# POWR-KRAFT (Logan) Lathe Info



## scootermcrad

Hello everyone! Great place! I did a little intro, but had some more questions regarding a lathe I just purchased. I was hoping to get some more info.

First off, to be very honest, I've never set up a lathe before. This is new stuff to me. I've only used one, and even that is not saying much. Anyway, I'm trying to change all that....

I bought this 10" POWR-KRAFT lathe (84-TLC-2139), which I'm told is essentially a Logan. 50" bed. Appears that it might be the equivalent of a Logan 821. Everything appears to be there to turn a part, but I don't know what a lot of it is. I would also like to clean it up and possibly repaint it before I get it put back together. So maybe someone can give me some recommendations on setup, paint, and maybe just some information about POWR-KRAFT in general.

Super excited to get this thing going! I have a lot to learn! I would appreciate any info you guys could provide!

So here it is before it was carefully taken apart to bring to my shop...






















And how it sits, ready for clean up...




































Maybe someone can tell me what these items are. I'm assuming that the green block with the adjuster is a bottom clamp of some kind, but I have no idea.


----------



## Philjoe5

Scooter,
Looks like you have a nice Logan in great condition. There are a few Logan, PowerKraft user groups. One hosted by Scott Logan is located here:

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/lathe-list/

and contains a wealth of info on these lathes - direct from the manufacturers spec sheets. Provide a serial number to Scott on the forum and he can tell you the manufacturers date.

I recently acquired a Logan 825 and found this forum useful in helping me set things up correctly. I enjoy working with this lathe a lot. It is very well designed and is capable of very fine work.

I don't recognize the green object in your photo but perhaps someone else will chime in. Feel free to PM me with any questions about your lathe and I'll try to help you out.

Cheers,
Phil


----------



## cfellows

Scooter, 

It looks like you've got pretty much everything you need. A couple of observations.

1. You should be buy 4 carriage bolts with two nuts each to use as leveling bolts for the bed. These bolts are probably 5/8" or 1/2" diameter, whichever is the largest, that will fit through the holes in the bottom of each foot (head down). You will need some adjustment to take any twist out of the bed when you get it set up in your permanent location. You could do it with packing and shims, but bolts would be better.

2. The (green) tailstock looks like it might be off another lathe? Therefore you should check pretty carefully to make sure that the barrel center is the same height as the center of spindle in the headstock. Others might chime in here to tell you how to do it.

3. The bolts that hold the threading gear change box on don't look original to me, although that might not matter. However, it also looks like you are missing the middle bolt.

4. Can't really see in the tool box but you might need some tool bits for doing the cutting. I generally prefer carbide inserts and use TPG 321 like these: http://www.utsupply.com/Prod_Tables/tpg.htm but there are lots of other options.

5. The height gauge looks pretty much like a lost cause, but those are pretty inexpensive to replace 

By the way, I have an 11.5" logan so I know a little bit about them...

Chuck


----------



## D0ZX

That's going to be a nice machine. I have a Logan 820 and I really like it.
I can't tell for sure but it looks like the spindle bearing retainer is missing on yours. The one right behind the chuck, if so you will have to get one along with the metal shield for the bearing.


----------



## Niels Abildgaard

Looks like a South Bend clone and if if this is the case You can improve it by putting it on a solid foundation.Espesially as it is a long bed thing.
My Boxford have 6 anchor points on bed underside and I put it on a piece of rock supported on all points.
The improvement in accuracy and surface quality relative to my first configuration(much like Yours) is real and the granite is not more than 150 kilogram.


----------



## scootermcrad

Thanks for the input guys! Good stuff and some great observations! Definitely a re-badged Logan, based on all the part numbers on it. Even the legs say Logan right on them.

Yeah, the tail stock raised a flag with me as well. Definitely going to have to be careful with that one. The strange thing is the mis-matched colors of things all over the place. I don't know if someone just got crazy with a paint can, but usually mis-matched paint implies that there has been some exchange of parts at one point in it's past.

As for anything that might be missing, I have no idea. There is a tub that came with it that is just FULL of extra parts including an entire set of gears and I'm assuming related parts. Need to get a manual and get organized to see what's missing and what's been exchanged. The spindle plate mentioned may be sitting right in front of me, but I wouldn't know.  HA! 

