Good video. I like the way you analyze these issues and work through the problems and get to a solution. That chuck overhang was something I didn't think too much about before. Thank You
Uncle Winky, Your Videos are great and keep on doing what works for you. Us kids typing these comments are not the know all and be all. Read the comments like my grandad ate his Chicken pies. Chew and Swallow the meats, Spit out the bones. "Dont let bullies get to you son" - Gramps
When I was a youngster, an old timer told me "rigidity is a key factor in all machining operations" I think that applies here. I go thru the same issues on my circa. 1948 9"South bend. I use my steady rest to cut off when possible. That helps a lot. I also use a drip coolant to flood the cut-off zone. My results are mediocre at best. Before I retired my go-to lathe was a 20" Clausing. I never has an issue with that, LOL. Now I just do the best I can with what I have.
Cool... the steadrest is a very good idea. I found a sweet combination between the original chuck and a modified blade holder but if my old chuck completely bights the dust I'll have to change my approach.
@@WinkysWorkshop What about tool height ? How much affect does that have ? And the geometry ? Partoff blades have zero top rake. My old teacher hand grinding HSS blanks put quite a lot of positive top rake.
@@stevewilliams587 Good point and observation. This cutoff blade is set on center and has no back (top) rake. Ideally it should be set at a slight upward angle but due to compound height and holder design I use it flat or level. The top of this blade is concaved the full length and grinding a back rake into the tool destroys this feature. This feature is preferable to the back rake grind as it makes the chips more narrow than the cut. I'm guessing it requires a bit more power but it seems to be a very good tradeoff.
Interesting video and comparison Winky. You are spot on, the key to a good setup with minimal vibration is rigidity (on any machine). What you have demonstrated well is a reduction in bending moment, the shear forces are the same but the bending moment is vastly reduced meaning the spindle bearing is more capable, simple physics (the laws of which are constant). Well done. Cheers, Jon
Nice video Wink, a very good discussion subject, it can be sidelined in many shops so makes it a good topic Very much the same problem with my 12" Asian. I wouldn't dare auto feed like that which shows that bI should pay heed to your quest. Thanks for the insight, cheers!
I have a maximat 7 lathe very well made, german engineering, i couldn't find new jaws for the original chucks and they were broken, I bought a larger chuck off amazon but its 2" thicker and it works great but you do get chatter so you are 100% right it makes a huge difference.great video and explanation.
I knew a guy named Chuck Overhang! (:=) Also, whenever I cut something off, I always made sure the compound slide doesn't "overhang" the dovetails. Good discussion!
@5:27 I'm a novice, and only a woman (!!!) but the first thing I learned the hard way, was never to leave a chuck key on top on any lathe. It vibrated, or I knocked it (unsure) into the spinning chuck and it launched itself across the shop and hit someone smack on the back of the head! Luckily they were bruised but okay. 🧡
Chuck used to hang over at my shop till I made him go home!!! Sorry for the corniness, I had to say something to get a comment into the counter!!! As always Winky, I watch and enjoy all your content!!!!
Very true to the facts! I have roughly the same logan lathe. The short chuck that must ave been original to the machine will part off fine so long as you feed the tool fast enough. On the other hand my heavy 8" bison chuck will just about want to chatter the whole lathe apart if I try parting off.
Haha... Two lathes and different size spindles. When i first got the Logan I bought the 3 and 4 jaw 6-inch shares chucks. I use them but not often. They are way too big.
Absolutely agree. The modified chuck still works better and to be honest I could increase the feed rate and make the chatter go away. I just wanted to demonstrate the effect of overhang .
Gday, my small Chinese lathe is near impossible to do parting off with, the spindle is small, with a piece of material in the chuck and an indicator on the jaw I can gently pull on the material and measure the flex in the spindle, it’s not good at all hence why I brought a larger lathe, it’s rock solid, great video and great topic, Thanks Mark, Cheers Matty
This is a shame... with todays technology they could make a very good small lathe at a good price. Most people would be willing to pay a an extra $100 bucks to have a good lathe anyway.
Flexural stiffness of a cantilever beam with a load on the end (roughly like a lathe spindle) is proportional to overhang^2 (squared), so yeah, overhang certainly *may* be the issue. Here's the thing: for a given overhang every lathe will chatter at some combination of workpiece diameter and spindle speed. Assuming the workpiece is stout and the bearings are a non-issue, the frequency of this chatter is a function of *either* the spindle *or* the compound. It's relatively easy to address compound stiffness problems by adjusting the setup, or supporting the cutoff tool with a machinist jack or similar. If the weak link is the spindle, not so easy to fix. I do not understand why all modern chucks are so much wider than vintage chucks. Excellent video - thanks for posting!
Thanks for the comment. Yeah... I could have fixed the chatter with higher feed rate although speed had little effect, it sounds different but the chatter is there. With the small chuck, within reason speed and feed have little effect. The compound on the Logan is wimpy but the direct mount tool with the compound set straight supports the blade very well. I used a quick change for most stuff but not cutoff. A quick change post on a wimpy compound is very bad because the tool is hanging off the side of the post.
Thanks for another very thoughtful video. I would be interested in seeing those chucks disassembled and some analysis of what design changes have made the newer chucks so much "longer". It's not only old Logan chucks that were short. Many of the old South Bend, Atas, Cushman, and others also shared the minimal overhang characteristic. I'm a bit surprised the Chinese don't copy some better designs in this case. It makes me wonder if there are other tradeoffs that favor the longer chucks.
Certainly the longer jaws on the Chinese chucks are a plus but not worth the problems the extra depth create. The last video I did is modifying the mid size chuck in this video to reduce the overhang BUT, I was only able to do this by maybe 5/8". I think it would be easy to make a shallow chuck. They are made very similar but with smaller components. I'm guessing nobody has tapped into this market yet. However.... this is understandable. Most don't understand the cause of the chatter they are fighting. Even the small Harbor Freight lathes have deep chuck which is crazy. Somebody is NOT connecting the dots!
My immediate guess is cheaper manufacturing costs. Perhaps it's also easier to break the "low profile" designs. I presume the pinions inside are smaller in OD, which may actually give higher clamping force, though that may be countered by differences in the scroll.
@@BobOBob I didn't think about the smaller pinion but you are right. The small chucks have smaller pinion and slower scroll. I have noticed it take a lot more torque to get work to hold in the Chinese chucks. A larger T handle compensates for most of this.
