A new to me Monarch 10EE

I have pulled the trigger on a 1960 10EE square dial machine. I currently have a 1940 Round dial machine that I traded beekeeping equipment for the fellow that I got it from wants to buy it back after I fixed it up and has been after me to find another machine for him. I go to pick it up next week it is 358 miles from here. It has issues but I think I can overcome most of them. Electronics is not an issue for me as I have been in electronics since 1963. The one issue is visible in this picture that I hope I can upload.

labeeman said:

I have pulled the trigger on a 1960 10EE square dial machine. I currently have a 1940 Round dial machine that I traded beekeeping equipment for the fellow that I got it from wants to buy it back after I fixed it up and has been after me to find another machine for him. I go to pick it up next week it is 358 miles from here. It has issues but I think I can overcome most of them. Electronics is not an issue for me as I have been in electronics since 1963. The one issue is visible in this picture that I hope I can upload.

View attachment 196713

Click to expand...

Tailstock ram needing sorted is easy. Rust will leave a few scars, but is not a show-stopper.

Scary one is that it looks as if the rear spindle-bearing reservoir sight-glass may be busted-out.
Costly fubar if so and the bearing was run dry.

Good news is the rear bearing is cheaper than the front set, and I have a used one in 'probably' usable condition on a spare round-dial spindle - if it is even the same one for a square-dial. I don't know if it is.

Nor if you will actually NEED one. Picture isn't all that bad as such things go, but still...

Don't let loose of the 1940 10EE just yet. You may need it to make parts for this one.

Monarchist said:

Tailstock ram needing sorted is easy. Rust will leave a few scars, but is not a show-stopper.

Scary one is that it looks as if the rear spindle-bearing reservoir sight-glass may be busted-out.
Costly fubar if so and the bearing was run dry.

Good news is the rear bearing is cheaper than the front set, and I have a used one in 'probably' usable condition on a spare round-dial spindle - if it is even the same one for a square-dial. I don't know if it is.

Nor if you will actually NEED one. Picture isn't all that bad as such things go, but still...

Don't let loose of the 1940 10EE just yet. You may need it to make parts for this one.

Click to expand...

That is not what I am worried about Yes the rust will leave scars and yes there is a sight glass or two busted and a chip on the bed on the back way near the head stock that the tail stock rids on but the tail stock will never ride there the part I am worried about is the carriage is a round dial on a square dial machine (did not notice this until I pulled the trigger). and no I will not let the 40 machine loose until I get this one turning. I am guessing that it had a bad crash and busted the original carriage I am hoping that the spindle is OK. It was within my price range and close enough for me to pick up as most Monarch's i see for sale are over 1000 miles from here I am in the deep south where small machinery is rare unless it is from China I have one of those glad I bought it now I know what a piece of Junk they are.LOL
Thanks for the offer of the parts. Now I will put my large frame motor in the back burner for the time being. I paid too much for it at $1200.00 should have offered him less but he started the auction 23 day ago and was asking 3799.00 a few day ago he dropped the price to 2499.00 so I offered him half.

labeeman said:

..the part I am worried about is the carriage is a round dial on a square dial machine (did not notice this until I pulled the trigger).

Click to expand...

Need a Pilgrim more familiar than I as to what that means.

Off the top of my head, the Square Dial had thread-cutting enhancements, but I don't recall them acting anywhere but in the HS QCB and controls area.

IIRC the apron oil pump gained a second cam and follower to drive it from more 'activities' than had originally been the case.

There again, I don't know if that was RD/SD related or just year of production. RC99 might know. ISTR his RD had the dual-driven pump.

Otherwise, it may not make a bit of difference, and 'might' have been a factory fit, as rebuild, if not as-new anyway.

Back to the sight glasses.. Spindle bearing reservoirs the only ones I'd worry much about. The threading and surfacing gearing is tough as cut-nails, seriously durable, even poorly lubed. Much the same in the apron, though wear will be more a factor.

Not easy to work on, but neither are parts terribly costly to source or fab.

Round Dial with a Round dial carriage.



A Square dial with a Square dial carriage the difference is in the lead screw handle and the thread dial it is separate on a round dial.

labeeman said:

Round Dial with a Round dial carriage.
View attachment 196734


A Square dial with a Square dial carriage the difference is in the lead screw handle and the thread dial it is separate on a round dial.

View attachment 196733

Click to expand...

Half-nuts engage lever, I take that.

Neither one makes any functional difference to the user, only to the factory assembly crew. Or as to getting the correct parts for a restoration - but you already know about that oddity in advance, so no biggie, either.

Does sound as if you gained enough on entry cost it can have some restoration and tooling budget - over time, if not right away.

Shout-out what you need as it arises. Lost of help out here.

Thanks it looks like it may be a non issue then will holler if I need anything. PM has already been a Big help to me on getting my 1940 EE back to making chips.

Picket up my Monarch yesterday was in better shape than the pictures showed. There are two sight glasses missing not broken as I thought the head had been drained of oil, did not feel any bumps in the spindle when I turned it. The two C16J tubes are missing and there is a thrust bearing missing on the cross slide, The relay contacts are next to new no major pitting. It has a 3 hp reliance motor in it.

labeeman said:

It has a 3 hp reliance motor in it.

Click to expand...

'Small frame' 3 HP Reliance?

Yep it is smaller than the large one I have.

labeeman said:

Yep it is smaller than the large one I have.View attachment 197211

Click to expand...

The one I have here, 1150-4000 RPM, has a splined shaft, and DID have a GE tachogenerator on the other end. Good motors. Better at high-RPM than the large frame - check the dataplates.

Downside is that it has but - IIRC - 15 ft/lb or so of torque at base RPM and below vs around 23 ft/lb for the older 690-2400 RPM motor. Hence the move to 5 HP DC, next generation.

The small frame 3 HP is accordingly the most likely to be dependent of all 10EE except VFD conversions on having a good gearbox.

Ironically, the original large frame 'could have' probably done just fine with no gearbox. Didn't happen because the sort of DC Drive and feedback or tacho needed to power them with stable regulation at really low RPM did not enter MMT's environment until advent of the "Monarch Sidney" 3-Phase-only DC Drive & siblings. Those two components were never matched to each other AFAIK. More-recent Parker-SSD drives can also deliver seriously low RPM in direct-drive, so long as equipped with a rather massive ripple filter choke.

Around the era of the Monarch-Sidney, DC motor costs had begun their climb into the $11,000 - $12,000 MSRP high altitudes, so VFD came next instead of further improved DC.

So long as we already HAVE the costly DC motors, as Everettengineer pointed out, the availability so many years on, of decent Solid State DC Drives has given us the option to 'backfill' that gap at far more realistic costs vs VFD + new/used 3-P motor and adaptation machining work.

That said, if you can find decent tubes, straight restoral to 'as-built' should be cheaper and less labour-intensive yet.

I have figured out what took the chunk out of the bed it was the chuck guard that clamps to the bed.

labeeman said:

I have figured out what took the chunk out of the bed it was the chuck guard that clamps to the bed.

View attachment 197217

Click to expand...

Well I'll be damned! I have its near-twin, near-as-dammit same location on one of my 10EE!

The good news is.. it is in the TS guide way. Carriage uses it not at all, HS never comes forward.

TS can't get close enough to utilize that area, would not be bothered by it that short of a missing piece if it could do.

IOW - it is but an uglifier, no detraction from accuracy or functionality whatsoever. It doesn't even make a place for swarf to get under the TS way-wipers.

Monarchist said:

Well I'll be damned! I have its near-twin, near-as-dammit same location on one of my 10EE!

The good news is.. it is in the TS guide way. Carriage uses it not at all, HS never comes forward.

TS can't get close enough to utilize that area, would not be bothered by it that short of a missing piece if it could do.

IOW - it is but an uglifier, no detraction from accuracy or functionality whatsoever. It doesn't even make a place for swarf to get under the TS way-wipers.

Click to expand...

The Steady rest also uses that guide but i would not have it that close to the chuck.

labeeman said:

The Steady rest also uses that guide but i would not have it that close to the chuck.

Click to expand...

With only 20" c-to-c before workholding and tooling even get a ration of daylight, most 10EE seldom see a steady even leave its storage. Traveling rest, maybe a tad more often, but those too are seldom needed.