-
Welcome back Guest! Did you know you can mentor other members here at H-M? If not, please check out our Relaunch of Hobby Machinist Mentoring Program!
Atlas Forum Nearing 10,000 Messages...
- Thread starter louosten
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2011
- Messages
- 5,039
Yes. The atlas lathe with the help from Sears was affordable for the home shop guys. Today you can pick them up relatively cheap so they make a good choice for a first lathe. If you work within its means you can have a lot of fun learning the hobby and make some really nice looking parts.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 10,511
One reason is availability of lathes and availability of parts. The reason for the generally better availability of the Atlas and Craftsman lathes is probably because so many more of them were sold than of the Logan (Wards), Clausing or South Bend. The reason for this is likely a combination of marketing and price. In 1943/44 (one of the few years that I have prices on Atlas/Craftsman and Logan/Wards, the prices on various models of each looked like this (the last column is shipping weight):
Craftsman 101.07383 12x24 $129.00 255#
Craftsman 101.07403 12x24 $155.00 270#
Atlas V42 10x24 $138.00 261#
Atlas H42 10x24 $145.00 271#
Atlas TV42 10x24 $159.00 261#
Atlas TH42 10x24 $164.00 271#
Wards (Logan) 10x24 $172.50 320#
I don't have prices (or weights) on equivalent Clausing or South Bend lathes in the same time period but weights were probably higher and prices a lot higher.The generally lower Craftsman versus Atlas prices are probably the result of sales volume as many parts were common to both.
Craftsman 101.07383 12x24 $129.00 255#
Craftsman 101.07403 12x24 $155.00 270#
Atlas V42 10x24 $138.00 261#
Atlas H42 10x24 $145.00 271#
Atlas TV42 10x24 $159.00 261#
Atlas TH42 10x24 $164.00 271#
Wards (Logan) 10x24 $172.50 320#
I don't have prices (or weights) on equivalent Clausing or South Bend lathes in the same time period but weights were probably higher and prices a lot higher.The generally lower Craftsman versus Atlas prices are probably the result of sales volume as many parts were common to both.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2015
- Messages
- 2,558
If I had to guess, I'd say it's a sheer numbers thing.
They sold lots, they're affordable and most guys just need to make simple parts.
Kind of the "every man's" lathe. Works to make things down on the farm or in a basement at night after a days work in the office. They're also lighter than most machines and even though that compromises some rigidity, it makes it easy to get it down in that basement workshop. It''s simple two man lift to carry after a few pieces are stripped off, or and easy 4 guy lift if that's too heavy. I moved my TH42 by myself by taking the tailstock off, running the carriage up to the headstock and then just grunting it into the garage off the tailgate of the truck (was pretty much at my limit though!)
It's pretty much a perfect fit for me and what I do with it. That's why I have one.
It's also fun to tinker with and make upgrades to. It's a simple machine and seems to respond well to things like a QCTP, DC motors, etc....
That's my story and I'm sticking to it!
They sold lots, they're affordable and most guys just need to make simple parts.
Kind of the "every man's" lathe. Works to make things down on the farm or in a basement at night after a days work in the office. They're also lighter than most machines and even though that compromises some rigidity, it makes it easy to get it down in that basement workshop. It''s simple two man lift to carry after a few pieces are stripped off, or and easy 4 guy lift if that's too heavy. I moved my TH42 by myself by taking the tailstock off, running the carriage up to the headstock and then just grunting it into the garage off the tailgate of the truck (was pretty much at my limit though!)
It's pretty much a perfect fit for me and what I do with it. That's why I have one.
It's also fun to tinker with and make upgrades to. It's a simple machine and seems to respond well to things like a QCTP, DC motors, etc....
That's my story and I'm sticking to it!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 10,511
This site's official policy has always been that you don't blatantly run down someone else's equipment. Which isn't the same thing as telling someone that they just can't do whatever they want to do with the equipment they have - you just need to be polite (and correct).. The policy has been violated a few times but the violators promptly got stonked and either left or quit doing it. The policy doesn't just apply to Atlas nor just to a specific Forum, either.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2011
- Messages
- 310
I always figured that Atlas lathes were probably less expensive than South Bends. But I ran across an old South Bend catalog not long ago and was kind of surprised to see that the cost of a basic 9" South Bend in the mid-1930s was pretty much the same as the Atlas at the time -- about $100 (less motor).
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 10,511
What year? And what bed size? I don't have any Atlas price lists handy but the Sears catalogs all have the prices in the catalog. In 1935, the Sears version of the 936, with fixed tool post mount, a full set of change gears, and less motor, cost $64.50. With compound tool rest, it cost $77.50. And the longer beds were listed as +$8.00 for each additional 6". So just over $100 for the 954 model (9x36).
The following year (1936), the first back-geared 12" appeared (in the catalog - the claim was made that it had been available for about a year). The 12" models were actually a little less expensive with the 16-speed back geared 12x18 101.07380 costing $74.95 up to $93.50 for the same in 12x36. Less motor in all cases. And if you wanted to start off more cheaply, the 8-speed (no back gears) 101.07360 cost $63.50 to $85.95. The sales gimmick being of course that you could buy the back gears later, at of course a higher total price than if you had bought them to begin with. As in the 1943 examples I gave earlier, the equivalent Atlas 10" models were probably around 5% higher. So the Atlas wasn't a whole lot cheaper but was cheaper.
The following year (1936), the first back-geared 12" appeared (in the catalog - the claim was made that it had been available for about a year). The 12" models were actually a little less expensive with the 16-speed back geared 12x18 101.07380 costing $74.95 up to $93.50 for the same in 12x36. Less motor in all cases. And if you wanted to start off more cheaply, the 8-speed (no back gears) 101.07360 cost $63.50 to $85.95. The sales gimmick being of course that you could buy the back gears later, at of course a higher total price than if you had bought them to begin with. As in the 1943 examples I gave earlier, the equivalent Atlas 10" models were probably around 5% higher. So the Atlas wasn't a whole lot cheaper but was cheaper.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2011
- Messages
- 310
Well, just as an example, in 1937 an Atlas 1036 (10D) with 3-foot bed was $98.50 without a motor. According to a 1936 catalog, a South Bend 9" lathe with a 3-foot bed was $75 without a motor, or $98.25 with motor, switch, and countershaft. The weights are even almost identical -- 242 lbs. for the Atlas and 250 lbs. for the South Bend.
I don't know if the difference in price between the two brands changed over the years, but I was surprised to see how close they were when both lathes first came out. The two companies must have really been competing against each other for the hobby/home shop trade.
I don't know if the difference in price between the two brands changed over the years, but I was surprised to see how close they were when both lathes first came out. The two companies must have really been competing against each other for the hobby/home shop trade.