Seems the SB 9" lathes "get no respect at all" to quote the funny man...on many online forums.
Referred to as a "little lathe", often in a somewhat demeaning way.
So, is bigger, always better?
I totally GET the mass/weight rigidity argument. But, for someone like myself that does only small work, and doesn't NEED a larger swing over bed- and doesn't NEED to curl a 1/4" chip off a chunk of steel in one pass- what's the disadvantage?
Basically, my question boils down to this...
As long as the limitations of the machine are known- and it's not excessively worn and can cut within acceptable parameters (I guess that depends on the tolerances of the work to be done), why can't a smaller machine do accurate work, with light cuts that don't push it's limits? Even with light cuts, is it inherently less accurate than a machine with greater mass- all other things being equal?
Thanks in advance for the insight.
Referred to as a "little lathe", often in a somewhat demeaning way.
So, is bigger, always better?
I totally GET the mass/weight rigidity argument. But, for someone like myself that does only small work, and doesn't NEED a larger swing over bed- and doesn't NEED to curl a 1/4" chip off a chunk of steel in one pass- what's the disadvantage?
Basically, my question boils down to this...
As long as the limitations of the machine are known- and it's not excessively worn and can cut within acceptable parameters (I guess that depends on the tolerances of the work to be done), why can't a smaller machine do accurate work, with light cuts that don't push it's limits? Even with light cuts, is it inherently less accurate than a machine with greater mass- all other things being equal?
Thanks in advance for the insight.