Want a new shaper-advise?

I want to stack three 4 1/2" diameter cutters on the shaft- 5 1/2" tall all told. Each cuts a different profile, but uses the same fence setting. Right now I have a Felder, with two of the cutters stacked, but the design of the spindle leaves 3" or so of shaft sticking past the top bearing , before the seat for the cutters- a recipe for flex.
THis is used for long door stiles, so infeed and outfeed tables would be nice, as well as a front spindle lock and a brake.
I do not have martin money. Any ideas on tools? There is a Rong Fu (Jet)or something like that we use, it is much better than the Felder spindle-flex-wise.
Anyway, there is an old Porter 203 local to me, I have not looked at it- any other ideas on good used shapers?

I run a recurring job on an old Oliver 285 shaper. 1.25" spindle that is 9" long. Only spindle I have for it. The job is a bit scary and I was concerned with spindle flex as well so I made an over arm top bearing mount out of 1/2" and 3/4" thick steel plate, welded it up so the top plate was where I wanted it and then milled the mounts and bored the hole for the bearing. I serves as a guard and bearing mount. That is a cheap solution to beef up a shaper spindle in my opinion. Works for me as this machine never gets used for anything else. The guard/mount is bolted on so I can remove it to change cutters etc.

stoneaxe said:

Right now I have a Felder, with two of the cutters stacked, but the design of the spindle leaves 3" or so of shaft sticking past the top bearing , before the seat for the cutters- a recipe for flex.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand this, sounds like a crazy design. Is it an inserted spindle, or solid? Can you post a photo?

Felder spindles are solid with two bearings integrated into the quill portion of the spindle. You loosen two collars in the machine and insert the spindle, and then lock the bearings. There are a couple of issues. The bearings are relatively small and the spindle is graduated in steps to change speeds so the smallest diameter is the weak spot. SCMI T130 uses relatively small bearings too ( manufacturers like sealed or shielded grease bearings so the large high load bearings that used to be spec'd are no longer ), but the spindle is more stout so it is a little longer. The overhead support was more common on old machines but does serve to allow for cutters higher up on the spindle. If you can tolerate used machines, the old Martin or Polish copies ( EMA, Unitronex, Zefam, a bunch other names ) are very heavily built. Generally when you get into the stacked cutters you get into the 40-50mm spindle diameters. If you have the room, a second shaper is the way to go. Dave

I have always liked Gomads. Better than a scmi in heft and build.

Invicta were nice. My old t160 scm is a tank. Just got a tilting spindle Bauerle I am looking forward to setting up soon for a job.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Griggio is another Euro make with pretty good spindles & bearings on most sizes. Some of the iron seems thin to me, but it's well made/cast.

Older USA machines were made for heavy heads and stacked cutters on large projections with huge heavy tables. Usually no slots, though; if that is important. Many of the good machines were double spindle. Whitney's being a prime example of interchangeable spindle type. But each machine needs assessed on its own merits. I have a 1920's Advance double spindle with monster twin row spherical bearings at both ends plus an additional deep row thrust bearing on the bottom, with 7" under the nuts, and they were built to swing that when required. I sometimes put a different profile on each cutterhead and run one part past them. One spindle will be climb-cutting, though, so this has to be power fed. A caveat: 1-1/8" was a very common spindle diameter for old US machines. Modern cutters are mostly 1-1/4" bore.

smt

A friend has an old EMA tucked away, he bought it new years ago. Maybe I will check that out.
Is there such a thing as a shaper with an outboard spindle bearing that rises and falls with the cutter? of course it would have to come off to load a new cutterhead, but just curious.

I think the old ones could slide through the overhead/outboard bearings, for adjustment. But don't know what a likely range would be. Some of those has 1-1/2" spindles as options.

Does your Felder have a changeable spindle? If so, and if the quill will extend to within about an inch or the table surface, you could probably just make a new spindle out of 4140 pre-hard with a lower collar and with the size (diameter x length) and features desired.

4 x 6 x 1/2" structural angle planed or ground squared and bolted on each side of a table flush and parallel with the top surface is an easy way to add 12" length. I have not tried larger sizes, but the material is cheap enough.

smt

I do not think the felder spindle will get that close to the table- that is why they extended the shaft.

If you go over to Canadianwoodworking.com you will find threads about old shapers with overhead supports. Extending spindles to add cutters doesn't beef up the build of the quill and I would be worried about that. The old high spindle machines ran huge quills and large 63xx precision oil bath bearings to handle the high loads and high speeds. Shapers are designed much lighter today and exceeding their limits is a bad recipe. Darcy mentioned Gomad which is similar to the Unitronix and otheers I mentioned. EMA made a couple of sizes. The larger would be able to handle what you thinking about and a spindle could be made reasonably.

The Felder 900 and format are a heavier build than the 700 and the spindles much larger and stouter. I would not try to stack more on the 700 series. It isn't heavy enough. Dave

Just to be clear, my suggestion was to build a new spindle to utilize the 3" of space the OP said was between the bearing and the table (current spindle shoulder is way off the bearing); and to make it larger dia if the bearings were adequate (I don't know that shaper). However this point is moot as Stoneaxe does not think the quill will rise further to use this dead space/excessive overhang.

Overhead support, OTOH should be fairly simple for a known, repeating, or constantly set up tool stack length.

I'd go to the steel supplier and look for a very short drop of a very stout W- or I section. (say 1" thick flanges) Cut the bottom front leg off and maybe the top back leg (creating a straightened Z shape). Make the faces flat and parallel. Drill for table bolts on back lower leg. Bore the upper for a bearing. Possibly include a shoulder if the spindle will float in the bearing. Not if the spindle will be fixed to the ID, then the OD needs to float. Add an oil dripper if desired.

I think a snug sliding fit of the (new) shaft extension/journal would work fine if the OD of the bearing is retained in the bore. But might size the journal and the bearing bore size to include an internal expanding collet if the OD can float in the holder a bit.

smt

beckerkumm said:

If you go over to Canadianwoodworking.com you will find threads about old shapers with overhead supports. Extending spindles to add cutters doesn't beef up the build of the quill and I would be worried about that. The old high spindle machines ran huge quills and large 63xx precision oil bath bearings to handle the high loads and high speeds. Shapers are designed much lighter today and exceeding their limits is a bad recipe. Darcy mentioned Gomad which is similar to the Unitronix and otheers I mentioned. EMA made a couple of sizes. The larger would be able to handle what you thinking about and a spindle could be made reasonably.

The Felder 900 and format are a heavier build than the 700 and the spindles much larger and stouter. I would not try to stack more on the 700 series. It isn't heavy enough. Dave

Click to expand...

The gomads have always impressed me.

My 69 t160 with oil pump is a beast as well.

I just don't understand these newer shapers.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I saw a interesting shaper type machine once. I think it was fairly modern. It had a horizontal spindle with several bearings and several cutter heads mounted on it. It had several fences as well. The guy used it to shape door rails and stiles. Looked like a pain to shift cutter heads. The spindle was maybe 16" long I think the spindle was around 3/4".
Bill D.