Thoroughly agree with you. If you look at those old Union and Skinner chucks from the early 20th century, they were much thinner. Probably due to the plain bearing spindles!
yeah... they understood the limitations of a small spindle! Some company like Grizzly or Jet needs to get with the Chinese and make a shallow chuck... or better yet, make one in the USA
Once again Winky, great demonstration! Makes me wonder if for cut off taking the time to dial in a part on a 4 jaw that usually have the least overhang might be time saved minimizing chatter. LOL, put a board under that chuck Interestingly the accessories part of my Logan manual has "less overhang" as a feature of their 5" 3 jaw. I can't swear to it or give a citation right off, but I think the originals were Cushman. I could easily be 109% wrong.
Union or Cushman probably. So you saw me pinch that finger huh? I have a large but shallow 4 jaw with an open back. I thought it would be great but it is not... I'm guessing the open back lets the chuck flex.
I have a South bend , a while back I made a fixed compound for it and took my adjustable compound off and that made a huge difference also. I got the idea from other you tubers videos .
@@WinkysWorkshop I haven't given up my compound I still have it and use it but for most turning operations most of us the compound just sits on top of the cross slide and is not used. I was only saying a ridged compound cuts a lot of charter out as well.
@@WinkysWorkshop If you think about it, the bar, the jaws and the scroll are all clamped as one piece. But there's no clamping of that lot relative to the chuck body. As you know, the scroll is loose in the chuck body - so what if you tighten the chuck jaws as normal and then added extra clamping between the chuck body and jaws. I thing the Logan chuck fairs a lot bet as it's a significantly better quality chuck - a clue given by the fact it's only got one keyhole - so the positioning of the scroll is constant. I'm guessing that the Logan scroll is a much tighter fit in the chuck body.
I would think that, when tightening the chuck, the teeth of each jaw tend to disengage the scroll which would provide at least some clamping action.@@millomweb
Great demonstration! It makes me anguish that all of the new 3 jaw chucks are so much thicker than the old ones and wonder why that it. It seems like they'd want them to be thinner to save on material cost!
You get a similar problem on milling machines. Some folks running a big chunky tilting vice think the chatter's happening because the vice isn't ridged enough, but the real problem is because they've moved the workpiece 3 or 4" further from the ways. Any play in the bed get's amplified, and the cutters got a lot more leverage on the table. This is another reason 2 piece machine vices often feel slightly more ridged than traditional vices. They put the workpiece as close to the ways as possible.
Am I the only one who gets a Fred Rogers sensation while watching/ listening? It's not a bad thing, just unusual. Thank you for the useful information 😁
Thanks Mark, I'd be interested in seeing the effect when the difference in overhang is not as extreme, such as the middle chuck to the at the beginning and the other with 1/2" more overhang.
That's a very good HSS (high speed steel) cut off blade. I made the holder. Here's the video, the part number is in the description under the video. Thanks for watching.
I see your point exactly. One thing I didn’t hear you mention was the weight difference from one to another, and more weight farther out, will put more stress on things. A simple experiment would be to pick up a 10 lb. weight, hold it fully extended, then bring it back close to your body, see which is easier.
@@WinkysWorkshop yes thank you for taking the time to show the difference. You made a very good point as close to the Head stock on the lathe as possible the less chatter you will eliminate. You didn't have to do a demonstration to convince me.
The solution on mine was to use an er collet chuck. With your threaded snout on your lathe, you could just about thread the chuck and screw it strait onto the spindle. I did a short review on my channel and the chatter is much less.
If it's well balanced the extra mass of a heavy chuck can give more momentum and that sometimes reduces a tendency to chatter. As you point out the weakness is really in the spindle design. A few other factors that can help when parting: lock the saddle and that helps remove one more source of chatter. Also turning the part before parting ensures it isn't eccentric so when the tool first makes contact it's a little less likely to start chatter (once started it doesn't want to stop). With a VFD it's easy to tweak the speed to hopefully avoid the chatter resonant frequency. Ultimately all small machines suffer from rigidity issues to some extent. Buy as much cast iron as you can fit in your workshop.
I always thought the weight would play a part in smoothing things out. And maybe it does but it's to a small degree. Ultimately I can part smoothly on the larger chuck by speeding up the feed a little but I wanted to illustrate the effects of overhang. The small chuck is not at all sensitive. I can part off all day long without issue. I never thought about the VFD in this case... now that would be great!
Reduces load knurling as well, less wear, less fooling around adjusting, less runout, more ridgid . Plus it looks like the chuck was just made for that lathe. like hardinge and there little chip cover when you use collets. Just well done!
For sure a good step in the direction of higher rigidity. Force multiplied by the length of the arm makes torque. The same applies to the cutter. Do what can be done to lower force/torque wherever it's possible. They add up in higher performance.
This has perfectly illustrated the rigidity factor, just an observation, please consider having a piece of wood on your bed ways, I would hate for you to drop the chuck them!, cheers Dave
Great discussion Wink, but I think we need more testing:) How about chucking a weighted bar and measure defection, the longer the bar the finer the measurement. See the difference between all chucks. Cheers
@@WinkysWorkshop I agree. Not much can be done about it. I like the low profile of the stock unit. You can tell what the engineers were thinking. Collet chuck (er32) would be handy for smaller stock.
Hello Mark, I think you are correct for pursuing this… I have been watching another CZcamsr who has been doing lots of testing on vibration on his lathe at different speeds, he has run tests with chuck jaws in and out and weighed the jaws… He like you is trying to improve his performance. Take care Paul,,
That was a very good demonstration. I appreciate the way you kept all the other factors the same: same stock, same speed, same tool, same coolant, same feed rate, and as far as I can tell, the same technique on your part which was mostly the application of the coolant. Is it my imagination or was there a lack of those streamers in the second parting? Could they be produced by the chattering of the tool bit? Edit: No, I looked again and if anything, there were more with the shorter chuck. I need to improve my powers of observation.
I have 2 South Bend 9A's , one chatters on parting with the 6" chuck, the other doesn't. The only diff is that one has a 3' bed, the other a 4.5' bed and the longer bed is 10 years younger. I use a Norman patent style toolpost so it's similar to yours. I solved the problem by making a ER32 collet chuck (~ 3/5" long). ER32 maxes at ~ 3/4" which matches the spindle bore so no need to go higher.
is the weight even around the circumference on on those chucks? that is a lot of chatter for a short cutoff . you need a balancing jig to check but something does not quite ad up here. i assume you measured the perimeter is spinning true with an indicator.
