Page 3 of 4
Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 1:49 pm
by dusty
Is the front rail on a 500 table similar to the rear rail on a Shopsmith aluminum table bandsaw. I am trying to envision the problem since I have little to no experience on the 500.
john; the edges of the 510 tables are not machined either. I don't know just how rough the 500 tables are but my 510 tables were pretty bad. They were bad that is until I used the conical disk on them to knock down some of the rough edges.
I squared two of my floating/extension tables with the bosses on the front edge. I did that for the very reasons we are discussing. I needed a table side that was square to the bosses so that I could mount a miter track on the extension table. A miter track that is not parallel to the blade is near useless and could be dangerous.
Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:36 pm
by reible
Hi Dusty,
Let me see if I can address a few of your questions but rather then in this tread I start a new one.... leaving this one for solutions of the posters issues.
As soon as it is up I return and post the location.
Ed
Edit:
See this post:
https://forum.shopsmith.com/viewtopic.php?p=72882
500 extension table
Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:45 pm
by MikeG
Here is a photo of the front edge of my extension table and fence. Notice that vertical face of the front edge does not contact the fence.[ATTACH]10071[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]10072[/ATTACH]
Here is without the fence so you can see the bevel.
Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 3:41 pm
by dusty
MikeG wrote:Here is a photo of the front edge of my extension table and fence. Notice that vertical face of the front edge does not contact the fence.[ATTACH]10071[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]10072[/ATTACH]
Here is without the fence so you can see the bevel.
Does this mean that the beveled edge of the table along with the mating surface of the Rip Fence Base (220) establishes the position of the Rip Fence Base (with respect to the table and the Fence is then further adjustable?
Are the set screws (221) used to square the Rip Fence Base and thus the Rip Fence with the table?
Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 4:21 pm
by reible
dusty wrote:Does this mean that the beveled edge of the table along with the mating surface of the Rip Fence Base (220) establishes the position of the Rip Fence Base (with respect to the table and the Fence is then further adjustable?
Are the set screws (221) used to square the Rip Fence Base and thus the Rip Fence with the table?
Hi glad to see a few picture getting posted. See my post above for a new thread and more pictures and text.
The purpose of the set-screws are to off set the fence and were primarily for disk sanding operations.
The fence head is not adjustable to the front rails, they are always in the same relationship. The adjustment is between the head and the extrusion just like the current newer designs.
Ed
Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 5:39 pm
by dusty
Bandsaw rear table rail does appear to be very similar to the rail on the front edge of the 500 table.
[ATTACH]10091[/ATTACH]
The "fence" (shown in the same picture) on the Circle Jig uses the same aluminum extrusion.
Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 11:43 am
by JPG
I started a new thread also that I started creating after Dusty's suggestion that '500' folks post some pix etc.
Its creation required me to get on the 'create a pdf with pix that vbulletin would not choke on' learning curve. Thus the late posting.
Caappold I hope it is helpful to you!
https://forum.shopsmith.com/viewtopic.php?p=73003#post73003
Thanks
Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 7:37 pm
by garyorgill
The link provided gave me the info I needed
thx,
go
Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:32 pm
by swampgator
I have pics of one of my 500's with the tables closely aligned, but I can't get the pics up because of the small size limit to this sight. I have cropped them down to the smallest valuable size, but still much too large. Any suggestions?

Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:01 am
by JPG
swampgator wrote:I have pics of one of my 500's with the tables closely aligned, but I can't get the pics up because of the small size limit to this sight. I have cropped them down to the smallest valuable size, but still much too large. Any suggestions?

They need to be 'resized', not cropped. resize them to 800 x 600 or less(both ways). If you do not have the software to do it, I recommend 'IrfanView'. Is is a freebe.
http://www.irfanview.com/main_download_engl.htm