This one is for you Dusty.
A couple of quick comments. This was not setup to do anything other then take a picture. The tubes will need to be supported with either the extension table or legs and it should work on either side of the machine.
I'll let the picture speak for itself, and if anyone wants to comment or ask questions feel free.
[ATTACH]6245[/ATTACH]
Ed
Experimental table system
Moderators: HopefulSSer, admin
Experimental table system
- Attachments
-
- DSCF7093sc.jpg (81.92 KiB) Viewed 9313 times
{Knight of the Shopsmith} [Hero's don't wear capes, they wear dog tags]
-
JPG
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 34645
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:42 pm
- Location: Lexington, Ky (TAMECAT territory)
A viable procedure for those lucky enough to have two 510/520 main tables AND 5' tubes! I like it!!!!reible wrote:This one is for you Dusty.
A couple of quick comments. This was not setup to do anything other then take a picture. The tubes will need to be supported with either the extension table or legs and it should work on either side of the machine.
I'll let the picture speak for itself, and if anyone wants to comment or ask questions feel free.
[ATTACH]6245[/ATTACH]
Ed
Only improvement I would suggest is to get another main table and put one on BOTH sides of the 'normal' one.
Might need to mount the 'left' one reversed(I figured out why the table was reversed on another thread posted yesterday[it needs to clear the headstock?]).
- Is the rear tube the same distance down from the top of the table as the front tube on a 520??? Tis true on a 510(same rails front and rear)!╔═══╗
╟JPG ╢
╚═══╝
Goldie(Bought New SN 377425)/4" jointer/6" beltsander/12" planer/stripsander/bandsaw/powerstation /Scroll saw/Jig saw /Craftsman 10" ras/Craftsman 6" thicknessplaner/ Dayton10"tablesaw(restoredfromneighborstrashpile)/ Mark VII restoration in 'progress'/ 10E[/size](SN E3779) restoration in progress, a 510 on the back burner and a growing pile of items to be eventually returned to useful life. - aka Red Grange
╟JPG ╢
╚═══╝
Goldie(Bought New SN 377425)/4" jointer/6" beltsander/12" planer/stripsander/bandsaw/powerstation /Scroll saw/Jig saw /Craftsman 10" ras/Craftsman 6" thicknessplaner/ Dayton10"tablesaw(restoredfromneighborstrashpile)/ Mark VII restoration in 'progress'/ 10E[/size](SN E3779) restoration in progress, a 510 on the back burner and a growing pile of items to be eventually returned to useful life. - aka Red Grange
-
JPG
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 34645
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:42 pm
- Location: Lexington, Ky (TAMECAT territory)
A viable procedure for those lucky enough to have two 510/520 main tables AND 5' tubes! I like it!!!!reible wrote:This one is for you Dusty.
A couple of quick comments. This was not setup to do anything other then take a picture. The tubes will need to be supported with either the extension table or legs and it should work on either side of the machine.
I'll let the picture speak for itself, and if anyone wants to comment or ask questions feel free.
[ATTACH]6245[/ATTACH]
Ed
Only improvement I would suggest is to get another main table and put one on BOTH sides of the 'normal' one.
Might need to mount the 'left' one reversed(I figured out why the table was reversed on another thread posted yesterday[it needs to clear the headstock?]). - Is the rear tube the same distance down from the top of the table as the front tube on a 520??? Tis true on a 510(same rails front and rear)!BTW Cool roll around under the SS storage!:)
╔═══╗
╟JPG ╢
╚═══╝
Goldie(Bought New SN 377425)/4" jointer/6" beltsander/12" planer/stripsander/bandsaw/powerstation /Scroll saw/Jig saw /Craftsman 10" ras/Craftsman 6" thicknessplaner/ Dayton10"tablesaw(restoredfromneighborstrashpile)/ Mark VII restoration in 'progress'/ 10E[/size](SN E3779) restoration in progress, a 510 on the back burner and a growing pile of items to be eventually returned to useful life. - aka Red Grange
╟JPG ╢
╚═══╝
Goldie(Bought New SN 377425)/4" jointer/6" beltsander/12" planer/stripsander/bandsaw/powerstation /Scroll saw/Jig saw /Craftsman 10" ras/Craftsman 6" thicknessplaner/ Dayton10"tablesaw(restoredfromneighborstrashpile)/ Mark VII restoration in 'progress'/ 10E[/size](SN E3779) restoration in progress, a 510 on the back burner and a growing pile of items to be eventually returned to useful life. - aka Red Grange
-
dusty
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 21371
- Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:52 am
- Location: Tucson (Wildcat Country), Arizona
reible wrote:This one is for you Dusty.
A couple of quick comments. This was not setup to do anything other then take a picture. The tubes will need to be supported with either the extension table or legs and it should work on either side of the machine.
I'll let the picture speak for itself, and if anyone wants to comment or ask questions feel free.
[ATTACH]6245[/ATTACH]
Ed
Yup, I've got one of those too. What is more, I have bent tubes to prove that you need extension table support.
I have used this set up when I had a lot of panel work to do. I added to it something that I know you have also; the extension table brackets which help to add the needed support on the outfeed side.
Have you tried dual tables with dual carriages?
"Making Sawdust Safely"
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.
Since I'm working banker hours today I think give out a bit more information.
The 510 table you see is in rather poor condition, it is from the basket case 510 I got some years back (it has been upgraded to a 520). Not only does it have a line of drill divots and and a side cut with the table saw blade it also has some sort of "filler" stuck in a lot of places. I was able to get the flat parts flat but the stuff seems to respond to only blunt force trauma when trying to get it out of the grooves.
I was able to pick up a table that is in a lot better shape for a reasonable price so I will be replacing that damaged one. The new one doesn't have the underside parts so I will need to take them off the damaged table. (I think that will reduce the weight a great deal and make it easier to use then as pictured with the "legs" folded under).
For now I have started some repairs and restoration on that old 510/520 machine so it is in an unusable state and might be that way until spring. This will allow me after taking the underside parts off (and attach them to the new table) to use it for a while with out committing much additional resources. Then the question will be is it worth the $100 or so to get another set of 520 hardware (rails and mounting parts) and keep the setup.
I didn't want another carriages as this is the machine I normally do lathe work on and don't want to give up the space.
I did check the alignment and at least at first glance the heights are the same (that I expected) and the miter tracks seem to align as close as a ruler can be used to check. More checking will have to be done to see if they are viable as additional miter tracks for operations like cutting etc.
Ed
The 510 table you see is in rather poor condition, it is from the basket case 510 I got some years back (it has been upgraded to a 520). Not only does it have a line of drill divots and and a side cut with the table saw blade it also has some sort of "filler" stuck in a lot of places. I was able to get the flat parts flat but the stuff seems to respond to only blunt force trauma when trying to get it out of the grooves.
I was able to pick up a table that is in a lot better shape for a reasonable price so I will be replacing that damaged one. The new one doesn't have the underside parts so I will need to take them off the damaged table. (I think that will reduce the weight a great deal and make it easier to use then as pictured with the "legs" folded under).
For now I have started some repairs and restoration on that old 510/520 machine so it is in an unusable state and might be that way until spring. This will allow me after taking the underside parts off (and attach them to the new table) to use it for a while with out committing much additional resources. Then the question will be is it worth the $100 or so to get another set of 520 hardware (rails and mounting parts) and keep the setup.
I didn't want another carriages as this is the machine I normally do lathe work on and don't want to give up the space.
I did check the alignment and at least at first glance the heights are the same (that I expected) and the miter tracks seem to align as close as a ruler can be used to check. More checking will have to be done to see if they are viable as additional miter tracks for operations like cutting etc.
Ed
{Knight of the Shopsmith} [Hero's don't wear capes, they wear dog tags]
-
dusty
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 21371
- Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:52 am
- Location: Tucson (Wildcat Country), Arizona
Ed,
I see that you have two different vintage tables. When you compare the casting residue around the edges, does one vintage seem to be more completely finished than the other.
I find that when I pull two tables tight together, that casting residue prevents even contact the entire length of the tables.
I passed mine through the conical disk two or three times to sort of even up the sludge on the edges. With that done, the miters were more easily made parallel when the table were tight together.
I see that you have two different vintage tables. When you compare the casting residue around the edges, does one vintage seem to be more completely finished than the other.
I find that when I pull two tables tight together, that casting residue prevents even contact the entire length of the tables.
I passed mine through the conical disk two or three times to sort of even up the sludge on the edges. With that done, the miters were more easily made parallel when the table were tight together.
"Making Sawdust Safely"
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.
Hi,
I guess I never got back to you on this... sorry. The 520 table has two bossed areas along each side so you can not set them edge to edge but rather bossed area to edge. If you are having trouble picturing that let me know and I'll post a picture.
