Subject: Re: lathe differences

From: [email-masked] (Drew Diamond)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1993 00:29:56 GMT

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (John Kopf, X6305) writes:
>From: [email-masked] (John Kopf, X6305)
>Subject: lathe differences
>Date: 11 Nov 1993 20:18:50 GMT
>
>yesterday I went to a machine tool trade show.  I picked up an number of
>catalogs from used machinery companies.  Looking through these last night,
>I realized that I don't know the difference between a:
>"Lathe",
>"Toolroom Lathe", and
>"Engine Lathe".
>
>Can someone explain what difference, if any, there is between these
>designations?
>
>JK

Hello John.

The lathe catagories are fairly blurred. However, a machine calling 
itself a "toolroom lathe" or "instrument makers" lathe should be capable 
of working to fine tolerances (in the hands of a good worker). It 
probably comes "fully colleted", meaning that a set of collets for round
(and perhaps hex) stock is provided, although 4 and 3-jaw chucks may be 
applied to less accurate work. The standard of construction is very 
high. Typical examples would be a Hardinge (beautiful!- English) or 
Schaublin (Swiss).

"Engine lathe" I think is a rather old-fashioned term used to describe a 
machine which is powered by (say) an electric motor, rather than by foot 
treadle or hand. One so described may even be of the old over-head belt 
arrangement, where the power for the machine-shop was provided by a large 
engine (probably steam), and transmitted to a host of machines via overhead 
shafts, and connected to individual units via an endless flat belt.

Something called a "lathe" could be practically anything- from a 
toolroom to a woodworking machine.

Regards, Drew.

---

From: [email-masked] (Mark Fraser)
Date: 15 Nov 1993 21:18:12 -0800

Doesn't the term "engine" apply to those units with the ability to follow
patterns, do threads etc. - "this is an engine that makes threaded taper
rods..."

/mark

---

From: [email-masked] (f.w.kerfoot..iii)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1993 13:50:51 GMT

>From article <[email-masked]>, by [email-masked] (Drew Diamond):

I believe that there are two different animals being addressed here.
A "tool maker's lathe" is what Drew describes above. In addition to
the above description, they frequently come without a lead screw.
Thus there is no thread cutting ability, and no power feeds on either
axis. On my dad's Schaublin, and I believe on the corresponding
Hardinge, there is no carriage feed. All longitudinal motion is
provided with the compound. The carriage can be moved to another
location on the bed by loosening a locking handscrew. An indexing
mechanism is provided on the compound angle, so that it can be
set very accurately to 0 degrees (and also to +-45 degrees).

A "toolroom lathe" is a term applied to an upgraded and more fully
equipped engine lathe. My 10" South Bend is the toolroom lathe
version. It came standard with the collet closer (but not collets),
the taper attachment, a graduated tailstock wheel, and probably a
few other gadgets I don't recollect at the moment. Most (all?) of
these were available separately as options on the basic lathe.

I think the distinction arose from the application. A lathe purchased
for a production application would be provided only with the options
that application required, rather than being equipped to to handle
any generic lathe application. By contrast, the lathe in the toolroom
at the factory needed to be versatile enough to handle a wide variety 
of tasks.

I'm not aware of where the term "engine lathe" arose, or what
distinguishes it from a "lathe". The South Bend catalog of 1958,
if I recollect, refers to all of the non-toolroom lathes as engine
lathes. By 1958 they all had separate motors, so Drew's explanation
fits.

Frank Kerfoot
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (gary preckshot)
Date: 16 Nov 1993 17:27:32 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
> >>Date: 11 Nov 1993 20:18:50 GMT

[............]

> > high. Typical examples would be a Hardinge (beautiful!- English) 
.............
> Hardinge, there is no carriage feed............

I hate to throw cold water on all the misinformation being provided, but I
have a Hardinge out in my shop.  The cast doors on the pedestals say
Hardinge, Chicago (Chicago, England, maybe?).  I wrote to the current
factory in Connecticut (or maybe Mass.) to discover the antecedents of my
lathe (#252) and they wrote back that all records had been destroyed in a
fire in 1925 or 1926, at which point they had made 5000 lathes.  This puts
mine about 1916, since they began production in 1915.  Subsequently they
moved back east and continue to produce one of the most elegant, accurate
toolroom lathes in existence.  Like my 1916 version, modern Hardinge
toolroom lathes have all feeds and a lead screw and are distinguished by
their dovetail ways.  I look at my lathe and I can see where all the modern
features had their genesis.

What Frank may be describing is often known as a watchmaker's lathe.  These
were small lathes having no feeds or lead screws and were usually used by
watchmakers to turn the pins that fit into jewel bearings.

Gary

---

From: [email-masked] (Michael J. Edelman)
Date: 16 Nov 1993 18:00:03 GMT

In article [email-masked],  [email-masked] (gary preckshot) writes:
...
>watchmakers to turn the pins that fit into jewel bearings.
And to cut wheels (gears) as well. A watchmaker's lathe is like a tiny 
wood lathe with a headstock that uses collets. Most have indexing holes in
the headstock pully to allow gears to be cut.

That's the old-style watchmaker's lathe. Modern watchmaker's lathes have 
compound rests, but still do not, for the most part, have lead screws.

There are, of course, exceptions to everything...

--mike

---

From: [email-masked] (Neil R. Marsh)
Date: 16 Nov 1993 09:29:10 -0800

> patterns, do threads etc. - "this is an engine that makes threaded taper

        I believe "engine" was originally applied to any "mechanical
contrivance."  Shares a common root with "ingenious" and "ingenuity."
In older texts I see "engine" used the same way more recent ones use 
"device."  This seems to have continued in the British Isles for some 
time after we in North America began using it to mean "powerplant." 
(Some yank probably got tired of saying "locomotive.")  Maybe it just 
depends on where and when the lathe was made?

        As long as I'm this close to being off topic:  In today's usage, 
what's the difference between an "engine" and a "motor?"  Power source, 
ie., steam or internal combustion versus electricity?  Relative number of 
moving parts?

Etymologically yours,
Neil

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Marsh  [email-masked] -or- [email-masked]  Chehalis, WA USA

---

From: [email-masked] (f.w.kerfoot..iii)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1993 19:36:19 GMT

>From article <[email-masked]>, by [email-masked] (gary preckshot):

I also thought I remembered that Hardinge was a US company, but didn't
have anything handy (like a Hardinge lathe) which would verify my
memory.

> watchmakers to turn the pins that fit into jewel bearings.

As Gary states, Hardinge also makes toolroom lathes, which have leadscrews
and feeds. I was not trying to imply otherwise. However, both Hardinge
and Shaublin make examples of a class of lathes which are significantly
larger than traditional watchmaker's lathes (the Shaublin is about an
8" swing, and would support workpieces up to perhaps 24" long- I believe 
that the Hardinge equivalent is in the same size class) which
I believe have traditionally been called tool maker's lathes.
The whole distinction I was trying to draw was the "toolroom" versus
"tool maker's" lathe distinction, which seems to have gotten lost
on Gary, who has a Hardinge TOOLROOM lathe with a lead screw and feeds
(not surprisingly).

Frank Kerfoot
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul Gloger)
Date: 17 Nov 93 00:45:54 GMT

>In a previous article, [email-masked] (Neil R. Marsh) asks:

>>what's the difference between an "engine" and a "motor?"  

To which Michael Burlage replies:

>Gasoline ENGINE
>Electric MOTOR
>It has to do with the power source.

Well, then, what about my MOTOR cycle?
No, friends, the real difference between "engine" and "motor" is not one of
"true" meaning, but simply a difference in usage, and the same holds for a
host of other word pairs as well.  The difference is that we call some
things motors and some engines.  It's as simple as that.

Paul K. Gloger
C.B.E. Engineering
[email-masked]

>BTW, I belive the term "engine lathe" refers to the old days
>when most lathes were run f rom a water-wheel.
>engine lathes did not need a water-wheel as they had there
>own "engine"
>may or may not be true, who knows?

>-- 
>"Onward through the fog"
>                         - Power-Hitter
>[email-masked]
>[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Drew Diamond)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 07:01:29 GMT

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (gary preckshot) writes:
>From: [email-masked] (gary preckshot)
>Subject: Re: lathe differences
>Date: 16 Nov 1993 17:27:32 GMT

Hello Gary. Maybe there is a Hardinge USA, and a Hardinge, England. The 
lathe we have in our workshop here, and I have the sublime privilege to 
use from time to time, is described as "Super Precision Tool Room Lathe" 
model HLV-H, made by the Hardinge Machine Tools Ltd Co., Fetham, 
Middlesex, England. Perhaps someone can clear this up for us?

Regards, Drew.

---

From: [email-masked] (David Erickson)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 17:09:52 GMT

>Middlesex, England. Perhaps someone can clear this up for us?

I hope there is a Hardinge expert out there who can give us a description
of the various lathes and a capsule history of the company.  Just to add
one more piece of information:  I have a copy of Toolmaking, an ATS book
published in 1940, which shows a picture of a Hardinge lathe which does
not have a lead screw, and in fact looks like a very large watchmakers
lathe, with perhaps 18" btw. centers.

-Dave Erickson

---

From: [email-masked] (gary preckshot)
Date: 18 Nov 1993 18:10:13 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Drew Diamond) wrote:

stuff.....
> Hello Gary. Maybe there is a Hardinge USA, and a Hardinge, England.
[.....]
> Middlesex, England. Perhaps someone can clear this up for us?

I'm pretty sure that Hardinge started off in Chicago, lost their factory in
the 1926 Chicago fire, and moved to New York.  That doesn't rule out their
starting a subsidiary in England, or, perish the thought, starting a US
subsidiary in 1915 in Chicago.  Will mysteries never cease?

