3" Caster Upgrade - My Review

[dusty]

I got the washers and found something very interesting and something I can't explain. I used the same templates for both legs (I checked them). On the right side I need 1 washer to get the desired 1/4 and 1/2 rise and the washers are really unnecessary. On the left side I need 5 washer to get the desired elevations, without the washers even in the second position the legs barely clear the floor, you can't get 1 washers under them.

What explains the different in the legs? Why did I not have this issue with the old casters.

I have not yet installed the washers because I need help lifting the machine. I don't even know if I can get 5 washers in or should I redrill the holes.

You can do this by yourself. Take the headstock off tp work on the casters.

To answer your question about why the difference between legs, I would suggest measuring the hole location with respect to the floor.

When the legs are grounded, are all four wheels equal distant OFF the floor? I used a piece of 1/8" veneer as a feeler gauge. Mine are close but now equal. I attribute that to the fact that I referenced off the 9/32" original holes but I used 1/4" bolts to attach my drill guide to the legs.

"I would think long and hard about redrilling". Perfectly located holes would be fractions of an inch from where the holes are now. About all you would is enlarge the holes to get position.

When grounded on all four legs, you should be able to spin the wheels by hand. When elevated to the mid position, you should be able to move the machine without the legs dragging. If you have that, "I would think long and hard about redrilling".

[dusty]

Paul, If I am not mistaken, you were one of several who rebuilt caster wheels a while back. How did that rebuilt caster work for you?

The wheels, I think, look very much like the 3" wheels in the new caster assemblies.

[JPG]

Dusty, please go back and alter the posts that you referred to the holes as 9/16"(more than one post). 9/32" would be preferable.

Now to clarify one of my previous posts. IMHO, 1 9/16 is probably a proper offset from the original holes along the long connecting the original hole centers.

However that assumes the caster hole centers and the leg hole centers are coincident.

As Dusty pointed out, SS instructions call for drilling a 9/32" hole. The castor mounting holes are about 9/32" as well.

Now a 1/4" screw is used to attach the casters to the leg. GEE when you secure the first end(caster) the screw will probably rest against the bottom of the caster hole and probably the top of the leg hole. When securing the other end(caster) Lord only knows about that holey alignment.

Sooo that would lower the leg by up to a 1/6". With Dusty's smaller leg holes, the offset would be leg 1/32" lower. It might also explain why only one casater wheel is off the floor in one of his pix.

I would be curious what Dusty's result would have been had he inserted bushings(9/32 od x 1/4" id) in the caster mounting screw holes.




Up/Down 4X???? Ever hear of 'scooting'?:D

Now if I did his correctly, here is a link to Ed's experience with the 'new' casters.
https://forum.shopsmith.com/viewtopic.php?t=10221


P.S. Ed, I missed yer casting hole ctc discrepancy earlier. Something to be concerned about with used purchases.

[dusty]

I think I made the dimensional corrections (9/16" to 9/32") where needed. Hope that did not cause any problems.

I can not go back to verify reality in the photo where one of the wheels appeared to be grounded when the legs were grounded. I did verify that there is an air space beneath all four wheels when the legs are grounded.

This is important. We do not want the wheels supporting any weight when the legs are suppose to be grounded thus supporting the Mark V. This is sometimes an issue on my garage floor. There are at least a couple locations where the floor undulates just enough to be a stability issue. I have learned to check everytime I relocate the unit and anytime I am having difficulty doing a table alignment.

[JPG]

I think made the dimensional corrections (9/16" to 9/32") where needed. Hope that did not cause any problems.

I can not go back to verify reality in the photo where one of the wheels appeared to be grounded when the legs were grounded. I did verify that there is an air space beneath all four wheels when the legs are grounded.

This is important. We do not want the wheels supporting any weight when the legs are suppose to be grounded thus supporting the Mark V. This is sometimes an issue on my garage floor. There are at least a couple locations where the floor undulates just enough to be a stability issue. I have learned to check everytime I relocate the unit and anytime I am having difficulty doing a table alignment.

As an oversight, I neglected the following in my previous post.

The original casters exhibit about 1/16" 'slop' in the vertical direction due to the tension retaining ring in a groove near the 'top' end. I assume the newer 3" casters exhibit a similar characteristic.

