South Bend Heavy 9?

I recently bought a lathe and as part of the deal was given some other lathe parts the seller didn't want anymore. One of those was a headstock. The receipt from the seller for the headstock calls it a "Heavy 9/9 Jr. Headstock". I looked at lathes.co.uk for info on the headstock but didn't find any of the photos matched what I have. Any information, or resources for this model would be greatly appreciated.

The "Heavy 9", from what I understand, was a "Heavy 10" headstock de-stroked to swing 9". So it either had a 1-7/8x8 or 2-1/4x8 threaded spindle rather than the 9/10k 1-1/2x8 spindle. This was a special order (or specification) for the US Navy.

Don't know for certain, but that is what I had heard. Perhaps somebody knows better.

morsetaper2 said:

The "Heavy 9", from what I understand, was a "Heavy 10" headstock de-stroked to swing 9". So it either had a 1-7/8x8 or 2-1/4x8 threaded spindle rather than the 9/10k 1-1/2x8 spindle. This was a special order (or specification) for the US Navy.

Don't know for certain, but that is what I had heard. Perhaps somebody knows better.

Click to expand...

Very interesting that it would be a special order for the US Navy. To further complicate my confusion, I just double checked and this one actually has a 1-1/2x8 spindle nose (Major OD 1.491).

Mine has the 10L spindle - 1-3/8 OD, the larger thread. It has no indication it was ever involved with the US
navy - no anchor marks anywhere.

My understanding is this was a precursor to the heavy ten. When SB went into production they bumped up the swing
to 10 inch.

Courtesy of Steve Wells site...

http://www.wswells.com/data/catalog/1931_Jr_Cat_No.22C/1931_Jr_Cat_No.22C.pdf

But I believe this is actually the model you have...which is the more evolved version of the 9"jr...note you do not have the bolt holes in the headstock foot...

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/south-bend-lathes/first-lathe-230708/

iwananew10K said:

Courtesy of Steve Wells site...

http://www.wswells.com/data/catalog/1931_Jr_Cat_No.22C/1931_Jr_Cat_No.22C.pdf

Click to expand...

Thanks for linking this. The headstock I have does not have holes in the extended "feet" as those pictured in the catalog linked. As I understand, one of the features of the 9 Jr. was that it bolted directly to the bed, vs the clamping system seen in the 9/10k system, and the headstock I have.

So a pre 1930s bed or a heavy ten bed with some scraping involved is required to utilize this headstock, correct?

So Jim, You have a "heavy 9" that is 5C capable? I always thought you had a heavy 10.
My mention of being a special specification for the Navy came from, IIRC, Dave Ficken. But I could be all wet. Was a long time ago when he still had a shop out on Long Island.

To the OP, if the spindle is 1-1/2x8 its def not a heavy 9.

jim rozen said:

Mine has the 10L spindle - 1-3/8 OD, the larger thread. It has no indication it was ever involved with the US
navy - no anchor marks anywhere.

My understanding is this was a precursor to the heavy ten. When SB went into production they bumped up the swing
to 10 inch.

Click to expand...

morsetaper2 said:

So Jim, You have a "heavy 9" that is 5C capable? I always thought you had a heavy 10.
My mention of being a special specification for the Navy came from, IIRC, Dave Ficken. But I could be all wet. Was a long time ago when he still had a shop out on Long Island.
To the OP, if the spindle is 1-1/2x8 its def not a heavy 9.

Click to expand...

Ah.

Guilty as charged.

The heavy ten in the basement shop is the second one that's been in there. Original was from dave sobel, cast iron base machine.
Pretty worn. I traded up to a more modern one (double tumbler and all) after a few years.

Then: a very kind gent on this board put a nicely set-up heavy nine out for sale. Well-tooled. He would
deliver!

I've always wanted one of those - it's like you took a heavy ten and ran it through a shrink ray.
Shorter bed, smaller swing. Same full size spindle! I *had* to buy it. So that's in the garage right
now, more or less shrink wrapped. It came with a single phase motor, and I fitted a one hp three phase
motor, and a VFD into it. The chip pan (again, cast iron base type) was over-long so I cut it down and
welded it together so it barely is longer than the bed.

But yes, short answer, I'm crazy.

(oh yes - if anyone is interested in the original single phase 1/2 hp motor, just right for underneath drive,
let me know)

morsetaper2 said:

To the OP, if the spindle is 1-1/2x8 its def not a heavy 9.

Click to expand...

So a heavy 9 casting with a non-heavy 9 spindle?

That is a mid 1929 or later 9" 'wide bed' headstock. I would expect those ears on the front to be drilled for mounting holes. I'm not sure if there was a period where that was not done, or if this was intended as a refit for older beds, etc.

SB never used the 'Heavy 9' nomenclature, but that term seems to be retroactively applied to the 9" 'One inch collet lathe', which was the immediate precursor to the heavy 10. The headstock in question is not from that lathe.

allan

"Heavy 9" is a misnomer as is "heavy 10"...there are no such things...never was.

You have what is loosely referred to as a "wide bed 9" and that includes several models of 9" lathes.

Though not an official designation "heavy 9" is generally accepted as being the machine Jim has, basically identical to the 10L but with a reduced swing, those were only made for a couple years ~1938-39 IIRC.

wetbehindthegibs:

That headstock looks very similar to the headstock that I have on my SB lathe. I have what is referred to as a Junior 9. The Junior 9 was the precursor to the standard SB 9A/B/C that we all know and love (people in the know, correct me here...) . It has 1 1/2 x8 spindle thread, MT3 spindle taper with about 3/4" spindle through hole diameter (I'll have to check mine to confirm that last measurement). The bed it would go on is a little wider than a standard 9" bed. I have been told that the Junior 9 headstock can go on a heavy 10 lathe bed, but I've never done that or checked.

I guess the next question is feasibility of completing the lathe. I know with the 9/10k its easy to find parts and frankenlathe one together, but for this headstock is it going to be a much more difficult project?

You are missing much of what goes on the headstock too- cone pulley, bull gear, back gear, reverse tumbler, etc. You effectively have about 1% of a lathe. You would basically have to buy a complete lathe just to add this headstock to it.

Instead, I would sell it to someone looking for a replacement if the bearings are good. If they are poor, I'd probably make an indexer for a milling machine out of it.

allan

kitno455 said:

Instead, I would sell it to someone looking for a replacement if the bearings are good. If they are poor, I'd probably make an indexer for a milling machine out of it.

allan

Click to expand...

I would second that suggestion. Parts to a Junior 9 are hard to come by in my neck of the woods and you have a small portion of the overall lathe.

that head case looks just like mine but a much nicer finish, my lathe has 420-y on the gear cover plate. has the flat apron thats broke and i would love to know if a model c would work on it if i bought the entire saddle, my compound is flat wore out, yeah my lathe was a freebee and is in dire need of repair, short serial number and no letters, i did get a bunch of tooling and the entire change gear set, the bed is good, tail stock is sloppy, part of head stock is broke where the back gear is but runs nice, have collets also, i have since upped it to a 1 1/2 hp motor 1750 rpm, yeah i like power over kill but i can now make scrap a lot faster lol, yesterday i was getting up to 6 feet long ropes of mild still for chips at a cut of close to 1/16 or more with out back gearing and useing carbide, alum i went as deep as 3/16 and it was just ripping right through it, i now have a 5 gall bucket of alum i filled and stepped on to get more in and probly filled it in 2 hours. i made a 3 step pulley for the motor. bout 1 1/2 3 1/2 and 5 inch, yeah i keep it flooded with oil and im thinking i might need to build a drip pan and just plumb it up with a filter and pump, would be cleaner and cheaper then buying this stuff in the gall... its a oily mess and well its will coat you in it as well,,,, i wonder if cone bearings or another type of bearings would be better for more speed then the babbiting or so that its got now..... the size suites my needs but the factory power and how long it takes is a waist for me, thats why the upgrade, any ideas and all help is welcomed and needed, can email me

this is to old beater. I have some parts (used) that may fit your lathe. Post some pics and I will see if mine will replace yours.

I think I'm going to just sell it instead to someone who can utilize it rather than try and build it. Thank you to everyone who helped by sharing information on the headstock.

Am I allowed to post a for sale in the south bend forum or does it need to be in the classified specific forum?

Here in SB section an occasional for-sale post is fine.

allan