开云体育

Good Morning, Frank:
I managed to get the headstock shimmed dead center with the tail stock height. I placed a length of 12L14 between centers and indicated along the top and rear of the stock. The indicator moved less than 1/2 of 0.001", which I felt was fairly accurate. I took a light test cut of 0.010" and got a nice, smooth cut with no chatter, which was caused by the height difference originally. Here is my current situation: Both ends of the stock are spot on when miked, but the center of the stock is about 0.007" larger. Any thoughts as to corrective action, or am I looking for too great precision in this machine? Best regards, Nick
Frank Hoose <fhoose@...> wrote:Well, you needed an excuse to buy a mill anyway. You
won't regret having one.

Frank Hoose


--- Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@...> wrote:

Thanks for the site Frank, now all I need do is
purchase a mill and some extras to accomplish this
task! Nick
Frank Hoose <fhoose@...> wrote:Rick Kruger
has posted some info on aligning the ts:

--- Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@...> wrote:

Roy:
Should the material be removed from the base

or

the tail stock casting, or both? I imagine it will
require setting either piece accurately in all

three

planes prior to cutting. How should the base be
checked on the lathe prior to milling? What

methods

have others used to determine squareness in regard
to the bed? I appreciate all your help in getting
this lathe up to an acceptable level of accuracy.
Best regards, Nick
"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@...>"
<roylowenthal@...> wrote: My choice would

be

cutting on the tailstock. A number of people
have found that the tailstock machining is not
parallel to the
bed/headstock axis. You've now got room to

correct

errors without
having to shim the tailstock after machining.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "ntdefeo
<ntdefeo@y...>"
<ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Good Afternoon All:

Finally got most kinks out of my alignment

problems with

replacement parts from Homier. Headstock,

saddle,

cross-slide and

compound assemblies were replaced. Accuracy is

dramatically
improved,

although new problem is headstock is 0.015"

lower

than the
tailstock.

What would be the preferred method of

correction?

Should I shim the

headstock, and if so, is there a difference in

brass vs. steel
shims?

Or, should the tailstock base be carefully cut

down? Replacement of

the parts has improved accuracy greatly, but due

to this height

difference, I get a slight chatter and taper

0.0055" on a 9.5"
length

of stock. I attribute the chatter to the height

difference as the

tool advances toward the headstock. If you

advise

that shimming the

headstock is the preferred method, I would also

consider upgrading

the spindle bearing to ABEC-3 units, in

contemplation of eventually

using a 4 or 5" 4-jaw chuck on this lathe. Have

any of you changed

these bearings? If so, any notable difference in

how the lathe

sounds/operates? Any suggestions/recommendations

would be greatly

appreciated.

Regards,
Nick

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up

now

[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up
now.


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

Well, I guess if you had both models sitting side by
side you could say that the older model is dark blue
and the new model is light blue. But without the other
one to compare to, you could say the the new one is
dark blue.

Here are links to the
reviews of the new and old style:




lathe.com/Mini_lathe/Reviews/Homier_7x12/Homier_7x12_p1.htm

Frank Hoose



--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Craig C. Hopewell
<chopewel@r...>" <chopewel@r...> wrote:

Charlie and Frank,

When speaking to Homier customer service the question always asked

is

"dark blue or light blue". Having never seen both colors it is
difficult to answer. If they are trying to determine whether a
machine is old-style or new-style there are better criteria than
color, e.g., the set screw dials. If new-style machines came in

two

colors, I still could not answer for the same reason and the fact
that I would call my new-style machine medium blue. In any event,
Homier sent the correct chip tray based upon the order date.

Frank,

Do you have a picture of both colors? Are the colors unique to the
style?

Craig

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Charlie Starks"

<cstarks@c...>

wrote:

Hi Frank, is the dark blue one the new version?

Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: Frank Hoose

The quality varies from machine to machine, but from
what I have seen and heard, has steadily gotten better
over the last few years. The new ones are usually very
good right out of the box, although they still require
some adjustments and TLC for best performance.

The early Homier lathes were from a different
manufacturer. The good ones are pretty nice, but I
heard that they had a lot of QC problems and I believe
that was a factor in why Homier switched to the Sieg
brand.

Frank Hoose


--- "Craig C. Hopewell
<chopewel@r...>"
<chopewel@r...> wrote:
> I can appreciate your concerns completely and had
> for some months
> prior to purchasing a Homier 7X12 been paralyzed due
> to same. Any of
> the 7X1x lathes will be somewhat deficient if real
> precision is to be
> expected. The choices really come down to $$$; a
> Homier at about $360
> delivered, a Lathemaster at over $700 delivered, a
> Prazzi at some low
> to mid thousands of dollars, or a Myford at over
> $7000 in this size
> class.
>
> Craig
>



[

Charlie and Frank,

When speaking to Homier customer service the question always asked is
"dark blue or light blue". Having never seen both colors it is
difficult to answer. If they are trying to determine whether a
machine is old-style or new-style there are better criteria than
color, e.g., the set screw dials. If new-style machines came in two
colors, I still could not answer for the same reason and the fact
that I would call my new-style machine medium blue. In any event,
Homier sent the correct chip tray based upon the order date.

Frank,

Do you have a picture of both colors? Are the colors unique to the
style?

Craig

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Charlie Starks" <cstarks@c...>
wrote:

Hi Frank, is the dark blue one the new version?

Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: Frank Hoose

The quality varies from machine to machine, but from
what I have seen and heard, has steadily gotten better
over the last few years. The new ones are usually very
good right out of the box, although they still require
some adjustments and TLC for best performance.

The early Homier lathes were from a different
manufacturer. The good ones are pretty nice, but I
heard that they had a lot of QC problems and I believe
that was a factor in why Homier switched to the Sieg
brand.

Frank Hoose


--- "Craig C. Hopewell
<chopewel@r...>"
<chopewel@r...> wrote:
> I can appreciate your concerns completely and had
> for some months
> prior to purchasing a Homier 7X12 been paralyzed due
> to same. Any of
> the 7X1x lathes will be somewhat deficient if real
> precision is to be
> expected. The choices really come down to $$$; a
> Homier at about $360
> delivered, a Lathemaster at over $700 delivered, a
> Prazzi at some low
> to mid thousands of dollars, or a Myford at over
> $7000 in this size
> class.
>
> Craig
>



[

Hi Frank, is the dark blue one the new version?

Charlie

Well, you needed an excuse to buy a mill anyway. You
won't regret having one.

Frank Hoose


--- Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@...> wrote:

Thanks for the site Frank, now all I need do is
purchase a mill and some extras to accomplish this
task! Nick
Frank Hoose <fhoose@...> wrote:Rick Kruger
has posted some info on aligning the ts:

--- Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@...> wrote:

Roy:
Should the material be removed from the base

or

the tail stock casting, or both? I imagine it will
require setting either piece accurately in all

three

planes prior to cutting. How should the base be
checked on the lathe prior to milling? What

methods

have others used to determine squareness in regard
to the bed? I appreciate all your help in getting
this lathe up to an acceptable level of accuracy.
Best regards, Nick
"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@...>"
<roylowenthal@...> wrote: My choice would

be

cutting on the tailstock. A number of people
have found that the tailstock machining is not
parallel to the
bed/headstock axis. You've now got room to

correct

errors without
having to shim the tailstock after machining.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "ntdefeo
<ntdefeo@y...>"
<ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Good Afternoon All:

Finally got most kinks out of my alignment

problems with

replacement parts from Homier. Headstock,

saddle,

cross-slide and

compound assemblies were replaced. Accuracy is

dramatically
improved,

although new problem is headstock is 0.015"

lower

than the
tailstock.

What would be the preferred method of

correction?

