New Lathe Problems advice needed

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

Steady on here. While Chester are not my number one "go to" they perhaps deserve the opportunity to put things right.

I do note that the model has possibly changed to a super prefix, so this may have been one of the last needing a home.

Perhaps it is just a 'Friday afternoon jobbie'. It may be that we have only heard one-sided comments from a few disgruntled previous customers. Perhaps it was just dumped on an unsuspecting customer.

It clearly has problems, so let's see what Chester have to say. Then decide whether Chester is a suitable supplier. I expect the other suppliers have had quality problems at times and most have detractors.

I think it is not fit for purpose, but one does wonder why customers come on the forum before contacting the supplier.

I'm not accusing anyone about anything; all I am saying is see what Chester have to say, and actually do, about it.

[Carl Wilson 4Participant @carlwilson4]

No. Not steady on. It isn’t just a few disgruntled customers. They’ve been getting away with horrendous service and poor quality for a long time now.

Customers don’t just come on the forum before contacting Chester. All the people who’ve posted on this thread, apart from the OP are relating experiences they’ve had with Chester in the past, not current difficulties.

By allowing the likes of Chester to get away with it we are giving them a licence to continue to rob people of their hard earned money.

[I.M. OUTAHEREParticipant @i-m-outahere]

My comments were made with the understanding that the op had modified the machine and now dismantled it which would usually void any warranty .

If the mods are reversible ( ie no holes had been drilled or tapped and nothing had been cut off ) and the machine can be assembled so as to look like it had never been touched the best option would be to return it and hope they honour the warranty .

There is no garauntee that the replacement won't be the same or worse and it may be something that Chester don't know about , They simply can't test every machine that comes off the boat before a customer picks it up .

Scraping the head in can be diffficult but if they don't take it back the op really has little choice , i have had to do this on my first chinese machine but fortunately it was mostly burrs around the mouting holes on that lathe but the C2 clone was a different matter ! The vee in the headstock was way too big for the vee on the bed so the headstock kept moving it was also nose down on the spindle – fortunately not by much , a bit of a scrape had that sorted and the vee was shimmed so the spindle ran parralell on the horizontal plane and located on the vee bed – apparently this is a fairly common fix .

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Seems like it's "not fit for purpose" and you should get your money back.

[Raymond AndersonParticipant @raymondanderson34407]

If you bought that pile of s***e from Chester then don't even think about trying to fix that ! Shocking in the extreme. Sometimes I think model engineers are their own worst enemy. It's fine sorting up some small defect but that's not small !! If more hobbyists sent the shockers back then suppliers might get the message. Tell them to pick up their plie of junk and either get a fully tested [ and inspected ] one, or money back.

[Alfie PeacockParticipant @alfiepeacock58331]

I've noticed Chester Tools advertise here on this site, I would of thought they would add a response to this forum. They are not getting a good review especially if one is considering a new machine, two well known suppliers flashing their advertisement next to each other,which one would you go for now.

[Ady WilsonParticipant @adywilson52106]

Take a look at this video of a guy in America who is checking the quality of his Grizzly lathe G0602 which is essentially the same 10×22 lathe sold under many names in the UK.

I think a lot of people have machines that are good enough to do what they want for them but in reality if you strip these Chinese machines down I think most would be suprised how far out they really are. There is no way to get the maximum out of a machine with these kind of tolerances. I think it would be a big ask to presume that if I ask Chester to replace the machine it will be much better made.

The test sheet which came with the machine gives correct data for runout etc.. (although I have not checked all of it) but obviously all that means nothing if mating surfaces are only contacting in a few places. Also there is no way Chester could have known about this fault as it took me a good few hours to diagnose it and then strip it down to see what was going on. I bought my milling machine from SPG Tools a couple of years ago and have been very happy with it, I seem to remember when ordering that they set them up themselves before sending them out which is good to know. I dont know with other dealers if they check the function of the machine before sending it out? An inspection record of a machine is handy to have but like I just said it doesnt cover quality of surfaces and build, only things like runout and parallelism.

China makes a ridiculous amount of stuff nowadays, we make nothing. We wont pay people to build quality things anymore it is easier for the big money men to farm it all out to China, India etc.. If you have a problem with your phone or bank and ring for help you get put through to India. What else is there to say? What I have learned in life is if you want something right then you have to do it yourself because the fact of the matter is when you buy something the company that made it got the job because they could do it cheaper than anyone else.That speaks volumes. I just find it ironic that a place like the UK which was at the forefront of the industrial revolution cant even produce equipment like it used to and it has instead opted to let others build what we would class as sub standard products for us to buy.

