Shopsmith Forums

Years ago there was an article about shopsmith that spanned 4 issues of The Home Shop Machinist. Here are the first 2 pages of the first in the series. I'm sure many may want to read this but I'm unsure if I can post it all here. If I can please let me know or send me a private message if you would like to see more.

holsgo wrote:Years ago there was an article about shopsmith that spanned 4 issues of The Home Shop Machinist. Here are the first 2 pages of the first in the series. I'm sure many may want to read this but I'm unsure if I can post it all here. If I can please let me know or send me a private message if you would like to see more.

I would love to read it all BUT there might be a copyright violation involved. The question is whether or not the original article in HSM is copyrighted.

I do thank you for alerting me to the existence of this article (series of articles). I will hunt it out even if you do not post it.

Thanks for sharing.

Well, someone else knows better than me but I can send you what I have.

There are four issues in the "shop machine adventures" series.

Robert L. Bailey
http://shopmachineadventures.com/

Parts 1 through 4 were published May- Dec, 2007 (4 issues) in Home Shop Machinist magazine. I went to my local library and scanned copies of the articles for my personal archives (horay for fair use!).

There are three remaining parts which you can buy directly. I did buy them, though I probably won't implement the suggested changes anytime soon if ever.

In issues 5 and 6 the discussions involve the table and table extensions. In the online brief it appears that Mr Bailey addresses only a 500 table. Is that the case. If so, those two issues may not be much help for a 505/510/520 owner. Please correct me if I am wrong.

In the other issue, he discusses the quill. Can you tell me basically what he recommends doing to "improve" the quill. I have about .003" of runout and I don't intend to do metal milling work; I may not need to improve performance.

I will be doing some light reading tonight. I actually have yet to read these in full. Only parts separated by years. I have the first 3 issues and will buy the fourth if I get that deep into it. I just cut a hole in my 54 greenie (headstock hole) and I just lined the bench tubes with poly and filled them with sand to reduce vibration. I only gained about 10 lbs per tube but that's more than I had. I'll send pics of the thing in pieces as I prep for paint. Trying to get any tips from this magazine article before I reassemble.

[quote="dusty"]
In the other issue, he discusses the quill. Can you tell me basically what he recommends doing to "improve" the quill. I have about .003" of runout and I don't intend to do metal milling work]

He beefed up the quill's rotating shaft to the absolute max diameter he could fit inside the existing quill/rack tube. He also used a re-grease-able set of bearings which can be preloaded (adjustably) for minimum play. These detail changes were to minimize both runout and deflection. A fascinating article, but one I probably won't implement myself.

nuhobby wrote:He beefed up the quill's rotating shaft to the absolute max diameter he could fit inside the existing quill/rack tube. He also used a re-grease-able set of bearings which can be preloaded (adjustably) for minimum play. These detail changes were to minimize both runout and deflection. A fascinating article, but one I probably won't implement myself.

Me neither. My machine is over twenty years old and has never been greased so the idea of re-grease-able bearings does not excite me. I think the quill is good without change.

Thanks for the feedback.

He was a UF professor and I know the machinist that helped him with some of the work.

I have some of the articles and they are an interesting read. While I have every intention of buying a mill one of these days, after some thought decided this really wasn't something I wanted to do with my shopsmith.

Troy

The 10-ER is actually a better candidate for converting to metal work since it is made so much more rigid and heavier than a Mark V.