAGED 16- reverse the motor rotation and stop at the work end if no reverse is available simply rotate the motor/countershaft pulley by hand 17- lubricate the work again 18- continue 13 to 17 until the tread deep is reached (by metric & Unc/Unf the deep equal the pitch only if the top slide is set over ) 19- does not remove the work from the chuck to test the fit on the nut Complicated to read, imagine, and write but with little training is becoming easy. An inexpansive training can be done with water pipe (nuts available). Otherwise in the group in the link section there is a link for SB lathes http://wewilliams.net/SBLibrary.htm select ho to cut thread on the lathe (8M) On this site you will finding several FREE initiation manuals (for SB lathe / basically the same except for gears arrangement &...)+ Brgds Pierre ------- Re: Thread Cutting Posted by: "tr0up" a.troupx~xxemail.com Date: Tue Oct 28, 2008 12:12 am ((PDT)) I'd add just one or two things (there's no limit to how much detail one could go into, and my hat is off to Pierre (chapeau, mon vieux! ) for such a comprehensive post. The items I want to add will not make any diff in the short term, but if you plan to keep your ML7 for a while, or sell it for a decent price, they will pay off... 1) Thoroughly clean the toothspaces of all change gears, ideally whenever you take them off -- an old toothbrush, and a bit of kero works a treat (I keep the hole in the spindle plugged to limit swarf accessing them, but they still get the occasional chip - if stored clean, they'll go back on clean even if the frenzy is on you). If necessary, pick any chips out with a sharp scriber tip -- they will be rolled into the cast iron. It's not unheard of for second hand lathes still to have the Cosmoline (or whatever evil goo they use -- the rust protection from the factory) on many if not most of the changewheels. I presume this is because (at least down under) many home workshop lathes seem not to have been used for much threading. It's crucial to get this stuff off: easier said than done in the case of my recently acquired Super 7: it's older than I am, made the same year QE#2 took the British throne and Ed Hilary and Tenzing climbed that peak in Nepal. And most of the changewheels had evidently never been used, or even cleaned. 2) Grease the gears as you put them back on (this is controversial: Myford suggest this to keep noise down, and noise always goes hand in hand with wear, but some say not to, as grease does help any chips to stick; my philosophy is to make sure no chips get near them). I use a moly disulphide gear grease which is not sticky. 3) Most important: DO NOT set ANY of the gears up at a meshing distance which does not leave some rotational lash or free play. The amount of lash is something you quickly get used to simply by feel, but you can get an idea from holding one of the gears on the tumbler bracket (which reverses the feed direction) and wiggling the other. (This is how you check lash between any pair of gears in the general case.) Or you could use a thickness of paper as a limit gauge between mating teeth: some say newspaper (~0.07mm) but I tend to go for about 0.1mm myself, which is probably photocopy paper. This will cause no deleterious impact on thread quality: one of the reasons involute profiles are used for gears is so they will still deliver a constant, unvarying rotational output despite meshing at increased center distance, up to the extreme situation where the radius on the tips starts to contact the flank (which you can feel and hear as you spin the train -- it sounds like a boy holding a stick out while walking along a corrugated steel fence.) Furthermore when threading, the accumulated backlash through the changewheel train, while it may seem significant, is always taken up in the same direction. If, on the other hand, you set the gears up in close mesh, any geometrical inaccuracies, thermal expansion, or (heaven forbid) ingress of foreign matter, will immediately cause local overloading of the tooth flanks. 3) If using water pipe (or similar, eg cold rolled, or "black" steel bar) for any purpose, PLEASE don't use your self centering chuck! A 4 jaw independent chuck can handle the unfair stresses of gripping something which is neither round nor parallel ... a 3 jaw chuck will not enjoy this challenge, and over time will let you know... If you don't have a 4 jaw independent chuck, you could set up the pipe between centres and skim it true before submitting it to the tender mercies of your only chuck. For help with setting up a fine feed (I wouldn't try turning stainless on a Myford at 640 rpm, BTW). It's similar to screwcutting, but with more gears involved. It will look like the photo on p 25 (as printed, not the pdf page #) of the manual under "Files" on this site. In these compound gear trains, every gear other than the first and last of the train (the 'train' being the gears whose sizes are listed in the chart) is twinned up with another, not as simple spacers but in such a disposition that each small gear drives a large gear on the next stud. If this doesn't provide sufficient guidance, try getting hold of one or more of the superb books which can be found new or used on the internet, such as "The Amateur's Lathe" by Sparey. It might be difficult getting guidance from a forum like this until you've got the terminology and basic concepts straight in your mind. Now, having postponed doing the things I should be doing in favour of the things I enjoy, it's back to calculating my GST return (=VAT) ... sigh ... ------- Got this with my Super 7 ??? [MyMyford] Posted by: "lseacombe" leex~xxseacombe.plus.com Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 4:25 am ((PST)) Hi all. This is my first post I have recently become the proud owner of a 1961 Super 7. I am completely new to lathe work but I'm willing to learn. Amongst the bits I got with it is I think a quick release collet thingy but I've no idea how to use it or where it fits or even if it's complete... It also has about 5 collets. I have added a picture in the Photos section under My Super 7. Please can anyone help, I bow to your knowledge and help if possible... Pretty Please! Lee ------- Re: Got this with my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "blunozer2000" edjordanx~xxbwr.eastlink.ca Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 1:17 pm ((PST)) Lucky you! What you have is a lever operated collet chuck, Myford part number 20/065. Unfortunately, Myford no longer offer it, and may not even supply collets for it. It is a great device for quickly changing workpieces as you simply stop the spindle, pull the lever, and out pops the workpiece. To mount it on your machine, first remove the chuck :>) Now remove the bolt that is seen running from 11 o'clock to 5 o'clock at the lower left in your photo, and remove the forked clevis from the rest of the assembly. Having removed the chuck you will see a tapped hole, at the same height as the spindle, just to the rear of it, in the headstock. Screw the clevis into this hole, but don't tighten the locknut. Now thread the central, rotating part of the collet chuck assembly onto the spindle nose. You should have a C-wrench to tighten it. Now connect the clevis behind the spindle to the tab that you removed it from. Tighten the locknut on the clevis and the bolt that goes through the clevis and the tab. If there is a collet in the chuck, moving the lever back and forth tightens or loosens the grip on the workpiece. To change collets, unscrew the nosepiece of the chuck. It has a detent in it, and you needn't always tighten the nosepiece completely when you change collets. Leaving it a bit "loose" give a very slight adjustability of the size of work the collet will grip (but not much!). The bad news about this wonderful piece of kit is that Myford don't seem to support it anymore, and the collets are, I think, totally proprietory to them. At least, I've never been able to find any on that great source of everything, eBay! You may be luckier, if you are in the UK. Good luck, and enjoy what you have bought. Ed Jordan Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, Canada ------- Re: Got this with my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "Karen Gallagher" karengx~xxa1.com.au Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 1:31 pm ((PST)) Yes, that's a lever operated collet chuck. Remove any other chuck you have mounted, and behind the spindle nose (ie towards the motor) there should be a socket for it to screw into. Turn the entire chuck to mount the unit; when it's lined up, tighten the lock nut to secure it. There should be a manual available somewhere. Collets come in increments by 1/64" up to 5/8", plus I think the metric once come in .5mm sizes. Only use stock that's within a few thou up or down of the stated size. Collets are quite expensive, took me many years before I acquired a full set. I also got Hardinge to make me a one-off (3/4" with a 5/8" throat) a long time ago for a special job. These chucks are extremely accurate & hold small stock very tightly. Great for when you are making very small components, and for threading tiny bolts (in conjunction with a hand-crank). Karen ------- Re: Got this with my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "lseacombe" leex~xxseacombe.plus.com Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 4:54 pm ((PST)) Thank you for the reply, it's a shame Myford don't supply the collets anymore I'll keep trying on Ebay... Ok forgive me but I did say I was new to this. I have had a look on the net but I can't find out how to remove the chuck. Do I need to chock a gear wheel and which way does it turn to undo clockwise or counter clockwise? ------- Re: Got this with my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 5:10 pm ((PST)) I would try putting the chuck key in and giving it a sharp rap with a block of wood. If that doesn't start it to loosen, chock a gear and try again. The chuck unscrews counterclockwise (like a regular right-hand screw thread) ... such that the normal turning operation tends to tighten rather than loosen the chuck. ------ Re: Got this with my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 6:16 pm ((PST)) There is a spindle lock at the back-left end of the headstock immediately behind the spindle. It is actuated with a pin that extends through the back of the change gear cover. Press the pin towards the chuck and slowly rotate the chuck until the lock is seated. ------- Re: Got this with my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "c j.s" callinicus1953x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 5:21 pm ((PST)) Hi All, The above is true, except for the latest Myfords. These tricky little devils have a screw which locks the chucks on, so they can run backwards without the chuck unscrewing. Don't ask how I know!! cjs ------- Re: motor size? [MyMyford] Posted by: "David Wain" d.wainx~xxxplornet.com Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:21 pm ((PST)) John, As some one who has shied away from converting my ML7 to 3ph with an inverter because of a lack of electrical knowledge, I would appreciate it if you could share your knowledge on the subject. I live on the Canadian side of the pond so all equipment would have to be purchased here. My immediate questions is what type/size of motor, size of inverter and controller. Your help would be appreciated. David W. Canada ------- Re: motor size? Posted by: "John Mandell" jmandell2x~xxpointech.com Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:58 pm ((PST)) I just ordered a 3-ph motor & VFD ("AC Drives") from http://www.factorymation.com/ They seemed to have the best prices. I'll be happy to report on their quality & service. I got a unit that has 110V input, 1/2hp VFD (TECO FM50) for $105. The corresponding motor (230V) was $148. Both new units. I am planning this pair for my band saw, but if it works well, I'll get a similar unit for my Myford. (My Myford manual recommends 1/3hp x~xx 3-ph, or 1/2hp x~xx single phase.) I have a Hitachi VFD on my milling machine and it's wonderful! It was not difficult to wire it up, but I got a bit overboard on the remote control panel! Cheers, John Austin, TX ------- Re: motor size? Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:13 pm ((PST)) I am in Toronto and think that you are making a mistake by insisting that the items be purchased here. I would love to purchase locally but in my experience Canadian distributors tend to be overpriced, not customer friendly, not have inventory and know little about their products. I purchased my FM50 VFD from a US supplier (http://www.factorymation.com) and the motor from Craigslist. Insist that they ship via USPS or UPS Overnight in order to avoid the UPS ripoff for "handling charges". Pardon my rant! For your original question I would purchase whatever is cheap. A FM50 VFD is suitable (I have a 1hp unit) and most any 1/2 or 3/4 hp NEMA 56-frame 3-phase motor. If buying new I would get an "inverter duty" motor. Where in Canada are you located? ------- Re: motor size? Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 2:09 pm ((PST)) John, could you point me at the FM50 model that you ordered? The only one I can find with that description is priced at $223. Thanks ------- Re: motor size? Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 2:12 pm ((PST)) See http://www.factorymation.com/s.nl/sc.2/category.30/.f The 0.5hp is $105 and the 1.0hp is $120. ------- Re: motor size? Posted by: "John Quirke" jjquirkex~xxeircom.net Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:47 pm ((PST)) Hi David, I use a .75KW Omron Sysdrive inverter operating a 1/2hp original myford 3 phase motor. I use a .75Kw unit as it cost me £100 complete with a kit of parts to make up a control box on the front of the lathe. A friend (a sparkey) advised me to always use a higher rated unit than the equivalent motor size rather than use one which is running at 100% of its output all the time and the cost difference is minimal. You can view the owners manual for such an inverter at http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~mleuten/MagneticBearings/Manuals/SysDr ive.3G3JV.pdf Look at the manual but do not be overwhelmed by it, you can use it to give you a basic overview or delve deeply if that is your wish. Several other types of inverter are on the market and are equally as good, this just happens to be the one I use. I also attach a photo of my set up on my Super 7 . The inverter is visible on the wall behind to the top and left. Below that is a box with a contactor that turns on the unit. I incorporated the original forward / reverse switch on the front panel to control the forward / reverse of the inverter and the large rotary knob on the left gives me control of the speed. The inverter can go up to 120 cycles per second but I have limited it to 80 and this is plenty for this type of work and is unlikely to stress the motor too much. The mandatory red button on the front kills all when hit, and hopefully I will never have to use it in anger. By the way the dual power sockets on the front was one of the most sensible things I did (no more extension leads trailing across the floor). The he black horizontal item at the top of the picture is a roller blind which pulls out and down over the lathe to protect it from the dust and grit of the workshop when not in use. I hope this is of some help to you and if more info is required then just ask. Yours in the workshop John ------- Re: motor size - using 3 phase Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:02 am ((PST)) I'm in Mississauga and I'll certainly pardon the rant about UPS - I've ranted a lot myself having tripped over that outfit many years ago. But what's "UPS Overnight" and how does it differ from regular UPS in that respect? I'm not familiar with it myself. Thanks to you and John for the Factorymation site reference. I'm in the process of restoring an old ML7. It came with a separate motor which the seller swore was the one that had been fitted (he had several motors of various types). It's a GE 110V single phase 1/2HP. Problem is, the access panel to the connections is missing, the connections are unlabeled and I have no existing wiring to guide me. A Google search for the motor (P/N 136A3685P3) has been fruitless (if anyone has any info on this motor, please let me know). On top of that the controller box cover is missing and I have no guidance of the wiring for that either. I might have to end up taking the whole lot to a motor shop and having them sort it out for me but I've no idea what it would cost. Reading the discussion here, I might be farther ahead to junk what I have and get the VFD & 3-Ph motor. If I did that, would it replace everything (the controller box as well as the motor) ... or do I still need some kind of controller circuitry? ------- Re: motor size - using 3 phase Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:17 am ((PST)) UPS has several speeds of service including "standard" (perhaps a week to deliver) and "overnight" (as you might guess, delivery tomorrow morning). With standard they charge various fees for "customs clearance", "handling", "duty prepayment", etc. With an inexpensive item such as a VFD these charges are often about $30-50. Their fees are in addition to normal shipping charges plus applicable taxes. If shipped overnight they do not charge the special fees plus you get the item at your door tomorrow. Overnight shipping is often less than the sum of shipping plus fees for "standard" delivery *and* you get the rapid delivery. Your results may vary but that has been my recent experience. I assume that by "controller" you mean the normal Fwd/Stop/Rev drum switch that is in a small metal box with a lever/knob on top. If so, I wired my VFD so that the switch performs the normal functions. In addition, I wired a 5-turn variable resistor to control the speed. ------- Re: motor size - using 3 phase Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 5:51 pm ((PST)) Actually, no I don't have thatdrum switch at all. I have a metal box about 8 x 7 x 3 missing the front panel. Inside is device that might be a relay or contacter plus a dual push-button (start/stop) switch and another device which I believe may be overload cutout/reset switch. Ganged to the side of this box is another smaller, box containing a main on/off switch. None of this seems to show up in any Myford literature that I've seen (not that my experience is anything like exhuastive) so perhaps it was added locally somewhere down the line. I don't know the history of the machine. I was kind of hoping that a VFD/3-Ph motor would allow me to just toss this box altogether. If it does it would likely actually save me money in the long run, not to mention the hassle. ------- Re: motor size - using 3 phase Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 7:44 pm ((PST)) It is likely that you can ditch your control box. Most VFDs allow start/stop, speed selection and rotation direction from their front panel (the TECO FM50, for example, has a keypad that allows you to do everything). Unfortunately it is not particularly convenient to use. At a minimum you will probably want a small box with a few switches -- start, direction and emergency stop -- plus a variable resistor to vary the speed. You can probably get the necessary good quality switches, resistor and box for less than $20 if you shop at your local surplus electronics stores. I believe that you said that you were in Mississauga so you might want to visit Active Surplus at 347 Queen West in Toronto. ------- Collet selection [MyMyford] Posted by: "Tavewa365" yahoox~xxtavewa.freeserve.co.uk Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:09 pm ((PST)) Hello, this is my first post to My Myford, I have been lurking for a couple of days. I am the proud owner of a 1958 Super 7, with a cone clutch and drip feed oiler. I am looking to get a set of collets for more accurate work holding. I am torn between an ER32 set, for their capacity, and a Myford set, for their Myfordness. The other thing to add is that I am hoping to use the same set on my Fobco Universal, which is a drilling machine set up for light milling duties. It has the same 1 1/8 12TPI Myford spindle thread to allow collets to be used to hold milling cutters. The Fobco will not allow a drawbar to pass, so the ER32 with Myford adaptor, or a Myford set should work. Do the group members have any opinions on ER vs. Myford? The Myford ones look a bit fiddly, not to mention expensive. If I was to go the ER route, would the members recommend a set from RDG, Chronos or somewhere else? Does anyone have any opinions on the accuracy of the various offerings. ------- Re: Collet selection Posted by: "jhnsltr" jhnsltrx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 1:32 pm ((PST)) Hello, I went through this process a short while ago. I've ended up with both Myford collets (I've had these a while, long before the ER types were as commonly available as they are now) and ER25. The Myford collets are good with minimal overhang but are expensive and limited to one particular size only for each collet and a maximum of 1/2". They fit into the collet nose piece in a similar way to the ER collets and their closing nut. The ER collets have a range of 1mm or so for each collet and so are much more versatile in this respect. I bought a flange mount chuck from Chester Uk and fitted it to a back plate from Chronos based solely on cost. So I've ended up with a bit more overhang than buying a direct screw mount like the chucks from RDG but at half the cost. I went for the ER25 range because of the smaller diameter end of the range. Most suppliers list 15 collets in the range but if you look at ArcEuro Trade's website they list 18 collets that go down to a smaller diameter. However the ER 32 does have a bigger maximum size. Both the ER25 and ER32 largest diameters exceed the through capacity of the Myford Headstock. Having used both types I much prefer the flexibility of the ER collets and because of the type and size of the work I do am satisfied with the ER25 range. The lack of stiffness because of the increased overhang has not show to be aproblem either. An additinal benefit is I have an adapter with a 2MT shank that enables me to use them in either my drilling machine or milling machine. Albeit with caution because as good as they are, deadlock collets they aint! If I were starting again I'd definitely go down the ER route and with the ER 25 sizes and I'd buy the collets (a full set of 18 at one go) from Arc Euro and the flange chuck from Chester and either make or buy a back plate at best cost. I did consider making a screw on dedicated ER25 chuck but felt by the time I'd bought a closing nut and a spanner and done the work I was no better off. Hope that this has helped. Best of luck with the deliberations. ------- Re: Collet selection Posted by: "gordon_frnch" gordon-frenchx~xxnetzero.net Date: Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:41 am ((PST)) I guess that I would be the one to ask because I have several different collet sets that are useful on Myford lathes. First choise would be to get and fit a 5C collet chuck. The act of fitting it to the spindle, when properly done, assures accuracy of the workholding. Until recently the tool merchants have had both Chucks and cheap sets of 5C collets that are for the most part accurately made and are quite serviceable. I have even purchased square and hex collets in 5/16 and 1/4 inch sizes for their general usefullness. The 5C is my favorite. Second would be 2 Morse taper collets. They have proved to be cheap and very useful. Particularly if you have any other 2 MT spindles in the shop. Generally you will not find any make that are not sufficently accurate to give good service. I have and use many of them. Third is ER25. I don't think that this system is for those on a budget. I was bequeathed a set of collets with a 2 MT holder that I found very useful in a mill I also have, so I recently bought an adapter for the Myford spindle nose from Chronos. The fitting difficulties are recounted in a previous message in this forum. The nose piece shipped with the holder makes use very fiddling. The cost is quite high, but when properly fitted to the spindle the ER25 spring collet system is very accurate. It IS an item to be favored by the Myford tool collector. Lastly the Myford collet set. I have two collet closers; one for my super 7 and another for my C7. I have enough collets (15 or so) to get by, but I don't know where or how I would get any for any special use that would arise. I would not advise anyone starting out to even fool with the Myford collets because of the fitting time required to set it up for use. And not being able to find a viable supply of the collets themselves. I need to also mention that I have a 6 jaw scroll chuck that comes pretty close to being like a collet chuck. It is extremely easy to set up and use, and if I had no other accurate means of holding cylindrical stock, it would be my first choice for general use. Gordon French, Roseburg, Oregon ------- Re: Collet selection Posted by: "tobybishopx~xxaol.com" tobybishopx~xxaol.com Date: Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:57 am ((PST)) Hi All, just a reminder that collet sets and chucks can be bought from http://stores.ebay.co.uk/CTC-Tools from Hong Kong. Use the "search within site" to find what you're after. You have to be prepared to wait a few weeks for the post to arrive but at these prices I was very happy with my ER25 set and MT2 chuck for my DW mill and of course it also fits the 7 series spindle. The chuck has an M10 thread so I needed to make a new drawbar but that wasn't a problem. There have been several others who expressed the same positive opinion about items from this supplier. I've not yet seen any negative comments here. As usual with such comments, I've no connection other than as a satisfied customer, Toby ------- Taper attachment [MyMyford] Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Fri Nov 14, 2008 10:39 am ((PST)) I have recently purchased a taper attachment for my S7. The mounting area at the back of the lathe is painted (it appears to be factory applied). Should I attempt to remove the paint or simply mount the taper unit on top of the paint or...? Has anyone plans for attaching a dial indicator to the taper unit to assist with setup? I seem to recall something in MEW but can't find it now. ------- Re: Taper attachment Posted by: "Rich Dean" toolman8x~xxcopper.net Date: Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:23 pm ((PST)) Ken, Paint should be no problem unless it has trash in it giving an uneven surface. The adjustment is relative to the lathe bed and any slight misalignment at the mounting matters not. The bar's scales are only a rough measurement. An indicator on the lathe bed is more useful to indicate saddle movement with a second indicator to show off set for a given movement. Use trig formula. A sine bar can be used in some situations as well. RichD ------- Re: Screw Cutting-Top Slide Setover Posted by: "anthrhodesx~xxaol.com" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 11:44 pm ((PST)) In a message dated Dec 2, 2008 rrh0001 writes: > Much as I really enjoy my ML7 the other problem is that the larger top slide adjustable dial I installed collides with the cross slide so that the two can never be parallel. I don't know if this was the case before I upgraded the di < Ramsay, Read the George H Thomas article on "A Retracting Top-Slide for Screw Cutting". It's in GHT's "Model Engineer's Workshop Manual" (p.184 thru 204) which manual is a compilation of various articles originally published in ME. I can't give you the ME issue numbers but I suspect that others may be able to do so. Besides describing the retracting feature GHT also uses an offset crank to drive the top feed screw through a gear which allows more clearance between the top slide crank and the cross slide crank. He also says that, except for the swivel question, the modified top slide should be usable on the ML7 as well as the Super7 for which he designed it. You can include the retracting function or exclude it but the geared drive to the top feed screw should help you with eliminating the interference between the cranks for the two slides. If you use a two gear train, as does GHT, you'll have to also cut a new top feed screw and nut (I think the originals are right hand thread but you'll have to check). If you use a three gear train (crank gear, idler gear, screw gear) you can use the original screw. Regarding the limited graduations for the top slide, make yourself a secondary reference mark on the top slide at 90 degrees to the original mark and reference it to the existing graduations on the cross slide. I would do this by first verifying that the original reference mark when set to zero on the cross slide graduations was truly parallel to the ways. Put a test bar that was known to be accurate between centers, mount an indicator on the top slide, and traverse the carriage. Zero movement of the indicator shows that the test bar is true to the longitudinal axis. If necessary adjust the test bar until you get zero change in indicator readings. Now set the top slide witness mark to zero and traverse the top slide with the indicator bearing against the test bar. Zero movement of the indicator shows that the original reference mark on the top slide is accurate to the graduations on the cross slide. If necessary fiddle the swivel setting until you get zero movement of the indicator. (If the witness mark is no longer on zero of the cross slide graduations you might consider redoing the witness mark.) Next mount the 4-jaw chuck on the spindle and place a piece of straight stock in the jaws turned so that the stock is horizontal across the ways. Traverse the carriage towards the headstock until the indicator bears against the straight stock and lock the carriage to the bed. Not moving any of the slides, rotate the chuck to bring the other end of the straight stock to bear against the indicator. If the readings in each position of the chuck are the same the straight stock is perpendicular to the axis. If the readings are not identical, fiddle the position of the straight stock in the chuck until you're satisfied that the straight stock is accurately perpendicular to the axis of the lathe. Now, leaving the chuck in one position with the straight stock horizontal, feed the top slide across the lathe with the indicator bearing against the straight stock. Fiddle the adjustment of the swivel until you get zero change in the indicator readings. At this point the top slide is accurately at 90 degrees to the lathe axis and if you make a new witness mark on the top slide in line with the zero mark on the cross slide graduations you will be able to read the angular settings in the second 45 degrees of swivel. You may have to remove the cross slide crank during this zeroing procedure but once you've completed the job you can put it back on. Hope there might be some useful ideas in this posting. Anthony Berkeley, Calif. ------- Re: Screw Cutting-Top Slide Setover Posted by: "rrh0001" tzamx~xxmac.com Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 6:09 pm ((PST)) Anthony, Thank you for helpful message. Your suggestion to scribe an alternative zero mark for the top slide, 90 degrees to the existing one, would be a much better way to accurately determine the more acute angles (i.e. top slide compared to cross slide axis) than trying to manipulate and read a machinist's protractor in multiple planes. For angles less than 30 degrees it would be necessary to have an alternative top slide clamping arrangement and I like GH Thomas' description of one on p. 217 of the Manual. The clamping bar (he refers to) on the headstock side of the cross slide would also be a good place for the new scribe mark you suggested. It may be possible, even at these acute angles, to use the Piddington extended toolholder to reach into the root of a thread without the top slide dial fouling the cross slide. If so, this might avoid the need for the off-set crank modifications Thomas referred to. Fortunately, my immediate issue has been resolved by the 2:1 cross slide:top slide advance of the cutter. I will need to cut an acme thread for a Holt leadscrew so I may yet find that I need to setover the top slide. Ramsay ------- Re: Screw Cutting-Top Slide Setover Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 12:57 am ((PST)) Anthony's comments about the wisdom of GHT are unchallenged but I do question his own comments about the ability to interchange the two or three slides. Mine, and I have the longer ML7 and Super 7 slides are not the same width. Whether they started off that way, I cannot answer. What is certain is that the gibs are different -- and conform to the manuals. In an earlier post, I wrote of the two castings for the dial housings being different intervals -- so I suppose that I am right! Again, GHT also remarked on the possible warping of the S7 slide. In an earlier S7B I had to correct the warping which had been done by an earlier owner. Quite frankly, I doubt that a ML7 slide can be 'modified' without wrecking everything. 'Martin Cleeve' actually wrecked his ML7 slide by breaking the tee slots -- and this was a 'short wheel base' model. For those who have his 'Screwcutting in the Lathe' will notice that his is neither ML7 nor Super 7. Sorry, but it isn't! Actually, it is a steel one. Again, the topslide is not a ML7 nor a Super 7 one. It has a single stud fitting. Again, Jack Radford pretty well slated the Myford one on his Super 7 and did a complete redesign. Might I then, ask for a very careful reappraisal of what is recorded. Norman ------- Re: ML7 Compound Modification to S7 Style [MyMyford] Posted by: "rrh0001" tzamx~xxmac.com Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 5:14 pm ((PST)) "flycycle2003" wrote: > Is it possible to modify a ML7 compound to the Super 7 style that > avoids the 2 tee nuts & allows full rotation of the compound ? My ML7 > is equipped with the long cross slide table. Have you considered the arrangement described by GH Thomas on page 217 of the Model Engineers Workshop Manual? It still requires the use of two tee nuts but it may give you the full rotation you're looking for, albeit not as elegantly as an S7. I have not done this yet so I can't speak from experience but rather from his description. Ramsay ------- Re: ML7 Compound Modification to S7 Style Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 1:10 am ((PST)) As a new old boy, I have repeatedly attempted to mention the cross slide problem between the ML7 and the Super 7. If my earlier replies pop up finally, I apologise. The first point is that the two slides are NOT compatible. They are two different widths, have two different castings for the feed screws and two very different gibs. Again, the Tee slots are at different intervals. Moving on, reference is usually made to Martin Cleeve and his Screwcutting in the Lathe. His long cross slide on his ML7 was non standard. True, it was made by Myford to special order but was STEEL. Again, his topslide was not Myford nor were the fixing standard. It was a single bolt onto a homemade topslide. So let's turn to GHT and the central spigot of the S7. He mentions the high probability of weakness and the bowing of the slide. I found it on a 2nd hand lathe so it is not an isolated problem. Cleeve cracked a Tee slot on his earlier short cross slide -- hence the steel one. Jack Radford actually went to redesign the whole affair -- and publish the result. Perhaps someone will write further experiences ------- Re: Lathe Stripping [MyMyford] Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:15 am ((PST)) "Morgan Ramanauskas" wrote: > Hi All, im going to strip my whole ml7 and clean it all, as the last > owner has taken terrible care of it. One of the backgear sprockets is > broken and needs to be replaced. Just been (and still going) through exactly the same scenario. > How do i go about accessing the backgear? > Ive tried removing the screws on top of the piece above the > backgear, however i cant seem to remove it? I presume you mean the bearing caps that hold the spindle bearings. You will need to remove both bearing caps and take out the spindle assembly (may as well take that apart and clean it up while you are at it). Remove the two SHCS (Socket Head Cap Screws) on each bearing cap. The bearig caps themselves are a little tight and you probably can't simply lift them off. I "tapped them off with a small plastic mallet. Caution: under each screwhole of each bearing cap is a laminated shim. You MUST replace these in the same locations and in the same orientation (both left/right and which side faces up). Find a way to store and label these so you can do this. Make sure they don't get damaged. Once the bearing caps are removed, the spindle assembly with gears and cone pully can be lifted out. The backgear is held at the left end by a large washer and a countersunk hex socket screw. Remove this with a regular L-shaped allen key and the gear can be taken off. It's just possible you may have to remove the backgear operating lever (two setscrews) to give more freedom. I don't recall now .... I was fully stripping mine anyway. ------- Re: Lathe Stripping Posted by: "Morgan Ramanauskas" Mogzieno1x~xxAol.com Date: Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:50 am ((PST)) Hi, thanks for the reply. It sounds like i've taken all the screws, bolts, etc. out and that i just need to use a rubber mallet to loosen the bearing caps. I'm worried that the paint is holding the pieces together; would burning the paint off help? Thanks Morgan ------- Re: Lathe Stripping Posted by: "Sid Knee" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:27 am ((PST)) I think burning the paint off would be very risky on a number of levels. There are monel-metal (or somesuch) bearing halves in there that could get distorted by the heat. The laminated shims could get damaged or separated. The first thing I would do is to try the plastic/rubber mallet route. I really though mine were stuck until I tried that. They actually shifted quite easily with the mallet. You can try a block of wood pressed against the side (front) of the bearing cap and angled upward. Then hit with a mallet. (Be careful it doesn't suddenly fly off .... I actually left the bolts hanging on by a thread or two). I also had to use a mallet when reassembling the bearing caps. If the paint is really a problem, I would suggest that you scrape it off around the joint line with, say, an old chisel scraping *across* or *along* the joint line. I would be very wary of using the chisel or a knife blade to actually cut through the paint into the joint line -- that's where the shims are. I know I keep going on about the shims but believe me these *are* critical. They are set at the factory to adjust the bearing clearance. If you alter them in any way the adjustment will be upset and you will have to re-shim (not a trivial task even when you've waited weeks to get new shimstock from Myford). Either that or you will rapidly wear out the bearings which will cost a lot to fix. Above all, don't get panicked. take your time and do it slowly and methodically. I also found it helps, when doing a complete strip down, to have plenty of zip-loc plastic bags to put hardware in along with a note of where it came from. I don't know where I came up with this but I think you are in Scotland? That means you are better off than I am in one way. Most of the hardware is BSF/BSW which is probably reasonably easy to get on your side of the pond. I'm in Canada and they are just totally unobtainable here. So I'm having to be very careful that I don't mislay (or damage) anything. Sid ------- Re: Lathe Stripping Posted by: "Ross Wheeler" myford.contactx~xxalbury.net.au Date: Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:34 am ((PST)) Here was how I went about it: http://house.albury.net.au/myford/#backgear RossW ------- Re: Lathe Stripping Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:31 am ((PST)) If you are going to overhaul the whole lathe you would be well advised to get a manual from Myford. It costs about £12 and would save you an awful lot of questions here. It's not that anybody objects to such questions but it would make sense to help yourself as much as possible before leaping for the keyboard. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: Lathe Stripping Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:17 am ((PST)) Look and ye shall find, knock and you'll find the bearing shells buggered. Ooops! On more serious note, if your lathe bed is buggered, you can have is reground by Myfords but if you are reasonably practical you can get a bed 'Blancharded' on Tyneside for about £35. You will still have a lot of work but you have a reasonable reference to re-build on. Norm ------- Re: Lathe Stripping Posted by: "alan4227" a.j.moorex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Wed Dec 17, 2008 2:59 pm ((PST)) > if your lathe bed is buggered, you can have it reground by Myfords Only if the shears are more than 0.48in thick at the most worn spot (they start out at 0.5in). Below this they won't touch it. Apparently to grind it further would put too much bending stress on the leadscrew and bugger up its bearings. Regards, Alan ------- Re: Lathe Stripping Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:26 am ((PST)) Alan is quite right about alignment but that problem has been addressed many times. There is also the saddle and a lot more things. However, if you are out for a restoration and not a paint job, need I say more than it is only a heap of castings to be (re-)machined? ------- Re: Lathe Stripping Posted by: "Morgan Ramanauskas" Mogzieno1x~xxAol.com Date: Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:01 am ((PST)) Hi all, today i got a lot done. I managed to get it all apart and have cleaned all of the gears. Thanks for your tip of using a piece of wood ;) The lathe is mechanically sound, except the backgear cluster, and is generally just clogged with dirt. I think the previous owner used it for woodwork, the sawdust and oil have gone together to form some sort of super gunk. I'm either going to replace the backgear or have a go at fixing the missing tooth. Thanks for all your help :) Morgan ------- Re: Lathe Stripping Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:36 am ((PST)) 'Twas not I that suggested the wood, but it's always a good idea to use nice crushable wood against metal surfaces that shouldn't be marked. I doubt you will be able to replace a missing tooth successfully because of the high load on the back gear. It would be a pity to cause further damage if your tooth repair failed under load. Cliff Coggin ------- ML1 Parts wanted [MyMyford] Posted by: "marcoseries1" marcoseries1x~xxyahoo.com.au Date: Sun Dec 28, 2008 9:40 pm ((PST)) I am in the process of rebuilding an ML1 which is worthy of restoration. If anyone has any ML1 bits lurking under the workshop bench, I am after the top slide and a few of the gears and would be happy to hear from you. Many Thanks Marco ------- Re: ML1 Parts wanted Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Mon Dec 29, 2008 12:40 am ((PST)) Marco, you raise 2 points. The first is really the gears or more gears. These are currently available new and secondhand as 20DP Myford- and a dozen similar lathes. This leads me to the topslide issue. Frankly, there was a time pre-war when small home lathe manufacturers were producing 'generic' parts which would fit any number of maker's lathes. I recall that Tom Walshaw writing as 'Tubal Cain' did an article or two in Model Engineer of his discoveries. Maybe someone will locate the aricles. Again, the top slide is no great problem to make and suitable ones have been mentioned time after time here and in current mags. This raises a bit of one of my more recent 'epistles' here. 'Cleeve' changed the height of his ML7 by an eighth (I think) to accomodate his earlier ML2 or 3 accessories. If my deductions are correct, the top slide of ML7 will do- probably with a 1/8th packing. If one projects my recollections further, what Cleeve amongst many other contributors has provided chapter and verse already. All that remains is to find a suitable library with the information and so on. Cheers Norman ------- Re: ML1 Parts wanted Posted by: "marcoseries1" marcoseries1x~xxyahoo.com.au Date: Mon Dec 29, 2008 8:04 pm ((PST)) Norman, Would love to get my hands on some of the articles you mention. Have tried my local library, but asking for Model Engineer magazines raised some odd looks, which just got more intense when I mentioned they should date back to the 50's. It would seem my request did stretch the capabilities of the library archives, especially here in Western Australia. Interesting to note that an ML7 topslide with a packer may work. Ideally finding the original topsilde would be first prize, but a good second prize may be a modified ML7 one. The ideal would be for me to make my own, but as I am a novice in this hobby, both my workshop and my skills would not support it. Thanks for the help and advice. Best Wishes Marco ------- Re: ML1 Parts wanted Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:27 am ((PST)) Marco, it is always a problem when someone hasn't a clue of where the writer lives! Chancing my scrawny arm, I would guess that there is something in the Oz library system which will have an interchange of books from not only one library to another but from one state to the next. Going off at a tangent (a bit), I was watching the 'box' and learning that the British Library contained not only all the British books but ALL the world's as well as ALL the magazines and newspapers! It poses the question about what OZ actually possesses. One should be prepared for those who are unhelpful! Another solution might lie in one or other model engineering clubs. What do they hold or what does some old timer have lining his workshop? Now I have tried to put much of the Martin Cleeve stuff onto the net but ran into copyright issues! Actually a cobber was doing the postings, I was just the wrinkled old office boy in finding the stuff! What is 'there' wherever is there is interesting. Off the top of my head, there is the Cleeve gearbox, the fixed steady made from metal chunks and fattened with homemade nuts and bolts. There is how to make a top slide, a vertical slide and if push comes to shove, a whole baby lathe. What is needed Marco is someone to get hold of the stuff, make it up again for their own tooling and re-publish it here. Me- sorry but I'm almost 80 and half blind now! A job for a younger man, eh! A successful 2009????? And I greet you all well Norman ------- Re: ML1 Parts wanted Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:12 am ((PST)) As a sort of addendum,I Googled 'Model Engineer' Index and came up with the start of several lots of information. One is Colin Usher's excellent site. At least, others will also be able to try to get help as well. Whilst I was 'messing on' I got over 200 Martin Cleeve articles. Suddenly, I came up with a bright idea. It isn't a new one but 1. it doesn't have to be a top slide to watch the wheels go round or do something more constructive. If you had a tool holder of some sort, you could start making things. 