Here's the tub, but there is also a whole 'nother tray of stuff and a tool box full of cutters.







For cutters, I didn't show it, but I have a pretty good assortment of cutters that came with it. Must be a hundred different cutters and maybe even a couple boring bars. It appears a couple different tool holders as well. Quick change and post style?? (just guessing)

Great info! Keep it coming! I'm going to check out and join the Yahoo! users group for sure!


----------



## scootermcrad

Just ran the SN. My mistake. It's stamped as a Montgomery Wards lathe and was apparently made in 1949. I LOVE old machine tools!


----------



## cfellows

It's a Logan. Montgomery Wards sold Logan lathes under their Powercraft name. Sears Roebuck sold Atlas Lathes under their Craftsman name. Don't think Southbend ever sold their lathes under another name.

 By the way, the piece with three bolt holes around the outside in the upper right corner of the parts bin picture is the front spindle bearing cover that DOZX mentioned.

Chuck


----------



## scootermcrad

cfellows  said:
			
		

> It's a Logan. Montgomery Wards sold Logan lathes under their Powercraft name. Sears Roebuck sold Atlas Lathes under their Craftsman name. Don't think Southbend ever sold their lathes under another name.
> 
> By the way, the piece with three bolt holes around the outside in the upper right corner of the parts bin picture is the front spindle bearing cover that DOZX mentioned.
> 
> Chuck



Great! Thanks Chuck! I figured that might be the piece.

Not sure if the missing bolt is in there too. Might be. That would be good. I would like to keep it as original as possible and only make updates for performance, when needed.


----------



## Philjoe5

Scooter,
Be aware that in your photo #1 (top) the backgear is not engaged and in photo #5 from the top it is engaged. A common problem occurs if the backgear shifter has ever been disassembled. If the shifter rod is pushed back into place the rack will not engage the eccentric rod properly. The result is that when backgear is placed in position any load placed upon it will cause it to disengage (dont ask me how I know this).

The proper method for reinserting the shifter rack is described on the yahoo forum. This helped put me on the right track (no pun) .

Cheers,
Phil


----------



## scootermcrad

Philjoe5  said:
			
		

> Scooter,
> Be aware that in your photo #1 (top) the backgear is not engaged and in photo #5 from the top it is engaged. A common problem occurs if the backgear shifter has ever been disassembled. If the shifter rod is pushed back into place the rack will not engage the eccentric rod properly. The result is that when backgear is placed in position any load placed upon it will cause it to disengage (dont ask me how I know this).
> 
> The proper method for reinserting the shifter rack is described on the yahoo forum. This helped put me on the right track (no pun) .
> 
> Cheers,
> Phil


Ah geesh.... I have no idea what I'm doing. I didn't even know that until I looked at the pictures. And even MORE embarrassing, I didn't even know what that DID! HAHA! I really need to get some reading in and a parts manual. I found some links for a parts manual. Does the parts manual include a USER'S manual, or is there one of those out there too.

Total rookie here, folks! Never used one of these. Now I know how a 90-year-old person feels when they look at the new touch-screen cell phone! HA!  I don't know what any of these things do... YET!


----------



## Philjoe5

Not to worry scooter. Six months ago I did not know what a Logan lathe looked like. 

There are many resources available to make your learning curve a little less overwhelming. The Logan company still exists, though they are not making lathes these days. But they have replacement parts and machine manuals. They are located here:

http://store.lathe.com/

I've also gotten spare parts on eBay and manuals show up there too. Have fun with your lathe.

Cheers,
Phil


----------



## scootermcrad

Ordered and downloaded a manual!  Looks like it will be very helpful!


----------



## AR1911

I think the tailstock is Logan. They have a pretty distinctive shape. It might not be orignal to your lathe though, so check it center-to-center with the spindle when you get it cleaned up.

It is possible your lathe may have been originally a change-gear model that was later upgraded to the QC gearbox. that would explain the gears in the tub as well as the odd and missing bolts on the QC box. Scott Logan can tell you when it was told and in what configuration. He might can tell you what city it shipped to.

All that dirty rusty tooling: Go buy a gallon or two of Evaporust at Harbor Freight or your local hardware or auto parts store. Wash all the dirty tooling with soapy water, drain, then immediately pile them into a clean plastic tub and cover with Evaporust.

Next day they will be rust-free and ready to wipe down. Save the liquid for the next batch. 

