Shopsmith Forums

Nice jig design, Dusty! How are you going to make it? Are you just going to glue a 3/8" thick strip to a piece of 5/8" thick MDF or something?

As an alternative, if you have a large flat work surface, you could lay the tables upside down, then butt a 3/8" thick strip up against the tables, lay the rails on top of the 3/8" strip, and go from there.

Gary

greitz wrote:Nice jig design, Dusty! How are you going to make it? Are you just going to glue a 3/8" thick strip to a piece of 5/8" thick MDF or something?

As an alternative, if you have a large flat work surface, you could lay the tables upside down, then butt a 3/8" thick strip up against the tables, lay the rails on top of the 3/8" strip, and go from there.

Gary

I may just do that, Gary. That would be a lot easier than storing a jig that is so seldom used.

The 3/8" offset, the distance from the plane of the main table top to the top of the rail, is an empirical number. It is not a Shopsmith specification. I simply mounted the front rail, held it downward in the mounting holes and secured the nuts that secure the rail to the table. I then measured where it was (3/8") and used that dimension to set the rest of the rails.

Yes, Gary, if I made it I would use the two piece process that you describe. The only value of a jig, for me, is that I can start something and if I get called away (which I often do), I can take up right where I left off because the jig and all of the movable pieces would somehow be clamped to the table/tables.

dusty wrote:Do you still have a problem, Bruce or have you resolved it by now? Just curious. This thread did start with your report.

Dusty,
I think I remember mentioning in an earlier post that I was going to remove some shims that I had installed when I originally installed the 520 upgrade. Well, the procrastinator in me has not allowed me to get it done. I will try to do it soon and see how it works. I'll post my results then. Thanks to everyone for bringing this issue back to the forefront of my short-term memory. It seems I have no long-term memory.

Bruce

[quote="dusty"]I just reread this thread and realize now that you do not have a 520. This is only significant because the installation/alignment procedures for the 505/510 specifically mention using shims to align the tubes. I suspect that 500 procedures are the same as 505/510.
...
I do not believe that this should be a deterrence to your installing a 520 upgrade kit. If the same problem existed with a 520 rail, it could be resolved the same way (with shims)."
.....................................

This is always a gray area it seems. "Upgrades", that is.
I bought my "Mark V" (finally looked at the plate on the motor housing) at a county fair and picked it up at the SS facility in San Leandro. Soon thereafter I upgraded to what SS called 510-R, which included all new tables, now completely assembled with tube rails. These parts too came from the SS store in San Leandro. The only shims I ever saw were part of the alignment of the Extension table base, which is bolted on, not studded. Adjusting rails wasn't mentioned. Nor was that a mallet should not have been necessary to insert extension tubes. Who knew?

It was well into this thread before I realized, also, that you were talking 520 and I was not. But now that I've finally seen an actual 520 rail I agree that a problem resolution on a 520 would also work on a 510-R.

Reading these threads is making me feel much better about the prospects of finally getting the various tables to finally line up, one way or the other, with some careful measurements and a few pounds of studs, washers, nuts and shims. If I can get the rails to fit like Nick's in the Sawdust Session I will count my blessings and forget about the other stuff. At least my Main is now flat!

The best thing of all that I'm picking up from this forum is that it isn't necessary to live with sloppy alignments-- there are fixes.

(But dang! I just realized the sale on the 520 Pro Fence upgrade ended almost 2 weeks ago. Guess I'll hafta wait for the next one. Should've visited the Forum earlier.)

Thanks everyone for all the good info!

dusty wrote: This does not mean that you cannot resolve and alignment problem by using shims but the ones provided in the help kit won't do the trick.

Thanks for the update. I was contemplating ordering that kit, mostly for the shims.
I'm sure I can find shims at Woodcraft or maybe even Home Despot.

keakap wrote:Thanks for the update. I was contemplating ordering that kit, mostly for the shims.
I'm sure I can find shims at Woodcraft or maybe even Home Despot.

I don't believe you will have a problem. Remember, this is not a critical measurement. You are going to be working on gaps on the order of 1/32" to 1/16" and not .003".

I used common flat washers to do the 510. I had to sort through a small handful to get the ones I used and I could have used any without a negative effect.