2. if you had a bloody big block of metal, you could do lots from the saddle. You could, for instance, mill a top slide. 3. if you had a face plate and an angle plate of angle iron, think what you could achieve. Oh and incidentally, it took years for Cleeve to get a three jaw chuck. Regarding the 'bloody big block of steel', I found that it was not only Cleeve who had one but George Thomas and Prof Dennis Chaddock had them as well. Tubal Cain had something a bit more refined called a Gibralter Tool post which was really a bloody big -- well, you get the idea. Oh, I have one- or three as well! Norman ------- Re: ML1 Parts wanted Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:26 am ((PST)) Well you beat me to it about the indices Norman. These are an excellent resource to search and then keep a look out for sales/disposals of old ME magazines. Often these can hardly be given away and can be had for the cost of the postage. OK not cheap to post to Oz as you find them but maybe someone in UK who could accumulate them for you and scan the articles or send a big pile via the cheapest route? Good luck Bob ------- Re: ML1 Parts wanted Posted by: "mark" aboard_epsilonx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:10 am ((PST)) Forget model engineer if the tight fisted baskets wont let people share it with everyone. go here .. http://books.google.com/books?id=T9kDAAAAMBAJ&dq=popular+mechanics+% 22metal+shaper%22&lr=&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0#all_issues_anchor or (if effing yahoo breaks link ) http://tinyurl.com/7p37qs Nearly all the American popular mechanics magazines ever published are on line ... these come with lots of pages on lathe projects....set- ups and tips ... they have even bothered to put links in the original magazine indexes. Model engineer has been put to shame by this. !!! All the workshop practice books are online too, if you search the P2P network. All the best. markj ------- Slide Handles [MyMyford] Posted by: "Morgan Ramanauskas" Mogzieno1x~xxAol.com Date: Mon Jan 5, 2009 8:07 am ((PST)) Hi guys, I'm having trouble with the top slide handle on my ml7; the handles keep unscrewing rather than actually turning the shaft? Has anyone got any ideas to a solution? Would thread lock work? Thanks Morgan ------- Re: Slide Handles Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Mon Jan 5, 2009 8:10 am ((PST)) Hi Morgan -- The handle should act like a locknut against the end float adjusting nut -- these are a royal pain in the ass to adjust, but if you do the handle up tight enough it should be just fine. There are a couple of spanner flats on the adjuster nut to help with the process. Threadlocker would certainly fix the problem, but it would also be a pain next time you need to adjust the end float. Regards, Tony ------- Re: Slide Handles Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Mon Jan 5, 2009 11:02 am ((PST)) I recall that GHT mentioned one of the variants of the S7 actually having been glued. Having said all that, he went on to describe improvements to the ML7 one in MEWM. Methinks, time to buy the book -- or books if you include Radford's one! Norman ------- Super 7 tailstock on ML7 ? [MyMyford] Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:42 am ((PST)) Can anyone tell me whether the Super7 tailstock *as a complete assembly* will (or will not) fit the ML7 ? ------- Re: Super 7 tailstock on ML7 ? Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:47 am ((PST)) I don't know myself but I can measure the shears on my ML7R which uses a S7 tailstock if you email back. Bob ------- Re: Super 7 tailstock on ML7 ? Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca Date: Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:56 am ((PST)) On my S7 (green, 1985 vintage) I get the following measurements: Front shear: 1.746 x 0.501 thick Rear shear: 1.3710 x 0.501 thick Between shears: 1.369 What are the dimensions on your ML7? ------- Re: Super 7 tailstock on ML7 ? Posted by: "rrh0001" tzamx~xxmac.com Date: Sun Jan 18, 2009 3:01 pm ((PST)) I have a Tri-Leva and recently acquired an old but complete Super 7. I just finished attaching the complete S7 tailstock assembly onto the ML7 bed and can state that it fits fine. Ramsay ------- Re: Super 7 tailstock on ML7 ? Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Sun Jan 18, 2009 4:43 pm ((PST)) My ML7 measures: Front shear: 1.750 x 0.515 thick Rear shear: 1.376 x 0.515 thick Between shears: 1.375 Close enough to be the same nominals. ------- Re: Super 7 tailstock on ML7 ? Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Sun Jan 18, 2009 4:45 pm ((PST)) That just about clinches it then - thanks, Ramsay. One thing .... is the centre height OK (it should be but you never know and there doesn't seem to be any adjustment in that direction)? ------- Re: Super 7 tailstock on ML7 ? Posted by: "rrh0001" tzamx~xxmac.com Date: Sun Jan 18, 2009 5:43 pm ((PST)) I checked with centres in each of the Tri-Leva spindle and the S7 tailstock. When the tailstock is advanced the centres are as close (by visual inspection) as they are using the Tri-Leva tailstock so I don't think you have any worries on that score. I'm unaware of any subsequent changes in the design of the S7 tailstock but note that these are both quite old machines. The Tri-Leva is K 50000 vintage and the S7, with a serial number of SK 2458, is a real grandad. Ramsay ------- Re: Drive belts [MyMyford] Posted by: "tr43sdf" robert.bedardx~xxgmail.com Date: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:40 pm ((PST)) "peterscott147" wrote: > I want to replace the drive belts on my ML7. The motor/countershaft > belt is currently an M section belt. Is this correct or should it be > A section? > Similarly should the countershaft/spindle belts (I have a Trilever) be > A section? Thanks for any help, Peter Hi, I have just been thru this with my ml7 tri-leva. After much trial and horror, I have found that a 4L255 which means half-inch wide and 25.5 inches long belt seems to work fine on the countershaft. It was special order therefore non-returnable, so I have only one belt and I have only used it in the center pulley. Hope this helps Robert, new to the group as of today ------- Metric Leadscrews on a Super 7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "Keith New" keithx~xxbritfix70054.waitrose.com Date: Tue Jan 27, 2009 4:20 pm ((PST)) Hi. I've replaced the feedscrews and nuts on the topslide and cross slide of my Super 7 as they were very worn. The leadscrew dial is metric anyway (marked 0-3.2mm), so I went the whole hog and converted cross and topslides to match, rather than keep with imperial as I work in mm these days anyway. The new metric leadscrew dial for the cross slide, bought at the same time, is graduated 0 to 40 for a full turn, ie, 0,5,10,15,20,25, 30,35 and back to 0. It appears by measurement with my trusty Swiss electronic dial gauge that a full turn of the cross slide advances it by 2mm, so why graduate it in 40 divisions and not 20 i.e., 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5 etc? I suppose the 40 graduations relate to 4mm off the diameter being turned rather than radius measurement. Then again, I have previously only used imperial dials but I cannot recall any lathe cross slide I have used before graduated at twice the distance moved. So I checked the topslide. It's marked the same, ie 0-40 and one turn = 2mm. Am I missing something here? Regards Keith New ------- Re: Metric Leadscrews on a Super 7 Posted by: "John Stevenson" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk Date: Tue Jan 27, 2009 4:58 pm ((PST)) No, many industrial lathes read what they take off. John S. ------- Re: Metric Leadscrews on a Super 7 Posted by: "lioneltedder" lionel.tedderx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Jan 28, 2009 6:21 am ((PST)) Hello Keith New, Forty divisions with a 2mm pitch feedscrew will give 0.05mm per division. This is just under 2 thou. Twenty divisions would give 0.10mm; rather too coarse for lathe feed dials. Most metric lathes of the small precision type that I have used (mainly German-made Lorch and Boley) have dials graduated in 0.02mm.divisions. This would require one hundred divisions for a 2mm pitch feedscrew. I suppose Myford supply forty division dials because they are cheaper to make than 100 divisions! Most vernier gauges (not the electronic type) measure in increments of 0.02mm although I have one that measures in 0.05mm. 0.05 is a fairly convenient division for a lathe feedscrew. You say that your leadscrew dial is marked 0-3.2mm. This leads me to think that it is actually an imperial screw of 1/8th" inch pitch, as 1/8th" is 3.175mm and a bit of rounding-up has taken place! Myford metric leadscrews are of 3mm pitch. I do know that early metric ML10 lathes had imperial leadscrews, with appropriate change-wheels being supplied to give metric pitch threads, but I do not know if this applied to Super Sevens also. Regards Lionel ------- Re: Metric Leadscrews on a Super 7 Posted by: "c.j.s." callinicus1953x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:21 am ((PST)) Hi Keith. When I was demonstrating a new metric Myford at Ascot last year, I wondered about the divisions, so asked The Man at Myford. His reply was that Imperial lathes' cross slides were marked in actual movement, but metric lathe cross slides were always marked in diameter reduction, ie. twice actual movement. It can be confusing, but vaguely sensible, saves our continental cousins from having to multiply by two :>) (Thought I would get that in before John S had a chance.) In serious mode, the only problem occurs when thread cutting, you have to go in twice the dial reading, to get the right depth of thread. Hope this clarifies things cjs [and in a later message cjs wrote] Further to my last. The gearbox and leadscrew were still in Imperial threads!! As our Americans friends might say "Go figure?" Nice machine though, made me wish I could afford to upgrade. Sooo much quieter than modern asian wannabees. ------- Re: Metric Leadscrews on a Super 7 Posted by: "duncanwebster" duncan.webster2x~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:35 am ((PST)) Metric lathes are arranged so that if you turn the feedscrew by 2 mm graduation, you reduce the diameter of the work by 2 mm, ie you have advanced the cross slide by 1 mm. This takes a bit of getting used to, but is eventually simpler as you don't have to divide by 2 all the time. For instance if you're aiming for 12 mm diameter and the mike says 13.5, just put on 1.5mm graduations and it will be the right size. However, I find metric mikes an abomination, the number of times I've made things exactly 0.5mm too small is legion. I now use the digicaliper to get somewhere near, then switch to the mike if it's that critical. It's a bit of a swine if you're proposing to use a vertical slide to do milling tho' you'll have to double things all the time. ------- Re: Metric Leadscrews on a Super 7 Posted by: "Maritz, Johan" Johan.maritzx~xxarcelormittal.com Date: Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:12 am ((PST)) Hi Keith, my little input as well. I have a so called metric Super 7. I have checked my leadscrew last night. I have a DRO installed on my long and cross travel. The leadscrew is still an imperial one with 3.17 mm movement for one rotation of the handwheel. What I did pick up however is that the hand wheel is indeed calibrated to measure distance in metric. I have a spare leadscrew, this one also gives 3.17 mm of movement but this one has an imperial calibrated handwheel on it. On the topslide one complete revolution moves it 2 mm. So each division is 0,05 mm of movement. On the crosslide I have very small divisions and every second one a little bigger division representing 0,05 mm. So each individual division represents 0,025 mm of movement. Yes indeed one revolution for the crosslide dial do take 4 mm off the diameter of stock. I hope this is not too confusing. Regards Johan Maritz ------- Re: Metric Leadscrews on a Super 7 Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:20 am ((PST)) Hi Johan -- You have an Imperial leadscrew, the pitch is 8 turns per inch. Regards, Tony ------- Re: Metric Leadscrews on a Super 7 Posted by: "Keith New" keithx~xxbritfix70054.waitrose.com Date: Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:09 pm ((PST)) Johan. Thanks, you have confirmed my suspicions. I am so used to "10 thou moved means 20 thou off the diameter", I will have to rewire my brain to match. As to moving the topslide from 0 to 20 on the dial actually means I have cut 1 mm off the face will need a complete reprogramming exercise. I will have to make a laminated notice to hang above the lathe to remind me each time. It also explains why my Indian made vertical slide's dial is divided double the distance moved, as it is metric as well. My plans to fit a DRO "sometime" is now reclassified "sometime soon". Thanks Keith ------- Re: Metric gear set up for Ml7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "freddiefroggie" donaldjsmx~xxaol.com Date: Tue Feb 17, 2009 3:24 am ((PST)) Greetings all, Very close to Metric threads can be cut on an Imperial Super 7 with a gearbox by simply changing the gear on the spindle which drives the tumbler gears, with one which most of us will likely already have, no official Metric conversion set is required, and then selecting a suitable setting with the gearbox levers to get the pitch you want. I recently cut a 1.5mm thread for an ER25 collet closing ring by this method which is completely satisfactory. See Model Engineer item in Post Bag in Vol.168 No.3922 5-18 June 1992 entitled "Screwcutting Accuracy" by J.E. Walford and follow up article in Vol.169 No.3928 4- 17th September 1992 article by W.J. Faulks entitled " Accuracy In Screwcutting". A chart detailing the extra gear size and the gearbox lever settings necessary is printed in the M.E. articles. I must stress that the pitches achieved with this method are not 100% proper metric pitches but are probably near enough for most practical purposes. Purists please don't flame me. Keep making the swarf. Donald J. Mitchell Castle Douglas Bonnie Scotland. ------- Re: Metric gear set up for Ml7 Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:34 am ((PST)) And for the purists amongst us, the only correct metric threads which can be cut on a Myford have to use a 127 'transposing' gear -- and an accurate leadscrew. ------- Diamond tool holder [MyMyford] Posted by: "David Wain" d.wainx~xxxplornet.com Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:42 pm ((PST)) Hi. I am considering buying a diamond tool holder for a ML7 and was wondering if anyone on the forum was using one and what their experience might be? It seems to me that it would cut down on tool grinding etc. and since the front and side clearance angles are preset it would save a lot of fiddling around. It is expensive so any input would be appreciated. Thanks David ------- NOTE TO FILE: The entire thread on the diamond toolholder is contained in the text file here titled Toolholders for the Lathe. Starts with the same above message and date. ------- Myford ML7 Raising blocks [MyMyford] Posted by: "kenrcatt" kenrcattx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:39 am ((PST)) Hi I am new to the group, having just purchased a 2nd hand ML7. I am having a problem trying to find a pair of raising blocks for it, again 2nd hand. £98.00 for a pair from Myford is a little steep for me. Could anyone point me in the right direction? regards ken catt ------- Re: Myford ML7 Raising blocks Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:45 am ((PST)) Dear Ken, Try RDG. Last time I looked they were about £24 a pair. A friend of mine bought some and they were fine. Regards Tim ------- Re: Myford ML7 Raising blocks Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:22 am ((PST)) Hi Ken, welcome aboard! Raising blocks? Obviously we are now getting a higher class clientele. Mine are welded boxes! The important part is to ensure that your lathe is levelled in both planes. Cheers Norman ------- Re: Myford ML7 Raising blocks Posted by: "Steven Vine" microstocx~xxhotmail.com Date: Thu Feb 26, 2009 2:43 pm ((PST)) I have got my ML7 gently nestling temporarily on a couple of wooden 2 inch x 4 inch blocks of wood in a Myford tray. I know, I know, I know ... It is only a temporary measure (2 years now) that is working ok. It does the raising bit! I am still keeping my eye out for some 2 inch or 3 inch steel box section offcuts, or maybe I will have to eventually make some out of other profiles (U or L). I looked at the RDG price (around £40 was it?) and decided I need to spend the money elsewhere at the moment. Just my (cheap) take on the matter. Steve ------- Re: Myford ML7 Raising blocks Posted by: "gwinspur" gwinspurx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Sun Mar 1, 2009 10:11 am ((PST)) It's worth pointing out that raising blocks must also allow for vertical adjustment (which the proprietary items no doubt do). My machine sits on four shop-made adjustable feet to a design by the late T D Walshaw (Tubal Cain) - cheap, effective and the amount of extra height is up to you! ------- Re: Myford ML7 Raising blocks Posted by: "Wilf" wilf.bakerx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Mar 5, 2009 9:45 am ((PST)) Distance between studs is 4.625" ------- Re: Myford ML7 Raising blocks Posted by: "dwballchin" davidwbailey1067x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Fri Mar 6, 2009 5:51 am ((PST)) I dont know if anyone else has suggested this but my simple answer came out of the scrap box. Two short lengths of 50mm (2") hollow box section drilled to allow longer studs or bolts between the stand and the bed feet. If your scrap box is empty try that of any steel fabricator for an offcut. ------- Myford ML4 backgear help ! [MyMyford] Posted by: "woody4321blue" swoodward1x~xxhotmail.co.uk Date: Mon Mar 9, 2009 4:34 am ((PDT)) Hi all, This is my second post on this forum and I am enjoying reading advice and hints etc and really enjoying my little Myford. However, I am trying to understand how the backgear works on my ML4. The mechanism basically is two toothed wheels (which currently do not rotate on the swing arm). I haven't tried using the backgear so far as I don't believe it will work if these toothed wheels cannot rotate; are they supposed to rotate? Also I don't quite understand how the back gear drops the speed of the mandrel! Does the mandrel split to allow for the change in speeds? Sorry I couldn't find anything on the forum to help me on this and I am pretty sure its a simple thing to resolve when you know what you're doing. Any help appreciated. Regards Steve ------- Re: Myford ML4 backgear help ! Posted by: "PAUL BACHE" paulbachex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Mon Mar 9, 2009 5:16 am ((PDT)) Hi Steve, if you look in the group files you will find the handbook for your machine, this will explain how it all works, essentially you need to loosen (better to remove altogether) the socket grub screw that locks the drive pulleys to the main headstock spindle, this is found on the left hand side of the drive pully, but the handook has pictures which show it better than I can explain it, Regards Paul ------- Re: Myford ML4 backgear help ! Posted by: "DA. Forsyth" notLeftBehindx~xxiwr.ru.ac.za Date: Mon Mar 9, 2009 5:45 am ((PDT)) Try this: http://iwr.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/lathe/backgear.html ------- Re: Myford ML4 backgear help ! Posted by: "DAVID WILSON" d.j.wilsonx~xxmac.com Date: Mon Mar 9, 2009 6:57 am ((PDT)) I have posted some new photo's of my Tumbler reverse fitted to my ML4 in my Album. Let me know if this helps. will strip it down to give you more information Dave ------- Re: Myford ML4 backgear help ! Posted by: "woody4321blue" swoodward1x~xxhotmail.co.uk Date: Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:25 am ((PDT)) Hi All, Thanks for your help, the website provided allowed me to understand the idea behind the backgear drive system for which I am grateful. I made an examination of my Myford last night. It seems that the backgears are jammed as they don't turn even on the swing arm, not had time yet to work out how they are actually disassembled for cleaning/lubricating. Also, I underscrewed and removed the bolt to the left of the pulley wheel but this didn't free up the pulley wheel/drive side of the mandrel so I am pretty sure I need to strip it down sometime and overhaul it especially if I want to do thread cutting in the near future. I will do a search on ML4 headstock strip down advice as I guess there will be something on here to help me with this. PS> I need to bore out a piece of aluminium using my ML4 lathe and I was wondering how others had resorted to clamping onto the cross slide saddle? The aluminium is approx 4" x 3" but im struggling to work out a positive way of clamping, I think I'm going to need some very specific clamps and maybe a small angle plate. Regards Steve ------- Early S7 Saddle Reconditioning [MyMyford] Posted by: "dewintondave" bouserx~xxgmail.com Date: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:09 am ((PDT)) I was turning some wheels for a new project. A rule was placed across the newly faced wheel, and it rocked an alarming amount! I knew that my "as new" lathe wasn't quite as it should be. I clocked across my flat faceplate and got an amazing .012" plus across the 6" or so. When the the saddle was stripped off the bed it was found to be well worn. There was more than one wear step, which makes me think that this saddle may not be the original. The step was so deep that I couldn't crank the saddle around by adjusting the saddle gib strip. Fortunately we have a surface grinder at work and I was able to correct it. In order to be able to grind the saddle, the cross slide top surface was ground true to the bearing surfaces, then the front face was ground true to the dovetail. The saddle was mounted to the cross slide, and the slide was locked. The cross slide was mounted on to the magnetic table and clocked true across the front face. All horizontal surfaces, and most vertical surfaces of the saddle were ground at the one setting. I completely removed the traces of the original scraped finish. Today I ground the front and rear saddle strips, the faces weren't too flat. Saddle just lifted off the lathe. Steps in the wear, and original scraped surface. Worn step on bearing face face. Same step different angle. Once I'd ground off the step, the face took at least .005" to clean up square along the length. Saddle set-up on cross slide ready for surface grinding. Newly ground bearing face. The far face adjacent to where the rear saddle strip is located cleaned up easily. This would make an excellent bearing face with shim fitted. The faceplate now clocks in "adequately". This has been an interesting project. I've learnt how to adjust the cross slide properly, and to allow for the wear along the width of the bed so that the saddle doesn't bind or wobble too much when traversed along the whole length. Dave ------- Re: Early S7 Saddle Reconditioning Posted by: "alan4227" a.j.moorex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Mar 14, 2009 10:39 am ((PDT)) Interesting project, Dave. What is the condition of the bed? With that much wear on the saddle I would expect the bed would be pretty worn, too. Also, having ground the saddle bearing face there will presumably now be some vertical play. Have you adjusted the shim thickness on the rear saddle strip to eliminate this? Regards, Alan ------- Re: Early S7 Saddle Reconditioning Posted by: "dewintondave" bouserx~xxgmail.com Date: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:14 pm ((PDT)) The bed doesn't appear bad at all, I'm sure I can see some original tool marks on it. This is also why I think my saddle may not be original. The bed is worn about .002" on the width at the chuck end. I also ground the surfaces that the saddle strips are screwed to. Shims are not needed now. I think the rack pinion engages better now. Dave ------- Lathe setup [MyMyford] Posted by: "zitman2008" imarshallx~xxrocketmail.com Date: Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:00 am ((PDT)) Hi all, Last night I decided to check my ML7 over with regard to setup. I turned a length of inch and a quarter aluminium bar for about 4 inches on its length. There was a discrepancy of about 3 thou between each end of the turned portion. The end furthest from the chuck being wider. The bar was turned between centres. I also checked the run out on the spindle and register with barely any movement in the dial gauge (certainly less than a thou). I also checked the front face of the register, also with no discernible run out. I checked my spindle nose collet chuck and there was about a thou run out at 4 inches from the collet. The chuck back plate had no noticeable run out and the chuck body had about a thou run out. I fitted a centre in the head stock and tail stock and adjusted the two to be tip to tip across the lathe but did notice about a thou of difference in height. 3 thou 'taper' on 4 inches of length seems excessive, is there anything more I can check to find out why? Also is it possible to adjust the height of the tail stock? The lathe is securely bolted to a proper Myford cabinet. Any thoughts? Z ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "MikeD" durnfjmx~xxaol.com Date: Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:19 am ((PDT)) It could be that the bed is twisted -- the manual describes how to adjust that on the raising blocks. MikeD ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:20 am ((PDT)) Dear Z, The bed is probably slightly twisted, either because the base to which it is bolted is not quite true or because of an inherent slight twist (quite usual). Assuming you have Myford or equivalent raising blocks then adjusting the front, tailstock foot should allow you to make the lathe turn parallel. The raising blocks have adjustable inserts which are independent of the clamping bolt to allow you to set the lathe bed without twist. Getting the lathe set up is a simple if tedious exercise. Tim ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "Karen Gallagher" karengx~xxa1.com.au Date: Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:30 pm ((PDT)) Have you checked the tailstock alignment? It's easily moved from side to side for turning minor tapers. Karen ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "Susie Frith" susie.frithx~xxhotmail.co.uk Date: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:24 pm ((PDT)) Hi Z. If you are turning a bit of bar to check bed alignment just use a decent lump that won't deflect under the cut - like your bit of 1 1/4 alloy, but only hold it in the chuck - NOT between centres. If you previously turn a relief section between the ends and turn two bobbins these will be easier to check. Basically I'm telling you to do what Myfords say in the book! You need to use a fine finishing cut on the bobbins so I'd suggest using a carbon steel cutter as these can be made much sharper than carbide, but keep the speed down, or HSS. Carbide does not wear so quick but is so brittle it has to be fairly blunt and lumpy with not such a keen edge, so needs quite a bit of umph to cut which might upset your readings. If you turn between centres then you'll be measuring any 'outness' in the tailstok setting as well as the headstock. With the tailstock height setting, first put the soft centre in the headstock. Take a skim off it to make sure it is concentric. Make sure there is no burr or bruise on the shank or socket, then put the hard centre in the tailstock. If you place a bit of thin flat shim between the two centre points the shim should be square in both vertical and horizontal planes. Things would need to be very worn to make a height difference beyond Myford's normal acceptable limits, but there might be some horizontal misalignment if it has been offset to turn tapers. Hope this helps a bit, Susie ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Thu Mar 19, 2009 3:53 am ((PDT)) Dear Z, To add to Suzie's excellent advice, if you are checking your tailstock alignment, make sure that the bore of the tailstock is scrupulously clean and also clean the lathe bed and more importantly the underside of the tailstock casting. I got caught out by a small piece of swarf under the front of the tailstock casting giving me several thou of vertical mis-alignment - easy to solve once I had found the piece of swarf! Regards Tim ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:24 am ((PDT)) Sadly, Susie is wrong! If one pinches a pair of centres with a shim, the alignment is probably OK - but for the most worn portion of the bed, ie 6" from the chuck. Again, it does not verify that the lathe is not in twist. One needs the minimum of two very sensistive machinist's spirit levels to check for warp/twist and for level of length. Then you get to old Schlesinger's limits - and that. I recall recently old Tubal Cain happily prattling about this in ME in the real old days and noting that it was not all done and dusted in a few short lines on the Internet. The only time that you play pinching with centres is when the machine came out of the factory - and we are doing Euclidian geometry with straight lines. My old grey lathe, ain't what it used to be. Sorry, nice try -- but on a worn bed -- you must be joking! Norman ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "Susie Frith" susie.frithx~xxhotmail.co.uk Date: Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:52 am ((PDT)) Norman, I don't recall saying that checking if the tailstock centre was in alignment with the headstock centre was a check for bed twist. If it came across as that then I must double check what I write (if anything) in future. It was only a suggestion as a way to check gross misalignment of the tailstock w.r.t the headstock when turning between centres. You seem to be saying that once the bed is worn at all then turning between centres will be impossible... I get the impression from your regular replies that really none of us should give any suggestions here in a few short lines on the internet, but patientally wait for the hefty tome, drawn from years of professional experience, of infallable advise that will no doubt be published soon from your quarter. Susie ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:35 am ((PDT)) Susie, Your suggestion was reasonable and helpful, so don't be put off by Norman's comments. Norman is not infallible - I know of John Schlesinger the film director, and Henry Schlesinger the former US Secretary of State, but I've never come across a Schlesinger in the context of measurement uncertainty. Maybe Schroedinger was the man Norman meant? M ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "Barry Kneller" bkba09515x~xxblueyonder.co.uk Date: Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:56 am ((PDT)) Susie, I agree with Mike - don't let the comments of the Elitists, rivet counters and Myford Purists stop you from posting here, There is a great wealth of Myford knowledge and information available on this site, just ignore the occasional, negative grumblings of the few. Barry ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:26 am ((PDT)) .... or Heisenberg perhaps. (He was the gent who was driving down the expressway one day when he was pulled over by a cop. The cop leaned in his window and said "excuse me sir, do you know what speed you were doing". To which Heisenberg replied "no, but I know where I am".) Shroedinger spent most of his time trying to find his cat didn't he? ------- Re: lathe setup Posted by: "John Stevenson" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk Date: Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:01 am ((PDT)) http://www2.tu-berlin.de/presse/125jahre/festschrift/schlesinger_e.htm More info here [ and ramblings ] and a couple of rare Myford pictures. http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/showthread.php?t=13085 Regards, John Stevenson L Stevenson [ Engineers ] ------- Re: lathe setup Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:35 am ((PDT)) Dear John, Thanks for that info - most interesting. The Latta article is well worth a read! Regards Tim ------- Re: lathe setup Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:48 am ((PDT)) Well there you go - a(nother) guy I've never come across. Apologies. Mike ------- Re: lathe setup Posted by: "Malcolm Parker-Lisberg" mparkerlisbergx~xxyahoo.com Date: Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:15 am ((PDT)) Schlesinger’s book, Testing Machine Tools, contains parametric tests, such as roundness, straightness, squareness, level, and was limited to the characterization of machine spindles and moving components. Engineers at Lawrence Livermore National Labs found these methods inadequate for specifying their machines so a methodology was developed to supercede them. Lawrence Livermore National Labs developed techniques to aid in specification, design & production of the world’s most accurate machine tools. Defining : “parametric error budgeting” “parametric error measurement” These include: Identify machine motion error parameters. Identify machine axis relation parameters. Identify machine thermal error parameters. Identify machine environmental error parameters. Sum error parameters. But as the most of us are not designing super accurate machines the majority of his methods will still be applicable to our needs. ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "c.j.s." callinicus1953x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:41 pm ((PDT)) Hi Norman, I think someone is being a little bit uncharitable, isn't one? Susie's answer was perfectly valid as a quick test. If there are doubts about the TS height, then this test is a good beginning, before reaching for more complex methods. Using a "minimum of two very sensistive machinist's spirit levels" on a bed, come off it! We are talking Myford here are we not? I seem to recall even GHT, could be wrong attribution it might have been one of the other "in the real world" experts, thought to turn parallel to 1 thou in six inches to be good enough. You can set the bed up with fifteen levels but if you 'really' want to turn parallel you are still going to have to set the tailstock to be true with a test piece first, otherwise you are on a hiding to nothing. Might I say, if you recall "recently" old Tubal Cain prattling on etc., you must know a good medium, he died 11 years ago! All the best cjs ------- Re: Lathe setup Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am ((PDT)) Errors in the tailstock height are actually a bit of a red herring for most turning work - do the trig and you will find that a 1 thou error in TS height translates into a significantly smaller contribution to the error in the turned diameter at anything other than very small diameters. If you were turning a 5 thou diameter bar between centres (!) then a 1 thou error in TS height would be a concern; however, at say 1" diameter, a 1 thou error in TS height translates into approximately naff all difference in the turned diameter for all practical purposes. Regards, Tony ------- ML10 Gib Strip [MyMyford] Posted by: "g4sdl" brian.dorricottx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Apr 2, 2009 2:45 am ((PDT)) Hi,another newbie question I'm afraid (thanks for replies on reversing ML10 direction I'll go with a handle on headstock). The gib strip screws are a bit of mess on the ML10 and I want to replace them with cap heads but am a bit unsure of the thread, I measured it as 32 tpi and 4.6mm diameter (sorry only metric measures). My thread gauge says that 32G is 5/32 -- is this a whitworth size? and is it what I need for this machine? Myfords quote 3 different types and silly money (1.35 per screw). I know I'll have to round the ends down as per existing screws if I use cap heads or is there a better way? I think they are longer on the cross slide than the top slide but longer can be cut anyway. Any help appreciated Brian in Manchester ------- Re: ML10 Gib Strip Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Apr 2, 2009 4:18 am ((PDT)) Brian, I think you will find they are 2 BA (a metric thread you will be pleased to know with 0.81mm pitch). You should be able to find some cap screws at model engineering suppliers in small quantities. Tapping drill 3.9mm - clearance 4.9mm. The thread should tap out to M5 (tapping drill 4.2) pitch 0.8mm if that is easier for you. You will find a number of different imperial threads on your Myford so it is always worth converting your metric measurements into imperial to check a match with a 'proper' comprehensive range of threads (running & ducking). hth Bob ------- Re: ML10 Gib Strip Posted by: "GODFREY PALING" g.palingx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Thu Apr 2, 2009 5:08 am ((PDT)) Hi Bob, I think you should say the BA thread is not actually metric. The BA thread is 47 1/2 degrees and the ISO Metric coarse thread is 60 degrees. 2 BA tapping drill is 4.00mm, clearance is 4.80mm, the 2BA major dia is 4.7 mm, pitch 0.81026mm. M5 tapping drill is 4.20mm, clearance is 5.10mm, the M5 major dia is 5.00 mm, pitch 0.800mm. Regards, Godfrey Paling ------- Re: ML10 Gib Strip Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Apr 2, 2009 5:56 am ((PDT)) Sorry Godfrey, I must beg to differ. BA threads have all their dimensional roots in the metric measurement system. For example the pitch = 0.9mm^ba number. Just because a thread has a 60 degree included angle does not make it metric - Checkout the many unified threads - all imperial but 60 degrees. Tapping and clearance drills re a matter of preference and required thread depth. If the op has a damaged 2BA thread then passing trough a 4.2 drill to knock off any crests and minimise the risk of breakage when re-tapping M5 which will be more than adequate for the job. Bob ------- bearings setup [MyMyford] Posted by: "brogdenalbert" brogdenalbertx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Fri Apr 3, 2009 3:51 am ((PDT)) hi. I have a ml7 and have just aquired a headstock for a super 7 with all the bits to fit into it. Could someone please help as regards fitting the bearings and setting them up. I have read the manual and still can't figure it out. Thankyou, albert ------- Re: bearings setup Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Fri Apr 3, 2009 4:06 am ((PDT)) Maybe you could describe in detail what the problem is that you are having? Then hopefully we can help. Bob ------- Re: .bearing more detail Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Fri Apr 3, 2009 6:06 am ((PDT)) brogdenalbert wrote: > hi > thanks for the reply.I'm sorry if the following seems very basic. > 1.which way round do the bearings go. Fit bearings so the adjustment applies pre-load to the pair of bearings. > 2.do you put both bearings and the spacer with the cutout in the > headstock first,then the distance piece. Yes. > 3 I have 2 adjustable rings ,one has 4 cutouts the other 8,why is > this?, and which goes where. My 7R has 8 slot rings at both ends. I don't think it makes much difference. > 4.I assume the spindle goes in now,and then the setup. Yes. It is a while since I had my headstock apart but I seem to recall using a dress makers pin to hold the felt pad, which should be pre soaked in oil, out of the way whilst fitting the spindle. > Again I apoligise for what is probably a simple routine. Happy to help Bob ------- preload [was bearings setup] Posted by: "brogdenalbert" brogdenalbertx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Fri Apr 3, 2009 7:00 am ((PDT)) Thank you Bob for your reply. Just one thing I don't understand as I do not know much about bearings. I assume these are tapered bearings. What does "Fit bearings so the adjustment applies pre-load to the pair of bearings" mean. Albert ------- Re: preload Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Fri Apr 3, 2009 7:28 am ((PDT)) Yes the bearings are effectively tapered in as much as they are designed to be loaded from one side only. Unlike a taper roller bearing they do not come apart though. If you look at the outer journal (the bit that is stationary in this application) then you should see one face is narrower than the other. Fit both bearings so this side bears on its adjusting ring. The diagram in the S7 manual in the files section posted by Ian809854 April 24 2006 shows this in figures 34, 35 and 36 if you study the sections through the bearing. Hope this is clearer. Bob ------- Re: preload Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Fri Apr 3, 2009 8:53 am ((PDT)) Albert. One small but important point: The spacer between the two angular thrust bearings has a cut out. This is to allow oil to pass through. When you assemble the bearings, make sure this is at the top, otherwise oil may not reach the bearings. To be certain, you can remove the oil nipple in the top of the headstock and temporarily stick a piece of wire or a thin screwdriver through to locate the hole in the ring. HTH Mike ------- S7 Thread [MyMyford] Posted by: "Mike Crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 4:37 am ((PDT)) There is a tapped hole in the S7 headstock next to the spindle nose. This is for attaching the Myford collet chuck or, I believe, a chuck guard. I would be grateful if someone could tell me what the thread in this hole should be. TIA Mike ------- Re: S7 Thread Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 4:50 am ((PDT)) Hi Mike. It is tapped 3/8" BSF hth Bob ------- Super 7B Poly V Belt conversion [MyMyford] Posted by: "chief220592" chief220592x~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:52 am ((PDT)) Hi, I have a 1977 vintage Super 7B, and am looking into converting the headstock drive belt from the original "V" belt drive to the newer Poly V belt drive. Has anyone done this conversion? Does Myfords supply parts to do the conversion? I cannot find any details on the website as to parts/prices of the bits required. I know you can get a conversion kit from Hemingways, is it easy to do? Is it worth the time spent machining and stripping down things and fitting? I am also going to fit a inverter drive at the same time. Any input from other users would be greatly received. Chris ------- Re: Super 7B Poly V Belt conversion Posted by: "derek_tuckey" dt16millerx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:02 am ((PDT)) Hi Chris, I have a Super 7B of roughly the same vintage as yours and I fitted an Inverter/Phase motor from Newton Tesla in 2003 did not find the need to replace the V belt. I would do the Inverter job first which will make a considerable difference and then you may find as I did that the existing belt is fine because it so seldom has to be moved. Derek Tuckey ------- Re: Super 7B Poly V Belt conversion Posted by: "MikeD" durnfjmx~xxaol.com Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 11:21 am ((PDT)) Absolutely second what Derek says here, since I fitted a Newton Tesla conversion also around 2002/3, I rarely need to change the belt position, only engage backgear for really slow work. MikeD ------- Re: Super 7B Poly V Belt conversion Posted by: "entofficex~xxaol.com" entofficex~xxaol.com Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:07 pm ((PDT)) I third what Derek said -- put one of Newton's variable speed control with a 3 phase motor on my super 7 b last year -- it's a new machine -- it purrs and you rarely have to change the belt (I use the link belt). Joel ------- Myford Lever Operated Collet Chuck [MyMyford] Posted by: "Mike Crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:40 am ((PDT)) Does anyone out there have a Myford lever operated collet chuck? I ask because I'm renovating one, and I need some information. The hinged frame which the lever operates retains two slipper blocks which run in a groove in the rotating part of the chuck. On my example the two slipper blocks are made from some red fibre material, and are very worn. Wear aside, they look wrong to me, and I wonder if they should really be made from a material such as phosphor bronze. Any help appreciated. Mike ------- Re: Myford Lever Operated Collet Chuck Posted by: "Peter Dobson" peterdx~xxmodelrail.net Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 9:18 am ((PDT)) Now there's a funny thing..... I have one of these beasties, bought second hand sometime ago. I never got round to using it and it is now surplus to requirements!!!! However mine has a 'bronze'? casting for the hinged frame to which the lever is fitted and this has a steel 'bolt' top and bottom. The top bolt is fitted with a lubricator. Both bolts have a spigot on the end which locates in a hole in a COMPLETE BRONZE? RING in which the remainder of the chuck body rotates. There is a circlip style washer which I assume enables one to dismantle the front from the rear of the chuck. There is no sign of any slipper blocks. The question now is to decide which is the genuine one - or maybe they both are. regards Peter Dobson ------- Re: Myford Lever Operated Collet Chuck Posted by: "Mike Crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:10 