reform vs WW 8mm lathe

[Henry RancourtParticipant @henryrancourt22682]

I’ve been searching trying to learn the difference between the two lathe types. So far I’ve only found that the reform bed width might be smaller than a WW 8mm lathe. Is that true and are there other differences?

[OldironParticipant @oldiron]

Try looking under Boley on http://www.lathes.co.uk

[Henry RancourtParticipant @henryrancourt22682]

I’ve spent a few hours on the site and never found an info regarding dimensional differences or any other types of differences.

[Henry RancourtParticipant @henryrancourt22682]

I just found a Boley Leinen reform lathe for sale on a used tool site and it lists the bed diameter as 26mm. I have a Boley Leinen WW 8mm lathe and the bed diameter is 45mm. So that is one significant difference. Maybe there are more to find.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Quick answer:

The lathe shown here does not have a Webster Whitcomb bed.

Reform series lathes were available in either Geneva pattern, or like this ^^^

MichaelG.

[Henry Rancourt]

On Henry Rancourt Said:

[…] I have a Boley Leinen WW 8mm lathe and the bed diameter is 45mm […]

Sorry to contradict you, but the WW bed is trapezoidal

MichaelG.

[Henry RancourtParticipant @henryrancourt22682]

You should got to http://www.lathes.co.uk/ and do a search for watchmakers lathe bed styles. Scroll down to the 5th or 6th image and it shows what a WW lathe bed looks like. It is just like the one the video in the post above and just like my Boley Leinen WW 8mm lathe in the photo.

[Henry RancourtParticipant @henryrancourt22682]

this is image from http://www.lathes.co.uk 

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Apologies … I evidently mis-understood your opening post.

MichaelG.

[Henry RancourtParticipant @henryrancourt22682]

Just for clarification attached are photos of Geneva and WW pattern lathes.

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

One of my books has a chapter on lathe bed design, and, of course, I can’t find it!

From memory, there is no “right answer”, because each design balances pros and cons.  Typically: cost, strength (degree to which sag and twist are resisted), accuracy, precision, resetability, smoothness, and how well the saddle and tailstock are secured.   Multiple compromises possible, for many different reasons!   And some designs are proprietary, with a strong suspicion it was done for commercial reasons;  customers finding a few years after purchase that “only our accessories will fit”.

WW vs M – some thoughts

 

The book doesn’t get into Watchmaking lathes but looking at the WW and M bed profiles, I suggest:

• Both have similar strength and precision
• The WW style requires more machining than the M, hence more expensive.   Benefit is the bevels are further apart to resist rocking, and an accessory rail.
• The M-style bed is a valid simplification rather than a cheapening.   I guess the bevel position simplifies the design of the tailstock too, and anything else that clamps on to the bed.  Savings that can be passed on to the customer or added to the profits!
• Just a guess.  When these lathes were sold new:
  • traditionalists with plenty of cash would prefer the WW.
  • Cost conscious modernisers might prefer the M.

Other Examples

The book goes into flat-bed vs trapezoidal forms, and concludes flat-beds are inferior.  Originally flat beds were easier to make, but I think advances in grinding technology mean trapezoidal beds aren’t particularly difficult or costly today.

Also discusses gap vs girder beds.  Gaps add utility but weaken the structure, which needs to be strengthened underneath and this isn’t always done well.  Girder beds are stronger and easier to make, but they restrict the size of what can be turned.   Book concludes in favour of girders because they are more rigid.   Advice is buy a bigger lathe, don’t compromise with a gap.   But the book was written for manufacturing purchasers, not hobbyists, who might well vote “gap”.   What’s good and bad in lathes depends hugely on what they are used for.

If more is found about M vs WW I’d be interested to know.  Might be necessary to search the company archives for the paperwork.  Patents are often informative too. I struggle to find them, Michael is far better!

Dave

[rjenkinsgbParticipant @rjenkinsgb]

The Reform uses a visually similar profile bed to the WW, but scaled to around 2/3 the size at 30mm wide.

Both use the outer bevels for alignment, with clamping via the middle slot.

The two side by side:

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Thank You, rjenkinsgb

MichaelG.

[Henry RancourtParticipant @henryrancourt22682]

The Geneva bed was sometimes called a D bed because it was round with just a flat surface, usually as the side surface, but  I’ve seen some images showing the flat as the top surface.

[Henry RancourtParticipant @henryrancourt22682]

So, thinking that Geneva style beds are a thing from the past, I just realized that my Prazi SD300 has a Geneva style bed.

 

 

[SillyOldDuffer]

On SillyOldDuffer Said:

 

[…] If more is found about M vs WW I’d be interested to know.  Might be necessary to search the company archives for the paperwork.  Patents are often informative too. I struggle to find them, Michael is far better!

Dave

Dave …

The origins of the WW lathe are well-documented by Goodrich:

and the flame was borne thereafter by Fred. Derbyshire.

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search?q=pn%3DUS936422A

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search?q=pn%3DUS1168063A

MichaelG.

.

http://www.fwderbyshire.com

http://www.fwderbyshireinc.com

[Author]

Posts