[4]

Hafco AL900A lathe, is anyone able to identify what it really is?

[3]
[10] Like what you see?
Click here to donate to this forum and upgrade your account!

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
Doug, your peep sight method is ingenious to say the least, I've never heard of being done that way but if it worked fine. The final test is does it turn parallel when a bar is not supported by the tailstock. that is the only true test.

I don't think you can say the original factory settings still existed on the lathe as it was not turning parallel. The correct settings are the ones that work. Adjusting the levelling feet will not make a great deal of difference, that is only for the final thou or so.

with the lathe as level as you can get it measuring on the bed surfaces even with a carpenters level, as long as it's true, will be good enough to start with. Then you have to square the headstock then the tail stock in that order. You can't use the tail stock as a reference if it is not correct.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Bob. Thanks for that, I did not realise the feet leveling was only a finale, I thought it was the basic adjustment and everything else was reliant on it.

So, tomorrow (providing there are no other tasks needing a higher priority) will put feet back to level with carpenter's level as everything is doubtless out of kilter now, will then do the turned point in the chuck , align headstock to tailstock then run tailstock to far end and peep sight it and see what that tells me. If that agrees will then try for parrellel turn.
I see on the web that I should have an old double edge razor blade to insert between the 2 centres as the most accurate way of aligning them. Hmmm, will need to do some digging to find one of those!

However, if moving tailstock to far end is out of line with peep sight, what then?

The ways look nice, I think (and hope) that they are straight.

I suppose another check would be to dismantle the carriage/saddle and check for anything weird out of sight.
But that really will be a last resort.

Regards
Doug
 

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
Bob. Thanks for that, I did not realise the feet leveling was only a finale, I thought it was the basic adjustment and everything else was reliant on it.

So, tomorrow (providing there are no other tasks needing a higher priority) will put feet back to level with carpenter's level as everything is doubtless out of kilter now, will then do the turned point in the chuck , align headstock to tailstock then run tailstock to far end and peep sight it and see what that tells me. If that agrees will then try for parrellel turn.
I see on the web that I should have an old double edge razor blade to insert between the 2 centres as the most accurate way of aligning them. Hmmm, will need to do some digging to find one of those!

However, if moving tailstock to far end is out of line with peep sight, what then?

The ways look nice, I think (and hope) that they are straight.

I suppose another check would be to dismantle the carriage/saddle and check for anything weird out of sight.
But that really will be a last resort.

Regards
Doug
Doug 1st. Rough lelvel is all you need to start.

2. Have you proved the headstock is square by turning parallel without the part supported in the tailstock that is the first test. Turn a piece as long as you can. It's no point proceeding until you have that.

3. now check the tailstock with a center point freshly machined in the chuck, adjust tailstock center to center. If you don't have a razor blade handy a piece of thin steel shim will work,, even a blade out of a box cutter will work, not quite as accurate, but close enough for this stage.

4. Now slide tailstock to the right and insert a test bar. with center pre drilled. You can start with a 1" cold rolled steel bar, or something better if you have it. Mount dial indicator on tool post or saddle, run indicator up and down length of bar should be close to parallel. Rotate bar 180 deg (roll chuck over by hand) confirm measurement is the same. If there is any error, from chuck to tailstock with indicator at tailstock end adjust tailstock to half the error, lock it and measure again. repeat until parallel to your requirements. Now for the proof, take a light cut from one end to the other, and measure with micrometer. make final adjustment as needed.

You can now test your peep sight if you wish, but you certainly don't need it here. And it just might be introducing an error.

Later down the track when your lathe castings have relaxed and you've acquired a better level you can fiddle with the levels but not really necessary unless you want to do toolroom quality work..
You only ever need the machine itself, a dial indicator and a level. to reset it if it ever gets out of whack, usually only after being moved, or a crash.

BTW the original factory settings were only ever valid in the factory, after it was shipped and relocated it should have been done again.

One other test you can do is place a largish piece in the chuck and face it, test with a straightedge for flat. this will confirm your saddle is square with the rest of the lathe.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Pierre thanks for the links.

Bob - I am still struggling with item 2 on your list. Doesn't seem to matter how much I turn the headstock, the damn thing still won't cut parallel!
Will keep at it tomorrow.
Am locking the carriage and using compound and cross slide only to eliminate any issues there may be with the carriage.
Headstock on mine has 4 locking cap screws and 2 adjusting cap screws. Both of the latter are on the motor side of the headstock. I am assuming there is a central pivot. Does that sound correct?