I do not think the wheels need to actually raise off the floor as long as no significant weight is supported by the casters. That slop allows a no support condition with the wheels touching the floor as long as it is positioned within the 1/16" slop range. That 1/16" range is small indeed and may be a roll of the dice(tolerances) to attain. However if slight pressure upward to the wheel results in any motion upward(of the caster only), we can assume the wheels are not supporting any appreciable weight.

[JPG]

Ed: Since you have documented the template/leg hole ctc distance discrepancy with a pix, what is the ctc distance of the original holes in the older template(and your caster mounting holes)?

All casters/legs that I have measured are 4 1/8" ctc. That includes recent(casters with screws retaining the cam shaft) and greenie vintage. It also agrees with Dusty's dimensions. It also includes casters with both foot pedal locations.

What is not clear to me is, do your legs/casters have a different ctc spacing, or is the earlier template 4" rather them 4 1/8"? If so if you 'picked'(originally) the wrong hole to register on, your holes would have been 1/8" off.

I am going back to your thread where you showed the hole alignment problem. If what this post states is not consistent with that pix, I shall return here.

[JPG]

Well I went and have returned.

The following post provided the major clue as to the problem with the earlier instructions/template.
https://forum.shopsmith.com/viewtopic.php?p=115881&postcount=37

Notice in that post, he mentioned the total separation between locating and center punching of the two holes.

First the template was used to reference off the existing hole(only that one hole). Then the template was used to center punch the first hole.

Then the template was moved so as to reference the second original hole. Then the template was used to center punch the second hole.

Notice the two 'original' holes were not simultaneously aligned with the original holes at any time(thus the actual ctc spacing of those reference holes on the template was irrelevant(and NOT 4 1/8"))!

That leaves with the distance between the original hole and the corresponding new hole. I believe all versions move the holes 1 3/4" which is too much. Due to the slop(9/32 holes vs 1/4 screws) in the leg and caster mounting holes a precise hole offset is difficult to state with any good accuracy.

However IMHO 1 9/16 is a good distance if the hole slop is compensated for(1/4" leg holes and shimming the caster mounting holes), but if not, 1 1/2" will compensate for the hole slop.



Add to this the 'upside down template'(the template was printed assuming the legs were upside down, so the template printing was oriented with it all upside down, so the printing would be 'right' side up). That put 'up' towards the floor end of the leg. Also aligning the template edge to a rolled edge has to be sloppy at best.


All in all a good teaching example in how not to convolute a relatively simple procedure by deviating from common use of a template with two holes by providing a hole spacing different from reality and complicating things by requiring the template be moved in mid stream.

Ed assumed(as would I and most folks) that the template had the original holes spaced correctly, and that a single positioning of the template over those two holes would indicate where to center punch. Had that been done, the edge reference and up/down... would have been redundant and not necessary.

Notice that is essentially what Dusty did with his 'stick'!;)





I am curious what the exact old instructions were relative to 'repeating' template locating.

[paulmcohen]

Paul, If I am not mistaken, you were one of several who rebuilt caster wheels a while back. How did that rebuilt caster work for you?

The wheels, I think, look very much like the 3" wheels in the new caster assemblies.

They worked much better then the original Shopsmith OEM casters when rolling but were still difficult to change direction. The new 3" ones both move easily and turn easily.

I ended up selling the upgraded 2" wheels for much more than Shopsmith sells the OEM ones new. They cost me about $8 and I sold them for $28, I was shocked.

[dusty]

The casters have been taken off and turned around so that the pedals are accessible from the rear side. The accessory shelf made it difficult to operate the pedals. This is much better.

I am now through with this upgrade and I am pleased with the results. As reported by those who completed earlier, the Mark V is much, much easier to move. In fact, it is now so easy to move that operating it without grounding the legs is an absolute NO-NO!

Will I get my money back? Probably not soon because I seldom my the Mark V but when I do it will not be difficult. This means that I'll be better able to move it around even when I am eighty.

[nil]

So my new mark 7 arrived yesterday, and I ordered the upgraded caster set with it. It had a relatively recent date on the template (may 2012, I think), so I followed it exactly, lining up the template so both original holes matched up exactly when lit from behind the leg, then I punched and drilled, and I was disappointed to find that the stand barely clears the floor on the highest level.

This was really disappointing. I even made 1/4 inch holes so that there would be no slop.

I'm not really sure what shopsmith is thinking. In fact, it mystifies me that in making new stands that they couldn't have pre-punched both sets of holes at the factory to match the casters that they have at the factory.