Shopsmith Forums

What is the physical difference between the Mark V 500 sawblade arbors and those used for the Mark V 505,510,520 and Mark 7? If you have answered this in a previous post, don't be discouraged. No man can illuminate another's mind until the appointed time. The light does not come on for each of us at the same time. Sometimes, it takes a different approach. Also, does the size of rubber gasket on the way tubes matter. I saw one in Doug Reid's video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4DJFtjJR7c that is much larger than the one I have on my way tube. Is it just a reference point?

Are the arbors in the photo, mark V 500 or Mark V 505,510,520?

Saw Blade Arbors for MARK 7 & MARK V Models 520,510 and 505
555130 1-1/4" Saw Blade Arbor (for MARK 7 and MARK V Models 520,510 and 505) ... $29.99Add To Cart
555608 5/8" Saw Blade Arbor (for MARK 7 and MARK V Models 520,510 and 505) ... $31.99Add To Cart


Saw Blade Arbors for MARK V Model 500
505511 1-1/4" Saw Blade Arbor (for MARK V Model 500) ... $29.99Add To Cart
555321 5/8" Saw Blade Arbor (for MARK V Model 500) ... $31.99

Simple saw blade arbor question answer. - The V 505 -520 , 7 tables are wider from slot to edge of table*. Therefore the arbors need to position the blade further out from the headstock. Not 100% of the reason, but tis far easier to remember.

Same reason for the wider way tube sleeve. It is a spacer. When the carriage is pushed towards the headstock, the spacer establishes the distance between them and if all else is co-pathetic, the blade will be positioned nearly centered in the table blade slot.

P.S. I missed the pix. They all appear to be the longer ones.(NOT M5/V500)

* Turns out it is 0% of the reason - see below
https://www.shopsmith.com/ss_forum/view ... 51#p269051

JPG wrote:Simple saw blade arbor question answer. - The V 505 -520 , 7 tables are wider from slot to edge of table. Therefore the arbors need to position the blade further out from the headstock. Not 100% of the reason, but tis far easier to remember.

Same reason for the wider way tube sleeve. It is a spacer. When the carriage is pushed towards the headstock, the spacer establishes the distance between them and if all else is co-pathetic, the blade will be positioned nearly centered in the table blade slot.

P.S. I missed the pix. They all appear to be the longer ones.(NOT M5/V500)

Copacetic

My grand father used that word all the time.

jsburger wrote:

JPG wrote:Simple saw blade arbor question answer. - The V 505 -520 , 7 tables are wider from slot to edge of table. Therefore the arbors need to position the blade further out from the headstock. Not 100% of the reason, but tis far easier to remember.

Same reason for the wider way tube sleeve. It is a spacer. When the carriage is pushed towards the headstock, the spacer establishes the distance between them and if all else is co-pathetic, the blade will be positioned nearly centered in the table blade slot.

P.S. I missed the pix. They all appear to be the longer ones.(NOT M5/V500)

Copacetic

My grand father used that word all the time.

I know! I use ain;t, fer, thet, thar thaing as well as y'all etc. alot also. Intended as a pun. Consider it as being vernacular.

JPG wrote:

jsburger wrote:

JPG wrote:Simple saw blade arbor question answer. - The V 505 -520 , 7 tables are wider from slot to edge of table. Therefore the arbors need to position the blade further out from the headstock. Not 100% of the reason, but tis far easier to remember.

Same reason for the wider way tube sleeve. It is a spacer. When the carriage is pushed towards the headstock, the spacer establishes the distance between them and if all else is co-pathetic, the blade will be positioned nearly centered in the table blade slot.

P.S. I missed the pix. They all appear to be the longer ones.(NOT M5/V500)

Copacetic

My grand father used that word all the time.

I know! I use ain;t, fer, thet, thar thaing as well as y'all etc. alot also. Intended as a pun. Consider it as being vernacular.

Ok, I really appreciate your response and my light is getter brighter. Could someone please post a photo of a 1 1/4 Mark V 500, not 505,510,520 sawblade arbor so I can do a side by side comparison. Thanks!

shoedo wrote:Ok, I really appreciate your response and my light is getter brighter. Could someone please post a photo of a 1 1/4 Mark V 500, not 505,510,520 sawblade arbor so I can do a side by side comparison. Thanks!

left one is liklely a Mark 5.

Next two are likely MV500

Third one(longer) is mV505-520

Note all have a nut on the quill side and have a left handed thread.

The light is fully illuminated now. Thank you!

Prepare to be blinded by this comprehensive summary by chapmanruss:

http://shopsmith.com/ss_forum/community ... 22629.html

Despite being blinded by the light, I think we are missing something in the "why" part of the story. There is no discernible difference in the distance from the left edge of the main table to the center of the blade slot, 7 inches, from Greenie to 520. They are co-something.

Before I don't think I cared, but now I'm really curious to know why this change was made. Sure, we know the saw arbor, sanding disc, and lower saw guard have to match each other to be used together, but what consideration drove the center-line of all of them to be different than 500 and predecessors? (Or perhaps not the center but the left or right edge?)

My hypothesis, ready to be shot down: Driven in the interest of safety and/or better dust/chip control, aligning the left edges of various tools and creating a variable width lower saw guard that could be used in more operations. In essence, lining things up with the Molding/Dado Arbor.

And what is the magnitude of the actual change? I measured it on a 500 Vs 520 sanding disc but that is not definitive because on the 500 that measurement was unimportant, and in fact inconsistent between early and late M5/MV. I spent an hour looking for my definitive(?) original equipment 1-1/4 inch Greenie saw arbor with no success.

- David