Schaublin Rebuilder in Los Angeles?

I recently moved my Schaublin 102N into a commercial space where I will have access to it any time I want.

Until recently I had been keeping it at my (former) employers place, where they had the benefit of it's presence for 2 years without charge (They didn't pay for it, but I was the only one that used the machine - mostly to solve their problems).

I have an issue to resolve of a MT2 tailstock that sits 0.005" too low. When I bought my machine, it came with a star wheel tailstock (W25) that is well aligned to the machine. I bought my used MT2 tailstock on a trip to Switzerland. It is the correct style for the 102N but is non-adjustable and seems to have been subject to too much wear.

You can search my old posts from 2009 for more detail if interested. I made a set of shims for the tailstock out of brass that bring the alignment to acceptable levels, but they are a pain to work with.

I would prefer to solve this problem by building up the tailstock. Moglice has been suggested as a possible solution.

Can anyone recommend someone that could resolve this problem? Ideally someone that could work on the machine on-site. Moving the machine is not an absolute deal-breaker but I'd prefer to save the expense.

My shop is located in the NorthWest part of Orange County, CA.

cinematechnic said:

Moglice has been suggested as a possible solution.

Click to expand...

I seem to recall a post in wich problems associated with Moglice for tailstock building up were adressed.

IIRC, it was said that Moglice was too slipery for the tailstock to stay in place even when tightly clamped.
What can be a plus for a moving saddle turned out to be a minus for a tailstock that has to hold axial pressure without moving.

I wonder if it was not in Daryl Bane's thread about the rebuilding of his 10EE.

I don't know of any good way to repair those tailstocks without either adding metal to the bottom or making a new barrel with the bore offset. I agree with Tien that Moglice would be a bad idea here (Turcite too)- anyway you would have to machine the bottom to use either. Scraping them in is a nightmare as you have to manage to get proper contact on 3 surfaces at the same time and have them all contact the bed (with the right number of points per inch) at exactly the moment that the barrel is perfectly aligned to the spindle axis. The only way I found worked well was to use a modified bed for checking that permitted contact on the bottom and one side at a time. If I were you I would sell it and put the money toward one of the newer adjustable ones; it will almost certainly come out cheaper than having someone do the work on yours.

Thanks for the replies. I was concerned about the slipping issue with Moglice myself. It seems all the products that serve that function to build up a surface are designed for low friction. I use Emralon on worn lens threads. It's Teflon in a phenolic resin carrier. I can't imagine laying down .005" coating of Emralon. Getting that to be an even coating would not be easy.

How about this crazy idea: I disassemble the tailstock, mask all the iron that's not painted except the "foot", plate it with copper until the coating is slightly thicker than .005" (have to see if that's doable), have someone scrape it into alignment, and then plate with a very thin (like .0002") of nickel.

The only other thing I can think of is to mill pockets into the foot of the tailstock, insert pieces of high quality cast iron, secured with screws, and then have it scraped on those new bearing surfaces.

A new tailstock is about 3500.- CHF and the Swissy is trading at $1.05 (damned Federal Reserve printing Dollars 24/7). I remember a member here several years ago having a bad experience ordering a new tailstock (major problems with the build quality).

Member and Archie Cheda moved somewhere between LA and San Jose and He scrapes and has a machine shop. If he can't, I bet he knows someone. I know a couple of scrapers up in the Bay area, but that's a long haul. You could also consider "Grade Linen" Phenolic as it won't squish like Turcite. To do it right you will need to mill out some material. You can also make a new bottom 1/2 of the TS too. I will look for a old thread showing that and add it. Rich

Rather than adding material to the tail-stock why don't you remove material from the base of the head-stock to bring the head-stock down to line up with the tail-stock.

cinematechnic said:

A new tailstock is about 3500.- CHF and the Swissy is trading at $1.05 (damned Federal Reserve printing Dollars 24/7). I remember a member here several years ago having a bad experience ordering a new tailstock (major problems with the build quality).

Click to expand...

Back in 2004 or so the place I worked for got a couple of the new style adjustable tailstocks and they were fine; maybe more recent ones have issues. I know the new beds are quite soft cast iron so it seems some of the new Schaublin stuff doesn't stack up to the old. If you check Ricardo.ch the adjustable ones crop up from time to time, usually a couple thousand asking price but better than the new price.

