MK VII compatability

[everettdavis]

I am amazed at the idiocy of the CS response. Due to new blood no doubt.

I was also shocked at the CS response. Probably the same person that recommended 1/4" belt deflection in the PowerPro.

Thanks for jumping in on this thread. I screwed up on the arbor recommendation. Please note this Homebrew!

I think the issue is more of a problem as the company Shopsmith Inc. never manufactured the Mark VII. It was made in 1960 by Magna Tool /Yuba decades before. They closed the doors on that company after splitting in 1964 and it was 1972 before a third party, found the warehouse filled with tooling and parts and made an offer to buy the assets. John Folkerth formed Shopsmith Inc in 1972 and began resurrecting manufacturing and producing Shopsmith tools.

Aside from not having parts, or ever manufacturing the Mark VII you have, I was astonished that they found and were willing to produce copies of any documents they could obtain for existing customers in 1971, much less 2015.

With all the product liabilities for hundreds of saws brands that found their way into product liability courts back in those days, I can well imagine why there would never be any support for a product they never made, as to do so, they would inherit attached product liabilities from a decades old product they had no official parts for anyway.

Ebay is often a source for Mark VII parts, even parted out carcasses with some meat still on the bones that can provide a few of the parts you may seek.

Don’t bash Shopsmith Inc. too hard as the current company had nothing whatever to do with the Mark VII.

Yes there is a heritage and a number of common parts still in the newer lines, but they just cannot open Pandora’s box on the VII.

[JPG]

Guess I am just too pragmatic to think one must ignore things which one did not create that are simply totally compatible. Current designs that are identical to original designs by predecessors seem to me void of any possible liability(after all the designer is not around).

I see no difference in advising one to use an arbor manufactured today from a design 50 years old on a 50 year old machine built by the original designer or on a machine built today by the current manufacturer. The function and purpose are identical.

Any one have a copy of that Mark VII info put out by 'SS'.

[everettdavis]

I see no difference in advising one to use an arbor manufactured today from a design 50 years old on a 50 year old machine built by the original designer or on a machine built today by the current manufacturer.

I understand the sentiment, however Shopsmith Inc. found themselves in court some time back on machines manufactured by Magna / Yuba in the 1950's that predated the Mark VII. They won their case but spent a lot of money doing so.

People are so lawsuit happy these days I think it makes corporate lawyers advising companies very skittish so they often advise their clients to keep a good distance from the appearance of supporting 40-50 year old equipment.

I find it amazing that we are even able to keep 50 even 60 year old equipment serviceable today, but that's the beauty of a machine that is manufactured with quality and durability in mind. We are fortunate Mr. Folkerth had the vision to resurrect the company, or all we could find today would be on eBay and in Craigslist, if any even survived.

[dusty]

This is not at all unusual but I wholeheartedly disagree with position of some regarding Shopsmiths'
responsibility to have current knowledge of the Mark VII. At this point in time, the only commonality between the Mark VII and Mark V is in their name. The Mark VII was the design and sales product of a company other than today's Shopsmith, Inc.

We got spoiled by the more experienced Customer Service personnel that have now departed Shopsmith. They had the background knowledge only because of the many years that they had worked at Shopsmith.

If you have technical questions about an Edsel do you really expect to get answers at the Customer Service Desk of your local Ford dealership?

[JPG]

This is not at all unusual but I wholeheartedly disagree with position of some regarding Shopsmiths'
responsibility to have current knowledge of the Mark VII. At this point in time, the only commonality between the Mark VII and Mark V is in their name. The Mark VII was the design and sales product of a company other than today's Shopsmith, Inc.

We got spoiled by the more experienced Customer Service personnel that have now departed Shopsmith. They had the background knowledge only because of the many years that they had worked at Shopsmith.

If you have technical questions about an Edsel do you really expect to get answers at the Customer Service Desk of your local Ford dealership?

I question answers gotten there re current models!

[JPG]

I see no difference in advising one to use an arbor manufactured today from a design 50 years old on a 50 year old machine built by the original designer or on a machine built today by the current manufacturer.

I understand the sentiment, however Shopsmith Inc. found themselves in court some time back on machines manufactured by Magna / Yuba in the 1950's that predated the Mark VII. They won their case but spent a lot of money doing so.

