Depth of cut cowells me90

[kinross1Participant @kinross1]

Hi Jason.
Just had a look and I do not think that the nut head is meant for adjustment. I could undo it a little but as I am now able to cut . 5 mm without a problem I will settle for that. My belts do seem very tight. As has been posted the secret is to keep them and pulleys clean of oil etc.

Thanks. Mike.

[old martParticipant @oldmart]

Half a millimeter is close to 0.020″ which is an admirable result for your lathe, I would rarely cut that deep on a much bigger lathe with carbide inserts of any shape or grade.

Remember to oil your bearings every time you use the lathe when the belts are tight.

[Roger WoollettParticipant @rogerwoollett53105]

The Cowells ME90 should deal easily with 18mm silver steel.

If you are getting belt slip I suggest you should use the backgear. In any case I would start with 240rpm.

I use HSS tools and in this case would want around 10 degrees top rake (opinions vary). Make sure the cutting edge is really sharp.

If the cut is any length I would use the auto-traverse and probably a touch of neat cutting oil.

I have not tried this out but I would expect a 0.5mm cut to be reasonable. Perhaps less to finish.

[kinross1]

On kinross1 Said:

Hi Jason.
Just had a look and I do not think that the nut head is meant for adjustment. I could undo it a little but as I am now able to cut . 5 mm without a problem I will settle for that. My belts do seem very tight. As has been posted the secret is to keep them and pulleys clean of oil etc.

Thanks. Mike.

Jason is quite correct: the Cowells ‘manual’ confirms this, and refers to a locknut on the screw, although I think this may not always have been fitted. The headstock drive belt does need to be ‘twanging’ tight.

I do not know what new belts are like, but those on my second-hand ME90 have developed(?) a glossy, slippery, hard-ish surface. The headstock spindle bearings piddle oil everywhere they can, including onto the spindle pulley, resulting in belt slip. I’m afraid that’s just another example of the primitive design of this lathe. It’s essentially a 1920s-style design, with none of the improvements that a century of small lathe development has brought, and includes major design features that are now considered just plain wrong. I’m very disappointed by my machine, and am highly amused by today’s prices. Fortunately, mine was almost like new and not expensive.

I note that Cowells have (at last) revised their web site, and show a new address. Does anyone know what has happened?

[bernard towersParticipant @bernardtowers37738]

perhaps they moved to avoid the complaints

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

I fitted mine with 3 phase motor, vfd and tooth belt drive between countershaft and mandrel. Did away with back gear as I have a bigger lathe for jobs needing slow speed. That cured the belt slip issues.

I still sold it eventually, needed the space.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

The older owner retired and a new one has taken over.

 

Thanks for confirming my thoughts on the adjuster. Below is a photo from a Cowells promotional flyer when the ME version was launched which shows what I correctly thought is an adjuster.  Th ehead of the screw rides on teh cam and if it were not there then the tension lever would not work as the cam has nothing to bear against.

I had heard that the “Modern” addition of a plastic cover on the ME also helped coat the gears in oil as it hit that and dripped back onto the running gear.

[Author]

Posts