It's a combination of small spindle and the spindle type (threaded). Logan also uses a double ball bearing in the headstock which is a little weaker that a sleeve or roller bearing. The overhang on my South Bend has the same effect although not as pronounced (plain bearing). Threads on a 1.5 diameter spindle are a also weak. The leverage a chuck has on a small spindle is enormous and you get compression at the threads. Even .0005" compression is extreme at the end of the jaws. Even a small increase in diameter exponentially improves the connection point. If you put a 3 foot bar (maybe 1.5" dia) in the chuck and have somebody push down on the end of the bar you will see the the backing plate pull away from the spindle register. I made significant improvement on this by making steel backing plates but chatter is still an issue. Going from a 1.5" to 2" spindle probably increases the rigidity of a spindle and connection point by an order of 10x.
Good demo on chuck overhang. Not the best way to remove a chuck though. O.K. for 3 jaws, but using the chuck key as a lever can break the screws on a 4 jaw chuck.
What's your BBQ sauce recipe, smells great??? On a lighter note, I am chuffed to see a real lathe showing 'Chatter Central' just as my Optimum TU2004V mini lathe shows. I am a skilled woodworker, new to the lathe & find chatter scary! The point between chatter, cutting & grabbing is quite narrow for my machine. It makes a great deal of sense that the chuck should be as narrow as possible, but that sort of precision obviously comes at a price. Great presentation, thanks.
Have you thought about restoring your old chuck, you can re-grind the jaws using an internal grinding spindle although you will need to load the jaws as if in operation.
Yeah... I've ground the jaws and it did improve but now the scroll is worn and the socket to the chuck key is in bad shape. So far it's working but there will soon be a day when I won't be able to tighten it
@@WinkysWorkshop another thought, slim chuck's are available here in the UK a company called Arc Euro Trade sells a variety of chuck's , is there a supplier in the USA ?
Possibly... and for sure the problem with the chinese is that they are MUCH deeper! With that being said, after mounting this last chuck it had less than .0005" runout! VERY good!
If you watch as many machining videos as as i do, you'll notice that the parting off part of most machine doesn't make the video. Almost all the smaller home shop type lathes have chatter, overhang issues. Watch people do a cutoff on a 7 x 14 chinesium lathe. Still making good and truthful videos, keep ip the good work. Let the big boys do the video on cut off tools, and taking 1/4 inch cuts. (Abom, Rucker, etc...)
Small less ridged lathes can make cutoff tricky however, as you saw, it can be done with less overhang and a direct mount tool holder. Also increasing the feed rate with the new chuck resolves the chatter. It's hit and miss finding the sweet spot (feed speed) but doable. With the small chuck it never fails. This video was to demonstrate the effect of overhang although it has morphed into doing cutoff - but no problem.
To be totally honest a small threaded spindle it where most the movement is. Even if the overhang was the same it would be more solid. And yes, this would be a huge step. Maybe better get a new lathe.
Never had a problem on a 24 inch American Pace-Maker! (Actually, I agree with you entirely, chuck overhang should not be ignored. Asian manufacturers just don't seem to care!)
Here an informtion that you may not know about chucks. Chucks need to be balanced, just like wheel on a car. every lathe II've worked on had it's chuck balanced and certified to a limit in RPM. I'v e worked in a shop where they go two brand new 17x40 gap bed lathe with 9" chuck. When the chuck were unbalanced, I could break insert of the cutoff tool, but when each chuck were balanced and certified up to the max RPM speed of the spindle, these two lathe gave good performance, even with soft jaws. Even the four jaws chuck had to be balanced. So balancing chucks does make a BIG difference. And you can't compare new chucks that have more grips on parts with an old chuck that doesn't have a lot of grip. Also many a lot of thing can affect the machining and the surface finish of any parts. When a lathe has a balance chuck, is prefectly level, screwed to the floor, the head aligned and the tail stock aligned with the center of the spindle bore. That lathe will do amazing parts. And set a zero between the spindle and the chuck to be sure you always put that chuck the same way. And also whe it come to overhang, it's not supposed to start from the spindle. When you talk of overhang it should start from the from of the jaws of the chuck. So always consider the chuck part of the spindel and have your chuck balanced and have you jaws grinded and avoid playing musical chair between lathe with the same size chuck. So no wonder you have an obsession with overhang & chucks.
I agree with a lot of what you said but I doubt a 5 inch chuck is going to have any significant balance issues. I can see where a 9 inch or larger would or could. My chucks are screw on single start threads so they go on the same no mater what... My lathes have different spindles so I can't swap the chucks and to be honest I never have cut off problems not that I have addressed the compound with a new blade holder and minimized overhang. Even the larger chuck stops chattering with a slightly higher feed rate. I let it chatter to demonstrate the effects of chatter. The 6-inch Shars chuck is simply too big for the small 1-1/2" lathe spindle.
@@WinkysWorkshop You're probably looking at it the wrong way. If they make a back plates that fit your spindle for that 6-inch chuck, it means the chuck is made to run on your lathe. You may have a bad spindle also, or bad bearing. Do you have the entire story or historic of this lathe? something probably happened to it in the past and that's the cause of your issues when you put a chuck on it. I say that, because even CNC lathe, they may look new, but in reality someone crashed a tools in the chuck and they didn't fix all the problem cause by that crash. And each time you use that CNC lathe you get errors on some jobs. So your lathe even if it look clean and in good condition, has an living history in the machining world. So the spindle, bearings, gears, pullies and bearings surfaces, if something happened in that past, it will affect your use of the lathe in the present. And if that lathe was really ok, you would have never modified your chucks. Me when I talk of overhang it about the parts in the chuck, and not the chuck itself.
@@lepompier132 I understand what your saying, but Winkys demonstration wasn't an effort to solve the chatter issue. It's not even an issue for him really. He was just showing that, with all things equal, same lathe, spindle, speeds and cutting tool, the amount the chuck hangs out from the bearing point, has an effect on cutting ability. As he mentioned, if the spindle diameter were greater, it wouldn't matter as much. Everything flexes...putting the mass of a chuck, then the work-piece that far away from the bearing is like adding a pipe to a wrench to get more torque on a bolt. It's easier to move the bolt, and in the case of the extended chuck distance, easier to generate harmonics that flex the entire spindle. These older lathes that came with smaller spindles, came with thinner chucks and it obvious why.
Slowing it down might have helped but did you notice there was no chatter on the shorter chuck? Increasing the feed rate on the larger chuck would also eliminate the chatter yet the small chuck was fine with the slower rate. Yes, chatter free cutoff was possible with the larger chuck but I was trying to show the effect of overhang. The smaller chuck is VERY forgiving and the larger is very touchy on speed and feed.
@@WinkysWorkshop I think as we are mostly hobby machinist it very hard for us to take the time to do the research required to produce optimum cuts to achieve our task. So many variables such as our tool holders, cutters, type of material, SFM, Feed Rate, etc. We need to experiment and keep a log of everything so when we find that magic combination we have it ready to use on our next project. So good luck with that!