am ((PDT)) Peter. Thanks, that's very interesting. My chuck has the cast bronze frame ring with two spigots and lock nuts, but no evidence of another bronze bearing ring or a retaining circlip. On my chuck the two spigots simply retain the two short slipper blocks (which I'm pretty sure are not original) in the groove in the rotating head. If your bearing ring is continuous, how does it fit into the groove in the head? Is it split? I wonder if the design evolved over time? Mike ------- Re: Myford Lever Operated Collet Chuck Posted by: "Peter Dobson" peterdx~xxmodelrail.net Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:00 am ((PDT)) Mike. Short of dismantling it I am really not sure how it comes apart. The circlip may be the key - pun intended - to how it all fits together. Further investigations will have to await the morrow as workshop is in garage and it raineth anon. Also it is cold out there.... Peter D ------- Re: Myford Lever Operated Collet Chuck Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:24 pm ((PDT)) Peter, I quite understand. Thank you for your input anyway. Mike ------- Re: Myford Lever Operated Collet Chuck Posted by: "Peter Dobson" peterdx~xxmodelrail.net Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:27 am ((PDT)) Mike, I have now had a chance to examine my piece of kit more closely. Please forgive the simple description but it helps with understanding my prattlings - I hope. At the rear there is the thingy that screws onto the headstock mandrel and at the front there is a closing ring. My closing ring is shiny and has a pin in it that fixes a spring in place - I found this out after taking the beastie apart. The spring would appear to have some connection (pun again!) with a ring of gear tooth like 'bumps' on the face that is revealed when the ring is removed. However I cannot prove that assertion since the spring in mine would appear to be broken. Having said that I am slightly at a loss as to what the spring might do anyway. When the closing ring is removed the centre piece of the whole caboodle falls out and causes extreme pain to your foot - unless you do it over the bench or just happen to know what you are doing. No I didn't know but the bench saved my feet. Anyway, the bit that falls out has tapered surfaces and a series of ball bearings around its circumference and a woodruff key to prevent rotation all of which matches the inside of the rest of it. With this out of the way it is easy to see how the rest of it fits together. The rear portion of the remainder of the device has a reduced diameter at its front end with a groove machined around it. The bronze bearing ring is fitted over this reduced diameter and then a steel ring is placed on the same diameter. The thickness of this ring must be fairly critical as the circlip is then fitted into the groove to hold everything in place. This last para is partly assumption as I have not removed the circlip so the actual details might be a little different. I trust that this all makes sense. Peter Dobson ------- Re: Myford Lever Operated Collet Chuck Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:47 am ((PDT)) Peter. Thanks very much for going to this trouble. Much appreciated. I can relate to most of your description (I'm guessing that the leaf springs inside the closing cap, and the matching serrations, are there to reduce the risk of the cap spinning off when the collet is released with the lathe running). However I have difficulty matching up your description of the bronze bearing arrangement with what I have in front of me here. The main sliding body on my chuck, which is roughly 2.85 inch outside diameter for its entire length, has a 1/2 wide groove machined in it. Base diameter of groove 2.5 inch. There is a slight wear ridge on the body adjacent to one side of the groove, but no signs of circlip grooves or the like. So I can't see how a bronze bearing ring could fit into the groove unless it were split. Incidentally on my chuck the two threaded spigots which locate the rotating body inside the outer bronze frame ring (using slipper blocks on my chuck) just have slotted ends for a screwdriver (no oil nipple). I wonder if your chuck and mine are different versions? Regards Mike ------- spindle collets [MyMyford] Posted by: "sardinesarnie" sardinesarniex~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue May 12, 2009 1:07 pm ((PDT)) Hello All. New to Myford lathes and would appreciate any help here. I have a Myford lever operated collet system that attaches to the machine spindle nose.The main heavy steel body seems to slide and rotate freely, and this in turn fits inside a circular cast yoke with a long ball handle attached. From web photos, I can see that an articulated joint then attaches to a threaded hole somewhere near the far side of the spindle area. I have the spring collets and the end "closing"ring. As far as I can tell, nothing is missing. I can see how the collet assembly works without the long ball ended lever/yoke parts simply by tightening the end closing ring by hand, but can someone explain to me what the ball ended lever and yoke is for? More lengthy questions to follow when I have sorted my way through the boxes. Many thanks for any help. ------- Re: spindle collets Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com Date: Wed May 13, 2009 2:40 am ((PDT)) I have no real knowledge of this but when I have seen them the impression I got was that if you bring the handle away from the headstock the collet stops spinning. Maybe it acts as a clutch to allow rapid changing of work pieces for production work? ------- Re: spindle collets Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed May 13, 2009 2:56 am ((PDT)) The lever is to open and close the collet quickly. The closing ring is not intended to be used to close the collet. It is adjusted so that the collet is fully closed when the lever is moved fully to the left (towards the headstock). The collet will then release when the lever is moved fully to the right. The collet does not stop spinning if it's opened while the spindle is rotating, but it will release its grip on a long workpiece so that (for example) the workpiece can be fed further through the headstock. Obviously this needs to be done carefully to avoid injuries, and it's safer, though slower, to stop the spindle. HTH Mike ------- Re: spindle collets Posted by: "sardinesarnie" sardinesarniex~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed May 13, 2009 11:44 am ((PDT)) Mike, Tim. Thanks for your fast response. Mike, I can now see how it should work. I had thought of trying the collet set up with the spindle rotating, but had visions of horrible mechanical things happening. All clear now. Thanks. ------- Accuracy of my Super 7 ??? [MyMyford] Posted by: "lseacombe" leex~xxseacombe.plus.com Date: Wed May 20, 2009 4:21 pm ((PDT)) Hi All I am new to lathe work and I'm loving it but I'm a bit concerned on the accuracy of my fairly newly aquired Super 7. I put a round bar in today about 1" dia. and 8" long. I used a 4 jaw chuck and managed to get it centered to within 0.001" on a DTI, I then centre drilled the other end and added the tailstock with a rotating centre. I took three or four lightish cuts then a final at 0.002"; after this I took the bar out and measured it over about 5" the bar tapers 0.001" (thousand of a inch) towards the tailstock, now being new to this I don't know if this is acceptable or miles out? The lathe is bolted to a large half inch thick steel plate. I don't have the money for fancy engineers spirit levels but my ordinary level shows I'm as close as, is there a cheaper more accurate way to tell if the bed is level? One other thing is no matter how little I take off each pass I never get the lovely bright finsh on steel they get on the videos I've seen even with the power feed is there a secret I'm missing? Any help really appreciated Lee ------- Re: Accuracy of my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "Rich Dean" toolman8x~xxcopper.net cmsteamer Date: Wed May 20, 2009 5:51 pm ((PDT)) Lee, 0.001" is not all that bad. Depends on what you need. The tailstock is adjustable in the horizontal plane. See the grub screw in the front under the locking shaft. There is another in the rear. CW rotation of the front screw moves the TS toward you, but you must slack off the rear one first. Reverse all that for rearward movement. Also, check the base fit between the ways. If you can feel any loosness, there are two gib screws on the rear of the base. A loose TS will shift about causing erratic errors. RichD ------- Re: Accuracy of my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "Frank Chadwick" fr4nk.chadwickx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Thu May 21, 2009 1:39 am ((PDT)) Lee, Taking last things first, to get a good finish you need a sharp tool and the correct speed for the job. The speed depends on the material being worked and the radius. (The greater the radius, the faster the linear speed past the tool, there are standard tables for this). On your lathe alignment, a half thou in 5 inches sounds pretty fair to me but you shouldn't have involved the tailstock. The basic alignment involves getting any twist out of the lathe bed by judicious shimming. Have a look at Rollies dad's method, http://www.neme-s.org/Rollie's_Dad's_Method.pdf As to the tailstock, one way to check offset is to fit centres to headstock and tailstock and bring them together, nipping something the size of a razor blade between. If everything is perfect the blade will sit up vertically and be at right angles to the bed. I'f you're not far from Oldham I would be happy to pop round and help get you off the ground. Frank C. ------- Re: Accuracy of my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "Thomas Staubo" thstaubox~xxonline.no t_staubo Date: Thu May 21, 2009 6:39 am ((PDT)) Here's another article on setting up a lathe, written by Chris Heapy: http://kansai.anesth.or.jp/gijutu/kousaku/easyweb.easynet.co.uk/chr ish/tsetup.htm Thomas ------- Re: Accuracy of my Super 7 ??? Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com timperrin97 Date: Thu May 21, 2009 12:30 pm ((PDT)) I find to get a really good finish it helps to have the angle between the back face of the tool (not the cutting edge but where the tiny tiny bits of swarf dust builds up) and the workpiece very small. This allows the swarf to build up and act like a REALLY fine sand paper. Gives a nice shiny finish. ------- Questions for Canadian Myford owners [MyMyford] Posted by: "coppermine65" coppermine65x~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Jul 2, 2009 6:52 am ((PDT)) Hi everyone, I am a newbie to machining and I am thinking about buying an ML7 to fabricate parts for audio equipment. There is a used ML7 that I am considering but this particular machine doesn't come with a steady rest or a 4 jaw chuck. It's missing some change gears as well, but I don't plan on threading just yet. Do BusyBee machine chucks, faceplates or steadies fit a Myford or can they be easily adapted? Failing that could you reccommmend a good mail order place. I found one from the web that had all the Myford accessories I wanted, but the store in question stopped answering my queries after I told them I was from Canada. Thanks Jonathan ------- Re: Questions for Canadian Myford owners Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca kstrauss7 Date: Thu Jul 2, 2009 7:37 am ((PDT)) I live in Toronto with a S7B and am always looking for Myford accessories. There are many sources that I have used: make my own, eBay, used machinery stores, garage sales, purchases/trades from friends, mail order from Myford http://myford.com/ although phoning seems to work much better than email), mail order from RDG http://rdgtools.co.uk/ most of their stuff is made in India with acceptable but not great quality) and trips to UK model engineering shows (rather expensive when air fare is included!). Keep looking and you'll find stuff. The major advantage of the Myford 4-jaw is that it mounts directly on the spindle which lets larger work swing in the gap. I currently use a Bison 4-jaw mounted on a backing plate that doesn't provide that advantage. New England Brass (http://brassandtool.com/Chucks-Lathe.html) has a Bison to directly fit a Myford. I believe that they ship to Canada or you could visit them at N.A.M.E.S. or in Massachusetts. The faceplate for a BusyBee 2227L could probably be used on a Myford by making a threaded disk to fit into its center. I just did an "eyeball" check and it appears that it would just clear the Myford gap. I don't recall seeing anything else at BusyBee that is suitable for easy adaptation. Please let us know if you find something! Where in Canada do you live? ------- Re: Questions for Canadian Myford owners Posted by: "coppermine65" coppermine65x~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Jul 2, 2009 10:35 am ((PDT)) Ken, Thanks for that info. I am in Ottawa. We have a pretty good used machinery dealer in Ottawa (www.marksmach.com). I emailed him about Myford accessories but I haven't heard back from him yet. Jonathan ------- Re: Questions for Canadian Myford owners Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca kstrauss7 Date: Thu Jul 2, 2009 12:30 pm ((PDT)) What supplier refused to ship to Canada? If ordering from the US beware of the exorbitant "handling fees" charged by UPS. USPS (post office) works well. If ordering from the UK remember that Customs Classification Number Item 8461.90.10.91 (Tools - machine tools for working metal) is duty free but you will still have to pay GST/PST. ------- Re: Questions for Canadian Myford owners Posted by: "coppermine65" coppermine65x~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Jul 2, 2009 8:00 pm ((PDT)) Ken, I was dealing with www.myford-lathes.com. It wasn't that he refused to ship to Canada, it's just that after a prompt reply saying he had all the accessories I wanted, there has been deafening silence after I asked whether he would ship them to Canada. I did find www. mainwaymachinery.com, which is in Burlington. He said he had a decent condition ML7 and accessories, but he wanted $2K for an ML7. I thought was a bit steep since it only came with a 3 jaw chuck. For that price I though some more accessories would have been included. Jonathan ------- Re: Questions for Canadian Myford owners Posted by: "Dan Miller" 59vwx~xxcomcast.net dguthriem Date: Sat Jul 4, 2009 7:53 am ((PDT)) Hi Ken, Can you elaborate on the mounting of the chuck directly to the spindle? Does it screw on to the spindle nose or have a morse taper spindle? I went to that Bison chuck site but most seem to require a backplate...I'm missing something. Thanks Dan ------- Re: Questions for Canadian Myford owners Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca kstrauss7 Date: Sat Jul 4, 2009 8:13 am ((PDT)) I have seen Myford supplied Pratt-Burnard chucks with female threads within the body to screw directly onto the Myford nose. On the referenced website see their item number 7-805-0455 which claims 1-1/8"x12W threads. Looking more carefully, that item appears to be a 3-jaw instead of a 4-jaw chuck. My Bison 4-jaw is very similar to 7-850-0600 and is mounted on a normal cast iron back plate. They advertise item number MYA3091 on http://brassandtool.com/Backplate-Adaptors.html although it is probably best to cut your own backplate threads to exactly match your nose. On the other hand, the central bore of my chuck is about 1.6" so it might be feasible to make a mounting adapter that recesses most of the Myford nose within the chuck's body. ------- Re: Questions for Canadian Myford owners Posted by: "jim" lathe-partsx~xxnew-or-used.co.uk checker71uk Date: Sun Jul 5, 2009 4:10 pm ((PDT)) Hi All in Canada My name is Jim Marshall my company is called Lathe_Parts,I break Myford 7 Lathes for a living and have been shipping to Canada for years. I am on 44 1205 480 666 mon-fri 9-5pm UK time. lathe-partsx~xxnew-or-used.co.uk You will find me on ebay.co.uk under lathe-parts (im the guy with the red checker back ground. Best regards Jim ------- Re: Modifications to a ML7R [MyMyford] Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com klokenz Date: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:09 am ((PDT)) At 11/07/2009 20:40, you wrote: >I'm becoming ever more frustrated by the limited range of angles >that the topslide can be rotated (+/- 45 degrees). I am considering >imitating the Super 7 design by fitting a dovetailed collar on the >base of the topslide, boring out the cross slide table and drilling >and tapping the table sided for clamp screws. >To complete the changes, I will fit a smaller diameter micrometer >dial on the topslide so that it does not foul the cross slide >feedscrew support bracket. Bob, you're clearly intending to make a proper engineering job of it, and I wish you success. George Thomas mentions in his Workshop Manual that you can fit two bars through the tee slots, and have two more bars fixed to these, with holes for the hold down bolts. He doesn't illustrate this, but it's understandable (I hope!). It's almost tempting to simple arrange a small bracket or block on each side of the cross slide to take the bolts. I needed to be able to swing the topslide on my ML7 around for a job that wouldn't recurr very often, but which had a definite time limit associated with it. In the end I made a simple adapter plate from 3mm steel that sits on top of the cross slide, held down by 6mm countersunk screws into home made tee nuts. It has a clearance hole to pass the spigot under the topslide, which is thus still located by its usual hole in the cross slide. A hole at each side allows (just) a 6mm screw through the topslide arcs with a nut underneath. The downside is that this raises the tool by the thickness of the plate, but for me this was acceptable as there was adequate movement available on my QC tool holder, and I only had to adjust one tool. Wouldn't want to go any thinner for the plate than 3mm as otherwise I think it might be too flexible, but for my job 3mm was OK. A somewhat savage approach, but quick to implement and it got the job done. No prizes at an ME exhibition though! Kevin NW England, UK ------- Re: Modifications to a ML7R Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:34 pm ((PDT)) Hi Kevin, Many years ago I made something similar to the GHT idea being two angular C shaped brackets with the top and bottom arms of the C fitting into the t slots of the cross slide and tapped holes in the central part of each C to clamp the topslide. All seemed to work OK at the time but when I dug it out a few weeks back for one of those "pushing my luck with a small lathe" jobs, I suffered from chatter which I tracked down to these brackets not clamping solidly. Now I have more time (just retired!), I thought I'd sort the problem out by imitating the S7 clamp which reputed clamps very well without needing excessive tightening. I wish I had thought of your pragmatic solution instead of my C brackets all those years ago but Hey Ho! With the help of a couple of contributors to this group, I now have most of the dimensional info I need. I'll call Myford tomorrow to order a couple of the hardened locking pads and then I can finalise the machining dimensions. Regards Bob ------- ML7 tailstock barrel depth measurement [MyMyford] Posted by: "obald102" obaldx~xxihug.co.nz Date: Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:25 am ((PDT)) How deep is a blind hole drilled from the tailstock? How would i know? Anyone got an elegant way of measuring this on an ML7? I've seen that the Super 7s have a crude scale marked in 1/8" graduations on the barrel but ML7s don't even have this. I'm not up to making a micrometer scale for the tailstock wheel. Any advance on taping a 6" rule to the tailstock and a nail to the back of the chuck (so to speak)? ------- Re: ML7 tailstock barrel depth measurement Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:32 am ((PDT)) Buy one of the cheap digital verniers and cut off the jaws and fix it on a rigid bracket on the tailstock and attach the moving part to the barrel. In use, touch the drill tip onto the workpiece and set the zero to get direct digital readout of depth drilled. hth Bob ------- Re: ML7 tailstock barrel depth measurement Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com m0czp Date: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:23 am ((PDT)) Hi, Simple way is to make a collar with clamping screw to fit the drill you are using (diameter is not at all critical, whatever you have to hand). Really, really simple way is to wrap a piece of insulating or masking tape around the drill or to use a permanent marker (this is more difficult to see). None of these ways are very accurate but you should be able to work to a 1/16" (1.5mm) this way. If you are going to do lots of holes or you need really accurate drilling then a more sophisticated approach (modified caliper, clamped collar on tailstock barrel and DTI, graduated handwheel etc) is called for. Hope this helps. Tim ------- Re: ML7 tailstock barrel depth measurement Posted by: "Pierre EHLY" pierreehlyx~xxorange.fr pierreehly Date: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:27 am ((PDT)) Hi, http://www.model-engineer.co.uk/ look here in recent articles (3° from top) brgds pierre ------- Re: ML7 tailstock barrel depth measurement Posted by: "Christopher Hicks" cmh21x~xxcam.ac.uk Date: Mon Jul 13, 2009 4:04 am ((PDT)) It depends how accurate you need. The tailstock thread on my ML10 is 8TPI (I imagine the ML7 is the same), so I know a whole turn is 1/8", half a turn 1/16" etc. By eyeballing the angle of the handle and counting turns and part turns I reckon I could be accurate to about +/-0.01". To do better than that I, like many others, would suggest fitting a short, cheap digital scale. Christopher Hicks ------- ML7 Headstoke Spindle V Cone Pulley [MyMyford] Posted by: "berniew1936" berniew1936x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:23 am ((PDT)) Guys: Having never taken the headstock apart (I've only had the lathe for 8 months) I don't know the answer to this question. I have just found that the V cone pulley slips when tapping a largish thread (5/16 Whit); the small backgear on the end of the pulley stops along with the whole spindle and the pulleys keep moving. So how are they (the V code pulley and the small gear) joined together? Cheers Bernie ------- Re: ML7 Headstoke Spindle V Cone Pulley Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:05 am ((PDT)) They are a tight press fit or in your case not so tight. I'm sure I have read here how folks have overcome this problem but I've not remembered the detail. I suggest you search the archives here and see what has been written before. Bob ------- Re: ML7 Headstoke Spindle V Cone Pulley Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net cliffcoggin Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 7:23 am ((PDT)) The same happened on my ML7. Apparently the cone pulley was originally pressed onto the bronze gear. I had to remove the spindle in order to get access to all the components, and then glue them together again with Loctite. The job was easy, except for removal of the very tight sleeve (B13 in the manual) that holds the cone pulley assembly in place. Take the opportunity to renew the drive belt while the spindle is out and have a close look at the spindle bearings. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: ML7 Headstoke Spindle V Cone Pulley Posted by: "mark" mark.brown807x~xxntlworld.com madfreet Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:13 am ((PDT)) Which small gear are we talking about...I stripped my Headstock spindle down only a few weeks ago to replace a broken bull wheel; it's really very simple. Tell me what your problem is. Mark ------- Re: ML7 Headstoke Spindle V Cone Pulley Posted by: "berniew1936" berniew1936x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:28 am ((PDT)) Thanks for all the advice guys. I have drilled and tapped the smallest pulley, 1/4" BSF and put a grub screw in which seems to have fixed the problem. Cheers Bernie ------- Tool for removing V-cones? [MyMyford] Posted by: "Bob Salter" bob.salter1960x~xxgooglemail.com Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:40 am ((PDT)) What on earth do I use to remove the hex head screws in the v-cones? Would a 3/16 long socket do it or is there something better? Cheers Bob ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:47 am ((PDT)) Sorry but I can't follow which cones/screws you are talking about. Please expand. Bob ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Bob Salter" bob.salter1960x~xxgooglemail.com Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:52 am ((PDT)) I wish to remove the countershaft and spindle. In the pulleys for speed change there are hex head screws. I went and bought a socket set but nothing reaches them. Please be patient, I have no engineering knowledge. Thanks Bob ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:04 pm ((PDT)) OK I'm with you now. On my lathe there is one socket set screw in the groove of the smallest pulley. This needs a 1/8" allen key. If the short end won't reach, use the long end into the screw and a pair of pliers on the short end. When you take out the countershaft, look out for the loose key that will fall out and keep this safe. If you have other problems then come back and let us know which model you have. If you don't have it already, you can download manuals from the files section on this group. Hope this helps. Good luck Bob ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Bob Salter" bob.salter1960x~xxgooglemail.com salter_bob Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:08 pm ((PDT)) Hmmm, on mine, the socket set screw has a hex head, ie it looks like an allen key. I can't get a socket to reach it though. I have a 1954ish super 7. Thanks Bob ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "dmac_dexter" maclean.darrellx~xxgmail.com Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:18 pm ((PDT)) If you don't have an extra-long Allen head socket to reach down between the sheaves, then take a regular Allen wrench and insert the long leg into the screw head. Turn the short end with an adjustable wrench or pliers. ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:22 pm ((PDT)) Sounds like something non standard has been bodged in there Do you have a spare socket head cap screw that would fit on your hex head? If so put a couple of locked nuts on the end and use that to remove it. Good luck Bob ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net cliffcoggin Date: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:32 am ((PDT)) Agreed, and once it is out, throw it away and fit a standard Allan screw. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Bob Salter" bob.salter1960x~xxgooglemail.com salter_bob Date: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:54 am ((PDT)) I guess I will change them when I eventually get them out, however I'm not sure about it being a bodge. All the securing bolts are the same including the one for the headstock wick. I'll add a pic of them later. Thanks for the tips. Cheers Bob ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:54 am ((PDT)) I'm intrigued by these screws Bob. I've not seen a grub screw with a male driving end before so I look forward to your photo. My ML7R (1979 vintage) has the S7 headstock but must be a later design as there is no access to the headstock wick other than by removing the spindle. Whereabouts are you out of interest? Bob Near Southampton UK ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Bob Salter" bob.salter1960x~xxgooglemail.com salter_bob Date: Sat Jul 18, 2009 8:25 am ((PDT)) Problem solved. In the absence of anything useful I went to the pound shop and got some small sockets. I proceeded to reduce them on the belt sander until I got the damn thing out. It turns out I have the ml7 countershaft but without the woodruff key. I don't mean it was missing, it has never had one on the speed change pulley as there is no keyway in the shaft. The lathe is circa 1954 and is a super 7 according to the serial number. I have my doubts but will keep going with it. I'm just outside Perth in Scotland by the way. Cheers Bob ------- Re: Tool for removing V-cones? Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Sat Jul 18, 2009 9:23 am ((PDT)) Sounds like you have a homebrew hybrid there Bob. If you arm yourself with various manuals from the files section, then you should be able to work out what is from what. There are two types of bed with wider and narrow shears. I think your serial no means the narrow shear version. Perth is a bit too far away for me to offer to pop round and help!! Cheers Bob ------- Tumbler Reverse Gear [MyMyford] Posted by: "rodney.j.wilsonx~xxbtinternet.com" Date: Sat Jul 18, 2009 6:33 am ((PDT)) In a 'senior moment' I've stripped four or five teeth from the 30T fibre tumbler reverse gear on my ML7R. I'm not used to the new saddle stop I'm afraid, but am grateful for the 'weak link'! How do I go about removing the old gear and replacing with the new one? It doesn't appear obvious to me at all at the moment. Also, while here, has anyone got a replacement that they can supply quicker than Myford? No response from Myford this morning by 'phone or email. ------- Re: Tumbler Reverse Gear Posted by: "John Quirke" jjquirkex~xxeircom.net hinkela2 Date: Sat Jul 18, 2009 7:25 am ((PDT)) HI Rodney. You are not the first and you won't be the last; try this number on Ebay 360169361491 from http://myworld.ebay.co.uk/marypoppinsbag/ Yours in the workshop John ------- Re: Tumbler Reverse Gear Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Sat Jul 18, 2009 8:25 am ((PDT)) The pins are retained from the rear of the quadrant IIRC. Remove the quadrant and you should be able to see what to do. It is years since I stripped mine (in a Junior moment!!) but I don't recall it being difficult to change them. I can vouch for marypoppinsbag as I know the chap who makes the gears - a first class guy and his daughter runs the website. nb I have no commercial connection with MPB Good Luck Bob ------- Re: Tumbler Reverse Gear Posted by: "John Stevenson" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk Date: Sat Jul 18, 2009 3:07 pm ((PDT)) If you are desperate and can get to NG10 1FR tomorrow then we have some in stock. If you need to buy by post then you can save a couple of bob. http://www.metoolsonline.com/ under gears. John S. ------- Re: Tumbler Reverse Gear Posted by: "rodney.j.wilsonx~xxbtinternet.com" Date: Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:02 am ((PDT)) Mine is done and ready for when the replacement gear arrives. Quite easy. The pin pushes out from the rear of the lever. I did mine with a half ton arbour press but guess the vice would work too. Important to press, or tap, on the whole visible pin. The 'inner dia' is a plug to the oil reservoir that's best left untouched. It does look like a sleeved hole! I shall use a small piece of paper behind the wheel, when reassembling, to make sure it's not too tight. Thanks All. Thanks Bob for the emails and John for the offer of a 'Sunday opening' - I've ordered via Ebay for postal delivery. ------- countershaft [MyMyford] Posted by: "sardinesarnie" sardinesarniex~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:48 pm ((PDT)) Hello All. Would appreciate(more)help for my super7 here if any one can assist. Finally fitted a motor to the beast and started it up. Oh dear, horrible noises from the countershaft area. No real amount of play evident before, but now under power and the noise is er,..noisy. The oil cups are devouring oil faster than I can put it in. So I suspect worn oilite bushes and possibly bearings at the clutch assembly end. Are the bearings just ordinary bearings available from bearing stockists? Any traps to catch the unwary when dismantling? I can't detect any play when holding the countershaft and trying to rock it though. Anyone with any experience of replacing said bushes/bearings? I assume that the oilite bushes are only available from Myford(?) Many thanks yet again for your advice. Regards, ------- Re: countershaft Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com Date: Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:29 pm ((PDT)) I found when removing the countershaft on the ML7 it is REALLY hard to get it out from the overarm. I had to remove the entire assembly and knock it out with a 3/4" bar and a hammer. It was not an easy task. Beware that getting it back in is nearly as hard. ------- Re: countershaft Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:34 am ((PDT)) That's curious. Dismantling and assembling the clutch and countershaft of my ML7 was a piece of cake, though I didn't need to change the bearings. The fiddliest part of the job was getting at the small screws that secure the plates in the middle of the belt guard. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: countershaft Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:56 am ((PDT)) I found that at the points where the bushes sat the actual shaft was quite heavily worn so as a result it was quite hard to get the rest of the countershaft, which was now a larger diameter, through the bushes. I think I need to replace the countershaft and bushes at some point. ------- Re: countershaft Posted by: "mark" mark.brown807x~xxntlworld.com madfreet Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 3:49 am ((PDT)) Although the shaft is worn where it sits within the bushes, the fact remains that the shaft had to pass through these bushes when it was made ...i.e. The shaft itself hasn't grown in its circumference...plus the fact that the bushes themselves will have worn too. I took my countershaft apart a few weeks ago as it was getting excessively warm; the shaft itself was scored grooved where it sat in the bearings. I put this down to lack of lubrication by its former owner..indeed it looked like they had used grease instead of the recommended oil. The oilite bearings looked to be unmarked...ten minutes very careful work with a diamond file got the shaft in reasonable shape (removing this shaft renders the lathe unusable) removing all the old grease and reassembly cured the overheating problems. Yes they are a tight fit but excess force was never needed...a gear puller helps with these sort of jobs..also check that the bracket hasn't twisted and the bearing holes line up (see Peter Neils lathe rebuild article about this). good luck Mark ------- Long Cross-Slide [MyMyford] Posted by: "berniew1936" berniew1936x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:51 am ((PDT)) Guys, I have bought a ML7 Long Cross-Slide with leadscrew and gib strip complete, and have been trying to fit it to my ML7 but the long lead screw hits the back of the groove in the saddle casting before the cross slide gets anywhere near the center of the bed, Is there something I am missing or doing wrong? Cheers Bernie ------- Long Cross-Slide Posted by: "HG" hgx~xxallthemunros.com henry9828 Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:19 pm ((PDT)) I seem to recall experiencing the same problem years (and years) ago. I think you have to drill a clearance hole at the back of the saddle for the longer feedscrew. Regards, Henry ------- Long Cross-Slide Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:59 am ((PDT)) I have the long feedscrew and have not had this issue. From memory my saddle already had a hole all the way through. I'm not 100% sure though because my machine in in boxes at present. ------- Re: Long Cross-Slide Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:06 am ((PDT)) I certainly did not have this problem with my 1979 ML7R. The long slide fitted without modification. It could well be that in the days when the OPs machine was built that the long cross slide was not an option and so there was no need to drill all the way through the saddle dovetail. Bob ------- Why 12 TPI on ML2 feedscrews? [MyMyford] Posted by: "avelingdx" weeridcaurx~xxhotmail.com Date: Sun Aug 2, 2009 4:44 pm ((PDT)) Any ideas on why Myford chose to use 12 TPI for cross slide and topslide feed screws on its ML2 (and pobably early ML4s as well)? Coming up with engraved dials is a pain - choose from 83 or 85 divisions. I had both on the ML2 I'm working on at the moment. On the cross slide was an 83 division dial (I believe my Father made this one) and on the topslide was an 85 division dial (which I'd made many years ago). Neither dial were adjustable. The lathe now sports 7/16" x 10 TPI Acme feedscrews with adjustable 100 division dials. Since there's room for these larger feedscrews on the ML2 why did Myford elect to use the 12 TPI ones? I believe ML7s have 3/8" x 10 TPI feedscrews. These would have fitted the ML2 better but I had a 7/16" x 10 Acme tap in right hand so that made the decision for me. I'd appreciate any thoughts on this matter. My ML2 is an early one and had the weeny mandrel and small spindle nose of 7/8" Whitworth. It's now 1" x 8 TPI UNC with a 1.250" diameter register, still bored #1 Morse taper. Regards, Alan S ------- Re: Why 12 TPI on ML2 feedscrews? Posted by: "Ian Newman" ian_newx~xxyahoo.com ian_new Date: Sun Aug 2, 2009 11:36 pm ((PDT)) Hi, I would guess that the original design of the tool just used a convenient size. The market that the lathe was aimed at in the 1930s assumed a certain level of engineering ability, most users would be working with firm joint calipers and possibly an external mic. Many small lathes of this period do not have calibrated slides. My Drummond 3 1/2 inch flat bed from 1912 has no calibrated collars on any of the feeds. Ian ------- Re: Why 12 TPI on ML2 feedscrews? Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com m0czp Date: Mon Aug 3, 2009 1:52 am ((PDT)) Dear Alan, 12 tpi was quite a common thread for cross and top slides pre-war (and for some post war). I refurbished a Portass S for my Godson a year or so ago and that came with 12 tpi cross and top slide feed screws. I made new feedscrews at 10 tpi and had a couple of spare myford fedscrew nuts which I cut down and fitted. Whilst I was at it I made friction dials as well. All in all an interesting exercise - not difficult but I took it slowly and carefully. Regards Tim ------- Why 12 TPI on ML2 feedscrews? Posted by: "Tony Griffiths" tonyx~xxlathes.co.uk tonylathes Date: Mon Aug 3, 2009 7:24 am ((PDT)) http://www.lathes.co.uk/myford/page12.html ------- Why 12 TPI on ML2 feedscrews? Posted by: "John Stevenson" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk Date: Mon Aug 3, 2009 10:38 am ((PDT)) Tony, part way down on that page it says "The changewheels (20 D.P. and 20-degree pressure angle like those on the later & Series lathes) " ? Should be 14 1/2 degree pressure angle and 7 instead of & ? Sorry to nit pick John S. ------- Why 12 TPI on ML2 feedscrews? Posted by: "Tony Griffiths" tonyx~xxlathes.co.uk tonylathes Date: Tue Aug 4, 2009 11:01 am ((PDT)) Thanks John, nit-picking very acceptable -- and always welcome where these details are concerned. My best wishes, Tony ------- Tapped holes [MyMyford] Posted by: "sardinesarnie" sardinesarniex~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Aug 4, 2009 12:26 pm ((PDT)) Hello All. There are two 1/4 BSF tapped holes on top of the saddle on my super7. One is on the left hand side of the top face of the saddle approximately mid point,the other is also on the top face of the saddle, about 40mm to the right of the saddle clamp bolt. Both have grub screws used as "plugs". Having looked at other machines, they also have these holes. I think the left hand hole is for securing a travelling steady via a bolt, can anyone tell me what the right hand tapped hole is for? Many thanks. Regards ------- Re: Tapped holes Posted by: "Mike Crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net mikecb1uk Date: Wed Aug 5, 2009 2:00 am ((PDT)) The right hand hole is often used for a support for coolant spray. Mike ------- Cross feed [MyMyford] Posted by: "the_iliad26" stephen.white200x~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:49 am ((PDT)) Hi, In need of help again. My cross feed appears to have some play in when moving forwards and backwards. I have adjusted the adjusting collar to the point where I cannot turn the hand wheel, and I still have some play in it. I have now altered the adjusting wheel so I can operate the cross slide. Any advice? Stephen White ------- Re: Cross feed Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net mikecb1uk Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:06 am ((PDT)) Stephen: Unless you re-engineer the design and fit thrust bearings and anti backlash nuts you will never eliminate backlash altogether. If the backlash is reasonable, a few thou or less on the dial, just accept it and learn to allow for it. Most of the time you will only be moving the slide in one direction, so it doesn't matter much. If the backlash is really excessive, it probably means both the nut and the screw are worn, and the only cure is to replace them both. You could try changing the nut only, but my experience is that the screw wears unevenly, so you may then end up with backlash that varies significantly over the travel of the slide. Mike P.S. Don't expect a new nut and screw to give you zero backlash. The last time I replaced mine the backlash from new was around 4 thou. ------- Re: Cross feed Posted by: "Mike Myatovic" armed_and_hammeredx~xxhotmail.com Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:24 am ((PDT)) Wouldnt worry about it, most machine tools have backlash, you just got to make sure to take up the slop in the right direction depending on if you're turning or boring. And you're not doing your wrists or your cross feed nuts any favour by tightening it up every time there's a little bit of play, you're basically speeding up the wear by causing more friction with the nut set that tightly. If you get a massive increase in backlash after you've adjusted the play, then i'd suspect you have something abrasive on the screw and/or feed nut. ------- Re: Cross feed Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:49 am ((PDT)) You might want to consider this modification http://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/projects/MYF001/index.html especially if you replace the screw and feed nut (which are now only available as matched pairs from Myford). Then you can eliminate the contribution to backlash from the dial end just leaving that from the play in the nut. If you do go down the ballscrew route, be aware that these offer so little friction that slides will move 'by themselves' during machining and locking each movement axis will be essential. Bob ------- Conical Facing. [MyMyford] Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com timperrin97 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:29 am ((PDT)) Hello, I have just reassembled my ML7 after having a bed regrind and repainting it to find that the conical facing problem that I had attempted to solve is still present. What is my next port of call? I think it unlikely that the bed has been incorrectly reground, having been done by Myford. To clarify what I mean by conical facing I am on about -- when you face off a piece of metal the end is not face but very slightly raised in the centre. ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca kstrauss7 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:39 am ((PDT)) I assume that you have locked the carriage while facing. How much is "very slightly"? ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com timperrin97 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:49 am ((PDT)) I have locked the carriage. Very slightly is 5 thou back from flat. If that isn't clear do say and I shall try to explain. That is on a piece that extends about 2.5" from centre. ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 am ((PDT)) Your central guide on the saddle is 'shagged'knackered, worn. Do you really want me to tell you how I did mine? Norm ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com timperrin97 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:47 am ((PDT)) Feel free. I have a feeling it won't be cheap or easy. ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:50 am ((PDT)) From what I read, a lathe is normally set up to face very very slightly concave but I can't recall why. Bob ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com timperrin97 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:53 am ((PDT)) I also remember hearing that but mine is facing convexed. Does anyone know why it should be concaved? ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca kstrauss7 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:22 pm ((PDT)) They story that I have heard is that a convex surface will rock when placed on a flat. A concave surface will be stable. ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com timperrin97 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:45 pm ((PDT)) Ken, But a flat surface would also be stable? I find that a little odd, but if it has been done in the real world it MUST be beneficial. ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca kstrauss7 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:29 pm ((PDT)) If the facing were *precisely* flat it would certainly be stable. However, there is always a slight error and it is preferable to err on the side of concave instead of permitng the possibility of convex. ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "Norman Atkinson" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 1:13 pm ((PDT)) > But a flat surface would also be stable? I find that a little odd, > but if it has been done in the real world it MUST be beneficial. The two faces will wring together. Your saddle adjustment lies in No's 1 and 4 shears. Simple arithmetic, Next? N ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "sardinesarnie" sardinesarniex~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:39 pm ((PDT)) Hi, as you have had the bed reground, the headstock assembly must have been removed. I have not removed the headstock assembly from a Myford, but have you checked the alignment of the headstock bearing centre line relative to the machine bedways? Viewed from above, the headstock bearing centreline should be aligned parallel to the ways. Does your machine turn a length of bar parallel over a 150mm length? ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com timperrin97 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:43 pm ((PDT)) I will have to try regular turning. I have literally finished assembling it today and was attempting to face off a casting. I will give it a go tomorrow. ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "c.j.s." callinicus1953x~xxyahoo.co.uk callinicus1953 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:36 pm ((PDT)) Hi Tim, Could it be that your saddle is worn off square. If your bed was worn enough to need grinding, then your saddle is also likely to be equally worn. If you have not yet converted it to the long rear shear, now might be a good time. Remember it is only the shears and gibs that keep things square. cj(UK) ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "Mike Myatovic" armed_and_hammeredx~xxhotmail.com hickstick_10 Date: Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:47 pm ((PDT)) Is your tool on center height, and is it sharp? The myford standard tool post is pretty sh!tty when it comes to holding tools, with only one screw doing all of the holding for you. When you had the regrind you sent the saddle to myford im assuming and they would have noticed the wear on the dovetail if it was extreme. So i would nip the toolpost tighter, or sharpen that tool bit, if it's leaving a teat in the center. Slowing down your feed as you approach the centre will also help. Also you can put a dial indicator on your cross feed and feed the dial point across your 4 jaw chuck or face plate while it's screwed to the spindle nose; this should tell you if your cross slide area is "shagged". regards mike ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "durnfjmx~xxaol.com" durnfjmx~xxaol.com durnfjm Date: Thu Aug 13, 2009 3:27 am ((PDT)) >>Can anyone point me to one of the articles detailing the conversion >>of an early S7 narrow guided saddle to rear shear guide >There is a detailed description in J A Radford's excellent and readily >available little book " Improvements and Accessories for your Lathe". Ah ha! - That's where it it! - I have the book. Many thanks, Mike ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com timperrin97 Date: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:13 am ((PDT)) If I were to put in a proper gib strip on 4th shear would it be possible for me to adjust my lathe to cut concaved? My thought is that you could slacken off the front gib to allow the saddle to sit slightly inwards and then clamp it on the rear gib. Could someone confirm that for me just so I know it is sound in theory. ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "timperrin97" perrti02x~xxgmail.com timperrin97 Date: Thu Aug 13, 2009 7:14 am ((PDT)) I have measured everything up and worked out that I have, at most 0.070" in which to put a piece of gauge plate. Are there any suitable ways of securing a piece of ground steel to the rear shim of the saddle? I don't think there is enough width to tap into securely and I would prefer it to be removable, so Araldite isn't an option (even though I'm not sure it would be a great idea anyway. Are there any other options or do I just need to find a way to tap and screw it? ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "Tim Ostley" Tim.Ostleyx~xxgooglemail.com m0czp Date: Thu Aug 13, 2009 7:24 am ((PDT)) Tim, Use Superglue (the proper stuff). If you want to remove it then gentle application of heat will separate. Tim ------- Re: Conical Facing. Posted by: "Bob Minchin" bob.minchinx~xxntlworld.com bobdownfield1 Date: Thu Aug 13, 2009 7:30 am ((PDT)) Try a piece of this http://www.cromwell.co.uk/CTL4130200A Drill a couple of holes in it and hang it odd a couple of dowel pins let into the rear shear interspersed between the gib adjusting screws that you will need to fit. hth Bob ------- Lead Screw Handwheel [MyMyford] Posted by: "berniew1936" berniew1936x~xxbtinternet.com berniew1936 Date: Tue Aug 18, 2009 9:14 am ((PDT)) Guys: How is the LeadScrew Handwheel fixed to the end of the leadscrew; is it just a push fit or screwed on? I have taken off the 7/16 nut from the end of the leadscrew but can't seem to move the handwheel. Cheers Bernie ------- Re: Lead Screw Handwheel Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk tonyjeffree Date: Tue Aug 18, 2009 9:36 am ((PDT)) Push fit but there's a keyway IIRC. Regards, Tony ------- Re: Lead Screw Handwheel Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxsympatico.ca kstrauss7 Date: Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:14 am ((PDT)) Strangely there is no keyway on my S7. ------- Re: Lead Screw Handwheel Posted by: "Rich Dean" toolman8x~xxcopper.net cmsteamer Date: Tue Aug 18, 2009 11:46 am ((PDT)) S7 here has a 5/32" pin thru the shaft and the narrower slotted handwheel hub has been jammed over the pin making a tight fit. RichD ------- Re: Lead Screw Handwheel Posted by: "jim" lathe-partsx~xxnew-or-used.co.uk checker71uk Date: Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:40 am ((PDT)) Hi Bernie. It's a push fit on to a hole with a pin in it; there is no keyway or woodruff key. regards Jim ------- How to make my hand wheel dials more readable [MyMyford] Posted by: "djmorrow2004" morrow2002x~xxlightspeed.ca djmorrow2004 Date: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:32 pm ((PDT)) Is the a preferred way to make the lines and numbers on the handwheel dials a bit more readable? My first thought was a light coat of black paint and then clean off the excess, above the numbers and lines, with some fine wet/dry sandpaper. I figured it would be safer to ask first before I made a bit of a mess of things. ------- Re: How to make my hand wheel dials more readable Posted by: "hickstick_10" armed_and_hammeredx~xxhotmail.com hickstick_10 Date: Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:01 pm ((PDT)) Rub a black wax crayon on the engraved lines and wipe it off with a rag. ------- Re: How to make my hand wheel dials more readable Posted by: "dave20thmay" d.j.wilsonx~xxmac.com dave20thmay Date: Fri Aug 21, 2009 1:40 am ((PDT)) That will not work very well. The lines are embossed not engraved, so there is nowhere for the coloured wax to stay. I think that the dial would have to be painted thinly. THEN LEFT to properly dry. I mean hard then gently buff off with, maybe a very fine diamond file. [snip] Regards Buddy ------- Re: How to make my hand wheel dials more readable Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk tonyjeffree Date: Fri Aug 21, 2009 1:28 am ((PDT)) Works better from a durability standpoint if you use something that is not oil/coolant soluble, such as cellulose paint for example. The wax approach works, but doesn't last very long in contact with oily fingers in my experience. Regards, Tony ------- Re: How to make my hand wheel dials more readable Posted by: "stevenson_engineers" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk Date: Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:04 am ((PDT)) Yes they are embossed and are made from a Mazak type material, can Mazak be anodised ? If so then matt black and then a light clean up with a diamond file much has been written below. It would be a more durable finish but I don't know if Mazak can be anodised ? Somewhere in the back of my mind [I know, let's not go there] was a recollection of some after market dials that were more cylindrical than bevelled and blacked. Anyone else remember these ? John S. ------- Re: How to make my hand wheel dials more readable Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net mikecb1uk Date: Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:41 am ((PDT)) Myford themselves sell quite nice replacement dials which I believe will fit ML7s. These are cylindrical rather than bevelled. IIRC they do both fixed and indexing varieties, and they're not outrageously expensive (for Myford). I have them on one of my machines, and they're nicely engraved, blacked, and polished. I guess you may be thinking of these John? Mike ------- Re: How to make my hand wheel dials more readable Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk tonyjeffree Date: Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:05 am ((PDT)) Yes, they do fit the ML7. Regards, Tony ------- Re: How to make my hand wheel dials more readable Posted by: "gerry waclawiak" gerrywacx~xxhotmail.co.uk gerrywac Date: Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:39 am ((PDT)) I turned up some new dials in aluminium put in the lines with a graver and stamped the numbers and skimmed down to remove the raised areas and then filled everything with gloss black enamel. The enamel was removed from the main areas when part dry with a rag dampened with thinner ensuring it was not removed from the markings. When dry a quick rub over with fine wire wool or abrasive briught the dials up a treat. I did think about anodising or laquering them for protection but in practice this did not prove necessary and they have been plain for years and still look new. Gerry Leeds UK ------- Re: Myford Clutch [MyMyford] Posted by: "brstandardfan" keithx~xxbritfix70054.waitrose.com Date: Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:12 pm ((PDT)) Tim Ostley wrote: > Dear David, It probably depends upon whether you have a jog facility on the VFD. If not then you would find the clutch useful for this purpose. I would probably keep the clutch anyway. My Super 7 has a clutch and VFD and I use both. Tim < David: Even with the jog feature on the VFD available, the clutch is still useful to feed power in in a controlled way up to full speed. I find the jog function is also too coarse in it's effect sometimes, especially if you have the speed set on the VFD to high or full speed. Because the clutch slips until fully engaged, accidents can be avoided especially if you are working very close to the chuck jaws. Instead of clouting the jaws with the tool and taking a chunk out of them, they will meet with a gentle clunk and no damage done. My Super 7 is a very early one and is nearly as old as I am, with the earlier version of clutch. This can be easily controlled from hardly touching to full engagement by judicious use of the lever. Whether the later version of clutch has the same level of "feel" I don't know as I have never used one. Keith ------- DRO for Saddle on Super7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "cmsteamer" toolman8x~xxcopper.net cmsteamer Date: Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:36 pm ((PDT)) I could not stand it any longer. Having great success with a DRO addition on my South Bend 9A I got busy one week end and whipped up a version for the S7. See 9 pics in the album "RichD's Myford S7". The import 6" calipers are so cheap now it is worth a chance to butcher one to find a way to mount it. The lathe shear edge readout clamp was not so hard, but working out the scale bar mounting to leave the threading dial in the clear was a real head scratcher and then a MKII version after the first one looked too clunky. As you can see the caliper jaws were sawed off and the rough edges ground & polished like it never happened. The steel is not fully hardened so drilling & tapping is possible. The readout clamp body is cut to a 15 degree angle for better visibility. Bending up the bar mount is the fussy part to get the bar in the correct position so it will lay against the shear parallel and be stiff enough to resist shifting. There is nothing else to grab to. If you use the dial stud (MKII) you will have to make a longer one to accomodate the extra nut & spacers. Hopefully the pics give you enough info to do your own version. RichD Ball handles are my speciality! ------- Mandrel Handwheel for the Super7 [MyMyford] Posted by: "cmsteamer" toolman8x~xxcopper.net cmsteamer Date: Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:55 pm ((PDT)) Another weekend project. With a tricky up to the shoulder internal threading job for a project I saw the perfect excuse to throw together a mandrel handwheel. Not liking the handcrank variety seen described in the mags & books I looked about for ideas and under my nose was the answer in the form of a spare South Bend Lathe 4.1/2" apron handwheel. Also, not liking the split shank usually seen to lock it in place I settled on a tapered plug that pushes a pair of bronze stubs outward to jam into the mandrel bore actuated by a junkbox thumbwheel to pull in the tapered plug. It locks in solid easily. The o-ring seen around the shank retracts the plugs when released. The wheel is large enough to comfortably turn the mandrel and is not so unbalanced that at low speeds you can leave it in place until the threading is done. See the pics in my album "RichD's Myford S7". This was a junkbox special. See what you can do. RichD ------- S7 Tailstock Barrel Depth Scale [MyMyford] Posted by: "cmsteamer" toolman8x~xxcopper.net cmsteamer Date: Sun Aug 23, 2009 9:11 pm ((PDT)) This is the result of a mag article from years ago. Having a fine scale to judge drill depths is very handy. These days a digital DRO stuck on somehow would be the norm, but this little mod has served the need perfectly for years. Basically you mill a 1/4" wide shallow groove in the top of the tailstock barrel to a snug fit on a 3.1/2" length of 1/4" width steel scale. The 1/64 increments are on the near edge. Not too tight as sometimes it's an advantage to slip it into alignment with the hairline to agree with the work at hand. The groove lays slightly behind the coarse engraved scale. The acrylic plastic indice block is radiused to fit closely to the TS barrel to minimise the parallax. It's secured with two #0-80 (10 BA) screws. The pics have more info. Enjoy. RichD ------- ML7 countershaft lever [MyMyford] Posted by: "n1arb" stephen.brainx~xxlimesbb.co.uk n1arb Date: Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:04 am ((PDT)) Does anyone know how to separate the parts on the countershaft lever (the one that tensions the belts)? Myford call it "Eccentric and lever assembly". I've made a new shaft as the old was worn on the flats and assumed I could separate the old one easily from the handle boss once I'd knocked the pin out. Presumably they are two separate parts but heating and hammer treatment have got nowhere. Thanks, Stephen ------- Re: ML7 countershaft lever Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net cliffcoggin Date: Thu Aug 27, 2009 5:13 am ((PDT)) As far as I recall there is a taper pin securing the handle boss to the shaft. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: ML7 countershaft lever Posted by: "n1arb" stephen.brainx~xxlimesbb.co.uk n1arb Date: Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:04 am ((PDT)) CLiff - thanks. Yes, I've knocked it out and the thing doesn't budge in the slightest. Stephen ------- Re: ML7 countershaft lever Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net cliffcoggin Date: Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:03 am ((PDT)) Oops. I seem to have missed that you had already got the pin out. Cliff ------- Spindle running eccentric [MyMyford] Posted by: "karen_ozau" karengx~xxa1.com.au karen_ozau Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:41 am ((PDT)) Sorry to post something on topic :) My 1976 model ML7T appears to be out of alignment. Last time I tried to bore anything the result was somewhat tapered -- the job was held in a 3 jaw chuck & a boring tool used in the four tool turret. I never measured the taper but it was horrendous. Before starting on a more important job, I checked the spindle out today, having found even a ground mandrel in my lever operated collet chuck was giving me erratic readings. With no chuck fitted at all, I'm getting .005" difference in readings in the spindle register with half a rotation of the spindle. There is zero play in the spindle, nor is there end float, that I can measure. Bearing caps (white metal) appear in good condition. Question -- how do I correct this? Please, no telling me to ask at my local club or library -- I'm currently out bush in Australia & those are not options. And I have NO formal education in engineering so keep it non technical if you can. Many thanks, Karen ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "John Buckley" jfsb1x~xxyahoo.com jfsb1 Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:56 am ((PDT)) Hi Karen, Just out of curiosity put the chuck back on and set the DTI to measure vertical movement on the chuck body. Once you have it set up, use a decent piece of timber to apply pressure to the underside of the chuck. If there is any slack in the headstock bearings you will see a movement on the DTI reading. If all is OK with that reading set the DTI up on the inside of the headstock taper and rotate the spindle by hand to see what variation in readings you get. Let us know what the outcome is. I am in Tamworth NSW and if need be may be able to talk you through the process if you run into trouble. Regards, John ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 2:24 am ((PDT)) From where I sit (on the other side of the globe), I think that you may have belief in the spindle misplaced. I think that it is now in need of removing one leaf of each of the four shims which separate the bearings from the spindle. Remove the bearing caps and with a penknife carefully remove ONE shim, put it all back and see if the mandrel still turns under hand pressure only. If you can't get it to turn -- then I'm wrong, and you replace the shims etc., and we try something else. It's very difficult to explain the trigonometry involved when something say 6 inches away from the mandrel end shows 5 thou deflection but nothing 'appears' to be wrong right up to the chuck. In all of this, I assume that you are not moving anything along the lathe bed or any moving part. You have to focus on one problem and not introduce variables. Would you, as a matter of interest, tell me your findings please? Norman ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 2:48 am ((PDT)) My earlier post holds but maybe you will find fiddling with shims a bit of an unknown chore. So remove the front bearing and insert a piece of cigarette paper between the bearing and the spindle and re-assmble. If the whole lot turns (see my early comments) you have to try my earlier advice. Remember that a cigarette paper is the tool makers standard gauge for many problems. ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "karen_ozau" karengx~xxa1.com.au karen_ozau Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 3:04 am ((PDT)) Many thanks for the answers to date. John - I put the Pratt 3 jaw chuck on, set up the DTI to measure vertical movement & saw only a tiny deflection (<.0005" which I assume can be ascribed to something bending). Norm - tried that this morning when I had the bearing caps off for inspection - the TriLeva assembly makes it a bit painful so I thought I'd check out removing a shim at the time. Could not turn the spindle, even when using the manual crank handle I use when tapping. I've replaced the shim. Due to a nasty dust storm at present I'm not doing any more dismantling of anything till tomorrow when it should have settled down (it's already clearing up). It's 20:00 as I type this, in QLD time. John, good to see I'm not entirely alone in the Myford world out here :) Looks as if you copped the dust storm badly there too :( Karen ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "karen_ozau" karengx~xxa1.com.au karen_ozau Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 3:08 am ((PDT)) Norm, sorry forgot to answer part of your question. No, I'm not moving anything on the lathe bed. In the first tests this morning, the DTI was in the 4 tool turret on the topslide. Tomorrow, I will repeat this using the magnetic mount placed on the sheers as my test for John was this evening. I agree, we have to do this one problem at a time. I'd actually started by just trying to centre the tailstock after doing some taper turning, & had got very erratic results, hence going back to basis in my measurements now till we can discern what is wrong and thence what to do about it. Karen [and in another later message Karen writes] OK, I'll purchase some cigarette papers in the morning, and let you know what happens. DO you want this cigarette paper inserted with all the original shims in place, ie as it is now? I presume so. ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "karen_ozau" karengx~xxa1.com.au karen_ozau Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 3:26 am ((PDT)) In MyMyfordx~xxyahoogroups.com, "donald" wrote: > Norman, .... I like to think that I have a reasonable command of the English language but I'm buggered if I can work out what the bit in your post means which I have copied below ???? Quote:- "I think that you may have belief in the spindle misplaced." Confused (as always) Donald. Bonnie Scotland. < I think he means my belief in the spindle being out of alignment may be incorrect. I hope he's right :) A new spindle of the current type will set me back around A$1500 by the time it's here. The issue here is really, I don't know where to start this fault finding process, & I need expert guidance in the learning process. I'm trying to keep an open mind as to what's wrong and am interested in all suggestions to assist in correct diagnosis. I make no pretence at skilled knowledge in this field and I'm banking on the experts here to guide me. This the reason I've been in this group for some years, with only the rare posting from time to time when I feel I may have had something to contribute. Karen ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 3:43 am ((PDT)) OK, Donald! I was trying to be polite (so there). I believe that Karen's ideas are wrong and dead wrong, and I wanted her to do something to change here ideas. Had she not been out in the bush -- she was up the Creek without a paddle. I have been taken to task for being impolite amonst other things. What the poor lady is trying to do is too many things at once. All that she needed to do is solve the spindle problem FIRST. And that is why I chose to ignore the secondary issues of taper and whatever. Once we got the spindle lark solved -- then tackle the rest of the problems. What has to be said is there is a posting on the 'other channel' which is similar -- but is hopelessly answered - wrong - wrong. You don't start scraping a Glacier white metal bearing -- until you have a contact bearing between that bearing and the spindle. That, in guid Scots, is to read the manual. Having said all this, I am convinced that all that this lady needs to do is simply find out what is the cause. Simply, cheaply and without damaging anything. Just think, we had a bloke who was getting advice and me criticism by introducing a set of high speed problems in a lathe that would probably be rotating at 300 rpm. Toujours la politesse -- which is classical Scots from the Auld Alliance Francaise. N ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 3:55 am ((PDT)) Karen, You need not rush out( where????) for some papers. Have you a bit of Kitchen foil to cut a little neat square? Simply unscrew the two bolts on the front bearing. Lift it off complete with the top bearing assembly. You will find that there are two laminated shims (my earlier posting). Then simply wipe the whole lot clean and put the bit of foil flat on the exposed spindle so as not to foul up the replacement of every thing. Put the two shims back over the respective holes, and carefully drop the top bearing on and follow with the two bolts and tighten up. If the lot won't rotate -- I'm wrong -- dead wrong. If I am right you remove one pair of 2 thous shims and follow my recipe as above. And Karen, I've done it -- long time ago, but I have. And yes, they don't make the spindle and Glacier bearings for the ML7 any more. OK?? ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "karen_ozau" karengx~xxa1.com.au karen_ozau Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:18 am ((PDT)) Thanks, yes I do have kitchen foil here (that will save me a ride to the nearest convenience store 5 km away). If the dust storm settles as expected, I'll pull the bearing caps off again in the morning and report back. Removing a single layer of shim left me with a spindle that would not rotate -- but refer also to my comments about today's dust storms, which may have affected earlier results. My earlier observations (turning taper etc) were just setting the scene a little, by the way. I know full well the difficulties of diagnosis by remote -- my career was in computer support: rule #1 -- never believe what the user tells you they did :) Another factor -- I have small, irreplaceable supplies of Plastiguage left here, if that helps in your diagnosis. Karen :) [and in a later message karen wrote] It's been quite a while since I was called a young lady (I suppose it's all relative, but shall we say I'm over 60?) Sleepless night here due to after effects of the dust storm yesterday, so having an early breakfast & will play with kitchen foil as directed after I've finished my morning cuppa. Just gone 2 am here so all's quiet in the neighbourhood, time to awaken the local dogs :) Karen ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "karen_ozau" karengx~xxa1.com.au karen_ozau Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:20 am ((PDT)) "ravensworth2674" wrote: > Karen, Concentrate on the spindle, please. OK, here's my next report. Started off by repeating tests from scratch, 10mm mandrel between centres, DTI wanders by .002" as before, as if spindle is bent or centres not centred. Tried all my different centres, same result other than error magnified with longer centres. Centre of spindle carefully cleaned once again, tests repeated, no change. DTI mounted on cross slide for this test. No lateral forces on spindle. Remove all centres, DTI mounted on sheers, rubbing on spindle only. NO ERROR (change from before) when spindle turned without lateral forces. DTI wobbles a tad when hand crank in spindle shaft is moved laterally. Mounted 3 jaw Pratt chuck (no separate backplate) with similar wobble -- but then I cannot expect a 3 jaw chuck to be accurate anyway. Collet chuck not tested as it's a bit fiddly & didn't see the need at this stage. Single sheet of foil inserted under front bearing cap, between white metal and spindle. Re-assembled, more force required than usual to turn spindle (the crank handle was slipping, even when the knurled wheel was tight). An unused piece of foil was measured at .0008" using a Starrett mic, cleaned & checked for zero reading. Question -- what torque should I be tightening the bearing caps to? I used 'reasonable force' using a T handled Allan key with short handles. I consider myself to have a fair to good 'feel' for the right torque of small nuts & bolts, it 'felt right' to me but I'd like to check this with someone who knows the actual torque settings if possible, if only to rule out loose caps. Back to the floor, any suggestions? thanks, Karen :) ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:41 am ((PDT)) Karen, If the spindle is 'stiff' with one shim removed and slack with it 'put back' you should average the two by putting in a piece of foil which is half the thickness. Do the rear bearing next. If it turns OK by hand, oil up and power up. Frankly, I don't think that the mandrel is bent. You could check this on Vee blocks on a surface plate with a dial mike -- but it means a strip down (sorry!). You now should have a spindle which is running -- and which should bed in slightly. If it runs hot, put the shims back. Your next headache is 'your tongue' which is probably worn (silly joke) but under the saddle is a guide tongue which wears convex, so that it rocks against the No2 shear (measured from the No1 Shear at the front as you face it). Let's see the first bit first. OK ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "karen_ozau" karengx~xxa1.com.au karen_ozau Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:49 am ((PDT)) Back a step, please, Norman. I did not remove any shims at this stage, merely added the foil. So, what do you wish me to try, remove a shim and add the foil back? Testing -- I don't have a surface plate or Vee blocks, but I do have a sheet of plate glass I can use as a reasonable substitute for the surface plate. Vee blocks are a problem. Karen :) ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 11:04 am ((PDT)) Sorry, getting carried away. I'd peel off one shim from each little lamination and re-assemble (with the foil removed of course.) If the spindle is 'free' to revolve, then you know that the original bearing setting was too slack. If the spindle shows resistance to move, then insert a foil spacer with each of the laminated 9 minus 1 sets. Sorry, but it is 'trial and error' You'll soon get a feel for what is going on. If the spindle is stiff again, I'm afraid that you put the removed shims back in, etc. Report please on outcome. Norman ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 9:54 pm ((PDT)) Karen, Might I sympathise in this 'red dust' thing. 'We' get something similar in the Balearic Islands in Spain when the red dust from the Sahara Desert in Africa is airborne and covers all the white painted homes with red. And then it gets wet with rain - and - well, you know! Meanwhile, you have a fair report on how to test your lathe spindle (as and when). Again, when you get round to stripping the lathe, you have to start looking at wear. I strongly suspect that the lathe is worn both 6" from the chuck end but that the saddle gib underneath is worn convex which causes the whole thing to skew round. There is a cure for this (or to minimise the situation) So I would invest in the late Jack Radford's 'Improvements and Accessories for your lathe (Publisher Tee) JAR was an outstanding Kiwi engineer and wrote a chapter on 'Renovating a Myford Lathe'. His was the Super 7B like mine but no matter. All being well, come back as and when the time is right. I may be still here but surely someone will pick up the matter if I am not. Meanwhile, I'm also thinking of a little bit of part of my family that settled in a place called Tumbarumba in NSW. Good Luck Norman ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "Karen Gallagher" karengx~xxa1.com.au karen_ozau Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:08 pm ((PDT)) Thanks Norman -- one of my next projects is Radford's spherical turning fixture, I have the drawings from Hemmingway, all laminated & ready to start as soon as I'm happy with the ML7 again. I'll see if I can locate that book. Where to begin with the dust cleanup .. broom is NOT the way to go, it'll have to be the vacuum. It's an evil, fine, abrasive dust, mostly iron oxides "Never approach a bull from the front, a horse from the rear or a fool from any direction." ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:34 pm ((PDT)) Err Uhm, but it isn't quite 'Radford' Frankly, I'd have gone for the Thomas Boring head -- on the Radford spindle and had two tools! I'm funny that way. If you are stripping the lathe down to bed only, I'd do an odd thing. Whilst you don't have a surface plate you have a piece of plate glass. So you clean the bed of collected rubbish. Clean all the remaining oil off with some good thinners. Now draw a lathe bed on a bit of white shiny chip board or similar and make a map of your bed. On each 'bed' you draw 1" squares with a waterproof felt tip. Armed with set of feeler gauges, you put the plate glass on the proper bed and gently prod under the bed and make up a real map of the bed on the board. You might be surprised! Then flushed with success, you take your biggest mike and measure and map the shears. You then arm yourself with a bottle of your favourite 'painkiller' and get a dose of the shakes. But you have entered the realms of those who know and the know-alls. I hope that our 'Brief Encounter' has proved useful. (You might wonder why all this. I have a wife who also entered the world of men. An old man, long gone taught her every step. She is now retired but became the second lady fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh in Dentistry. I sort of liked that old grumpy with---a ML7 on which he made specialist tools. My bride came down the aisle to him playing 'The Arrival of the Queen of Sheba' on the organ -- and there is no answer to that. Norman ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net cliffcoggin Date: Thu Sep 24, 2009 2:26 am ((PDT)) I am glad you found the dust problem Karen, because alarm bells rang in my mind when you said the spindle was harder to turn after adding kitchen foil shim under the bearing caps. It should have become easier not harder at that point, so something else was clearly at fault. Cliff Coggin Kent UK ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Sep 24, 2009 3:18 am ((PDT)) Cliff, If Karen added a foil between the spindle and the glacier bearing -- with all other things unchanged, it must tighten the spindle. If she removes a 2 thou shim thus making the bearing smaller, the spindle will either lock or continue to rotate. If it rotates, the bearing was worn. If it locks, some adjustment is possible by adding a foil shim to each side of the wear. If this allows the spindle to rotate- all is well. If the spindle is locked, then the original removed shims must be replaced. There is an adjunct to the final comment and that, the 2 thous shims be scraped to allow a marginally tighter set of bearings. I am sure that you are aware that adjusting bearings by scraping, the bearing or the shims only removes tenths of thous. (We may be actually discussing the same situation and conclusion. If so, please accept my apologies.) Regards Norman ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "john56552" john.777cordenx~xxbtinternet.com john56552 Date: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:44 pm ((PDT)) Hi All, First post, recently acquired ML7. On checking the headstock bearings I found that applying firm - not excessive - pressure on a bar held in the chuck gave 2 thou movement at the spindle nose. I happened to visit the Myford works for the open day and chatted to one of their fitters. He advised adjusting the headstock play, which I carried out as follows: Remove bearing caps. Mark the caps and bearings in some way so you know which is which. Under each cap is a pair of shim pads. These don't look like pads of shims - I thought it was a solid spacer initially. Using a sharp knife peel off one shim. He uses a sharpened hacksaw blade. I used the point of the blade of a `snap off` knife. The pads were 18 thou thick - that is, 9 shims. I used a fine file almost flat across one corner to reveal the edge of the shim - a bit like contours on a map. Some gentle picking had a corner up and the rest followed. I checked the remaining thickness before pulling the whole thing off, just in case I had started to peel off 2 shims. I cleaned up the spindle and bearings thoroughly and lightly smeared marking blue on the shaft before reassembling. Without tightening the bolts, the shaft revolved freely. Tightening the bolts resulted in the shaft needing pressure to start to turn, but only just tight after that. Checking again with the dial gauge revealed absolutely no play! I stripped the bearings again and found the marking blue reasonably evenly transferred to the inside of the bearings. I just lightly used some superfine `scotchbrite' on the bearing faces before cleaning and reassembling with copious amounts of oil. Don't forget to put the drive belt back!! So this was a good afternoon's work - a daunting task completed more easily than I imagined. Hope that helps! John ------- Re: Spindle running eccentric Posted by: "ravensworth2674" ravensworth2674x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:55 pm ((PDT)) Yes, John, I'm in complete agreement. Why not put your sound advice into the files section for future use? Regards Norman ------- [MyMyford] Group Closure Posted by: freudiankey Date: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 3:31 PM Good Day to all, Once again the group has been nothing to do with what it is designed for. Many are encouraging stricter moderation and so here it is. I have had this group for a number of years and to be honest I've had enough. I would like to thank all those who have contributed in a positive way to make this group the pleasure it used to be. Thats all folks. To those who wonder what's going on and are here for Myford Engineering reasons, my apologies but no doubt another group shall rise from the ashes soon enough. Who knows, I might even join! Best regards. Freudiankey Ex Moderator ------- NOTE TO FILE: The End of the MyMyford Group at Yahoo In the final lead up to November 2009, heated arguments and insults crept into more and more conversations in the MyMyford group and alienated more and more legitimate contributors. Finally the list moderator had had enough and disbanded the group. Thankfully the group myfordlathes continued on with serious inquiries and assistance from helpful folks. ------- Headstock shims [myfordlathes] [the new group for myford at Yahoo] Posted by: "berniew1936" berniew1936x~xxbtinternet.com berniew1936 Date: Fri Oct 2, 2009 1:19 am ((PDT)) Hi All. I am new to this group and have not had my ML7 for very long so I am still learning. My problem is a only a quick one I hope and the answer may be out there somewhere but I can't find it. I have had to remove 2 thou from the shims in the headstock, at the spindle nose end, to remove some play, but I can't remove any from the change wheel end, as that end would then bind on the spindle. As the shims are now not the same thickness (14 thou at the nose end and 16 thou at the changewheel end) is the spindle now not running parallel to the lathe bed? Is this OK or is there something else I should do? Cheers Bernie ------- Re: Headstock shims Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk tonyjeffree Date: Fri Oct 2, 2009 1:40 am ((PDT)) Hi Bernie - First off, the place where most wear will occur is on the front bearings (the rear one is smaller -- the reason being it doesn't need to be so big) so it isn't surprising that you need to adjust the front bearing and not the back. Also, because most of the work you do involves using a cutter at the front of the work, the turning action will tend to force the spindle up against the top half of the front bearing, so the majority of the wear is on that top half. Removing a shim should therefore not significantly affect the alignment of the spindle with the bed. Even if it does result in the spindle pointing slightly down towards the bed, this will have a relatively small effect on the accuracy of the lathe -- a bit of trig will show you that if you are turning a (say) 1/2" diameter part, moving the tool 2 thou above/below center height has a very small effect indeed on the finished diameter -- in this case, approximately 0.000004" (4 thousandths of a thou). Regards, Tony ------- Re: Headstock shims Posted by: "berniew1936" berniew1936x~xxbtinternet.com berniew1936 Date: Fri Oct 2, 2009 3:01 am ((PDT)) Thanks Tony. That has put my mind at rest. I was not sure if there would be a problem or not. Cheers Bernie ------- Leadscrew cover [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com kstrauss7 Date: Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:51 am ((PDT)) I would like to fit a protective leadscrew cover to my S7. Spiroflex (http://www.spiroflex.com/pdfs/Ld_scr_grds_A_B_eng.pdf ) makes helical covers but their smallest size appears to be too large to fit between the leadscrew and the lathe bed. I seem to recall that Troup described using telescoping tubes but I am unable to find the discussion in the group archives. What have other people done to keep crud off of the screw? ------- Re: Leadscrew cover Posted by: "tobybishopx~xxaol.com" tobybishopx~xxaol.com tsb2225 Date: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:33 am ((PDT)) Hi Ken I've put a couple of photos in a folder called "Toby's photos" to show how I have tried to limit the amount of crud that gets onto my leadscrew. When I got the S7 there was no cover at all and someone had removed all the power cross feed gears. They had then in-filled the key-way in the leadscrew with an insert and filed in the thread profile. I suspect that the lathe has done a lot of screw cutting up close to the chuck as the leadscrew is very rounded there but still nice and square (ACME?) at the other end. After removing the in fill piece and cleaning out lots of crud I decided to try to protect the screw. I bought a 2nd hand cover from Fleabay but the fit was poor (not sure if all leadscrews are the same diameter - I suspect the S7 one is bigger but could easily be wrong). I decided to make my own that fitted better, using the base of the commercial item as a template with a section of thin walled tube as the cover, silver soldered on. This can however only be so long before it hits the QC gearbox. So I also added the loose plate shown in the photos. This was cut and folded from a card template and sits firmly in the gap and makes it easy to brush away swarf forwards, backwards and down between the bed sections. The two combined covers keep most debris off the leadscrew and an old toothbrush deals with the rest. The plate has to be lifted out when working right up by the chuck or when using a faceplate but by then the tube cover is there anyway. For the curious, the bright coloured cloth in the photo is an old tie-died sheet that keeps the general dust off the Myford - I really must get around to sealing the eaves and ridge of my garage to keep the wind blown dust out. Not quite the answer you were seeking but it might help. cheers Toby Fareham ------- Re: Leadscrew cover Posted by: "brianollerenshaw" brian.ollerenshawx~xxntlworld.com Date: Tue Oct 13, 2009 1:25 pm ((PDT)) Ken. I made a leadscrew cover from a length of anodised ally carpet edgeing, stuck on the origonal short cover with double sided tape. see pic in 'Brians bits' Brian ------- Re: Leadscrew cover Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com kstrauss7 Date: Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:48 pm ((PDT)) All I see is your fixed steady in that album. ------- Re: Leadscrew cover Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk tonyjeffree Date: Tue Oct 13, 2009 3:24 pm ((PDT)) ...but you can see it in the 3rd pic Regards, Tony ------- Re: Leadscrew cover Posted by: "brianollerenshaw" brian.ollerenshawx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:19 am ((PDT)) Ken, pics 2 & 3 Brian ------- Extending ML7 tailstock reach [myfordlathes] Posted by: "obald102" obaldx~xxihug.co.nz obald102 Date: Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:24 am ((PDT)) Is there any way of adding an extension to the reach of the tail stock carrying a half centre towards the headstock? I want to do this to make a longish thread on a rod that needs support at the tailstock end and avoid the cross slide crashing into the tailstock body when trying to bring the tool up to the work. ------- Re: Extending ML7 tailstock reach Posted by: "durnfjmx~xxaol.com" durnfjmx~xxaol.com durnfjm Date: Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:52 am ((PDT)) can you use a fixed or travelling steady? ------- Re: Extending ML7 tailstock reach Posted by: "John" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk stevenson_engineers Date: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:01 pm ((PDT)) Yes you need something called an Extension socket. http://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/Catalogue/Extension-Sockets Sorry this is a UK site but you get the idea, I see you are from NZ and I am not familiar with agents there but perhaps Hare and Forbes in OZ will carry the same parts ? John S. ------- Re: Extending ML7 tailstock reach Posted by: "myford7x~xxymail.com" myford7x~xxymail.com Date: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:59 pm ((PDT)) Can you put your screwcutting tool on the right side of the toolpost? ------- Re: Extending ML7 tailstock reach Posted by: "obald102" obaldx~xxihug.co.nz obald102 Date: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:55 pm ((PDT)) Thought of that. I then wouldn't be able to get the tool close enough to the headstock - a metric thread so once the half nuts are engaged that's how they must stay. I'm currently planning on having more tool overhang than I would normally feel comfortable with and making up a support for the underside of the tool near the cutting tip. ------- S7 rear shear guide modification [myfordlathes] Posted by: "durnfjm" durnfjmx~xxaol.com durnfjm Date: Wed Jan 13, 2010 7:57 am ((PST)) I've just spent ages looking for the details of the modification to change the guiding of the saddle of a 1960s S7 from adjustable gibs on shear 1 and shear 2, to shear 1 and shear 4. I've found a half page article in ME 4086 page 152, but was sure I'd seen a more detailed article/instruction/discussion. ISTR it has been discussed here (or was it at the other place), but I can't find that either. Can anyone point me in the right direction, please? MikeD ------- Re: S7 rear shear guide modification Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net mikecb1uk Date: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:25 am ((PST)) Mike,there is a detailed description of a similar modification to the one you describe in J A Radford's book "Improvements and Accessories for your Lathe. His modification uses shears 1, 2 and 4, but you could adapt it to use just 1 and 4. HTH Mike ------- Re: S7 rear shear guide modification Posted by: "moyes_a" admx~xxamoyes.fsbusiness.co.uk moyes_a Date: Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:13 pm ((PST)) Mike. There was also a short article by J. A. Radford on this in ME3418 page 541 (4th June 1971). From memory Myford adopted the modification themselves for new lathes shortly afterwards. Andrew ------- S7 rear shear guide modification - done! Posted by: "durnfjm" durnfjmx~xxaol.com durnfjm Date: Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:00 am ((PST)) Well I finally got fed up adjusting the carriage gibs for working at the headstock end, or further down the bed, and have modified the carriage on my well used and much modified 1961 S7 to bear on shears 1 and 4 (instead of 1 and 2). I roughly followed the method described by J A Radford in his book Improvements and accessories for your lathe, used materials that were to hand, and it should have been completed easily in 2 evening sessions in the shop - but of course, while the job is in bits I'll just do . . . . So it actually took me 4 sessions, but it was well worth while! What a difference - the carriage feels "silky" from one end of the bed to the other, and is no stiffer at the tailstock end than the headstock end. If anyone has a pre "broad guide" S7, I would thoroughly recommend doing the mod, it is very straightforward and will probably cost you nothing, but you do need access to a decent milling machine. MikeD ------- Resettable Dials on ML7 [myfordlathes] Posted by: "dmac_dexter" maclean.darrellx~xxgmail.com dmac_dexter Date: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:33 pm ((PST)) My old 1952 ML7 has the fixed cast dials and I would like to fabricate some resettable dials for the lathe. Does any one have a drawing of how such a dial would be produced? I have an idea and have put it to paper, but would like to compare it to any that may have been produced by others. The price from Myford is prohibitive at over $80CDN a piece plus shipping. Thanks ------- Re: Resettable Dials on ML7 Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net mikecb1uk Date: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:50 pm ((PST)) Take a look at G H Thomas' book "The Model Engineers Workshop Manual", which is readily available. This is an essential book for Myford enthusiasts, and contains detailed designs for many useful accessories and tooling items. These include designs for micrometer dials of the kind you are interested in. HTH Mike ------- Lathe bed compatibility [myfordlathes] Posted by: "chapmanad" Chapmanadx~xxaol.com chapmanad Date: Sat Jan 23, 2010 7:59 am ((PST)) I have a mongrel ML7 with a late ML7 longbed, Super 7 saddle/apron, and a super 7 tail stock. I am thinking of replacing the head stock with a Super 7 head stock. Are there any serious (i.e. not fixable) compatibility issues with doing that? Regards, Andy Chapman ------- Re: Lathe bed compatibility Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net mikecb1uk Date: Sun Jan 24, 2010 2:49 am ((PST)) In a word, no. Mike ------- Re: Lathe bed compatibility Posted by: "myford7x~xxymail.com" myford7x~xxymail.com Date: Mon Jan 25, 2010 7:07 pm ((PST)) You may have to drill and tap a 7-16" hole (I think) in the back of the bed for the stud used to brace the headstock. That's about it, I think. ------- Re: Lathe bed compatibility Posted by: "Chapmanadx~xxaol.com" chapmanad Date: Tue Jan 26, 2010 12:21 am ((PST)) Yes, I think there is a dowel on the S7 that the ML7 doesn't have. Thanks. AndyC ------- Hello All!! [myfordlathes] Posted by: "MOA" moa111x~xxyahoo.com moa111 Date: Thu May 20, 2010 5:39 am ((PDT)) Hello, I'm from the North East of India and just joined this group half way to refurbishing my ML-7. I found it a year and a half back rusting in the corner of a seedy workshop. Bought it off for Rs.8000/- (about £100)... much to my delight, the past year has been a slow but satisfying one with the machine. Only one thing is a worry. That of a slightly worn bed. Predictably the movement of the carriage tightens significantly as we get towards the tail-stock, although it doesn't jam as such. Obviously it'd be absurd to ship it all the way to Nottingham for regrinding.... at least for a cheapskate like me! :) That leaves us with local expedients and perhaps even DIY. There is a machine shop (Technical School)nearby inhabited be incredibly witless sub-morons. The school, however, is pretty well equipped, and I noticed among a multitude of machinery, a huge 12 foot automatic planer being used primarily to sharpen paper guillotines for printing presses... what a waste. Would it be viable to get a bed regrind done on such a machine? If so, would any member be so kind as to enlighten me on the procedures, techniques, tips and tricks(particularly that of ensuring parallelism)... also do's and dont's. Thanks in advance. regards, Moa ------- Re: Hello All!! Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net mikecb1uk Date: Thu May 20, 2010 6:04 am ((PDT)) Moa You say your bed is only slightly worn. How much wear is there, and where is it? Before resorting to major machining I would be inclined to carry out careful measurement on the widths and thicknesses of the shears every two inches or so along the bed. If the wear is only a few thou you can improve the situation a lot by some careful scraping. There was an article describing this procedure in Model Engineers Workshop a year or two ago. HTH Mike ------- Re: Hello All!! Posted by: "Chapmanadx~xxaol.com" Chapmanadx~xxaol.com chapmanad Date: Thu May 20, 2010 6:32 am ((PDT)) Hi Moa, If you slacken off the saddle gib-strip, you will probably find that the tightness goes away. It will also become very sloppy, of course. What this tells you is that the tightness is caused by variations in the width of the front rail, not by wear on the top surface of the rail. That means that, to effect a cure, you will need to grind the vertical faces of the rails and not just the top face. I hope that helps in some way. Kind regards, Andy Chapman ------- Re: Hello All!! Posted by: "Dennis Jewitt" dennis.jewittx~xxtiscali.co.uk dennis_jewitt Date: Fri May 21, 2010 12:23 am ((PDT)) I had this problem on an elderly ML7. I read about a solution in an old Model Engineering magazine from the 60's that worked for me. 1) Remove the felt wiper and felt from the saddle. You will see that the saddle is guided from the front and rear faces of the front shear. There is a small gap between the rear face of the rear shear and the saddle and you will need a shim thicker than this gap. 2) Slacken off the 4 gib screws located on the saddle. Insert a long thin shim between the saddle and the outer shear bending the shim over to retain it. The ME article suggested using that metal banding material often used to secure crates etc. Readjust Gib screws and test. The effect of this mod is that the saddle is now guided from the front face of the front shear and the back face of the rear shear. 3) If you get good results from this quick experiment, as I did, then make a new felt wiper plate and felt to protect the new surfaces from swarf. Let us know how you get on Good luck Dennis ------- Re: Hello All!! Posted by: "MikeD" durnfjmx~xxaol.com durnfjm Date: Fri May 21, 2010 2:33 am ((PDT)) I wasn't sure if that applied to the ML7, but I did a similar mod to my 1964 S7B a few months ago - what a difference!!!! Well worth the effort. (in my case, I removed the saddle and Araldited the no4 gib in place - but if Dennis' method works on an ML7, even easier!! MikeD ------- Worn Crosslide feedscrew and feednut -cured. [myfordlathes] Posted by: "alan" lubetkin1934x~xxyahoo.co.uk lubetkin1934 Date: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:20 am ((PDT)) Hi. Myford are now closed for summer holidays -- and unable to replace my worn-out ML7 leadscrew -and having quite a few jobs to machine -- I tried something I have been pondering a while. I took out the die-cast feednut and with a junior hacksaw split it smack down the center line. Put one half back in and secured it with its retaining screw. So far so good. The second half I also screwed home, but this time with a thin steel washer between feednut and crosslide- thus staggering the 2 halves by around 10 thou. Plenty of lube and ran the feedscrew into position. Amazingly perfect! I guess I struck lucky with the washer thickness -- no backlash at any position of the slide and not too tight either. In these troubled time, we of have to improvise! Alan ------- Re: Bed Wear [myfordlathes] Posted by: "alan" lubetkin1934x~xxyahoo.co.uk lubetkin1934 Date: Wed Jul 7, 2010 1:44 am ((PDT)) Hi There. I think the simplest radical improvement you can make to a worn Myford is by changing the way the carriage works. Myford designed the carriage to slide on the front and rear vertical faces of the front half of the bed. In half an hour you can convert it to run on the front vertical face as before and on the rear vertical face of the rear half of the bed -- which as it is not normally used is seldom worn at all. Simply slacken off the gib-strip adjusters at the front of the carriage and slide a suitable hard steel strip into the gap you will now find between the carriage and the rear shear. You can use a hacksaw blade with the teeth ground off -- or in my case a piece of polished and hardened steel strapping from a pallet of plastic tubes. If you find the right strapping it will fit perfectly -- just cut to length. I detempered both ends of the strapping with a gas torch so that it could be bent (to stop it sliding out)through 90 deg at the ends without cracking, bent one end, oiled it generously and slid it into place, bent it over at the other end while 'in situ' and then re-adjusted the gibs. Result, trouble free motion of the carriage over the entire useable length of the bed. Cost, virtually zero, time half hour, skill level basic! Alan ------- Re: Bed Wear Posted by: "MikeD" durnfjmx~xxaol.com durnfjm Date: Wed Jul 7, 2010 2:07 am ((PDT)) As I said in a recent post, Myford changed the way the carriage is guided (S7) from serial number K107657 onwards, I'm not sure if that was when they went "green" or before or after -- the mod you suggest can ONLY be done on ones earlier than this -- (but is IS well worth doing!). MikeD ------- Re: Bed Wear Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk tonyjeffree Date: Thu Jul 8, 2010 11:13 pm ((PDT)) On 3 July 2010, Helge Kyndbo wrote: > Mike, Sorry, but what is a BMS strip ? "Bright Mild Steel". Its a TLA [Three Letter Acronym] ;-) Regards, Tony ------- Re: Bed Wear Posted by: "MikeD" durnfjmx~xxaol.com durnfjm Date: Fri Jul 9, 2010 12:28 am ((PDT)) Bright Mild Steel -- nothing special about it, (I believe) it's normally cold rolled leaded EN1A or something similar, but it really is not critical. MikeD ------- Myford Spindle Nose - Update [myfordlathes] Posted by: "piedrj" otebgnx~xxjisp.net piedrj Date: Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:46 pm ((PDT)) I posted an earlier question asking about spindle threads msg #1292. I wanted to let all that helped out know how the thread cutting came out. Pictures in the photo section under Bobs Myford. Now this is a little long but it might help someone in the future. First it turned out I found some 5" back plates that I had ordered in 1986, as I recently moved my shop they were not where they belonged, so no internal threading. Thanks to Rich Carlstedt's and Alan Moores's info and digging out my 14th edition of the handbook I found all the technical info on Whitworth Threads. Their calculations were right on relative to the specifications which interestingly varied all over the place. However read on to see what Myford actually did. Let me tell you what I found when I carefully measured my spindle nose, the tailstock adaptor nose, and the dividing head nose. The OD of the spindles across the top of the threads ranged from 1.1212 to 1.1237. According to the handbook the OD should have been reduced by a value called h/6 which Rich had at .0089 (handbook 20th), Alan at .004 and my 14th edition has the h/6 as .01334 assuming the number means radius. Rich's number produces a 1.1072 diameter, Alan's a 1.117 diameter, my number if you assume it is a radius produces a 1.098 (if a diameter 1.1116) when rounding the tops of the threads. Notice big difference in handbook values themselves and actual Myford spindles. I checked the depth of the thread on the tailstock nose that had centers so I could set it up in the lathe. As best I could measure by lining up the 55 degree cutter and using my DRO to give distance from top to bottom it was .054 which is in line with the Handbook if you start with a 1.125 OD and ignore the rounding of the threads. Conclusion: Myford nose is 55 degree thread with modified OD; basically it's a Whitworth ignoring the rounding. Just for completeness the length of the threads ranged from .54 to .56. The register diameter ranged from 1.249 to 1.250 and its length .43 to .44 to the register face. I of course decided to match as close as possible the actual Myford spindle. I made a test spindle using 1018 which I was just going to pitch but it came out so well I finished it by boring a recess for 3/8 cap screw. I now have a spindle nose I can set up on the mill table, rotary table, and my little Sherline CNC rotary table. The sleeve on the right of the picture is for the Sherline. This was a nice bonus. I made the actual spindle on an unmachined 6 inch cast iron back plate. Turned up the large side to fit a L00 back plate and bolted in on, then turned the spud side to the spindle. Other than the cast iron was of dubious origins and did not finish up real nice, the whole exercise came out great. I used my Myford chucks, back plates and face plates for final fitting as I turned the threads. I have a Grip Thru chuck and set up a test bar in it on the Myford to turn about 5 tenths TIR. When mounted on the Clausing L00 it actually turned with almost no needle deviation. I also bored a .54 hole through the spindle. So a success was declared. My threads were 1.1205 to 1.1225 and the depth on both is .053. My goal was to be able to use my smaller Myford chucks on my Clausing 5900. Now time will tell if the exercise pays off. Certainly the extra spindle nose for the mill will be useful. Thanks to all who provided the information. Bob ------- Information sheets [myfordlathes] Posted by: "hassydirekt" hassydirektx~xxyahoo.com.au hassydirekt Date: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:44 pm ((PDT)) Hi all; Further to my post on Myford brochures I've also created a folder for 'Information sheets' to hold the various 1-pagers issued by Myford over the years. I've uploaded a couple of these to get it started and hopefully others will too, so that we can share this info around. I've also uploaded (into the relevant folders) some older brochures on the ML10, ML7 and Super 7 lathes, ditto. As per my earlier comments if this offends anyone or breaches the group's rules please (Moderator) delete thse files and let me know. Cheers Dave ------- Price lists [myfordlathes] Posted by: "hassydirekt" hassydirektx~xxyahoo.com.au hassydirekt Date: Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:55 pm ((PDT)) Hi all; Have uploaded some old (March 1970) price lists for the ML7, Super 7, ML10 and Ancillary equipment to the relevant folders in the Files area. While the prices are 'amusing' (Read 'em and weep!), the value of these is in the codes (part numbers) and descriptions. However space in the Files area is limited so if others (ie the Moderator) think these a waste of space then feel free to delete them. Also uploaded is a small brochure on the Quick setting lathe tools (in the 'Accessories' folder) which may be of interest. Cheers Dave ------- Super 7 Serial Number Suffixes [myfordlathes] Posted by: "obald102" obaldx~xxihug.co.nz obald102 Date: Sat Aug 7, 2010 9:34 pm ((PDT)) What do the suffixes on Super 7 Serial Numbers mean? They all have a 'SK' prefix but there are 'B', 'C', 'D' and 'M' suffixes. 'M' in particular appears for a few years, disappears and then pops up again. I know 'R' means a Myford factory bed regrind, but the others? ------- Re: Super 7 Serial Number Suffixes Posted by: "G Bennett" gbennettx~xxshaw.ca graham_pge Date: Tue Aug 10, 2010 9:04 pm ((PDT)) The "M" suffix means Metric. The "L" in an "SKL" prefix means Long bed. I have an M suffix that is no longer metric, so the lathe left their shop as metric and was changed between then and now. Cheers, Graham ------- S7 gearbox matters [myfordlathes] Posted by: "obald102" obaldx~xxihug.co.nz obald102 Date: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:52 pm ((PDT)) I seem to recall from somewhere that it is inadvisable to use the fine feed function of the gearbox when using the higher spindle speeds. Is this correct or am I confusing the folly of trying to use the backgear when using the highest speeds? And somewhat related is it usual for there to be a significant increase in the amount of 'geartrain type' noise when backgears are engaged? This doesn't appear to be of a worrying kind but is significant. ------- Re: S7 gearbox matters Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net mikecb1uk Date: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:30 am ((PDT)) No problem using fine feed on the higher spindle speeds. In my experience of 4 different Myford 7 lathes, and a new ML10, backgear noise is a "feature", no matter how carefully I have set the meshing. HTH Mike ------- ========================================================================= NOTE TO FILE: Following is the date in 2010 at which I went beyond merely collecting daily digests from the MyMyford and myfordlathes groups at Yahoo. I started to extract significant conversations from the digests on an ongoing basis, and edit them and reformat them and insert them into the files here. Update: As of July 2015 I'm all caught up by adding several earlier years of pertinent messages from the MyMyford and myfordlathes groups. And I am still putting Myford group information into generic files like Chucks General or Toolholders for the Lathe if it also applies to other machines, so check those generic files too. ========================================================================= ------- [THIS NEXT QUESTION TURNS OUT TO BE FOR A SUPER 7 -- not an ML7.] ML7 jamming!! (not Bob Marley style) [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Ron" silverfoxccx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Sat Sep 4, 2010 1:31 pm ((PDT)) I thought i had a bit of play in the spindle, so tried to adjust it as per the manual. Now i have acquired the following symptons: The rear bearing runs VERY hot, and by that i mean i cannot keep my hand on it for too long. Second problam is When i am drilling from the tailstock the spindle locks solid when I apply a bit of pressure. A tap on the rear end frees the spindle. question is Which way and by how much turning do i readjust the rear bearings to bring it back to cool running and non locking? Any Techy people out there? Thanks Ron ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! (not Bob Marley style) Posted by: "michael" megpax~xxcox.net Date: Sat Sep 4, 2010 1:48 pm ((PDT)) Hello: I had a Myford super 7 b for 31 years. My machine had taper cone and double ballrace spindle arrangement. You have to loosen the spindle bearings for high speed work and take up a little for really heavy slow turning. The double ballrace takes the end thrust from drilling and turning toward the headstock. I don't know how your bearings are designed but sounds like you have not adjusted your bearings properly. Be sure to use the proper lubrication as well. mike ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! (not Bob Marley style) Posted by: "Andrew Chapman" Chapmanadx~xxaol.com Date: Sat Sep 4, 2010 1:52 pm ((PDT)) But the ML7 does not have that arrangement. Kind regards, Andy Chapman ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! (not Bob Marley style) Posted by: "Ron" silverfoxccx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Sat Sep 4, 2010 2:05 pm ((PDT)) Sorry my mistake it is a Super 7B Ron ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! (not Bob Marley style) Posted by: "michael" megpax~xxcox.net Date: Sat Sep 4, 2010 2:13 pm ((PDT)) Usually heat and jamming are symptoms of something set up too tight. It is possible to set roller bearings too tight as well as plain bearings and they will heat specially at higher rpms. Mike ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! Procedure Posted by: "Rich Dean" toolman8x~xxcopper.net Date: Sat Sep 4, 2010 5:54 pm ((PDT)) Ron, The Super 7(B) has a large bronze taper cone front bearing (chuck end). The rear bearings are a pair of angular contact ball bearings held together with a spacer and large Castle nuts. With the lathe was supplied a hook spanner for the purpose of adjusting the C Nuts to set the clearance of the front bearing. Per the instructions in the manual, to increase the clearance, use the spanner to unscrew the front nut (RH thread) and tighten the rear nut. When all is correct at the top speed utilised, the bearing should get warm but not hot. This assumes the correct lubrication is supplied. An additional check can be done by inserting a bar into the spindle bore and lifting up whilst an indicator is set on the top of the nose. Not more than about .0015" is needed for oil film clearance. Do not over tighten the castle nuts. Snug is all that's needed. End thrust is taken by the rear bearings and should not affect the front bearing except under extreme loads. Hope this helps, RichD ------- Re: [myfordlathes] ML7 jamming!! (not Bob Marley style) Posted by: "Robert Mitchell" rmm200x~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Sep 5, 2010 9:24 am ((PDT)) My only qualification for commenting is I have owned a S7B since 1977. >From what you have said so far the taper bearing is not getting oil, which will cause running hot and seizing. If it seizes it may gaul... Make sure the oil fill tube is actually feeding oil. The level should drop as the spindle spins. Use the correct grade oil - Nuto 30 is like a thin hydraulic fluid. Shell (among others) has oil equivalent tables to the British ones. I would bet 30wt motor oil would cause seizing. Loosen the castle nuts a bit so you have adequate clearance. No more than slightly snug; don't crank down on them. The bronze bearings may just be worn to the point of replacing; Myford carries replacements. Short of a hopelessly worn bed on the lathe, Iwo uld spend whatever it takes to get it fixed up. The S7B is a dandy lathe. Robert Mitchell ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! (not Bob Marley style) Posted by: "Andrew Chapman" Chapmanadx~xxaol.com Date: Sun Sep 5, 2010 9:45 am ((PDT)) The oil is not critical. What is critical is that some oil gets to the whole of the bearing surface. The rear bearings must be set so that there is a very slight clearance in the front bearing. The rear bearings stop the shaft wobbling about but they also stop the taper being forced into the bearing. It may jam if that happens and it will necessarily get hot because no oil can get to the bearing surface unless there is at least some clearance. Think of the rear bearings as a pair of thrust bearings. One of them prevents the spindle moving forward so that it doesn't become loose and the other prevents it from moving back so that the taper bearing doesn't jam. The two thrust bearings also need to be pushed together but not very hard. That will prevent lateral movement of the rear of the spindle. If you follow the Myford setup procedure correctly, this problem will not occur. Kind regards, Andy Chapman ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! (not Bob Marley style) Posted by: "mike.crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Sep 6, 2010 8:05 am ((PDT)) Ron: To add to what others have already said. If the REAR bearing is getting hot it suggests that you have set the preload on the ball races much too high. The loading should be just enough to remove any play. You will ruin the bearings if you run them tight. If the spindle is jamming under normal drilling pressure you have set the front cone bearing clearance too small. I think you need to start over on the setting up procedure, and follow the Myford instructions to the letter. In a nutshell, move the spindle forward, so that the front cone bearing is well clear, adjust the preload on the rear ball races, move the spindle back so that the cone bearing clearance is just taken up, then move the spindle forward again to give the specified running clearance. M. ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! (not Bob Marley style) Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Mon Sep 6, 2010 12:00 pm ((PDT)) Agreed. Incidentally, the Myford instructions contained in the S7 user manual are slightly different from those in the later belt change document. I couldn't find it in the group's files so I have just uploaded a copy of the belt change document as Super7BeltChanges.pdf into the Super7 folder. ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! Clarification Needed Posted by: "wheezer" wheezer606x~xxverizon.net Date: Mon Sep 6, 2010 1:27 pm ((PDT)) This is an interesting discussion, but I am not clear whether this procedure applies to the ML7, S7 or both. Please clarify. Thanks lance ------- Re: ML7 jamming!! Clarification Needed Posted by: "Andrew Chapman" Chapmanadx~xxaol.com Date: Mon Sep 6, 2010 1:34 pm ((PDT)) S7 Kind regards, Andy Chapman ------- New Member : Help needed for removal of Apron on S7 [myfordlathes] Posted by: "bakerdon18" bakerdonx~xxiafrica.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 6:21 am ((PDT)) Hi, I have today joined this group and would like to start by seeking advice on how to remove the apron on my Myford Super7 (SK123935M, with QC Gearbox QC122481). I think I have committed the unforgivable by engaging the saddle/ leadscrew claspnut and/or the cross-slide power drive while the saddle was locked in place with the (rear) 5/16BSF saddle clamp bolt. I have removed the cross-slide, and the four 1/4"BSF apron cap screws, so the apron is loose but cannot be removed due to fouling. I am told that, to remove the apron, one has to extract the leadscrew from the gearbox (and to free it at the tailstock end by disconnecting the RH Leadscrew bracket) so that the leadscrew can be lowered to allow the apron to be removed. My question is 1] Can the leadscrew be simply withdrawn from the gearbox and later pushed back - no hassle? I would appreciate any advice on the above - and will stay on this List now that I've found it. I have recently replaced my 38-year old Super7 (sans gearbox & power cross-feed, bought new in 1972) with the one above. Life would definitely be the poorer without my Myford Super7 - I believe I could almost use it blindfolded! Thanks Don Baker (George, S. Africa} ------- Re: New Member : Help needed for removal of Apron on S7 Posted by: "Andrew Chapman" Chapmanadx~xxaol.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 6:31 am ((PDT)) You can do it by dismantling the half-nut assembly from the front of the apron. If you remove the lever and then remove the two slotted studs, the half-nuts can be removed, freeing the apron. It might be an idea to replace one or two of the apron screws before you do that, so that the apron will be less susceptible to the effects of gravity when it comes free. Kind regards, Andy Chapman ------- Re: New Member : Help needed for removal of Apron on S7 Posted by: "Andrew Chapman" Chapmanadx~xxaol.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 6:34 am ((PDT)) Incidentally, the S7 manual does not explicitly advise against using a lathe blindfolded but I bet they would have done if they had thought of it. Kind regards, Andy Chapman ------- Re: New Member : Help needed for removal of Apron on S7 Posted by: "John Towell" johntowellx~xxdsl.pipex.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 6:36 am ((PDT)) Don I removed the apron on my early power cross feed S7B a few months ago and asked Myford for advice on the process. I made the following notes which might help? Spoke to Malcolm at Myford (0115 925 4222) and he told me how to remove the apron to assess where the wear was. First you need to remove the 2 socket screws at each end that hold the apron to the saddle. On non power cross feed lathes you ease the saddle down and slide the saddle away. With power cross feed there are 2 power cross feed gear wheels protruding above the surface of the saddle and you need to lower the apron more to slide the saddle away. To lower the apron more you need to remove the right hand leadscrew bracket so that the leadscrew is able to move further down. This bracket is held by 2 bolts and 2 dowels. Once the saddle is away you can slide the apron along the lead screw towards the tailstock end (Drive gear for power cross feed picks up drive from keyway in lead screw). To slide the saddle off the lead screw you need to remove the lead screw hand wheel which is retained with an 18mm nylock nut and a dowel pin for location through the lead screw plus the round bush held on lead screw with grub screw. When re-fitting the saddle to the apron you will need to adjust both the saddle to apron fit and the lead screw half nut adjusting screw. First unscrew the half nut adjusting screw right out. Move the apron as far to the right as it can go and engage the clasp nuts - it will be tight. Undo the screws securing the apron to the saddle and these two parts will self align. Nip up the screws and then tighten the screws. Move the apron to the mid point along the bed and engage the clasp nuts. Hold the lever down with your left hand and screw in the adjusting screw until it stops, then take your hand off the lever and screw it in a further 1/4 turn. If you do not adjust this then you may get tracking marks when taking fine cuts - these will be at 1/8 inch? The lead screw pitch? Regards John Towell ------- Re: New Member : Help needed for removal of Apron on S7 Posted by: "Don" bakerdonx~xxiafrica.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 7:24 am ((PDT)) Thanks John, for getting back to me so quickly. I had more or less got to where you described but there still seems to be not enough slack to disengage the apron from the leadscrew. One obviously doesn't want to force too much deflection on the leadscrew. I copied an article from the Myford website a few days ago, where they talk about also extracting the leadscrew from the gearbox. Hence I wondered whether it just slides in & out (with keyway) of the gearbox. Do you know? Don ------- Re: New Member : Help needed for removal of Apron on S7 Posted by: "John Towell" johntowellx~xxdsl.pipex.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 7:45 am ((PDT)) Don I do not know about removing the leadscrew from the gearbox as I followed Malcolm's advice and deflected the leadscrew which worked OK. Good luck with the job. If you need photos I can help. Regards John ------- Re: New Member : Help needed for removal of Apron on S7 Posted by: "Don" bakerdonx~xxiafrica.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 8:05 am ((PDT)) John, I tried, & was wrong about the leadscrew being able to slide out of the gearbox - it's retained inside. But I'm just concerned that the amount of forced downward deflection apparently needed on the RH end of the leadscrew would not do the leadscrew any good. But thanks again for your help Regards Don ------- Re: New Member : Help needed for removal of Apron on S7 Posted by: "Rich Dean" toolman8x~xxcopper.net Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 8:28 am ((PDT)) Don, run the saddle/apron all the way to the right (remove tailstock). Pulling down the leadscrew a little there is no problem. Cheers, RichD ------- Re: New Member : Help needed for removal of Apron on S7 Posted by: "Don" bakerdonx~xxiafrica.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 11:15 am ((PDT)) Thanks Rich, & John, I got it apart - at the tailstock end - although I had to use rather more force on the leadscrew than seemed wise. Found no apparent fault with the bevel, and other, gears, but there is still a jamb somewhere in there - I'll have a good look tomorrow. Putting it all back should be interesting. Thanks for your help. Don ------- Re: Super 7 Belt Change service sheet [myfordlathes] Posted by: "ianstrickland733" ianstrickland733x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 9:25 am ((PDT)) Hi Ken, Thanks for posting a PDF file of the above document. I have a very floppy oil soaked belt on my S7 which will need changing in due course. The only problem is the PDF is very fuzzy and difficult to read. Do you suppose Myfords might still have copies of said document, or is there some other way to get a readable copy? Have you seen the latest MEW which has a design for an automatic leadscrew disengement device for screw cutting etc. That's my next project, but I will incorporate my interlock device. Regards Ian Strickland. P.S. Did I read somewhere that you are in Toronto? ------- Re: Super 7 Belt Change service sheet Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 1:52 pm ((PDT)) My apologies but the belt change document was obtained from another so there is nothing that I can do about the quality. Have you considered replacing the original belt with one of the Flex-twist or similar belts? That is what I did on my lathe and it works well. Since the belt is made of links it can be installed without removing the spindle or jackshaft. That said I recently disassembled my spindle in order to adjust clearances and it didn't take too long. I lived for many years in Toronto but have recently moved to Cobourg Ontario which is about 60 miles to the east of Toronto. Where are you? ------- Re: Super 7 Belt Change service sheet Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:21 pm ((PDT)) ianstrickland733 wrote: > The only problem is the PDF is very fuzzy and difficult to read. Do you > suppose Myfords might still have copies of said document, or is there > some other way to get a readable copy? Ian, that's odd, as it's perfectly readable on my system, though might not print out too well. But, it so happens that I was sent a different copy just a couple of days ago, which may be a bit sharper. Also it includes a supplementary leaflet. I leave it to others to determine if the supplement applies to all lathes, or only certain later models. I've uploaded it as "Super7BeltChanges plus supplement" in the Super 7 section, right next to Ken's original. Hopefully you'll be able to read one or other of them. Having said all that though, I can thoroughly recommend using one of the link belts, which you can fit without dismantling anything. I bought mine several years ago from Tony at lathes.co.uk ... he would sell you the correct length plus two or three spare links if you told him which lathe it was for, which was cheaper than other suppliers who only sold by the metre. Might have changed now, and usual disclaimer. Of course, you can't use a link belt if you've got one of the latest Myfords .... they use poly-vee belts. Kevin NW England, UK ------- Re: Super 7 Belt Change service sheet Posted by: "Ian Strickland" ianstrickland733x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:44 pm ((PDT)) Hi Kevin, Great. Your PDF is so clear. Thanks very much. Regards Ian Strickland ------- Re: Super 7 Belt Change service sheet Posted by: "Ian Strickland" ianstrickland733x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:56 pm ((PDT)) Hi Ken, Thanks for your reply. You have probably seen Kevin's upload which is brilliantly clear. I am vaguely familiar with linked belts, but not the name Flex-twist. Kevin said he got his from Tony at lathes.co.uk so I'll enquire of him. I have been to Toronto, indeed my God Mother lived there for many years. Sadly she is no longer with us but I did visit her when I was in Toronto for the "Toronto Blessing" at the Airport Vineyard Church about 15 years ago. I am in the UK, about 15/20 miles SW of London, in Walton on Thames, Surrey where my wife and I have lived since 1970. I retired just over 2 years ago, and now have a bit more time for the workshop. Not as much as I would like as 5 years ago I was ordained an Anglican priest. I just hope that there will be fantastic workshops in Heaven!! What about you? God bless Ian ------- Re: Super 7 Belt Change service sheet Posted by: "Peter L Allen" allenplx~xxtastelfibre.com.au Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 5:07 pm ((PDT)) Recently got rid of the rubber V belts - replaced with Powertwist belts from Chronos. Yes I know they sell only metre lengths but if the complainers bothered to research they'd find the primary belt ends up with 3 or 4 links spare and the secondary with about 6 or so. Now use the top speeds freely for small stuff, such is the decrease in noise and vibration. One of the long term "dreams" was to do a poly belt conversion - now struck off the "list". allenpl ------- Re: Myford-Dickson Toolholders Gone??? [myfordlathes] Posted by: "jwgott1" jwgx~xxleonard.com Date: Wed Sep 8, 2010 11:31 am ((PDT)) I've been purchasing new Dickson style tool holders from Bob at New England Brass and Tool Company. They are made by Bison in Poland. Very high quality. He also sells the less expensive, lesser quality Garvin brand which is made in India. Same stuff RDG and Chronos sell. Give Bob a call 781.729.7672 or check out his website. http://brassandtool.com/Toolpost.html I have no relationship with him. Just a satisfied customer. Jonathan Bethesda, Maryland [later msg] I have fitted these holders successfully to an original Myford Dickson tool post. 1980s vintage. I own several of them. ------- Re: Help with router!! [myfordlathes] Posted by: "karen_ozau" karengx~xxa1.com.au Date: Sat Sep 18, 2010 9:03 pm ((PDT)) In myfordlathesx~xxyahoogroups.com, "Bobble" wrote: > I was wondering if anyone knows of an EASY way to mount a woodworking router to the toolpost of a myford S7. I need to rout some dovetail slots in a wooden cylinder accurately and thought there must be some way to do it with the myford. Thanks Bob < I needed to screwcut some wooden dowels for an antique desk that needed repairs - I used an air powered die grinder using Jubilee clips to hold it to the tool post. A lot less weight on the tool post & slides, and did a beautiful job of cutting the threads too. Speed is pretty much on a par with a router. Karen ------- Using ER Collets on a Super 7 [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Barry" 2barryforrestx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:10 am ((PDT)) I do not have a milling machine and so I intend to do some basic milling using my early Super 7. With a view to purchase of a milling machine in the future I thought that if I used ER collets in the Myford these same collets could be used in the milling machine in the future. As I do not yet have a specific mill in mind I do not know the type of collet chuck required for the mill. However, I will be able to use the collets in either machine. Can any member advise me as to the best "option" for holding ER collets in the Myford taking into account:- convenience, distance of cutter or workpiece from spindle nose, risk of vibration/accuracy or anything similar. While money is not a specific issue I am sure I dont need a "Rolls Royce" solution. I think there are basically three options: 1. MT2 Shank Collet Chuck 2. A Collet chuck that screws onto the spindle nose 3. A collet chuck fixed to a backplate screwed onto the spindle nose. I have searched the web and cannot find anything that specifically addresses this issue. Any advice out there from old hands or other users that have been down this road and what the problems are or might be. Also if there are issues related to ER25 or ER32 (other than the obvious of max. size of tool the collet will take). Thanks Barry ------- Re: Using ER Collets on a Super 7 Posted by: "dnaman43" mevagissyx~xxgmail.com Date: Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:21 am ((PDT)) > 1. MT2 Shank Collet Chuck > 2. A Collet chuck that screws onto the spindle nose > 3. A collet chuck fixed to a backplate screwed onto the spindle nose. I have both 1 and 2 (ER25) and an ML7. Since I got the screw-on chuck, I haven't used the MT2 collet chuck on the lathe at all. For one thing it limits the length of material you can use. For another it means fiddling with a draw-bar. Unless you are using up some existing equipment, #3 seems unnecessarily complicated to me. And having two mountings in series as it were might affect the accuracy a bit. ------- Re: Using ER Collets on a Super 7 Posted by: "wheezer" wheezer606x~xxverizon.net Date: Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:30 am ((PDT)) > 1. MT2 Shank Collet Chuck I use this method. OK except that work cannot pass into spindle bore. > 2. A Collet chuck that screws onto the spindle nose Make your own. Look here http://bit.ly/anDvJ2 > 3. A collet chuck fixed to a backplate screwed onto the spindle nose. Look here http://bit.ly/9rN3we Allows you to use your own backplate and pass the work into the spindle. ------- Re: Using ER Collets on a Super 7 Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:56 am ((PDT)) I have Item 1. It was made by Schaublin so it is accurate but has considerable overhang and I cannot pass longer lengths into the spindle. It works well for chucking short pieces. I recently purchased Item 2 from Chronos. The finish is good and it is a snug fit onto the spindle nose. Unfortunately I get a TIR of about 1.5 thou even when measured inside the taper. I'm considering taking a skim cut on the taper to try to improve things. Making a chuck on your own spindle and buying a commercial nut is probably the best way to get an accurate result. Using Item 3 should allow correcting runout much like using a set-true chuck and stock can pass through the spindle as with Item 2. However, the backing plate might interfere with some milling work. I have an R-8 to ER-25 collet holder for the mill that was purchased very inexpensively from CTC. Since I have a set of Bison milling holders in Imperial sizes I only use the collets to hold metric shank cutters. ------- Re: Using ER Collets on a Super 7 Posted by: "David Everett" deverett2003x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:54 pm ((PDT)) I use ER 32 collets on my S7 and milling machines. On the lathe, I use option 3. I have managed to get almost nil runout with this system. Initial machining is the same as fitting any other collet attachment and will ensure minimum runout to the accuracy of the collet. Overhang is not too much of a problem, certainly less than a heavy chuck. Because of the PITA of changing the drawbar on my (Wabeco) milling machine to swap between collet holder and drill chuck, I stick with the collet holder exclusively. After not too much usage, I have become pretty adept at changing collets, even for drills. ER system collets have the advantage of having a wide clamping range compared to the traditional Myford, C5 or R8 systems. DaveThe Emerald Isle ------- Setting over the tailstock [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Bobble" salter_bobx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Oct 3, 2010 8:53 am ((PDT)) I finally bit the bullet and bought a new rdg hbm chuck so my myford is almost operational. I notice if I centre drill and then extend the workpeice and bring up the tailstock that the workpeice becomes eccentric, worst at the tailstock end. I assume the tailstock has been set over at some point in its past and needs readjusting. Do I need to slacken the bolts at the chuck end and tailstock end of the tailstock to do this or do I just adjust the setting screw? I ask because the bolt nearest the chuck has had its head broken off and I can't get it out. Sorry for the stupid noob questions. Bob ------- Re: Setting over the tailstock Posted by: "Rich Dean" toolman8x~xxcopper.net Date: Sun Oct 3, 2010 10:28 am ((PDT)) Bob, when the outer end of the bar becomes more eccentric when extended out of the chuck that's an indication the bar is either bent or the chuck is misaligned (wobbling) or the jaws are ground incorrectly. This has nothing to do with the tailstock. RichD ------- Re: Setting over the tailstock Posted by: "Bobble" salter_bobx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Oct 3, 2010 11:28 am ((PDT)) I dont think I explained it very well. I centre drill the work piece. When I extend it WITHOUT the tailstock in contact there is no wobble at all, Im delighted with the chuck. As soon as I put the tailstock centre into the hole I drilled the workpeoce AT THE TAILSTOCK END becomes eccentric. This is why I think the tailstock is out of true. The max runout on the chuck is listed as 30 thou which I guess is a lot in engineering terms but for the purposes I will use it for it is virtually irrelevant. The closest I will get to engineering work is making tapered reamers. These would be step turned, measuring all the way and then filed to required taper. Beyond that working with acetal and long hole boring in wood will be my main work. Hope I have explained it better this time. The bolts I mentioned in the original post are part number 24 in the tailstock parts list in the manual, they are 2ba cap heads, one has no head so I can't release it. Thanks again Bob ------- Re: Setting over the tailstock Posted by: "John" johnx~xxstevenson-engineers.co.uk Date: Sun Oct 3, 2010 12:26 pm ((PDT)) If the work piece becomes eccentric when the centre is applied then that means the centre holes isn't central to start with. Are you sure about the 30 thou max allowed ? sure it's no 0.003" which is 3 thou ? If they are selling chucks that say 30 thou they must be bowling them from India to save carriage. John S. ------- Re: Setting over the tailstock Posted by: "Peter Dobson" peterdx~xxmodelrail.net Date: Sun Oct 3, 2010 12:45 pm ((PDT)) Which rather suggests to my simple mind that the tailstock is not in line unless the centre was drilled in some other way!. Surely a gross error check can be made by fitting a centre in both the headstock and tailstock and 'attempting' to bring them together. If they don't align then the tailstock is most likely to be out - but if they do align then the chuck may be at fault. Back to first principles methinks and then one step at a time. Peter Dobson ------- Re: Setting over the tailstock Posted by: "Steve Ward" zx12x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Oct 3, 2010 1:18 pm ((PDT)) I'm slightly confused (perhaps I'm reading it wrong). If the tailstock is set over (even if say deliberately) you still wouldn't get any wobble. If you turned it down you'd simply get a taper (but still concentric around the original centre drilled hole). The only way to get wobble when you place the end of the tailstock in the job is if the tailstock can rotate (say a rotating centre) if this centre is offset relative to it's bearing then you'd get wobble. As I say though, I may be reading/misunderstanding what's happening... Steve ------- Re: Setting over the tailstock Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Oct 3, 2010 1:49 pm ((PDT)) Are we sure the material is truly round? If it isn't then you could be gripping it one way when you drill the end but be gripping it differently when it's extended. Kevin, NW England, UK ------- Re: Setting over the tailstock Posted by: "Rich Dean" toolman8x~xxcopper.net Date: Sun Oct 3, 2010 1:59 pm ((PDT)) Bob, there's a lot of things at play here. The tailstock held centre drill will make a hole in the centre of *rotation* no matter what as long as the TS is close. Otherwise you will get a circular groove instead. Releasing the stock and extending it disturbs the original setting. The centre hole may not have been in the centre of the stock (bad chuck) and applying a TS centre will now lock the stock to the drilled centre hole. The stock surface may run out (eccentric) due to the offset chuck. To repeat your exercise, clock the stock close to the chuck to be sure the stock is running reasonably true first. The 30 thou spec is WAY too off for any reasonable engineering tasks. Cheers, RichD ------- Re: Setting over the tailstock Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Oct 4, 2010 12:33 am ((PDT)) If you put dead centres in both the headstock and tailstock, then bring them together with something like a steel rule held gently between the points, the deflection of the rule will show whether they are in alignment. