# Lathe performance testing



## Niels Abildgaard (Jun 17, 2018)

More than fifty years ago I had one third of a Myford Super 7.
It is still in custody of a friend that is chairman in Society against cruelty to Myfords.
I made him a pair of tangential carbide holders and he uses next to nothing else today.



Many years later i got a Boxford and improved it immensely (I think) by supporting bed on a piece of granite and making a sensible driving system.








I gave it to my son but after some time I missed the feel of swarf in bed and bought a Boxford AUD very late model.








It was a lousy and I scrapped it with  relief.Parts were also getting to  heavy for handling  single-handed in my living room.


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Jun 17, 2018)

A week ago I bought a cheap chineese WM210 lathe

https://www.amazon.de/BananaB-Präzisions-Metalldrehmaschine-Drehmaschine-Drehbank/dp/B07DDH82JF/ref=sr_1_3/260-0657212-5441825?ie=UTF8&qid=1529223772&sr=8-3&keywords=mini+drehbank

The toolholder compound slide is a disaster but fundamental accurasy is impressive.
A first test of DTI and test bar show no error at all and lathe is just standing on a table





Spindle is stiffer in bending than my former Boxford and noise not unpleasant(hearing aids disarmed).
Spindle bearings are two taper rollers 62mm outside 30mm inside and spindle bore 21mm/MT3.
My next modification will be making a spindle with two 62mm/40mmmm inside bearings.
Bore can then be 26mm and nose will suit ER40 collets.
Its first job was to slim own spindle flange  easing chuck change.
Went without fuss even if lathe is free-standing on a table in my living room


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Jun 17, 2018)

I have acces to my my first Myford and my first BoxRockFord and want to judge the performance of my chineese love.
The video with an Unbrako 12.9 screw being reduced shows a possible testing method.
Measure mass  before and after and measure the  tool-action time.Make a video maybe.
Mass of 12.9 bolt steel removed per second will be a very good performance parameter and 12.9 screws can be had everywhere.
Dimension of screw is not important.
Anybody wants to join the fun?
I look forward to see my modified, cheap chineese beat  old ,over-rated iron.


----------



## goldstar31 (Jun 17, 2018)

It’s quite n interesting account and Thank You
I bought a Sieg c4 to live indoors

Regards

N


----------



## goldstar31 (Jun 19, 2018)

I see that 'factory reconditioned' Super 7's are now available from RDG at £2995 and that its without  any accessories  or gear box. I see that Axminster Tools is selling their Sieg SC4 for just a bit more than £1200.

I was offered a rather more modern update of the Myford with gearbox and some accessories and industrial stand for £3250.

In the discussion about the possible purchase, I was told that the newer Myford motors are more powerful than earlier models( like mine- a Mark1)

Regards

Norman


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Jun 19, 2018)

goldstar31 said:


> I see that 'factory reconditioned' Super 7's are now available from RDG at £2995 and that its without  any accessories  or gear box. I see that Axminster Tools is selling their Sieg SC4 for just a bit more than £1200.
> 
> I was offered a rather more modern update of the Myford with gearbox and some accessories and industrial stand for £3250.
> 
> ...



My WM210 was 508£ including transport to my living room and VAT.
I am checking runouts etc at the moment and can hardly believe Myfords or Siegs are more accurate.
As I can judge, it is sold from a chineese firm(Shanghai) operating from a container unloading station in Belgium.
There are a lot of rent seeking sharks in the English pond.
 It will  remove metal soon and will be measured doing so
It will be fun to compete with old english and lesser breed chineese.
Anybody joining the game?


----------



## goldstar31 (Jun 19, 2018)

I paid £350 for the secondhand Sieg- with some bits. I then paid £50 for the new DRO's and added  two new chucks, a fixed steady, a faceplate and an adapter to------take MYFORD chucks and collets etc.
So I have interchangeabilty( is that a word?) and can continue to use adapters to make use of Number 2 Morse taper tooling on things like dividing heads, rotary tables and  my sets of tool and cutter grinder equipment.

