Shopsmith Forums

3rd pic of goldie here
Okay this is how I see it and I will measure diam of cutter head tomorrow and see if there is a difference in diam between it and the greenies.
In my eyes; outfeed table and cutter head mounting are in the same casting, that is fixed! PTO shaft hole is in that casting and in a fixed position also. Cutter head bearing holder is a fixed size and mounts into an area of the outfeed table casting. Cutter head PTO shaft goes through hole in the same casting. All determining the height of the cutter head perimeter in relationship to the height of the out feed table, which is lower then the table, again a fixed dimension. Since they are all fixed/predetermined the only way to get the cutting edge of the blade to the same height of the outfeed table is to raise it above the perimeter of the cutter head as needed. In my case is 9/32 of an inch of unsupported horizontally for the 4" length of the blade, which I do not find acceptable or feel safe with based on 4 other jointers I deal with, which one is a Delta X at my other shop, did not mention that earlier. So in my next post, since I am running out of room here I will tell you what I plan on doing, input is welcome and wanted!!!

My plan!!!!! Since so many dimensions are fixed and interrelate it took more then the standard 4 Martini think tank quota tonight!!!!!LOL
I have almost 3/16" gap above the PTO shaft and the hole in the casting, about a 1/4"+ clearance from blades to table castings at the closest point of contact, with the infeed table set at zero cut depth, which is the closest position of it to the cutter head, at that setting. I am going to shim in between the bearing holder and its mounting area in the out feed table casting 5/32nds.
That will raise the cutter head by that amount and let the blades be recessed back into the cutter head by 5/32nds and reduce there unsupported portion to 4/32nds/= 1/8th" from the cutter head to the heel of the bevel. I find this an acceptable and safe level of exposure. I will have to adjust the depth of which the jointer sits in its position on the SS to be properly aligned with the PTO, not a problem. Its that simple, see what 5 Martinis can do to expand the mind!! I need to get a dorm frig with freezer for the shop to cut down on travel time back and forth to the house, non productive time.

JPG, ventured out to the shop, greenie and goldie jointer cutter heads are the same size, used a machinist rule, looks like 1 7/8" diam, best I could do with them mounted in the jointers.
FYI, the blades on the greenie has "Disston" embossed on them,I think they were a tool steel manufacture back when. Nope, still are, making blades and cutting things.
http://disstontools.com/ourhistory.html

You are obsessed with the 'unsupported' dimension of the back side of the blade. Mine has operated for over a half century with that same 'situation'.

Keep in mind the SS blades are tapered. They are also wedged in place. As the wedges are tightened, the wedges exert force against the blade which causes the tapered blade to be escape proof. This is different from the typical jointer blade retention hardware.

The dimension I would be concerned about is the amount of blade being secured by the stuff just mentioned.

Shim the bearing blocks if you must. It will increase the amount of blade in the head.

Make sure to not do so too much. You will likely need to increase the retaining screw's length.

I eagerly await the results of measuring the head diameter(yours and Dusty's).

Another way to compare is to measure the distance from the table tops(set for a zero cut) to the head at the leading edge of the blade at the apex and the distance from the table tops to the drive end shaft.

All this with 0 martinis.

rbursek wrote:JPG, ventured out to the shop, greenie and goldie jointer cutter heads are the same size, used a machinist rule, looks like 1 7/8" diam, best I could do with them mounted in the jointers.
FYI, the blades on the greenie has "Disston" embossed on them,I think they were a tool steel manufacture back when. Nope, still are, making blades and cutting things.
http://disstontools.com/ourhistory.html

Like so many 'American' institutions, Disston is under foreign control and a shadow if it's former self.

I would make sure those blades are indeed tapered(fatter at the bottom).

They are not tapered at the bottom, the blade is flat, maybe 5/64th thick, I will mic them up tomorrow. IF you feel comfortable with that much exposure, I may try them and see how they cut/lack of chatter ect. B4 I go a head and modify.
I will pull the ones out of the goldie for comparison, they are much "wider", adjusting screws are almost at the bottom.

I just recalled seeing the following tidbit over at Tool-Hunter.com:

One last recent improvement to the SS jointer sounds a little gross, but the motive is pure and the results were very effective. A few years ago SS increased the diameter of the cutterhead and increased the size of the knife locking wedges in order to tighten-up the spaces that can cause injury if an operator happens to get their hand too close to the running cutterhead. Again, this is available as a service part, but I'm not prepared to go to this extreme. My featherguard keeps me at a safe distance, and my fear of injury handles the rest.

It does sound as if you need to get some proper wedge-shaped Shopsmith blades.

I have two cutter heads. The diameter measures between 2.249" and 2.252". I took measure ments at several locations to ascertain that the cutter head dimensions were consistent.

The blades that I have are depicted here.

According to Dusty, his blades are only 0.015 difference in thickness over the width of 0.72. Detecting the taper would thus require careful measurement.

If they are indeed flat, I would not continue to use them.

Glad to hear about the cutter head diameter change. That would explain the difference in 'protrusion'.

The Cutter Head dimensions are depicted here:

[ATTACH]25286[/ATTACH]