Regards
Doug
 

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
Doug, yes many or most lathes that I know of do have a central pivot. However not 100% sure if yours does. With the locking screws loosened set a dial indicator up to see if anything moves, then try the adjusting screws. hard to know what is going on without being there. can you take and post some pics. I know this is terribly frustrating, but it as to be done. Can you determine if the headstock is actually turning on its base as you adjust.. Can you grip a long bar in the chuck with some sticking out both ends, then try to move it by hand.

I don't think the carriage is your problem, don't worry about it, unless you have a specific reason to believe it's a problem. What we are trying to achieve is to get a line through the headstock to be parallel to the bed. The only way to achieve this is to rotate the headstock on its base, no other adjustment will fix it.
,
 
Last edited:

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
Doug, yes many or most lathes that I know of do have a central pivot. However not 100% sure if yours does. With the locking screws loosened set a dial indicator up to see if anything moves, then try the adjusting screws. hard to know what is going on without being there. can you take and post some pics. I know this is terribly frustrating, but it as to be done. Can you determine if the headstock is actually turning on its base as you adjust.. Can you grip a long bar in the chuck with some sticking out both ends, then try to move it by hand.

I don't think the carriage is your problem, don't worry about it, unless you have a specific reason to believe it's a problem. What we are trying to achieve is to get a line through the headstock to be parallel to the bed. The only way to achieve this is to rotate the headstock on its base, no other adjustment will fix it.
,

Doug, DO NOT use compound slide for this. Unlock carriage and use the long carriage feed, for your test cut. If you have long bar set in the chuck, you can set it up fairly well just by running a dial ind. mounted on the toolpost, run it up and down the length of the bar using carriage handwheel only, when you get it reading the same over the length, then take a test cut, for final adjustment.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Bob
Understood. I reverted to your method.
I had to move the headstock a surprising amount. It appeared to be very reluctant to do as told and each time when I tightened the locking cap screws it removed most of the gains but not by any predictable amount. So it was a very repetitive process.
Got it down to 1 thou out of parallel per inch over a 6" unsuported steel tube. Then 1 thou per inch over 18" of 2 1/2" alloy thick walled tube.
So very consistent.
Then trued tailstock to headstock centre to centre using razor blade. See Photo.
20180628_110141.jpg


Now for the big question, is 1 thou per inch out of parallel acceptable?
If am very wary of fiddling any more due to the amount of spring in the headstock. Any changes there are pure guess and hope as there is no consistency to the response especially with the amount of spring that seems to be in it when snugging down the locking cap screws.

Opinions please?
 

pdentrem

Active User
Registered
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
2,118
It is still too much, but now you know what to do and you can relax a bit. It would be better to achieve nearer to Zero across the whole length but it will take some time to do so. I would take a break and start to learn the machine and turn some small stuff and practice a while. Dial the rest in at your leisure but don’t wait too long.

Old computer printers are a good source of straight steel rods, some are ground only and some can have a high polish.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Pierre

Thanks for the advice. I will look for a broken printer and see if it has a suitable bar.

I do wonder if I am better off now to wait for summer. A soaking 45°C in February should allow everything to relax and adjust to its new home?

Regards
Doug
 

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
Doug, well done, it would appear that it has been out of alignment for some time. and It will take time to get it back, each time you make a major adjustment, you need to let the main castings relax again, because old stresses have been relieved and new ones applied.

If you're having trouble getting the headstock to move and stay in position as you tighten the bolts. maybe over time a lot of crud has filled the clearances around the bolts and won't allow things to move properly. Is it possible to lift the headstock off the lathe and check the mating surfaces, yes I know it's a big job, and must be done with extreme care.

Actually before you attempt that, completely remove the holding bolts, one at at time, and remove any crud that has accumulated in the holes. I expect you will get quite a bit of crud out. Replace each bolt before moving on to the next one. Then you will find that it will move better and stay moved as you tighten it up. If That is successful, you may not need to lift it.

One thou per inch is still quite a lot. but one thou per foot is pretty good and many people will accept that, but you should be able to get it to within one thou over the full length between centers. You make the call how good do you want it. think about the things you are going to machine, if you are making a bush that is one inch long an it has a taper of one thou, is that a problem, no not really.