So-- yes- I'm certainly interested but hope that my version of things does not distract your posting

Please continue-- of only for me

Regards

Norman

Apologies, I forgot that I bought a 4 jaw self centering chuck as well.  Nice1


----------



## Hopper (Jun 19, 2018)

You can probably get even greater performance by using synthetic grease in the bearings instead of dino grease.


----------



## goldstar31 (Jun 19, 2018)

Err-uhm!!   Myfords take high bollock ISO32 oil on the spindle bearings and SAE20 on the rest.


----------



## DJP (Jun 19, 2018)

I question the usefulness of any ad hoc lathe comparisons. To do it right these machines should be in a lab with a constant voltage supply, the same tooling and set up plus multiple runs where averages are used for comparison. Even then the manufacturers will surely find errors in the methodology or move the comparison to value for price.

My opinion is that every lathe can be optimized for the job it is doing that day and that's the best we can do. Having the bragging rights for ownership of the 'best performing' lathe doesn't mean much to me.

I'm only pushing back a little to see why there is interest in lathe performance across brands and generations.


----------



## goldstar31 (Jun 19, 2018)

Perhaps someone should mention that the original Myford company went into administration
I assume Boxford also failed.

The name of Myford was bought by RDG tools from the administrators of Myford.


This has been made many times  here

Regards

Norman.


----------



## bazmak (Jun 19, 2018)

Also remember that Myford was building the 7 series lathe 70 yrs ago and most are producing good work
They were not cheap but have stood the test of time.Like most english companies that produced Good,last
a lifetime products they went bust.I too have a chinese C4 and its good for the money,but will it be here in 50 yrs ?
The cheap but good quality chinese lathe (after lots of mods) brought affordable home model machining to 
the masses. Praise all round to all quality UK,USA etc machine tools


----------



## Hopper (Jun 20, 2018)

And in its day, the cheap but good quality Myford ML7 brought affordable home machining to the masses.  The ML7 was cheaper than its predecessor, the M-type Myford/Drummond and in later years was considerably cheaper than a Boxford or a Raglan Little John. How it ever picked up the "Rolls Royce of Lathes" moniker is a mystery. They were a good enough basic lathe but built down to a price, much like the Chinese lathes today. More like "the Morris Minor of lathes" really. 

It is telling, though, that a new Chinese lathe is found to do exactly what a new lathe is supposed to do and that is considered cause for jubilation and claims of superiority over 70-year-old machines. I'd be disappointed if my new lathe DIDN'T perform that well. 

Anyway, the heck will all this new stuff, I'll carry on with my 1937 Drummond.


----------



## MRA (Jun 20, 2018)

>  I assume Boxford also failed.

Actually, they're still going.  Here you go:
http://www.boxford.co.uk/equipment/equipment-overview/

They still supply parts from stock for what one might think of as a 'Boxford', which they call a '3656', here:
http://www.boxford-software.com/spares/3656menu.html 

 - though I think as parts run out, they become 'nla'.

I was given a Model A; if I had more room I'd go for a Colchester Student or perhaps the S&B 1024 which might get slung from work.  I think one gets much better value in a bigger machine, probably because not many folks (including me) have the space.  Perhaps I'd draw the line at a DSG


----------



## MRA (Jun 20, 2018)

...Strikes me this conversation (rather like talking about cars) depends on ones point of reference.  My previous lathe was very, very worn out, very unusual, and very old indeed.  Rather like a car I once had which did 500 miles to the gallon of oil, and 1000 miles to the head-gasket.  Sometimes it's good to come to any old pair of shoes which (merely) fit, from a few years in a pair a size too small!


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Jun 21, 2018)

I am collecting kit parts for a 21 century amateur lathe.
Up to now I have made a lot of scrap going back to China for recycling













WP_20180621_009[1]



__ Niels Abildgaard
__ Jun 21, 2018


















WP_20180621_005[1]



__ Niels Abildgaard
__ Jun 21, 2018


----------



## 99Norton (Jun 21, 2018)

Having rebuilt an early 1930's Thornton that was far to big to fit in the garage when I bought my house I downsized to a clapped out 10" Atlas that needed a bed up rebuild and now have  14 x 40" Chinese generic lathe. For the price I got a lot of bang for my buck with the new one. Like every machine it had a few niggles that need fettling but keeps getting better.  I think the steel and iron was better on the old stuff but modern design and finite element analysis mean that a lot of the new ones are actually stiffer which is good.  I'm in agreement with DJP as I've seen some amazing work done on clapped out machines by top notch machinists. That said it is so nice not to have to compensate for wear.
  Niels that project looks very interesting, something that most of us just dream about in the 'one day' catagory.


