What's new
What's new

Monarch AA 1430? s/n AA-3041

machmat

Aluminum
Joined
Jan 26, 2009
Location
Florida
Hello everyone,

I have a bunch of questions about a machine.

monarchlathe-02.jpg


I posted this at the end of another thread but thought that maybe it was better to have it on its own. I am very new at this forum stuff, and apologize for any errors that I make due to ignorance or over-enthusiasm.

I have been reading all the posts I can find on older Monarch lathes, and have found especially enlightening ones posted by Carla. They have been very informative, thank you.

I have not found much about the model AA, so what the heck, maybe some of you way more knowledgeable about this machine than I, might take a moment.

The first question is about the date. The previous owner of the machine, who knows little about its history, thought that it was post war, late forties. The machine came with the plant and they use it rarely.

The serial number 3041 seems to place it in the late twenties to early thirties. I emailed Monarch and they responded that it was delivered on March 1930 to the Pittsburgh, PA Department of Education. This is exciting news, and might explain why a machine that is so old, and one that has not received the best of care or much use for the past couple of decades is still in pretty good condition.

One problem is the card for this serial number specifies that the machine as a 16" x 72" When I posted the serial number one person said that I might have missed a digit, so I went back see. The machine is in a warehouse waiting to be moved.

monarchlathe-03.jpg


Unless I am missing some important element it looks like the serial number is AA-3041. There is no brass Identification Tag, that I guess is common on Monarchs with all the pertinent information. I don't even see where the tag might have been. There is a spot on the headstock where something was, but whatever it was, it was there by adhesive and not rivets or screws.

Further on the identification route, at least with South Bends, it seems that the head stock configuration and apron are two of the most evolving elements and these change substantially over the years.

monarchlathe-06.jpg


monarchlathe-07.jpg


So that is all I currently know. As per Carla's recommendation, about another Monarch, I will be pulling the top cover off to inspect the condition of the gears and will post pictures.

I am concerned about the low top working speed of 640 rpm. Much of what I machine is plastic and aluminum, but also a fair bit of stainless. I would think that this would be a great lathe for 2" to 3" diameter stainless bar stock. The unit is 5hp 3 phase and I purchased a fancy 5hp VFD. This could possible increase the highest speed somewhat.

From Carla's and other posts, pre 1935 lathes do not have hardened beds. Would this be a reason not to own a 1930's Monarch?

Everything is filthy, covered in oil and dust, but the head seems quiet, I have not worked in through every speed. The compound, cross slide, tail stock, and apron all move very smoothly. The bed does not show appreciable wear. There are some minor dings. The machine has its steady rest, taper attachment, some chucks, a lot of other tooling which I need to inventory.

On the down side of moving this into the shop is that it is nearly two tons, takes up 32 square feet of floor space and while this would greatly improve my capability on larger work, I do not get a whole lot of larger work. It is also eighty years old, while the price is right, would I be wasting time and energy on such an old machine?
 
Last edited:
"From Carla's and other posts, pre 1935 lathes do not have hardened beds. Would this be a reason not to own a 1930's Monarch?"

Starting in about 1936 (based upon the patent issue dates), Monarch invented both an alloy for improved lathe beds, and a process for hardening these.

The burner unit was later improved so that the very top of the Vee way was cooled during hardening, thereby allowing the top the the way to be hardened, too, for otherwise the very top was over-hardened and was prone to fracture.

Some such lathe beds have affixed a "Flame-Hardened" label, but many do not.

It is pretty safe to state that post-1936 Monarch products were flame-hardened.

The "Flame-Hardened" label is also found, occasionally, on competitive lathes, which were undoubtedly made under license from Monarch.

Now, along with the technology for producing flame-hardened ways, there were developments in tool technology, and also materials science.

These developments resulted in alloys which were more suitable for machining at much higher speeds, thereby dramatically improving productivity, which was so very essential in meeting the many demands of the war years.

An older lathe is perfectly suitable for machining materials which were then popular, say, cast iron and mild steel.

For machining stainless and exotic alloys, perhaps a later machine, having more power, and higher spindle speeds would be more appropriate.

But, a fully functioning machine, even an old one, is very much better than no machine at all.
 
....... a fully functioning machine, even an old one, is very much better than no machine at all.

You are so correct. I have a shop full of machines that are old, some tired but most work amazingly well, and I do get good work out of all of them.