Logans are good tools. Enjoy yourself with it, then make sure someone younger than you also learns to use it so you will have someone to pass it on to when you are done with it.


----------



## scootermcrad

What SHOULD the bolts be? If the tail stock checks out to be "off", what can one do to make it workable? I bought it from a friend and he says he used it this way, so I'm inclined to believe him, but he admits he was no machinist either.


----------



## cfellows

scootermcrad  said:
			
		

> What SHOULD the bolts be? If the tail stock checks out to be "off", what can one do to make it workable? I bought it from a friend and he says he used it this way, so I'm inclined to believe him, but he admits he was no machinist either.



The front to back alignment is adjustable by the set screws in the base. However, if the vertical alignment is off it will have to be raised (with shims) or lowered (perhaps by milling off some between the top and base) as the case may be.

Chuck


----------



## D0ZX

Here is a pic of the original bolts in mine. 






And one of my TS


----------



## scootermcrad

Thanks guys!


----------



## d-m

Am I missing something here?
Interesting that there is no friction knob on the apron for feed. May be do the the possible QC box upgrade or just a power craft thing. Maybe something to also ask Scott about. keep in mind that when you power feed with the half nut you want to be sure you know were everything is. You will only have to crash it once to learn this lesson.
DOZX what model and year is your Logan you have oil cups on the gear box I don't have them and do you have power cross feed ?
Dave


----------



## D0ZX

Dave
I noticed that as well. I think my rig was built in 1944. Here is a pic of my apron so scooter can check his out.


----------



## Stan

If you join the bulletin board on the Logan site you will get a lot of info from people with Logan/Wards lathes that have been modified in every conceivable way.

You lathe looks like a Logan model 200 basic lathe that came with change gears (not a quick change box) and without power cross feed. All power longitudinal feed is via the half nuts so there is no gear drive with clutch for power feed.

Once again, join the Logan lathe group and get all the info first hand.


----------



## scootermcrad

Hey guys!

Now that the holidays are over, I've slowly been getting back into this. Picked up a couple books and a manual from Logan that covers all the parts and such for the machine. I have it all bolted back together and started leveling it out with a high quality machinists level. Lookin' good!

Did a general clean up of the machine fixed a couple things that didn't look right. Had a super sketchy belt guard, the motor was mounted pretty whacky, and the counter-shaft chassis that mounts the left side leg was mounted all wrong. That's all in good shape now. Next step is to get the tail stock lined up and check to see how everything else mics out.

The machine does seem to have a power cross-feed. It's controlled with a plunger. Haven't looked very closely at any of the power-feed components yet. I have a lot to learn.

I DID indeed join the Yahoo group. Haven't had time to poke around too much beyond finding out the year of make and the model that it is so I could get the correct manuals.

QUESTION!! I need to put the outer spindle bearing cover back on (three-holed flange thingy). I obviously need to pull the chick to do this. What is the proper way to lock this machine to remove the chuck? Re-installing?

I'll get some more pictures soon for you guys.


----------



## scootermcrad

Here's how she's lookin' in her new home...

















I feel like the tensioner for the flat belt is missing something. Seems like the lever would want to drop out of tension if bumped even the slightest bit...






Here's a better view of the apron...


----------



## Philjoe5

Looking good Scooter. You'll soon be making chips.

Chuck removal is best done by engaging back gears. Then apply moderate pressure with the chuck key or better yet insert a piece hex bar in the chuck and use a wrench on it to unscrew the chuck. Install a chuck by screwing it onto the spindle and just snug it up by hand. 

Remember to put a piece of wood under the spindle to protect the ways.

Cheers,
Phil


----------



## scootermcrad

Philjoe5  said:
			
		

> Looking good Scooter. You'll soon be making chips.
> 
> Chuck removal is best done by engaging back gears. Then apply moderate pressure with the chuck key or better yet insert a piece hex bar in the chuck and use a wrench on it to unscrew the chuck. Install a chuck by screwing it onto the spindle and just snug it up by hand.
> 
> Remember to put a piece of wood under the spindle to protect the ways.
> 
> Cheers,
> Phil



GREAT! Thank you Phil!

Speaking of back gears... I was just messing around with it a bit and noticed that when I pull the plunger out to engage the back gears, if feels jammed. If I tension the flat drive belt and try to turn the final stepped drive pulley, nothing will move. Am I doing something wrong? Is something out of wack??