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: Delrin [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Bobble" salter_bobx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Oct 6, 2010 2:07 pm ((PDT)) You can adjust the feedrate? How? Bob ------- Re: Delrin Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Wed Oct 6, 2010 2:44 pm ((PDT)) The page numbers differ for a ML7 and S7. For the S7 without a gearbox look at the manual on page 32 and following. Power feed is a variation of screwcutting. If you have a quick change gearbox you need to reverse the fine feed cluster gear and then just change the gearbox lever positions to vary the feeds. The manuals explain all! ------- Re: Introduction and question [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Brad Campbell" lists2009x~xxfnarfbargle.com Date: Mon Dec 6, 2010 4:34 am ((PST)) On 06/12/10 19:35, Cliff Coggin wrote: > Welcome Brad. The ball oilers can be prised out with a small lever > under the lip. They are smooth sided parallel fittings 0.25" diameter > that were only lightly pressed in. Ahh.. and here's me thinking they are screwed in and trying to unscrew them. Duh! Thanks for that :) > Unfortunately Myfords are notoriously slow at answering email. I assume > telephoning is out of the question if you are in the Antipodes. Well, not out of the question but if they are only slow at E-mail then I can wait. I've had the machine under a blanket in dad's shed for a couple of years and only recently built a bench for it and had it moved. I can wait for E-mail. In fact I long for the days where you could write a letter to someone and they could spend a week considering and drafting an answer without you panicking that they have not responded in 15 milliseconds. I'm actually popping over to Scotland for Christmas so I was going to order a 4 jaw chuck and pick it up while I was there. Regards, Brad ------- Re: ML-7 Spindle Pulley [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Sun Dec 26, 2010 9:29 am ((PST)) Original Message ----- From: "craig00747" Sunday, December 26, 2010 >Hi Guys >I have got a slight problem with the spindle pulley,which is rotating on >the shaft,especially when the machine has warmed up.I read that it is >recommended to apply some loctite to the shaft,after it has been stripped >apart.Has anyone of you done this before?I assume that the shaft must be >stripped from the end,where the preload is adjusted?Did you use a puller >assemble,to pull the pulley off the shaft?There is a sleeve on the >shaft,to the rear side of the pulley and that seems to be very tight on >the shaft.Any advice would be appreciated.Maybe there is a link to a >thread which covered this before? Regards Craig If you are referring to what Myford call the V cone pulley then yes, I have done this job, and yes, the spindle needs to be removed and dismantled, and yes, the sleeve next the thrust bearing can be extraordinarily tight. I did not have a puller so I turned a brass button to fit the end of the spindle so that I could safely batter it repeatedly for 20 minutes with a 2 lb. hammer. Refitting the sleeve was a doddle. I simply warmed it with a blowlamp to expand it, and it simply fell down the spindle. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: ML-7 Spindle Pulley Posted by: "C.S.Johnson" csjohnsonx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:18 pm ((PST)) Hi Craig, The counter shaft pulleys are prevented from turning by woodruff keys and locked by grubscrews. The headstock pulley is supposed to be free to rotate and is provided with an oil nipple to lubricate it. It can be locked to the back gear by a toothed key in the backgear. Colin ------- Re: ML-7 Spindle Pulley Posted by: "craig00747" hawkt45x~xxmsn.com Date: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:28 pm ((PST)) Hi Colin: I think that it must be the woodruff key on the spindle shaft, which is causing this. It only happens after a bit of turning work, for the pulley to rotate and the spindle remains still. Regards Craig ------- Re: Myford Super 7 [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Ron" silverfoxccx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:21 pm ((PST)) Has anyone adjusted the headstock spindle following a belt change? I have a small problem with mine insofar as when I am drilling in the chuck, any pressure from the tailstock causes the spindle to seize. A slight tap on the end frees it until the next time. Any comments on correct way to get it right appreciated. I just cannot fathom out the instructions in the manual. Perhaps I am too old to understand! Thanks Ron ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Posted by: "donald Edwards" wandleside3x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:59 pm ((PST)) Hi Ron: You need to re-adjust the setting of the thrust bearing at the tail end of the spindle. This needs to be set so that the front cone bearing is just riding on the oil film when you are applying a cutting or drilling load, not just when running light. Your present setting of the thrust bearing is very nearly there, just a spot more forward movement. If this setting is not 'just so' you will experience the problem you have, caused by the cone bearing at the front of the spindle pressing too firmly into it's mating seating. Conversely if you set it up with too much clearance you will experience severe chattering as the front bearing cone floats. Get it just right and it's a great bearing. The adjustment needs to be done ASAP as the seizing means that the lube has been forced out of the bearing and metal to metal contact can score the bearing and cause expensive damage .(You've probably seen Myford's current spare parts price list!) I should add that I do not possess an S7 but did watch a friend deal with this problem on his machine, so I hope you don't think I'm trying to teach you to 'suck eggs' Cheers, Don Edwards ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Posted by: "donald Edwards" wandleside3x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 5:11 pm ((PST)) Hi Ron, [snip -- Don's correction was done to first message here] Re-reading your last line, does this help? The split ring with the securing screw at the tail of the spindle needs to be drawn up tight to eliminate any clearance in the assembly of gear-train drive-pinion, the rear bearing inner races and the spacer sleeve on the spindle. Then the two adjusting rings move the whole spindle/rear bearing assembly forward or backward as necessary. To apply the method that I saw used to obtain the very small movement of the spindle, would in your case be, to loosen slightly the forward ring and then return it until it almost touches the spacer sleeve, then bring up the rear ring to tighten up the assembly again, trying the setting under load after each alteration until it was correct. I've no knowledge of the pitch of the adjusting rings, but they are screwing into a cast iron housing, so possibly 16 or less, so even a sixteenth of a turn would move the bearings forward about .015", enough to give too much clearance. Hope this helps. Don ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 6:10 pm ((PST)) There are detailed instructions in the group's Files section. See Super7BeltChanges_plus_supplement.pdf in the Super7 folder. ------- Re: Myford Super 7 Posted by: "AVG" avg2ukx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:00 am ((PST)) It's a pair of angular contact ballraces clamped between the castellated nuts. You need to loosen the front nut a minute amount and tighten the rearward one to shift the pair of races forward very slightly. Just tightening the rearward one might do it. Alan ------- Poly V Belt Conversion [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Christopher" chcx~xxjacom.co.uk Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 7:13 am ((PST)) Has anyone made and fitted a poly v belt to a S7 as offered by Hemmingway Kits? Is there a benefit as claimed? Part of the process is to remove and reuse the existing bushes from each pulley. How do I do that without damaging them? ------- Re: Poly V Belt Conversion Posted by: "Peter" peter.isbisterx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 12:10 pm ((PST)) Hi Christopher: I'm only finished machined the pulleys. Before I take the spindle down I will make some dollies up out of a soft metal to help drive the bushes out. I reckon about 1" od and 3/4" on the shaft and 4" long. I only need two bush /gear assemblies to remove and replace as the countershaft pulleys are keyed on and screwed onto the shaft. The bush and gear assembly should knock out from the ring next to the back gear. If I can't push the bushes out and as I don't want the old pulleys I will consider splitting the cast iron off the bushes by sawing, chain- drilling ,mill slitting etc: As to wether it is an improvement ;-poly vee drives are the natural successor to vee belt drives (how many new cars or machines are made today with single vee belts). If is good enough for Myford to go to the poly vee set up on there new machines it's good enough for me! Time will tell? Hope this helps Regards Peter ------- Re: Poly V Belt Conversion Posted by: "Christopher" chcx~xxjacom.co.uk Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 8:42 am ((PST)) Yes that is, Peter - thanks I have a feeling having looked at the pulley again today that it might be better to pay for new bits given that the pulley combination does have a value Difficult to know what to do as the castings are expensive (£65 for everyone else's benefit) and a lot of work is involved. Let us know how you get on - particularly pulling/pushing out those bushes! Christopher ------- Re: Poly V Belt Conversion Posted by: "Peter" peter.isbisterx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Thu Mar 3, 2011 9:52 am ((PST)) Hi all, I removed the combined bush and gear assembly without any bother, I suppose this is the luck of the draw as to the tolerances produced when new, as some "Myford" users have apparently had to use bearing fit to re-attach the bush into the pulley bore. The oilite bush was a little more stubborn and the inner end face got bruised. A new one with a bigger flange was sourced from a local bearing supplier for £4. In recollection of the original v belt motor set up, it now seems smoother, quieter,and overall vibrations less, particulary of the rythmic "hum" type!This is with the lathe free standing as I had to move it to get the clutch shaft out and intend to fit a drip tray anyway. I'll have to wait a bit though as I had a knee replacement recently! How do you lift yours, might be an interesting topic? Hope this helps anyone wanting to do this modification. Regards Peter ------- basic operating info [myfordlathes] Posted by: "jacobspaul23" jacobspaul23x~xxyahoo.com Date: Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:53 am ((PDT)) Hi everyone, I am new to the site and to myford lathes. I have had a look at the Super 7 manuals in the files site but do not know very much about the lathes. I am still not clear on some of the basic operating methods. I am supposed to be having a look at a Super 7 with gearbox and power crossfeed this week but realise that to be able to make any judgement I need to get gemmed up a lot better. I hope some of you will take pity on me and answer my very basic questions and maybe offer any tips on things to look for on the lathe. The things I am still unsure of are: 1 How do you change the belts (for different speeds)on the two sets of pullies on the motor and countershaft. Is there a detensioning lever(like on the c/shaft to spindle) somewhere? 2 What is the correct procedure for engaging the back gear? 3 What is the correct method for changing chucks/faceplates? 4 Is there anything to stop chucks unscrewing in reverse? 5 Am I right (or wrong) in thinking the spindle is left hand? Anyway please help someone and thanks in advance for any info Cheers Paul. ------- Re: basic operating info Posted by: "David Everett" deverett2003x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Sat Mar 26, 2011 1:53 pm ((PDT)) Hi Paul Welcome to the world of Myford. I hope you have a successful purchase. To answer your questions: 1. The countershaft lever detensions both sets of belts. 2. On the later (green) versions of the S7, to engage the back gear, you will find a lever on the 60 tooth bull wheel that rotates 180 degrees. Move that lever and then lift the front right hand lever located below the front headstock bearing. There is an oiling point below where the chuck screws on and it is important to make sure that gets a regular dose of oil when using back gear. 3. If the chuck is firmly in place, engage the spindle lock (located on the left side of the headstock and pushes in to lock the spindle) and try and pull the chuck/faceplate off by hand. If it will not come off by hand, one way is to open the jaws sufficiently to place a piece of (say) 2 x 1 hardwood in the open jaws and use that as a lever. Do NOT use a hammer on the chuck key. 4. There is no manufacturer's provision to prevent a chuck unscrewing in use. In reality, the only time a chuck will come unscrewed in operation is if the spindle stops suddenly or you use the spindle in reverse rotation under moderate or more load. Light duty and slow speed usually does not cause a problem, although it is not recommended. 5. If you mean the spindle thread, it is a conventional right hand thread. Hope this helps. DaveThe Emerald Isle ------- Re: Questions from a beginner - part 2 - picture round Posted by: "Haydut1200" haydut1200x~xxgooglemail.com Date: Wed Jun 15, 2011 11:41 am ((PDT)) Jamie, Can I suggest a couple of books for you? The Myford series 7 "bible" is Ian Bradley - Myford Series 7 Lathe Manual, available on Amazon for less than 6 quid. Also L.H. Sparey - The Amateur's Lathe, again for less than 6 pounds. The "Workshop Practice Series" are well worth a look at, and there are about 43 in the series at last count. When you have skint yourself on those, grab a copy of George Thomas - Model Engineers Workshop Manual (Past Masters). The last one is dearer at between 23 and about 28 pounds. OK, it was more than a couple, and I apologise for spending all your beer tokens for you. :) I own the first two books and a number of the WPS ones and can vouch for those being great books. The last one I have heard nothing but praise of, and there is a reserved copy waiting for me to pick up from the library tomorrow morning. Martin ------- Top slide adjustment [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Ron" silverfoxccx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:28 am ((PDT)) Whats the best order to re-tighten the 4 screws. Outer two first then inner two, or v.v left hand two then rh two or v.v. Any suggestions? Thanks Ron ------- Re: Top slide adjustment Posted by: "Haydut1200" haydut1200x~xxgooglemail.com Date: Thu Jun 16, 2011 1:54 pm ((PDT)) Ron, I don't think there is any particular best order. I had my topslide apart a couple of days ago to replace the base, and adjusted the screws as the topslide was being moved into place, with final adjustment when the slide was in its usual resting place. I must admit to not using the topslide much anyway; I prefer to use the leadscrew handwheel, so I keep them slightly on the tight side. More experienced users may have a different and better way of doing it. Martin ------- Re: Play in cross feed [myfordlathes] Posted by: "anthrhodesx~xxaol.com" Date: Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:28 pm ((PDT)) In a message dated Sun Jun 19, 2011, Ron writes: >Have an ML7 with power cross feed. Noticed that i have 6-8 thouu of movement across the bed. Definitely the cross slide and not saddle movement. I also had about the same 4-6 thouu 'freeplay in the handle. Have tightened up handle and eliminated the free play but the slide still has the 6-8thou. When i take the handle assembly off the slide and try and move the slide with the lead screw... no play. Any ideas on what it might be and where to start? < Ron, I don't have a Myford lathe but I've taken a look at the parts manual and believe I understand the mechanism of the cross slide. The cross slide feed nut mounts to the front of the carriage with the power feed gear behind it. The cross slide end bracket attaches to the front of the cross slide. The cross slide feed screw passes through the end bracket with a thrust bearing in the outboard end of the end bracket. Also outboard of the bracket are the manual operating handle and the micrometer dial. In manual operation the crank is turned which feeds the screw into or out of the feed nut. By design this will push the slide away from the operator or pull it back towards the operator. The potential locations of lost motion would appear to be: Excessive clearance between the screw and the nut. Either or both may have the wear. If you operate the screw through it's entire range of feed play may be equal at all positions of feed or may vary from front to middle to the rear. If equal and there are no other causes the excessive play is likely to be wear in the nut. If the amount of play varies throughout the range of motion of the slide at least part of the wear may be in the feed screw but some may still be in the nut. Besides the issue of excess clearance between the screw and nut lost motion may also arise from inadequate mounting of the nut, inadequate mounting of the end bracket, or excess clearance in the thrust bearings. My suggestions are: Remove the hand crank, the thrust bearings, the end bracket, and the feed nut from the carriage and cross slide. Off the lathe, assemble the screw into the feed nut and try to determine at various locations along the length of the screw how much play there is between the screw and the nut. Install the nut on the carriage with the screw already started into the nut and pick up the feed gear. Try to rotate the feed screw, if you can't rotate it the feed gear is probably engaged with the apron gears so disengage the power cross feed. Now the screw should turn freely in the nut so try again to get a sense of how much play there is between the screw and the nut. Having installed the nut on the carriage inspect it to make certain that it is mounted securely, if the nut can move in its attachment to the carriage it will contribute to lost motion. Mount the end bracket to the cross slide and, without installing the thrust bearings on the screw, inspect the attachment of the end bracket to the slide, if the bracket can move relative to the slide it will it will contribute to lost motion. Before installing the thrust bearings try to move the cross slide by pushing it and pulling it, the motion should be free without lateral or twisting motion of the slide on the carriage. Feed the feed screw back through the end bracket by unscrewing if from the nut and install the thrust bearings, adjust the thrust bearings and try to determine the end motion of the slide, keeping in mind whatever the lost motion was between the screw and nut in that position of the slide. The end motion of the screw within the end bracket should be as small as possible without binding. Install the micrometer dial and operating crank, reaching under the bracket to hold the screw see if you can detect any relative rotation between the crank and the screw, do the same for the dial, any lost motion on either of these components relative to the screw will give false readings on the motion of the cross slide. All of the above actions should be taken with the power feed disengaged. If you reach a point where you are satisfied with the adjustments, with the motor off engage the power feed and try rotating the feed screw via the manual feed crank. There should be minimal rotation with the gears engaged but, even if such motion is excessive it should not contribute to excess play in the cross feed, it will only indicate that there may be wear in the cross feed gears in the apron and/or the one through which the feed screw passes. Finally take a longitudinal cut on some scrap and check several in feeds to see if they are acceptable, the take a manual facing cut followed by a power feed facing cut. You want to verify that everything is operating correctly and that the lost motion, which is impossible to eliminate completely, is within an acceptable level. If all is operating correctly but play is more than you can accept you should have a pretty good idea of where the problem lies. You will then be able to make any corrective decisions on your own or ask specific advice regarding methods and sources from the list members. Please tell me if this makes sense and if it's helpful. Anthony Berkeley, Calif. ------- Re: New Member, New to ML7. Pulley Locking Screw Type? [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Ken Hutton" kenhuttonx~xxrocketmail.com Date: Wed Jun 22, 2011 5:15 am ((PDT)) Cliff Coggin wrote: > Ken. Please don't tighten that screw to the spindle or you will damage it. As I and others here have pointed out several times it IS an oiling point, so the top of the screw needs only to be flush with the bottom of the pulley groove. Regards, Cliff Coggin. < Cliff, I can only assume that Myfords changed the design at some point, as it's definitely a fixing screw on my ML7. If I unscrew it then the pulley spins and no feed from the top mainshaft to the bottom pulleys. I have had it screwed hard home for the past 8 years and it works fine. I have to say also that I have never used the "back gear " scenario, never has a need to, I only machine brass and mild steel and I use the same speed all the time...saves mucking about with the belts. Ken Hutton Sunny Cornwall UK ------- Re: New Member, New to ML7. Pulley Locking Screw Type? Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:32 am ((PDT)) Hi Ken. Unfortunately it isn't a design change that afflicts your lathe, it's a fault. Your lack of drive through the spindle is because the pulleys have become detached from the bronze gear onto which they were originally a press fit. It is a not uncommon fault that I found the hard way when mine had the same problem. Luckily John Stevenson knew of it and advised me how to fix it. The solution is to remove and dismantle the spindle, (which can be a pain if your spacer sleeve is as tight as mine was, though they are not all like that,) clean the bronze gear and V-cone pulley mating faces, then Loctite them together. Mine has worked well since I did the repair some six years or more ago. As you have found, the oil point screw can be used to lock the drive, but if you try to use back gear you will find that screw will chew a deep groove around the spindle, and it would be a shame to spoil such a venerable machine as the Myford. If you think about it a little more, Myfords would not have been so silly as to entrust one tiny screw to transmit a considerable amount of power. Trust me, it is only an oil point. Regards, Cliff. ------- http://www.model-engineer.co.uk/forums/postings.asp?th=28673 IanT 09/06/2009 14:42:28 44 forum posts 10 photos My old Super 7 (the type with the oil window in the headstock) had had a hard life before she came to me. None the less with a little care and attention it's been a very useful tool and I'm not too bothered about the inherited dents etc. However, I've now adjusted the clutch a couple of times but it's starting to slip again. I don't want to overtighten the adjusting grub screw as this is the clutch model that Myford no longer have spares for. There is an expanding cylinder inside the countershaft/ clutch drum and I suspect that the two friction surfaces are getting a bit worn by now. I wonder if anyone has sucessfully stuck (epoxied) a shim (brass or tinplate) to the expanding cylinder to take up the wear - as these are normally non-bearing surfaces. This would mean less need to tighten the adjustment screw. Any other ideas would also be welcome however. For instance is there anything in old ME's about this? DMR 09/06/2009 18:35:18 4 forum posts Ian, I have SK1711 as original with roller bearings. I fitted a backup grub screw behind the main one (BSF) to lock the position as I descided it was probably working its way out. No more troubles. Originally (3 years ago) I had slip as I had set it up. descided I was probablly being too soft and it was wearing out the clutch because of slip. the tighter you make it, the more you think the two bits holding the roller bearing in the handle are going to give up, but it all seems OK. Myford still have those bits as they fit the clutched ML7, but not the bearing which can be had from elsewhere anyway. Good luck anyway, Dennis IanT 09/06/2009 19:29:49 44 forum posts 10 photos Thanks for the feedback Dennis - I may try that and see if it solves the problem. Regards, Ian ------- Vertical slide. [myford lathes] Posted by: "Bobble" salter_bobx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:11 am ((PDT)) Hi all: Forgive my ignorance here but I have just received a lovely new vertical slide and vice. I had always envisioned the vs to simply bolt on the toolpost but I think I was mistaken. Does it bolt on to the cross slide table behind where the toolpost would normally sit? I looked in the amateur lathe book but there are only closeups, no way to see where it sits. Can someone reassure me as to the correct positioning of the new toy please. Bob ------- Re: Vertical slide. Posted by: "used to be Buddy. ( Holly )" d.j.wilsonx~xxmac.com Date: Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:38 am ((PDT)) Yes you remove the tool post and it bolts into the "T"slots. There is a photo of my vert and vice in use, in my Album ML4 Tumbler Reverse regards David J Wilson ------- Re: Vertical slide. Posted by: "Bob Salter" salter_bobx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:19 am ((PDT)) That's great, thanks. One other question if I might. I have a heavy duty flexi drive system, the handpiece of which I will clamp in the vs vice. I am going to mainly cut slots in wood with it. Would I be better using endmills or router bits do you think. Thanks again Bob ------- Re: Vertical slide. Posted by: "Yi Yao" yix~xxyyao.ca Date: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:45 am ((PDT)) I've used both and they all work fine. The router bits may leave less burs behind. ------- Re: Vertical slide. Posted by: "used to be Buddy. ( Holly )" d.j.wilsonx~xxmac.com Date: Wed Aug 24, 2011 7:46 am ((PDT)) I would use a router. Just in case the flex drive does grab and twist itself up like a constrictive snake. Regards David J Wilson ------- Re: Vertical slide. Posted by: "trevor_kentx~xxbtopenworld.com" Date: Thu Aug 25, 2011 12:44 am ((PDT)) Hi All. I acquired a vs and an MA71 vice recently and have been enjoying doing some milling work. What I've noticed on the vice is that there isn't a sharp 90 degree angle between the fixed jaw and the vice base so any work placed in the vice is forced forward a few mil when the vice is tightened. The moving jaw has a recess in it; why isn't the fixed jaw the same? Or am I holding the material incorrectly in the vice? Thanks Trev ------- Re: New member [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Don Hammond" don.hammond13x~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Aug 30, 2011 5:51 am ((PDT)) On 29/08/11, don.hammond13 wrote: >> I would like to say hell-o to the members of the Myford group. I >> just got a Myford and I will have a lot of questions. Don On August 29, 2011 Yi Yao wrote: > Hey, sounds like me just a month ago! If anything, I've learned to ask on this forum before doing anything to my Myford that I am unsure of. Given my lack of experience, there were a lot of things that I am really glad that I asked. Welcome to the club. What Myford did you get? Yi < Thank you, and yes want to make sure I know what I am doing, before the lathe gets turned on. The lathe is a Super 7. That is easy since it is so indicated. I was told it is a 7B plus. How do you figure that out? Thanks again, Don ------- Re: New member Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:57 am ((PDT)) The "7B" means that it has a Quick Change Gear Box. http://www.lathes.co.uk/myford/page16.html says that the Super7 Plus has a larger spindle bore, a different nose thread and MT4 socket. ------- Re: Standard Spanners set sizes for Super7 [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Rich Dean" toolman8x~xxcopper.net Date: Wed Sep 7, 2011 10:07 am ((PDT)) marcelbernards wrote: > I am missing some spanners of my '55 Super 7 and the book shows 3 but gives no sizes and no part numbers. So I want to have it complete and buy some imperial sized spanners. Not so easy in metric Holland, but they are available. Which sizes are they? Also the C spanner is missing, but I think I need a 40-45mm sized one, right? Thanx, Marcel < Marcel: There are 3 open end spanners. Single ended 3/8" for top slide dovetail sq head grubscrews (3/8" Flats). Double ended 3/16 - 5/16 Whitworth (1/4 - 5/16 BSF). Double ended 5/16 - 3/8 Whitworth (3/8 - 7/16 BSF). Also a hook spanner for the headstock left thrust bearing adjustment. To fit 1-7/8" diameter ring nut with a 5/32" hook tip. Thickness 1/4". All Myford S7 fasteners are Imperial. RichD ------- ML7 headstock alignment [myfordlathes] Posted by: "gnuoyb" gnuoybx~xxgmail.com Date: Wed Sep 7, 2011 11:16 am ((PDT)) Hello fellow Myford users and greetings from sunny Queensland (well it's sunny this week anyway!). I've had my ML7 for around thirty years. Serial number K6421 so presumably pre 1950. Not surprisingly it has a little wear so to try and improve things I have invested in a test bar. Some might say I should have done that thirty years ago and they are probably right. I did make a parallel test bar and it was certainly useful but the new one is ground to fine limits and has a 2MT end which makes it far more useful. I checked that there was no play in the spindle bearings and then checked that the bed wasn't under any tension due to the holding down bolts. I inserted the test bar in the spindle and then measured the run out at its end as I rotated the spindle. TIR was a little over 0.001" Not bad I thought. Next, after adjusting the saddle for minimal play, I mounted my DTI on the cross-slide vertically above the test bar and measured the variation over its 8" parallel portion. TIR was zero - excellent I thought. Finally I repeated this with the DTI horizontal and found around 0.0035" variation. Rubbish I thought. I assume this will be wear in the shears or misalignment of the headstock so I removed the latter and checked that there was no foreign material trapped in the shears. There wasn't. Now for my question and I apologize for the long introduction. The headstock is located vertically by 4 bolts and horizontally by 2 setscrews so that the tongue on the bottom of the headstock bears against the inner rear shear. If I insert a thin shim (say 0.002") at one end here, I should be able to compensate for the error noted above. This may be a case of two wrongs trying to make a right but does this matter and can any one see a problem with it? Turning between centres should be OK, drilling from the tailstock could be iffy, I can live with that. Anything else? ------- Re: ML7 headstock alignment Posted by: "Jochen Becker" jwhbeckerx~xxyahoo.de Date: Wed Sep 7, 2011 1:51 pm ((PDT)) Gnuoyb, some questions in return: you did turn the spindle and you have measured a TIR of 0.001 (a) this is <-0.0005|0|0.0005+> the centre of your testbar is moving in small circles (radius .0005) you slid the saddle along the 8" testbar (testbar steady, I assume) (b) you have measured a HORIZONTAL TIR of 0.0035 (c) you have measured a VERTICAL TIR of 0 Because of (a), (b) could also be 0.003 or 0.004 or anything near Because of (a), (c) was possibly just luck (sorry) Repeat (a) and mark on the bar the High point with a pen. Turn the testbar relative to the spindle by 90° Repeat (a). Is the high point still the same? If yes, the testbar is not straight. If no, remember relative position of testbar to spindle, check and clean your spindle nose taper, clean and check the testbar's taper. Re-insert testbar with the same relative position of testbar to spindle Repeat (a) Is the high point now the same as before? If yes, your morse taper was not clean, and the testbar is not straight. If no, your spindle is not straight. With shimming the headstock as you described, you would keep, but move the small circles of (a) in horizontal direction, depending on where you inserted the shim. To reduce (b), you will only need some measurements and a simple calculation. Shimming will rotate the headstock relative to the bed shears, which is, what you want. You have to find the centre of rotation. That is, where along the total lenghth of the lathe bed is the pivoting point. We locate the headstock against the rear shear only. This implies, that the location of the pivoting point depends on whether your horizontal TIR is a positive or negative distance. Does the bar point towards or away from you? Case 1: TIR is a negative distance, the bar inclines towards the operator at the tailstock end. Then the pivoting point of the headstock will be at the edge of the headstock (towards the tailstock end) or maybe a bit within the lenghth of the headstock. Let us assume the edge. Take the distance from the edge to the point, where you have measured the TIR of 0.0035. This distance be 'D'. Case 2: TIR is a positive distance, the bar inclines away from the operator. Then the pivoting point is near the LHS edge of the headstock. Again, let us assume the edge. Take the distance from this edge to the point where you have measured the TIR of 0.0035. Now your shim. Think about the lenghth of it in situ (left to right). For Case 1: try to imagine where its RHS edge will sit eventually. For Case 2: try to imagine where its LHS edge will sit eventually. Take the distance from this (future) edge to the pivoting point, we were talking about above. This distance be 'S'. In case 1, the pivoting point lies between 'S' and 'D'. In case 2, the pivoting point is on the LHS, and 'S' lies within 'D'. The rest is easy: TIR/D=shim/S or S/D * TIR = Shim The relation of the two distances S and D is equal to the relation of the TIR to the shim. I have used this procedure when I trammed my vertical mill. It works! Alternative method: trial and error. Have fun Jochen ------- Re: ML7 headstock alignment Posted by: "gnuoyb" gnuoybx~xxgmail.com Date: Thu Sep 8, 2011 5:02 am ((PDT)) Guten morgen Jochen. Many thanks for your comprehensive reply to my question. I did in fact do very similarly to what you suggested but left that out of my description because it is standard practice and would have made my rambling introduction even longer. What I did in the case of (b) and (c) was to establish the minimum and maximum DTI reading in each case and then rotate the bar so that the DTI read the average of the two readings. That's pretty well the same as rotating the bar 90 degrees from minimum or maximum. Further, in the case of (c) I moved the cross slide backwards and forwards to make sure that I did have the maximum reading at both ends of the test rod. However, you did well to point this out as others may well follow this procedure and miss this vital step. I removed the test bar several times and cleaned it and the spindle because I did not believe at first that the horizontal error was as bad as it was. Unfortunately, the readings did not change. Today I followed your shimming procedure and ended up with a 0.0025" shim at the rear left end of the headstock. TIR both horizontally (b) and vertically (c) is now negligible. Runout (a) remains at 0.001", I can live with that. Now for the check! I removed the test bar and installed the faceplate. With the DTI at approximately centre height I measured the runout on the face of the faceplate near its outer edge. Result 0.003", more on this later. As above, I rotated the faceplate so that the DTI read half way between minimum and maximum and then wound the cross slide in, noting the DTI reading as it moved. Success! The DTI reading change was negligible. I conclude that the shimming process was successful and am grateful for your advice on this. As noted above, my faceplate does not run true. I could simply turn it true but as a check I set up the DTI on the spindle face against which chucks and the faceplate bear when they are screwed home. There was a very small variation (maybe 0.0002" but too small to accurately measure with my DTI) as I rotated the spindle and I marked the high spot. I screwed on the faceplate again and noted that the maximum reading measured as above corresponded with my mark on the spindle. Would I be better off machining the spindle face dead true or should I be doing more checks before taking such a drastic step? Thanks again Bill ------- Re: ML7 headstock alignment Posted by: "Don Hammond" don.hammond13x~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Sep 8, 2011 5:17 am ((PDT)) I want to check out my lathe. Where do you get the best test bars? Don ------- Re: ML7 headstock alignment Posted by: "Marc Pellacoeur" marcpellacoeurx~xxsfr.fr Date: Thu Sep 8, 2011 5:20 am ((PDT)) Hi, At RDG tools, they have one. I bought two in order to verify the tailstock with the spindle. Marc Pellacoeur ------- Re: ML7 headstock alignment Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Thu Sep 8, 2011 5:43 am ((PDT)) MT2 test bars are also available from ArcEuro (45.00 incl VAT, part number 100-140-10200) and Chronos (29.79 plus VAT, part number GX12, currently out of stock). ------- Re: ML7 tailstock adjustment Posted by: "Haydut1200" haydut1200x~xxgooglemail.com Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 8:33 am ((PDT)) Cliff Coggin wrote: > I need to adjust the set-over of my ML7 tailstock to bring it into alignment with the headstock, but I have been unable to shift it despite loosening both adjustment screws. Before I get brutal with it can anybody tell me if there is another locking screw I have missed, or is the body simply stuck on its base by decades of congealed oil. < Hi Cliff, You prompted me to finally take a look at my own tailstock. I took it off the lathe, cut a small brass wedge, and along with a few whacks with a plastic hammer, I soon had it apart. It was very tight where the base locates in the main body. It's still tight after cleaning it up, and I suppose it is meant to be, but the screws move it now. If you try to loosen it while it's still on the lathe, make sure the tailstock lever isn't locking it to the lathe bed. You'll need it off the lathe anyway so that you can remove the lock nut and clamping plate to get the base off to clean it. Which I am sure you knew, but just in case... :) Martin ------- Re: ML7 tailstock adjustment Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 10:40 am ((PDT)) Cliff, I once set my tailstock over to turn a taper. Very successful, but the hassle of getting it back properly inline again convinced me to never do it again! The tailstock on mine was VERY tight. Loosen the screw on one side "to give it some space" and use the screw on the other side to actually move it. When finished lock both up tight, re-check, re-adjust etc. Definitely no chance to move it just by hand. A masterpiece of fitting really. Kevin, NW England, UK ------- Re: ML7 tailstock adjustment Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 3:07 am ((PDT)) Thanks Kevin & Martin. Safe in the knowledge that mine was held by nothing more than gunge I attacked it with a half pound hammer (cushioned by a block of wood of course,) until it moved back and forth, scraped the congealed oil off the surfaces, applied fresh oil, then refitted and adjusted. While it was in the vise I also cleaned and oiled the thread, thrust bearing, and barrel clamp. All is now sweetness and light once more. Cliff ------- headstock belt tensioning [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Rodney Gentry" rgent14x~xxhotmail.com Date: Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:10 am ((PDT)) Hi everyone, can some kind soul explain to me the correct procedure for retensioning the headstock belt on an ML7 please, and how the correct tension is determined? One of the two locking nuts is fairly inaccessible, does anyone know what size they are across the flats? Rod Gentry ------- Re: headstock belt tensioning Posted by: "C.S.Johnson" csjohnsonx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:32 am ((PDT)) Hi Rod, There are two tensioning screws in the countershaft bracket, that bear on the exocentric cam shaft. Pull the exocentric lever forward fully. Screw them in evenly until the belt can be moved about 1/2" lightly with the fingers. If the belt slips tighten them, keep the tension of the belt to a minimum that just does not slip. Nuts are 1/4" BSF. Mine measure 0.445". Use a socket or better still a box spanner and a screwdriver on the screw. Colin ------- Re: headstock belt tensioning Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:37 am ((PDT)) The headstock belt on my ML7 is adjusted by two dome-headed screws which act on an eccentric rod. No nuts are involved at all. Do you perhaps mean the motor belt which does has a stay locked by a 7/16" nut? Cliff Coggin Kent UK ------- Another new member [myfordlathes] Posted by: "mattkingbasingstoke" localadx~xxgmail.com Date: Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:25 pm ((PDT)) Hi, I have recently bought an early Super 7 and am in the process of getting it up and running. Please treat me gently as I am a total newbie to this lathe thing although I have read a couple of books on it. I am setting this up at the moment as it came without a cabinet so I have managed to obtain for free, one from an ML8 wood lathe which is a similar design and substantially made. I have risers and a tray on order so I guess there may be more questions to come. I have a quick couple of questions which I hope you could answer. 1) My machine is an early example (not close to remember serial number) but it has the knurled screw in knobs for changegear access and backgear etc. so has the early headstock bearing oiler. Do I fill up from the hole on top and somehow adjust the drip rate with the knob at the front?? I can see a sort of needle through the sight glass. 2) The thread dial indicator fixes on via one bolt. Is it just the tightness of this bolt that gives the friction to engage against the leadscrew? 3) My workshop is also used for a bit of woodwork and I know these don't mix too well. Any idea where I might be able to get a cover in the UK? Thanks in advance.. matt ------- Re: Another new member Posted by: "Haydut1200" haydut1200x~xxgooglemail.com Date: Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:30 pm ((PDT)) Hi Matt, I can't help with your 1st question, the answer to your 2nd is yes, and as for number 3, I have a genuine Myford cover which I keep permanently in the cabinet under the lathe, and I throw a couple of old bedsheets over the lathe to cover it. They fit better and are much easier to put on. Admitted, they look tatty after a while, but it's not a beauty contest. :) Martin ------- Re: Hello everyone. [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:20 am ((PDT)) Wednesday, October 19, 2011 "brian.mullanx~xxymail.com" wrote: > New to the group and a proud new owner of a Myford 7. I am quite familiar with southbend lathes and am just now finishing the rebuild of a southbend 9". I must say this Myford is as impressive as I thought it would be. Wonderfully engineered and crafted out of the highest quality materials (the Zamak dials on the cross and top slide being an exception to this). I've played with the lathe a little bit and have a few questions that will be elementary to all here. 1) The first thing I did was to fill the drip feeder oilers on the head with oil - 1/2 an hour later there is oil leaking out at the base of the upper glass window (where the upper glass reservoir sits on the metal base). I uploaded a picture of the style of oiler in the album "Toronto myford7". I assume this is a result of the 10years the lathe sat unused before I purchased it. Are there seals or gaskets in this are that I can replace or are the oilers defunct? 2) The bull gear appears to be meshed to the spindle by way of a set of teeth that travel radially in a channel, held in place by a socket head cap screw. Perhaps the cap screw is a replacement from the original because I cannot get a standard ball end allen wrench in between the screw head and the bearing cap. Is there a solution to this other than shortening the allen wrench or is the shcs a mismatch? 