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Jun 23, 2018)

Destination is nothing,journey everything.













WM210 bare essentials



__ Niels Abildgaard
__ Jun 23, 2018






When I have made my new dream spindle and put the assembly on granite I will fill lathe bed with granite -epoxy mix.
Scrappers nightmare and very rigid.
It would have been smarter to use the sligthly smaller version:

https://www.amazon.de/BananaB-Präzisions-Metalldrehmaschine-Drehmaschine-Drehbank/dp/B07DG1YPWQ/ref=sr_1_1_sspa/259-3701518-3043119?ie=UTF8&qid=1529177412&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=mini+drehbank&th=1

Cheaper and more rigid.
Will do next time.


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Nov 17, 2018)

I have put the WM210 on hold for the time being.
Facing was 100 my CONVEX on a 120mm diameter sample and that is not OK.
Some brave soul on the web had same problem and remilled the slide.
I like to think he is younger than me because I feel to tired to contemplate it.
It was instant love  when I saw this adwert:

https://www.hbm-machines.com/produc...-hbm-250-x-550-profi-metaaldraaibank-compleet.

It has got Gipsy feet and a base of diabas/dolerit from a former gravestone .






Testbar DTI is within hysteresis of my swiss TesaTast instrument that is plus minus 5 my.
A planing test gave 10 my CONCAVITY on a 120mm dia testpiece.Very,very OK.
The distance between headslock and rear side of flange was 16mm  and to narrow for my fingers.
I let the machine autoimprove so gap is now 20mm.






Taking of the 3 jawchuck is less than a minute and putting faceplate on is about two.
It was expected that turning would be unsecure due to the castoring wheels.
I have tried it  on four wood blocks,but saw no difference and being able to move the package is nice to have.


----------



## Cogsy (Nov 17, 2018)

What is the 'my' unit you mention? I'm not familiar with it.


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Nov 17, 2018)

Cogsy said:


> What is the 'my' unit you mention? I'm not familiar with it.



0.001mm


----------



## Cogsy (Nov 17, 2018)

Niels Abildgaard said:


> 0.001mm


Ah, so it's microns. I've never seen the 'my' designation before, I'm much more familiar with 'μm'.


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Nov 18, 2018)

Thank You for clarifying.
When I was apprentice more than fifty years ago they were my`s here in Denmark.
Microns are 0.001mm and mills 0.0254mm?


----------



## goldstar31 (Nov 18, 2018)

deleted

N


----------



## Cogsy (Nov 18, 2018)

Mills I'm not familiar with at all. In my work I only deal in SI units and their derivatives, if anything else comes along it gets converted to SI. Of course model making is different and I can (and do sometimes) work in inches. I envy your measuring equipment - there's no way I can accurately measure 1/10th of a mm at home.


----------



## goldstar31 (Nov 18, 2018)

deleted


----------



## Asm109 (Nov 18, 2018)

a mil is 1/1000 of an inch. ie 0.001 inches.  Or .0254 mm or 25.4 microns.


----------



## bazmak (Nov 18, 2018)

Not heard of mil,always refered to as thous in the UK in the OLDEN days


----------



## redhunter350 (Nov 19, 2018)

Well my on board computer was programmed in imperial so still use thous and tenths ! Plus all my kit is imperial. However I have a close friend in the gunmaking industry in Italy and asked him to clarify the metric terms , the list is below:-
Metric Micron 0.001mm
0.001
1 millimetre = 0.03937"
0.1 decimo = 0.00397"
0.01 centesimo = 0.00039"
0.001 micron = 0.000039"
I keep it handy for reference and the conversion to imperial gives it meaning- to me and my computer!


