JPG wrote: ↑Wed Nov 17, 2021 8:30 pm
The drill press positioning of the table does not depend upon the tilt o° stop. The table is rotated 90° from there and has a different stop for drill press operation. If the slide rod were short, it COULD be used to set the drill press stop but a drill bit will do.(or a coat hanger wire).
JPG,
So, I have attached the Shopsmith manual that I have with the relevant pages that this proposed new alignment procedure replaces. Since pdf's seem to be the preferred format on the forum now, I attached the pages in pdf format. I disagree with the assumption on this thread, that many forum members are making, that any kind of alignment using a drillpress chuck translates unadulterated to an alignment that is useful for tablesaw mode when a sawblade arbor is mounted on the spindle. All systems that require calibration/alignment do so under a set of specified conditions, which in this case means the machine is vertical, drillpress chuck is mounted and main table is at 90° stop (based on the OP's description and his picture #4). So, as I stated previously this looks like a good replacement of the original alignment,
but ONLY for setting the 90° stop as detailed in the attached pdf. I don't subscribe to the idea that a "1/2" dia ball bushing shafting" is useful in setting the 0° stop. My reason is that I don't trust any systematic offsets are zero between the two cases. Now for tablesaw mode, I need the machine to be horizontal, sawblade arbor is mounted and main table is at 0° stop. This is where the alignment for 0° stop with a sawblade mounted is important IMHO. Others believe you can rotate the "1/2" dia ball bushing shafting" in hortizontal mode and get it perfectly level then raise the table (0° stop) up to meet it and set an alignment for this that applies to the tablesaw mode, but I disagree. This "might" be a great shortcut, but is not an alignment I would trust for setting the 0° stop in tablesaw mode. Frankly, I am a bit surprised by this thread. Usually anything related to "alignment" and there is copious discussion on the forum with differing viewpoints. I am a bit gobsmacked that everyone on the forum, except for me, has embraced this new alignment recommendation on this thread,
whereas usually they would challenge it. Like I said, it might be a great shortcut for some users, but I am going to stick with the recommended alignments. Alignments/calibrations are the one area where I always try to follow the rules/procedures in place because they exist for a reason, i.e. to counteract specific systematic offsets inherent to the machine for a particular set of conditions.