Shopsmith Newbie - Drill Press not Vertical?

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 1:54 pm

racerchris wrote:Ok, so took the plunge and bought a used SS 500. Finding that the way tubes are not 90 degrees to the horizontal tubes. Is this normal?

You have already received several answers and this post may very well not add anything to what you have already been assured but here goes nothing.

These are pictures of my 510 taken since I read your post. You can interpret but if you have questions please post them.

[ATTACH]3924[/ATTACH][ATTACH]3925[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]3926[/ATTACH][ATTACH]3927[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]3928[/ATTACH]

mickyd · Post by **mickyd** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 2:17 pm

Sure do like your toys Dusty!!

tom_k/mo · Post by **tom_k/mo** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 2:21 pm

Boy Dusty, sure can't argue with THOSE numbers... Cool toy too.

charlese · Post by **charlese** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 3:16 pm

Hi Dusty! I don't own a Wixey - so am a little confused by the readings in a couple of those photos. The Wixey shows angles of 89.x degrees on the vertical way tubes. In reality, isn't the 89 degrees actually 91 degrees? Does the Wixey measure angles greater than 90 deg.?

I thought all Mark V's were designed to over-throw the vertical position for safety reasons. Isn't this true? 91 degrees is what I remember! Same memory as Chris (nuhobby).

reible · Post by **reible** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:14 pm

Hi,

See Dusty hasn't slowed down since his last birthday... beat me to the punch by hours!!!!

Well since I took the picture might as well show them to you too. Mine too is short of 90 deg. The reason this works is where the pivot point is and where the weight is... I will not bother to explain because I'm sure someone will not agree and we will end up with 30 posts of disagreement.

I also will not do the math to see how many inches off relates to degrees off. I know how you guys hate math.

So here are my pictures. Note the machine was vertical then zeroed then dropped down and latched. The degrees you get are what was shown. I will mention that it was on the wheels so the weight in the vertical mode may have compressed them etc etc.

[ATTACH]3921[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]3922[/ATTACH]

Ed

racerchris · Post by **racerchris** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:41 pm

mickyd wrote:If your machine looks like this, it's called a Greenie and yes, it's 50 years old.

Yup, that's it. It was advertised as a "1986" model, but clearly it is not. Although table has been upgraded to the 510 model, as there other signficant changes from 1955 to 1986 that would be a down side?

racerchris · Post by **racerchris** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:50 pm

Thanks all for the pics. These pics definitely suggest there is something wrong with mine... Both look like very nice, well taken care of units. Congrats! Perhaps, the newer ones are more accurate in this regard?

a1gutterman · Post by **a1gutterman** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:55 pm

racerchris wrote:Yup, that's it. It was advertised as a "1986" model, but clearly it is not. Although table has been upgraded to the 510 model, as there other signficant changes from 1955 to 1986 that would be a down side?

Well...for one thing, unless it was updated, you have a 3/4hp motor vs. the newer 1 1/8hp. That should knot be a bad thing, as long as you use 9" and/or thin kerf saw blades (according to some on this forum).

a1gutterman · Post by **a1gutterman** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:57 pm

racerchris wrote:Thanks all for the pics. These pics definitely suggest there is something wrong with mine... Both look like very nice, well taken care of units. Congrats! Perhaps, the newer ones are more accurate in this regard?

I do knot believe it is a question of accuracy, and there has been no significant design in the frame...

racerchris · Post by **racerchris** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:04 pm

a1gutterman wrote:I do knot believe it is a question of accuracy, and there has been no significant design in the frame...

Thanks for the reply. I don't have the fancy digital gauge, but a T square and some quick math suggests mine is out by about 3 degrees...