----------



## Philjoe5

If you engage the back gears what exactly seems jammed? If you try to rotate the spindle in back gear you'll be unsuccessful, the belt will slip, even under considerable tension. 

Be sure to disengage the bull gear by pulling the locking pin out before powering up (amhik) otherwise you will be trying to drive two gear trains at once - the belt will slip.  

Cheers,
Phil


----------



## scootermcrad

First things first... I got the chuck off! Piece of cake! I used a large socket, gripped from the inside, and a long handled breaker and it came off effortless. Thanks!

THEN! I put the chip guard/bearing seal back on, tightened it down, but I think it needs a spacer or thick gasket. Locks down on the spindle bearing and keeps it from moving. I need to look at my manual to see what's missing...



			
				Philjoe5  said:
			
		

> If you engage the back gears what exactly seems jammed? If you try to rotate the spindle in back gear you'll be unsuccessful, the belt will slip, even under considerable tension.
> 
> Be sure to disengage the bull gear by pulling the locking pin out before powering up (amhik) otherwise you will be trying to drive two gear trains at once - the belt will slip.
> 
> Cheers,
> Phil


This is where I think I'm getting a little lost and confused. If I pull the plunger out, the back gears are engaged and I indeed cannot move it by hand and definitely not with the belt either. The change gears are not engaged (lever to the center/neutral position).

You'll have to excuse my ignorance here... Which is the "bull gear" and which pin are you speaking of?

I'm confused...


----------



## Philjoe5

I'm no expert on Logans or their Powerkraft series so your lathe may differ from my model 825. In the 7th picture down on page 1 of this post you show your lathe with the top of the headstock open. The big gear right behind the chuck is the bull gear. On the chuck side of the gear on my lathe is a pin with a knurled top. If you rotate the chuck you'll see it if it's there. Pulling the pin out disengages the bull gear from the spindle. That allows the back gears to do the driving.

The change gears operate independently from the back gears.

Cheers,
Phil


----------



## scootermcrad

Philjoe5  said:
			
		

> I'm no expert on Logans or their Powerkraft series so your lathe may differ from my model 825. In the 7th picture down on page 1 of this post you show your lathe with the top of the headstock open. The big gear right behind the chuck is the bull gear. On the chuck side of the gear on my lathe is a pin with a knurled top. If you rotate the chuck you'll see it if it's there. Pulling the pin out disengages the bull gear from the spindle. That allows the back gears to do the driving.
> 
> The change gears operate independently from the back gears.
> 
> Cheers,
> Phil



BINGO!! I found it! Problem solved! Thanks a TON Phil! I love this thing!


----------



## scootermcrad

Okay, since you guys are on a role, here's another question for you guys.

Is there supposed to be a seal, a spacer, or something, between this bearing shield and the head stock and bearing?? The manual isn't very clear and since it was apart already I can't figure out if something is missing. I definitely do not see LA-195 or LA-247, but then I may not be clear on their position. Seems like I should have LA-195, but that doesn't solve the problem of LA-194 locking the spindle.

When I tighten the three screws down it locks up the spindle. Obviously that's not right and it explains why it was not put back in place.


----------



## D0ZX

It looks to me like you have the LA-195 on the spindle now and it is backwards. I would take 2 putty knives, 1 on each side and carefully work it back off the spindle, it should slide off easy if you don't cock it. Install LA-194 and check for binding. Then install LA-195.
That is how mine is and there is no LA-247 in mine but my rig has 4 bolts holding on the retainer...


----------



## scootermcrad

D0ZX  said:
			
		

> It looks to me like you have the LA-195 on the spindle now and it is backwards. I would take 2 putty knives, 1 on each side and carefully work it back off the spindle, it should slide off easy if you don't cock it. Install LA-194 and check for binding. Then install LA-195.
> That is how mine is and there is no LA-247 in mine but my rig has 4 bolts holding on the retainer...


Great!! Thank you!! I will try that!


----------



## scootermcrad

Fired up the lathe for a spin! Found a few issues... 

First the counter-shaft bushings were SHOT, so I ordered some replacements. 

