Morse taper revolving centre in chuck jaws

[AndyP]

Is there any reason why I shouldn’t do this? Saves a lot of time changing chuck jaws.

As you can probably see I already have. I had another revolving centre in the tail stock. It can’t be pushed back into the chuck as there is a sufficient flange for it to rest against.

 

[Raymedullary]

So long as you are not griping the morse taper in the chuck and you are adhering to the usual practice of driving the centre into the timber first independent of the chuck, then no there is no reason why you should not do this.
Some might say that you are introducing a snagging hazard with the chuck catching the tool/your hand I guess.

 

[AndyP]

Thanks Ray,
No the morse tape is not being gripped just the body.
I used it to turn a 4” square blank down to 3” diameter and at no point did I feel my hands were at risk from the jaws

 

[Lurker]

I just remove the chuck entirely and access the MT in the drive shaft. Takes moments.

 

[PAC1]

It's ok if you are right-handed; a lefty (like me) might be getting a bit twitchy.

 

[Lurker]

Or one of these

Charnwood CDC25 Crown Drive Centre for Chucks 25mm Diameter : Amazon.co.uk: DIY & Tools

Charnwood CDC25 Crown Drive Centre for Chucks 25mm Diameter : Amazon.co.uk: DIY & Tools

www.amazon.co.uk

 

[Lurker]

It's ok if you are right-handed; a lefty (like me) might be getting a bit twitchy.

I’m left handed too, maybe why I don’t do it, but not consciously considered why.

 

[AndyP]

I just remove the chuck entirely and access the MT in the drive shaft. Takes moments.

Yeah, I was being lazy and getting fed up with constantly changing jaws and removing the only chuck I own. What I really need is a section of chucks.
I’m right handed too so running the gouge towards the chuck was not a problem.
I was prepping a blank for a pepper grinder and have come up with a cunning plan to more than double the capacity without increasing the height. More on that when I finish the piece.

 

[SamQ aka Ah! Q!]

I ..... have come up with a cunning plan to more than double the capacity without increasing the height.

I'm intrigued, being possessed of a Jet 1221 (smallish lathe), but have you jinxed yourself Andy? By inserting the subtle-as-a-brick Baldrick reference?
Hurry up! I want to see your plan!!
S.

 

[Mr P]

Is there any reason why I shouldn’t do this? Saves a lot of time changing chuck jaws

I do that all the time, just because it's easy and quick.

 

[AndyP]

I'm intrigued, being possessed of a Jet 1221 (smallish lathe), but have you jinxed yourself Andy? By inserting the subtle-as-a-brick Baldrick reference?
Hurry up! I want to see your plan!!
S.

I have made 4 grinders to this pattern. Supplied by www.Prokraft.co.uk
Known as easy-fit as no special tools nor skills required.


Although I have made mine slightly wider I have stuck religiously to those internal dimensions.


It occurred to me that the 25mm hole down the middle only needs to be 25mm where the grinding mechanism needs to be a snug fit. I could make a 38mm hole most of way down as long as I left enough room for the screws that hold the shaft retainer in place. The tenon in the top would need to be larger too of course. On a 75mm grinder this would, if my maths are correct, double the capacity.


So that is the plan for the two grinders that I am currently working on and if I can make a 38mm ring with a 25mm hole in the middle to enlarge the tenons in the top it would be easy to enlarge the hole on the grinders I have already made.

 

[Dr.Al]

I did something similar on a couple of the crushgrind ones I made. Like the Prokraft ones, the dimensions are only critical at the bottom so you can open up the top as much as you like.

 

[AndyP]

Just a shame it took my addled brain so to realise that.