Hi Martyn,
I think your question has been answered (It's "Yes" ) but I'm aware others (new to this game) may also be reading this thread.
So for them – I'd like to point out that the length of material you can hold in any "MT" based collet chuck will be limited by the depth available at the back of the collet 'cone' (using a hollow draw bar or not). Of course it will hold shorter work very securely and it's repeatability (for second operation work) will be better than most 3-Jaw chucks.
However, in the longer term (and for anyone stating from scratch with ER collets on a lathe) I believe that the ER chuck type that mounts on a back-plate is generally a better long term solution.
I standardised on ER collets (I use both ER32 & ER16) some time ago and have a MT2 mounted ER collet chuck as well as a number of ER chucks on back-plates (plus an ER Spin Indexer and various ER collet blocks etc.).
I generally prefer to use a MT2 'Clarkson' chuck on my milling machines but the MT2 ER32 does get used where I don't have a suitable Clarkson collet or the cutter is unthreaded. I know I've also used it in the tailstock of my S7 but I can't off hand recall quite why now, as the drill chuck is my first go-to to grip odd bits normally. I'm hoping it will be useful to hold cutters on the Stent T&C grinder (when it eventually gets finished).
However, I frequently use ER32 chucks (each on a lathe specific back-plate) in preference to my 3/4 jaw chucks and they can hold any length of stock that my 3/4 jaw will manage up to 20mm. Maybe, I should add that I have three lathes operational at the moment and they all have different mandrel tapers. I have managed to move work between them (using these ER collet chucks) on occasion – basically when I managed to screw up my machining sequences and needed to 'tweek' something without messing up my current settings/set-up.
However – being able to hold longer material is extremely useful because many work holding situations are made much easier when the 'work piece' is still attached to the parent material. Much less material gets wasted when you are able to simply part-off as required, rather than cutting material into 'work' lengths plus a bit to hang onto – which results in a box of (often unusable) short ends. These savings can mount up over time!. A back-plate chuck can also be moved to another lathe by simply changing the back-plate (not so easy if the taper is different) and I've done this at least once..
Of course , if you have both a lathe and mill with the same MT taper (as I think you do Martyn) then the advantage will clearly move back towards getting the MT type ER chuck – and you may never need anything else.
However, based on my own experience, I think that once you have used ER collets, you will discover increasing uses for them and you will find your ER holding 'systems' will expand over time.
Regards,
IanT
Edited By IanT on 13/08/2015 10:45:43