Next, I found that the 3-jaw chuck that was on it must have been put together in the wrong order. Chuck runs true, but the parts do NOT when they are clamped in there. Going to pull it off tomorrow and have a look. A 1/4" round part runs about .015" out! WOW!

Last... I need to get the turret tool post/holder set up right and with the right cutters or I need to ditch it and run something else. I guess I could go back to the tool post that uses the Armstrong style holders or check out what was mentioned earlier in this thread.

What all do you guys run for tool holders? What works well with these old machines?


----------



## D0ZX

I'm running a DTM 100 series (AXA size) wedge type. By far the best upgrade I did so far.
There are several brands of this style post that are very affordable. You can see it in the tailstock pic I posted.


----------



## Stan

The part #194 (bearing cap) does hold the bearing tightly in the bore. Logan used several different methods to obtain the clamp pressure. Some bearing caps (194) were individually ground to fit, some used a shim washer (#247) and some used a spring washer. 

The bearing cap applies pressure to the outside race of the headstock bearing while #195 rotates with the spindle, while making a close fit to the bearing cap to keep cuttings out of the bearing.

Old worn out three jaw chucks can have significant runout which varies with the size of stock. Not much you can do with a worn out chuck.


----------



## scootermcrad

So this might be a stupid question, but since I really am clueless about the turret style tool post I have, I want to ask some questions.

I just ran across a picture of this style tool post using Armstrong type holders.





I have a bunch of these holders/cutters and although I would like to eventually change to something that is a little more of a quick change design, I would like to get going with what I have in the mean time, if possible. Maybe I just need someone to point me to some good information about these turret style tool posts so I can set it up correctly and make it useful.

Going to play around with that 3-jaw chuck today to see if it was simply reassembled in the wrong order or if it is actually worn beyond use.


----------



## Philjoe5

Regarding runout on a 3 jaw chuck, be sure those spindle threads are absolutely clean. 
Clean the chuck scroll and jaws too, that can make a difference. Also, you might do a light skim of the chuck backplate face in case the previous owner neglected to do that.

Like DOZX I have the AXA 100 QCTP mounted on my model 825 and it works well. They can be had for about $100 and extra holders can be made but they are inexpensive too.

The turret toolpost works Ok but you'll need to place shims under the toolbit to be sure the cutting edge of the tool is centered with the spindle. I used this arrangement for years but once I set up a QCTP I never looked back.

Good luck
Cheers,
Phil


----------



## scootermcrad

I see an AXA 100 Quick Change T-post set on Amazon right now. It's probably an "Import". Worth considering for hobby use?

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002YPDQ4G/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20

I will pull the back off the chuck and clean things up. Thanks for the tip!


----------



## Philjoe5

There are numerous import QCTP's that work fine for hobby use. They come in two flavors, piston and wedge. Wedge is claimed to be more rigid so if a $20-$30 premium over the piston style is doable I'd go for the wedge. I can't tell from the Amazon product which one it is. This one is a bit more but it IS wedge type:

http://www.littlemachineshop.com/products/product_view.php?ProductID=2280&category=

Many folks find the piston style just fine so you pays your money you takes your chances.

Cheers,
phil


----------



## scootermcrad

Philjoe5  said:
			
		

> There are numerous import QCTP's that work fine for hobby use. They come in two flavors, piston and wedge. Wedge is claimed to be more rigid so if a $20-$30 premium over the piston style is doable I'd go for the wedge. I can't tell from the Amazon product which one it is. This one is a bit more but it IS wedge type:
> 
> http://www.littlemachineshop.com/products/product_view.php?ProductID=2280&category=
> 
> Many folks find the piston style just fine so you pays your money you takes your chances.
> 
> Cheers,
> phil


I really like that one you linked to! Compatible with several different makes, as well. I was looking at the Phase II posts on US Shop Tools site. About $236 for the same set as you mentioned. Definitely an import and does not offer 4 different stations like the one you linked to.

http://www.usshoptools.com/current_year/all_products/2010_11_pdf/PGS_501_506.pdf

Do you, or anyone else, have experience with the tool post that LittleMachineShop is selling??


----------



## scootermcrad

Update...

Spindle bearing cover LA-194 is now installed. Indeed, the piece that was screwing up the works was LA-195. It was installed backwards, as suggested, and was keeping 194 from sitting correctly. The bearing looked to be in good shape and was retained by a clip. I added some grease and put 194 and 195 back on.

