Carriage Stop Ring 516667, the intended function??

[dusty]

Metal?


Rather than continue to split hairs, realize that the purpose is to get it to space the headstock/carriage so the blade will be under the blade slot.

Absolute precise centering was/is not the objective.

That target slot is NOT a ZCI.

Your target slot is not a ZCI. Mine is and has been for several years.

Now my ZCI slot grows from time to time and I have to replace it but I still use a ZCI unless I plan to tilt or do dadoes and occasionally I use one for dadoes.

I use a ZCI as an alignment tool when doing a Main Table alignment.

[JPG]

Metal?


Rather than continue to split hairs, realize that the purpose is to get it to space the headstock/carriage so the blade will be under the blade slot.

Absolute precise centering was/is not the objective.

That target slot is NOT a ZCI.

I totally agree and I believe I said that before in another thread.

Yes you did!

[reible]

When I purchased the 5/8" saw arbor (555321) it came with instructions that said if you had the plastic lower guard then you needed must use the rubber spacer (501307) that came with the saw arbor. If you had the metal guard then you needed to get the AL spacer (555070). So it would appear that when they changed from the metal guard to the plastic they needed to move the blade location and perhaps have a new arbor(?). I might well have the old ring in my collection somewhere.

I checked the part number of the rubber spacer and that is the same one that is current now. The instructions were printed 8/93.

The part comes with the powerpro quill which is the machine I checked measurements verses Dusty and found the .040+ difference so it could be they compress with age, mine being only a few year old, but that will not account for that much of the space.

Ed

[ERLover]

I dont use my SS as a table saw so I am not commenting much here, BUT I though it was to protect the head stock if going to the verticle posintion and not locked, keep it from slamming down on metal on metal.
Also all of mine are on the far tube.

[JPG]

I dont use my SS as a table saw so I am not commenting much here, BUT I though it was to protect the head stock if going to the verticle posintion and not locked, keep it from slamming down on metal on metal.
Also all of mine are on the far tube.

Apparently thee are not 'enlightened' yet.

Nowhere in the SS literature does it refer to it as a shock absorber(which it is totally inadequate as IMHO).

The SS literature does refer to it as a spacer ring.

[JPG]

Metal?


Rather than continue to split hairs, realize that the purpose is to get it to space the headstock/carriage so the blade will be under the blade slot.

Absolute precise centering was/is not the objective.

That target slot is NOT a ZCI.

Your target slot is not a ZCI. Mine is and has been for several years.

Now my ZCI slot grows from time to time and I have to replace it but I still use a ZCI unless I plan to tilt or do dadoes and occasionally I use one for dadoes.

I use a ZCI as an alignment tool when doing a Main Table alignment.

But the mother ship has not.

If you cut the ZCI slot with the spacer, is it not repeatable?

[dusty]

The Rubber Baby Bumper (aka Carriage Stop Ring) exists with two different dimensions. The newer Stop Ring will be 1 7/16" wide while the older ones (the one I have on my 520) will be 1 3/8".

My 520 has a newer headstock which is built with a small nib on the side of the headstock where it meets with the rubber bumper. The older headstock(the one on my Shorty) has no nib. Therefore the rubber bumper meets with the headstock (rather than the nib on the headstock).

If I use the older rubber baby bumper on the newer headstock, the cut line lines up in exactly the same location as when I use the newer rubber baby bumper with the older headstock. If I exchange rubber baby bumpers, the cut line is no longer in the center of the table cutout (the insert).

My own conclusion: The nib on a headstock and the dimension of the rubber baby bumpers are somehow related. If the objective is to put the cut line in "the center" of your table insert, you might be disappointed - depending on which rubber bumper you have and which headstock you are using.

I build my own table inserts and I use, almost exclusively, a thin kerf blade. As I am currently configured, my table inserts are interchangeable. If I ever change rubber baby bumpers, that will not be the case.

For those who do not use ZCI, this is absolutely a "non-issue". For those who do use ZCI, be aware.

This now constitutes the end of a short discussion regarding rubber baby bumpers and their dimensions.

[JPG]

Am I correct in stating that the nib causes the blade slot to be further from the quill? If not correct the following is invalid.

If so, the new casting(nibbed) with the newer spacer(1 7/16") would place the blade 1/16" further from the insert center line than the diagram above which used the newer spacer with the older casting.

I am not questioning your measurements, but, this just seems contradictory(bassackwards) rather than premeditated(designed).

[dusty]

Am I correct in stating that the nib causes the blade slot to be further from the quill? If not correct the following is invalid.

If so, the new casting(nibbed) with the newer spacer(1 7/16") would place the blade 1/16" further from the insert center line than the diagram above which used the newer spacer with the older casting.

I am not questioning your measurements, but, this just seems contradictory(bassackwards) rather than premeditated(designed).

Your observation is correct. Using the new spacer (1 7/16") holds the carriage off by the difference in bumper dimensions. The blade will be positioned to the left of the intended cut line.

This was why I queried Shopsmith about the new (1 7/16") spacers when I received them. Using them messed up my alignment.

Now it is possible that I can do a complete main table alignment and compensate for that by moving the table to match the revised blade position. I have not done that and do not intend to because I have completing projects in the works right now. I have gotten back to work on the RV renovation.

[dusty]

Am I correct in stating that the nib causes the blade slot to be further from the quill? If not correct the following is invalid.

If so, the new casting(nibbed) with the newer spacer(1 7/16") would place the blade 1/16" further from the insert center line than the diagram above which used the newer spacer with the older casting.

I am not questioning your measurements, but, this just seems contradictory(bassackwards) rather than premeditated(designed).

Your observation is correct. Using the new spacer (1 7/16") holds the carriage off by the difference in bumper dimensions. The blade will be positioned to the left of the intended cut line.

This was why I queried Shopsmith about the new (1 7/16") spacers when I received them. Using them messed up my alignment.

Now it is possible that I can do a complete main table alignment and compensate for that by moving the table to match the revised blade position. I have not done that and do not intend to because I have completing projects in the works right now. I have gotten back to work on the RV renovation.
Hmmm, the enlarged trunnion holes. Why were they necessary???