Tool post for my antique lathe

Amateur looking to purchase a quick change tool post for my lathe, I don't have much information on the lathe at this time, what i do know is it has a "Preston" speed selection plate on it, 9" swing, 1 3/8" from top of compound to center of spindle, 16' from spindle to tail stock. I am currently looking at the phase II or Aloris, I could use your advise, any recommendations would be appreciated. I have posted pictures of the lathe on my profile if your interested.
Thanks
Mark

Buy Quality.

Buy quality. That way, you will never be dissatisfied with it. You can carry it on to future lathes.

SouthBendModel34 said:

Buy quality. That way, you will never be dissatisfied with it. You can carry it on to future lathes.

Click to expand...

He's right, you know. Buy once, cry once. Can't go wrong with Aloris.

SouthBendModel34 said:

Buy quality. That way, you will never be dissatisfied with it. You can carry it on to future lathes.

Click to expand...

I can only totally agree with SBM34 ...

Can't beleive how many cheap and average ones I went through over the years - quite simply should have bought a good one in the first place. It would have been so much cheaper.

For me, I'd recommend the "Multifix" system ... just one of a number of excellent systems but not cheap.

Remember - You ONLY get what you pay for!

John

SouthBendModel34 said:

Buy quality. That way, you will never be dissatisfied with it. You can carry it on to future lathes.

Click to expand...

But not if you get larger lathes.

I went quality on my first QC toolpost, and bought a Dickson set for a Myford 7 while in London. I used it on a Hardinge 7" lathe and later put a spacer under it to use on a Hardinge 9" lathe. Eventually, I bought the OEM Hardinge QC sets for the 9" Hardinge lathes. They are very fine tools.

I also went with quality on my second QC set. I bought a new Taiwan 12 x 36 lathe and spent almost the price of the lathe for a Swiss 40 position QC with a set of holders including the internal and external threading holders. The lathe turned out to be not so good, but I still use that Swiss QC set on my Clausing 12 x 36 lathe.

Lots of lathe info on Tony's site, the first place to look for such.
http://www.lathes.co.uk/page21.html

But Tony does not have a W. M. Preston (Galt, Ontario, Canada) lathe page, so he may be interested in good photos and details of yours. The Preston does not look like an exact copy of a 9" South Bend, but some similarities are inevitable.

I see that the neighboring towns of Galt and Preston merged and became Cambridge, Ontario in 1973. The town of Preston was named for the town in England, so the lathe maker's name seems to be a coincidence.

Larry

What's wrong with the tool post you have now? I looked at the pics of the machine, I suspect you will be using it for hobby/learning???? If that's the case, what you have will work just fine.
In the pics it appears you are missing one of the tumbler gears. If you don't have that situation worked out, then in my opinion you should concentrate on that and not worry about a quick change tool post.
Just my $.02

Nothing wrong with the tool post I have now, I am doing homework to eventually add a quick change tool post. Yes it will be used for hobby/learning, I have already used the lathe to modify a gear i bought to replace the tumbler gear that was damaged. I have also added a new drive belt, and will be giving it lots of TLC.

helifixer:

Your lathe, being 9" swing, would take an "AXA" size Aloris toolpost (or Asian knockoff of same). I have an Aloris AXA on my Southbend heavy 10" lathe and it is a great toolpost and well made. Over the years, prior to my "retirement", I bought a number of Aloris and Dorian toolposts and toolholder sets for lathes where I was employed.
As the man says: "you gets what you paid for". I got a 13" LeBlond roundhead Regal lathe for my own shop, and it had the original "lantern" style toolpost. Nothing wrong with that system, and I am old enough to have "come up" using that style of toolpost and toolholders, grinding my own HSS toolbits. At some point, probably because ENCO was being swallowed by MSC, I decided to buy a Phase II BXA size toolpost and toolholder set for the LeBlond lathe. I had 700 bucks tied up in the LeBlond lathe, fully tooled, but could not stomach what a new Aloris or Dorian BXA series toolpost and toolholders would cost. I ordered the Phase II wedge type toolpost and toolholders. Made in China, but I figured Phase II had a bit of a better reputation for Chinese made tooling. The toolpost set arrived and I milled the base nut to fit the compound on the LeBlond lathe. Here is what I have found with the Phase II knockoff of the Aloris BXA toolpost and toolholders:

1. The toolpost itself seems well made and functions properly

2. The individual toolholders are another matter. Right off the bat, nearly all of the socket head screws for clamping the toolbits in the holders split through the corners of the female hex socket heads. I simply bought metric setscrews from a known manufacturer at my local Fastenal.