Enjoy.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Bob, I am chuffed to get it to this point. It has been a multi-day (2 to 3 hours per day) to evaluate and then test then adjust it. As you say, it appears to have been out every which way for a long time.
At my measure point 1" out from the chuck there is a 50 to 70 thou spring back when I cinch down the right front cap screw. I tried using the 2 adjustor screws in a controlled fashion and it was just a hiding to nowhere. So then resorted to moving
the headstock by hand (easier than I expected) and just left the adjustor screws loose.

When I had it at 1 thou per inch I then refreshed the centre point on the homemade mild steel centre as per your instructions and zero'ed
the tailstock. As mentioned, there is a consistent 1 thou per inch taper with and without the tailstock. That in itself is encouraging as it is one
less complication.

By the way, the tailstock moved the opposite direction to what logic dictates would happen when turning the cap screws, is that normal?

I will do the de-gunking as you advise and then tackle the headstock again when time permits, perhaps tomorrow or the weekend.

Change of subject. I see on ebay there a SECO CNXG carbide tips which should suit my tip holders. I want to replace all the chipped tips that came with the lathe but cannot find a listing for the properties of these particular ones with the "X" code.
I would like medium <-> fine, would these be suitable?

Regards
Doug
 

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
Bob, I am chuffed to get it to this point. It has been a multi-day (2 to 3 hours per day) to evaluate and then test then adjust it. As you say, it appears to have been out every which way for a long time.
At my measure point 1" out from the chuck there is a 50 to 70 thou spring back when I cinch down the right front cap screw. I tried using the 2 adjustor screws in a controlled fashion and it was just a hiding to nowhere. So then resorted to moving
the headstock by hand (easier than I expected) and just left the adjustor screws loose.

When I had it at 1 thou per inch I then refreshed the centre point on the homemade mild steel centre as per your instructions and zero'ed
the tailstock. As mentioned, there is a consistent 1 thou per inch taper with and without the tailstock. That in itself is encouraging as it is one
less complication.

By the way, the tailstock moved the opposite direction to what logic dictates would happen when turning the cap screws, is that normal?

I will do the de-gunking as you advise and then tackle the headstock again when time permits, perhaps tomorrow or the weekend.

Change of subject. I see on ebay there a SECO CNXG carbide tips which should suit my tip holders. I want to replace all the chipped tips that came with the lathe but cannot find a listing for the properties of these particular ones with the "X" code.
I would like medium <-> fine, would these be suitable?

Regards
Doug
Doug, it's hard to comment on some of the problem you are having, without being there and seeing it myself.
I'm pleased that you have come so far at this point.

The tailstock screws on mine appear to move it towards you as you screw. them in, At least that is what the drawings would indicate, I have no idea what others do. I haven't as yet tried to adjust mine, as I haven't found the need.

In fact I have not yet made any attempt to test the squareness of my lathe since buying it and setting it up in my garage. I'm beginning to suspect it is out, a bit, but not as much as yours, but I was doing a job today and became aware that the headstock is not square to the cross slide. as it happens it is not critical to the job in hand, but none the less I shall have to attend to it, but it will have to wait until the job is finished

Unfortunately you are asking the wrong person for advice on carbide tips, I struggle to make sense of the codes. So far I have only bought few tip holders that came with a packet of tips, and that is what I use. I grew up on HSS as carbide was quite new and most of our machines were not fast enough, The lathe I worked on during may apprenticeship had a top speed of only 350 RPM. Most of the time I'm using my Diamond tangential tool holder from Eccentric Engineering, Never used one before, but had heard lots of good stories so bought a couple when I bought my lathe, and so far so good.

I suggest you start a new post asking for advice on tips, many of our members appear to be quite knowledgeable on the subject, but be prepared for some conflicting opinions, as choice of tip has many factors, including personal preference
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Pierre and Bob

Using Pierre's idea of a ground rod from a printer, I sacrificed a printer I had that was past its best and managed to get a rod whose ends are about 5/16" diameter but the body looks to be around 1/2" diameter.

It took me about 6 goes before I got the 3 jaw chuck to grip it true according to the dial indicator. The result was impressive, very gently turning the chuck showed no deflection at all!
Not believing what I was seeing and wondering if the pressure of the spring in the dial indicator was deflecting the bar, I presented the cutting tool to the bar and did some tests - turning the chuck using the key as a lever and doing so gently.
There is a 1 thou difference on the cross slide vernier between no contact and a tiny curl coming off the tool. So that would be a diameter runout of no more than 2 thou.
However I think it is less due to having to back off through the slack of the cross slide worm and then touch back on the rod again.
So I am calling it a 1 thou diameter run out at the bar length of 10" from the chuck jaw.
Unless I am barking up the wrong tree, I am very happy with that?