@@williamhardin5254 Yep... plus most of us have the additional challenge of less than ridged machines. It's good experience but larger industrial lathes can be much more forgiving.
I have never seen anyone use a parting tool like that. kind of defeats any point that chatter is the chuck and not the proper tool and speed selection. using a lathe is always a trade off. I do agree with mass of the cross slide. But conversely the mass of the chuck will also change your cut. I own a 1 1/2 inch late and have no such issues.
I've tried a lot of standard parting methods and different style blades. Some were terrible and some I could fiddle with and make them work... (if the planets were properly aligned). Mostly on a quick change post which is the absolute worst on a less than solid compound. This blade is amazing. it has a T profile and a concave top that make the chips more narrow than the cut. It would probably be better with a slight incline to give it a little back rake but it works fantastic as is. It cuts fast and never fails... I always use auto feed. Just because it is different than what you have used does not make it a bad idea. The holder is my design and it transfers the load to the compound much closer to straight down than other designs. Compounds handle a straight down load much better than twisting and lifting. czcams.com/video/R4-I_peyBFE/video.html
Again your using a parting tool to turn using the side of the tool. It is not rigid enough to use as a turning tool nor should there be any edge on the side of the blade. I am confused as to your issue. As for parting i generally use the back gears on my atlas 10f lathe and cutting through steel is chatter free
@@spoke4915 Not rigid enough? Funny, did you see me break any blades? No relief on the sides? Yes parting is much more demanding on a lathe but the same speed and feed calculations still apply. The only reason for lower speeds is 1) to reduce heat build up (side friction mostly) 2) to allow time for chips to clear and 3) to compensate for a lack of rigidity. My tool holder addresses my lack of compound rigidity, the blade profile addresses the friction and chip removal and cutting near the spindle bearing addresses the spindle rigidity. Yes I was running slightly too fast at first but the speed was appropriate when the diameter was slightly smaller (compromise). Step out of that box you put yourself into and watch the video. Yep, I can slow it down and hand feed to compensate for a lack of rigidity but why not address the rigidity. Step outside the box you put yourself into. This cut off method works perfect every single time and it's fast and easy. The video is proof. I could have done the same video with any turning tools. This video was about the effects of overhang not the parting tool.
I can´t understand how they came up with that spindeldesign, It looks to me like that spindel is for drilling, very weak design. Bad leverage, Good video
Screw on chucks used to be common. Also these lathes were considered home of small shop lathes and not high production. I've never own a new small lathe but I hear they share the same problem and have a screw on chuck. I'd say cost was the main driver.
@@WinkysWorkshop It´s not the screw design thats the problem, it is the flange behind it that should have bigger diameter to support chuck and make it stiffer, as I see it. But thats the way it is. Your modification helps a lot
I was thinking .. I need to slap your wrists for not putting a board across your bed when swapping chucks. Then I thought you will have your answer .. "I am always very careful" 🤔🙄🤣 Why not a video on refurbishment of the Logan chuck ?
You saw the finger pinch... hmmm. I never put the board over the bed. My fingers protect the ways. I'm kidding, that was a first. I'm usually more careful and take more time. Some aspects of the chuck can be fixed but others would be hard to fix. Really I need a new pinion gear and the scroll is worn.
This was a good video. Solid and on point. Perfect demonstration. Thank you, Phil
Glad you enjoyed it
Good video. I like the way you analyze these issues and work through the problems and get to a solution. That chuck overhang was something I didn't think too much about before. Thank You
Thanks 👍 This is not much of an issue on larger spindles.
You made a very good point. Many of us would not have thought of this overhang issue. Thanks for sharing.
Your welcome, Thanks for watching!
Uncle Winky, Your Videos are great and keep on doing what works for you.
Us kids typing these comments are not the know all and be all.
Read the comments like my grandad ate his Chicken pies.
Chew and Swallow the meats, Spit out the bones.
"Dont let bullies get to you son" - Gramps
Well said... Uncle Winky! Love it
When I was a youngster, an old timer told me "rigidity is a key factor in all machining operations" I think that applies here. I go thru the same issues on my circa. 1948 9"South bend. I use my steady rest to cut off when possible. That helps a lot. I also use a drip coolant to flood the cut-off zone. My results are mediocre at best. Before I retired my go-to lathe was a 20" Clausing. I never has an issue with that, LOL. Now I just do the best I can with what I have.
Cool... the steadrest is a very good idea. I found a sweet combination between the original chuck and a modified blade holder but if my old chuck completely bights the dust I'll have to change my approach.
Yes reducing over hang is always a good idea
Agree, thanks.
@@WinkysWorkshop
What about tool height ?
How much affect does that have ?
And the geometry ?
Partoff blades have zero top rake.
My old teacher hand grinding HSS blanks put quite a lot of positive top rake.
@@stevewilliams587 Good point and observation. This cutoff blade is set on center and has no back (top) rake. Ideally it should be set at a slight upward angle but due to compound height and holder design I use it flat or level. The top of this blade is concaved the full length and grinding a back rake into the tool destroys this feature. This feature is preferable to the back rake grind as it makes the chips more narrow than the cut. I'm guessing it requires a bit more power but it seems to be a very good tradeoff.
Interesting video and comparison Winky. You are spot on, the key to a good setup with minimal vibration is rigidity (on any machine). What you have demonstrated well is a reduction in bending moment, the shear forces are the same but the bending moment is vastly reduced meaning the spindle bearing is more capable, simple physics (the laws of which are constant). Well done. Cheers, Jon
The math might be complicated but yes, it is very basic. Thanks!
wow thats amazing the difference between chucks and the overhang. very good demonstation. thanks for that.
You bet, thanks
Nice video Wink, a very good discussion subject, it can be sidelined in many shops so makes it a good topic Very much the same problem with my 12" Asian. I wouldn't dare auto feed like that which shows that bI should pay heed to your quest. Thanks for the insight, cheers!
Yeah... the auto feed cutoff works well with the new blade holder and old chuck. However, I agree. Everything has to be just right.
I have a maximat 7 lathe very well made, german engineering, i couldn't find new jaws for the original chucks and they were broken,
I bought a larger chuck off amazon but its 2" thicker and it works great but you do get chatter so you are 100% right it makes a huge
difference.great video and explanation.
Thanks and thanks for the comment.
I am truly convinced you are spot on accurate!
Glad you think so! And I certainly agree!
I knew a guy named Chuck Overhang! (:=) Also, whenever I cut something off, I always made sure the compound slide doesn't "overhang" the dovetails. Good discussion!