Aside from the s-t setscrews, the depth stop studs and knurled nuts are junk. Sloppy workmanship, holes in the thin knurled stop nuts tapped out of square.

The parting or cutoff tool holder seems to have been machined slightly undersized for stock size cutoff tool blanks. I had to grind the blank down (height of the blank was tight and would not enter the holder) on the surface grinder.

Knurling tool is a complete piece of junk. The one and only time I tried using it, I discovered the knurl wheels are made so the center holes for the pins are not concentric with the circumference of the knurl wheels. Eccentric- not concentric.

Thoroughly disgusted, I called Phase II. I got a guy named Brent on the phone. I explained the issues with the knurling tool. Brent could not comprehend what "concentric" and "runout" meant. He "yes'd" me and assured me Phase II would make good on it and send another set of knurl wheels. Never happened. A new lie to add to the list of basic excuses (computer is down, check in the mail, etc): "We will be happy to send you replacement ------. What's your name and shipping address ?"
I decided Phase II is no better than the other firms slapping their names on Chinese knockoffs of US or European made tooling.

Plainly put: if you don't want to spend a lot of money up front, you take your chances with Chinese knockoffs of the Aloris or Dorian toolposts and toolholders.

On the plus side, I do find that the Phase II toolpost and toolholder does have good "repeatability"- if I take off a toolholder to do some other operation, then replace it, the toolbit or boring bar is right where it was previous to my removing the toolholder. I've done quite a few jobs with the Phase II toolpost and toolholders, and aside from the sloppy workmanship and piss poor clamping screws, it does the job- as long as I do not use the knurling tool. I solved that by buying an English made scissors type knurling tool on Ebay, and use it in a toolholder on the BXA toolpost.

What you appear to have is a "lantern" post, which I happen to consider are nearly worthless for any serious purpose. "Nearly" only because once in a blue moon it might reach somewhere you need to reach. So far I have had the moon stay stubbornly white for 15+ years. There might be one of those posts in a drawer somewhere around here that I have forgotten about, but I don;t use them..

For my purposes, a 4-way post has been more than adequate, although I do use some various block type and other holders for boring bars. I have done mostly one-off prototype and minor tooling stuff, repair parts, etc, very little "volume" type production, and even that nothing over maybe 50 or 75 pieces, as a rule. That's a lot like the usual home shop person.

You can spend a lot on a "really good" QCTP, and then a bunch more on the holders you need to make the "quick change" actually helpful, since you may want as many as a dozen or so holders for various cutters, cutoff tool, threading tools, maybe a knurling tool, a couple boring tools, and so forth.

And after you get all that tool holder stuff, you still don't have tools. If you are going to operate a shop for profit, you want a good QCTP and plenty of holders. For your purposes, you would do fine with a plain "block" type holder that holds a single cutter. Standardize on one size, and grind them so the cutting edge is at the top, and you can make your block holder hold them all at just the right height by making a "filler block" to go under the tool.

Save that money for other tooling, and the mill you will be wanting.

In fact, you can use that "lantern" post in a reasonable way.... Make a ring that fits over the center post section. Make it just as high as wil hold your standard cutter size right on-center when they are set on top of it so that the screw in the post holds the cutter down on the ring. If you are lucky, you can just flip over the existing ring to give a flat top surface at the right height...... Now, put all those holders in a drawer, along with the little "rocker" piece, and the old ring if it isn;t the right height.

The cutter clamped on the ring will be way more solid than the usual lantern holder, and will, if made right, always put the top of the cutter on-center where it needs to be.

JST said:

In fact, you can use that "lantern" post in a reasonable way.... Make a ring that fits over the center post section. Make it just as high as wil hold your standard cutter size right on-center when they are set on top of it so that the screw in the post holds the cutter down on the ring. If you are lucky, you can just flip over the existing ring to give a flat top surface at the right height...... Now, put all those holders in a drawer, along with the little "rocker" piece, and the old ring if it isn;t the right height.

