What's new
What's new

Lathe clutch plate replacement opinions

beckerkumm

Hot Rolled
Joined
Aug 5, 2014
Location
Wisconsin Rapids WI
I am having problems with the Matrix clutch on my Smart Brown 1024. Taking it out was a real PITA so I want to consider replacing any worn bronze wet plates. The steel plates all look good as i would expect. Original replacements from Matrix are still available but about $100 each and 10 are used. I found some replacements much cheaper from a Colchester lathe which also uses a Matrix clutch but they are slightly thinner .057 vs .061 for the original and have a cross hatched pattern embossed into them. They also are much rougher than the smooth old plates. If the originals are not worn and retain the same thickness, would you replace them with the new or retain them? Thanks, DaveDSCN3953.jpg
 
I am having problems with the Matrix clutch on my Smart Brown 1024. Taking it out was a real PITA so I want to consider replacing any worn bronze wet plates. The steel plates all look good as i would expect. Original replacements from Matrix are still available but about $100 each and 10 are used. I found some replacements much cheaper from a Colchester lathe which also uses a Matrix clutch but they are slightly thinner .057 vs .061 for the original and have a cross hatched pattern embossed into them. They also are much rougher than the smooth old plates. If the originals are not worn and retain the same thickness, would you replace them with the new or retain them? Thanks, DaveView attachment 308331

MUST be folks around - UK contingent, mayhap? - who have operated both lathes during their tenure?

My "question" would be whether the Matrix goods used in the Colchester were meant for and WERE - more abrupt - or less abrupt - as to clutch take-up than the Matrix goods in the S&B.

And/or .. if there were annoying issues as to wear or degrading performance known for either that might have prompted a change to the design?

IOW.. I class the difference as intentional, and engineering-driven, not cost-driven. The production cost difference would not have been large.

Ergo regard the difference as significant.. and to a purpose.

Will it matter? Guess that depends on how badly worn if not adopted as a probable improvement.

As to the $100 cost? EACH?

Almost certainly the diameter is not a match, but still..

A Rockwell "New Departure Model DD" two-speed bicycle coaster brake I had in the late 1950's used identical LOOKING alternating steel and Bronze plates for braking. As did other coaster brakes without the planetary geared 1.1:1 overdrive.

New sets were CHEAP from Sears-Roebuck, too!

Dave?

It would be seriously amusing if ignorant bicycle parts DID fit your Matrix clutch ...and save the better part of that possible thousand dollar outlay!!!

:D
 
Wow termite!
You are spamming the forum again with your brand of complete bullshit!
That low post count must be getting to you, as your lesser bullshitter buddies are beating you.
On the other hand, the termite is going back into the "drunk hick in the barn act" its a cyclic thing the termite studies have discovered.

Anyway, you are still the top troll termite! No threads or photos of your own, just pure bullshit.
 
Chris Hallybone at Bracehand sent me all the Matrix parts he had so I have extra of the smooth plates. The clutch design changed over the years but the plates stayed the same. I have a post over at the new S and B groups Io forum but there aren't many members yet. Dave
 
Reading more about Colchester lathes, it seems their Matrix clutches were instant on and made to grab quickly rather than the slower engagement of the S and B. That may be the reason for the different type plate. The difference in thickness might be compensated by a different thickness steel plate or placement of the snap rings on the shaft. If any Colchester or Harrison owner has experience, it would be helpful as well. Dave
 
Reading more about Colchester lathes, it seems their Matrix clutches were instant on and made to grab quickly rather than the slower engagement of the S and B. That may be the reason for the different type plate.

The grooves fit with that.

- They should allow faster exit of the oil film.

- A rougher remaining surface should trap "some" predictable amount of oil so it wasn't TOO abrupt an action.
 
If Price > value of your time, then make them.

If you make them, depending on size, you could start off 75% done with bronze thrust washers.
 
If Price > value of your time, then make them.

If you make them, depending on size, you could start off 75% done with bronze thrust washers.

I have enough to replace with either the smooth or the grooved. I'm looking for opinions as to which I should use. the mix and match idea has been pretty much trashed. If I went with the new, it would likely be either on the high or low side. I have 8 new and 15 old and need ten total. Dave
 
Can you get some extras wire edm'd out?

Another thought - if you know the original thickness of the plates, build up a pack and cut a packing shim for the descrepancy.
 
I took everything apart today. The bronze plates look to have started out at .063-.064 and most were worn only to .062. A couple were at .060 so I replaced them with spares from the extra clutch I had acquired as well as some of the needle rollers. I didn't use any of the Colchester plates that were thinner at .059 but rougher and with the oil grooves. They also had a slightly wider inner diameters but the outside dimensions were exactly the same so they will work in future unless I find a Colchester guy in need.

Will put the clutch together with the gears over the holidays and see how everything works. DSCN3955.jpg Dave
 
I've worked on the Colchester clutches, they have quite a bit of adjustment with the knurled rings. On the lathes, usually a simple adjustment was all they needed. Usually, when beat, the ears on the plates are worn.

Mr Bridgeport
 








 
Back
Top