Ed
I guess I never got back to you on this... sorry. The 520 table has two bossed areas along each side so you can not set them edge to edge but rather bossed area to edge. If you are having trouble picturing that let me know and I'll post a picture.
Ed
dusty wrote:Ed,
I see that you have two different vintage tables. When you compare the casting residue around the edges, does one vintage seem to be more completely finished than the other.
I find that when I pull two tables tight together, that casting residue prevents even contact the entire length of the tables.
I passed mine through the conical disk two or three times to sort of even up the sludge on the edges. With that done, the miters were more easily made parallel when the table were tight together.
{Knight of the Shopsmith} [Hero's don't wear capes, they wear dog tags]
Hi,
Got my new to me table on Friday and got busy today doing a bit more experimenting as well as gathering more data.
The old 510 table with 520 hardware but no under side parts weighs in just over 10 pounds according to our bathroom scale. Having all those parts gone make it a lot easier to handle and it now will mount on either side of the headstock.
[ATTACH]6290[/ATTACH]
When mounted to the left the depth of cut is reduced due to the way the casting is made. It certainty looks like it would be an easy job to grind away a bit of material to allow it to go as low as the main table but I'll not do that right away as once it is gone it is gone. I don't see any issues with doing this to the table as long as I don't want to return it to use as a main table.
[ATTACH]6291[/ATTACH]
The new width of the table is just a bit wider then expected do to the bosses on 520 table.
[ATTACH]6292[/ATTACH]
While I had it together I sketched the left side of the main table on to the right side of the extra table so you can see what is potentially in the way. This seems to be way more then is needed by just the head stock so perhaps a lesser amount can be removed. I should also mention that several of the ribs also need to be shortened.
[ATTACH]6293[/ATTACH]
So far I'm liking this but again do I want to spend the extra money for the 520 rails unless I love it.
Ed
Got my new to me table on Friday and got busy today doing a bit more experimenting as well as gathering more data.
The old 510 table with 520 hardware but no under side parts weighs in just over 10 pounds according to our bathroom scale. Having all those parts gone make it a lot easier to handle and it now will mount on either side of the headstock.
[ATTACH]6290[/ATTACH]
When mounted to the left the depth of cut is reduced due to the way the casting is made. It certainty looks like it would be an easy job to grind away a bit of material to allow it to go as low as the main table but I'll not do that right away as once it is gone it is gone. I don't see any issues with doing this to the table as long as I don't want to return it to use as a main table.
[ATTACH]6291[/ATTACH]
The new width of the table is just a bit wider then expected do to the bosses on 520 table.
[ATTACH]6292[/ATTACH]
While I had it together I sketched the left side of the main table on to the right side of the extra table so you can see what is potentially in the way. This seems to be way more then is needed by just the head stock so perhaps a lesser amount can be removed. I should also mention that several of the ribs also need to be shortened.
[ATTACH]6293[/ATTACH]
So far I'm liking this but again do I want to spend the extra money for the 520 rails unless I love it.
Ed
- Attachments
-
- DSCF7127sc.jpg (88.99 KiB) Viewed 9169 times
-
- DSCF7125sc.jpg (63.04 KiB) Viewed 9165 times
-
- DSCF7126sc.jpg (56.71 KiB) Viewed 9166 times
-
- DSCF7128sc.jpg (69.12 KiB) Viewed 9164 times
{Knight of the Shopsmith} [Hero's don't wear capes, they wear dog tags]
-
dusty
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 21371
- Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:52 am
- Location: Tucson (Wildcat Country), Arizona
Experimental table system
Grinding away the interferring materials on that main table will not be a problem. It grinds, files and drills quite easily. I filed the sides on three of my floating/extension tables so that I could attach miter tarcks. Without filing I could not get the tracks parallel to the main table miter tracks.
The only concern that I might have is removing that much material. What adverse effect might that have on the structural integrity of the table? Will it remain flat?
If one had a Mark V that was dedicated to the saw function, it makes one fine table top.
You CANNOT adjust depth of cut however without someone to help or without dismantling the extra table. The weigh torques the carriage so bad that it disables the lift.
Add a router table on the other side and you have one huge table.
The only concern that I might have is removing that much material. What adverse effect might that have on the structural integrity of the table? Will it remain flat?
If one had a Mark V that was dedicated to the saw function, it makes one fine table top.
You CANNOT adjust depth of cut however without someone to help or without dismantling the extra table. The weigh torques the carriage so bad that it disables the lift.
Add a router table on the other side and you have one huge table.
"Making Sawdust Safely"
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.