I try, or at least in this particular case, I'm trying to temper my lust for old iron. Moving and setting this machine up is going to require a major investment in time, energy, money and space.

The more time I spend investigating this Monarch, the more impressed I am. I'm thinking, at least in March of 1930, this tool was at the very top of what was available in machine tools. I am so impressed with the quality.

I would think that a flame hardened bed would be very desirable for a production machine. But for a lathe that is eighty years old and if the bed is in good condition, which this seems to be, and for a lathe that could have a future in a shop where its use is more repair and prototyping than production, it might be a perfectly respectable machine tool.

I am going to put a straight edge on the ways, see if I can detect any dip.

Thanks for the information.
 
A 1930 AA will have Monarch's flanged spindle and not a standard "D" style cam lock spindle nose, this standard did not happen until the mid 1930's. As noted the spindle speeds are a lot slower than machines built after 1955. If that is not a problem for you, and if everything is in working order, then I would not sweat the non-flame harden beds. Monarch used a tough material for their beds, and if the ways are in good shape, it should be fine. You might want to put a test part in the spindle and run a dial indicator to see if you can detect if there is a dip in the ways, which often happens at the headstock end since most of the turning is done there over a short distance. This is found more on lathes that run lots of similar parts over its lifetime, I would guess you would not find this on this lathe, but it is always better to check.

John
 
Thanks, I am a little afraid to run it till I get the cover off. The staining I think would mean that the drain is probably restricted so it has leaked over a period of time between the cover and the spindle housing. I am very curious to look inside, there were a number of Carla messages that talked about what to look for: worn shift forks, rounded off clutch dogs, corrosion of any sort, sludge, broken teeth. This inspection will make all the difference in keeping or not keeping.

I have a Monarch book and it shows just holding a bar in the chuck end to do a check. I have always put a bar and cut to check as a test bar, and then measured the diameter. I wouldn't just holding a piece in the chuck would be all that good a test?

I just got back an image of the original order:

original-orderform-02.jpg


It is kind of hard to read, but it clearly states that this is a 16" x 6' lathe, which it is NOT. So there is an error, but it goes back 79 years.

Also in the first line where it says "Spindle Mounted In > it says "TIMKENIZED" which I am assuming means that it has Timkin bearings. Curious terminology.
 
A 1930 AA will have Monarch's flanged spindle and not a standard "D" style cam lock spindle nose, this standard did not happen until the mid 1930's.

So how do I handle this non-standard chuck mounting, what is the norm? Would it be that difficult to make a few adapter plates to mount a regular chuck on?

I have a 9" South Bend and don't mind a threaded on chuck, although these are a lot bigger and heavier. As I understand it the chuck is on a taper with a threaded collar that locks it in place. I have not tried to remove the chuck that is on the machine yet.
 
"Also in the first line where it says 'Spindle Mounted In' it says 'TIMKENIZED' which I am assuming means that it has Timkin bearings. Curious terminology."

Not so curious, from a Monarch historical perspective.

The so-called Timkenized Monarchs were amongst the first lathes to utilize (Timken) tapered roller bearings, and the use of same lead to the entire industry converting to rollers, for true heavy duty lathes.

The next Monarch innovation was flame-hardened ways.

And, the innovations continued to come, particularly with the 10EE and later with the post-War machines.
 
peterh5322;1212203 Not so curious said:
I do get that feeling that Monarch was a leading edge company.

Is it still?

I looked at an EE some time back, it was not in good condition and rejected it because the problems not only were serious but the drive system was so complicated, every repair detail just looked like lots and lots of money.

The curiousness is more about the term than the technology. I have a small boat trailer that I am selling, I am going to add "TIMKENIZED" to the the listing ;) A 1930's advertising stroke of genius.
 
From Monarch. I don't think they normally post a PDF copy, but since there is a conflict in this case with the order not agreeing with the reality, they went the extra mile. They also said that they have no parts, manuals or anything else for this machine, just too old.

I have been trying to collect as much documentation as possible, and this is nice bit to have.
 
It is kind of hard to read, but it clearly states that this is a 16" x 6' lathe, which it is NOT. So there is an error, but it goes back 79 years.

Also in the first line where it says "Spindle Mounted In > it says "TIMKENIZED" which I am assuming means that it has Timkin bearings. Curious terminology.

