On 2012-12-15, Gunner <
gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:13:10 -0600, Jon Elson <
jme...@wustl.edu>
> wrote:
>
>>Ignoramus26907 wrote:
>>
>>> Dan, I won that machine, I will report my findings.
>>Well, if in good shape, it should be very nice. Of course, all
>>the usual things can be wrong, like worn ways, badly worn
>>leadscrews, etc. When I put a readout (not digital, but optical)
>>on my old Bridgeport, I was amazed at the differential wear on the
>>X leadscrew. I didn't think it was possible for it to be worn
>>so much in the center without the entire thread going away.
>>I had very close to .050" error in the middle, then it would start
>>to go down after passing the center. Well, that explained why
>>I couldn't make any larger things where the bolt holes lined up!
>>
>>A DRO might be the easiest way to make accurate parts with it.
>>
>>Jon
>
> Indeed. And a couple times a year..move the damned vise from one end
> to another and spots in between.
>
> A LOT of mills were never run that way..and have horrendous wear in
> one spot.
>
> Same with most lathes. I dont care if its a 54" lathe..there is going
> to be wear within 8" of the chuck/spindle nose.
>
> Same with CNC machines of all sorts.
>