The cutter clamped on the ring will be way more solid than the usual lantern holder, and will, if made right, always put the top of the cutter on-center where it needs to be.

Click to expand...

That's really good advice. I should have been a lot clearer in my earlier post and explained using the lantern post more to it's potential. On my 9A, I use a very similar system as JST described. I generally use 3/8" shank tools which sit on a shim block I made which sits on the rocker and holds the tool on center when the rocker is level. I could have completely replaced the rocker as JST explained to get even better rigidity, but having the rocker gives room for minor adjustment if need be. I never use tool holders in the tool post like it was intended. They just make things even more flimsy and limit the tool bit size.
Small boring bars can be held the same way, larger ones can be held in an easily made tool block.
The point being that if the machine is not being used in a setting where time is money, there is no real need for a "quick change" anything. If that's the case, I'd rather spend my limited budget on other things that will actually expand my abilities, rather than simply let me do the same set of things a bit faster.

JST said:

In fact, you can use that "lantern" post in a reasonable way.... Make a ring that fits over the center post section. Make it just as high as wil hold your standard cutter size right on-center when they are set on top of it so that the screw in the post holds the cutter down on the ring. If you are lucky, you can just flip over the existing ring to give a flat top surface at the right height...... Now, put all those holders in a drawer, along with the little "rocker" piece, and the old ring if it isn;t the right height.

The cutter clamped on the ring will be way more solid than the usual lantern holder, and will, if made right, always put the top of the cutter on-center where it needs to be.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I found that McMaster-Carr had various thicknesses of nice wide hard steel (grade 5, 8 8 & or other good grades) washers that have an I.D. almost exactly the same as the O.D. of my old lantern toolpost's center post. By various combinations of thickness I have some flexibility if I want (depending on variations in cutting tool), and it is all very rigid. When I looked at the cumulative cost of all of the quick-change stuff (if you are going to have multiple holders for multiple functions, which is the only way that it is a benefit), I'd rather focus my budget first on other aspects of equipment and tooling. I kept the dished washer and rocker just in case I come up with some situation where I do want the other adaptability.

Derek Smalls said:

...The point being that if the machine is not being used in a setting where time is money, there is no real need for a "quick change" anything. If that's the case, I'd rather spend my limited budget on other things that will actually expand my abilities, rather than simply let me do the same set of things a bit faster.

Click to expand...

Old-school "lantern" TP should still be in a drawer even if one has 4-Way and QCTP. Sometimes it can get into places a QCTP or 4-Way just cannot.

"Quick and dirty" was to simply flip the concave "washer" upside-down and use a wedge instead of a rocker. For that matter, slanted "washers" with matching wedges were once a stock item. Wedges beat shims on 4-ways as well. Some are even milled specifically for wedges - as are certain Hardinge block toolholders that are not hard to adapt to other makes of lathe.

With a wedge, one still has height adjustability, but the angle built-in to the Armstrong/Williams and/or the cutting tool itself remains consistent as you adjust the height to compensate for various cutting tool grinds/re-grinds. Better yet, a wedge - so long as shallow-angle - won't MOVE when it is not meant to do as easily as a rocker.

One of the veteran "Grand Old" makers - LeBlond, IIRC - also had a dual-bolt post. Tool went between two uprights, heavy top-bridge clamped down on it. Not hard to emulate. Rob the clamping set for the mill.

All that aside, possession of a gen-you-whine Aloris wedge-locking QCTP HAS been proven - or so they swear - to make yer d**k longer, thicker, and harder, whereas a lowly 4-Way only makes it heavier and stiffer...so no danger of QCTP going scarce in the market...

Monarchist said:

Old-school "lantern" TP should still be in a drawer even if one has 4-Way and QCTP. Sometimes it can get into places a QCTP or 4-Way just cannot.

.....

Click to expand...

I've had one somewhere for at least 15 years, and none o' them type situations has come up yet.

Flipping the rocker washer can work, but usually only if you still use the holder. the washer is most often too short. Sometimes it does work.

Either way, it is a heck of a lot cheaper than spending a lot on a QCTP.. Those QCTPs must increase length and diameter of the old "Richard", because every hobby forum has a chorus of folks who claim it will turn an A**as or a J*t into a 10EE by just putting it on the machine...... "Yuh know, yuh just gotta have one to do any useful wurrk"

They must think those QCTPs are made of "billet" material.

