Shopsmith Forums

Can anyone give me some history on this Mark 7? Certainly not the Mark 7 that I know???

Thanks

Chuck S.

VII
Only the most coveted Shopsmith of all time.
I'll let the real history buffs chime in.

This is an excerpt from the Shopsmith owner's site.

1960
Mark VII (7-in-1 tool) Included a spindle shaper & dust collection system. The unit could be tilted in either direction. Plastic racks controlled Headstock movement. The MARK V Headstock will fit on the Mark VII frame (the plastic rack must be removed). It also has a plastic speed control that tends to melt with extended use. Shopsmith, Inc. has very few repair parts for these tools.

I have two of these and a spare headstock. While they had some unique parts with problems I think that it was the best multi-tool made by Shopsmith (Magna). Google Shopsmith Mark VII or search this forum with JPG40504 or redleg and Mark VII to see some of the issues. I have the newer Mark 7 and the speed and tables are better. A working rack system should have been included with the Power Pro. If the old Mark VII headstock could only be upgraded with the Power Pro motor I would do it. Fixed the number 40504 sorry about that JPG.

One of the mysteries is why they were labeled both ways
(7,VII). Along with why Magna American produced plates with both UL and CSA symbols only to spot face the CSA symbol to obliterate it.

JPG40504 wrote:One of the mysteries is why they were labeled both ways
(7,VII). Along with why Magna American produced plates with both UL and CSA symbols only to spot face the CSA symbol to obliterate it.

I don't think it is a mystery. I would bet that someone simply did not catch the error in the art work until it was too late (costly) to correct it.

To paraphrase someone infamous, - "At this point, what difference does it make"?

dusty wrote:I don't think it is a mystery. I would bet that someone simply did not catch the error in the art work until it was too late (costly) to correct it.

To paraphrase someone infamous, - "At this point, what difference does it make"?

Infamous indeed!

The mystery in my mind is why after doing such with the Mark 5 plate, did they repeat with the Mark VII.

Perhaps they intended to get CSA approval, but were not successful with either model.

It makes no difference, but is interesting to ponder. History is like that. Irrelevant as long as you do not repeat it. Then you shoulda known better!

My mark VII has working rack and gears. It is REAL shame they didn't add that to the new 7. It is easy to move the head stock to the center and tip it up to vertical. Then you just easily crank it to a higher location. Better plastic, iron or brass would have made it practical. And of course all decent drill presses have a lifting mechanism with a gear rack

dusty wrote: To paraphrase someone infamous, - "At this point, what difference does it make"?

Infamous indeed!!

But, I'm not going political here!:D

The Mark VII is the one I'd LOVE to add to my collection, but there the space issue here. Once you know, and abide by, it's limitations, it's a real good machine.

Side story. When I was a kid, growing up in Northern California (Sunnyvale) my next-door neighbor had a Shopsmith. It was the MkVII. To the end of his days, my father cursed the whole family of Shopsmiths, because they had "plastic in the moving parts." If only he knew. (He'd have fallen in love with the E series, because all the important parts were cast iron, but he was too stubborn. And, and engineer.)

steve

e.friedl wrote:My mark VII has working rack and gears. It is REAL shame they didn't add that to the new 7. It is easy to move the head stock to the center and tip it up to vertical. Then you just easily crank it to a higher location. Better plastic, iron or brass would have made it practical. And of course all decent drill presses have a lifting mechanism with a gear rack

I'm curious, is the plastic rack strong enough to move the headstock in the vertical position? I wouldn't have thought so.

(Is the 55+ year old plastic STILL that strong?)

Oh, most decent drill-presses aren't designed to be lowered to the horizontal position, or used there. I do 80% of my drill-press work horizontally.

steve

skou wrote:I'm curious, is the plastic rack strong enough to move the headstock in the vertical position? I wouldn't have thought so.

(Is the 55+ year old plastic STILL that strong?)

Oh, most decent drill-presses aren't designed to be lowered to the horizontal position, or used there. I do 80% of my drill-press work horizontally.

steve

Time will tell here. If not I will be making new racks.

But if I do not get the belt/speed control lack of understanding, lack of believing it is correct, uncertainty over parts overcome, the rack will be moot!