I am going to let Chester know about the machine but am not going to build it back up because I really believe if they send me another the surface tolerances are not going to be what I want them to be (everywhere). If they want to send me a new Head stock casting to replace the rubbish one that would be appreciated. Whats interesting is my old lathe which I bought new a few years ago, a clarke CL500m has been a solid reliable machine but lacked a lot of features. That machine is also sold under many names across the globe. I wondered why they had never changed the model for something newer and I guess it must be because for what they are they are half decent machines. Obviously they are made in china too but their manufacturer must be someone they can trust to supply a reliable quality of product. I mean some of these factories over there must not even have a quality control department. If you or I worked in a factory and were given that head stock I am sure we would take it back to parts or wherever we had got it from and asked them for another. But I think over there it is a production line system where a bunch of zombies are paid simply to tighten nuts.

On a lighter note you do get a free knitting machine with this model lathe, it has nine patterns to choose from. When I get it fixed I will sort a beanie hat for the long hours of lapping and scraping ahead of me.

[Tony Pratt 1Participant @tonypratt1]

Posted by Raymond Anderson on 20/11/2017 07:56:48:

If you bought that pile of s***e from Chester then don't even think about trying to fix that ! Shocking in the extreme. Sometimes I think model engineers are their own worst enemy. It's fine sorting up some small defect but that's not small !! If more hobbyists sent the shockers back then suppliers might get the message. Tell them to pick up their plie of junk and either get a fully tested [ and inspected ] one, or money back.

Well said Raymond, we keep buying shite they will keep making it!

Tony

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Ady,

Your analysis of the situation seems very sound, and I admire your philosophical attitude.

Yes: 'We' have brought this upon ourselves.

I can only hope that Chester responds appropriately, in a decent like-minded manner.

MichaelG.

[Tony – CHUKParticipant @tony-chuk]

Hi Ady,

Sorry to hear you are having problems. We would be more than happy to help resolve this issue, please make contact with myself, or our customer services manager Andrew Clark, on the telephone numbers on your paperwork or by email so we can start to get this sorted for you.

We can't help if we don't know there is an issue!

All the best,

Tony

Chester Machine Tools

Edited By Tony – CHUK on 20/11/2017 10:12:37

[Ady WilsonParticipant @adywilson52106]

Here`s a video I made just to give another visual on the problem. I can get a 0.05mm feeler gauge and in places a 0.08mm between the bed and head stock in too many places.

https://youtu.be/uPgcLETS4C0

[KWILParticipant @kwil]

Quote

"Accreditation & Membership

We are a professional ISO9001 accredited, internationally renowned company known for our unsurpassed dedication, reliability and superior quality.

We are proud to be Members of BESA and The Chambers of Commerce.

Chester are also Built to Last
All our machines are made from cast iron and are quality checked both at the factory and before despatch. "

What more would you want?

[Ady WilsonParticipant @adywilson52106]

I have just emailed Chester with pictures of Head stock and video link of chatter and fact feeler gauge can be put in between mating surfaces. Just wait and see what they say? I would be happy if the sent me another Head Stock, but would that fit?

[mark smith 20Participant @marksmith20]

Posted by Ady Wilson on 20/11/2017 09:23:08:

Take a look at this video of a guy in America who is checking the quality of his Grizzly lathe G0602 which is essentially the same 10×22 lathe sold under many names in the UK.

Going by the contact shown by the bluing ,i get the feeling the scraper marks on the saddle that are already present are simply for decoration.

[OuBallieParticipant @ouballie]

When the company I worked for in the '80s went down the ISO 9000 route, I was aghast to discover the system was nothing more than a glorified paper chase, and nothing to do with quality of product.

We spent all our time modifying our paperwork to comply, and absolutely nothing at all on quality of product, as that was not part of being ISO accredited.

Since then I have taken ISO with a pinch of salt.

Geoff – Am I missing something?

[Chris TriceParticipant @christrice43267]

I remember a previous discussion about far eastern machines and getting partially shot down in flames. My opinion has always been that a cheap price does not mean you should expect less than something fit for purpose and, how times have changed. The fact Chester are looking into this for the customer is good obviously but the fact that they have to (and there are far too many similar stories about machinery from any number of importers) is the whole point. It shouldn't happen. Straight away, any joy or confidence in a machine or its replacement is destroyed. You get what you pay for.

[Chris TriceParticipant @christrice43267]

And the idea that it doesn't matter as long as the retailer makes good is still disappointing to those like myself who want to buy something once and not have to play musical returns with a supplier until by apparent luck I'm supplied one that is adequate. This is why I still prefer to buy good second hand british equipment and accessories for the same price as new far eastern. Even with some previous ownership, the quality is usually still there with the caveat that you employ all the usual cautions when buying secondhand.

[Carl Wilson 4Participant @carlwilson4]

Completely agree with those sentiments.

