Results 1 to 18 of 18
Thread: Barnes Lathe Seat
06-22-2010, 05:07 AM #1
Barnes Lathe Seat
Not sure if this is legal or not so if it is not, please disreguard and delete.
There is a seat on the bay that is being sold as a seat for a Barnes lathe/scroll saw. While the web is identical to what Barnes used, the mounting part is not, not anywhere near it. From time to time these show up and I have a couple.
Barnes had a flat bottom and had two mounting holes in the seat.
I sent the lister detail information and even offered to take pictures and send to him plus offer my website as a way to hopefully establish so level of experience. Nothing yet!
I understand that shortly authentic reproductions of the REAL seat will be available.
06-22-2010, 05:45 AM #2
Ed, do you have pix you could post of this imposter?
At least I'm assuming it's an imposter and not simply "production variations." The report I have is that Barnes used the same seat on both the No. 2 Velocipede Jig saw and on their lathes, with the only difference being the style/angle of the underarm.
"The Tool Works" where I got my Barnes repop seat many years ago, inquired me about my need for the underarm. While they could sell me an underarm for the No. 2, they had no plans to reproduce the underarm for the lathe (it wasn't their focus.)
I think my repop seat on my No. 5 is correct. It has two bolt holes made to receive the single plowshare type bolt (pyramid head) that holds it in place. Maybe some level of adjustment for shorter/longer legs?
p.s. I examined that Ebay listing (I'm at work and this is technically verboten - but ve have our ways!) and the seat, besides being damaged slightly (operationally not a problem) is stamped with a "7." But a No. 7 Barnes saw didn't have a seat?
Last edited by Joe in NH; 06-22-2010 at 06:07 AM. Reason: P.S.
06-22-2010, 01:11 PM #3
I own a couple of seats that have different mounts, with the same pattern as Barnes seats, however will not mount properly to a Barnes lathe. And was I disappointed with those purchases.
I do have a couple original Barnes seats and they are as Ed described.
On the seat bracket I have these two.
The top one is an original for the metal lathes. the lower a reproduction and Doug said for the wood lathes
06-22-2010, 05:25 PM #4
Excuse my ignorance but I've never seen a Barnes seat in person. Are they cast or stamped?
06-22-2010, 07:14 PM #5
They're cast. And as I say, the two holes where the bolt attaches the seat to the underarm are square. More properly "square tapered" to match the pyramid headed bolt (single bolt) that holds the seat to the underarm.
I have Doug's underarm on my No. 5. It's like the lower of the two indicated. I've done a lot of pedalling using that underarm. Dunno his source or inspiration for that sale.
Y'know, I actually went to Vermont with a paper & pencil in hand to "trace" the specifics of the underarm from another willing Barnes No. 5 victim. I even took pix. (film) I don't remember any radical difference of that underarm compared to Doug's. Or at least it didn't strike me. I wonder if I still have the tracing or pix that shows that one?
Like building a nuclear power plant, mebbe we need to get the best examples extant as our models in each case. If we're going to put a lot of work and money into this, it would be in history's best interest to get it right.
I know Mike said there were more than one pattern of flywheel around for 4-1/2. I'm pretty sure eventually I'll be in the market for one.
That is knowing myself as I do.
06-22-2010, 07:33 PM #6
The seat auction has ended, however, with the seat selling for an appropriate (IMHO) $20 plus shipping.
The closeup of the underside is most telling about what it should be mounted to. Definitely won't fit either of the underarms shown by TK above?
p.s. I found I could do the upload and now the pix are "forever."
Last edited by Joe in NH; 06-23-2010 at 04:38 AM. Reason: Pix
06-23-2010, 03:01 AM #7
The seller did finally say he thought we were right but the auction had a bidder. He was going to contact him, explain things and let him decide.
Will admit I have never taken time to compare all the support arms for the Barnes lathes (wood & metal). The design appears to be the same but can see that Barnes could have made one a little longer for the larger lathes. (Simple design and easily cast from the original or a pattern)
On the flywheels, I do have two different sizes for the 4 1/2 and have talked to at least two other people who have seen that. Thought I was getting taken one time when I picked up two lathes and saw that one flywheel was bigger.
One thing that could account for this is a larger flywheel could produce a faster sprred and since the 4 1/2 would do both wood and metal, might be an advantage. As I remember, the larger flywheel was on an earlier version (not the V belt version) so that might have been a factor two. Something to do more research on.
They also used two different size spriockets on the pedal shaft. Same result, I think.
06-23-2010, 04:43 AM #8
If it were my choice of the two 4-1/2 flywheels I would choose the heavier of the two. Or maybe the one larger diameter if the weights are similar (rotational inertia.)
Is it possible to "narrow down" a No. 5 flywheel and convert it to a 4-1/2? I've done this on a 3 step pulley for a lathe overhead drive. But there was considerable "meat" to the casting. Perhaps this is the source of two different flywheel patterns?
06-23-2010, 07:34 AM #9
I measured my #5 Round belt gear driven lathe and it is approximately the same diameter as the #4-1/2 flat belt lathe.
