开云体育

Retaining the same dimensions you gave, could you do it on a 7X10?

Frankie

So, that would imply, as to lathe size, the bigger the better, no?

Frankie

With all the talk about bed length, it seems to me the only space
that matters is how much space you have between the work piece in a
chuck and tool bit in the compound
Frankie

Frankie,

For the lack of a better example, I'll try this one...

Imagine you had a big 1" bolt, 12" long. You want to face the underside of the head, and turn the flats off the bottom 1/8" of the hex portion.

You could hold the top portion of the bolt head in the chuck, and support the threaded end of the bolt at the tailstock. All of the work would take place within a 1" area near the chuck, but the between center space allows the full length handling of the project.

Paul, Central OR


lathechuck wrote:

No...

With the HF 7x10, the working distance with the chuck mounted is more like 8". They use the older convention of distance between tapered centers mounted at both the headstock and tailstock to get 10".

Also, the headstock spindle bore would not take 1" stock for trying to hold the bolt by its shank with just the head exposed. The bore is just under 13/16", and some users have used a reamer to open it up to a full 13/16".

Paul, Central OR


franksjoy@... wrote:

Generally very true. Usually the only detractors for a longer bed are budget and shop space.

When considering how the extra length would be useful, remember all the work that can be done with the tailstock. Drilling, reaming, tapping and threading with a die. These operations can consume quite a bit of the tool space. Especially when you add the length of threading tool holders. Many Model Engineer experts recommend using taps and dies for threads 1/4" and smaller.

And sometimes, it's just nice to be able to move the tailstock out of the way without having to remove it from the bed.

Paul, Central OR


franksjoy@... wrote: