Axleson Lathe purchase

No real information on it right now. Need to see it in person. The owner said it is dirty/dusty and not rusty, ran at a shop he was at a long time ago- nice and tight.

Any thoughts on this other than run. Cost is low, owner wants it gone.

Top notch

Free downloads here

Axelson Manufacturing Co. - Publication Reprints | VintageMachinery.org

Looks like an easy cleanup. Light rust from sitting inside unheated shop unused. Has chucks and steady and carriage stop. You're good to go.

Axelsons are very high end heavyweight lathes. The rust will come right off the ways without any evidence it was ever there.

My Axelson looked like that when I bought it. It's an early 50's one with toolsteel insert ways. The rust came right off the ways and looks like new.

Just be prepared as these are big girls. They weren't skimpy with the iron.

Make sure you have enough power to run it. Really nice machine.

All good news, thanks for the link and info. Any specific method you used to remove the rust? As for the power, don't know what the motor is, hopefully something reasonable that I can run with no issue.

Will be a nice addition once up and running. Kinda stoked about it, I am a Monarch fan, so how is this compared to a Monarch equivalent?

Something like a Monarch series 60 would be pretty nice too. Often Axelsons came with a really large through hole in the spindle making them great for working the ends of pipe, hydraulic cylinders, stuff like that.

drom68 said:

All good news, thanks for the link and info. Any specific method you used to remove the rust? As for the power, don't know what the motor is, hopefully something reasonable that I can run with no issue.

Click to expand...

If it is not already, it can be made so rather easily. Power, if I've picked the correct brochure from the source John referenced, Eg: 16", either "toolroom" (you must sacrifice a goat..) or engine, (ignorant steaks will do...) was customer-selected, Axelson recommending 10 to 15 HP @ 1800 RPM.

Motor on it may be either 10 or 15 HP @ 480 VAC 3-P. You can move plenty of metal with it using a 10 HP @ 240 VAC, 3-P.

Motor hanging out the back as it does won't be hard to swap if you have to do that, as it was MADE to accept more than just one type. Use the same "frame" size or fab a plate or ring and 'deal with' the shaft. Get lucky, it is already 10 HP and dual-voltage.

Will be a nice addition once up and running. Kinda stoked about it, I am a Monarch fan, so how is this compared to a Monarch equivalent?

Click to expand...

To the 'workaday' Monarch's it compares very well. If I were actively in the trade and had to make a choice of one over the other based on limited space, I suspect I'd move a wall so as to keep BOTH!

Lathes this large are nothing like 'cheap' to tool or rebuild, so by this date, the condition as-had would sway the balance between Monarch & Axelson, regardless of whom had what advantage half a century and more ago - when still brand-new. Both are known for unusually long service life anyway.


Bill

Any specific method you used to remove the rust?

Click to expand...

On ways at least - especially if the older chilled cast iron - it shoved right off with a somewhat dull way scraper.

The "outside" photo gives an idea of what it looked like after being out in the weather for years.

Yours may not be nearly as bad

It is a 16 x 54, should have thrown that in there. Not sure if it is a toolroom version or standard. Owner is not too responsive due to work. As far as size, I think this is going to be a tight squeeze into my shop, weight is not bad at 6K, but the owner does not have a way to load so I will work something soon.

Johnoder, you did some serious work to that lathe. Looks good, how do you like running it?

Thanks! - but ask again in five years

Johnoder, you did some serious work to that lathe. Looks good, how do you like running it?

Click to expand...

It turned out to be a can of worms, but I don't mind at all

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/v...a-heavy-iron/20-heavy-greaves-klusman-183407/

The Axelson machine tool division only made heavy lathes. They never made anything else until they were sold off in the late 50's. In comparing an Axelson to a Monarch of similar size I would say the Axelsons are built a bit stouter and come with far more advanced standard features than the Monarchs. Axelson and Lodge and Shipley are in the same boat I think. I would put Monarch's heavy stuff in a class by itself built for more show than go.

I'm a bigger guy. I'm tall and have long arms and big hands. I LOVE how all the controls are laid out on the Axelson. I like the big SOLID levers and large grips on everything. The spindle clutch is awesome and the power feed levers and half nut are perfect. The two speed tailstock and how it switches from high to low with one hand instantly are really nice features. Axelsons all have loads of spindle speeds, a really nice fwd-reverse clutch, two speed tailstock, Tensioned leadscrew, real cartridge oil filter for the headstock pressure lube, and ingenious crossfeed stop. One Axelson uniquity is the standard 2 speed tailstock. Not just the two speed part, but how it's designed. Axelson rated their tailstock for full load overhanging the bed by 1/3. A very unique feature of the Axelson taistock is that since it is rack driven and they put the rack all the way to the front of the barrel, you can pull the taper ejector right off the rear in a few seconds and run the barrel out the back several inches. When you need ALL the center distance you can get the Axelson tailstock will swallow a center, or a drill or whatever as long as it's smaller than the barrel diameter and allow about 6 more inches of center distance. That stuff was standard equipment on every one they made.

