- Joined
- Sep 5, 2021
- Messages
- 3
This is my first post, hopefully this is the right forum.
I am rebuilding a new-to-me South Bend 9C, and the front V-way is visibly worn near the headstock (a fingernail catches on it), but the rear V-ways show minimal wear.
To quantify the wear, I did the following test of my own creation (hopefully it is sensible): I slid the carriage and tailstock together so that they are touching. I mounted a dial indicator on the carriage at approximately a tool cutting height, so that I can measure the relative distance to the side of the tailstock. I then slide the carriage and tailstock together along the bed and see how much the dial indicator changes, which gives a measure of how much a cutting tool and the tailstock are out-of-parallel.
When I do this test, the indicator shows a relative motion of approximately 8 mils, with most of the deviation near the headstock, as expected based on the front V-way having visible wear in this region.
From reading forums, I see occasional discussions about regrinding the ways, and the usual conclusion being that the cost is simply not justifiable for an older machine.
Rather than regrinding everything, would it be a bad idea to simply regrind the front V-way to be parallel to the tailstock V-way? My thought is that the tailstock V-way is in much better condition (based on look and feel), so grinding just the front V-way would help align the carriage to this reference, and bring the machine into better alignment.
I know that this would result in the carriage sitting ever-so-slightly low in the front, but it is already sitting slightly low due to the bed wear near the headstock, so if the grinding does not exceed this wear depth, I am not seeing any harm being done.
Before I do anything foolish, I wanted to see if any of the more experienced people may have any thoughts about grinding just the front V-way. Thanks for any suggestions or cautions!
I am rebuilding a new-to-me South Bend 9C, and the front V-way is visibly worn near the headstock (a fingernail catches on it), but the rear V-ways show minimal wear.
To quantify the wear, I did the following test of my own creation (hopefully it is sensible): I slid the carriage and tailstock together so that they are touching. I mounted a dial indicator on the carriage at approximately a tool cutting height, so that I can measure the relative distance to the side of the tailstock. I then slide the carriage and tailstock together along the bed and see how much the dial indicator changes, which gives a measure of how much a cutting tool and the tailstock are out-of-parallel.
When I do this test, the indicator shows a relative motion of approximately 8 mils, with most of the deviation near the headstock, as expected based on the front V-way having visible wear in this region.
From reading forums, I see occasional discussions about regrinding the ways, and the usual conclusion being that the cost is simply not justifiable for an older machine.
Rather than regrinding everything, would it be a bad idea to simply regrind the front V-way to be parallel to the tailstock V-way? My thought is that the tailstock V-way is in much better condition (based on look and feel), so grinding just the front V-way would help align the carriage to this reference, and bring the machine into better alignment.
I know that this would result in the carriage sitting ever-so-slightly low in the front, but it is already sitting slightly low due to the bed wear near the headstock, so if the grinding does not exceed this wear depth, I am not seeing any harm being done.
Before I do anything foolish, I wanted to see if any of the more experienced people may have any thoughts about grinding just the front V-way. Thanks for any suggestions or cautions!