I would be interested in seeing the wear factor information. Even though turcite is soft, I know machine rebuilders that claim it has excellent anti-wear properties, partly because of the reduced friction.
The drawback I would be worried about for both turcite or moglice is that if junk gets under the way wipes, and it will, it will embed itself into the softer material and lead to accelerated wear. I have seen that effect, esp. on Bridgeports with turcite on the table slides, so I know it to be real.
I think if I had turcite/moglice on my saddle ways, the saddle would come off for cleanup about once a year.
To the question of which is easier to install, it depends on how good the grinder
is, how much time was spent in setup and how much experience you have with turcite. I have seen saddle grinding jobs that kept the cross slide and bed ways perpendicular to a tenth. Turcite is quick to scrape (or abrade). It is also less forgiving of measurement errors. Unlike moglice, you can't make a final correction when the turcite is applied.
I've been gathering as much info as I can on this subject ( you might remember my posts on Moglice last year) so your info is helpful.
I have a '43 10EE that I would like to rebuild.
I don't have any real world experience yet with Turcite versus Moglice so I'm just trying to learn. So please take this with a grain of salt I'm just trying to reason this out...
According to the guy that runs Morely Machine tool (http://www.morleymta.com/), and he uses a lot of moglice in refitting large equipment, he insists that the softness and fictionlessness actually reduces wear.
So much so that he said he gives lifetime warranties on his work??? Sounds extreme to me, but I'm pretty sure that's what he said.
The theory goes like this (if I can remember correctly);
The metal particles become embedded in the moglice and they just become part of the way surface - basically small hard areas in the total surface area. The pressure is spread out across the entire surface area so the hard areas do not put anymore pressure than the surrounding Moglice. (unless the paticles are big enough to go all the way through, I guess, but they wouldn't last that way for long)
To me it makes sense, how could some metal particles embedded in a soft matrix abrade the slide ways more than a flaked and scraped slide way with metal particles under it?
Now Turcite may be different, but I would suspect it to act the same, I don't know I've never seen Turcite. Could the Turcite wear that you've seen be due to improper application or something else like the use of compressed air or maybe some sort of solvent/coolant that kills Turcite?
Don't a lot of the newer CNC equip use one of these two? If so do they last longer or shorter that the earlier metal on metal CNC equip? I pick CNC becasue of the extremely high cycle rates. I would think that as fast as these machines move nowadays that if the tucite/moglice really wore out fast then these machines would be worn out in a matter of days?
I too would really like to see a fair and unbiased comparison, good luck huh
Steve, it must last quite a while, I agree with you, but I always inspect machines carefully when I am at an auction, and I have seen turcite with big steel curls embedded in it on Bridgeports, and the chips had wear from being in contact with the ways for a while. It can't be good for the ways. My thinking is that because the turcite is soft, it is easier for a chip to work its way in. Bridgeports are different from Monarchs and CNC machines, they have really poor way wipes. Monarch way wipes are the best there is if they are replaced when worn.
As to the theory that the metal chips embedded into the turcite become part of the
way surface, some chips work-harden to an extreme degree. I am not buying it. If all you cut is brass and aluminum, maybe.
One more thing to think about: if you use Moglice, you may end up with the slides running on non-bearing surfaces if you aren't careful. I've been meaning to ask Russ what steps he took to prevent the moglice from contacting the rounded top of the bed vee way.
I have no experience with Moglice, but have rebuilt two machines that had Turcite when I bought them; a Bridgeport and a 10EE. In both cases, I replaced the old Turcite because of some apparent thinning (due to wear?), but not worn through. Neither had large chips imbedded in the Turcite, although there were some very, very fine flakes at the leading edges. I think the way wipers must have done a good job.
Good point on the slides running on non-way surfaces.
Maybe scrapers/marking dye would help?
An interesting idea .... maybe once the slides begin to wear the micro-gaps between the way and the slide as they cross over a worn area allows the chips in and become embedded further in.
Maybe Moglice is best on low use, precision and highly maintained machines?
I use the Garlock Multifil Tape when I re-do a carriage. The first operation after the adhesive has cured is to trim the excess away and to set the carriage up on the mill and recut the groove at the top of the V slide, then start scraping.
On my 10EE I was going to mill the Moglice on the V top flat away, but noticed that the top of the inverted V was ground as clean as the sides, and got lazy and left it in place. If it turns out to be a problem I'll always have the option of pulling the saddle off again and taking the cut then. Maybe someone will convince me that it really is necessary...
My original plan was to put some .032" wax on the top of the V, but I wasn't sure that I'd have enough clearance for it and simply omitted that step. If someone really wanted some clearance they could run a couple of layers of tape on it, same as I did for the oil grooves.
As for the industrial use of Moglice - I never thought of it as being only on 'well-maintained' or 'infrequently used' machines. On the Devitt site there's a bunch of heavy machinery such as grinders and planer mills that it's being used on - and I wouldn't put either of those in either category.
Your bed was re-ground correct? In reference to the crest of the "Vee" on the bed, I think unless this surface was re-ground when the sides of the "Vee" were done you should deffinately relieve the Moglice at the top where the sides of athe "Vee" converge. It is very possible that the crest of the "Vee" way is true to the other surfaces, but unless it was ground at the same time as everything else you can't count on it. On my '63 the top radius is not ground. It appears to be machined but does not have the same level of finish that the sides of the "Vee" have. Even if it was originally ground it has to be done when the bed was re-ground to be absolutley true. The other thing is that of wear. if athe top is in contac, then as things wear it is possible that the the relationships between the top arc and the side "Vee" will change and that could change the alignment or wose hold the carrige uo and allow clearance to wear into the sides and thus allow side to side clearance.
I would deffinately relieve the top of the "Vee" in the Moglice....Thid is how the machine was built and it will assure the highest and longest accuracy.
Ross, the top of the inverted V was ground at the same time as the sides, and is as true as they are. The bed is beginning to be a little bit 'polished' by the saddle travel and I can see this polish on the faces of the V, so I think I'm getting good contact all around.
I wouldn't have done this if everything hadn't been ground at the same time, but the shop was careful to grind the same height off the rear flat as the front V, including the top of the inverted V.
The only thing in the grinding I wish I had specified was that they take the entire top down the same amount - they took .006 from the inner ways and .007 from the outer, and now I can't level the bed using the inner and outer flat ways.
[brain phart caused me to hit 'submit' twice]
[This message has been edited by rke[pler (edited 07-29-2004).]
Sounds like you gott it covered....Again ,nice job!