People are so lawsuit happy these days I think it makes corporate lawyers advising companies very skittish so they often advise their clients to keep a good distance from the appearance of supporting 40-50 year old equipment.

I find it amazing that we are even able to keep 50 even 60 year old equipment serviceable today, but that's the beauty of a machine that is manufactured with quality and durability in mind. We are fortunate Mr. Folkerth had the vision to resurrect the company, or all we could find today would be on eBay and in Craigslist, if any even survived.

Do share the details. I am aware that Yuba got sued way back before Magna American designed the Mark VII, but was not aware Shopsmith, Inc. got sued re earlier production. That would make SS skittish!

[charlese]

....We got spoiled by the more experienced Customer Service personnel that have now departed Shopsmith. They had the background knowledge only because of the many years that they had worked at Shopsmith.

I wholeheartedly agree, Dusty!

We were indeed spoiled by Customer service of yesterday! I believe the gals at CS shared the same love of the machines and the history of them as we do. It will take time for new folks to develop knowledges, skills and abilities to mimic the performance of Customer Service of 'yesterday'.

The attitude that was held back then was - [Shopsmith is your woodworking partner and wants nothing more than to keep you working, either through sending you parts, or coaching you along with written or verbal help.]

Have faith that improvements in CS help will be coming along. The leadership is there! It will just take a bit of time to develop and adsorb needed knowledge.

I can remember when I was often surprised by the nomenclature and history of Shopsmith. Now, years later, I,m still surprised, but not quite so often.

[beeg]

So does anyone KNOW the names of the people in CS now? It was my understanding that Gail? came back from 7 years ago.

[everettdavis]

I see no difference in advising one to use an arbor manufactured today from a design 50 years old on a 50 year old machine built by the original designer or on a machine built today by the current manufacturer.

I understand the sentiment, however Shopsmith Inc. found themselves in court some time back on machines manufactured by Magna / Yuba in the 1950's that predated the Mark VII. They won their case but spent a lot of money doing so.

People are so lawsuit happy these days I think it makes corporate lawyers advising companies very skittish so they often advise their clients to keep a good distance from the appearance of supporting 40-50 year old equipment.

I find it amazing that we are even able to keep 50 even 60 year old equipment serviceable today, but that's the beauty of a machine that is manufactured with quality and durability in mind. We are fortunate Mr. Folkerth had the vision to resurrect the company, or all we could find today would be on eBay and in Craigslist, if any even survived.

Do share the details. I am aware that Yuba got sued way back before Magna American designed the Mark VII, but was not aware Shopsmith, Inc. got sued re earlier production. That would make SS skittish!

Here you go, but the crux of the matter is that the injured party was injured on a machine made by Magna Engineering and sold by Montgomery Ward in 1954, that her fiancé bought at an estate sale in 1994 a full 40 years after the sale to the original owner. She was injured 29 Sep 1994.

They sued Shopsmith Inc., and the case was dismissed in 1998, but from that timely judgment, Huff appealed stating that the trial court erred and that Shopsmith assumed all the liabilities of the predecessor who went out of business 8 years prior to John Folkerth in 1971-72 purchasing some of their assets which in their opinion should legally transfer product liability under the 'product line' doctrine.

Shopsmith Inc. again prevailed with the 31 May 2001 decision as you can read in the attached document. All those legal expenses were borne by Shopsmith Inc., who the court ruled twice was not liable.

Eunice Patricia Nichols HUFF v Shopsmith Decided May 31 2001.pdf

(245.38 KiB) Downloaded 541 times

Everett

[Homebrew]

Alright, guys - I didn't mean to touch any nerves or rile anyone up so much; I was just looking to find out what parts available from the Shopsmith catalogue I could use on the machine I have in my shop. Several members of this fine forum have been very helpful in that matter, and I was also able to find I the back of the storage cabinet next to the dust collection bag a printed copy of a presumably abridged version of the owners manual. Though it's faded, the part numbers for the drill chuck and 1.25" table saw arbor match part numbers available online for the Mark V/5, model 500. That leads me to believe that the model 500 version of the 5/8" arbor will fit for me as well.

As for the coupling kit - if I can get back to asking questions - I noticed the kit , which includes coupler and hubs costs about $10.50 more than the coupler alone. Each hub costs somewhere between $3 and $4. What, then is the benefit of our having the coupling kit?