Jason.
Thank you for that explanation, you have told me this in the past, but I had forgotten. I'll look up that model as well for my education.
In John Hinkley's case, I checked through a selected number of pitches, both metric and imperial and I found the same degree of mismatch in both. Just using the figures straight from his chart and multiplying by the leadscrew pitch in the normal way [John quotes 3 mm] you will find that all the pitch results are too coarse by a factor of 4.5 times.
Thus, include that in the calculation as a preliminary reduction before Z1 [ 40/180 would allow for a sensible bore size on the lathe spindle] gives results which at last make sense. It is though, in my view, a very clumsy way of going about things, first of all gearing down and then gearing up again, certainly from 1/2 leadscrew pitch and coarser which will put a lot of loading on the gear teeth, some are quite low in tooth number as well.
The other thing that puzzled me was the appearance of a 63 tooth gear in the change wheel set up for a metric result on a metric leadscrew lathe. I can understand it being used for conversion to imperial pitches, but not that way. The maths works but they could be so much simpler.
Do these lathes not have a back gear set up of any sort to give screwcutting a better chance?
Regards
Brian