Should I shim the

headstock, and if so, is there a difference in

brass vs. steel
shims?

Or, should the tailstock base be carefully cut

down? Replacement of

the parts has improved accuracy greatly, but due

to this height

difference, I get a slight chatter and taper

0.0055" on a 9.5"
length

of stock. I attribute the chatter to the height

difference as the

tool advances toward the headstock. If you

advise

that shimming the

headstock is the preferred method, I would also

consider upgrading

the spindle bearing to ABEC-3 units, in

contemplation of eventually

using a 4 or 5" 4-jaw chuck on this lathe. Have

any of you changed

these bearings? If so, any notable difference in

how the lathe

sounds/operates? Any suggestions/recommendations

would be greatly

appreciated.

Regards,
Nick

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up

now

[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up
now.


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.

The quality varies from machine to machine, but from
what I have seen and heard, has steadily gotten better
over the last few years. The new ones are usually very
good right out of the box, although they still require
some adjustments and TLC for best performance.

The early Homier lathes were from a different
manufacturer. The good ones are pretty nice, but I
heard that they had a lot of QC problems and I believe
that was a factor in why Homier switched to the Sieg
brand.

Frank Hoose


--- "Craig C. Hopewell
<chopewel@...>"
<chopewel@...> wrote:

I can appreciate your concerns completely and had
for some months
prior to purchasing a Homier 7X12 been paralyzed due
to same. Any of
the 7X1x lathes will be somewhat deficient if real
precision is to be
expected. The choices really come down to $$$; a
Homier at about $360
delivered, a Lathemaster at over $700 delivered, a
Prazzi at some low
to mid thousands of dollars, or a Myford at over
$7000 in this size
class.

Craig

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "jackasspkd
<leguess1@j...>"
<leguess1@j...> wrote:

I realize a new lathe needs to be adjusted and

tweaked but yall are

getting into milling and shimming a new lathe to

get it to line up

right. Is this typical for these Asian lathes. If

I couldnt get one

to adjust right I would send it back for another

lathe or for a

refund. I dont want to have to buy a milling

machine to start taking

metal off of a brand new lathe.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.

Shimming is valid; I suspect they'd replace your lathe with
current production, not an exact duplicate of original. Shimming is
also much easier to undo than cutting ;-)

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Point well taken Roy, although I have contacted Homier several

times, and wonder if I do exercise the option to return the lathe, if
they will give me the "newer" style 7 X 12, or another of the older
style, which is what I have. While both have their shortcomings, the
older Homier does have some additional features not found on the
newer style: oil ports, way wipers and lead screw extension. I will
attempt to shim the headstock, as this seems to be far less
complicated than cutting the tail stock base, as the tail stock does
indicate true in all three planes. Regards, Nick

"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@y...>" <roylowenthal@y...> wrote: My

thinking on a flycutter was primarily for surface finish. With

either an endmill or a flycutter it's going to require multiple
passes of light cuts. With no rational reason, I prefer the
appearance of the flycut surface; it's strictly aesthetics :-)
There is the issue of why not make it Homier's problem? I know
some of us (me), suffer from "male answer syndrome" and hate to

leave

a problem personally unsolved. However, the posts pointing out

that

this is a vendor QC problem, raise a valid point. As delivered,

the

lathe was unsatisfactory; the vendor's low budget "fix" has not
corrected the problem; time for a refund or replacement machine.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@y...>

wrote:

Roy:
I am wondering if using end mills might be better suited in

correcting the base, due to the limited amount of stock that needs

to

be removed from each surface, especially when quasi machining in a
horizontal plane. I have had some experience using flycutters years
ago (Bridgeport mill), and wonder if the milling attachment can
withstand the forces produced by the flycutter. The milling
attachment seems to be the most cost effective way to go, requiring
just a good angle plate and a suitable vice for the compound
assembly. Thanks for the excellent tip on getting this corrected

with

a different method! Regards, Nick

"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@y...>" <roylowenthal@y...> wrote:

A

milling machine is the nicest way, but, a cross-slide milling

attachment (Varmint Al's) and a fly cutter will work. Once the
errors are "mapped," mount the pieces (with shims) to indicate

the

same errors. Take light cuts until the whole surface is

machined,

reinstall & re-measure; correct any errors that crept in.