AND! I pulled the jaws out of the 3-jaw chuck to have a look at them. They are indeed worn.  The #1 jaw was not even square. Was warn on the tow and heal. Can they be reconditioned or should they just be replaced? I thought about putting them in the mill and facing each one square, again until dimensionally they all matched. Is it worth it? Not sure if I can get jaws for it. It's made by Falls Products. Don't know if they're even around anymore.


----------



## Philjoe5

I've used the Little Machine Shop QCTP on one lathe for 3 years and on a second lathe for 6 months. No complaints.

I don't recognize that chuck name, maybe someone else has? Many times those jaws are hardened and will be a challenge to mill. Cost of one trashed carbide end mill = cost of one import chuck (often of decent quality). Pays your money, takes your chances.

Cheers,
Phil


----------



## scootermcrad

Philjoe5  said:
			
		

> I've used the Little Machine Shop QCTP on one lathe for 3 years and on a second lathe for 6 months. No complaints.
> 
> I don't recognize that chuck name, maybe someone else has? Many times those jaws are hardened and will be a challenge to mill. Cost of one trashed carbide end mill = cost of one import chuck (often of decent quality). Pays your money, takes your chances.
> 
> Cheers,
> Phil


That's good news about the QC tool post! I think I will give it a go!

Here are the jaws removed from the lathe. Looks like they were once 1.800" long, .618" wide and have an adjusting pitch of about .288". Any chance that someone might know of a replacement jaw?

There is a Falls Products that makes de-burring machines, but aren't even in the same location as the one that made this chuck, so I'm thinking it's an entirely different company.

This is frustrating...


----------



## scootermcrad

Ok! I ordered a QC tool post and an adapter for one of my other smaller 4-jaw chucks. It will have to be machined, but that will be a great project once this thing if finished.

Also, I talked to a machinist over the weekend that said I can save my 3-jaw chuck by locking the jaw outward (inside a tube) and use a carbide tipped boring bar to re-surface and true them up. That is great news because I had no luck finding new jaws and it would be a shame if it was destined to be a paper-weight.

Thanks for everyone's help! You folks have been great! Can't wait to start doing something useful and fun with this machine!


----------



## Stan

Two things wrong with your method of truing up your chuck.

1. If you want to hold the work with the outside jaws, that is hold a piece of round bar, you have to have the jaws clamped in, not out. The easiest way to do that is is to tighten the jaws on a thin piece of round (like a hard washer) at the very inside end of the jaws and then remove that shoulder after truing up the jaws, It is much easier to grind the jaws than to bore them.

2. When you have completed this operation, you will have a chuck that is precise at the diameter you ground them at, but may be worse than it is now at any other diameter. The wear is in the scroll and is not uniform for all diameters. Grinding or boring the jaws is legitimate to correct for bell mouthed jaws but otherwise is usually a waste of time. Think about it logically. Why would one jaw wear more than the other two? Also remember the scroll would wear more where it is used the most.


----------



## scootermcrad

Stan  said:
			
		

> Two things wrong with your method of truing up your chuck.
> 
> 1. If you want to hold the work with the outside jaws, that is hold a piece of round bar, you have to have the jaws clamped in, not out. The easiest way to do that is is to tighten the jaws on a thin piece of round (like a hard washer) at the very inside end of the jaws and then remove that shoulder after truing up the jaws, It is much easier to grind the jaws than to bore them.
> 
> 2. When you have completed this operation, you will have a chuck that is precise at the diameter you ground them at, but may be worse than it is now at any other diameter. The wear is in the scroll and is not uniform for all diameters. Grinding or boring the jaws is legitimate to correct for bell mouthed jaws but otherwise is usually a waste of time. Think about it logically. Why would one jaw wear more than the other two? Also remember the scroll would wear more where it is used the most.


Yeah! Duh! Good point! Of COURSE the diameter of the cut is going to change. Brain fart!

The jaws are worn strange. It seems only ONE of the jaws is damaged. The other two match dimensionally and the third seems to be worn on the heal and tow of the surface, essentially giving it a curved face with the highest (or longest) dimension matching the other two jaws.

Okay. NOW! With my blunder been admitted, can the correct process be explained to me? What is the correct grinding process?? Should I just send these out??