On this vintage of lathes - the 6ft is the bed length not between centers length. A 16" swing is right for Model AA. Measure the length of the bed to see if it matchs. Eye-balling the picture, it looks like it would be close. I do not know when Monarch started specifing their lathes by center distance instead of length of bed. I know post WWII lathe are listed by center distance, so I guessing it happen some time before the WWII.

"Timkenized" was a term coined by Monarch. They were the first lathe builder to use Timken bearings to support the spindle. Monarch holds a long list of firsts (see thread about Wendell Whipp, former Monarch president). Saddly, Monarch machine tool is nothing what it was after the lathe div. was sold off in 1997, and the Milling division retained the name. Monarch lead the way in modern lathe development including building the first NC lathe in 1955.

On the question of spindle nose, if this lathe comes with a chuck, the chuck will have an adapter plate to adapte it to the lathe spindle nose. Either use this or make a similar one for other chucks.

For the question manual, I have a pdf copy of Monarch's 1930 manual. I sent you a private message about this.

John
 
On this vintage of lathes - the 6ft is the bed length not between centers length. A 16" swing is right for Model AA. Measure the length of the bed to see if it matchs.

The distance from center of spindle to first contact with the bed is 7 1/2", and the total length of the bed if I remember right is 59". I am not sure where I read somewhere that there was a 14x30 AA? The bed has V ways that are about forty something inches, they do not go to the end of the head stock.

monarch-Vway-01.jpg


It might not be completely clear in this picture but the V-way ends about a third of the way down the head stock. It is not like a South Bend where the profile of the bed is the same from end to end. I thought MAYBE the bed could have been shortened, but I just can't see how this could be a possibility.

Somewhere I thought I had some kind of documentation that said this was a 1430, or it was on the machine somewherel, but if it is I can't seem to locate it, or I am just not looking in the right place.
 
I have a pdf copy of Monarch's 1930 manual. I sent you a private message about this.

Thanks, sent private message but am having some email difficulties during the past couple of hours, not sure what is going on.

I have not pulled the chuck yet, on the todo list. There is a bit of tooling, I think there is a four jaw chuck, maybe two, and some other items that look like they might fit the spindle, I am hoping to get to all of this soon.

Do you by any chance have one of these lathes??
 
Years ago I had the opportunity to acquire a Hendey lathe, the Monarch has a lot of the same features. Massively built, quality machine.

I am slowly becoming a fan of the Monarch. The big difference between now and then is that this time around I might be able to carve out the necessary space, I have the power, and it would add greatly to my capabilities.

I think this machine is in pretty good condition. I will know a lot more once I have a peak into the headstock, and can mic the ways to see how much wear there is.
 
Monarch AA 1430

I just ran across one of these machines that appears to be in pretty decent condition. Enjoyed reading the posts.

Does anyone have an accurate weight on this machine? Monarch did not, again, too old and they dont keep records on it. I would like to have this machine if my forklift can handle it. I dont want a machine that i cant move.
 
I just ran across one of these machines that appears to be in pretty decent condition. Enjoyed reading the posts.

Does anyone have an accurate weight on this machine? Monarch did not, again, too old and they dont keep records on it. I would like to have this machine if my forklift can handle it. I dont want a machine that i cant move.
yes, I know this is a very old thread. I have a 1936 monarch AA 14 x 30. I don't know about the flame-hardened ways, because I haven't seen any tags on it specifying that. It was sold to Edison Technical School(in Seattle) originally. I don't know about the weight, but I had it on my tandem axle flat bed car hauler, and it looked like it was really maxed out, so I think it is well over 4K lbs. I used my Cat backhoe/loader to lift it off the trailer and that was pretty maxed out, too. It came with a taper attachment, and 2 steady rests, one of which looks like it is really for a larger machine, and the smaller one seems to fit the ways ok, but it's hard to say if it is the original one. Does anyone have any pictures of their monarch steady rest for similar machine? Mine is 7.5hp. IIRC max spindle rpm is like 700 or so. I haven't got it running, yet. There are some oddball looking levers, and brackets, and such that I have no idea of their function, so it might be helpful if someone can help school me on them.
Bud L.


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Aa s/n 3039

Hello everyone,

I have a bunch of questions about a machine.

monarchlathe-02.jpg


I posted this at the end of another thread but thought that maybe it was better to have it on its own. I am very new at this forum stuff, and apologize for any errors that I make due to ignorance or over-enthusiasm.