Roy
<<SNIP>>

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of

Service.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

Point well taken Roy, although I have contacted Homier several times, and wonder if I do exercise the option to return the lathe, if they will give me the "newer" style 7 X 12, or another of the older style, which is what I have. While both have their shortcomings, the older Homier does have some additional features not found on the newer style: oil ports, way wipers and lead screw extension. I will attempt to shim the headstock, as this seems to be far less complicated than cutting the tail stock base, as the tail stock does indicate true in all three planes. Regards, Nick
"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@...>" <roylowenthal@...> wrote: My thinking on a flycutter was primarily for surface finish. With
either an endmill or a flycutter it's going to require multiple
passes of light cuts. With no rational reason, I prefer the
appearance of the flycut surface; it's strictly aesthetics :-)
There is the issue of why not make it Homier's problem? I know
some of us (me), suffer from "male answer syndrome" and hate to leave
a problem personally unsolved. However, the posts pointing out that
this is a vendor QC problem, raise a valid point. As delivered, the
lathe was unsatisfactory; the vendor's low budget "fix" has not
corrected the problem; time for a refund or replacement machine.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Roy:
I am wondering if using end mills might be better suited in

correcting the base, due to the limited amount of stock that needs to
be removed from each surface, especially when quasi machining in a
horizontal plane. I have had some experience using flycutters years
ago (Bridgeport mill), and wonder if the milling attachment can
withstand the forces produced by the flycutter. The milling
attachment seems to be the most cost effective way to go, requiring
just a good angle plate and a suitable vice for the compound
assembly. Thanks for the excellent tip on getting this corrected with
a different method! Regards, Nick

"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@y...>" <roylowenthal@y...> wrote: A

milling machine is the nicest way, but, a cross-slide milling

attachment (Varmint Al's) and a fly cutter will work. Once the
errors are "mapped," mount the pieces (with shims) to indicate the
same errors. Take light cuts until the whole surface is machined,
reinstall & re-measure; correct any errors that crept in.

Roy
<<SNIP>>

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

My thinking on a flycutter was primarily for surface finish. With
either an endmill or a flycutter it's going to require multiple
passes of light cuts. With no rational reason, I prefer the
appearance of the flycut surface; it's strictly aesthetics :-)
There is the issue of why not make it Homier's problem? I know
some of us (me), suffer from "male answer syndrome" and hate to leave
a problem personally unsolved. However, the posts pointing out that
this is a vendor QC problem, raise a valid point. As delivered, the
lathe was unsatisfactory; the vendor's low budget "fix" has not
corrected the problem; time for a refund or replacement machine.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Roy:
I am wondering if using end mills might be better suited in

correcting the base, due to the limited amount of stock that needs to
be removed from each surface, especially when quasi machining in a
horizontal plane. I have had some experience using flycutters years
ago (Bridgeport mill), and wonder if the milling attachment can
withstand the forces produced by the flycutter. The milling
attachment seems to be the most cost effective way to go, requiring
just a good angle plate and a suitable vice for the compound
assembly. Thanks for the excellent tip on getting this corrected with
a different method! Regards, Nick

"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@y...>" <roylowenthal@y...> wrote: A

milling machine is the nicest way, but, a cross-slide milling

attachment (Varmint Al's) and a fly cutter will work. Once the
errors are "mapped," mount the pieces (with shims) to indicate the
same errors. Take light cuts until the whole surface is machined,
reinstall & re-measure; correct any errors that crept in.