I don't like the small wimpy feeling levers on a Monarch comparitively. I feel the Axelson controls are appropriate and very productive. The SOLID SMOOTH feel of all the Axelson levers is really impressive.

In all, I would say this- There are countless 10EE's and similar sized Monarchs in shops making money with them today. In my decade+ of owning a shop and being in and out of other area shops I see very very few working/functional larger Monarchs in use today. Almost all larger Monarchs I have seen have been in hobby type shops or long out of use and piled in a back room. The vast majority of daily working money earning manual lathes I see in the PNW are Axelsons and Lodge and Shipleys and an occasional Pacemaker.

Garwood said:

The vast majority of daily working money earning manual lathes I see in the PNW are Axelsons and Lodge and Shipleys and an occasional Pacemaker.

Click to expand...

I could do strange things for the privilege of harbouring an Axelson toolroom/tool & gage. And L & S are 'universal soldier', IMNSHO.

However ...East coast & Midwest, it is otherwise the reverse of your PNW observation.

Axelsons are seriously rare, large Monarch's, ATW's, LeBlonds less-so.

Simple transport economics may have been a factor in the 'buy' decisions of decades ago.

Closer to where the heavy buggers were hatched from the egg, lower the departmental CAPEX and amortization hit. Initial transport and install are booked and amortized in the same bucket as the machine tool cost, after all.

'All of the above' were fair-sized corporation purchases where the bean-counter sits at the table in the Boardroom, Machinists and Foreman are far away.

Mfg Veep? Outright whore for quarterly bottom-line dollars, not comfortable handwheels for the blue-collars. DAMHIKT.

Bill

axelson site:craigslist.org

Shows pretty equal distribution of Axelsons for sale from coast to coast.

I don't really buy the big machines didn't travel far theory. I have seen just as many heavy Leblonds and Monarchs, but they were not in current earn their keep type uses.

My Axelson came from a GE facility on the East Coast. I have Mori-Seiki, Kitamura and Mazak CNC's that dwarf any of my manual machines. Obviously they came from Japan, but even my biggest 31K pounder with a 14'X18' footprint has crossed the country a couple times in it's 20 years of use.

About a year ago I was working a deal to buy (Deal did not materialize as marijuana grow industry discovered property and swooped in with big money) a heavy machine shop that serviced the forest and paper industries. It was defunct, but included a half dozen very large HD Leblonds from the 70's and 80's. The machines had very low use. They had also required an unusual amount of major repairs and rebuilding for their short lives to do their jobs.

I can only go off what I have seen and I certainly do not know much in the big picture. All I'm saying is that it appears to me that the useful life of a later, lets say WWII and newer, Axelson or Lodge and Shipley seems to me to be severalfold that of a Monarch.

I have a theory that the materials- The iron, used in the Axelson castings was superior to what lesser machines were using. Axelson literature touts this. They make big deals in the advertising about the alloys used in their foundry and how refined their processes were. Might not be true, but interesting that they made a deal about it.

I think that all these old American made machines are now past their useful lives, but the ones that are still in service, especially in real daily use applications are a testament to how well they were made. My 1951 Axelson has no way wear. It cuts the collar test to tenth over a foot. It was used right along side two same size Monarchs of the same year for the same use by GE. Those Monarchs were swaybacked wrecks. I have a conventional bed 22X60" Mazak CNC from the 70's. It has the same exposed bed/way design as the Axelson and has certainly made 1000's of times the numbers of parts and seen way more use than any manual machine could. It has no way wear to speak of and has required virtually no repair in it's life. I think those hold up whereas other seemingly quality machines degrade sooner because the materials and processes used in their construction are superior. I say it isn't clear when the machine is new, but put 30, 40, 50 years of daily use and abuse on a machine and see what it looks like. If the same capacity machines from two different manufacture are doing the same job and one outlasts the other by decades I'd say there's a difference in quality under the surface.

Axelson lathes are nice machines. I think they absolutely nailed their design and features and overbuilt them a wee bit better than some of the competition. There's no way to really prove that, so it's really just my opinion.