BTW, I've enjoyed Frank's information on engine vs. toolroom lathes.  And
he's right; libraries, or more precisely books, are addictive.  Sure hope
we never get a BEA to parallel the DEA.  Shades of Fahrenheit 451!

---

From: [email-masked] (f.w.kerfoot..iii)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 20:46:46 GMT

>From article <[email-masked]>, by [email-masked] (David Erickson):

As I described in previous posts, this sound just like the Shaublin 102
my Dad has, and I know he agonized between it and a similar but more
expensive Hardinge when he bought it. I'm still not sure what to call
this type of lathe. It is clearly (in my mind) too big to be called a
watchmaker's lathe. My Dad always called it a tool maker's lathe, but
that could be his choice. I looked in some Shaublin documentation I 
have, but it is all maintenance information rather than sales information,
so it just refers to it as a lathe.  Neither Hardinge nor Shaublin chose
to put product data in the microfilm catalogs here at work. Did the book
you have give the Hardinge in the picture a name?

Frank Kerfoot
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Roger Mitchell)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 14:43:05 GMT

My 16 X 72 inch South Bend lathe was originally powered by a foot
treadle. It is now powered by a 5 Horsepower 3 phase motor. The lathe  
was built in 1880
				Roger Mitchell
				President and Master Mechanic
				Fort Collins Municipal Railway

---

From: [email-masked] (f.w.kerfoot..iii)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 16:36:58 GMT

>From article <[email-masked]>, by [email-masked] (Roger Mitchell):

Was the treadle big enough for 5 horses? Seriously, was it possible to
do any reasonable work on a 16" lathe with only foot power? Apparently
so, but it sounds somewhat implausible. Perhaps with very light cuts
and slow feeds.

Frank Kerfoot
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (gary preckshot)
Date: 19 Nov 1993 17:23:11 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Roger Mitchell) wrote:
> treadle. It is now powered by a 5 Horsepower 3 phase motor.!!!!!!!!!!

Were there any specs on the guy who was supposed to work the treadle?

---

From: [email-masked] (Roger Mitchell)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 19:42:21 GMT

gary preckshot ([email-masked]) wrote:
: In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Roger Mitchell) wrote:
: > 
: > 	My 16 X 72 inch South Bend lathe was originally powered by a foot
: > treadle. It is now powered by a 5 Horsepower 3 phase motor.!!!!!!!!!!

: Were there any specs on the guy who was supposed to work the treadle?
The old lathe I described took 5 men to power it and one operator to
machine parts. The lathe never saw any serious metal cutting until I
purchased it from a man in Loveland, Colorado for a $100. It was purchased
new by Chain of Mines Mill in Central City, Colorado in 1880 and spent most
of it's life carving out large graphite crucibles for smelting gold ore in.
When the mine went broke in the 1930's, the father of the man I purchased it
from received it as payment of wages owed to him. I have owned this lathe for 
about 20 years now. It is still in remarkably good condition and shows little
ware.
				Roger Mitchell

---

From: [email-masked] (William F. Kaiser)
Date: 23 Nov 1993 14:24:54 GMT

> >Middlesex, England. Perhaps someone can clear this up for us?

[ Deleted ]

> lathe, with perhaps 18" btw. centers.

I'm not an expert on Hardinge, but I have their catalog "Total Workholding
by Hardinge," which contains a short history of the company.

"Hardinge Brothers began in July of 1890 when two brothers from Canada,
Franklin and Henry Hardinge, invented several watchmakers' tools.  Their
first factory was an eight-foot square building at the rear of a boarding
house in Chicago, Illinois

"Franklin Hardinge made a specialty of perfecting various devices and
tools, obtaining between 25 and 30 patents, which mainly related to the
Cataract line of precision bench lathes and attachments.  Franklin and
Henry together produced the first "True" chucks.

"During World War I a company in Rochester, New York, originally
called the Inanout Collet Manufacturing Company, and later Morrison Machine
Products, started production of collets and feed fingers.  Under the
leadership of Douglas Anderson and Leigh Evans, Morrison Machine Products
set up operations in Elmira, New York, in 1925.  In 1931 Morrison Machine
purchased and moved Hardinge Brothers to Elmira.  On January 1, 1938, the
two well-knows businesses were incorporated under the name of Hardinge
Brothers, Inc." 

Corporate Offices and Manufacturing Facility:
Hardinge Brothers, Inc.
1420 College Ave.
Elmira, NY  14902-1507  USA

Sales Offices in Devon, England, as well as in Australia, Canada, France,
and Germany.

The 300+ page catalog devotes two pages to pictures and brief
specifications of ten lathes, brochures available separately.  The rest of
the catalog is devoted to collets and other workholding devices.

Bill Kaiser
[email-masked]