The body is currently covered in a soft brown foam like sponge - so I need to be able to get that off somehow without scratching the rod, which appears to be mild steel. I will try petrol and if that doesn't work then paint thinners.
The problem being I am very reluctant to take it out of the chuck now that I have it so nicely sitting true.

I am now confident of being able to set the Dial Indicator up at the RHS of the rod and turn the headstock to hopefully obtain almost no taper -
aiming for a lot less than 1 thou per inch!
Providing I can get the foam off and whatever glue, being able to run the carriage back and forth with the dial indicator
rubbing on the rod body should then tell me how well the carriage is behaving.

.
20180629_110457.jpg
20180629_110517.jpg
20180629_110726.jpg


Doubtless, I will then have to do a fresh centre point and re-zero the tailstock.

Regards
Doug
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Well, as of this arvo it was all down hill. No matter what I did, the final sit of the headstock could not be predicted when the 4 anchor cap screws were tightened. Every time this would draw the headstock towards the apron and induce a taper.

In the end, I backed them all off and left it sit like that till I get back to it tomorrow arvo.

The screws all seem to want to rotate the head to the right for some strange reason.

Sigh.
 

pdentrem

Active User
Registered
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
2,118
Hopefully the shaft is not knurled to grab the rubber coating. Seems you are getting handle on the lathe.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Pierre

It is not knurled, but does have a spiral like roughness on it. However, that is consistent so I can allow for it when using it as a parrallel test tool.

The thought occurred to me overnight that the adjuster screws could be part of the problem with the head. I will try backing them right off and see if that makes a difference.

I will also move the headstock multiple times through all of its travel. Hopefully that may make it relax and move any grit etc that could be causing the issue.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Pierre and Bob

SUCCESS! :courage:

After quite a few hours of perseverance I am pleased to report that I now have 1 thou in 5 1/2" (length of my unsupported alloy turning bar) taper.

So, I will be content with that. Trying to attain perfection would be an exercise in futility!

The printer rod was a huge help in that it gave me a reliable reference. Due to the spiral mark from the sponge coating, which was not going to come off without being aggressive, I chose 2 reference points and retracted the dial indicator probe when moving back and forth between the 2. It can be done accurately if you are gentle. The reduced diameter RHS end gave me a handy cross-check that the bar hadn't deflected with all the dial indicator probing that happened countless times today as I could gently revolve the chuck by hand and verify the runout had not altered.

It was a very frustrating experience due to the spring in the headstock. In the end I put a washer under the cap screw closest to the operator. This helped reduce the spring/unpredictable movement effect. Until I did that, I was on a hiding to nowhere!

Initially the other 3 cap screws were also having an effect on the spring back too, but after much moving of the headstock left to right whatever was causing the issue with them disappeared from the equation and it was just the front right cap screw that was the problem.

But I was still faced with 40 or so thou spring when backing the screw off to move the headstock. I discovered that if I left the other 3 loose and cinched down this one (front right) all the way I could then predict the end reading give or take a couple of thous, so had to keep at it until is landed at the the desired tolerance. Then a case of gently cinching up the other 3 in a regimented order every time. Bit like doing up the wheel nuts on your car in that set pattern.

Running between centres was not so successful as I have a 14 thou runout even after re-zeroing the tailstock using the razor blade method and a freshly turned centre point in the 3 jaw chuck.
The live centre point does not seem quite right - I think it is giving me a false zero - I need to take a very close look at it and even with 2 pairs of magnifying glasses on I can't focus on it - the joys of getting older!
So will need to find a magnifying glass.

I knew that bedding down a lathe was a precise affair but never imagined it could by this finicky. However, I do think there is a back story to the history of this lathe that I will probably never know.
 

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
G'day Doug, I'm back again, we went away for a quick trip, but back now. Looks like you are making progress, Tat one screw pulling it over all the time I'm wondering if I didn't have a depressed wear mark under the head and it was pulling in to that, however it appears that by putting a washer under it you fixed it, seams to prove a point.

One thou over 51/2 inches isn't bad it will do for now.

Time to move on and start using your new lathe, getting to know it and brushing up on turning skills.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Bob, thanks.