SIP6A said:

Rather than adding material to the tail-stock why don't you remove material from the base of the head-stock to bring the head-stock down to line up with the tail-stock.

Click to expand...

That's a solution and I've encountered 102s that had that done. The hitch is it's not unusual to have a couple or more 102s and it's nice to be able to switch around the tailstocks- and the nice thing is (in my experience) they line up. Even Habegger 102 tailstocks line up on a Schaublin.

Cinematetechnic- how did you measure the .005" low condition? It would take a lot of effort/use/abuse to wear a 102 tailstock down that much. They tend to wear more in the front so you may be experiencing droop, exacerbated the further out the ram is extended. You may find that just getting your tailstock trued up will bring you quite close, and it could be useable until you find another pristine tailstock or an adjustable one.

Also the tailstock point's down and that can be checked by mounting a mag base and indicator and screwing the TS quill out 3" and locking to the bed and quill. Then checking TIR of the top front of the quill and then move it back and TIR (moving over top of quill using the cross-slide screw) and if it is pointing down, i have scraped the TS end of the base to tip it up so it moves up. I am assuming you tested the height with a test bar between centers?

My experience with Moglice on the tailstock bottom was very successful. The Moglice sets up rock hard and there is certainly no squish. THe Moglice so mated to the ways, that without flaking it would "wring" like gage blocks. Now this was done on freshly ground way surfaces, so your mileage may vary. Setting up an adjustable fixture for me was much preferable to scraping in alignment.

You could just have it straight Nickel plated and forgo the Copper. Than have it scraped in.

cinematechnic said:

I would prefer to solve this problem by building up the tailstock. Moglice has been suggested as a possible solution.

Can anyone recommend someone that could resolve this problem? Ideally someone that could work on the machine on-site. Moving the machine is not an absolute deal-breaker but I'd prefer to save the expense.

.

Click to expand...

CAUTION !!!!!!! Do not use Turcite or Rulon to correct the height of your tail stock.
If i understand this adjustment will be applied to the bearing face of the tail stock.
All those products are too slick. You will never be able to hold the tail stock from moving when drilling.

Made this mistake on a 15" Colechester and it was impossible to keep the tail from moving under drilling....
Had to remove the Turcite and scrape back to iron contact. In my case the shimming was done between the base and top of the tail stock assembly....

Cheers Ross

Hi Jorge, it's been a very long time since we last spoke.

I have a technique for sorting out misaligned tailstocks that works really well and gets you to near perfect alignment (within factory specs). It involves making a simple fixture to hold the inverted tailstock so that the barrel is true in the horizontal plane and then milling a couple of channels into the contact area of the tailstock base and also partially milling away the "side-cheeks". New cast iron plates are let into the base and glued in place - I use cyanoacrylate based adhesive as the material is not subject to any shock loading an is well protected. The plates are then surface ground until you achieve the correct centre height. You can then tackle the fore and aft alignment by introducing screw-set gibs of a similar type to those used on early Schaublin 70 carriages - two dowels and three screws per side. The gibs need about half a millimeter clearance behind them. Set the tailstock alignment checking that the gibs are in total contact with the bed, then glue them permanently in place with epoxy. You can double check the alignment again with the epoxy in place before it sets.

The attachments give a better idea of the process.

I've restored two tailstocks using the above with perfect results and once finished and painted it's almost invisible (only the witness mark of the epoxy on the cheek-gibs). However, it's very time consuming and IMO not commercially viable. I certainly won't be offering it as a service!

IMO introducing new cast-iron then machining scraping or doing something like the above is just about the only way to successfully tackle the problem - all other methods are always going to be a bit of a bodge!!

Best regards

David

Thanks to everyone that contributed for the great posts! This is, by far, my favorite forum on the web.

The reason I don't want to scrape the headstock lower is that it aligns well with my star wheel tailstock which came with my machine. So why change the headstock and tailstock that have good alignment just to match the worn tailstock?

As the the level of wear: I guess that's why I was able to buy it used in Switzerland for under $700.- USD. The guy that sold it to me even told me that the adjustable one was better. I guess he suspected it was probably worn. There is no way to check as the machine was 5000 miles away.

As for measurement: Put a dial indicator with a stem (I used an Interapid) held in a collet in the headstock. Indicate the inside of the MT2 bore.

David, good to hear from you! That looks like a good solution. Thanks for posting the pictures.