Roy
<<SNIP>>

My thinking on a flycutter was primarily for surface finish. With
either an endmill or a flycutter it's going to require multiple
passes of light cuts. With no rational reason, I prefer the
appearance of the flycut surface; it's strictly aesthetics :-)
There is the issue of why not make it Homier's problem? I know
some of us (me), suffer from "male answer syndrome" and hate to leave
a problem personally unsolved. However, the posts pointing out that
this is a vendor QC problem, raise a valid point. As delivered, the
lathe was unsatisfactory; the vendor's low budget "fix" has not
corrected the problem; time for a refund or replacement machine.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Roy:
I am wondering if using end mills might be better suited in

correcting the base, due to the limited amount of stock that needs to
be removed from each surface, especially when quasi machining in a
horizontal plane. I have had some experience using flycutters years
ago (Bridgeport mill), and wonder if the milling attachment can
withstand the forces produced by the flycutter. The milling
attachment seems to be the most cost effective way to go, requiring
just a good angle plate and a suitable vice for the compound
assembly. Thanks for the excellent tip on getting this corrected with
a different method! Regards, Nick

"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@y...>" <roylowenthal@y...> wrote: A

milling machine is the nicest way, but, a cross-slide milling

attachment (Varmint Al's) and a fly cutter will work. Once the
errors are "mapped," mount the pieces (with shims) to indicate the
same errors. Take light cuts until the whole surface is machined,
reinstall & re-measure; correct any errors that crept in.

Roy
<<SNIP>>

I can appreciate your concerns completely and had for some months
prior to purchasing a Homier 7X12 been paralyzed due to same. Any of
the 7X1x lathes will be somewhat deficient if real precision is to be
expected. The choices really come down to $$$; a Homier at about $360
delivered, a Lathemaster at over $700 delivered, a Prazzi at some low
to mid thousands of dollars, or a Myford at over $7000 in this size
class.

Craig

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "jackasspkd <leguess1@j...>"
<leguess1@j...> wrote:

I realize a new lathe needs to be adjusted and tweaked but yall are
getting into milling and shimming a new lathe to get it to line up
right. Is this typical for these Asian lathes. If I couldnt get one
to adjust right I would send it back for another lathe or for a
refund. I dont want to have to buy a milling machine to start taking
metal off of a brand new lathe.

I guess it all comes down to this: If money and space were no object, then a brand new South Bend 10" or one of the other lathes out there would fill the bill. On the other hand, for hobby/limited use, one of the bigger lathes is a considerable investment, not to mention cost of shipping and setting up such a machine. Given the small cost of these asian made lathes, even with their inherent inaccuracies, one would be hard pressed to justify purchasing a larger lathe, unless the intent is a start-up manufacturing shop, or serious production work. Regards, Nick
"jackasspkd <leguess1@...>" <leguess1@...> wrote:I realize a new lathe needs to be adjusted and tweaked but yall are
getting into milling and shimming a new lathe to get it to line up
right. Is this typical for these Asian lathes. If I couldnt get one
to adjust right I would send it back for another lathe or for a
refund. I dont want to have to buy a milling machine to start taking
metal off of a brand new lathe.


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

I realize a new lathe needs to be adjusted and tweaked but yall are
getting into milling and shimming a new lathe to get it to line up
right. Is this typical for these Asian lathes. If I couldnt get one
to adjust right I would send it back for another lathe or for a
refund. I dont want to have to buy a milling machine to start taking
metal off of a brand new lathe.