I have been reading all the posts I can find on older Monarch lathes, and have found especially enlightening ones posted by Carla. They have been very informative, thank you.

I have not found much about the model AA, so what the heck, maybe some of you way more knowledgeable about this machine than I, might take a moment.

The first question is about the date. The previous owner of the machine, who knows little about its history, thought that it was post war, late forties. The machine came with the plant and they use it rarely.

The serial number 3041 seems to place it in the late twenties to early thirties. I emailed Monarch and they responded that it was delivered on March 1930 to the Pittsburgh, PA Department of Education. This is exciting news, and might explain why a machine that is so old, and one that has not received the best of care or much use for the past couple of decades is still in pretty good condition.

One problem is the card for this serial number specifies that the machine as a 16" x 72" When I posted the serial number one person said that I might have missed a digit, so I went back see. The machine is in a warehouse waiting to be moved.

monarchlathe-03.jpg


Unless I am missing some important element it looks like the serial number is AA-3041. There is no brass Identification Tag, that I guess is common on Monarchs with all the pertinent information. I don't even see where the tag might have been. There is a spot on the headstock where something was, but whatever it was, it was there by adhesive and not rivets or screws.

Further on the identification route, at least with South Bends, it seems that the head stock configuration and apron are two of the most evolving elements and these change substantially over the years.

monarchlathe-06.jpg


monarchlathe-07.jpg


So that is all I currently know. As per Carla's recommendation, about another Monarch, I will be pulling the top cover off to inspect the condition of the gears and will post pictures.

I am concerned about the low top working speed of 640 rpm. Much of what I machine is plastic and aluminum, but also a fair bit of stainless. I would think that this would be a great lathe for 2" to 3" diameter stainless bar stock. The unit is 5hp 3 phase and I purchased a fancy 5hp VFD. This could possible increase the highest speed somewhat.

From Carla's and other posts, pre 1935 lathes do not have hardened beds. Would this be a reason not to own a 1930's Monarch?

Everything is filthy, covered in oil and dust, but the head seems quiet, I have not worked in through every speed. The compound, cross slide, tail stock, and apron all move very smoothly. The bed does not show appreciable wear. There are some minor dings. The machine has its steady rest, taper attachment, some chucks, a lot of other tooling which I need to inventory.

On the down side of moving this into the shop is that it is nearly two tons, takes up 32 square feet of floor space and while this would greatly improve my capability on larger work, I do not get a whole lot of larger work. It is also eighty years old, while the price is right, would I be wasting time and energy on such an old machine?

Hello,
I have an AA Monarch S/N 3039 which is the second lathe prior to yours. I originally posted a message titled 1942 AA Lathe which is obviously incorrect as I see from your postings and others. It is in the process of being painted now and I will update photos when complete. If anyone has parts particularly the cross slide handle, taper attachment, or square bar brackets please PM me. Also it is lacking the motor to clutch belt covers but I figure I can fabricate something there unless someone by chance has a parts machine lying around.
 
Years ago I had the opportunity to acquire a Hendey lathe, the Monarch has a lot of the same features. Massively built, quality machine.

I am slowly becoming a fan of the Monarch. The big difference between now and then is that this time around I might be able to carve out the necessary space, I have the power, and it would add greatly to my capabilities.

I think this machine is in pretty good condition. I will know a lot more once I have a peak into the headstock, and can mic the ways to see how much wear there is.
I know this thread is old but I see you are in Florida and I may be acquiring a Monarch Model AA, Lot No 3514 with a US Navy symbol, which would make it circa 1930. This lathe has the Flanged Spindle like yours, and I am curious about how to remove my 4-Jaw chuck.
I am just south of Jacksonville, so we may have some things to discuss.

I could not open any of your pictures in the this thread, here is a picture of the lathe I am trying to save from the junk pile.
 

Attachments

  • Lathe Front.jpg
    Lathe Front.jpg
    407.8 KB · Views: 10
You could get either in the - say - mid thirties. You get the chuck off by removing the bolts screwed into the flange - and some may have hex nuts on the the back of the flange - and just plain holes in flange. Old Monarch print was for my CM 22 years ago - which had the fanged nose and plain holes
1712323680234.jpeg
 
Last edited:








 
Back
Top