----------



## Cogsy (Nov 19, 2018)

Those terms may be specific to Italian gunsmiths, but they're not correct terms for general usage. For example, the centi- designates a division of 100, as in 100 cents in a dollar or 100 centimetres in a metre, yet the milli- designates 1000 units, as in 1000 millilitres in a litre or 1000 millimetres in a metre. Realistically, for our usage, tenths of a mm is all we can possibly hope to measure, and even then the surface finish is likely rougher than that unless it's polished or ground.


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Nov 27, 2018)

My new WM250 cheap chinese lathe is getting more and more adorable.
It sits on a piece og granite and runout and straigthness can hardly be improved.
What can be improved are those stupid EMCO designed/copied compound arrangements.




My toolmaker friend with more than 50 years expirience  bougth an identical  lathe  himself.
He likes to keep his AlfaRomeos original and un-modified and I hope he does not improve his sister lathe before some tests.
It will be possible to compare my gifts to humanity :

Lathe on rock
Better compound
Worlds best tangential carbide tool

with more mundane solutions.
What do readers think will be most beneficial?


----------



## Jasonb (Nov 27, 2018)

> What do readers think will be most beneficial?



Leave as is and get on making something rather than do "improvements" that in most cases are not needed. 

In 11 years of using the slightly larger 280 and 25years with an Emcomat 8.6 before that I found it did all I wanted


----------



## goldstar31 (Nov 27, 2018)

This gifts  to humanity thing? I hope that you are not being serious.

Norm


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Nov 27, 2018)

goldstar31 said:


> This gifts  to humanity thing? I hope that you are not being serious.
> 
> Norm


They are the best I can offer.


----------



## moerman (Nov 28, 2018)

What is your problem with the compound on this lathe? I have a simple SIEG C2 which probably has about the same design. It could have been made better, but that's a problem in manufacturing and not in design. What am I missing?


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Nov 28, 2018)

moerman said:


> What is your problem with the compound on this lathe? I have a simple SIEG C2 which probably has about the same design. It could have been made better, but that's a problem in manufacturing and not in design. What am I missing?


The toolposts are very different in design I think but send us a picture and correct me.
I think the SC2 hs a compound system where you have to wind the slide very ,very far aft before You get acces to two screws




This system can be improved by drilling two holes





And another picture



When cutting the SC2 system is very rigid and OK but a pest to angle shift.
On my WM250 lathe the EMCO system is flexible when cutting but easy to angle shift.
My new system(or rather a variation of the good old Southbend 9 system) is faster to angle shift than my old EMCO system and almost as rigid as the SC2 system while cutting.


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Dec 5, 2018)

First two pictures of the EMCO style system from a WM280.The made in millions 918 types have more or less the same and my present WM250 had as well.
last two pictures show my much stiffer system.


----------



## goldstar31 (Dec 5, 2018)

I don't wish to  seem controversial but I recall  several respected people  who would only use a swivelling top slide when it was necessary.

I'm talking about people like 'Martin Cleeve' with 'Turrets without Milling',
                                                     'Tubal Cain', the English variety and his Gibraltar tool post- still available from
                                                                              Hemingwaykits
                                                     John Stevenson- who was controversial about everything- and often right

I was re-reading Cleeve and his Turrets without Milling and noted that all that was needed was 4 chunks of steel for the front turret and 3 for the latter.  Not surprising- but I have a rear one-- for umpteen years.
I noted that in my scrap box, the necessary 4 lumps which only require bolting together.

Makes me wonder why people buy these fancy QCTP's and ratchet turrets- at enormous expense.

I made a George Thomas affair with its hardened ratchet -- and wondered what kept my ears apart!

Oh, and I have Martin Cleeve swing tool holder- for boring.


Just a simple soul

Norm


----------



## Wizard69 (Dec 5, 2018)

On my 9x20 I actually remove the compound for a quick change tool post mounted on a block.  The support block bolts to the cross slide.   

Obviously tapers can not be done with this approach.  But a bit of planning and a selection of cutters will solve that problem.


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Dec 5, 2018)

Wizard69 said:


> On my 9x20 I actually remove the compound for a quick change tool post mounted on a block.  The support block bolts to the cross slide.



Did turning improve measurably and can we have pictures?


----------



## Niels Abildgaard (Dec 5, 2018)

The three radial wedges  can also fix my stepped parting of blades system more rigid than most QCTPs
And homemade boring bar holders.


----------