Roy:
I am wondering if using end mills might be better suited in correcting the base, due to the limited amount of stock that needs to be removed from each surface, especially when quasi machining in a horizontal plane. I have had some experience using flycutters years ago (Bridgeport mill), and wonder if the milling attachment can withstand the forces produced by the flycutter. The milling attachment seems to be the most cost effective way to go, requiring just a good angle plate and a suitable vice for the compound assembly. Thanks for the excellent tip on getting this corrected with a different method! Regards, Nick
"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@...>" <roylowenthal@...> wrote: A milling machine is the nicest way, but, a cross-slide milling
attachment (Varmint Al's) and a fly cutter will work. Once the
errors are "mapped," mount the pieces (with shims) to indicate the
same errors. Take light cuts until the whole surface is machined,
reinstall & re-measure; correct any errors that crept in.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Thanks for the site Frank, now all I need do is purchase a mill and

some extras to accomplish this task! Nick

Frank Hoose <fhoose@y...> wrote:Rick Kruger has posted some info

on aligning the ts:

lstock/BaseMod/MillingBase.html

--- Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Roy:
Should the material be removed from the base or
the tail stock casting, or both? I imagine it will
require setting either piece accurately in all three
planes prior to cutting. How should the base be
checked on the lathe prior to milling? What methods
have others used to determine squareness in regard
to the bed? I appreciate all your help in getting
this lathe up to an acceptable level of accuracy.
Best regards, Nick
"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@y...>"
<roylowenthal@y...> wrote: My choice would be
cutting on the tailstock. A number of people
have found that the tailstock machining is not
parallel to the
bed/headstock axis. You've now got room to correct
errors without
having to shim the tailstock after machining.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "ntdefeo
<ntdefeo@y...>"
<ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Good Afternoon All:

Finally got most kinks out of my alignment

problems with

replacement parts from Homier. Headstock, saddle,

cross-slide and

compound assemblies were replaced. Accuracy is

dramatically
improved,

although new problem is headstock is 0.015" lower

than the
tailstock.

What would be the preferred method of correction?

Should I shim the

headstock, and if so, is there a difference in

brass vs. steel
shims?

Or, should the tailstock base be carefully cut

down? Replacement of

the parts has improved accuracy greatly, but due

to this height

difference, I get a slight chatter and taper

0.0055" on a 9.5"
length

of stock. I attribute the chatter to the height

difference as the

tool advances toward the headstock. If you advise

that shimming the

headstock is the preferred method, I would also

consider upgrading

the spindle bearing to ABEC-3 units, in

contemplation of eventually

using a 4 or 5" 4-jaw chuck on this lathe. Have

any of you changed

these bearings? If so, any notable difference in

how the lathe

sounds/operates? Any suggestions/recommendations

would be greatly

appreciated.

Regards,
Nick

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of

Service.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

I think this a case of one gets what one pays for.

There are some nice German lathes of a similar size but four to five times
the price, at least in the UK.

For many hobbyist buying cheap and getting it right is part of the fun.

A milling machine is the nicest way, but, a cross-slide milling
attachment (Varmint Al's) and a fly cutter will work. Once the
errors are "mapped," mount the pieces (with shims) to indicate the
same errors. Take light cuts until the whole surface is machined,
reinstall & re-measure; correct any errors that crept in.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Thanks for the site Frank, now all I need do is purchase a mill and

some extras to accomplish this task! Nick

Frank Hoose <fhoose@y...> wrote:Rick Kruger has posted some info

on aligning the ts:

lstock/BaseMod/MillingBase.html

--- Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Roy:
Should the material be removed from the base or
the tail stock casting, or both? I imagine it will
require setting either piece accurately in all three
planes prior to cutting. How should the base be
checked on the lathe prior to milling? What methods
have others used to determine squareness in regard
to the bed? I appreciate all your help in getting
this lathe up to an acceptable level of accuracy.
Best regards, Nick
"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@y...>"
<roylowenthal@y...> wrote: My choice would be
cutting on the tailstock. A number of people
have found that the tailstock machining is not
parallel to the
bed/headstock axis. You've now got room to correct
errors without
having to shim the tailstock after machining.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "ntdefeo
<ntdefeo@y...>"
<ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Good Afternoon All:

Finally got most kinks out of my alignment

problems with

replacement parts from Homier. Headstock, saddle,

cross-slide and

compound assemblies were replaced. Accuracy is

dramatically
improved,

although new problem is headstock is 0.015" lower

than the
tailstock.