Yeah... me too. Thanks
I am just a hobby guy and even I can figure this one out , good video and description of what you are trying to accomplish .
Cool, thanks
Great discussion. Seeing is believing.
Exactly... thanks
@5:27 I'm a novice, and only a woman (!!!) but the first thing I learned the hard way, was never to leave a chuck key on top on any lathe. It vibrated, or I knocked it (unsure) into the spinning chuck and it launched itself across the shop and hit someone smack on the back of the head! Luckily they were bruised but okay. 🧡
Good tip
Chuck used to hang over at my shop till I made him go home!!! Sorry for the corniness, I had to say something to get a comment into the counter!!! As always Winky, I watch and enjoy all your content!!!!
I've had that happen too... oddly enough his name was also Chuck! HA
Very true to the facts! I have roughly the same logan lathe. The short chuck that must ave been original to the machine will part off fine so long as you feed the tool fast enough. On the other hand my heavy 8" bison chuck will just about want to chatter the whole lathe apart if I try parting off.
Oh yeah... 8 inch is way to big for the Logan. My 6-inch is the same way.
You certainly have a lot of chucks. You got me convinced about the overhang.
Haha... Two lathes and different size spindles. When i first got the Logan I bought the 3 and 4 jaw 6-inch shares chucks. I use them but not often. They are way too big.
Interesting video. Thumbs up and thanks for posting.
Thanks for watching!
I still say it was well worth your time and effort , Anything helps on a lathe !
Absolutely agree. The modified chuck still works better and to be honest I could increase the feed rate and make the chatter go away. I just wanted to demonstrate the effect of overhang .
I have chased this problem for a few years on my atlas 12", Thanks for the tips.
Good luck. It's hard to find a low profile chuck.
I’ve been chasing that problem with my 12” craftsman too. I truly believe winky is correct!
I never did consider this ....... thanks WW
Thanks for watching... yeah, this is an overlooked problem.
Gday, my small Chinese lathe is near impossible to do parting off with, the spindle is small, with a piece of material in the chuck and an indicator on the jaw I can gently pull on the material and measure the flex in the spindle, it’s not good at all hence why I brought a larger lathe, it’s rock solid, great video and great topic, Thanks Mark, Cheers Matty
This is a shame... with todays technology they could make a very good small lathe at a good price. Most people would be willing to pay a an extra $100 bucks to have a good lathe anyway.
Alot to think about, when purchasing a new tool for the long haul.
You got that right!
Flexural stiffness of a cantilever beam with a load on the end (roughly like a lathe spindle) is proportional to overhang^2 (squared), so yeah, overhang certainly *may* be the issue. Here's the thing: for a given overhang every lathe will chatter at some combination of workpiece diameter and spindle speed. Assuming the workpiece is stout and the bearings are a non-issue, the frequency of this chatter is a function of *either* the spindle *or* the compound. It's relatively easy to address compound stiffness problems by adjusting the setup, or supporting the cutoff tool with a machinist jack or similar. If the weak link is the spindle, not so easy to fix.
I do not understand why all modern chucks are so much wider than vintage chucks.
Excellent video - thanks for posting!
Thanks for the comment. Yeah... I could have fixed the chatter with higher feed rate although speed had little effect, it sounds different but the chatter is there. With the small chuck, within reason speed and feed have little effect. The compound on the Logan is wimpy but the direct mount tool with the compound set straight supports the blade very well. I used a quick change for most stuff but not cutoff. A quick change post on a wimpy compound is very bad because the tool is hanging off the side of the post.
Thanks for another very thoughtful video. I would be interested in seeing those chucks disassembled and some analysis of what design changes have made the newer chucks so much "longer". It's not only old Logan chucks that were short. Many of the old South Bend, Atas, Cushman, and others also shared the minimal overhang characteristic. I'm a bit surprised the Chinese don't copy some better designs in this case. It makes me wonder if there are other tradeoffs that favor the longer chucks.
Certainly the longer jaws on the Chinese chucks are a plus but not worth the problems the extra depth create. The last video I did is modifying the mid size chuck in this video to reduce the overhang BUT, I was only able to do this by maybe 5/8". I think it would be easy to make a shallow chuck. They are made very similar but with smaller components. I'm guessing nobody has tapped into this market yet. However.... this is understandable. Most don't understand the cause of the chatter they are fighting. Even the small Harbor Freight lathes have deep chuck which is crazy. Somebody is NOT connecting the dots!
My immediate guess is cheaper manufacturing costs. Perhaps it's also easier to break the "low profile" designs. I presume the pinions inside are smaller in OD, which may actually give higher clamping force, though that may be countered by differences in the scroll.
@@BobOBob I didn't think about the smaller pinion but you are right. The small chucks have smaller pinion and slower scroll. I have noticed it take a lot more torque to get work to hold in the Chinese chucks. A larger T handle compensates for most of this.
very good video..thanks for your time
You are welcome
Thoroughly agree with you. If you look at those old Union and Skinner chucks from the early 20th century, they were much thinner. Probably due to the plain bearing spindles!
yeah... they understood the limitations of a small spindle! Some company like Grizzly or Jet needs to get with the Chinese and make a shallow chuck... or better yet, make one in the USA
Once again Winky, great demonstration! Makes me wonder if for cut off taking the time to dial in a part on a 4 jaw that usually have the least overhang might be time saved minimizing chatter. LOL, put a board under that chuck
Interestingly the accessories part of my Logan manual has "less overhang" as a feature of their 5" 3 jaw. I can't swear to it or give a citation right off, but I think the originals were Cushman. I could easily be 109% wrong.
Union or Cushman probably. So you saw me pinch that finger huh?
I have a large but shallow 4 jaw with an open back. I thought it would be great but it is not... I'm guessing the open back lets the chuck flex.
I have a South bend , a while back I made a fixed compound for it and took my adjustable compound off and that made a huge difference also. I got the idea from other you tubers videos .
That's a great option. I just not willing to give up my compound
@@WinkysWorkshop I haven't given up my compound I still have it and use it but for most turning operations most of us the compound just sits on top of the cross slide and is not used. I was only saying a ridged compound cuts a lot of charter out as well.
A very interesting video. So simple but so intriguing.
I'm not at all convinced that overhang is the true cause of the difference !
Interesting! What do you think it is?
@@WinkysWorkshop If you think about it, the bar, the jaws and the scroll are all clamped as one piece. But there's no clamping of that lot relative to the chuck body. As you know, the scroll is loose in the chuck body - so what if you tighten the chuck jaws as normal and then added extra clamping between the chuck body and jaws.
