ShopSmith headstocks and Philosophy

[reubenjames]

A somewhat philosophical question for you to consider (and provide feedback on). Don't laugh, I will agonize over this one for days (or weeks!) and maybe never be satisfied with my final answer.

If you have a 1982 headstock, and yet you fill it with 2001 guts (motor, sheaves, belts, drive sleeve, quill, idler shaft, speed control)...do you have a 1982 headstock or a 2001 headstock? The serial number on the belt cover is still clearly a 1982 serial number. The quill handle and headstock wedge locks and a few other things are still 1982 (I can't give up my toggle switch). Is it a 2001 headstock trapped in a 1982 body? Or is it simply a 1982 headstock with some transplanted organs?

What do I put in my signature when this transfer is complete??

[pieceseeker]

Think of it like you would a restored classic car. Lots of new or newer replicated parts for classic cars nowadays. Maybe all the parts aren't original, but the body and motor numbers can still match.

Can you restore an original bearing when it goes bad? It's just a part that helps make up the whole.

[dusty]

You have a "totally rebuilt" 1982 Shopsmith Mark 5 that runs like a dream. Something that every Shopsmith owner would be proud to have.

The real question arises when you either swap out or rebuild to a Power Pro headstock. Do you have a Mark 5 or do you have a PowerPro?

I think the answer comes to only you and maybe to a person who contemplates buying whatever you have.

[BuckeyeDennis]

I agree with pieceseeker and Dusty. Let's say you buy a 1930's house, and then strip the interior down to the studs. You reconfigure some rooms, and put in new plumbing, electric, appliances, etc. What you end up with is a 1930's house, totally renovated and "updated".

[garys]

What do I put in my signature when this transfer is complete??

IF I had a signature, I would simply put, "I have a Shopsmith."

[JPG]

It is a restored/refurbished/upgraded/repaired/fixed/(altered?) 1982 Shopsmith headstock with a toggle switch.

Besides, what does it matter?

[reubenjames]

Besides, what does it matter?

To one for whom it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter.
It's an age old question, couched in Shopsmith terms, and your outlook on it can have real world impact. But primarily it mattered to *me* for the sake of properly identifying what it is (discerning truth) and for accuracy in "advertising" (conveying that truth), even if it's limited to something like my profile signature. I wouldn't want to say I have a 1982 Shopsmith that runs like a dream if it was disingenuous. A rebuilt or restored 1982 is an acceptable truth, though.

[dusty]

Besides, what does it matter?

To one for whom it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter.
It's an age old question, couched in Shopsmith terms, and your outlook on it can have real world impact. But primarily it mattered to *me* for the sake of properly identifying what it is (discerning truth) and for accuracy in "advertising" (conveying that truth), even if it's limited to something like my profile signature. I wouldn't want to say I have a 1982 Shopsmith that runs like a dream if it was disingenuous. A rebuilt or restored 1982 is an acceptable truth, though.

But would that be disingenuous?

[JPG]

Besides, what does it matter?

To one for whom it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter.
It's an age old question, couched in Shopsmith terms, and your outlook on it can have real world impact. But primarily it mattered to *me* for the sake of properly identifying what it is (discerning truth) and for accuracy in "advertising" (conveying that truth), even if it's limited to something like my profile signature. I wouldn't want to say I have a 1982 Shopsmith that runs like a dream if it was disingenuous. A rebuilt or restored 1982 is an acceptable truth, though.

But would that be disingenuous?

Does that matter either?

Hey he is just trying to be 'genuine'.

[reubenjames]

But would that be disingenuous?

I think if I said it without qualification it may be. If I'm touting the benefits of the Shopsmith to all the naysayers and I cite my beautifully running 1982 model as evidence of its quality and longevity, without mentioning a few details, then it's less than forthright. My hesitation was if, in such a situation, it was correct to refer to it as a 1982 in any capacity, or more correct to say a 2001 with a new (old) body.