What would be the preferred method of correction?

Should I shim the

headstock, and if so, is there a difference in

brass vs. steel
shims?

Or, should the tailstock base be carefully cut

down? Replacement of

the parts has improved accuracy greatly, but due

to this height

difference, I get a slight chatter and taper

0.0055" on a 9.5"
length

of stock. I attribute the chatter to the height

difference as the

tool advances toward the headstock. If you advise

that shimming the

headstock is the preferred method, I would also

consider upgrading

the spindle bearing to ABEC-3 units, in

contemplation of eventually

using a 4 or 5" 4-jaw chuck on this lathe. Have

any of you changed

these bearings? If so, any notable difference in

how the lathe

sounds/operates? Any suggestions/recommendations

would be greatly

appreciated.

Regards,
Nick

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of

Service.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

Thanks for the site Frank, now all I need do is purchase a mill and some extras to accomplish this task! Nick
Frank Hoose <fhoose@...> wrote:Rick Kruger has posted some info on aligning the ts:



--- Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@...> wrote:

Roy:
Should the material be removed from the base or
the tail stock casting, or both? I imagine it will
require setting either piece accurately in all three
planes prior to cutting. How should the base be
checked on the lathe prior to milling? What methods
have others used to determine squareness in regard
to the bed? I appreciate all your help in getting
this lathe up to an acceptable level of accuracy.
Best regards, Nick
"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@...>"
<roylowenthal@...> wrote: My choice would be
cutting on the tailstock. A number of people
have found that the tailstock machining is not
parallel to the
bed/headstock axis. You've now got room to correct
errors without
having to shim the tailstock after machining.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "ntdefeo
<ntdefeo@y...>"
<ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Good Afternoon All:

Finally got most kinks out of my alignment

problems with

replacement parts from Homier. Headstock, saddle,

cross-slide and

compound assemblies were replaced. Accuracy is

dramatically
improved,

although new problem is headstock is 0.015" lower

than the
tailstock.

What would be the preferred method of correction?

Should I shim the

headstock, and if so, is there a difference in

brass vs. steel
shims?

Or, should the tailstock base be carefully cut

down? Replacement of

the parts has improved accuracy greatly, but due

to this height

difference, I get a slight chatter and taper

0.0055" on a 9.5"
length

of stock. I attribute the chatter to the height

difference as the

tool advances toward the headstock. If you advise

that shimming the

headstock is the preferred method, I would also

consider upgrading

the spindle bearing to ABEC-3 units, in

contemplation of eventually

using a 4 or 5" 4-jaw chuck on this lathe. Have

any of you changed

these bearings? If so, any notable difference in

how the lathe

sounds/operates? Any suggestions/recommendations

would be greatly

appreciated.

Regards,
Nick

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

Rick Kruger has posted some info on aligning the ts:



--- Nick DeFeo <ntdefeo@...> wrote:

Roy:
Should the material be removed from the base or
the tail stock casting, or both? I imagine it will
require setting either piece accurately in all three
planes prior to cutting. How should the base be
checked on the lathe prior to milling? What methods
have others used to determine squareness in regard
to the bed? I appreciate all your help in getting
this lathe up to an acceptable level of accuracy.
Best regards, Nick
"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@...>"
<roylowenthal@...> wrote: My choice would be
cutting on the tailstock. A number of people
have found that the tailstock machining is not
parallel to the
bed/headstock axis. You've now got room to correct
errors without
having to shim the tailstock after machining.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "ntdefeo
<ntdefeo@y...>"
<ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Good Afternoon All:

Finally got most kinks out of my alignment

problems with

replacement parts from Homier. Headstock, saddle,

cross-slide and

compound assemblies were replaced. Accuracy is

dramatically
improved,

although new problem is headstock is 0.015" lower

than the
tailstock.

