Replacement base for Mk V?

[JPG]

At this link if you look at page 184 it shows the rack for the mark 2 and the mk 5 side by side. images 20 NS 21. yes they are different.
http://books.google.com/books?id=5t0DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA180&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

[ATTACH]5675[/ATTACH]

I thought an paste of the images concerned might be helpful.

HOW did you lift the images out of the google site?

[mikelst]

HOW did you lift the images out of the google site?

in windows

If you hit Ctrl and Print Screen at the same time then windows performs a screen grab. Paste that into a paint program and you can crop and edit as with any other image.

[robinson46176]

If you do a google book search for popular mechanics it will take you to this link:)
http://books.google.com/books?id=9tkDAAAAMBAJ

This is a historical look at the mechanics illustrated magazine and well worth a browse. I like this a site(?) a lot.

Now if you were to pull up the August 1967 issue and get to page 148 you will find an article on building a new base for the Mark 2. Or you could just use this link and go straight there.]http://books.google.com/books?id=rtMDAA ... q=&f=false[/URL]

If you study that image of using the unit inverted to the left and having the headstock quill coming up from the bottom and through the table, then you can probably understand why I wanted to get a good Mark VII when I was buying for the shop... The writer was wrong about getting most of the benefits of a Mark VII from a converted Mark II. Not the least of the missing benefits is the reversible motor.
-
A new Power-Pro headstock on a Mark VII base and table setup might be a heck of a machine...
It might create a whole new demand for used Mark VII's.

[mikelst]

For some reason I just now 'discovered' this post.

Question: Did the Mark II have a different rack than the 5/V? Did the table rotate 90º both direction like the VII?

How else can the headstock UNDER the table work with the 'normal' table top "on top"?

I think a close look at that picture will show the table is reversed in the carriage. Since there were no teeth int he table legs that would be a no-brainer on this system

[JPG]

I think a close look at that picture will show the table is reversed in the carriage. Since there were no teeth int he table legs that would be a no-brainer on this system

I already "got it". See #38,40:D Thanks for the c-prt scn refresher!:)

[etc92guy]

......the homebuilt Mark 2 base is pushing me in a direction I'm fighting not to go.....a 10 E or 10 ER for $50.....and it runs.

The only thing missing is the wheeled based, mitre gauge and fence. But it has a jointer.

Not to mention what the SWMBO is going to say, especially since she said no to begin with.

Looks like the homebuilt base would be an ideal fit for the 10 ER

[JPG]

......the homebuilt Mark 2 base is pushing me in a direction I'm fighting not to go.....a 10 E or 10 ER for $50.....and it runs.

The only thing missing is the wheeled based, mitre gauge and fence. But it has a jointer.

Not to mention what the SWMBO is going to say, especially since she said no to begin with.

Looks like the homebuilt base would be an ideal fit for the 10 ER

$50!!!! Buy it ANYWAY!!!!!

NOTICE that the 10E/R has NO bench tubes!!!! The pivots for this mk II base mount on the BENCH tubes. Not sure HOW you could adapt it for a 10 E/R.

FARMER: The reversing in NOT actually a REQUIREMENT for below table spindle. Reverse the direction of feed(l to r rather than r to l) and it is equivalent.