Shopsmith Forums

I saw a picture of two extension tables joined together. Is it and accurate procedure? How to they do it? Not talking about the chrome tubes but actually joining two tables to make table wider permanently.
Thanks,
Tom

Not my picture, I don't think. But, I did join two. I just held them together with C clamps and drilled holes through the lips. 5 holes, IIRC. Then fastened them with bolts, nuts and lock washers.

I made a 'triple' narrow Mark 5 table by attaching angle iron and using one set of screws for the mounting tubes. Accurate?, not likely since the tables have cast in rails that vary.

woodmeister wrote:I saw a picture of two extension tables joined together. Is it and accurate procedure? How to they do it? Not talking about the chrome tubes but actually joining two tables to make table wider permanently.
Thanks,
Tom

I deleted my comments as they seemed to be misdirected.

I did briefly play with this idea on my 500 extension tables many years ago and it did not work as well as I hoped. I used two angle iron parts between the tables and screwed the legs on after using the existing hardware.

Sometime after that shopsmith came out with the 510 extension tables that used studs rather then bolts. I think that might work better as the two table tops can/could be adjusted independently. If I were ever in need of this idea again I would start there.

There are several variations of these tables, I have a stack of them on a shelf that I've taken off when I got them off ebay for the legs only. You would want two of the same vintage to make this work really well. In my case I had two identical tables since I had extension tables for both sides of the machine and upgraded to the wide table.

Ed

What am I missing? I laid the tables upside down on my flat bench and drilled the holes. The lips fit together quite well. The wider table(s) line up with the main table very well.
I don't understand the need for angle iron. Again, what don't I understand?

Gene Howe wrote:What am I missing? I laid the tables upside down on my flat bench and drilled the holes. The lips fit together quite well. The wider table(s) line up with the main table very well.
I don't understand the need for angle iron. Again, what don't I understand?

Objective. Do you want the extra table to the right of the legs and table, do you want the extra table to the left of the legs and table or do you want the legs centered on both tables? Just depends on what you want to do.

Ed

Gene Howe wrote:What am I missing? I laid the tables upside down on my flat bench and drilled the holes. The lips fit together quite well. The wider table(s) line up with the main table very well.
I don't understand the need for angle iron. Again, what don't I understand?

What vintage tables are we working with here? Mark 500 or Mark 510?

The reason for the 'angle iron' is to provide a 'base' for the tables to mount on. It makes no difference if 500 or 510/520 tables. That way each table is independently adjustable. I think the 510/520 can be aligned satisfactorily. Not so the narrow aux tables with cast in rail.

I made a triple narrow, but did not intend for it to be accurate other than height(flat). I did not do the stud conversion, but that is on the to do list. Currently they are shimmed to the angle iron.

[/quote]

What vintage tables are we working with here? Mark 500 or Mark 510?[/quote]
Mine are 500s.
Like JPG, all I needed was for them to be flat. They are.