My #5 with the wooden seat (1876-1880) has a drive pulley like the Barnes scroll saws use, that drives a small flywheel (11-1/4" diameter) with three round belt grooves, for speed selection, that then drives the spindle
I had a discussion with Doug when I first got infected with the Barnes Strain of Old Iron Disease, and seeking knowledge for temporary relief. He stated there were two different sprockets for the flywheel. One for wood lathes (speed) the other for metal lathes (power)
Also, he explained the difference in the seat brackets is the deeper offset was clearance for the tool post clamp screw under the bed on the wood lathes.
Are the legs taller on the wood lathes than the #4, #4-1/2 & #5 metal lathes (35") to compensate for the difference in the seat bracket?
06-23-2010, 07:51 AM #10
Looking at the underarm pix above, it would seem the top-most arm would have the most clearance underneath the lathe. But the underneath arm would bring the operator to a "higher" position maybe better aligned to use woodworking tools. Particularly on the woodworking lathe where the operators hands are level with the tool rest. Of course the pedals would have to be higher too, but they adjust.
Hmm. See http://treadleit.info/?q=node/107 and scroll down a little. This shows a No. 3 lathe very nicely done up with the "upper" underarm shown above. (see the "neck down" portion.)
Dunno. Wish I had those pix from about 1994 when I went to VT. I think they were of a 4-1/2 lathe. And thinking back now, I seem to remember that my tracing differed from the underarm received from Doug. But I had bought an underarm for a No. 5 and took him at his word that is what I got.
Maybe Justin Mercier can take a pix of his 4-1/2 underarm? It would be nice to say X lathe typically gets X underarm. And his, while a bit damaged, can be assured to be period and barn fresh?
Or mebbe it doesn't matter a whole lot?
06-23-2010, 02:11 PM #11
All I can report from my experience is the bottom seat bracket is a major pain on the knees, hitting the underside of lathe bed pedaling, for a 6'2" tall person on a #5 round belt lathe. That was the reason for the inquiry with Doug, after I compared the two seat brackets.
The next metal lathe I obtained with a seat bracket was like the top bracket.
06-23-2010, 04:33 PM #12
Anyone care to post pic of a real Barnes lathe seat top & bottom view. Can these wrong seats be ground and drilled too fit? Just in case I see one, would like to know.
06-23-2010, 05:49 PM #13
Barnes seats & not Barnes seats?
Below are some pictures of W.F and John Barnes seats.
Sorry to those like me on dial up
Note the pentagon hole in the middle.
06-23-2010, 05:51 PM #14
Not Barnes seats?
The seats below are NOT Barnes
This is the ebay seat that started this thread. It has a recessed pocket to hold water, relieve pressure on the operators family jewels, or hemorrhoids?
06-24-2010, 02:24 AM #15
06-24-2010, 04:07 AM #16
The e-bay seat is definately a farm impliment seat. It was either Ed or Doug who told me to watch out for those. The tell tale is the Barnes seats have the square tapered holes and a flat underside.
Hope to have seats being repoped very soon. I am going to talk to a pattern maker today to see what the best way to do this is.
I have the sprockets in the works as well and I will have both the power sprockets and the speed sprockets available.
The plan at present is to get my Model T Ford hot rod finished first and then focus on the Barnes stuff for a bit.
06-24-2010, 05:53 AM #17
You know, I'm a little surprised that "foot powered tools" generally have not had a bigger play. Or that they're not available more widely offshore.
For many years the Amish supplier Lehman Hardware (Lehmans.com) has offered a reproduction of a Singer treadle sewing machine. Reports are it was a credible copy, to include the gold painted "Singer" on the front and cast iron underworks and hardwood drawers. Lehman a couple of years ago stopped the importing of the machines in part because of declining quality but more simply because demand was low with so many American machines still available from Craigslist and yard sales. I'm sure the Internet has not helped bolster Lehman's demand for Singer parts/components. I myself bought a fully functional 1930s era treadle Singer (actually has both treadle and an electric motor) for $20 using Craigslist. Nothing beats the old machines for sewing Model A Ford seatcovers.
But here I'm talking about the Barnes treadle lathes, grinders, jigsaws, formers. Or even the mortise maker or the tenon cutter. And F.E. Reed and others made a treadle powered drill press. (Not a blacksmith post drill which is a crude device in comparison.) I've seen Treadle It; Vintage tools for woodand metal work and there definitely is a resurgent American interest in these things. But I'm surprised there hasn't been a pre-existing "developing country" source and market for these. Or (more to the point) a pacific rim sourced variety available.
About the only tool of this ilk I've seen is the reproduction "Lion Mitre Trimmer." I use an antique Stratford, CT Lion Mitre Trimmer quite extensively in my homebuilding and interior trim carpentry, and bought one of the pacific rim reproductions for small money for my Dad. Without a hundred years of wear, the Chinese clone actually outperforms my original trimmer. A credible machine.
Yeah, I know we should support our local industries. And in the case of footpowered tools maybe the pacific rim loss is our gain. One of the few times they've missed the ball.
Mike, put me down for a seat if you can keep it below $100. (taking the plunge.)
06-24-2010, 06:39 PM #18
I honestly do not think the current demand for parts is great enough for the Chinese to show interest. Frankly I hope they stay the Hell out of it. If they ever get into it I will be sunk for sure.
Joe, no problem on the seat. I am expecting the selling price to be around $80.00. I hope to hold to that.
I got a small quantity of seat bolts today if anyone needs one.