Quick change tool posts & indexable tools?

mikey said:
I agree with Will. About half my AXA tool holders are Aloris, the other half Phase II. Very little physical difference in the tool holder body and Phase II uses okay set screws. The height adjusters are far superior on the Aloris holders and they are consistently hardened but beyond that, no, not worth buying Aloris or Dorian just to hold a tool. A small lathe just doesn't have the guts to even remotely stress a tool holder so I would go cheap on these things.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I'm a believer that the quality of the tool post is more important than the holders. :big grin:

Yep the ones I have from Shars are indentical to the Phase II, even down to the engraving except Phase II uses better set screws & says Phase II on them. I used to buy them WT Tool cause they came unmarked (no branding). Then they started coming with the Shars logo on them. The bulk of mine that I got from Shars were before they started putting their logo on them. Not sure if they are still from the same factory. Lathemaster's QCTP & holders also came from the same factory except their AXA holder came premilled down for their 8x14 lathe. I had the LM QCTP AXA on my HF 8x14 before I got a DTM.

I wish I could have gotten a DTM in BXA for my current lathe. The guys who made DTM used to work for Aloris & claimed to have improved on Aloris' design. They were even located in the same city. Lol. I never took the DTM apart but what I noticed different were guides for the wedges. IIRC the owner eventually retired or something like that. I got the DTM AXA from a guy who purchased the remaining stock from DTM but the TP75a (BXA) QCTPs were long gone. No matter, I'm happy with my Dorian.

As you said the AXA holders were the same dimensions as Aloris but for some reason the import BXAs from that same manufacturer were not. No big deal but I always wondered why. The CDCO ones are from a different manufacturer. The quality of their holders are not as good but their price is the cheapest to be found.


IMG_5417.jpgIMG_5422.jpgIMG_5407.jpg
 
That DTM looks like a nice post. It says its patented so it has to be at least 10% different from the Aloris design. I think they're all about the same, especially on a hobby class lathe. These things are so rigid that the limiting factor is the platform upon which they sit. That's why I think a solid plinth with a tool post on it is probably the optimum configuration for most work.
 
That DTM was very nice, I miss it. Yeah, the Aloris design is a great one, hard to improve on it if at all possible. And for us hobby guys we would never notice the difference. However for import QCTPs, they are not all the same. I've seen some that were very sloppy right out the box as well as piston QCTPs vibrating loose.

I keep seeing more & more guys running a solid plinth. Not sure if Rob Renzetti was the first to do it on a manual lathe but he sure did make it popular. As great as it sounds & performs I'm not sure if I will make one though. Sure would be nice to have more rigidty & possibly take bigger DOCs but I use my compound a lot.
 
darkzero said:
I keep seeing more & more guys running a solid plinth. Not sure if Rob Renzetti was the first to do it on a manual lathe but he sure did make it popular. As great as it sounds & performs I'm not sure if I will make one though. Sure would be nice to have more rigidty & possibly take bigger DOCs but I use my compound a lot.
Click to expand...

Nah, Robin wasn't the first; the British have been using plinths or something similar for decades. They've also used rear mounted tooling for decades, too. I think this is because the model engineers only had smaller, less rigid lathes to mess with and there were some really brilliant guys back then, like GH Thomas. We, all of us, are standing on the shoulders of giants.

I have a plinth in progress. Suckers been not-completed for almost 3 years now. Just haven't had time to finish the stupid thing. I actually use my compound a lot, too, to cut chamfers or trepan something real quick. And it isn't like my compound is wimpy. The Super 11 compound is solid enough to take heavy cuts without moving.

The main reason for making a plinth is to use it to support a rear mounted parting tool on it. My cross slide had T-slots that allow the plinth to slide to the rear and be locked down with two screws. Then I can mount a parting tool or knurling tool back there and it should be far more rigid than using a compound for these tasks. Besides, I plan to mount a graver tool rest to the thing so I can use my gravers on my larger lathe.

What I will NOT do is fix the tool post. I think that's fine for carbide insert users but for HSS guys it is too restrictive.
 
Will,

You said the quality of the CDCO blocks was lower, how so??, I’ve bought over 300 of the AXA blocks from them, I never had one that didn’t fit or work as intended. The only thing I do is replace the set screws with 8 mm x 1.25 mm x 20 mm square head, full dog point set screws.
 
I’ve had a cheap Grizzly, a Phase II, 3 different Aloris and currently a Dorian. There was a noticeable difference between the cheap Grizzly tool post and the others, but other than the fit and finish, I can not said any of the others work any better than the others ones. I bought the Dorian, because they touted their new and improved wedge design, with allegedly multiple improvements over the “standard Aloris design”, there may be differences, but I never seen or felt them. Maybe it’s the difference between home shop and production operation, but for me, I could have saved a lot of cash, by staying with the Phase II, as since then, except for possible “status” points, I really gained nothing, performance wise.
 
Buffalo21 said:
Will,

You said the quality of the CDCO blocks was lower, how so??, I’ve bought over 300 of the AXA blocks from them, I never had one that didn’t fit or work as intended. The only thing I do is replace the set screws with 8 mm x 1.25 mm x 20 mm square head, full dog point set screws.
Click to expand...

I've received a few holders from them that had crooked threads on the adjusters as well as some that had poor finishes. Looked like a saw blade cut. The finish was just cosmetic but the crooked adjusters were a headache to adjust height. I had to rerurn something once, took me months to get a refund. Never had a problem with them before but after that I stopped buying from them.
 
mikey said:
I agree with Will. About half my AXA tool holders are Aloris, the other half Phase II. Very little physical difference in the tool holder body and Phase II uses okay set screws. The height adjusters are far superior on the Aloris holders and they are consistently hardened but beyond that, no, not worth buying Aloris or Dorian just to hold a tool. A small lathe just doesn't have the guts to even remotely stress a tool holder so I would go cheap on these things.
Click to expand...

That’s my opinion. I’ve never had a problem I could blame on the tool holder. More the operator of the lathe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
One thing else on the topic. My homemade and modified tools use 1/4 x20 all thread for the adjusters. I make the knurled adjuster my self. Then use a lock washer and nut for it. Never had a problem with tools staying on center. Now I did have a tool to jam one time and bent the adjuster because it was the weakest point. The only pressure on the adjuster is the block resting on it the force is on the dovetails


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
My AXA tool holder came in a couple of days ago, and I tried mounting it to the T-nut I fabbed up for the compound. The supplied stud for the body of the holder is threaded M14-1.5 at the top, where the nut holds everything down. On the other end of the stud, where it threads into the supplied bottom, is something other than M14-1.5. It might be M15, except I have no metric nuts/bolts/taps of that size to compare. I have no idea why they would take a stud and tap it differently on either end, doesn't really make sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top