I thing the Logan chuck fairs a lot bet as it's a significantly better quality chuck - a clue given by the fact it's only got one keyhole - so the positioning of the scroll is constant. I'm guessing that the Logan scroll is a much tighter fit in the chuck body.
I would think that, when tightening the chuck, the teeth of each jaw tend to disengage the scroll which would provide at least some clamping action.@@millomweb
Great demonstration! It makes me anguish that all of the new 3 jaw chucks are so much thicker than the old ones and wonder why that it. It seems like they'd want them to be thinner to save on material cost!
Yeah... it is very frustrating. Even the original chucks on the little imports have chucks with lots of overhang. Somebody id not connecting the dots!
You get a similar problem on milling machines. Some folks running a big chunky tilting vice think the chatter's happening because the vice isn't ridged enough, but the real problem is because they've moved the workpiece 3 or 4" further from the ways. Any play in the bed get's amplified, and the cutters got a lot more leverage on the table.
This is another reason 2 piece machine vices often feel slightly more ridged than traditional vices. They put the workpiece as close to the ways as possible.
I agree on the mill!
Am I the only one who gets a Fred Rogers sensation while watching/ listening?
It's not a bad thing, just unusual.
Thank you for the useful information 😁
dang... Someone else said I looked like Harrison Ford... I'll take that but not Rogers. Ha
Makes sense to me. Thanks
Thanks for watching.
Thanks Mark, I'd be interested in seeing the effect when the difference in overhang is not as extreme, such as the middle chuck to the at the beginning and the other with 1/2" more overhang.
I missed this comment... sorry. The middle size is about what you'd expect. Tolerable but not as good and the short original.
Good video you make some good points.
Glad you think so!
Great video!
Glad you enjoyed it
I liked your video. Tell me what steel the cutting tool is made of. It looks like a saw blade for metal. Thank you. Good luck.
That's a very good HSS (high speed steel) cut off blade. I made the holder. Here's the video, the part number is in the description under the video. Thanks for watching.
I see your point exactly. One thing I didn’t
hear you mention was the weight difference
from one to another, and more weight farther
out, will put more stress on things.
A simple experiment would be to pick up a
10 lb. weight, hold it fully extended, then
bring it back close to your body, see which is
easier.
True... however I think the stresses of cutoff are 100 times the weight. But hard to say.
@@WinkysWorkshop the mass affects the resonant harmonics (vibration) in the set up.
@@wwilcox2726 yes... everything effects it.
I bought a new 6" chuck for my atlas lathe same results, so if at all possible I use the tail stock and live center to stop the chatter.
Very good method, I sometimes do the same.
If you didn’t do that experiment I wouldn’t believe it!!!
Thanks!!!
You're welcome! And that is why I did it. Thanks!
@@WinkysWorkshop yes thank you for taking the time to show the difference.
You made a very good point as close to the Head stock on the lathe as possible the less chatter you will eliminate. You didn't have to do a demonstration to convince me.
@@bombardier3qtrlbpsi You're welcome. Thanks for the comments!
The solution on mine was to use an er collet chuck. With your threaded snout on your lathe, you could just about thread the chuck and screw it strait onto the spindle. I did a short review on my channel and the chatter is much less.
Yes I totally agree. the ER collets have been on my list for a while! I'll check out your video, thanks!
If it's well balanced the extra mass of a heavy chuck can give more momentum and that sometimes reduces a tendency to chatter. As you point out the weakness is really in the spindle design. A few other factors that can help when parting: lock the saddle and that helps remove one more source of chatter. Also turning the part before parting ensures it isn't eccentric so when the tool first makes contact it's a little less likely to start chatter (once started it doesn't want to stop). With a VFD it's easy to tweak the speed to hopefully avoid the chatter resonant frequency. Ultimately all small machines suffer from rigidity issues to some extent. Buy as much cast iron as you can fit in your workshop.
I always thought the weight would play a part in smoothing things out. And maybe it does but it's to a small degree. Ultimately I can part smoothly on the larger chuck by speeding up the feed a little but I wanted to illustrate the effects of overhang. The small chuck is not at all sensitive. I can part off all day long without issue. I never thought about the VFD in this case... now that would be great!
Reduces load knurling as well, less wear, less fooling around adjusting, less runout, more ridgid . Plus it looks like the chuck was just made for that lathe. like hardinge and there little chip cover when you use collets. Just well done!
Thanks, great comment!
For sure a good step in the direction of higher rigidity. Force multiplied by the length of the arm makes torque. The same applies to the cutter. Do what can be done to lower force/torque wherever it's possible. They add up in higher performance.
Thanks. I don't think people realize how much difference a small change can make
@@WinkysWorkshop The difference between chatter and no chatter is small, very small, I want to say. Your work took a good bite of the error zone.
@@Stefan_Boerjesson I agree. Thanks for commenting.
awesome, this is so cool
Thank you! Cheers!
This has perfectly illustrated the rigidity factor, just an observation, please consider having a piece of wood on your bed ways, I would hate for you to drop the chuck them!, cheers Dave
Thanks Dave.. and yes the wood is a good idea!
Great discussion Wink, but I think we need more testing:)
How about chucking a weighted bar and measure defection, the longer the bar the finer the measurement. See the difference between all chucks.
Cheers
Great suggestion! czcams.com/video/ysYusXnhCQY/video.html
@@WinkysWorkshop
I new I had seen that before, even gave it a thumbs up :)
@@rickpalechuk4411 Cool- I really do think the thread mount is a big contributor.
@@WinkysWorkshop I agree. Not much can be done about it. I like the low profile of the stock unit. You can tell what the engineers were thinking.
Collet chuck (er32) would be handy for smaller stock.
Hello Mark,
I think you are correct for pursuing this… I have been watching another CZcamsr who has been doing lots of testing on vibration on his lathe at different speeds, he has run tests with chuck jaws in and out and weighed the jaws… He like you is trying to improve his performance.
Take care
Paul,,
Cool... send me a link- Thanks
@@WinkysWorkshop czcams.com/users/smallcnclathesvideos
Great info winky, overhang is a bad thing.🤔
Agree... and more so with smaller thread mount spindles
That was a very good demonstration. I appreciate the way you kept all the other factors the same: same stock, same speed, same tool, same coolant, same feed rate, and as far as I can tell, the same technique on your part which was mostly the application of the coolant.
Is it my imagination or was there a lack of those streamers in the second parting? Could they be produced by the chattering of the tool bit? Edit: No, I looked again and if anything, there were more with the shorter chuck. I need to improve my powers of observation.
Good comment... yeah the chatter was breaking the chips.
