Thread: Just what you have been waiting for.

Too far away from me, but anyone chasing a heavier machine really should take a look at this one... The single photo does tend to show a machine that would be worth checking out... An axelson would probably be better then a dean smith and grace or at least equivalent...

Axelson lathe, probably an 18" swing (16" model)...... Hardened steel ways on the bed...taper turning

Weighs 3 tonne if the 16" model.. 4 X 0 grade timken bearings in the spindle... piddly small spindle bore though as typical on US lathes of that era.. This may even be the toolroom model going by the chrome plated handwheels and dials and micrometer stop on the bed..

The sales brochure is here http://pounceatron.dreamhosters.com/...s-multidoc.pdf

machine here Lathe Machine Axelson USA | eBay

enjoy....

With that photo and that description who would bother?
Mr zero feedback needs educatin'.

Apart from the top clutch lever and the tail stock it looks very much like a Macson circa 50-52 vintage .

Kev.

Lately, after taking inventory of my reapir costs plus time on my basket case machine tools, I have come to e conclusion that old machines need to be nearly free if there is going to be any hope of an economical restoration project.

I was given a free geared head drill press a couple of years ago. It lacks power feed, but it did have repairable damage. All up, it cost me about $1,000 in parts to restore, and about 50 hours of labour. It is a Taiwanese copy of a Swedish Rosenfors or Arboga drill. My friends call it the "Tai-Boga" which illustrates the calibre of friends that I can attract.

A similar drill new would have been cheaper. The Axelson, while appealing, has the same thang goin' on: it is going to require some parts (bearings, oilers, tool post, some modern motor control) and a lot of effort to erase the years of wear for the discriminating user. Even then it will likely have an RPM range too low for the typical HSM workpiece. Which is not to say that it wouldn't make a neat project for someone (even little old irrational me), but it helps to have one's eyes open to the downrange costs when shopping for a project machine.

You are right Greg, this would probably be a war baby being american so you have to consider it is 70+ years old.. If it has sat for any extended period of time it could have developed flight rust on bearings/gears... But I still think it worth a look if you were in the market for something like this...... it is overpriced at the moment... If it is in good order $1500 would be a good price... Top speed could be 1500rpm and ironically it may have more features then what has been sold int he past thirty years...

It won't sell for $2500 it is too old for that price..

I worked out why the guy in the catalogue has a bemused look on his face. Someone needs to tell him you work from the other side.

Some interesting features though. What's with the handle for the compound slide?


Greg think how much those 50 hours could have cost you if you took up golf

Stuart

Originally Posted by Greg Q

Lately, after taking inventory of my reapir costs plus time on my basket case machine tools, I have come to e conclusion that old machines need to be nearly free if there is going to be any hope of an economical restoration project.

I was given a free geared head drill press a couple of years ago. It lacks power feed, but it did have repairable damage. All up, it cost me about $1,000 in parts to restore, and about 50 hours of labour. It is a Taiwanese copy of a Swedish Rosenfors or Arboga drill. My friends call it the "Tai-Boga" which illustrates the calibre of friends that I can attract.

A similar drill new would have been cheaper. The Axelson, while appealing, has the same thang goin' on: it is going to require some parts (bearings, oilers, tool post, some modern motor control) and a lot of effort to erase the years of wear for the discriminating user. Even then it will likely have an RPM range too low for the typical HSM workpiece. Which is not to say that it wouldn't make a neat project for someone (even little old irrational me), but it helps to have one's eyes open to the downrange costs when shopping for a project machine.

Yeah, but (like you) a lot of it isn't about function, it's old iron collector disease. Epitomised by those who restore machines with perfect paint jobs - I wonder if they ever use the machines afterwards for fear of damaging the paint.....

Dealer sold me my Arboga radial arm drill 15+ years ago for $400. It was rattly, had a noisy bearing and was painted orange. He said it'd take him 40 hours of work to restore it and then he'd price it at $1800 or so and expect it'd take some months to sell. Selling it to me allowed him to more than double his money in less than a week without any time outlay. Guess what? It still has a noisy bearing, the orange has mostly worn or been scraped off and I've done absolutely no work to it. It drills holes fine and I couldn't care less what it looks like. My old machines are there to cut metal so as long as the sliding ways etc are clean, straight and getting oil, the bearings etc are ok, I just wipe off the years of crud and start using them...

If the Axelson was closer I'd take a look. Not at all interested at the asking price regardless. I paid a lot less for my Monarch which is a much bigger machine and in reasonable condition for its age. Like all the old American iron, the spindle bore is too damn small. Were I to buy another lathe, I'd want something with a 3" spindle bore.

Someone should grab it for around $1000, it really isn't worth more especially as advertised.

PDW

Originally Posted by Stustoys

Some interesting features though. What's with the handle for the compound slide?

You mean up on an angle?


It was a common feature of lathes back in the day before CNC.... I assume it was so you can swing the top slide around any angle and the compound screw handle would not foul on the cross slide screw handle... I know the AL1000C lathe I had the top slide wheel would touch the cross slide wheel if you had to do steep tapers..

Hi RC.
It does seem to have a very lower compound slide.
I just had a thought, would it have powerfeed on the compound?

Stuart

Originally Posted by PDW

Like all the old American iron, the spindle bore is too damn small.

I wonder if the bearings have a lot to do with that.... I can only imagine large precision bearings would have been horrendously expensive to make back in those days so they stuck to small spindle bores and small affordable high precision spindle bearings to get their claimed accuracy...

Bearings would be part of it but early lathes had solid (Babbitt) bearings so that can't be all the story. I think turning methods are in there too - think of all the things that used to be turned between centres that we now throw into a chuck of some sort. If you have a centre in the headstock then a bore is irrelevant.
My first lathe (a really old museum piece) didn't have a bore; the chucks that came with it were virtually face plates with dogs on them. I suspect that as chucks have gotten better, bearing capacity has had to be increased for the weight and bores have opened up.

Michael

Originally Posted by .RC.

I wonder if the bearings have a lot to do with that.... I can only imagine large precision bearings would have been horrendously expensive to make back in those days so they stuck to small spindle bores and small affordable high precision spindle bearings to get their claimed accuracy...

Probably part of it but IIRC the Colchester Master lathes had 3" spindle bores and they were smaller lathes than my Monarch CY. I expect it was the intended use, not really designed for long bars of large diameter through the HS because people did things differently or on other machines.

It's the one thing I find annoying about the CY, though. OTOH the auto-disengage threading and long feed system is wonderful and I've never seen that on a Colchester.

Perhaps I need a big DS&G machine next time.

PDW