----------



## scootermcrad

I found this video on Youtube...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAtASZxDaf4[/ame]

It explains one of the grinding processes. Is this what I have to have in order to true up those jaws? Is it the only way??


----------



## scootermcrad

I just found this method. Interesting... What level of courseness would one use for this type (or any) method?

http://homemetalshopclub.org/news/aug04/aug04.html


----------



## Stan

The video doesn't show any method of loading the jaws so I don't know what keeps the jaws in place while they are being ground. If you have a tool post grinder, then certainly use it. 

Doing model work, my chuck jaws get worn at the tips from holding short pieces (bellmouthed) and I regrind them with a Dremel mounted in a simple holder. As I said in the previous post. I look in my junk for a hardened washer about 1 1/2" in diameter and put it at the very back of the jaws and tighten the chuck on the washer. When the stone has cleaned up all three jaws, I remove the washer and grind the shoulder on each jaw where the washer was clamped lower than the newly ground jaw. I lose the thickness of the washer on the length of the jaw which is no big deal.

I looked at the hobby club method and haven't seen that method of loading the jaws but it looks valid and they give a good description of what they are doing. They use a pencil grinder instead of a Dremel and remember to run the chuck in the opposite direction to the grinding stone.


----------



## scootermcrad

Thanks Stan! When you first described the washer method, I didn't fully comprehend, but I can visualize it now! Makes sense. Thank you for the info!

I also saw another method, while doing some searches. I saw where 1/8" pins were installed into the chuck jaws so they could be loaded in a similar fashion to your method without having to move the washer.

During my search yesterday, I also ran across a publication on restoring chucks, so I ordered it.

Got to thinking last night that maybe the reason the jaws are worn is because there's too much play in the jaws themselves or maybe the scroll plate is actually worn out...

...How much play is too much play in the jaws? How could I tell if the scroll plate is worn?

Thanks again for your input, Stan!


----------



## Stan

> ...How much play is too much play in the jaws?



Like everything we do - it depends.

Depending on the type of work you do and the repeatability required plus numerous other things, if the chuck does the job that you require, then it is not worn too much. If, on the other hand, the chuck continually frustrates you, then fix it or replace it.

For example: If you put a 6" diameter chunk of flame cut material in the chuck to make a flywheel, then .015" is immaterial but if you just want to true up a 1" diameter bar so that you can cut a 1" thread then it is not acceptable.


----------



## scootermcrad

Right now, I would say that the chuck is in the "completely unacceptable" range. With even a 3/8" diameter piece of stock I'm getting .030" (very possibly more) of orbital run-out. I would use one of my 4-jaw chucks to achieve a more precise cut, but would certainly like to have a usable 3-jaw for doing quickie cuts.

Spending some time with this 3-jaw chuck, the real problem seems to be the inability to hold a part parallel to the center-line of the spindle. The orbiting increases as you move further away from the chuck jaws and there is actually visual gap in the #1 jaw when anything is mounted.


----------



## scootermcrad

Update...

Getting closer to making chips!

First: Countershaft busings are replaced! WOW, what a difference! One bushing was almost completely worn thru one one side. Things are looking good in that department.

On to other things, though. My quick change tool post came. Pretty cool! Except... Something is very obviously not right here...

(I know this is stupid, but this is my first time dealing with anything like this)

What do I have here? I ordered an AXA 100 style and it confirms it right on the box. Am I missing the block that slides into the slot or do I have the wrong tool post?  ???

(original on the left)


----------



## Stan

That is the standard block that you have to machine to fit your lathe unless you bought it from Logan who machine the block for you. No two brands of lathe use identical mounting, so the seller of these tool posts just gives you a block of steel to make your own.


----------



## scootermcrad

Stan  said:
			
		

> That is the standard block that you have to machine to fit your lathe unless you bought it from Logan who machine the block for you. No two brands of lathe use identical mounting, so the seller of these tool posts just gives you a block of steel to make your own.


Oh!! Awesome! I was pretty much thinkin' I was going to do that anyway. Pretty simple! Was thinking a T-nut style would probably work pretty good.

Thanks for the reply!


----------



## Stan

You are right to make it in a T nut shape. It give you room for a lot more threads.


----------



## ieezitin

Scoot.