The OP just plain should chill on the QCTP stuff, and spend his money on more helpful tools. Hobby users need to be a lot further along before they will notice the difference.

JST said:

I've had one somewhere for at least 15 years, and none o' them type situations has come up yet.

Click to expand...

Ha! I think I've still got a couple of lanterns in a poly bag somewhere and recollect thats because I could never sell them on eBay ... nobody wanted them!

John

I agree with most of what has been said so far, I tend to disagree in a few aspects.
First, let's discuss why pretty much everybody (including who speaks against you getting one) has or wants a QCTP: production or hobby (especially when you try to accomplish something in limited time) one doesn't like to waste precious time setting up the height of the tool. The advise of making a series of spacers to replace conical washer and rocker is a very good one. You reduce even more your setup time if you color-code your spacer and the tools needing them: you get the right combination at first trial.
Now, one negative aspect of these QCTPs that hasn't been mentioned yet is that they are big and move the cutting force far away from the anchorage points. If the machine is very rigid, no problems. Otherwise, you get a lot of chatter, and some excitement (e.g. on a A...s 10" the twisting of the compound during parting was so much that the blade would be yanked off the holder and flung to the opposite side of the room - same holder and blade work perfectly on my 10" Sheldon).
Now, one thing I tend to disagree is that I have good experience with no-brand Chinese QCTPs. The wedge type ones are significantly better than piston type, at least on the cheap ones. Same experience as described above regarding the cheap tool holders. But, with the difference in price between a cheap one and a good one I can buy enough quality hardware to fix at least 50 cheap ones.
Finally, the most recurrent situation that makes me frown to the QCTP is when I need to cut near the live center with the tool sticking out the least as possible to increase rigidity and reduce chatter: most of the times I have to modify my setup because the QCTP bumps into the body of the live center.

Paolo

Paolo hit the nail on the head. A QCTP with its holder does tend to crowd the live center on smaller diameter work. I use High Speed Steel (HSS) toolbits, and tend to regrind the same toolbits many times over, as well as often grinding cutting surfaces on both ends of the toolbit blanks. The result is I often cannot get enough clamping force on these shorter toolbits while getting the "stickout" needed to get past the live center. Short or stubby toolbits work fine with the old style of toolholders used in lantern type toolposts. This is probably the major drawback I've found to using the QCTP and toolholders for it.

I've had the same idea as Paolo regarding toolholders. I am planning to start buying Aloris or Dorian toolholders to get past the POS toolholders furnished by Phase II. I did buy the wedge type of toolpost and as I noted, no complaints there.

When I got my LeBlond 13" roundhead lathe, it had the original lantern toolpost on it. It had one toolholder with the lathe, but was otherwise fully tooled with chucks, steady and follower rest, etc. I started buying the old style toolholders at swap meets and similar, for about 5 bucks apiece. The result was I got a pretty good set of toolholders for the lantern type toolpost, even a Williams cutoff tool holders and spring type of threading tool holder. It was kind of a coin toss with me as to whether to stick with the lantern style toolpost or to go to the QCTP. As it is, I remove the QCTP when I use the heavier boring bars and "barrel style" boring bar holder. I never thought much of the rigidity (or lack thereof) in a QCTP when running boring bars. I found an Armstrong "barrel style") boring bar holder on ebay for small money. I made a new tee-plate to fit the compound rest's slot, and there was enough meat on the barrel to allow me to face off the bottom to get the correct center height.
I use boring bars that have square holes broached thru them, so I can use either HSS or cemented carbide toolbits. For very small boring jobs, I simply grind a boring tool from a HSS blank and run it in the QCTP handily.

The QCTP has plenty of advantages, but the crowding of the live center in the tailstock is probably the biggest complaint. I suppose if I were running indexable carbide cutting tools, I could get more tool "stickout", or, buy a CNC style live center. When the crowding of the live center is a problem, I often put the old reliable dead center in the tailstock. It does not happen often, but that is one way to address the problem.

Thanks for the feedback, i do not intend to get rid of my lantern any time soon, I do want to experiment with a QCTP eventual and would like your opinion on the Dorian QITP-25?