What's new
What's new

How does a well taken care of Harding HLV (non H, narrow bed, 1950s) compare with an HLV-H ?

The best price to pay is the least amount possible.

Later model narrow bed HLV have nearly all the same features as HLV-H.

The narrow HLV lathes are nice to use and quite capable, I wouldn’t shy from one that’s in good shape and a good price.
 
The best price to pay is the least amount possible.

Later model narrow bed HLV have nearly all the same features as HLV-H.

The narrow HLV lathes are nice to use and quite capable, I wouldn’t shy from one that’s in good shape and a good price.


I'm glad to hear that, cause I just got it, it's now sitting in my parking lot, the machine looks like a work of art !

Today's goal is to get it in the basement, ... yes, you hear that right, home shop wannabe machinists have extra challenges !

But on the flip side of that coin, we have no bosses or customers to satisfy !
 
Nice, congrats. Post a pic

Be careful moving it, look into how the bed is mounted to cabinet. It’s 3 points that not designed for lifting. Lift it by the cabinet, not the bed.
 
If both models work in a equivalent state yoiu would not be able to tell if part 1 came from which

But you do have to ask this question:

Why did the Brothers decide that the width of the lathe bed should be stepped up by 50% (roughly 4 to 6 inches)?
 
If both models work in a equivalent state yoiu would not be able to tell if part 1 came from which

But you do have to ask this question:

Why did the Brothers decide that the width of the lathe bed should be stepped up by 50% (roughly 4 to 6 inches)?

My uneducated guess would be that a wider bed adds rigidity, to resist rotation of the saddle while cutting.

Perhaps it only matter when cutting more aggressive depths ?
 
My uneducated guess would be that a wider bed adds rigidity, to resist rotation of the saddle while cutting.

Perhaps it only matter when cutting more aggressive depths ?
A cigar.

I think the Brothers were responding to customer experiences. Maybe their own because they obviously tested their products.

Another factor could be people wanting to cut larger work on the machine.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad to hear that, cause I just got it, it's now sitting in my parking lot, the machine looks like a work of art !

Today's goal is to get it in the basement, ... yes, you hear that right, home shop wannabe machinists have extra challenges !

But on the flip side of that coin, we have no bosses or customers to satisfy !
IDK about that last part. The boss might not pay me much, but she won't let me put the lathe in the living room.

For historical reference purposes, what does an HLV sell for these days?
 
A cigar.

I think the Brothers were responding to customer experiences. Maybe their own because they obviously tested their products.

Another factor could be people wanting to cut larger work on the machine.
I do wonder about them testing products.

I question the rigidity theory of the wider bed. Im all for a wider bed, but I’m curious how on their quest to a more rigid machine they missed the introduction of lack of rigidity and the joys of turning turning between centers on this lathe. One must fully extend the tailstock quill so you can avoid colliding the apron to the tailstock.

If you don’t invest in a CNC long nose center, work between centers on these machines is not pleasant.
 
Last edited:
A narrow bed is better for linear guidance.
What I mean is, narrow and long are best for guidance.
Think of the single inverted vee and flat type bed...
Only the vee way provides the guidance.
And the vee is narrow and long.
If wear develops, crab (angular guidance deviation)
is minimal with a vee way. This is because the hypotenuse
of the triangle has a very small (shallow) angle. Wear can
occur in the vee, but since the length is long compared to
the width of the vee, not much crab happens.
With the 5" bed (or worse the 7" bed), if wear occurs, the
hypotenuse is diagonally all the way across the bed, and
quite a bit of crab can occur. This is why the inverted vee
and and flat way bed became the standard for lathe makers.
Just to clarify, wear that results in crab happens because
of the forces that originate from the location of the drive
pinion and the half nuts. They are in the apron, and the
front of the saddle. So with a inverted vee and flat type
lathe, the driving elements are near the inverted vee way.
With the wide dovetail bed of the Hardinge type lathes,
this is also the same, the saddle being driven by the
apron in the front, but because the diagonal points of
contact are completely across the bed, the whole saddle
is going to crab, as this wear space is 'taken up' before
linear movement happens.
Consider if the saddle were not driven by the pinion gear
in the apron, but in the middle of the saddle. The Porter-
Cable Production lathes were like this. The rack and the
drive pinion were in the middle of the bed.
This equalizes the force and
puts a central drive for the saddle. No wear from crabbing
can occur. Also think of the very old 1800s lathes, with the
lead screw in the center of the bed, and double inverted
vee ways. Again, the drive from the bed to the saddle
was central and balanced. Not a good screw location for
dirt and swarf, so the lathe evolved to having the leadscrew
to the front side. The engineering compromise is unbalanced
drive forces, and wear developed, causing crab when the
saddle feed is reversed.
So in reality, the Hardinge type dovetail bed is great when
it is new, but bad when it wears. The wings of an inverted
vee lathe would have to wear a whole lot before you would
see the saddle crab. The Hardinge saddle will exhibit crab
with no where near as much wear.
When I talk about this lathe design and how much of an
engineering compromise the Hardinge bed design is,
guys come apart like I am calling their girlfriend ugly.
But this is ground level engineering. It is interesting to
study these things and see what time and wear have
proven out with the various designs that have been created
over the years. Maybe some others can comment and
discuss their favorite lathe designs.

-Doozer
 
Last edited:
You hit the nail on the head.
I have used a slightly worn HLVH - and they do exactly as you have described.
I personally, even as a toolmaker could never understand the attraction to them. They suck for anything but short collet work.
Get a good monarch EE and love life
 
When I talk about this lathe design and how much of an
engineering compromise the Hardinge bed design is,
guys come apart like I am calling their girlfriend ugly.
But this is ground level engineering. It is interesting to
study these things and see what time and wear have
proven out with the various designs that have been created
over the years. Maybe some others can comment and
discuss their favorite lathe designs.

-Doozer
If you went over to the gunsmithing section and posted that Smith & Wesson is no good and Colt is better.
And a few Dirty Harry movies had to tell everyone that they are good. I bet a few would offer their opinions.
 
Last edited:
I would have to use them and take them apart
before I could opine about those makes.

I have a 1920 Cataract lathe, which is a copy
of a Holbrook (English) lathe, and it is inverted
vee and flat. Probably the only Hardinge like
that. I believe the T-10 is a dovetail bed too.

-D
 
Maxim: any old good condition lathe is better than an old clapped out lathe. Further, any new lathe is better than any used lathe.

This rule can be extended to almost any type of machinery, including cars, trucks, household applicances, houses, and so on.
 








 
Back
Top