Sure they did..
On larger lathes with wider dovetails, saddles, beds, to handle the extra load, imposed by all the extra leverage...
These machines were built to a price vs capability point..
A 1934 16 in Lathe, only had 3 3/4 of compound travel, at almost 3 times the weight...
Putting a larger overhang compound, on a smaller lathe most likely will result in ..
A. Chatter ..... Nothing like trying to cut that longish taper, and have it turn into a chatterfest halfway there...
B. Saddle wing twist under load
C. Possible breakage/deforming of a dovetail, or worse.. For example: compound breaking at tool holder T slot... Worse breaking saddle dovetail..
The weeny wedge screw, compound mounting system, is NOT very solid..
I have spent HOURS watching all the joints, from saddle to compound, flexing merrily away, while using a small milling attachment... on a 9 in SB...
You can not turn a 9 inch SB into a 16 in, just by making a different compound...
I would imagine that Boxford spares, are just slighty less common, than the LONG produced SB...
Thats what taper attachments are for, and the optional turret tailstock for straight work... Link :
http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/south-bend-lathes/sb-tailstock-turret-177041/
If SB thought that a 4 inch travel compound on a light 9 in lathe, would have worked, it would have been fitted...
And the 16 inch would have had 8 inch of compound travel, untill someone used it, and it broke cleanly in half...
SB did not make lathes in the Monarch or Pacemaker class....