Wondered what happened to you. Thought I would give it a bit longer before getting worried.

A good training job for me will be to make the height setting devices that go on the quick change tool holders.
For some bizarre reason, all 4 of my ones are missing.

On 2 of the holders there is a running thread with an allen key recess, but no cap screw head. These look too short to me to do the job as there would not be enough thread to project above the height device for a back nut to lock it.
On the other 2 the running thread is missing altogether along with 2 square head cap screws on each holder.

See here for what I assume they should look like.
<http://www.bison-bial.com/spare-parts-and-accessories/u-6876/0>
Why buy them when I have a lathe and can make them!

So, do you have any idea of how tight a fit the skirt on them is in the 2 cam like fingers that rotate out from the head?
<https://www.cromwell.co.uk/shop/spindle-nose-and-workholding/quick-change-toolposts/t-00m-quick-change-toolpo-st/p/IND4454800K>
I would assume that they don't have to be a tight fit, because the lower finger would support the skirt, but, there is an upper finger and I doubt it is there for decoration?

Also, I went all over the QCT head trying to find any markings at all. There are none, likewise on the tool holders. You asked me about that quite a while back and I did not get to check it out till today.

Regards
Doug
 

tjb

Terry
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 3, 2017
Messages
543
Pierre and Bob

SUCCESS! :courage:

After quite a few hours of perseverance I am pleased to report that I now have 1 thou in 5 1/2" (length of my unsupported alloy turning bar) taper.

So, I will be content with that. Trying to attain perfection would be an exercise in futility!

The printer rod was a huge help in that it gave me a reliable reference. Due to the spiral mark from the sponge coating, which was not going to come off without being aggressive, I chose 2 reference points and retracted the dial indicator probe when moving back and forth between the 2. It can be done accurately if you are gentle. The reduced diameter RHS end gave me a handy cross-check that the bar hadn't deflected with all the dial indicator probing that happened countless times today as I could gently revolve the chuck by hand and verify the runout had not altered.

It was a very frustrating experience due to the spring in the headstock. In the end I put a washer under the cap screw closest to the operator. This helped reduce the spring/unpredictable movement effect. Until I did that, I was on a hiding to nowhere!

Initially the other 3 cap screws were also having an effect on the spring back too, but after much moving of the headstock left to right whatever was causing the issue with them disappeared from the equation and it was just the front right cap screw that was the problem.

But I was still faced with 40 or so thou spring when backing the screw off to move the headstock. I discovered that if I left the other 3 loose and cinched down this one (front right) all the way I could then predict the end reading give or take a couple of thous, so had to keep at it until is landed at the the desired tolerance. Then a case of gently cinching up the other 3 in a regimented order every time. Bit like doing up the wheel nuts on your car in that set pattern.

Running between centres was not so successful as I have a 14 thou runout even after re-zeroing the tailstock using the razor blade method and a freshly turned centre point in the 3 jaw chuck.
The live centre point does not seem quite right - I think it is giving me a false zero - I need to take a very close look at it and even with 2 pairs of magnifying glasses on I can't focus on it - the joys of getting older!
So will need to find a magnifying glass.

I knew that bedding down a lathe was a precise affair but never imagined it could by this finicky. However, I do think there is a back story to the history of this lathe that I will probably never know.
Congratulations!

I've been following this thread with curiosity. You've been getting great advice from obvious experts, and it's been a real education to me.

Hope you enjoy using your now-functional lathe.

Regards,
Terry
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Terry

Thanks. It has certainly been a learning experience, the path put before me by Bob and Pierre has undoubtedly helped a great deal. I won't call any of this "easy", but without their help it would have been much more prolonged and I would have had to discover for myself (the repetitive way) how to solve the problems by trial and error - probably lots of errors...... Without their help I most certainly would have not had the correct order to tackle the taper problem.
I had believed it was a bed twist due to an out of level issue, rather than the headstock alignment it actually was. This was from reading lots of "how to" information on the internet which almost all fixates on levelling to be the crucial issue for a lathe. I know now that it is just one factor and to paraphrase Bob, "it is a starting point, just get it reasonably level, then move on to the other adjustments that could have been fiddled with at some
time in your lathe's past".
For sure, the worst issue for me has been that spring back when trying to aim the headstock. Until such time as I worked out how to deal with those cap screws that hold down the headstock and a method of allowing for the movement when they were tightened cost me many hours.