I have 2 South Bend 9A's , one chatters on parting with the 6" chuck, the other doesn't. The only diff is that one has a 3' bed, the other a 4.5' bed and the longer bed is 10 years younger. I use a Norman patent style toolpost so it's similar to yours. I solved the problem by making a ER32 collet chuck (~ 3/5" long). ER32 maxes at ~ 3/4" which matches the spindle bore so no need to go higher.
But you still don't know why one chatters and one does not?
@@WinkysWorkshop I suspect the older lathe with the "conforms to war production board" tag was made to less rigid standards
Is that chuck thread 1.5”x8 tpi?
Yes
is the weight even around the circumference on on those chucks? that is a lot of chatter for a short cutoff . you need a balancing jig to check but something does not quite ad up here. i assume you measured the perimeter is spinning true with an indicator.
It's a combination of small spindle and the spindle type (threaded). Logan also uses a double ball bearing in the headstock which is a little weaker that a sleeve or roller bearing. The overhang on my South Bend has the same effect although not as pronounced (plain bearing). Threads on a 1.5 diameter spindle are a also weak. The leverage a chuck has on a small spindle is enormous and you get compression at the threads. Even .0005" compression is extreme at the end of the jaws. Even a small increase in diameter exponentially improves the connection point. If you put a 3 foot bar (maybe 1.5" dia) in the chuck and have somebody push down on the end of the bar you will see the the backing plate pull away from the spindle register. I made significant improvement on this by making steel backing plates but chatter is still an issue. Going from a 1.5" to 2" spindle probably increases the rigidity of a spindle and connection point by an order of 10x.
never considered that. Wow very interesting
Thanks Steve
Hows your spindle bearings condition?
As near as I can tell, perfect. There was almost no movement with enough pressure to bend a 3/4" x 3 foot bar.
Good demo on chuck overhang. Not the best way to remove a chuck though. O.K. for 3 jaws, but using the chuck key as a lever can break the screws on a 4 jaw chuck.
Thanks, you maybe right... although I've never had one really hard to get off.
What's your BBQ sauce recipe, smells great???
On a lighter note, I am chuffed to see a real lathe showing 'Chatter Central' just as my Optimum TU2004V mini lathe shows. I am a skilled woodworker, new to the lathe & find chatter scary! The point between chatter, cutting & grabbing is quite narrow for my machine. It makes a great deal of sense that the chuck should be as narrow as possible, but that sort of precision obviously comes at a price. Great presentation, thanks.
Thank you sir! Yes small lathes have a lot of compromises.
Have you thought about restoring your old chuck, you can re-grind the jaws using an internal grinding spindle although you will need to load the jaws as if in operation.
Yeah... I've ground the jaws and it did improve but now the scroll is worn and the socket to the chuck key is in bad shape. So far it's working but there will soon be a day when I won't be able to tighten it
@@WinkysWorkshop another thought, slim chuck's are available here in the UK a company called Arc Euro Trade sells a variety of chuck's , is there a supplier in the USA ?
@@boostie1005 - I found the web sight but did not see any slim chucks. But thanks for trying
Could the problem be American made Logan chuck vs. cheap Chinese chucks and not the overhang?
Possibly... and for sure the problem with the chinese is that they are MUCH deeper! With that being said, after mounting this last chuck it had less than .0005" runout! VERY good!
If you watch as many machining videos as as i do, you'll notice that the parting off part of most machine doesn't make the video. Almost all the smaller home shop type lathes have chatter, overhang issues. Watch people do a cutoff on a 7 x 14 chinesium lathe. Still making good and truthful videos, keep ip the good work. Let the big boys do the video on cut off tools, and taking 1/4 inch cuts. (Abom, Rucker, etc...)
Small less ridged lathes can make cutoff tricky however, as you saw, it can be done with less overhang and a direct mount tool holder. Also increasing the feed rate with the new chuck resolves the chatter. It's hit and miss finding the sweet spot (feed speed) but doable. With the small chuck it never fails. This video was to demonstrate the effect of overhang although it has morphed into doing cutoff - but no problem.
one more benefit is the possebility of holding a little longer parts
yes, the newer chucks have good size jaws which is nice.
I know this is a big step but you can eliminate over hang problem by having a cam lock spindle. ( ea. D1-6" )
To be totally honest a small threaded spindle it where most the movement is. Even if the overhang was the same it would be more solid. And yes, this would be a huge step. Maybe better get a new lathe.
Work stickout looked a little less on the second demo as well. Should ensure they're the same for fair comparison.
I agree... I think the results would be the same but I should have paid more attention
@@WinkysWorkshop With obsession, there's always a next time ;~). I don't mean to be "that guy", just thought I'd point it out.
@@DCFusor - Nah... I didn't take it in a bad way.
Never had a problem on a 24 inch American Pace-Maker! (Actually, I agree with you entirely, chuck overhang should not be ignored. Asian manufacturers just don't seem to care!)
Agree... and yeah... Larger spindles can handle way more overhang!
I have the same issue with my enco 9x20
Yeah... a smaller spindle.
@@WinkysWorkshop m39x4
Just kidding I know you work with what ya got!!
No problems.. I don't mind the compromise most the time.
Here an informtion that you may not know about chucks. Chucks need to be balanced, just like wheel on a car. every lathe II've worked on had it's chuck balanced and certified to a limit in RPM. I'v e worked in a shop where they go two brand new 17x40 gap bed lathe with 9" chuck. When the chuck were unbalanced, I could break insert of the cutoff tool, but when each chuck were balanced and certified up to the max RPM speed of the spindle, these two lathe gave good performance, even with soft jaws. Even the four jaws chuck had to be balanced.
So balancing chucks does make a BIG difference.
And you can't compare new chucks that have more grips on parts with an old chuck that doesn't have a lot of grip.
Also many a lot of thing can affect the machining and the surface finish of any parts. When a lathe has a balance chuck, is prefectly level, screwed to the floor, the head aligned and the tail stock aligned with the center of the spindle bore. That lathe will do amazing parts. And set a zero between the spindle and the chuck to be sure you always put that chuck the same way.
And also whe it come to overhang, it's not supposed to start from the spindle. When you talk of overhang it should start from the from of the jaws of the chuck. So always consider the chuck part of the spindel and have your chuck balanced and have you jaws grinded and avoid playing musical chair between lathe with the same size chuck.
So no wonder you have an obsession with overhang & chucks.
I agree with a lot of what you said but I doubt a 5 inch chuck is going to have any significant balance issues. I can see where a 9 inch or larger would or could. My chucks are screw on single start threads so they go on the same no mater what... My lathes have different spindles so I can't swap the chucks and to be honest I never have cut off problems not that I have addressed the compound with a new blade holder and minimized overhang. Even the larger chuck stops chattering with a slightly higher feed rate. I let it chatter to demonstrate the effects of chatter. The 6-inch Shars chuck is simply too big for the small 1-1/2" lathe spindle.
