Does Size Matter?

teamtj · Post by **teamtj** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 11:16 am

I inherited an old SS and also bought a PowerPro.

I've not used the old one (too many missing parts) but would like to use some parts of it, if possible.

I was looking at the sanding disk and saw arbor and noticed that the old ones are shorter than the new ones. I've attached pictures.

Does that make any difference? They seem to fit...

Just wondering before I use them and mess something up...

charlese · Post by **charlese** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 11:47 am

Probably only makes a difference in the ease of the saws and disks going through the slot in the table insert. Is the table on the older machine smaller than the new one?

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:01 pm

With the introduction of the larger 505-520 table, the distance to the blade slot in the table was increased. The size of the blade insert hole(in the table) was also increased.

The SS has a sleeve on the way tube that functions as a stop between the table carriage and the headstock. This sleeve positions the blade under the blade slot. The larger table requires a longer sleeve.

Since the slot distance was increased, the saw blade arbors needed to be lengthened also. This is a simplified explanation, there are additional 'details'.

With the increased table 'hole' it was now possible to use the sanding disk at the blade slot opening. So a longer hub was required for the sanding disk also.

Earlier models(10E/ER, Mark 5, Mark 2, Mark VII and Mark V 500) used the sanding disk off the left side of the table. The earlier models also used a thicker cast aluminum disk.

The shorter hubs can be used with a large table model, but the blade will need to be positioned manually using the quill feed. With off table sanding, the hub length does not matter.

Nuf said?;)

SDSSmith · Post by **SDSSmith** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 6:02 pm

[quote="JPG40504"]With the introduction of the larger 505-520 table, the distance to the blade slot in the table was increased. The size of the blade insert hole(in the table) was also increased.

The SS has a sleeve on the way tube that functions as a stop between the table carriage and the headstock. This sleeve positions the blade under the blade slot. The larger table requires a longer sleeve.

Since the slot distance was increased, the saw blade arbors needed to be lengthened also. This is a simplified explanation, there are additional 'details'.

With the increased table 'hole' it was now possible to use the sanding disk at the blade slot opening. So a longer hub was required for the sanding disk also.

Earlier models(10E/ER, Mark 5, Mark 2, Mark VII and Mark V 500) used the sanding disk off the left side of the table. The earlier models also used a thicker cast aluminum disk.

The shorter hubs can be used with a large table model, but the blade will need to be positioned manually using the quill feed. With off table sanding, the hub length does not matter.

Nuf said?]The longer hubs allow the sanding disc and saw blades to be used with the new guard system. I do not think you will be able to use the shorter arbors (saw and sanding disc) with the new guards on or off table. Unless of course, you are looking for a little excitement.

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 6:37 pm

SDSSmith wrote:The longer hubs allow the sanding disc and saw blades to be used with the new guard system. I do not think you will be able to use the shorter arbors (saw and sanding disc) with the new guards on or off table. Unless of course, you are looking for a little excitement.

De blue is past SOP!;)

It gets exciting only if one is careless!:)

SDSSmith · Post by **SDSSmith** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 6:42 pm

[quote="JPG40504"]De blue is past SOP!]Now that was clear as mud!

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 6:50 pm

SDSSmith wrote:Now that was clear as mud!

Hoookay, removing the excess soil, I do not think you will be able to use the shorter arbors (sanding disc) off table.

Been done that way for over 65 years.

idcook · Post by **idcook** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 7:21 pm

the blade will need to be positioned manually using the quill feed.

reible · Post by **reible** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 7:52 pm

So after cleaning up the shop I figured I go with pictures so show that the short arbors will NOT work with the guard systems of the 505/510/520.

If you are silly enough to not use the guards for protection then I can't help. It is been said before, use the safety equipment you have, it means nothing that you made it 40 years without.......... Blab blab blab. Use it!

I took a few pictures so lets get started with them.

First this is the 520 system with the proper arbor in place with blade mounted and bottom guard in place and adjusted. Notice that the blade is spaced away from the plastic housing so it will not touch.

[ATTACH]24509[/ATTACH]

From the other side you can see the arbor is seated fully. Also note that the guard is mounted on the quill.

[ATTACH]24510[/ATTACH]

Now for demonstrations only I have a blade from my original 500 system setting up against the plastic housing. It could never be used with the contact shown, you would need another 1/8" or so for it to clear.

[ATTACH]24511[/ATTACH]

Now when we go to the other side you will see it is not even close to mounting properly, even with the blade shoved as far as it will got in to the housing. You would need to move the arbor out at least an 1/8" farther out on the shaft, not that it matters as the arbor is not seated as it is and it only gets worse.

[ATTACH]24512[/ATTACH]

So moving the quill will help??? NO it will not as the guard moves with the quill so the other relationship doesn't improve.

[ATTACH]24513[/ATTACH]

They just don't play well together.

Ed

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 9:36 pm

Yep, but the sanding discs were my last point.