What would be the preferred method of correction?

Should I shim the

headstock, and if so, is there a difference in

brass vs. steel
shims?

Or, should the tailstock base be carefully cut

down? Replacement of

the parts has improved accuracy greatly, but due

to this height

difference, I get a slight chatter and taper

0.0055" on a 9.5"
length

of stock. I attribute the chatter to the height

difference as the

tool advances toward the headstock. If you advise

that shimming the

headstock is the preferred method, I would also

consider upgrading

the spindle bearing to ABEC-3 units, in

contemplation of eventually

using a 4 or 5" 4-jaw chuck on this lathe. Have

any of you changed

these bearings? If so, any notable difference in

how the lathe

sounds/operates? Any suggestions/recommendations

would be greatly

appreciated.

Regards,
Nick

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.

Roy:
Should the material be removed from the base or the tail stock casting, or both? I imagine it will require setting either piece accurately in all three planes prior to cutting. How should the base be checked on the lathe prior to milling? What methods have others used to determine squareness in regard to the bed? I appreciate all your help in getting this lathe up to an acceptable level of accuracy. Best regards, Nick
"roylowenthal <roylowenthal@...>" <roylowenthal@...> wrote: My choice would be cutting on the tailstock. A number of people
have found that the tailstock machining is not parallel to the
bed/headstock axis. You've now got room to correct errors without
having to shim the tailstock after machining.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "ntdefeo <ntdefeo@y...>"
<ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Good Afternoon All:

Finally got most kinks out of my alignment problems with
replacement parts from Homier. Headstock, saddle, cross-slide and
compound assemblies were replaced. Accuracy is dramatically

improved,

although new problem is headstock is 0.015" lower than the

tailstock.

What would be the preferred method of correction? Should I shim the
headstock, and if so, is there a difference in brass vs. steel

shims?

Or, should the tailstock base be carefully cut down? Replacement of
the parts has improved accuracy greatly, but due to this height
difference, I get a slight chatter and taper 0.0055" on a 9.5"

length

of stock. I attribute the chatter to the height difference as the
tool advances toward the headstock. If you advise that shimming the
headstock is the preferred method, I would also consider upgrading
the spindle bearing to ABEC-3 units, in contemplation of eventually
using a 4 or 5" 4-jaw chuck on this lathe. Have any of you changed
these bearings? If so, any notable difference in how the lathe
sounds/operates? Any suggestions/recommendations would be greatly
appreciated.

Regards,
Nick

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
7x12minilathe-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

My choice would be cutting on the tailstock. A number of people
have found that the tailstock machining is not parallel to the
bed/headstock axis. You've now got room to correct errors without
having to shim the tailstock after machining.

Roy
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "ntdefeo <ntdefeo@y...>"
<ntdefeo@y...> wrote:

Good Afternoon All:

Finally got most kinks out of my alignment problems with
replacement parts from Homier. Headstock, saddle, cross-slide and
compound assemblies were replaced. Accuracy is dramatically

improved,

although new problem is headstock is 0.015" lower than the

tailstock.

What would be the preferred method of correction? Should I shim the
headstock, and if so, is there a difference in brass vs. steel

shims?

Or, should the tailstock base be carefully cut down? Replacement of
the parts has improved accuracy greatly, but due to this height
difference, I get a slight chatter and taper 0.0055" on a 9.5"

length

of stock. I attribute the chatter to the height difference as the
tool advances toward the headstock. If you advise that shimming the
headstock is the preferred method, I would also consider upgrading
the spindle bearing to ABEC-3 units, in contemplation of eventually
using a 4 or 5" 4-jaw chuck on this lathe. Have any of you changed
these bearings? If so, any notable difference in how the lathe
sounds/operates? Any suggestions/recommendations would be greatly
appreciated.

Regards,
Nick