Regards
Doug.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tjb

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
Bob, thanks.

Wondered what happened to you. Thought I would give it a bit longer before getting worried.

A good training job for me will be to make the height setting devices that go on the quick change tool holders.
For some bizarre reason, all 4 of my ones are missing.

On 2 of the holders there is a running thread with an allen key recess, but no cap screw head. These look too short to me to do the job as there would not be enough thread to project above the height device for a back nut to lock it.
On the other 2 the running thread is missing altogether along with 2 square head cap screws on each holder.

See here for what I assume they should look like.
<http://www.bison-bial.com/spare-parts-and-accessories/u-6876/0>
Why buy them when I have a lathe and can make them!

So, do you have any idea of how tight a fit the skirt on them is in the 2 cam like fingers that rotate out from the head?
<https://www.cromwell.co.uk/shop/spindle-nose-and-workholding/quick-change-toolposts/t-00m-quick-change-toolpo-st/p/IND4454800K>
I would assume that they don't have to be a tight fit, because the lower finger would support the skirt, but, there is an upper finger and I doubt it is there for decoration?

Also, I went all over the QCT head trying to find any markings at all. There are none, likewise on the tool holders. You asked me about that quite a while back and I did not get to check it out till today.

Regards
Doug
Doug you have listed two different brands. There are quite a few of this design made by different companies in Europe, and they are not all interchangeable, so be careful. I'll have to dig mine out, it's a different brand again, I'll try to get some dimensions, and maye a pic or two The two flanges are actually on a helix and work like a cam, You would have to make them out of some pretty tough steel because they are hardened, A piece of axle steel would be good.

Send me a pic of yours so I can see what is missing, also note what the threads are, because I reckon I can get spares of some of the parts, if they are the same as mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Z2V

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Bob.

I will get some photos tomorrow. I need to see if I can find some regular axle steel. That huge 2 1/2" inch dia one I have is almost mild steel in the centre so will not be suitable.

I realised I showed 2 different brands, that was just for quick reference. However I have no idea of what the correct version for mine would be. Chances are it came from Paramount Browns or Modern Tools(?) in Adelaide.

Regards
Doug.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Bob. In the meantime, here is a photo I just found of one of the tool holders. I note there is a letter stamped on the inner face. Hopefully there is more and it will mean something.
20180617_164703.jpg


Here is the normal view (with that SECO tip holder).
20180620_134735.jpg


Although I am clicking on "full image" for some reason this forum is displaying the photos in reduced size, so you cannot see the markings in the first photo.

Doug
 

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
Doug,
it may have although I have not seen that style in either shop, but that don't mean they haven't got them or maybe used to have them. If it is unbranded then maybe its a cheap chinese knockoff that is no longer around. They seem to have all gone to the Aloris style, which is much easier to get and a lot cheaper.

that larger dia shaft you have maybe soft in the middle but it will still be tough, and you can always heat treat it after machining, but it might be easier to get a smaller dia one from a car mechanic.
This appears to be a chinese knockoff of the American Aloris, which is what I have, quite happy with it. The genuine Aloris is about 50 to 80% dearer depends on any specials at the time. Note that your style tool post and holders cannot mixed with Aloris type, they are totally incompatible.

It is much easier to get spare tool holders and other parts for the Aloris type, they are also a simpler design making them more suitable to be made at home, although you do really need a milling machine or a shaper. Or milling capability on the lathe as I'm working on , but it will be while yet.
 

Downunder Bob

H-M Supporter - Sustaining Member
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter ($50)
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
1,166
Bob. In the meantime, here is a photo I just found of one of the tool holders. I note there is a letter stamped on the inner face. Hopefully there is more and it will mean something.
View attachment 270826

Here is the normal view (with that SECO tip holder).
View attachment 270827

Although I am clicking on "full image" for some reason this forum is displaying the photos in reduced size, so you cannot see the markings in the first photo.

Doug
I ntice in that second photo that the tool is not setup correctly, you should loosen the 3 clamping screws and slide the tool to the right so that the back end is fully under the last screw, the way it is, it's not clamping correctly, it even looks as if that last screw is bent from using it this way.

Also how are you lockingh the tool holder onto the tool post without the clamping piece.
 

dgrev

Active Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
140
Bob

I noticed that and corrected it.

Because the height stop is missing, I have to set the tip height to the live centre point each time I change tools. It is a nuisance for sure.

Doug
 
[5] [7]
Top