@@WinkysWorkshop You're probably looking at it the wrong way. If they make a back plates that fit your spindle for that 6-inch chuck, it means the chuck is made to run on your lathe. You may have a bad spindle also, or bad bearing. Do you have the entire story or historic of this lathe? something probably happened to it in the past and that's the cause of your issues when you put a chuck on it.
I say that, because even CNC lathe, they may look new, but in reality someone crashed a tools in the chuck and they didn't fix all the problem cause by that crash. And each time you use that CNC lathe you get errors on some jobs. So your lathe even if it look clean and in good condition, has an living history in the machining world. So the spindle, bearings, gears, pullies and bearings surfaces, if something happened in that past, it will affect your use of the lathe in the present. And if that lathe was really ok, you would have never modified your chucks. Me when I talk of overhang it about the parts in the chuck, and not the chuck itself.
@@lepompier132 I understand what your saying, but Winkys demonstration wasn't an effort to solve the chatter issue. It's not even an issue for him really. He was just showing that, with all things equal, same lathe, spindle, speeds and cutting tool, the amount the chuck hangs out from the bearing point, has an effect on cutting ability. As he mentioned, if the spindle diameter were greater, it wouldn't matter as much.
Everything flexes...putting the mass of a chuck, then the work-piece that far away from the bearing is like adding a pipe to a wrench to get more torque on a bolt. It's easier to move the bolt, and in the case of the extended chuck distance, easier to generate harmonics that flex the entire spindle. These older lathes that came with smaller spindles, came with thinner chucks and it obvious why.
Sort of sounded like the RPM was too high for that chuck because the chatter went away as you got closer to the center of the part.
Slowing it down might have helped but did you notice there was no chatter on the shorter chuck? Increasing the feed rate on the larger chuck would also eliminate the chatter yet the small chuck was fine with the slower rate.
Yes, chatter free cutoff was possible with the larger chuck but I was trying to show the effect of overhang. The smaller chuck is VERY forgiving and the larger is very touchy on speed and feed.
@@WinkysWorkshop I agree with you but generally adjustments can compensate for a lot of the problems we encounter.
@@williamhardin5254 - Very true and good point
@@WinkysWorkshop I think as we are mostly hobby machinist it very hard for us to take the time to do the research required to produce optimum cuts to achieve our task. So many variables such as our tool holders, cutters, type of material, SFM, Feed Rate, etc.
We need to experiment and keep a log of everything so when we find that magic combination we have it ready to use on our next project. So good luck with that!
@@williamhardin5254 Yep... plus most of us have the additional challenge of less than ridged machines. It's good experience but larger industrial lathes can be much more forgiving.
👍👍😎👍👍
Thanks
I have never seen anyone use a parting tool like that. kind of defeats any point that chatter is the chuck and not the proper tool and speed selection. using a lathe is always a trade off. I do agree with mass of the cross slide. But conversely the mass of the chuck will also change your cut. I own a 1 1/2 inch late and have no such issues.
I've tried a lot of standard parting methods and different style blades. Some were terrible and some I could fiddle with and make them work... (if the planets were properly aligned). Mostly on a quick change post which is the absolute worst on a less than solid compound. This blade is amazing. it has a T profile and a concave top that make the chips more narrow than the cut. It would probably be better with a slight incline to give it a little back rake but it works fantastic as is. It cuts fast and never fails... I always use auto feed. Just because it is different than what you have used does not make it a bad idea. The holder is my design and it transfers the load to the compound much closer to straight down than other designs. Compounds handle a straight down load much better than twisting and lifting. czcams.com/video/R4-I_peyBFE/video.html
Again your using a parting tool to turn using the side of the tool. It is not rigid enough to use as a turning tool nor should there be any edge on the side of the blade. I am confused as to your issue. As for parting i generally use the back gears on my atlas 10f lathe and cutting through steel is chatter free
@@spoke4915 Not rigid enough? Funny, did you see me break any blades? No relief on the sides? Yes parting is much more demanding on a lathe but the same speed and feed calculations still apply. The only reason for lower speeds is 1) to reduce heat build up (side friction mostly) 2) to allow time for chips to clear and 3) to compensate for a lack of rigidity. My tool holder addresses my lack of compound rigidity, the blade profile addresses the friction and chip removal and cutting near the spindle bearing addresses the spindle rigidity. Yes I was running slightly too fast at first but the speed was appropriate when the diameter was slightly smaller (compromise). Step out of that box you put yourself into and watch the video. Yep, I can slow it down and hand feed to compensate for a lack of rigidity but why not address the rigidity. Step outside the box you put yourself into. This cut off method works perfect every single time and it's fast and easy. The video is proof. I could have done the same video with any turning tools. This video was about the effects of overhang not the parting tool.
@@spoke4915 czcams.com/video/fZlWJ_JqQtA/video.html
I can´t understand how they came up with that spindeldesign, It looks to me like that spindel is for drilling, very weak design. Bad leverage, Good video
Screw on chucks used to be common. Also these lathes were considered home of small shop lathes and not high production. I've never own a new small lathe but I hear they share the same problem and have a screw on chuck. I'd say cost was the main driver.
@@WinkysWorkshop It´s not the screw design thats the problem, it is the flange behind it that should have bigger diameter to support chuck and make it stiffer, as I see it. But thats the way it is. Your modification helps a lot
@@-Mats I absolutely agree.
I've got chuck hangover.
Take two aspirin and call me in the morning. HA
I was thinking .. I need to slap your wrists for not putting a board across your bed when swapping chucks.
Then I thought you will have your answer ..
"I am always very careful" 🤔🙄🤣
Why not a video on refurbishment of the Logan chuck ?
You saw the finger pinch... hmmm. I never put the board over the bed. My fingers protect the ways. I'm kidding, that was a first. I'm usually more careful and take more time. Some aspects of the chuck can be fixed but others would be hard to fix. Really I need a new pinion gear and the scroll is worn.
One way to solve your obsession! Get a bigger lathe! Lol
I have considered this! I kinda wish I had bought that Monarch 10EE. Small but stout!
@@WinkysWorkshop add very accurate if not worn out
1st order of business: install some fume extraction equipment.
Oh that oily smoke smell so good but maybe that would be a good idea.
The names Chuck, Chuck Overhang.
HA!
Shaken, not stirred!
You get far less chatter whilst wearing a face mask these days.😈
Ha... so true. I'll be glad when all this is behind us