JPG40504 wrote:Do NOT blame this on Hans!!!! The 10E/ERs have 3/4 x 1/4 bars.
Now if he had any say in the Mark 5 development, then he is guilty.
We may never know why, but there were so many new' things introduced with the Mark 5 that this may have just been a fluke(maybe a newbe injuneer just did not know any better).
But then there have been opportunities to change it.(not a good idea as that would make incompatibility problems).
With the 505-20 redesign of the table a 'bastard' t slot extrusion needed to be 'invented'.
Why?? It is thinking like this that creates those non-standard onfigurations. The 505/510/520 would have been fine with 3/4" miter slots.
JPG40504 wrote:Do NOT blame this on Hans!!!! The 10E/ERs have 3/4 x 1/4 bars.
Now if he had any say in the Mark 5 development, then he is guilty.
We may never know why, but there were so many new' things introduced with the Mark 5 that this may have just been a fluke(maybe a newbe injuneer just did not know any better).
But then there have been opportunities to change it.(not a good idea as that would make incompatibility problems).
With the 505-20 redesign of the table a 'bastard' t slot extrusion needed to be 'invented'.
He did......he was involved in Shopsmith product development up until 1960. A lot of innovation during his time.
Sorry I didn't respond to your question about the X-Y. It was made by Craftsman when they made industrial equipment. I don't know when it was made and I think they still show it in the "Craftsman" catalog but be sitting down when you see the price.
I believe Craftsman sold the patent to Palmgren, you see their model 83 - 8" rotary table on eBay quite often. It looks exactly like the one in my photo.
BigSky wrote:Why?? It is thinking like this that creates those non-standard onfigurations. The 505/510/520 would have been fine with 3/4" miter slots.
Mark Five, you missed the point.
The change(to weird dimensions) was made with the introduction of the Mark 5 back in the early 50's.
Since the 10E/ER was not compatible with most of the Mark 5 stuff, the miter bar size changing from 3/4 x 1/4 was not then a problem.
However more than a quarter century of production with the 'bastard' slots created a problem with compatibility when the 505/10 was created.
The newer 505-20 models do not stand alone like the Model 10s. Spts were already created and 'in the field' with the 'bastard' slot dimensions.
╔═══╗
╟JPG ╢
╚═══╝
Goldie(Bought New SN 377425)/4" jointer/6" beltsander/12" planer/stripsander/bandsaw/powerstation /Scroll saw/Jig saw /Craftsman 10" ras/Craftsman 6" thicknessplaner/ Dayton10"tablesaw(restoredfromneighborstrashpile)/ Mark VII restoration in 'progress'/ 10E[/size](SN E3779) restoration in progress, a 510 on the back burner and a growing pile of items to be eventually returned to useful life. - aka Red Grange
Sorry I didn't respond to your question about the X-Y. It was made by Craftsman when they made industrial equipment. I don't know when it was made and I think they still show it in the "Craftsman" catalog but be sitting down when you see the price.
I believe Craftsman sold the patent to Palmgren, you see their model 83 - 8" rotary table on eBay quite often. It looks exactly like the one in my photo.
Don G
I did not realize you left me hanging!:D So no need to be 'sorry'.
I can well imagine the $ needed to get one of them.
X - Y - Rotary, quite handy fer sure!
Stepped jaws on the vise, or parallel bars?
╔═══╗
╟JPG ╢
╚═══╝
Goldie(Bought New SN 377425)/4" jointer/6" beltsander/12" planer/stripsander/bandsaw/powerstation /Scroll saw/Jig saw /Craftsman 10" ras/Craftsman 6" thicknessplaner/ Dayton10"tablesaw(restoredfromneighborstrashpile)/ Mark VII restoration in 'progress'/ 10E[/size](SN E3779) restoration in progress, a 510 on the back burner and a growing pile of items to be eventually returned to useful life. - aka Red Grange
Another opinion! After reading your comments regarding the history and introduction to the MK5, there is a good possibility the SS engineers changed the slot dimensions on the Mk5 table was to eliminate the possibility of current ER users to interchange components between the two. I have no proof, just a thought.
Another opinion! After reading your comments regarding the history and introduction to the MK5, there is a good possibility the SS engineers changed the slot dimensions on the Mk5 table was to eliminate the possibility of current ER users to interchange components between the two. I have no proof, just a thought.
Don G
I had the same thought. I also wonder whether it may have been a safety consideration. I don't know that the left/right slot distances to the center of the blade is/was a standardized dimension but with the Shopsmith's moveable quill the Shopsmith saw blade can be moved closer to the right hand slot and thus closer than you would find on other table saws. If the Mark 5/V slot accepted gauges from other manufacturers that gauge might have a larger head/protractor than the Shopsmith gauge and that could be trouble if it was big enough to run into the blade. I also have no proof.
algale wrote:I had the same thought. I also wonder whether it may have been a safety consideration. I don't know that the left/right slot distances to the center of the blade is/was a standardized dimension but with the Shopsmith's moveable quill the Shopsmith saw blade can be moved closer to the right hand slot and thus closer than you would find on other table saws. If the Mark 5/V slot accepted gauges from other manufacturers that gauge might have a larger head/protractor than the Shopsmith gauge and that could be trouble if it was big enough to run into the blade. I also have no proof.
I do not think there was a 'standard' size bar back then.
The ER slot spacing is both wider(~~1") and offset(blade not centered).
The 'left' slot is about 2" closer to the blade.
The 10ER miter gauge protractor head is essentially the same as the current version(the 10E is different).
Tis still a mystery.
╔═══╗
╟JPG ╢
╚═══╝
Goldie(Bought New SN 377425)/4" jointer/6" beltsander/12" planer/stripsander/bandsaw/powerstation /Scroll saw/Jig saw /Craftsman 10" ras/Craftsman 6" thicknessplaner/ Dayton10"tablesaw(restoredfromneighborstrashpile)/ Mark VII restoration in 'progress'/ 10E[/size](SN E3779) restoration in progress, a 510 on the back burner and a growing pile of items to be eventually returned to useful life. - aka Red Grange
I have come to the conclusion that SS selected the dimension of 23/32" wide for their mitre bar as a means to protect the item as "Proprietary" as I stated before. Common sense tells me that as many SS's as there are in the world, Incra, Krieg, and others would make a model that would fit a SS. I thought the bar was 8mm metric before but now know it is 23/32" according to SS data. I would almost bet the dimension Is protected with a patent or some sort.
