Comparing Size & Rigidity of Palmgren Lathe Milling Attachments

I'm very pleased with the drilling capability with a drill chuck mounted in the three jaw. I'm going to make some basic round tool holders with a set screw so I don't have to mount the drill chuck and endmills directly in the chuck jaws. Seems to work for now but I'm reading they can slip in the chuck.

I have a spare Jacobs-style drill chuck that would work well chucked up in the three-jaw, except that the arbor its mounted on is a Morse taper. If I were to ever find the right sleeve for inserting MT3 centers in my spindle, I could just use the good Jacobs chuck that is currently in my tailstock. Or, I could just find a straight arbor for the other chuck. That would give me lots of versatility for drilling weird sizes for tapping holes, etc. I can see where it would particularly useful for drilling and threading the end of a shaft that is too large to go through the spindle.

I do (or will) have enough collets for standard hole sizes, probably including the tap drill size for 1/4-20, 3/8-16, and 1/2-13. These, plus sizes in the 16ths, would accommodate much of what I would need for this application. Any drilling i did on the lathe would have to turn out better than on my craptastic drill press, with its 60 thou (I'm not making this up) of runout. I have a set of cheapie HSS end mills for which have collets of one sort or another for enough of them that I could do most things. For cutting standard keyways, or milling slots, I have the sizes I need already.

Rick "but first task is milling the t-nut for my new toolpost" Denney
 
For the sake of comparing against the Palmgrens...

My South Bend lathe attachment has arrived. It's a monster--and I expect far more substantial than those used by reviewers to disparage the whole concept on the basis of lack of rigidity.

Looking at the South Bend documentation for these...

SB_milling_attachments_catalog.jpg

...we find relevant data for identifying stuff. The attachment I just received fit the dimensions of the Model 5 on the table, intended for the 16" lathe. Yes, it really weighs 65 pounds, even without the missing handle. And it has a "5" molded into the casting, which was sort-of a clue :)

I'm not sure from what I'm looking at how it was originally intended to be mounted. The base has a degree scale on it, apparently to be mounted in place of the compound using a similar attachment. Mine has been modified for another application, but I'm sure I'll be able to mount it on my 14-1/2 one way or another.

As for rigidity, this thing is massively constructed, and I would expect it to be able to hold stiffly anything that would reasonable fit in its jaws. Locking down all the saddle cross-slide motions would be a requirement for bigger stuff. I can't imagine that it wouldn't be adequate for the usual things I would need to do, like making or modifying T-nuts, precision drilling and tapping on smaller parts or really any parts that can be attached to it without interference from the lathe bed, facing up to an area of 4x5 inches or so using smaller facing tools, cutting keyways and other slots, and the like.

What it is not is high precision, though I have not yet attempted to measure it. It's battered and will need to be cleaned up and the mating surfaces stoned before really being able to tell. And it isn't that much lighter than my surface plate. The collar on the vertical axis is the typical SB small collar with a scale to 50 on it, but the lead screw has 10 buttress threads per inch. The collar may not be original, but 50 markings = 0.100, so I just have to remember that each mark is 0.002. I would not anticipate much desire to use the Z-axis motion during machining, however--it's not well-positioned for that and of course there's no power feed. Turning the workpiece so that it machines side to side would allow the use of the cross-slide power feet, with the carriage (and its micrometer stop) being used for measuring depth--what would be the Z axis on if rotated to look like a vertical mill. I think a nice, big clamp on the back side of the carriage to lock it down to the ways might not be a bad idea, and it would keep me from having to mess with the rear gib adjustments to do that.

I suspect this thing is 50% heavier and sturdier than the larger of the two Palmgrens in the OP, judging from the exertion (not) shown in the video. The larger Palmgren seems to line up with the Model 3 attachment used for the 13" lathe, but the South Bend may still be heavier.

Rick "good upper body workout" Denney
 
I haven’t used my milling attachment in years since I got the mill.
It’s an Atlas/craftsman 10-501 intended for an Atlas-Craftsman 10-12” lathe.
i machined a double ended spigot so I could use it on my SB9.
it weighs 15lbs, has a 2-1/2“ wide jaw. It is very well made.
Years ago I used it for key ways, slots & light surfacing.
It suffered from too much overhang which affected rigidity. Maybe worked better on a 12 Atlas, dunno.
I keep thinking I can figure a way to use it as a ball turning attachment,
maybe….
 

Attachments

  • D64E0A56-1176-4462-8AE6-32DC5C1FBFDF.jpeg
    D64E0A56-1176-4462-8AE6-32DC5C1FBFDF.jpeg
    528 KB · Views: 9
Back
Top