I am so pleased that you are coming to a point where you once again feel confident that you can do fine woodworking with your Mark V. Please do keep us posted with reports of your progress and ultimate success.

Well, I removed the shims and put the rail back on. I then loosened up the studs on the extension table. With no shims, the tube will not slide into the extension table. I noticed that for some reason I had an extra washer in the right rear rail mount screw. I reassembled with only one shim on each screw and aligned everything so that the tube slides easily through both tables. Now, the rear rip fence lock still seems tighter on the main table then the extension table, but I can live with it. I also lubricated the cam locks on the fence lock levers and that helped considerably, so I am going to consider the problem solved.

Bruce wrote:Well, I removed the shims and put the rail back on. I then loosened up the studs on the extension table. With no shims, the tube will not slide into the extension table. I noticed that for some reason I had an extra washer in the right rear rail mount screw. I reassembled with only one shim on each screw and aligned everything so that the tube slides easily through both tables. Now, the rear rip fence lock still seems tighter on the main table then the extension table, but I can live with it. I also lubricated the cam locks on the fence lock levers and that helped considerably, so I am going to consider the problem solved.

Good show. I hope that it now works in a manner much better than before. I don't understand why the fence would fit tighter on one table than another but if it works for you - that is great.

Shims required to align front rail.

[ATTACH]4534[/ATTACH]

To finish off my (whining) portion of this thread, here goes. Oh, btw, glad you found your solution Bruce, good to hear (and file away, for if ever needed).

I think the old measurements between tables that I published earlier were irrelevant because my ole Main table was defective. But what remains is a real stinker.

The RAILS are the problem. (Remember this is a 510-R.)

I'd get the Ext table lined up to the Main, I thought, then when the connector tubes got tightened the rails just pulled out of line. Everything "seemed" to be the same size and all...

Then just for the heck of it, decided to check the rail dimensions, and saw a strange thing-- the inner diameters were different.
Whut?
Well, with the outer diameters the same, that means only one possible thing.

We've all been focusing on the 'positions' of the rails, but not the Sizes!
Yep, the outermost point of the rail-- the part the Fence gets SET against-- got knocked off because the INNER diameters of the rails are different!
Inner D Main rail = 1-1/16; Inner D Aux table rails = 1-1/8, meaning the wall thicknesses of the different rails are Different! {When the tube puts the inner wall of two connecting rails in a plane, the outer wall of the Aux table rail is then a full 1/32" further out.}

No shims can fix this.

But it looks like one thing and one thing only CAN fix it.

I be watching my e-mail for the next SS sale on 520 ProFence upgrade.

Thanks to everyone for your inputs, without which I probably would have (again) just thrown up my hands in despair and thrown a cover over the SS (again) for another year or two.

Further discussion on the particulars of different table types or vintages reveals some interesting details.
I started out with a 500.
Upgraded to 510-- all new tables with tubular rails, I believe all parts compatible in size.
Later found the main table defective, and it was replaced.
Now it gets interesting, and this should be checked whenever there seem to be misalignment problems between table sets, or if you're having trouble with tight connector tube setups.

The replacement Main table set was different:
Old table-- rail tube wall thickness ~1/8"
---------- rail mounted to table with discrete 1/4-20 screws, Only;

Repl. table-- rail tube wall thickness measurably less than 1/8";
------------ rail mounted to table via studs in rail tube, and NUTS;

[When I lock tables together the connector tube aligns the INNER surfaces of the tubes, making the OUTER surfaces misaligned.]

Among other things, this difference in rail material means that my auxiliary tables are incompatible with the main table in two major ways-- 1) when connector tubes are used, as is, it is impossible to lock two tables closely together with both front and rear connector tubes; 2) so fence parallelism is unreliable (dangerous!) across tables.

An oddity beyond this is considering upgrading to 520. I understand there is an alignment 'gauge' used to set up initial alignment of the new rails, but my Aux tables allow Zero adjustment of rails. I have no idea how this is going to work out. I suspect drill bits will be involved.

So if you are having trouble with table alignments, check ALL parts for compatibility, especially the rail tube dimensions (if the O.D. is the same but I.D. is not, you got big trouble that shims can't fix!)