Harrison L5 mk2 or not

[sean logieParticipant @seanlogie69385]

Picked up lathe yesterday huffed and puffed and finally got the lathe into position in my small workshop (now even less room 😊) . Now, there seems to be a few variants of the L5 and I’m hoping someone can educate me on what variant L5  I have .

[John HaineParticipant @johnhaine32865]

Have you found the lathes.co.uk site?

[Clive FosterParticipant @clivefoster55965]

I’d say thats a late(ish) 1950’s machine. Still has the full circle hand wheels and long gear change lever on the feed selection box used on the older machines. Looks like a non-safety type clutch lever too. Later style bed foot at the headstock end too. Late 1940’s-early 1950’s versions had a sub sided foot, often with Harrison cast in. If the lack of plastic ball handles on the levers is factory rather than shop made replacements for broken balls it would narrow things down even further as this appears to have only been done for a short period. Harrison liked their screw on plastic balls.

Generally a nice solid machine. Simple feed box rather than screw cutting box id spit of s pain for general work as it’s hard to get appropriate feeds for a range of jobs without changing drop gears. Ideal candidate for a (hefty) Electronic Leadscrew System.

I never really got to grips with the snakes’n ladders speed selection diagram on the infrequent times I drove one.

Clive

[Andy StopfordParticipant @andystopford50521]

I’d agree with Clive, mid/late fifties, probably the Mk.3 version.

Although they look a bit crude, I reckon the solid handwheels are better than the spoked type which my 1966 L5 had. I was forever bashing the tip of my thumb on the spokes. It was really quite painful.

[Andy Stopford]

On Andy Stopford Said:

I’d agree with Clive, mid/late fifties, probably the Mk.3 version.

Although they look a bit crude, I reckon the solid handwheels are better than the spoked type which my 1966 L5 had. I was forever bashing the tip of my thumb on the spokes. It was really quite painful.

The lathe being as you said the mk3 ,would that explain the spindle centre height being 5 inches .

[Clive FosterParticipant @clivefoster55965]

Harrisons themselves never used a formal Mark designation. Improvements and changes were fed into production as convenient. Mk 3 term is generally applied to the mid 1950’s machines. Retention of solid hand wheels being the most obvious characteristic.

It’s an L5. Stud type tool post mounting rather than the T slot used on the L5A is diagnostic.  So specified centre height is 4 1/2″ although, as your measurement shows, there is actually a little more room under the spindle.

Clive

[sean logieParticipant @seanlogie69385]

On the look out for some tooling , QC toolpost , my L5 measures from the flat of the bed to the centre of the spindle 5 inches. With the toolpost that came with the lathe I’d have to use 12mm tooling with 2 1/2 mm shims. I’ve been looking at the AXA wedge type toolpost but unsure what size to order. 

[MacolmParticipant @macolm]

I would indeed suggest the AXA which can take up to ½ inch tooling, and is by far the most common size. You may need a spacer under the block to optimise the vertical positioning range, and possibly also a horizontal offset if you want the left cutting edge flush or slightly projecting beyond the left end of the top slide (a little creative design perhaps?)

I have had many years of good experience with that choice. Be sure to get the wedge type as you indicate, the rigidity is impressive.

[sean logieParticipant @seanlogie69385]

Thanks Malcom, I’ve a case of information overload . I maybe wrong ,but for the lathe I have it’s quite unusual for the centre height of the spindle to measure 5 inches instead of 4 1/2 inches . I just wanted to confirm what size toolpost to look at . Should I go for the 250-111 or 250-100 ?

 

Sean

[MacolmParticipant @macolm]

I meant to add that if you expect to use the lathe predominantly with large and heavy work, say 80mm diameter and bigger, then BXA might be a slightly better choice. But the AXA can still manage everything, though perhaps at lower rate of material removal. On the other hand, the smaller the better for intricate work where the AXA can easily use 10mm and 8mm tooling. The BXA works out a lot more expensive once you add everything up.

Do indeed be sure to get the wedge type which I think is 250-111 (AXA), but do check carefully. The piston type does not provide the same rigidity or positional repeatability accuracy. The same tool holders are used for either clamping system.

[sean logieParticipant @seanlogie69385]

Might be better with the BXA , the Internet says the AXA can hold up to 1/2″ tools, but I like the idea of the bigger more rigid set up of the BXA

 

 

Sean

[Author]

Posts