I run two Axelson lathes in the shop one is a raised bed 35" and the other is a 20"
The 20" I picked up at an auction near Philadelphia. I didn't even have a mask on when I robbed it for 1250.00 with a two steady rests, a full complement of DA tool holders, some boring bars, and a bunch of manchester trepannig tooling and some tool cabinets. It ran good but I put a new cross slide nut and screw in it since the old one was worn.
The 35" runs every day. It is a real nice machine. The old motor had a vibration in it when I got it. The coupling was shot too. I replaced it with a Lovejoy unit since the original one was priced at 1000.00. The only problem was not to jam the spindle into reverse with a big part in it at high RPM. I got a standard motor on it I think 25 HP. No belts to adjust and easy to change.
I did have the front apron off yesterday because the thread feed handle would not move. I didn't want to force it so I pulled it off. Problem was the plate which moves the half nuts would not turn. I polished up everything and put it back together. It took a day to do it all. I had that apart several years ago when the slide on the feed rod was worn out and had to be replace. I bought a new one from an outfit in Texas. Today I would make it myself since now I have a wire EDM.

I like the Axelsons much more than the Monarchs from a design point. The way the Monarchs shift gears uses dog clutches that wear. The axelsons move the gears with a yoke. The two speed tailstock is a pleasure to drill with. AS someelse said the handles are massive. I have a monarch and when I got it the handles were all damaged.

John

amdinc said:

The way the Monarchs shift gears uses dog clutches that wear. The axelsons move the gears with a yoke.

Click to expand...

to be fair, sliding gear engagement can't be done (easily) with helicals, and either setup is going to become worn and broken by trying to bangshift them.
Dogs are easy to weld up and mill proper, gear teeth not so much.

[486] said:

to be fair, sliding gear engagement can't be done (easily) with helicals, and either setup is going to become worn and broken by trying to bangshift them.
Dogs are easy to weld up and mill proper, gear teeth not so much.

Click to expand...

I find it interesting that all the high-torque gearing in the Axelsons is straight cut which should make them quite loud at higher speeds. The opposite is true. They are quiet and very smooth. The first time I had mine at 1200 RPM (before I even bought it) I thought it was at a much lower speed and I had a lever placed wrong. Nope. They're just that quiet. They shift gears very easily and quickly when stopped. They have a built in hydraulic brake driven from a valve in the spindle clutch handle that stops the spindle pretty quick.

I've had the apron face and the headstock cover off and the tailstock open to clean and inspect stuff and I replaced all the thrust bearings in the apron clutches because they got rusty over years. The whole time I was thinking "If money and resources were no object that's how I would build that too." They're nice, simple KISS engineering and I couldn't find a cut corner anywhere.

Ever worked on a lower end machine that uses a bunch of taper pins to hold it together? The Axelsons are all made so you can easily take them apart and put them back together with bolts and dowel pins, forged lugs on ends of shafts, keyways in shafts with clamping bolts for no slop, that kind of thing. They have shafts riding in common bearings, not in a bushing that wears out the shaft in time.

*sigh* you guys..... talk about encouraging Old Iron LUST... for a taste of strange pu .. ah .. handwheels! handwheels!

I have read some of the older threads on Axleson lathes. Very informative and makes me want this lathe more. Just hope all is well inside and that the outside is not too rusty or beat up.

I did read on one thread that if worked to its max potential the lathe will wear you out. Wondering if this is due to the feel of the lathe or if it would take that much to work the lathe to its max potential. Anyone ever work an Axleson to its potential?

drom68 said:

I have read some of the older threads on Axleson lathes. Very informative and makes me want this lathe more. Just hope all is well inside and that the outside is not too rusty or beat up.

I did read on one thread that if worked to its max potential the lathe will wear you out. Wondering if this is due to the feel of the lathe or if it would take that much to work the lathe to its max potential. Anyone ever work an Axleson to its potential?

Click to expand...

I have HEARD that, and more than once, in comparison to ATW, Monarch, even L&S. I have also heard the exact OPPOSITE. That an Axelson is LESS demanding to operate for long hours at a go.

Ga-ron-tee I'd have supplied me own KNEEPADS to swap War-One era thutty-inch or so NILES for the opportunity to be "worn out" by an Axelson. With its controls, rapids, speed ranges, and a whole lot more?

"Wear you out?" If so, only because you are getting so much more DONE with it to the hour, and frustrated because you are 'still chasing', not even close to the limits IT respects.

That would have to be about as stressful as having your first-ever date ... with .. let's just say "a mature lady"... of voracious appetite.

What a way to go...



Bill

I have not seen a Axleson of that size up close so this is my observation only. The Monarch lathes you are comparing are most likely 60/61's and maybe N or CK? Reason I ask is my series 62 is pretty stout, two speed tail stock, rapids, 14-1750 RPM 32 speed head, nice size knobs, leadscrew reverse, braking and, jog. The only real issue is the small through hole in the spindle about 2 1/4". My lathe is a 2013 but, the 1611 are not much less machine.

Steve