Mark V: Can the Bases Be Swapped During Assembly?

[JazzLuthier]

FYI, I successfully converted the 510 to left tilt today. The legs are indeed interchangeable. I didn't run into any issues with this conversion.

Now I just need to fashion some tube clamps in order to reverse the table.

[dusty]

FYI, I successfully converted the 510 to left tilt today. The legs are indeed interchangeable. I didn't run into any issues with this conversion.

Now I just need to fashion some tube clamps in order to reverse the table.

Pictures Please

[JPG]

By 'threaded spline', are you referring to the spur gears that control table 'height'?

If so, yes that only affects in/out positioning of the table which will most likely be seldom adjusted once set up.

Not sure the trinox clamp will be effective. It appears to be intended for use with tubes that have flanged ends.

Some table raising 'gears' with the teeth removed would allow locking to work.

[everettdavis]

I know it is 2 AM, and I am tired, but I keep coming back to this thread.

Maybe I am not thinking correctly, but it seems to me the issues were the teeth were on the wrong side of the tubes in the carriage with the table oriented for under table shaping, causing the table tilt to not be 90 degrees the right way.

You have reversed the legs as I suggested which moved the casters to the new operational side.

You have installed the Headstock 180 degrees and moved the carriage across.

Why can you not take the carriage, which is now in the right place and rotate the carriage 180 degrees on the way tubes in its new location?

This will put the teeth on the opposite side to where they were, allowing you to rotate the table 180 degrees as well.

The table positioning and carriage wedge locks can be assembled from either side so they will swap operational sides when you reverse the carriage. You can put them where you want them, even mix and match one control on each side of the carriage.

Would this not allow you the 90 degree access in the desired direction for the table that it could not do when originally crossed over?

It is late as I say, and I am likely not envisioning the issue fully not having attempted it on gear here.

Kindest regards,

Everett

[JPG]

I know it is 2 AM, and I am tired, but I keep coming back to this thread.

Maybe I am not thinking correctly, but it seems to me the issues were the teeth were on the wrong side of the tubes in the carriage with the table oriented for under table shaping, causing the table tilt to not be 90 degrees the right way.

You have reversed the legs as I suggested which moved the casters to the new operational side.

You have installed the Headstock 180 degrees and moved the carriage across.

Why can you not take the carriage, which is now in the right place and rotate the carriage 180 degrees on the way tubes in its new location?

This will put the teeth on the opposite side to where they were, allowing you to rotate the table 180 degrees as well.

The table positioning and carriage wedge locks can be assembled from either side so they will swap operational sides when you reverse the carriage. You can put them where you want them, even mix and match one control on each side of the carriage.

Would this not allow you the 90 degree access in the desired direction for the table that it could not do when originally crossed over?

It is late as I say, and I am likely not envisioning the issue fully not having attempted it on gear here.

Kindest regards,

Everett

I think you were thinking correctly at 0200. I said essentially the same thing relative to a M5/500, but since my 510 carriage is 'buried' I could not be sure the control swap was possible with a 510.

This thread is defined as a base swap question, but only the headstock and carriage positioning on the way tubes are required to 'reverse' the tilt and position the headstock 'below' the table.

[everettdavis]

JPG, I know.

I was considering how my 520 looks in Drill Press Mode with the table below the Headstock, then envisioned what it would look like with the Headstock 180 degrees rotated, and under that table.

It didn't seem insurmountable, but being able to swap the retractable caster controls swapping the bases, controls, carriage and table could be done with no cash outlay which is what he was seeking.

For those of us who do that sort of thing repairing and restoring Headstocks it seems natural. To a user who had none of that experience repairing and removing them, it could appear a bit of a challenge to tear down your working machine I suppose.

I am glad to read he has done what he wanted and is looking to invest in other upgrades when and where they make sense for his purpose. I know the topic subject was written from the initial perspective as he considered making changes and what they would entail.

Everett

[everettdavis]

.

[JPG]

I am glad you mentioned the casters.

All that is required is to mount them on opposite legs.

[robinson46176]

It's a sickness.
Diana had to have an EKG today. How sad is it that all I could think about was WOW!!! If I had that base and big caster set off of that mobile machine base I could make a ...


.

[JazzLuthier]

I will post pictures when I can. Unfortunately, I have been ill for a few days now. I picked up some 1" tube clamps meant for conduit from Home Depot for about $1 each (4 total). I plan to pull out the wheel and shaft from the carriage to facilitate flipping the table, but I just haven't made it that far since I got sick. (Please see my previous posts about how I plan to put a tube clamp on the existing table posts, on either side of the carraige to hold the table in-place while the carriage wheel and shaft is removed.)

As an alternative solution, I have visions of repurposing the tubes and table mounts from my lathe duplicator since I don't use it very often. The tubes are short, but shouldn't be an issue since I would be making a table. The trick is to convert the table bases from the lathe duplicator from parallel to the tubes to 90 degrees. I'll be processing that some more and seeing what kind of design will resist sagging. I may even figure out a way to use the extension table legs to support the table on the opposite side. As I said, I will need to give it some more thought.

At the end of the day, I would leave the 510 table exactly as it is and have a separate routing/shaping table for little more than the cost of some thick ply and some metal angle, attached to the lathe duplicator table bases. When I need the lathe duplicator, it will be as simple as moving the four bolts from the router/shaper table to the lathe duplicator table.