Possible purchase

"Wild Bad Bob" · Post by **"Wild Bad Bob"** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:55 am

Most likely, but the SS S# site and Mickyds both agree it was made in April-May of 85. I just got an email from the seller, it has a smooth grey finish, so I am confused!!! I hate conflicting facts. BTW, Good morning Dusty!!

"Wild Bad Bob" · Post by **"Wild Bad Bob"** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:57 am

Yes that is the article Dusty.

dgale · Post by **dgale** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:09 am

Many folks seem to get pretty fixated on the two-bearing quill…while a nice upgrade if you plan to turn large/heavy items on the lathe, it otherwise is not a mandatory or essential upgrade IMO. All other things equal between two machines (including price), I'd opt for the two bearing quill, but otherwise if I was investigating a used machine and didn't necessary have plans for large stock turning or other specific need, I wouldn't worry about it. Shopsmiths were made for decades before this was introduced and at least in my experience, my one-bearing quill machines have all held up fine and gone the distance without any bearing issues whatsoever. Basically, if you have a specific need for a two-bearing quill or otherwise are trying to decide between two similar machines and one has it and one doesn't, then you should opt for the two bearing version, but otherwise, don't worry about it - check out the machine, see what sort of condition it's in and what kind of work is required to bring it up to snuff vs. the selling price and decide based on that and don't get too fixated on if it's a two bearing model. Just my $0.02.

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:09 am

rbursek wrote:He emailed the S# it is Mark V-B 202442 which would make it produced in April -May 1985, that should have a dual bearing quill right?

The production chart that I most frequently refer to indicates that units with serial numbers greater than 190000 began production sometime in the Sept-October 1984 time frame.

[ATTACH]24827[/ATTACH]

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:21 am

rbursek wrote:Most likely, but the SS S# site and Mickyds both agree it was made in April-May of 85. I just got an email from the seller, it has a smooth grey finish, so I am confused!!! I hate conflicting details. BTW, Good morning Dusty!!

My suspicion about some of these apparent contradictions is that some units were produced using "old" parts still in inventory at the time of an upgrade or design change.

Example: A headstock casing that had been painted smooth gray would not be discarded simply because newer headstocks were being painted rough-gray. If this happened, it would explain many of the contradictions of detail.

Good Morning to all.

PS: We must also remember that many of the units we discuss here are units that have been around a long time and in the hands of more than one owner. Each of these owners could have made changes that deviate from the original production configuration. Changing out quills is an example that immediate comes to mind.

I would not bet that the two machines that I have are currently configured with their original quills. I have had both headstocks in a state of disassembly at the same time. There is no guarantee that they went back together with their original parts.

"Wild Bad Bob" · Post by **"Wild Bad Bob"** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:36 am

Just confused with the conflicting facts, smooth grey, but SN indicates by other info it should be hammered/rough, owner sez bought in 83, SN indicates other. I dont like inconsistencies.

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:09 am

rbursek wrote:Just confused with the conflicting facts, smooth grey, but SN indicates by other info it should be hammered/rough, owner sez bought in 83, SN indicates other. I dont like inconsistencies.

To avoid inconsistencies in matters related to Mark 5/v configurations, you will probably need to quit cross referencing these details. Otherwise, inconsistencies will prevail.

"Wild Bad Bob" · Post by **"Wild Bad Bob"** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:15 am

Then that must mean the info on these various sites/threads is inaccurate, even the one from SS itself with the serial numbers and model change descriptions above it, if in fact that is the original PH on the machine in question. If in fact it is the original, then the info here to this topic has no validity, which makes it useless. "I met him on the internet, he said he is a French Model"
http://www.shopsmith.com/ownersite/faq/markv.htm

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:56 am

rbursek wrote:Then that must mean the info on these various sites/threads is inaccurate, even the one from SS itself with the serial numbers and model change descriptions above it, if in fact that is the original PH on the machine in question. If in fact it is the original, then the info here to this topic has no validity, which makes it useless. "I met him on the internet, he said he is a French Model"
http://www.shopsmith.com/ownersite/faq/markv.htm

I certainly did not mean to say that the information is inaccurate but I do contend that when inconsistencies do exist, it is not surprising. The Shopsmith has a much varied back ground, having been built by more than one manufacturer, over a long period of time, with breaks in construction periods when the business changed hands..

"Wild Bad Bob" · Post by **"Wild Bad Bob"** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 11:14 am

Agreed, and I may find out from the owner today if he is the original one that it in fact was bought in 83, and for some reason there was warranty work done on the PH and that in fact is why the discrepancy, exp warranty work, sent a new PH made in 85 and put in the old housing to match the rest of the machine but put a current SN tag on it.