Craftex CT089

[Max Simons]

Hi Guys,

I have the Craftex CT089 13x24" metal lathe from busy bee. Im having a few issues. Firstly, the tailstock doesn't seem to want to center properly. It has an adjustment on it to move it in our out, but the issue i have it that it kind of "twists" on the bed when you apply the cam lock. The other issue is that the head stock seems to have alot of "Ballslap" and it quite noisy. When i run it at any speed over 450rpm, the chuck kind of "chatters" like its out of balance or something. I have read that some guys replace all the chinese bearings with good quality ones and this is supposed to help quite a bit. Has anybody ever attempted this? Maybe my expectations are just too high for a chinese machine.....?

 

[Tom Kitta]

Well I just sold the CT089 a week ago. I can confirm the tail-stock issue - it wobbles like 5mm or so. Usually centre drill actually centres it.

Not sure about the headstock - agree that there is balance issue at 450rpm with larger items - then it goes away at higher RPM or lower RPM.

The bearings on the CT089 are certainly cheap - they are huge for this class of a lathe - they have to after all go around a shaft of a 2 inch diameter or so. I would think that it would be expensive to replace these bearings. Also you may have a problem with the casting they sit in.

Others said you can make a good machine out of that lathe - maybe. I never find out.

 

[Max Simons]

I agree, I would like to find out what modifications that others have made.

 

[Tom Kitta]

For the tail-stock you can machine a new plate - bigger one under it. I think that the cast part of the tail-stock has too much slop but a larger plate under it should set it without that wobble. This was a suggestion I have received.

No idea about the head-stock.

 

[PeterT]

I'm trying to get a handle on the tailstock slide assembly because it looks like 2 square shoulder edges (only). Does it have an adjustable gib strip or something? Maybe the fix is to make a new, larger base plate clone but with a Vee notch to engage the bed Vee? Otherwise, yeah, I could see that being a potential issue.

 

[Max Simons]

Great ideas on the tailstock guys, I am going try and pull it apart and post some pictures.

 

[Tom Kitta]

Well, the V is for the saddle not the tail-stock - there should be another V on the other side of the bed for the tail-stock but that is missing on this lathe (makes it cheaper to make). I think that the area the red arrows point to is simply a bit to small - its a loose fit - or the part under it is a loose fit. cannot do much about the red arrow thing unless you try to re-build the casting - but the lower part can be re-made to fit better.

That is if the bed is not actually a bit off.

How does she cut? Mine always had issues with taper - had to offset the tail-stock - but when I did that given the problem you discovered it was hard to get it positioned just right.

 

[Max Simons]

You are right Tom, the red arrow part is a bit too narrow, oddly enough though, the other end is the right width, it's like it tapers a little towards the headstock end. it's cuts ok. I can't seem to get a good finish cut no matter what I do, it could just be the tooling, or my inexperience.

 

[Max Simons]

The tailstock has two detent balls on one side, maybe I can adjust them somehow. ...

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[PeterT]

My lathe uses the Veefurther from operator for tailstock base alignment. You're saying the geometry wouldn't work out to use the (only) Vee which is closer to operator for some reason?
Just to be clear, I'm saying make a new base block, but wider (towards operator side) & make the underside Vee cut in there to suit. The tailstock unit itself mounts the same way to the new base with lateral slot etc.

 

[PeterT]

something like so

 

[Tom Kitta]

Well you could use the same V for the saddle and the tailstock - main problem would be that you tailstock could not get too close to the machining part for say drilling. Also may be a problem with other operations.

Just put some tape on the tailstock and pretend it rides on the same V as the saddle and see whatever it would be OK.

If you can use same V you may need to modify the height of the tailstock - depending on your ultimate design.
Maybe you could use some "temporary" screw based V attachment for the tailstock?

 

[Max Simons]

I think that using the V would be a great idea! Only problem being ......I don't have a milling machine. I would have to find someone to machine it......might be cheaper to buy a new lathe.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[PeterT]

I'm not clear on what you are saying Tom. My tailstock position is similarly limited by where my cross slide carriage is positioned. It can only go as far until they meet (when red arrow closes to zero). So for close-in drilling, yes I move the cross slide close to the headstock. But with chuck & part extending from left & tailstock chuck & arbor extending from right, I can drill holes no problem. If he makes the new tailstock base the exact same height as existing, but with Vee on underside, mounting the tailstock unit the same way should yield the same height, no? Or is that not possible for some reason?

 

[PeterT]

The new base would replace existing base like green box, but tailstock would mount in same way. That's what I'm getting at.

 

[Max Simons]

As you can see from the pictures, there should be more than enough meat on the new base to ride on the V without affecting the height. And there should also be lots of clearance for drilling.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[PeterT]

Here is my etcha-sketch

 

[PeterT]

Now that I see Max's pics, it almost looks like the vertical sections in bedways must have decent finish? Are they ground? This what I was asking originally - there is no gib or adjustment strip to close the gap here or on the other side?

 

[Max Simons]

Here is my etcha-sketch

Damn good etcha sketch!

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[PeterT]

What are these circle thingy's for? Can they unscrew & make up the slider gap, or maybe thats just wishful thinking on my part?