3) The lathe came with an older GE 110v,1ph,1/2hp motor that is wired directly to the wall plug. Other markings on the motor are: SP, 9amps, order no. "Cole". It is badged J&Z. The lathe also came with the Dewhurst reversing switch. My obvious question is is this a reversing motor ? I would like to use the Dewhurst switch. The motor looks old enough to be original - my serial # is k52390 which puts it at around 1962, I think. The lever on the Dewhurst switch seems to rotate without limit i.e. you can push it around in circles - not sure if this is correct and I'm suspicious as to why it was removed from the machine in the first place. Thanks for all you help in advance. Let me know if you need more info. < Hello Brian. 1) If you dismantle the oilers you will find the glass dome seats on a rubber O-ring. It is likely the O-ring has perished and needs to be replaced. Get the closest size you can, in an oil restant rubber naturally. While the oilers are apart it would be worth cleaning the spring-loaded ball and orifice as well. 2) You have a standard cap screw on the bull gear detent, so the Allan key to fit it will need to be shortened to get into the gap. Mine also has a larger than 90º angle at the end, though whether that is an original Myford key or a previous owner's modification I do not know. 3) I can't help on the motor question. I have read here that the Dewhurst switch is prone to burnt contacts. Cliff Coggin Kent UK ------- Re: Hello everyone. Posted by: "Haydut1200" haydut1200x~xxgooglemail.com Date: Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:26 am ((PDT)) Cliff Coggin wrote: > though whether that is an original Myford > key or a previous owner's modification I do not know. Sounds like a Myford supplied tool as I have the same one. Martin ------- Posting of 7 Series Inspection Sheet [myfordlathes] Posted by: "pietbutter" pbutrosx~xxgooglemail.com Date: Fri Oct 28, 2011 6:40 am ((PDT)) All, I have posted a Inspection Sheet for the 7 Series lathes. By no means I'm claiming that I designed this entirely by myself. Most of it was taken from the Colchester Page in Lathes.co.UK. Most values have been taken form the same sheet, I have just adapted it for the Myford 7 Series and added a couple of additional ones concerning bed condition measurements. If you think anything is in error please let me know so I can correct it. I think it can be a useful sheet to assess the overall state of your lathe. Kind regards, Piet ------- Myford S7 Gearbox - help required! [myfordlathes] Posted by: "stevtalbot" stevtalbotx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Sat Nov 5, 2011 3:42 am ((PDT)) I have just removed the top cover from a newly acquired Myford Super 7 to enable a thorough inspection and clean out of the gearbox. Unfortunately having removed the cover I moved the upper lever (which moves the quadrant plate) a little too far, and, you have guessed it, the locating pin A2521 & D5/1922 launched into space never to be seen again. These parts provide the A,B & C locating detent points for the upper lever. It seems that parts are unlikely to be available from RDG/Myford so what I need to know is what is locating pin A2521 like. Is it in fact a ball bearing or a specially shaped pin and is the spring Any help would be appreciated. Regards, Steve T ------- Re: Myford S7 Gearbox - help required! Posted by: "DennisF MacIntyre" a1g2r3ix~xxyahoo.ca Date: Sat Nov 5, 2011 6:27 am ((PDT)) You say you lost the pin and spring? When I lose a small part, I am reminded of the bible verse " and she swept the house diligently - " ; have also used magnets or vaccumed. If I am installing small parts where there is a possibility of losing them, I will sometimes attach a thread to them until secured. It is also sometimes helpful to cover over where a spring might fly with a rag or even a fine screen. Not the answer you asked for and hope someone else does better than I. Hope you find it. keep smiling dennis mac ------- Re: Myford S7 Gearbox - help required! Posted by: "slotscot" dave.nicholsonx~xxblueyonder.co.uk Date: Sat Nov 5, 2011 12:39 pm ((PDT)) I had a look at mine. For future reference, before taking off the top off the gearbox, remove the grubscrew in the top which applies pressure to the spring and detent pin. Using a fine pair of tweezers the spring can be fished out and a using a bit of wire the hollow pin can be dragged out (I used a 2mm hex key) as well. The dimensions of the spring are, 9 or 10 turns of 0.021" wire, free length 0.375", outside diameter 0.112" Wouldn't think this is too critical apart from the outside diameter and length of spring. The pin is actually 0.187" dia, 0.310" long with a 0.125" dia hole drilled approx 0.2" deep for the spring to fit into. The undrilled end need to be radiused to make a spherical end and smooth as this is the sliding surface. I would be inclined to make the pin from silver steel but don't know if I would harden it, if it's too hard the quadrant could wear, easier to make a new pin than pay a fortune for a new quadrant.... ..others may disagree, comments welcome on this point. On reassembly don't tighten the grub screw too much or you can lock up the feed change quadrant. Any problem understanding the above description I will produce a drawing and attempt to put it into the file section. Dave Edinburgh ------- Re: [Bulk] RE: [myfordlathes] Re: New Member Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:37 am ((PST)) The shipping costs vary wildly. If the item is relatively small such as a couple of change gears it can be sent via Royal Mail for less than $10. My recent experience at the Canadian end has been that a mailed item arrives in my mailbox with no further charges for duty/HST/handling. If it is ordered from some place such as RDG who ships via DHL you will be charged about $20 for shipping and then pay HST at 13% + duty at 6.5% + "handling" of $7.00. On my latest RDG order the shipping plus other charges totaled about $55 on a $130 item. And yes, it was small enough to have come by mail. Note that VAT should not be charged by the vendor on export orders so things are not quite as bad as they seem; you may actually pay less than someone in England! If you are importing something expensive it may be useful to consider that most Myford parts and accessories should be Tariff Classification Number 8461.90.10.91 (Tools - machine tools for working metal) which is duty free from the UK. Many of the lazy and incompetent customs brokers (DHL for example) erroneously clear Myford parts as Tariff Classification Number 8202.51.90.90 (Other hand tools not otherwise provided) which has a 6.5% duty. If you live near a customs office (Toronto airport, for example) you CAN clear your own shipments with the helpful staff at Canada Customs and avoid paying anything other than HST. ------- Myford Compatibility of Mill and Rotary Table [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Barry" 2barryforrestx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 3:13 am ((PST)) I have an early S7 and sometimes mill using the vertical slide, etc. However, I now find that I am struggling use of a small rotary table. Can anyone give me some advice re suitable small 4" or possibly 6" rotary table for use on my Myford (attached to V'slide or to the Xslide on an Angle Plate, or whatever is needed). I would also want to use it on a small milling machine (I am proposing to purchase a Sieg X2 or similar in the near future) so dont want to go to big. There seems to be a wide choice of small tables from SOBA, Vertex, RDG & Chronos "own unbranded", etc. However, I dont want to spend a large sum and find I still haven't got what's needed, so any observations, or experiences from Myford / Small Mill users would be useful. I have reviewed the posts in the MEW forum about Rotary Tables so I am aware of the general issues about buying and using same, I'm looking for some more specific recommendation, etc. Thanks Barry ------- Re: Myford Compatibility of Mill and Rotary Table Posted by: "Andrew Curl" methuselahx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:33 am ((PST)) The classic 4" rotary table is the Sharp. I'm pretty sure that you used to be able to buy it in varying states of completion, from raw castings up. Another good low-lying one was the Cooke and Perkins, at 6" diameter- long out of production, but you'll see 'em second hand from time to time. Most modern ones are too deep to use hanging off a vertical slide or angle plate. If you are looking to find a small miller however, I have found that a MKII BCA compliments my 3.5" lathe perfectly, and of course, it has an 8" rotary table built in. The MKIII BCA is a different machine altogether- same configuration and twice the weight, but with enough daylight to cater for most ML7 lathe sized projects. The MKII was all I needed for a Stuart No.9... And that's a small working engine, not a model... I had both BCA variants at the time. Andrew UK ------- Re: Myford Compatibility of Mill and Rotary Table Posted by: "Andrew Curl" methuselahx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:49 am ((PST)) I forgot to say about G.H.T.s non-geared rotary table. It may be all you need, and it was designed for a seven series lathe, after all. Details to be found in his books. Andrew UK ------- Re: Leadscrew is lifted upwards when engaging [myfordlathes] Posted by: "ovenpaa" tagmignux~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 4:16 am ((PST)) I just experienced exactly the same issue with my ML7. After checking and cleaning the leadscrew nut I set it up as per the instructions on this forum and saw a lot of leadscrew flex so after dropping the apron off and checking it a couple more times I decided to do the adjustment in the middle of the leadscrew instead of the end, this resulted in no flex, so I moved to the end and repeated and it was fine. Hope that helps some David ------- Re: Splash guard for ML7 [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Mon Dec 5, 2011 6:22 am ((PST)) I`ve never seen one before. It looks very nice but it would be a royal pain to fabricate a one-off at home. Thanks for the photos. I'm envious! For Canadians, I have found that the Princess Auto Hand Tool Organizer, SKU: 8248759, at $4.99 (occasionally on sale for $2.99) is very useful to hold tools behind the lathe. It is quite study considering that it is plastic and has holes that are perfectly sized to hold MT2, micrometers, vernier calipers, chuck keys, etc. ------- Re: Splash guard for ML7 Posted by: "Lee" seaco33x~xxgmail.com Date: Mon Dec 5, 2011 6:32 am ((PST)) Mine is a much much simpler idea I just used the side of an old desktop PC fitted a bracket frame seal along the bottom, done... Pics can be found in Lee's Bits in photo's... ------- Re: Splash guard for ML7 Posted by: "David Everett" deverett2003x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Mon Dec 5, 2011 6:53 am ((PST)) There was an article in ME, probably early 90s, about a fabricated splashback for a Myford lathe. Dave The Emerald Isle ------- Re: Myford Dickson quickchange toolpost and holders [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Swarf" fredthemouse0x~xxhotmail.co.uk Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:49 am ((PST)) Hi Folks, Just a further heads up for you all. I have just had an email from A&R precision. It states that new stocks of the tool holders are now finally finished and ready for sale. They will be listing again on fleabay in next few days. If anyone needs any, nows your chance before they sell out again. I have also been informed that as they also used to make other items for Myford, such as the rack-feed (cowels style) tailstock kit and the rear tool post (compatible with front tool holders). They are considering a short production run on these, sometime in the new year, to test the water. WHOOPEE!! ------- Re: Myford Dickson quickchange toolpost and holders Posted by: "Maurice M. Greeson" mauricex~xxmckay3d.com Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:27 pm ((PST)) On Dec 20, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Ken Strauss wrote: > Do you have contact info for A&R? Perhaps an email expression of > interest. Hi Ken, Here is the email I used to contact them: Darenlynamx~xxbtconnect.com Sally was the contact Maurice ------- Re: Myford Dickson quickchange toolpost and holders Posted by: "we'realldoomed" sardinesarniex~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:33 pm ((PST)) A and R Precision Ltd Unit 3 Brindley Road Coventry CV7 9EP West Midlands England Tel: 02476 510020 I don't have a web address for them. No relation, no business interest, just thought the contact details may be useful to others. ------- Re: Myford Dickson quickchange toolpost and holders Posted by: "David Alexander" dave_ale2008x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Dec 21, 2011 12:39 am ((PST)) I bought from them earlier in the year and can vouch for their helpfulness. I live quite near them and they said they were happy for me to collect in person from the Unit. I made a bush to fit inside the toolpost to stop all movement of the toolpost, then drilled out the stepped washer that goes on top to fit my 1974 (imperial) S7, but that was 10 mins work and having the toolpost has saved me a lot of time since. No connection other than being a very staisfied customer. regards David Alexander Towcester, England ------- Re: Myford Dickson quickchange toolpost and holders Posted by: "David Everett" deverett2003x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Dec 21, 2011 7:06 am ((PST)) I also got a toolpost and some holders. I didn't like the idea of the toolpost rubbing on the machined face of the topslide so I made a stepped washer that was a reasonably close fit in the hole of the body and major diameter just less than the inside cross measurement of body (approx 1-3/4"), about 1/16" thick. Waiting for the rear toolpost to become available. Dave The Emerald Isle ------- Re: Myford Dickson quickchange toolpost and holders Posted by: "we'realldoomed" sardinesarniex~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Dec 22, 2011 12:01 pm ((PST)) In myfordlathesx~xxyahoogroups.com, "Swarf" wrote: > Hi Folks, A friend of mine was looking on a well know auction site for the listings from A&R precision. He could not find them, so contacted me to see if I could give him an item number. Any way, the listings have gone. I have spoken with A&R expecting to hear the words "sold out", but no, it seams a well known tool supplier have used the "breach of trade mark" rules on the auction site. This has enabled them to have A&R's listings removed. ( saying come to mind like "THE WORM HAS TURNED" + " NOW THAT THE BOOT IS ON THE OTHER FOOT" ) NOT TO WORRY THOUGH, the items ARE still available to purchase direct from A&R. Use the contact details in the previous posts above. As far as I gather, you can still pay by paypal. < I have a very simple solution to any well known suppliers who might adopt such tactics....I don't buy anything from them. For anyone who might want to purchase a cover for their my Ford lathe, but doesn't wish to pay a high price for a my Ford plastic cover, may I suggest that they visit their local pound shop and purchase a bicycle cover for the princely sum of er.... £1. It doesn't fit quite as well as the purpose made ones you might buy elsewhere, but it certainly does the job. It's a lathe cover, after all. When I get time, I may paint 'my Ford' on it in a nice red colour paint. Lovely Jubbly, as Dell Boy might remark. Kind regards, ------- Myford ML7 Clutch [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Claudio" cdelorenzix~xxgmail.com Date: Wed Jan 11, 2012 8:28 am ((PST)) Hi Everyone I am a newbie, having just purchased a used Myford ML7- I am new to the lathe, not having used one in over 40 years. I have been cleaning it up a a bit and trying to figure things out while I await the manuals I have ordered arrive. The clutch on my lathe is not functioning. Sliding the control in or out using the lever has no effect what so ever on anything, and there is no noise or sound either, indicating that there is no engagement of the mechanism. I was going to strip this down and have a look inside to see how it works, but before I touch it, I was hoping someone with experience could give me some pointers about what and what not to do? Are there any parts or substitute parts available for the repairs? Is it worth trying to rebuild the clutch, or is it cheaper to just replace the capacitors on the single phase motor as they burn out (;>))? Thanks in advance to anyone for information. I have been reading old posts, and this group has been very helpful thus far! Claudio ------- Re: Myford ML7 Clutch Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:11 am ((PST)) Claudio. I have a feeling there were two types clutch fitted to the ML7. Mine has a drum with a single shoe much like an old motor bike brake. I think the other type may have a conical clutch which others may be able to advise about, or maybe I am entirely mistaken on this point. The drum clutch is very simple to dismantle if you have any mechanical aptitude; while re-assembly isn't too bad, the most difficult part being inserting the two bronze dogs in the yoke of the actuating lever. Start dismantling at the handle end, then tap the shaft to the left. The clutch assembly is attached to the shaft and will emerge from the drum, enabling you to see how it works. The most likely fault is that the steel pin (approximately 1" x 0.125") that translates the axial motion of the shaft into radial motion to lift the shoe has fallen out or broken. None of this description will make much sense until you have a diagram or take it apart yourself, but believe me it really is very simple. Mine was made in 1949 yet there is no perceptible wear of the shoe lining or any of the metal components, and it still works perfectly. Cliff Coggin Kent UK ------- Re: Myford ML7 Clutch Posted by: "Claudio" cdelorenzix~xxgmail.com Date: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:57 am ((PST)) Thank you so much for your help Cliff! I think I can follow what you mean. As far as I can tell from the serial number, mine was built in 1968. I ordered the red ML7 manual from the UK (I am in sunny Canada, ha ha), so hopefully there will be some drawings/schematics in there? I'm chomping at the bit to get going on it however, so I may start without the manual (especially after reading your note). Claudio ------- Re: Myford ML7 Clutch Posted by: "Haydut1200" haydut1200x~xxgooglemail.com Date: Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:15 am ((PST)) There's an ML7 PDF manual in the files section which has an exploded diagram of the brake shoe type clutch. You will need to log in for this link. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/myfordlathes/files/ Martin ------- Re: Myford ML7 Clutch Posted by: "David Curl" david.curlx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Jan 12, 2012 3:27 am ((PST)) As no-one has said anything, it should be mentioned that there have been no spares available for the ML7 clutches for many years so you will need to fix it yourself. Perservere with it as a clutch is well worth having. It is one of those things that you won't miss till you haven't got one!! Dave C. ------- Re: ML7 Spare parts Request [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Fri Jan 13, 2012 2:35 pm ((PST)) clankennedy2004 wrote: > What I have remaining to > fit are small bits n bobs that i simply just cant find. > x2 Hard Rubber Bushes for the Counter Shaft bracket assembly (A1227) > x2 Thrust Washers for the Counter Shaft Assembly (A1937) > x1 Thumb Lever for the tailstock > x1 stud for the gear change cover (front) > x1 thumb nut to secure the gear change cover (front) > x1 Myford Sticker for headstock belt guard > x2 Raising blocks > x1 drip tray > x1 Motor Pulley (Original Size) for motor Hi, welcome to the Group ... didn't quite catch your name though. Congratulations on getting a Myford, and good luck with your refurbishment (or is it to be a restoration job?). Now, as to spares. Some of these are easy! Rubber bushes ... go somewhere that sells rubber bushes, meaning forget about ordering by the Myford spare part number. Thrust washers ... bearing shop. Stud for gear change cover ... use whatever fits. Likewise the thumb nut for the gear change cover. Myford sticker ... look in the Files section of the web-site for this Group and you'll find "MyfordBadge.jpg" .... print and stick. While you're there download a copy of the manual if you haven't already got a paper one. Raising blocks .... make them. The last but one issue (number 185) of Model Engineers Workshop magazine page 22 has a relevant article. Drip tray ... sheet metal fabricator. Pulley .... probably not a special size just for Myford. That just leaves the thumb lever for the tailstock ... use whatever fits until you get around to making something that looks better. OTOH, if what you really want is a cosmetically perfect lathe in factory fresh condition then forget most of the forgoing of course!! Good luck whichever way you go, we're all keen on Myfords here. Kevin, NW England, UK ------- [Paint for Myford lathe] Re: ... looking for the right paint [myfordlathes] Posted by: "RRH" mollygeorgiex~xxmac.com Date: Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:27 am ((PST)) "norman_lloyd" wrote: > I am trying to find the best machinery enamel for my Grey ML7. > I am in Canada so need something from here. > Is there any paint you would recommend that I can get here? Norman, I'm in Ontario and have restored two Myfords. In each case they were wrecks and needed a lot of work. When I finally got to repainting them I used ICI's Devguard 4308-0100, which is an alkyd industrial gloss enamel. The colour I chose is grey 4308-0400 Deep and the composition is: BLK 2P4; LFY 0P19+; WHT 1P34. I was down to bare metal and needed to use a strong primer. Again, I went with the ICI dealer's recommendation and used X-I-M White Primer Sealer Bonder 400. I subsequently sold one of the lathes but the paint on the S7 I kept has really been impressive. It's the grey colour that seems to be the closest to the Myford grey and it's tough stuff. Needs good ventilation when applying both it and the primer/bonder. If I were doing it again I would definitely use this. Ramsay ------- Re: ... looking for the right paint Posted by: "Stephen Black" black19650x~xxo2.co.uk Date: Fri Jan 27, 2012 9:33 am ((PST)) On 27 Jan 2012, at 16:44, Ken Strauss wrote: > Is ICI the same as "Dulux"? Do most dealers have the paint or > is this a special order? http://www.international-pc.com/default.aspx ------- Re: ... looking for the right paint Posted by: "Andrew Curl" methuselahx~xxntlworld.com Date: Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:59 pm ((PST)) Dulux is one of ICI's trade names. Andrew UK ------- Re: ... looking for the right paint Posted by: "RRH" mollygeorgiex~xxmac.com Date: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:42 am ((PST)) "Ken Strauss" wrote: > Is ICI the same as "Dulux"? Do most dealers have the paint or is this a > special order? Hi Ken: It wasn't a special order. I purchased it from the ICI retail/ wholesale paint dealer in Burlington. They have a fairly large wholesale trade; I don't know if it's carried by all ICI dealers. The paint is not Dulux, which is a trade name CIL puts on some of their house paints. Instead, the label on the can says ICI Devoe Coatings and then goes on to detail the information in my previous post. I think the Devoe brand refers to their industrial coatings and, presumably, that's why these coatings are all called Devguard #. One point I didn't make in my earlier post is that I wanted to paint the inside of the bed a lighter colour than the grey and I used the same Devguard 4308 but with a Stowe White colour. The grey needs the tinting I described earlier; the white can be used straight from the can. It's a few years since I bought this but I recall that as paint goes it was pretty expensive...something like $35 per quart. Ramsay ------- DRO scales [myfordlathes] Posted by: "JOHN QUIRKE" jjquirkex~xxeircom.net Date: Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:28 pm ((PST)) HI All Toying with the idea of fitting a DRO to my S7, and wondering if anyone has fitted magnetic scales as opposed to the glass scales there seems to be a very compact magnetic tape and reader system from http://www.allendale-stores.co.uk/dro/info/linear_encoder_comparison.pdf I have seen the glass scales units fitted and watched the U tube setups but I am wondering about the magnetic type and any issues around swarf contamination etc. Yours in the workshop John ------- Re: DRO scales Posted by: "Steve Ward" zx12x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Jan 28, 2012 12:54 am ((PST)) Hi John, On my 254 I fitted a glass scale to the saddle (no real need to fit one when there's plenty of space) and a magnetic one to the cross slide to reduce the amount of space needed (also makes it easy to remove the cross slide for cleaning since there's no mechanical connection). The only things I've noticed is if you get too close with a magnetic mount it'll mess up the reading (although tbh I've had to do this deliberately rather than ever have it happen accidentally) and the tape does attract swarf. I've never noticed any adverse effects from the swarf though although I did add some felt wipers to prevent it trying to get between the tape and the head. Overall I'm quite pleased with the tape - particularly the size which meant not losing travel and the lack of mechanical connection making it easy to dismantle and clean the cross slide. As I said though I fitted a glass scale to the saddle, didn't see the point and expense of using magnetic for this position since it's out of the way around the rear of the machine and I'd never remove the saddle for cleaning anyway so the mechanical connection isn't an issue. Hope this helps. Steve ------- Re: DRO scales Posted by: "Andrew Curl" methuselahx~xxntlworld.com Date: Sat Jan 28, 2012 5:04 am ((PST)) John, I run an MS type, and when I wanted to fit DROs I did the obvious - I collared the Guy who came in and repaired the DROs at work. We used Mitutoyo glass scale systems, and the old Sony Magnascales. He simply told me that good as they were, when the glass scale systems started to go, he would always be fighting a losing battle. The Sony magnetic system was reliable, but at the time, THE system was Newall's. This one works on induced current (I would guess) carries a lifetime guarantee, the scales pass within the reader heads so they are completely enclosed, they can be run completely submerged etc. etc... In fact the only thing you must not do is get the reader heads near magnetism, so no DTI on a pot magnet anymore. I never did this anyway, so it wasn't a concern. They are what I used, and I cannot find fault with them. If care is taken with the alignment during installation, they should never cause trouble. I think they were even selling a kit for the S7 at one point. Andrew ------- Re: DRO scales Posted by: "JOHN QUIRKE" jjquirkex~xxeircom.net Date: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:08 am ((PST)) HI Steve No problem, next weekend would be fine. At the moment I am looking at all the options and in particular the possibility of fixing the magnetic tape to a slot milled in the underside of the cross slide with the reader head in a recess in the saddle. Anybody done anything similar even in another machine. My main query is it possible to bond the magnetic tape to a stee l/ cast surface and avoid upsetting the magnetism, or must I use an alloy backing strip. Yours in the workshop John ------- Re: Leadscrew and half-nut alignment Posted by: "GEOFF" geoff_rosex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:27 am ((PST)) Well, I tried the shim idea, 2cm long, 5mm wide fitted at the back of the two outside securing bolts - and it worked! Lateral movement of the leadscrew is virtually non-existent, so I'll tolerate this solution until something better comes along. By the way, the shim material was 005" phosphor bronze and two bits of "Old Speckled Hen" beer can - great shim material! Geoff ------- Myford Super 7 clutch query - and parts needed [mfordlathes] Posted by: "Adam" yamahaxs650x~xxgmail.com Date: Sun Feb 5, 2012 11:11 am ((PST)) I have acquired a rather beaten up Super 7. Super 7 as found. The only broken part I can find is the clutch mechanism. Clearly there are parts missing and parts damaged. I have looked at a parts daigram and cannot work out if I even have the remains of the standard clutch... maybe this is something added as a bodge over the years?? I have the countershaft, a cone pulley and another cone (damaged) on the right: Close up of countershaft and pulleys another close up I have taken all this apart. Inside the large end of the cone pulley is what looks like an expanding shoe? (The securing screw is shown here just resting in its hole, it was screwed right in) Clutch components I cannot work out how this is supposed to work. Inside the countershaft and sliding in from the right is what I imagine is an actuating rod with a flat machined in it. I am guessing that when the (missing) handle on the end of the countershaft is operated it pulls or pushes or turns the actuating rod which in turn pushes something between the shoes to open them up and engage with the cone pulley. Does that sound right? I saw a complete clutch unit for sale on ebay but it looks different. Also he wants £275 for it. The cone pulley has a fragement chipped out of it as does the cone on the right. In fact the latter is really butchered. Can anyone advise what I need to find to get the clutch to work? Adam [later msg] Further research makes me think I have an early 1950s Super 7 with expanding shoe clutch. I guess spares are going to be hard to find! But if someone can tell me how it works or even better point me to a parts book then I am sure I can work something out. Adam. ------- Re: Myford Super 7 clutch query - and parts needed Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Sun Feb 5, 2012 3:50 pm ((PST)) Why not solve the problem by ignoring it? I have a fairly late model S7 with a fully functioning clutch. After converting to a 3-phase motor plus VFD I almost never employ the clutch! ------- Re: Myford Super 7 clutch query - and parts needed Posted by: "JOHN QUIRKE" jjquirkex~xxeircom.net Date: Sun Feb 5, 2012 4:27 pm ((PST)) This clutch has more in common with the early ML7's than the mid 50's on S7's. I attach a scan of the ML7 clutch components if it comes through (it is 1433 K) and this may be of some help. What is the serial number of your lathe? Yours in the workshop John ------- Re: Myford Super 7 clutch query - and parts needed Posted by: "Paul Kennedy" clankennedy2004x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Sun Feb 5, 2012 5:41 pm ((PST)) One Super 7 Motorising Assembly in all its glory. Its in PDF Format so its only 700Kb or so but you will need Adobe Reader to view it. Everyone has that now though ! Dont they ? :D Hope it's of some use. BTW. Im positively green with envy. :( I want a Super 7 :( ------- Re: Myford Super 7 clutch query - and parts needed Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Mon Feb 6, 2012 12:54 am ((PST)) Adam. I cannot see a scrap of detail in your last picture, but if the black round object on the newspaper picture is the clutch back plate, and if it carries a single shoe that expands to engage inside the drive pulley, then it sounds very much like the ML7 clutch. In that case the matter of the clutch was discussed fairly recently in the thread entitled "Myford ML7 clutch". To save repeating everything I suggest you look at the archive on the website for January this year, and then come back to us if anything is still unclear. Incidentally, unlike others on this list, I would rather lose the inverter drive from my ML7 than lose the clutch. I find the latter to be far more useful. Cliff Coggin Kent UK ------- Re: Myford Super 7 clutch query - and parts needed Posted by: "Adam" yamahaxs650x~xxgmail.com Date: Mon Feb 6, 2012 2:41 am ((PST)) Thanks to those who have sent drawings etc. I now understand how this is supposed to work. I see there are drawings in the "Files" area anyway, silly me should have looked in there first. The handle to push the actuating rod in is missing so I need to get hold of one one (unlikely) or fashion something myself. The Serial Number is at the rear of the lathe and says 71/110413. ------- [myfordlathes] Re: Feedback,comments or suggestions concerning the 'Correct' way to Posted by: "le_capeau_noir" adrian.brownex~xxvirgin.net le_capeau_noir Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:52 am ((PST)) Hi fellow Myford owners, I recently joined and have been catching up on the thread concerning levelling a lathe on set-up. This can be done without the use of a precision level. 1. Assuming that the lathe has its original headstock and there is no play in the bearings it is unlikely that the spindle is out of parallel with the lathe axis. 2. Assuming that the spindle nose is in good condition then fitting a chuck (also in good condition) will allow you to chuck a bar true to the lathe axis. 3. Chuck a silver steel bar as these are ground to high accuracy. Use a piece of at least 1/2" diameter 3/4" is preferable. The use of thicker bar avoids droop under self weight. 4. Set a dial gauge in the toolpost. Using the saddle handwheel bring the dial gauge up to the chuck and then move it away by about half an inch. 5. Using the cross-slide feedscrew bring the dial gauge into contact with the bar from at least 1/4" away until a suitable reading is obtained on the gauge. Don't be tempted to wind it back out slightly, go straight in as this ensures that all backlash is taken up. 6. Using the saddle handwheel traverse the saddle several inches towards the tailstock. Again don't be tempted to turn the handwheel in the opposite direction. Turn it in the same direction in one continuous movement. 7. Read the dial gauge. If the bed is in good condition then any difference will be due to twist in the lathe bed. Leave the holding-down bolts at the headstock end tight and gently adjust one of the jack-screws on the raising blocks at the tailstock end until the dial gauge reading is the same. Note that we are talking about differences of a few thou, anything larger requires further investigation. Hope this is of use. I've owned my trusty ML7 for 40 years (second owner from new 63 years ago). Regards Adrian Browne ------- Re: technical advice please [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Mike Crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 9:08 am ((PST)) Original Message ----- From: Robert Mitchell To: myfordlathesx~xxyahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 4:39 PM Subject: Re: [myfordlathes] technical advice please 1) I am really glad to see these parts available. 2) I am glad I don't need any parts - I could not afford $60 US for a screw and nut... Certainly on the screw portion I would have a go at turning my own. Sort of what these lathes are for... Curiosity: How did you do in the old set? I envision these specific parts lasting forever... - Robert Mitchell - rmm200x~xxyahoo.com From: David Everett Subject: Re: [myfordlathes] technical advice please To: "myfordlathesx~xxyahoogroups.com" Date: Wednesday, February 29, 2012, 6:20 AM David Have a look at the Myford site. New leadscrews and nuts are listed http://www.myford.co.uk/cgi-bin/sh000002.pl?REFPAGE=http%3a%2f%2fww w%2emyford%2eco%2euk%2facatalog%2fMyford_Super_7%2ehtml&WD=topsl ide&PN=Myford_ML7%2dR_Carriage_Assembly%2ehtml%23a244#a244 £38 for the set - excluding VAT. It's my experience that wear on the cross slide feedscrew and nut on a well-used ML7/Super 7 is not unusual. They certainly don't last forever. I've rebuilt 2 old ML7s and a Super 7 over the years, and all needed these parts replacing. Yes, you can make new feedscrews yourself, and I've done this on occasion and enjoyed the challenge. However, it's a question of skill level and how you value your time. As for the nuts, Myford ( RDG?) items are not that expensive, and even ignoring the fiddly shape of the part, turning the very small internal acme thread oneself would be a major challenge. You could make or buy acme taps and cut the thread that way, but if you only need one nut this is hardly cost effective. just my opinion FWIW. Mike ------- Re: technical advice please Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:48 pm ((PST)) David Alexander wrote: > Hello all > it loks like the leadscrew and nut on the compound transverse slide on > my Super & have given up the ghost. Doe sanyone have advice on whom is a > good lathe fitter in the Northants area or from whom to buy good quality > replacements. David, you've had a few leads from other folk already. You didn't say just what it is that's wrong with the cross-slide (or is it the top-slide?). I'll just mention though that some backlash, sometimes what seems like quite a lot, isn't necessarily a game changer. There's always some. The real worry I suppose is if it varies along the screw due to uneven wear. Apologies if all this is old hat to you! Kevin, NW England, UK ------- Re: technical advice please Posted by: "David Alexander" dave_ale2008x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 1:31 am ((PST)) Hello Kevin it's a lot worse than backlash, the thread is breaking up on the leadscrew. It keeps jamming and needs replacing with a new one. It's actually the topslide, the small fiddly one (sorry, I'm not a lathe technical jargon expert) regards David Alexander Towcester, England ------- Re: technical advice please Posted by: "Andrew Curl" methuselahx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 2:45 am ((PST)) Some technical jargon for you, David... The cross slide and the topslide have feedscrews, the long one that moves the whole carriage along is called the leadscrew. The feedscrews and their nuts should be readily available, and the nuts were not unduly expensive when they could be had on their own. I'm pretty sure that John S. has the ex-Myford taps to make these, and has made the offer to tap a fellow's prepared blanks before now. The original nuts weren't bronze- this is a good opportunity to rectify the situation. Andrew -------- Re: technical advice please Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:02 am ((PST)) Based on the value of ones labour making a nut is not worthwhile. On the other hand, considered objectively, most of our shop work is not cost effective! That said, has anyone tried making a replacement nut of Delrin® (Acetal) that is heated and compressed to an exact fit on the leadscrew? This technique has worked very well when making small Acme nuts for other precision applications. ------- Re: technical advice please Posted by: "Ken Strauss" ken.straussx~xxgmail.com Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 8:12 pm ((PST)) There have been several articles online. See http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/showthread.php?t=43645 for one. I tried it for the nut for a piece of photographic equipment (computer controlled slide for stacked closeups) and it worked quite well. ------- Re: technical advice please Posted by: "Robert Mitchell" rmm200x~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 8:56 pm ((PST)) Thanks for that link - it shows making a nut for a leadscrew much like ours. Good pictures. I was worried about a plastic nut deforming under the pressure of driving a cutter, but not after seeing those pictures. It looks very robust. Robert Mitchell ------- Re: technical advice please Posted by: "le_capeau_noir" adrian.brownex~xxvirgin.net Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 8:36 am ((PST)) David, if as you say the feedscrew thread on the topslide is breaking up then you really don't have any alternative other than replacing both feedscrew and nut. Basically you have two choices a) buy new ones from the 'new' Myfords (£56 +vat) or b) buy secondhand from either Ebay or one of the several firms on the internet offering Myford spares. Make sure that you order the correct one for the lathe (both the machine type and whether you need imperial or metric). I would have thought it unusual for the feedscrew to break up as this would probably be due to metal fatigue. Maybe the lathe has been run on work generating high vibration by a previous owner. If this was the case then it might pay you to get someone in the know to give the lathe a thorough examination to see if there is any other obvious deterioration. Regards Adrian Browne ------- Re: technical advice please Posted by: "Robert Mitchell" rmm200x~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 8:51 am ((PST)) Speculation: Biggest stress on the topslide feedscrew I can think of would be cutting off using power feed - and have the cut dig in. That seems to stress everything. Checking the position of the topslide when it encounters the damaged portion might give you some indication of what was happening at the time. Robert Mitchell ------- Re: technical advice please Posted by: "David Alexander" dave_ale2008x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 12:19 pm ((PST)) Thank you. My lathe doesn't have power crossfeed, and I've only used for very small, light jobs so far. I'm not yet experienced enough to do anything more demanding with it. I guess it was abuse by the previous owner. It's been fine for about 5 months. I've been trying to get hold of Darren Boden, the ex Myford fitter, but he's not answering his mobile or responded to my voicemail yet. I would be happy to have him fix, check and service my S7 which is 1974 vintage. I could use the drum type switch being replaced with something more reliable too. regards David Alexander Towcester, England ------- Link belts for the Myford? [myfordlathes] Posted by: "mckay3d" mauricex~xxmckay3d.com Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:57 pm ((PST)) As the drive belts on my Super 7 are over 20 years old I have been thinking about replacing them with link belts. I would be concerned about vibration. Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks Maurice ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "hughmcwhinnie" hughmcwhinniex~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:09 pm ((PST)) Hi I have the link belt on my lathe and it's quite smooth, i didn't try it with the rubber belt so i can't comment on the difference. hugh ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "Andrew Curl" methuselahx~xxntlworld.com Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:45 pm ((PST)) I've commented before about the suitability of metal studded link belts that can eventually cut through mazak ML7 pulleys. You must be careful. Powertwist is supposed to be good stuff, and it ought to be at £30 per metre. For me, ordinary vee belts every time, unless I suddenly feel (very!) flush. Andrew ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "Boz" melodycsaxx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 8:18 pm ((PST)) I replaced the main V belt on my old ML2 a few years ago with a Powertwist belt from Chronos: http://www.chronos.ltd.uk/acatalog/Powertwist_Drive_Belt_System.html Saved stripping the lathe head, and it ended up a lot smoother than the, admittedly creaky, old belt. They're a bit of a pig to force the links together in-situ but a pair of strong long-nosed pliers got it sorted for me. Boz ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "Alistair Campbell" campbell_alistairx~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 12:21 am ((PST)) Hi Maurice, The proper (British) Nutlink belting, not the cheap copies is superb. The aforementioned powertwist belts are Ok but they were made as a cheaper alternative to the original link belts, and are just - that despite the highter prices you pay for them these days. Myself and many people i know have been using nutlink in on ML7s and other lathes with 'soft' ie not Iron or Steel pulleys for decades, including on my grnadads Halifax Atlas copy with plastic pulleys and its brilliant stuff - it does not wear pulleys and to boot is a darn sight easier to fit than the power twist stuff which kills your fingers, and the vibration damping is awesome - assuming any vibration problem you have is caused by induced harmonics from a one piece belt in the first place. As with all belts use the correct size, the Vee belt ( Nutlink or not) the belt should NOT touch the bottom of the Vee in the pulley but rather 'wedge' between the sides of the pulley Vee giving a large contact area to counter slipping. With a correct fitting belt there is a surprisingly large gap between the belt and the bottom of the pulley Vee. Conceivably you 'could' damage a pulley - if you used any belting that was too small so it rode right in the base of the Vee. Morover as the twistlink stuff is like an abrasive chainsaw blade compared with nutlink belting i jusy wouldn't touch it, i have seen twist type belting let go - it's seriously spectacular - it tends to shred big time, never seen a nutlink break though. Just my penneth, Regds Al ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "Tim Lund" t.lund378x~xxbtinternet.com Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 12:26 am ((PST)) Tried Link Belts on my Super 7, works well on the motor/clutch drive and makes the changing of the belt to the Spindle easy but tends to slip on any heavy cuts or drilling large holes. Tim Lund ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 1:18 am ((PST)) Maurice. The subject comes up regularly here, and from memory there is no clear concensus in favour of either V belts or link belts. You will find proponents of both, each claiming their choice is better than the alternative, so "you pays your money and you takes your choice". Personally I used V belts, because at the time I didn't know of the alternative, and anyway I actually wanted to remove the spindle to examine the 62 year old bearings. Having done it a couple of times now I am happy to stick with V belts. Cliff Coggin Kent UK ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "AVG" avg2ukx~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 1:45 am ((PST)) I had a problem years ago using the original british link belting which was heavy canvas links latched together on a steel rivet every inch. I was using it on a sawbench, obviously fairly high speed. What I found was that the mass within the belting was throwing the belt outwards and hitting the guards within the saw. I found that I couldn't use it on that job. I think these belts would probably be ok on an old ML7 but personally I would be wary of using it on my super 7 on top speed. From what I have seen at the shows recently, latest belts do not have metal rivets and I would be happier using one of these. ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "Alistair Campbell" campbell_alistairx~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 3:43 am ((PST)) For full specs on link belting this is worth a look: http://fennerdrives.com/catalogs/hpcvbelt_uk.pdf Rgds Al ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "norman.hedgex~xxbtinternet.com" Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 4:36 am ((PST)) Maurice: I strongly recommend the Powertwist link belting. This does NOT have the metal links which some say can damage the pulleys. I have changed just the primary belt (from the motor to the countershaft) on my S7 so far and the improvement is amazing. With the V belt the high speed range was very rough and noisy - the top speed frighteningly so. With the link belt it is now quiet and smooth at all speeds. The headstock V belt is good condition but, when the time comes, that too will be changed to Powertwist. As well as the proven performance I've found avoiding dismantling a correctly set up and functioning headstock is surely a big bonus? Regards Norman ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "alan" lubetkin1934x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 5:23 am ((PST)) Hi Al. Very interesting comment re sectional belting and the way it should fit the pulleys. I bought some of the red twist-link belting that Chronos were selling about a year back as part of a minor war on vibration in my ML7... Mebbe longer ago than that. Since it seemed too wide to sit in the bottom of the groove I never fitted it, but merely cursed either Chronos or my ignorance. Both large targets! Now I will put it to work. Alan ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "Maurice M. Greeson" mauricex~xxmckay3d.com Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 7:43 am ((PST)) Many thanks to all who responded. I think I might try a quality link belt on the main drive as a test. Maurice ------- Re: Link belts for the Myford? Posted by: "Mike Crossfield" mike.crossfieldx~xxvirgin.net Date: Thu Mar 1, 2012 11:23 am ((PST)) Alan, That's interesting. I also bought some of the twist-link belting from Chronos, and was very unhappy with it. Like you, I found that it didn't fit the pulleys properly, and rode too high. It even fouled on the primary drive belt cover. I sent it back to Chronos and got a refund. It seemed to me that it was made to a metric standard, and was too wide to fit the (imperial) Myford pulleys. Mike ------- thread dial indicator [myfordlathes] Posted by: "mequalsmc2" polytx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Fri Mar 2, 2012 11:27 am ((PST)) Hello all, I have just acquired a myford ML7 lathe & I am trying to work out how the thread dial indicator works, as the cog below the readout dial doesnt touch the leadscrew, have I got something missing or is there some way of engaging the cog with the leadscrew? Regards Dave ------- Re: thread dial indicator Posted by: "Frank Chadwick" fr4nk.chadwickx~xxtiscali.co.uk Date: Fri Mar 2, 2012 12:23 pm ((PST)) It should pivot on the single mounting bolt, if it's tight, loosen the screw. Most people I know leave them out of gear unless screwcutting. Enjoy your ML7. Frank C. ------- Re: Myford Super 7B Bearings. [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Ian Strickland" ianstrickland733x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:01 am ((PDT)) 15 March 2012, stevtalbot wrote: > Does anyone know if the spindle rear ball bearings(H29 73003)in a S7 headstock should be mounted face to face, back to back or doesn't it matter. Also does anyone know the number and specification of these bearings? Many thanks. Steve T < Hi Steve, It matters greatly how these bearings are mounted. They should be horizontally opposed. See page 25 of the Myford Super 7 Manual. There should be a spacer H30A1991, between them, which should be mounted with the gap uppermost for oil to enter the bearings. The bearings should be locked solid by the locking rings. The clearance of the bronze taper front bearing is adjusted by these rear bearings. You really need to read the Myford manual for the correct way to mount these bearings and the adjustment them. Having the correct spanner to tighten the locking rings is essential if you don't want to chew up the slots in the locking rings. Myford/RDG sell these. Go to Myford.co.uk. 'C' spanner for standard bore is part # A2128, or 15328 for the big bore. You can find the Super 7 Manual in the Myford Lathes group, look under 'Files' on the left menu, then find 'Super 7 related files', then scan down to 'Super 7 Manual'. This should answer all your questions. I would just add that adjusting the bearings to get the correct clearance for the taper bearing is a "faff". When you think you have adjusted everything correctly, run the lathe at its slowest open speed for half an hour. Check to see if the front bearing gets warm. If it does, it's too tight. Adjust and try again. Gradually increasing the speeds until when running at top speed the bearing stays cool. I have had mine seize when I thought it was correctly adjusted. No damage done fortunately. Good luck. Ian Strickland. Surrey, England. ------- Myford Spindle Nose Thread [myfordlathes] Posted by: "le_capeau_noir" adrian.brownex~xxvirgin.net Date: Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:19 am ((PDT)) Hi fellow Myford users. Except for the newer large bore lathes, the ML7 and Super 7 spindle nose is definitely 1 1/8th Whitworth 12 TPI. Whitworth and BSF threads are 55 degree thread angle. UNF is a 60 degree thread angle, as are the ISO Metric threads, a 1 1/8th UNF 12 TPI nut will generally fit on a 1 1/8th Whitworth bolt since the OD is the same but the Whitworth threads are "thinner", but the reverse pairing will not fit. The tightness of fit on the Myford nose thread is not critical, always assuming that the female thread on the chuck/backplate etc is not undersize and is of sufficient length. What is vital however, is obtaining a very good close fit on the parallel part of the nose register behind the thread. This is the bit that gives the accurate location. A bit back I purchased a Myford chuck adaptor from RDG to fit my rotary table. When I went to use it for the first time I wasn't very pleased to find that the parallel part of the register was under sized and as a result a chuck could be moved from side to side by about 1mm. Not very good for repeatable accuracy. In the end I resorted to turning the register on the adaptor down and shrink fitting a steel bush on it before machining the bush down to an accurate fit on the chuck registers. A job machined on my lathe and transferred in the chuck to the rotary table now sets up to better than 0.001". Adrian Browne ------- Re: Myford Spindle Nose Thread Posted by: "Paul Kennedy" clankennedy2004x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:22 am ((PDT)) Hi , Id just like to add that I have also bought items from RDG which were below par in there finish and accuracy. A lot of items seem to be coming in from cheep foreign markets and they just are not quality items. It's a shame as RDG now own Myford Ltd and if their products get a reputation for being poor quality they will likely fail as an enterprise. I've also been charged £3 for 2 fiber washers. :/ Not someone I really want to deal with unless really necessary ! ------- Re: Myford Spindle Nose Thread Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:22 am ((PDT)) le_capeau_noir wrote: > The tightness of fit on the Myford nose thread is not critical, always > assuming that the female thread on the chuck/backplate etc is not > undersize and is of sufficient length. What is vital however, is > obtaining a very good close fit on the parallel part of the nose > register behind the thread. This is the bit that gives the accurate > location. Hi Adrian. I made this point a while back. Someone, I forget who now replied that this was a common mis-conception (remember, not my words, just repeating). His point was that, as the screw threads pull up they act in the same way as a cone in cone fitting and ensure that the chuck is accurately centralised. Said he had test results to prove his point. I can see where he's coming from, in that cone/cone is a well known system, and might be better theoretically than the Myford location system. But I have to say I've never heard that view expressed anywhere else, indeed I'm sure I've seen in the writings of Tubal Cain/Tom Walshaw that screw threads should not be relied on for centralising. If they could operate that way then why have cone chuck fittings or indeed the parallel portion on the nose of our lathes. Surely the engineers would have gone for a simple screw thread if that was adequate? I couldn't argue, he said he had test results, and I didn't. I just mention it now in the present context to give it another airing .... there weren't many comments from others at the time, and I wonder if anyone wants to chip in now, or even if the originator of the idea wants to add anything? For myself I still believe that the register area is "sacred ground". Kevin NW England, UK ------- Re: Myford Spindle Nose Thread Posted by: "DONALD EDWARDS" edward.darcyx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:30 pm ((PDT)) Hi Kevin, Your assumption regardig the 'register' area of 'screw-on' chucks is correct. The thread should not be a very close fit as there is the requirement that the 'register' diameter and face should be able to perform their function of locating the chuck truly upon the mandrel both radially and axially. Examination of the fit, when new, of a genuine Myford backplate or faceplate on an unworn Myford mandrel would establish this. Perhaps the reason so little response was provoked by the earlier comment about the 'fallacy' of this point may have been a general feeling that it was not worth disputing. ------- Re: Making a replacement cross slide screw for ML7 [myfordlathes] Posted by: "jburdenx~xxgenassist.co.uk" jburdenx~xxgenassist.co.uk Date: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:53 am ((PDT)) Hi All, First post here - had a Myford Super 7 for a number of years, only just found out about this group. Jamie - I would have a go a straightening first - nothing to loose. I had a similar problem with the leadscrew on my lathe when I was rebuilding it - at some point the leadscrew handwheel must have been knocked, and the end section of the screw was bent. I was going to get a replacement but thought I would try straigthening - and it worked well. I strightened mine by placing the handwheel section of leadscrew in the lathe chuck - i.e. just before the bend. If you then pull the chuck around by hand, the far end will show the effect of the bend clearly as the deflection will move around in a large arc. Move the screw around until deflection is directly away from you. Place a piece of close fitting tube over the threaded section (this stops putting another bend in the threaded section) and pull toward you gently - you wont need much force, especially on the cross slide screw. Repeat the process until the deflection is zero. Worked on mine - on re assembly, there is no movement on the handwheel at all. Hope you get it sorted! James ------- Re: Making a replacement cross slide screw for ML7 Posted by: "Tony Jeffree" tonyx~xxjeffree.co.uk Date: Wed Mar 21, 2012 4:07 pm ((PDT)) D) Carefully straighten the one you've got - perfectly do-able. I suspect that eliminating the backlash will always be a problem - it was on mine until I fitted the Arc Eurotrade thrust bearing kit. Plain bearings are a right pain to adjust right - they are usually either sloppy or so tight that they are unusable. Regards, Tony ------- Cross slide stuck [myfordlathes] Posted by: "djmorrow2004" djmx~xxldrider.ca Date: Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:35 pm ((PDT)) I was doing some deep cleaning and oiling today and cranked the cross slide way out. When I went to wind it back in, it stopped. It will move, with the hand crank, back & forth about 1/2 inch or so but that's about it. What the heck did I do ? ------- Re: Cross slide stuck Posted by: "Paul" paulbachex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:38 pm ((PDT)) sounds like the gib strip has moved ! Regards Paul ------- Re: Cross slide stuck Posted by: "djmorrow2004" djmx~xxldrider.ca Date: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:17 pm ((PDT)) Can you suggest a painless way of fixing this ? I'm still muddling around in the manual. I'm looking to find a simple fix to a seemingly simply error. David ------- Re: Cross slide stuck Posted by: "Andrew Curl" methuselahx~xxntlworld.com Date: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:51 pm ((PDT)) If your gib strip isn't pinned (a la GHT et al) the dimples can roll around on the adjusting screws and lock it solid. The only solution is to back them all off, wind the slide on, then readjust. Andrew ------- Re: Cross slide stuck Posted by: "djmorrow2004" djmx~xxldrider.ca Date: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:07 pm ((PDT)) I was continuing my reading of the manual. On page 34 in the Power Feed section, they caution against moving the cross feed more than 6 3/8" towards the operator from the extreme inward end ( manually or under power). It seems that the screw may become disengaged from the pinion. I think this is what I did. ------- Re: Cross slide stuck Posted by: "David Littlewood" davidx~xxdlittlewood.co.uk Date: Thu Mar 29, 2012 5:58 pm ((PDT)) Is it a model with power cross-feed? If not, it's usually a fairly simple matter of applying gentle pressure on the cross slide while turning the handle. Of course, you may have moved the gib strip as others have said, so you need to sort that out. If it is a pxf model, it's quite a bit more complicated - I think GHT describes the process in the Model Engineer's Workshop Manual, and I'd have to go and look it up, mine is a non- pxf model. David Littlewood ------- Re: Cross slide stuck Posted by: "Oliver Egleston" oeglestonx~xxcomcast.net Date: Thu Mar 29, 2012 6:16 pm ((PDT)) Undo the screws that secure the feed screw to the cross slide and withdraw the feed screw. You will find the screw has backed out of the pinion that powers the cross slide. By pushing the cross slide away from the operator, you will expose the pinion and it will be a simple matter to slide the screw onto the pinion with the key in the slot that runs the length of the screw. Then you can reattach the bracket for the screw to the cross slide and all should work normally. Regards, Oliver ------- Re: Cross slide stuck Posted by: "djmorrow2004" djmx~xxldrider.ca Date: Thu Mar 29, 2012 6:19 pm ((PDT)) Problem solved; and thanks for all the suggestions. As per the manual, I removed the two screws holding the cross slide end on. Next, I slid the cross slide in, flush with the apron. Then, I removed the nut that's screwed to the apron. Inside, there's a pinion with a keyway - that's the keyway that needs to connect to the screw. I screwed the nut along the screw a ways and then slid the screw in until the screw and pinion keyways connect, reverse the above described disassembly, and Bob's your uncle. All fixed. ------- Re: Cross slide stuck Posted by: "Robert Mitchell" rmm200x~xxyahoo.com Date: Thu Mar 29, 2012 6:21 pm ((PDT)) I am not at my lathe and I am speaking from memory... My Super 7 has power cross feed, and I have had your problem a couple of times. If you remove the screws holding the cross slide outer nut (directly below the cross slide), so the cross slide floats free, you can wiggle the feed screw until it engages with the internal nut. Screw it in until the cross slide outer nut is flush against the cross slide and replace the screws. Done. I hope my memory is reasonably close to accurate... Robert Mitchell ------- Re: Super 7B spindle adjustment [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Kevin" tadpolex~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Apr 8, 2012 9:37 am ((PDT)) Hi Ron, there are detailed instructions in the file "Super7BeltChanges plus supplement.pdf", which is in the Super 7 folder of the files section. Good luck! Kevin (seen it done, never done it myself) Kevin, NW England, UK ------- Re: Super 7B spindle adjustment Posted by: "John" a.johnwx~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Apr 8, 2012 1:15 pm ((PDT)) That pdf doesn't altogether make sense to me and I have adjusted one. Calling the spindle nut A, the next adjusting nut B and the one after that C. That's working from the opposite end end to the front cone bearing. The bearings in between A and B are a pair of back to back angular contact bearings. The threads are all right hand so forget clockwise anti ........ etc Nut A sets the preload on the back to back angular contact bearings. This needs some care in setting and can destroy the bearings. So with A and B tight on the bearings and those set so that the cone isn't fully home check that there is no end play in the spindle. I would do that at the A end of the spindle with a DTI. Myford aren't too clear about the degree of tightness needed. I would go for moderate hand tightness and rotate the spindle to ensure that the bearings are running true. YOU MUST MAKE SURE THE FRONT CONE IS FULLY FREE BEFORE DOING THIS. Once set lock it and leave it alone. This needs to be done before the front cone clearance is set otherwise you are just wasting your time. To loosen the front cone unscrew adjustment nut C and screw in B. These can be as tight as you like as there is a spacer between the outer races. To tighten the front cone unscrew B and tighten C. Again as tight as you like. To set the bearing clearance move the spindle in until it contacts the cone and you can't turn it by hand. Then move the spindle out by a turn of a 1/4 ins of the adjustment nut rim which it seems is 15 degrees. That's unscrew C and tighten B. Bad points. All of this is best done free from grease and or oil. You may finish up with some play in the ang contact bearings and oil films will prevent you from really making contact in the cone bearing before slackening off for the running clearance. Go back to adjustment nut A a tighten it up further for the one problem and adjust the 15 degree for the other. You should be able to prevent problems with the A nut by spinning - and checking and adjusting again or even tightening while rotating the spindle at the same time maybe. Really though with oxidised oil etc probably being about stripping and cleaning wouldn't be a bad idea anyway. Last thing the joys of this type of bearing set up. The 15 degrees is a starting point. It may need to be tighter for best turning performance once the lathe has warmed up. It may need to be looser for best drilling performance. For a super dooper finish it might even need an adjustment according to the temperature in the workshop. If it's set tighter for finish in some cases it will benefit from loosening off for roughing out. It's best to remember though that a lathe of this size can take 10 to 15mins to reach a stable operating temperature. Take it leave it but these aspects are a fact. Myford just say may need adjustment according to running conditions. RUNNING aught to be in capitol letters as in the extreme it can be changed according to the speed that is being used. Higher speeds generate more friction which means more heat which in turn may tighten the front bearing. It can go either way. Not sure as I didn't go that far into making best use of my S7. Leave sorting any problems with the pulley cone to you as I can't remember having to touch it. As they say it must have some free play. Looking at the drawing that can only be set with adjustment nut C and A but that means that the front cone can't be set. Best forget that aspect because if it doesn't work out it means that there is lots of wear in either the front cone if it's too tight or the ang contact bearings if it's too loose. Fixing a worn front cone problem is likely to be difficult other than by skimming something off one end of the cone pulley. The back gear end would be best for that. John ------- Re: Super 7B spindle adjustment Posted by: "Robert Mitchell" rmm200x~xxyahoo.com Date: Sun Apr 8, 2012 3:15 pm ((PDT)) John that was a good description. Can you add it to our files section? I will need it - someday... ------- Re: Super 7B spindle adjustment Posted by: "John" a.johnwx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Apr 9, 2012 4:23 am ((PDT)) I can but might be best to add a couple of other comments. 1) Check the end float before touching nut A. This means using the other nuts to move the cone out 1st. There is some chance that this needn't be adjusted. 2) As myford aren't to clear on just how much preload there needs to be on the angular contact bearings it would be wise to run the lathe flat out for up to 10 to 15mins and checking how warm the housing gets or the adjustment nuts or even better the inside of the spindle under these bearings if it's possible to reach with a finger. I would imagine people will stop the lathe 1st. I wouldn't be bothered if that part of the spindle was comfortably hot but failing that there should be some warmth in the housing. More preload will give more heat. 3) Myford make a point of only loosening the screw that locks nut A sufficiently to allow it to be turned and no more than that. The reason is that if the nut is too loose it will ride up on the thread form and when it's subsequently locked again this will force it down and add more preload. 5) It's not a good idea to run a lathe with loose bearings as it encourages wear. The cone for instance is more likely to wear oval more rapidly. It will tend to anyway due to cutter and drive belt tension forcing the spindle up and back. Once that is excessive the only remedy is to scrape the cone back in. The angular contact bearings will also wear unevenly if loose. Simply Bearings have a wonderful search facility - just go to the particular type and enter the sizes watching out for variations in the thickness assembled. The part I added at the end about cone bearing clearance is worth playing around with. I did but my ML7 after turning into a S7 went not long after as a rather well equipped boxford turned up. My father visited myford some years ago with the view to buying several S7 machines. He didn't because he thought rightly that the people who would be using them would probably break them. He was very impressed with the finish they gave. Talking to him afterwards he mentioned that they had probably carefully adjusted the machines bearings just before he arrived and left it running. As he held a senior position in a large automotive company and this sort of thing was one of his areas of expertise I wouldn't be inclined to disagree with him. I used to but as I own more and more types of lathe I don't any more. As he started working life as an apprentice at the same company, then tool maker and then on from that he had also used similar machines. He was fascinated by the shear size of the front bearing. John ------- Re: Super 7B spindle adjustment Posted by: "John" a.johnwx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon Apr 9, 2012 5:02 pm ((PDT)) "Ron" wrote: > John, Reading your notes, do you suggest that the spindle is taken out and cleaned,as well as the bush, of all oil etc before commencing the work, and also would newe bearings help? Thanks Ron < I wouldn't bother changing the bearings unless they have a rippled or odd looking finish where the balls run. That usually only happens if they have been run loose but expect the surface looks different. It should still look and feel smooth. Yes I think a general clean up with paraffin will help. Wipe that all off thoroughly and then very lightly smear all of the bearing surfaces with fresh oil. :-) There is no going back though once you start. I wish I could give a better figure for loading the angular contact bearings. One other possible test for odd wear in them after adjustment would be to rotate the spindle checking for any slight binding as it goes round. That would indicate uneven wear. If concerned about doing all just try adjusting them as a 1st step but if the bearings are worn you wont know for sure without looking. I would say that if the preload is checked on them 1st and that is ok there is little chance of their being a problem in that area. That just means adjusting the cone bearing out and checking for end play / rock. If there was any I would go the whole hog. My feeling in this area is that most of us buy used lathes and do not really know how well they have been maintained or what state they are in. I've just bought an ML10 and I will completely strip the head to inspect it. It's tempting to just use it but the grease could be 20 odd years old etc. That one uses opposing taper rolling bearings at each end of the spindle. I will take the additional precaution of marking the orientation of the cones on the spindle before removing any as these tend to run in with use. Same with the outers but if the bearings are ok those wont need to be removed. I don't think there will be an orientation problem on the angular contact bearings in a S7 as they are so close together but conceivably they could wear in at a slight angle. As when any bearings are moved they may need a further running in period after they are replaced again. Same will apply to new bearings. That just means making further adjustments from time to time. The sad thing about many used lathes is that people don't bother to adjust the bearings and it can make a remarkable difference to the finish and accuracy that can be obtained Buying an ML10 may seem odd but I have a need for a small accurate highish speed lathe for small work and hope to find I can run it at 3,000rpm plus. 4 would be great. Pity it's not a speed 10 really. It would be a lot easier to try. I might even change the type of bearings it uses. John ------- Re: Super 7B spindle adjustment Posted by: "John" a.johnwx~xxyahoo.com Date: Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:22 am ((PDT)) I just had an email about which way round angular contact bearings are installed. May be better to ask here really so I will answer here. Magneto bearings can be pulled apart and and may work out cheaper and myford might even have used them. They are installed the same way though and should be available up to 30mms dia if I remember correctly. The advantage of these is that they can be easier to install but the balls often run on a smaller surface area. Angular contact bearings wont come apart. If you look at the inner and the outer the rim one side of each will be thicker than the other. The bearings are installed so that the thick rim sides take the thrust when the bearings are adjusted. This means that the thick rimmed side of the inners will face the adjustment nuts. John ------- Simple DRO's [myfordlathes] Posted by: "chrisaskwith" chrisaskwithx~xxyahoo.com Date: Wed Apr 11, 2012 3:06 am ((PDT)) I wrote this for a forum I regularly visit (I recognise a few names there from here actually). Just my simple way of adding some DRO's to my Super &, probably not the best method or the most accurate but they were cheap and simple and work well for me. The Tailstock DRO I picked up on ebay and the Cross slide is the ARC unit I have been waiting ages for it to be back in stock. Hopefully pictures will upload ok, if not I will post direct links. As I promised to a few guys here are pictures of the DRO's I have fitted to my Myford Super 7 lathe. I have fitted 2, one to the tailstock and one to the cross slide. I decided that a carriage DRO was not needed since nearly all my turning is diameter critical rather than length, a rule or caliper is more than sufficient for my length measuring needs. First up is the tailstock DRO to give drilling depth, there is a small amount of slop due to fact that you can't fix it too securely to the tailstock barrel otherwise the DRO would get damaged during drilling when the barrel rotates a little (the key way always has a little bit of play) it is accurate however to about 1mm which is more than close enough for any drilling operation I have done. The tailstock barrel was drilling for a piece of threaded rod to act as the pin for the DRO, a threaded collar was made from aluminuim, this serves to lock the piece of threaded rod and also to act as a soft bump when you wind back the tailstock. If you do this mod yourself remember to make sure that the rod does not interfere with the auto-eject of the tailstock taper, mine ejects 3mm before the collar is reached. The rail of the DRO had to be carefully measured and cut to make sure it does not interfere with the tailstock handle when wound all the way back. The readout/sensor section was probably the easiest part to fit, I knew because of the curved and rounded body of the Super 7 tailstock I would have troublefixing anything to it so to make things easy I used 2 large rare earth magnets (sourced from a clothing tag remover) to attach the sensor, even though they only contact a small area of the tailstock they hold it more than firm enough, in fact removal can be difficult! Next up is the cross slide. There is very little room to fit a DRO to the Super 7 crossslide without modifying certain features, I wanted to avoid any modification if possible and also keep any drilling and tapping into the lathe as minimal as I could. In the end I managed to do it by drilling just 2 holes, one in the cross slide and one on the carriage. As to other modifications I had to shorten the rear cross slide gib locking screw so it sat below the surface (usually this sits proud around 4mm) and I had to switch the bolt on the carriage lock from a hex head to an allen head (turned the head down slightly as well for a bit more clearance) Other than that nothing else was touched. The hole in the cross slide was tapped 6mm and washers were used to shim out the rail to the correct distance. A bracket was attached to the sensor body and another 6mm tapped hole in the carriage was used to fix the bracket firmly. Both the top of the carriage and the cross slide were removed and placed in the drill press for these operations as the holes needed to be as accurate as possible, they were then tapped with a set of good quality HSS taps. Since the body casting of myford lathes are quality cast iron these operations were very smooth and easy.The Cross slide DRO seems to be very accurate and repeatable to at least 1/10th MM, probably even better if I were to carry out proper testing. Certainly it will be more then enough for my needs, I want it to help speed up roughing diameters and remove a lot of guess work. ------- Re: Speeds [myfordlathes] Posted by: "David Littlewood" davidx~xxdlittlewood.co.uk Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:55 am ((PDT)) Roger writes: >I am a fairly new owner of an ML7. I am a little confused about turning >speeds. I have found a table which gives the cutting speeds for various >metals and for instance, if turning aluminium, the cutting speed should >be 75-105 metres/min. That gives, for a 20mm diameter workpiece, a >rotation speed of 1200-1600 rpm. The maximum speed of the ML7 is given >as 870rpm. Am I missing something fundamental here? Roger The speeds commonly quoted are often designed for commercial use, where the maximum possible rate of metal removal is financially important. In most cases there is no problem with using a slower speed, it just takes a little longer - but this is for hobby use, so it doesn't matter. You are more likely to have problems at the other end of the speed range; too high a speed will result in rapid tool wear and other problems. In general I find I use my Super 7 on the lower speed range most of the time, even for turning small diameters, and have no problem. Changing the first belt to get the higher speed range is tedious. I do have a VFD and 3 phase motor fitted, which gives me about a 20% increase in speed, but this is still far short of those recommendations and yet still works fine. David Littlewood ------- Super 7 Power Cross Feed - Half Nut Lever Adjustment [Myfordlathes] Posted by: "john56552" john.777cordenx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:10 am ((PDT)) Hello All, I have a Super 7 B with power cross feed. The lever that engages the half nuts has become quite loose, to the point that I am worried the lever will droop and engage the half nuts when not required - I have installed a high tech fix using an elastic band to prevent this! I have looked through the files and the manual but can't see an obvious way to adjust the movement of this lever. Please note - it is not the half nuts I want to adjust - they work fine. I want to increase the friction needed to move the half nut engagement lever. Thanks very much in advance for any suggestions. Rgds, John ------- Re: Super 7 Power Cross Feed - Half Nut Lever Adjustment Posted by: "Mike Crossfield" miked.crossfieldx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:27 pm ((PDT)) John: On my non PCF Super 7 the lever friction can be adjusted by means of the centre nylock nut which retains the lever. Not sure if this applies on the PCF versions. If you don't have this adjustment I guess you could tighten up the gib adjustment screws to give a bit more stiffness. Mike ------- Re: Super 7 Power Cross Feed - Half Nut Lever Adjustment Posted by: "john56552" john.777cordenx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:16 pm ((PDT)) Thanks Mike, The PCF doesn't have that nylock nut! Yes, tightening the gibs is one answer, but I thought there may be another way. Thanks for taking the time to post. Rgds, John ------- Re: Super 7 Power Cross Feed - Half Nut Lever Adjustment Posted by: "john56552" john.777cordenx~xxbtinternet.com Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:03 am ((PDT)) Hi Mike, Well, gibs nipped up - problem solved! Seemed too obvious! Thanks again, John ------- [myfordlathes] How to remove copper pad in S7 cross-slide feedscrew adjusting colla Posted by: "old_iron_oz" old_iron_ozx~xxyahoo.com.au Date: Wed May 2, 2012 3:00 am ((PDT)) On my Super7, the copper pad that sits under the socket set screw, in the adjusting collar, on the cross-slide feed screw, won't come out. It appears to be a litle bit squashed into the thread of the set-screw hole. So I can't get the adjusting collar off, so that I can dismantle the feed screw off the cast alloy end bracket. The hole is so small and deep there seems to way to grab the copper pad to get it out. Any ideas? Wonderful workshop dodge? Or just drill it out and consequently damage the adjusting collar and the fine thread on the feed screw under the pad? If the Chinese manufactured an assembly like this, we'd all shake our heads and mutter 'bloody typical'. Only, this is supposed to be the best of British. Hmm. ------- Re: How to remove copper pad in S7 cross-slide feedscrew adjusting c Posted by: "Cliff Coggin" clifford.cogginx~xxvirgin.net Date: Wed May 2, 2012 4:54 am ((PDT)) Can you not simply unscrew the feed screw with a bit of force? The steel thread won't be damaged by the copper pad which is deliberately soft enough to conform to the thread for locking. Some of the copper will be sheared off but so what? It is designed to be sacrificed. Cliff Coggin ------- Re: How to remove copper pad in S7 cross-slide feedscrew adjusting c Posted by: "David Littlewood" davidx~xxdlittlewood.co.uk Date: Wed May 2, 2012 8:17 am ((PDT)) >If the Chinese manufactured an assembly like this, we'd all shake our >heads and mutter 'bloody typical'. Only, this is supposed to be the >best of British. Hmm. I think you have got it ass backwards; the technique of using copper or brass pads under a locking screw, to avoid chewing up the screw (or shaft), is the hallmark of first class toolmaking. A bog standard maker would just bung the screw in there and let you sort out the damage in due course. The pad being squashed into the thread of the locking screw hole is perfectly normal, and desirable, as it stops the little blighter from disappearing into another dimension when you remove the shaft. I see the copper pad is even shown in the S7 manual (part K11 in the cross-slide assembly drawing) so it isn't an addition by a later owner. What is slightly unexpected is that the pad is preventing the shaft being removed; usually the pad distorts enough to grip the thread of its hole, but loosely enough to move out a little when the set screw is slackened. Sometimes you need to tighten and slacken the set screw a few times to work the pad into the right degree of grip/looseness as the screw is tightened/slackened. I suggest you give this a try. At the end of the day, copper is a lot softer than steel, so I don't see why it should prevent the feedscrew coming out if you turn it hard enough - as I see Cliff has suggested. However, I have not tried this, and I'm not about to try it on my S7, so don't overdo it! If all else fails, you may be able to drill a small hole, loctite in a small shaft and screw it out. Don't forget to replace it though, otherwise your leadscrew will get chewed up. PS - There is an excellent description of using copper or brass pads in set screw holes in G H Thomas's book Dividing and Graduating (or its modern edition, the name of which escapes me). David Littlewood ------- Re: How to remove copper pad in S7 cross-slide feedscrew adjusting c Posted by: "old_iron_oz" old_iron_ozx~xxyahoo.com.au Date: Thu May 3, 2012 11:43 am ((PDT)) Thanks for that, you two. Unscrewing was possible but very difficult. I found after removal that the thread had been badly damaged by someone tightening the grubscrew without a copper pad underneath, sometime in the lathe's history (now 55 years old). That seems to have prevented the copper pad (installed by a later owner?) running along the thread when unscrewing. I had to apply much more force than I am used to applying. > PS - There is an excellent description of using copper or brass > pads in set screw holes in G H Thomas's book > Dividing and Graduating (or its modern edition, > the name of which escapes me). That's "Workshop Techniques" I think - I had a look through but couldn't find this -- the topic is not indexed, and there's an unusually large amount and scope of material in that book. ------- Re: How to remove copper pad in S7 cross-slide feedscrew adjusting c Posted by: "David Littlewood" davidx~xxdlittlewood.co.uk Date: Thu May 3, 2012 2:31 pm ((PDT)) It came up in the section dealing with the method of locking the main rotating spindle of the VDH. I made one of these many years ago - an excellent way of gaining experience in toolmaking - and used the method described; it is remarkably effective. Glad you managed to get the copper pad out without causing damage; don't forget to fit a replacement on re-assembly to avoid further damage! David Littlewood ------- Re: How to remove copper pad in S7 cross-slide feedscrew adjusting c Posted by: "old_iron_oz" old_iron_ozx~xxyahoo.com.au Date: Sun May 6, 2012 4:36 am ((PDT)) Oh, yes - found it. The fitting of the plugs to the three tapped holes in the spindle nose. Page 176-7 of "Workshop Techniques". An excellent book, redolent of toolroom mastery. Poor old MEW (the UK workshop magazine) just can't come close to this stuff - those old masters from the late industrial age like Thomas, Bradley, et. al. are all sadly passed away. The VDH is certainly a project to aspire to - one day! ------- Re: How to remove copper pad in S7 cross-slide feedscrew adjusting c Posted by: "David Littlewood" davidx~xxdlittlewood.co.uk Date: Sun May 6, 2012 7:04 am ((PDT)) Yes, sorry, I misremembered - it's the method of holding the sleeves *inside* the main spindle. The spindle itself is held by a caliper clamping system. Now this really *is* fierce in its grip - I couldn't believe how effective it is - but it needs quite a lot of meat on the outer part to fit it in. David Littlewood ------- Re: How to remove copper pad in S7 cross-slide feedscrew adjusting c Posted by: "Bob Hamilton" bobx~xxhamilton-bob.freeserve.co.uk Date: Fri May 4, 2012 12:32 am ((PDT)) I'm not familiar with the exact item you have been working on, but certainly understand what you have been doing. One of the machines at work had a part that was screwed together and then locked using a rolled spring dowel inserted into a hole drilled through the two components. Due to the fact that this item was reciprocating, the whole thing would work loose and it was then not possible to re lock it properly as the holes would not line up. We now have a tapped hole in the "outer" part and use a nylon plug with a grub screw. Not only does it hold perfectly adequately, it is also able to allow adjustment next time. The point I'm making is that the nylon insert is surprisingly good for this kind of job. Bob ------- Re: How to remove copper pad in S7 cross-slide feedscrew adjusting c Posted by: "old_iron_oz" old_iron_ozx~xxyahoo.com.au Date: Sun May 6, 2012 4:21 am ((PDT)) Hi Bob, that's not a bad idea -- I've got both nylon rod and copper rod here of the right size to make the pad under the grubscrew, and I think I'll try the nylon first, see if it holds the adjustment. Cheers Ian ------- Microscope on Super 7B [myfordlathes] Posted by: "otebgnx~xxjisp.net" otebgnx~xxjisp.net Date: Fri May 4, 2012 4:58 am ((PDT)) Hi. I just uplaoaded some photos of a microscope on the my Super 7B. This is the microscope and mount I have on my Sherline. I needed to make a needle adjusting screw and wanted a high TPI. It was easy to get 112 on the Myford. I decided to see if the microscope would fit. I used the Sherline mount and it worked out very well. It was like I was machining a 3/4" diameter thread. Could see everything. I only needed to go in .005. If I use this setup more I will make a custom mount as the Sherline mount works but I could have used some y direction adjustment not just x. The photo was of the 2 - 112 TPI tap I was making. Look under - Bobs Myford. Bob BTW the only reason I did not use the Sherline is I had never set up the gears and was as usual pressed for time. I knew the Myford could do the job just fine if I could see everything. ------- Re: Quick Change Toolpost [myfordlathes] Posted by: "David Alexander" dave_ale2008x~xxyahoo.co.uk Date: Mon May 14, 2012 12:26 am ((PDT)) 14 May 2012, g6uwi wrote: > Hello everybody. Can anybody help me with some information and advice? I want to buy a quick change toolpost, I know the likes of RDG and Chronos sell the cheaper versions and that Myford of course sell what they call the best and genuine one. I know that somebody used to advertise myford toolposts on ebay but he ran into problems with the new Myford owners. I think he was an ex myford supplier and he seems to have disappeared. What toolposts are there, which ones should I avoid and does anybody have the contact details of the guy that was making them? I can't afford a fortune. I nearly bought one of the Myford stand at the Harrogate model engineering show but I thought I would ask round first. Cheers Neil < The company is: A & R Precision Ltd Leofric House Binley Road Coventry CV3 1JN e-mail: darenlynamx~xxbtconnect.com They actually made the toolposts sold by Myford before RDG bought the business. They can still sell them, but described as 'compatible with Myford' to avoid those 'nice' people at RDG, from whom I will no longer buy because of the shabby way they treated A&R. I bought one from A&R, have been delighted with it and have had no problems at all. I have no connection with them other than as a very satisfied customer. regards David Alexander Towcester, England ------- Re: Quick Change Toolpost Posted by: "kingsteam9" robinkingx~xxnewbury.net Date: Mon May 14, 2012 1:51 am ((PDT)) Neil: Like Dave I bought mine recently from A&R, in my case for my ML10, and the quality and fit is first class. The spare toolholders also fitted perfectly and I can't grumble at the price either - well worth it. Robin ------- Re: Quick Change Toolpost Posted by: "John" a.johnwx~xxyahoo.com Date: Mon May 14, 2012 2:40 am ((PDT)) A&R don't seem to have listed on ebay recently and I notice that Chronos have listed some at similar prices. Sad to miss the A&R listings as I need some more. Nearly all of mine are by Myford but I also have 2 imports. They are ok apart from one aspect. They don't use high tensile screws to locate the toolbit so the ends mushroom over and the screws become difficult to remove. Given the cost of screws of the quality of the old unbreako's these days doing something about that is more expensive than people might think as we only buy a few. On the other hand it would cost the manu- facturers peanuts to switch. :-) I have about 15 holders. Why do I need more? They make people lazy. I only routinely used 1/2 a dozen of them. John ------- [subject is actually about unscrewing the chuck] thread on mL7 spindle [myfordlathes] Posted by: "Rodney Gentry" rgent14x~xxhotmail.com Date: Fri Jun 15, 2012 7:17 am ((PDT)) Can some kind soul remind me which way the thread goes to unscrew a chuck backplate on my ML7? I assumed that it would be left handed, but a friend thinks it is right handed. If I have to exert a bit of brute force I'd like to get it right first time. ------- Re: thread on mL7 spindle Posted by: "Bob Hamilton" bobx~xxhamilton-bob.freeserve.co.uk Date: Fri Jun 15, 2012 7:59 am ((PDT)) It's got to tighten against normal (forward) direction of rotation, so that will make it right hand. I would say that inserting the chuck key and giving that a sharp tap should do it normally, but a bit more might be required if it's not been off for years. I would be careful about how you resist the spindle from turning and would