[Anonymous]

Posted by OuBallie on 20/11/2017 11:14:08:

Geoff – Am I missing something?

No, ISO9000 is a consistency system, not a quality system. It says we have a procedure to do that particular task, and we always follow that procedure, and have a document trail to prove it. It says nothing about the quality of the procedures, and even less about the design process. As long as you follow the procedures, and can prove it, you're fine.

In other words you can produce cr*p, but you produce consistent cr*p where each unit is the same.

Andrew

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by OuBallie on 20/11/2017 11:14:08:

When the company I worked for in the '80s went down the ISO 9000 route, I was aghast to discover the system was nothing more than a glorified paper chase, and nothing to do with quality of product.

We spent all our time modifying our paperwork to comply, and absolutely nothing at all on quality of product, as that was not part of being ISO accredited.

Since then I have taken ISO with a pinch of salt.

Geoff – Am I missing something?

Sadly not. I too had exactly the same experience. The introduction of ISO9000 was a glorious opportunity to fix a large number of organisational and other defects that reduced productivity and otherwise annoyed our customers.

Unfortunately the boss had been ordered to deliver ISO9000 accreditation as a target and given no resources to actually change anything in the real world despite evidence galore that all was not well. The top team felt the status quo was good enough, possibly not realising that their work-force was flat-out due to internal inefficiencies.

Like you, I wasted a lot of time reviewing documentation that went straight into a cupboard. The final straw was discovering that our software quality process required the use of a Spectrum Analyser and lots of other inappropriate lab equipment. The ISO team had produced an impressive inch-thick document by retitling someone else's quality process. They hadn't actually read it!

A few years later the enterprise failed. The customer found an alternative who was cheaper, faster and more reliable. I was annoyed because the crash was avoidable. A hard working team were let down by leadership failure. At about the same time a colleague successfully turned his business unit round by introducing a pragmatic approach to quality, much of it simple. He was empowered to use ISO9000 to streamline and correct a raft of rusty work-practices. His leader wanted to change and invested. As far as I know they're still going strong.

Dave

[TrevorhParticipant @trevorh]

When I was involved with the accreditation there was simple rule to follow

"say what you do and do what you say"

it was that simple until you had to produce standard operating procedures for everything, but again once you actually understood what the work force actually did it wasn't so bad to document it

one of the hardest jobs was controlling it all – stop the workers from doing their own thing because they thoughtit was abetter way…..

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Ooops. Apologies to Ady for veering off into an interesting discussion about ISO9000.

Back on topic, I was sorry to read about your new lathe issues and hope Chester sort it out soon. Looks like someone in the factory fitted a headstock they should have rejected.

For the benefit of anyone else who might have a problem with a new lathe, I think older web advice suggesting that new Chinese lathes should be treated as a kit of parts to be stripped down and put right is unhelpful. Mostly they're not that bad, though obviously some still are! I suggest the first thing to do with a new lathe is to check it out carefully and report immediately any faults you're not happy to fix to the supplier. Don't make serious defects your problem by messing with it. Later on of course it's likely that you will want to improve the lathe. Go for it. Should be tweaks rather than a need for major surgery though.

Dave

[Ady WilsonParticipant @adywilson52106]

UPDATE**

I got a reply saying

"Although there may be an issue as you have stripped down a brand new machine whilst still under warranty and without consent, in this case it has quite clearly highlighted the issue that you have with the machine."

They will send someone to pick it up when I have it back together and on pallet (which i still have). They have also offered me another replacement machine or a full refund. I said I will think things over and let them know. So I can only say that they have been very fair and am happy and relieved at the outcome. They also said that when they get to look at the machine they will get on to the factory about it. So all good news.

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

So, there you go! Now we have heard from both sides of the problem – buyer and vendor. Problem solved.

Likely would have been without all this 'dirty washing' plastered all over the forum. Other vendors have the same problems with these imported machines.

Mostly the incidence is sorted without recourse to threads like this. The vendors are then regarded as the best thing next to sliced bread. Same problem, different perception by third parties. .

[Dinosaur EngineerParticipant @dinosaurengineer]

I too had the same experience of ISO 9000 – It would appear that the ISO Q.A. guys need some experienced real world engineers. Paperwork alone does not guarantee quality.

Posted by OuBallie on 20/11/2017 11:14:08:

When the company I worked for in the '80s went down the ISO 9000 route, I was aghast to discover the system was nothing more than a glorified paper chase, and nothing to do with quality of product.

We spent all our time modifying our paperwork to comply, and absolutely nothing at all on quality of product, as that was not part of being ISO accredited.

Since then I have taken ISO with a pinch of salt.

Geoff – Am I missing something?

[Author]

Posts