I own a Logan model 200 made in 1947, this is essentially the Model 825 but mine was not supplied with a quick change gearbox, your model is very close to the 825 free standing bench type. The previous owner of my machine was a clock maker and he made some superb work on this machine right up until he died two years ago thats when I got it and I am the second owner.

This is my second lathe in the shop and I find it gets used far more than the Atlas 12 I own, all my threading is done on the Atlas as like I stated the Logan has no QC and I do not possess all the change wheels yet. I find it flawless and a joy to operate, its well-built with quality castings and the saddle, crosslides and compound slide are accurate with the jib screws being very responsive to slight pressure.

Here is the one negative I have ( or had ) with it, vibration from the motor base traveling through to the headstock, which in turn could be recorded into your work, I did some research on the Logan group on Yahoo and it was established my model had a leg that was supplied from the factory that was attached underneath the motor base and grounded to the floor, I purchased mine at an auction and I am sure they lost it while transporting the lathe to the sale same with the change wheels.

On your reply 22 of this thread I see in one of the photographs you have the cast base with motor base attached, you may want to check into the history of your machine to establish if it once needed this said attachment. I did not bother to purchase the correct leg I just fabricated one up from pipe and made my own. I still have a little vibration after my mod , but in the future I have this dream to install a line shaft assembly and drive both my Logan and small milling machine to make it look Edwardian. Here is a picky of mine.

All the best  Anthony.


----------



## scootermcrad

Anthony,

Great lookin' machine, there! I'm intrigued by the story of it being owned by a clock maker. One of the things I would really like to do in my shop (some day) is build a replica Seth Thomas Tower Clock Movement. Without straying too far off-topic, do you know what kind of clocks he was building?

Very good note on the vibration. The POWR-KRAFT Lathes did not come with a leg, or at least it's not shown in the manual and parts book as being standard with this model. How it mounts now is simply a heavy 1/2" (or maybe 5/8") plate that goes between the leg and bed foot that extends out to the motor support. I suppose it would be possible to make a stand for it to isolate it better. Or maybe even mount it to the wall. Alignment may get difficult. OR! Maybe use a floor plate that would relate the stance of the lathe to a remotely mounted motor support, as suggest. Would probably still need to be tied to the bed, one way or another, to insure accurate tensioning on the flat belt (similar to how yours is attached by the lower portion of the case). Anyway... Great thought! I'm getting closer every day to making chips. Once I get it working and dialed in, I'll be able to determine if that modification would be needed. I'm definitely going to keep that in mind.

I'm very excited about the comments made here. I'm feeling pretty good about picking this machine up...


----------



## scootermcrad

Another thing that may need attention are the saddle gibs. I have no idea what condition they are in or really how they are even adjusted. I haven't paid much attention to how much play there is in the assembly, but with a lathe this old, I suspect I will need to restore or replace them.


----------



## Stan

Anthony: Just to clear up the different models of Logan lathes. The 825 is a cabinet model with underneath drive (completely different drive than yours). The 820 is on a metal pan with cast iron legs with the motor mounted behind and below the pan with a leg to support it. The 822 has the same headstock as the 820 but is a bench model which you bolt down to your own bench and it has a motor mount assembly which you bolt to the bench behind the lathe.

If you spend time on the Logan user group you will see every possible combination of these that people have made up using parts from two or more lathes.


----------



## ieezitin

Stan.

Thank you for the clarification on the model numbers, since I have owned this lathe I have done limited to little research on it, only at first did I get info I needed just to get me going and making chips. I actually belong to the Scot Logan group on Yahoo and I receive the emails daily just to keep my hand in on the group and read specific threads just of interest to me ( Scoot I suggest you join the group ) , one mod I will be doing is installing a QC box to increase my machines abilities.

Scoot

With reference to the clock making man, I am quite sore at myself for not taking pictures of this mans work and shop (I previewed the sale in his shop before it was moved to the sale house) I was there just for some marking out equipment and when the lathe come up no one wanted it so I snapped it up, but the real interest for people were this mans Jigs, small tooling, metal stock ( brass bar, sheet, square stock and bolts and hardware) and of course the clocks that were made by him, apparently this man had quite a following in the clock making circles. 

I cannot tell you what this guy specialized in as I have zero knowledge in clocks, all I can tell you is the jigs and fixtures plus handmade tooling were art in their own right! I got a sense this guy was a premium tool & die maker that got diverted into the tick tock game.

Anthony


----------

