Anyone here made a D1-4 Spindle nose?

[Joe in Oz]

My lathe has a flat flange with a shallow taper locating recess - and chucks or plates are held with 3 or 4 bolts into threaded holes in that flange.
Using front-mount or through-hole chucks, that is a relatively easy to use arrangement. However, I have a couple of chucks with D1-4 mounts and no way of drilling through holes that could line up with the flange holes (without going through the scroll ).
So I would like to go to D1-4 mounting for all my chucks. Making backing plates to suit seems relatively easy to me, however making a D1-4 holder or nose is daunting....
I've never seen any D1 type noses/holders for sale and can't find a suitable second-hand (=affordable) D1-4 spindle I could adapt either.
So I'm considering making either a complete spindle or an adapter from scratch....
Any advice or experience here?

 

[gasengin]

Maybe I don't understand the question, but D1-4 mounting plates are available on ebay. Think they are very common. If not in Oz, I'm sure direct ship from China would be available.

 

[TomS]

He's asking if anyone has made an adapter that mates a non-cam lock style spindle to a D1-4 chuck mount. This should be possible if care is taken to make the adapter as short as possible. Do a D1-4 spindle dimensions search on the internet and you will get literally dozens of hits. This will be an interesting project. Keep us posted.

 

[Mitch Alsup]

Maybe I don't understand the question, but D1-4 mounting plates are available on ebay. Think they are very common. If not in Oz, I'm sure direct ship from China would be available.

DI-4 mounting plates are easily found, you attach a chuck to the back plate and then attach the assembly to the spindle nose.
The contraption a DI-4 back plate mounts ONTO is not easily found. It is, in effect, an isolated spindle nose.

I think the person in question is looking for the thing that accepts a DI-4 assembly, not the DI-4 back place.
It is the one with 3 holes and 3 spring loaded cam lock locks,
not the one with 3 cam lock studs which.

 

[Tozguy]

I definitely think you can make an adapter to convert your spindle nose to accept D1-4. It will add around 1 1/2 inches to the spindle nose.
The shallow internal taper to fit your OEM spindle and the external D1-4 taper on the adapter would not be difficult to cut. I would not attempt to make the cams (although they are not hardened) but everything thing else you can make.
If you change chucks often you will certainly appreciate the D1-4 concept.

 

[benmychree]

I definitely think you can make an adapter to convert your spindle nose to accept D1-4. It will add around 1 1/2 inches to the spindle nose.
The shallow internal taper to fit your OEM spindle and the external D1-4 taper on the adapter would not be difficult to cut. I would not attempt to make the cams (although they are not hardened) but everything thing else you can make.
If you change chucks often you will certainly appreciate the D1-4 concept.

The cams are hardened, otherwise they would not last forever as I have observed them to do; perhaps those from China are lacking hardness ---
You should be able to buy the cams as a replacement part. The spindle nose that you describe on your lathe is common on turret lathes, and a friend has a big Monarch lathe that has that method of chuck mounting.

 

[Tozguy]

This is a cam from my lathe, it is definitely not as hard as the stud that chewed it up. Considering the need to hold on the stud and not loosen while in use it makes sense to me that it would not be 'hard' and therefor slippery.
When a D1-4 system is properly adjusted and installed there is no need for hardened parts. If things go sour I would rather replace a cam or stud than a chewed up spindle.

 

[benmychree]

This is a cam from my lathe, it is definitely not as hard as the stud that chewed it up. Considering the need to hold on the stud and not loosen while in use it makes sense to me that it would not be 'hard' and therefor slippery.
When a D1-4 system is properly adjusted and installed there is no need for hardened parts. If things go sour I would rather replace a cam or stud than a chewed up spindle.

I had a 14" Monarch CK that had a D type spindle nose, it was built in 1943, the cams looked nothing like the chewed up example that you posted relative hardness is a subjective thing; how hard is hard and how soft is soft? Without a hardness tester of some kind, it's only a guess; I'd offer that USA made cams are heat treated, to what degree, I have no idea, but definitely not soft. I do not have any parts to test for hardness.
The parts that you show in the pictures are definitely soft, as shown by the wear that is evident; they should not show wear like that; I assume that this is an "offshore" machine?

 

[Tozguy]

benmy, I was going to say the same thing, we can only go so far talking about hardness without having some numbers. I have been referring to relative hardness, D1-4 spindle, cam and stud
My buggered cam is not from wear. A few years ago I had an H of a time removing a 6'' scroll chuck that came installed on a new lathe, as if the factory forced the cam before the stud was far enough into the spindle. The vendor provided a new cam on warranty and it still looks like new.
Had the cam been harder would it have deformed the stud? If the stud got deformed how difficult would it be to pull it from the spindle? If the spindle got deformed how would I fix it? I got to realize that maybe the cam is the weak link by design because it is so easy to remove and replace.

I am not keen on blindly bashing the country of origin when something like that happens. It was my initiation to D1-4 stuff and I pondered the situation for some time before realizing the wisdom behind the 'soft' cam. Granted the factory should have put the chuck on properly. But the error is something that I could have done too being a greenhorn. So given the choice between a 'hard' or 'soft' cam, I would opt for the relatively soft one and the protection that it provides.

BTW, the socket of the cam got buggered from using a poorly fitting key. THAT was MY fault but it is another illustration of how soft the cam is.

 

[benmychree]

benmy, I was going to say the same thing, we can only go so far talking about hardness without having some numbers. I have been referring to relative hardness, D1-4 spindle, cam and stud
My buggered cam is not from wear. A few years ago I had an H of a time removing a 6'' scroll chuck that came installed on a new lathe, as if the factory forced the cam before the stud was far enough into the spindle. The vendor provided a new cam on warranty and it still looks like new.
Had the cam been harder would it have deformed the stud? If the stud got deformed how difficult would it be to pull it from the spindle? If the spindle got deformed how would I fix it? I got to realize that maybe the cam is the weak link by design because it is so easy to remove and replace.

I am not keen on blindly bashing the country of origin when something like that happens. It was my initiation to D1-4 stuff and I pondered the situation for some time before realizing the wisdom behind the 'soft' cam. Granted the factory should have put the chuck on properly. But the error is something that I could have done too being a greenhorn. So given the choice between a 'hard' or 'soft' cam, I would opt for the relatively soft one and the protection that it provides.

BTW, the socket of the cam got buggered from using a poorly fitting key. THAT was MY fault but it is another illustration of how soft the cam is.

I'd agree that the problem was likely caused by the stud on the chuck being screwed into the chuck too far. I wish I had some cans and studs to check for hardness, I have a Rockwell hardness tester and also ma Sclerescope hardness tester.
Personally, I prefer the L type spindle nose, it is much easier to keep clean and has only the one nut to tighten up, but both of my lathes have screwed on chucks, which is OK, except when you'd like to run in reverse ---