Shopsmith Forums

What is the main differences between these two, aside from manufacture dates?

This is from the 10ER Yahoo Group

Nov 8, 1947
Magna 10E Shopsmith introduced at Montgomery ward stores
nation wide and in their catalog.
4 bolt cast iron headrest changed to aluminum mid 48.
aluminum extension table bracket held by two studs w/wing nuts
wooden extension table top
flip out stop on table trunion
no table elevation until optional accessory came out

Late 1948
10ER introduced with revised:
table trunnion with spring loaded detent lever
tailstock with table bracket groove
cast iron extension table bracket w/ aluminum ext. table
chrome quill spring housing and depth gage
redesigned rip fence with rear lock
redesigned miter gage w/detents and clamp mount hole
table raiser arm and crank
redesigned belt/pulley guard (flat top for more clearance)

It goes on to list the various revisions through the ER's lifespan, but that's beyond your question.

Thanks, I appreciate it. I went looking for parts on Freecycle about a week or so ago and wound up with a 10E and am wondering what to do with it... so far I think it will make a good tool

Except for the E tailstock and extension table, all of the parts fit everything.

I may get an argument here, but the E or ER are better machines than the MkV. UNLESS you are standing it up as a drill-press.

You got a E model on Freecycle? My newest machine (E model) cost me $200! CONGRATS!

steve

skou wrote:Except for the E tailstock and extension table, all of the parts fit everything.

I may get an argument here, but the E or ER are better machines than the MkV. UNLESS you are standing it up as a drill-press.

You got a E model on Freecycle? My newest machine (E model) cost me $200! CONGRATS!

steve

I don't think you'll get an argument but you may provoke a discussion.

What do you believe the E/ER offers that makes it a better machine?

I believe the larger table, new rip fence, and two bearing quill are the characteristics of the Mark V that make it better.

Dusty, the ER had a 2 bearing quill from the beginning.

Since the table saw is the weakest part of ANY shopsmith, we won't even compare the 2 tablesaws.

Now, cast iron construction, versus aluminum.

Yes, the open belt design is not as safe, but the flexibility from this design is very helpful. (Try changing out the motor on a MkV, for a more powerful one, or a vartiable-speed DC one.)

A heavy cast iron base for a lathe? Much better.

I have yet to see the MkV attachment that can't be adapted to the ER. (Well, maybe, the planer, since it mounts directly on the ways.) My ER has a MkV headrest to mount my bandsaw.

Oh, in the other post, I mentioned the E tailstock and ext table. They only work with each other, as the ER tailstock and ext table only work with each other. You can't put an E ext table on an ER tailstock. You CAN put an ER tailstock and ext table on an E model, though, or visa versa.

steve

I recently came to own a 10e..... after the passing of my uncle. It got delivered last Sat in pieces....with smaller pieces in boxes full of dust. Lots of bits, blades, jointer blades, sand paper for a lifetime, etc.

I've been researching though to try and date the machine. I find the time line particularly interesting. The model I have is definately a 10E serial either 1046 or 1048. I have perviously dated the machines manufacture date between 1948 and 1952...but what I see above makes me believe it's more like 1947....and might have even been a Christams gift in 1947.

I'm facinated with the stories that go with anything... and especially a piece of family history that I now have. timing is everthing too...the cheapy sears table saw I had.....the moter just melted around the brushes....and died. Plastic junk;)

Anyway looking forward to getting the machine mounted again, cleaned up some and see what it can do..... got projects waiting.

Anyone know where to find plans for a bench with retactable wheels or casters?? I haven't found one just yet......although I foudn plans for a wooden stand in a Popular Mechanics article from 1956.

Have you visited the Yahoo Shopsmith10ERusers group? There is a ton of information there. Since I'm not a 10E or ER owner, I haven't spent a lot of time browsing. Here is the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Shopsmith10ERusers/

Answer to jrsbww1: My 10ER has a couple of heavy-duty casters on one end mounted on the end side of the stands. I move all the heavy bits to the one end, then lift the other end up about 3" and roll it away. I am seriously considering retractable casters like I have on the Mark V; much easier, no moving of bits, and no lifting!

Derek in Surrey, B.C.
On the wet coast!

SN 104x is definitely 1947.

The 10E tailstock had a non-adjustable 2mt center. The 10er made the 2mt center adjustable(sleeve).

The 10E extension table mounted to the tailstock with wing nuts (two studs). The 'extension table' was a piece of wood drilled to attach to the extension table bracket. The 10ER has milled surfaces on the tailstock and the extension table bracket. The extension table is aluminum.

The quill return spring housing is plain on the 10E. The 10ER has a pointer on the the return spring housing, and calibrations(fractional inches) on a collar on the quill shaft.

The 10E mitre gauge has no stops or detents. The 10ER has detents at 90, and every 15 degrees to both sides. The 10ER added the extension mounting slots like the mark 5/V.

The 10E fence was secured at the front only. Later 10ER versions added a screw clamp at the opposite end(rear) of the fence. The 5/8" hole for the mortise hold down was also added. The 10ER screw clamp angle varies(some straight out, later ones slanted down)

These are off the top of my noggin. The headstock rest and the hinged base end vary as to material and shape.

Will take/post pix when I start my 'blue beast'(10E) thread since I acquired various parts from both 'versions'. The beast is not yet completely ready for reassembly, but close.

Name derived from my decision to paint it the color I remember from the 1950's. Dark blue, but not as dark as navy blue.(almost)