Anyone reaming dies???

No I haven't Butch. We _had_ them in gunsmithing school (never used them) and I've heard and read about them, taper boring for flex VS straight, wallowing the centers etc and always been afraid to get into it :) plus I've got a cheap little lathe, I don't trust ANYthing day to day....(not that I would on an expensive machine either, unless I ran it every day)

I'm guessing that what you're saying is that Troy's dies are good enough that given a solid "colleted" support one can just chuck them up and bore?

thanks

al
 
Phil, no I'm not yanking anyone's chain.

I've finally been shown how to make identical chambers easily and now I'm trying to decide whether or not I can make identical dies. Currently the wait on decent dies is 6-12mo.

I'm too old to bail in hand-over-fist and just "try stuff" to see if it works or not. I need to have a well thought out plan. Right now my sticking point is as described, I don't have a good plan for aligning the hole if this alignment proves necessary.

I've had dies made by many professionals, not all of them are satisfactory. Not many of them are in fact. I'm sure that they were all good enough for most people.

al
 
Well well WELL....... Joe Duke just emailed me and re-described what he and Sam have been doing and ba-da-BING!!

It clicked.... (sometimes I'm slooww)

These two have recognized and solved my problem neatly! And are actually DOING it, have actually DONE it.

Which is huge.

Thank You Duke's!

al
 
I'm almost embarrassed to say, I still have not recognized the problem. Other than your lathe needs some work. If you're working on something that's real light, and you're constantly having trouble with it that adds to your setup times, then pleas just sell it and get a nice used lathe somewhere that was a good one when new. If it's just the chuck, you can replace it you know? If it's just the jaws, you can take a ceramic or CBN insert and bore them. There is this misconception that hard jaws can't be bored, well, that's not true. Now, I'll admit, a new chuck will be a damn site cheaper than a box of CBN inserts, but if you can get one somewhere, even a broken one, it'll work great for what you want. And ceramics are cheap (comparatively).

As best I can tell from reading this thread, the trouble isn't in the parts, it's in your machine. And there's no reason you shouldn't fix it. The time spent on that will be made up on the next two parts you put in it. Maybe just pull the chuck, pull anything behind it that looks like it is easily removable, and clean those parts. Maybe there's a chip or some dirt in the chuck taper or on the face where it mounts. Look for stuff that's been smashed in so hard its now connected. Feel around. Make sure it's clean.

I could almost bet there's folks who know me reading this thread, laughing, thinking about what would happen if Ole Phil had a tool that didn't work as intended. Lifespan in current fom = short...
 
4Mesh said:
I'm almost embarrassed to say, I still have not recognized the problem. Other than your lathe needs some work. If you're working on something that's real light, and you're constantly having trouble with it that adds to your setup times, then pleas just sell it and get a nice used lathe somewhere that was a good one when new. If it's just the chuck, you can replace it you know? If it's just the jaws, you can take a ceramic or CBN insert and bore them. There is this misconception that hard jaws can't be bored, well, that's not true. Now, I'll admit, a new chuck will be a damn site cheaper than a box of CBN inserts, but if you can get one somewhere, even a broken one, it'll work great for what you want. And ceramics are cheap (comparatively).

As best I can tell from reading this thread, the trouble isn't in the parts, it's in your machine. And there's no reason you shouldn't fix it. The time spent on that will be made up on the next two parts you put in it. Maybe just pull the chuck, pull anything behind it that looks like it is easily removable, and clean those parts. Maybe there's a chip or some dirt in the chuck taper or on the face where it mounts. Look for stuff that's been smashed in so hard its now connected. Feel around. Make sure it's clean.

I could almost bet there's folks who know me reading this thread, laughing, thinking about what would happen if Ole Phil had a tool that didn't work as intended. Lifespan in current fom = short...
Click to expand...


Well, nope,

It really doesn't matter what sort of lathe I've access to, I'd still do the same thing.

I don't trust machinery nor parts to be true. And if just one out of ten chucks up crooked I eat up all the profit from the ten...........

I'd no more just chuck up and hope than I'd barrel between centers ;)

al
 
I dunno Phil. I don't know that much about machine tools specifically, just something about machines in general. If the bearings are worn in the headstock, it doesn't much matter what holding device you hang on it. Or what level of precision you can measure when the machine is not in motion. Dynamic and static are just different worlds. Will boring the chuck jaws work for that -- will the machine reach an equilibrium at speed? I suppose it depends on how much wear.

And all bearings wear out, at least, when there is starting and stopping. Fluid bearings like in you car's crankshaft last forever as long as the oil pressure is maintained (e.g. engine left running). People forget that Murphy was dead serious with his law -- "Whatever can fail, will" is just shorthand for "mean time before failure."

EDIT

And Al, last time I read how Jim Borden barrels a rifle, at least one of the critical operations was done between centers . . . (I'd imagine Jim would say they're all critical, or he wouldn't do them . . .) Well, I've been wrong before.
 
Last edited:
It really doesn't matter what sort of lathe I've access to, I'd still do the same thing.

I don't trust machinery nor parts to be true.
Click to expand...
Well, If I had a machine I had no confidence in, I'd stop using it. At least for anything that mattered.

If you drop your calipers, and see that they no longer repeat, do you keep using them? To me, they're not even a woodworking tool at that point. I bet you'd replace them Al. And you should. So, why would working on the lathe parts that need it, be any different?

Charles,

Will boring the jaws help that? Yes. Will it fix it? No. Should it still be done? Yes.

Dynamic vs Static. If the machine has so many problems that dynamic vs static enters into this, then I guess we're back to my original point of all the indicating not meaning squat. This sorta brings me to mind of showing up at a 1K match with a rifle that doesn't shoot, has the stock screws loose, loose rest or none at all, loose scope mounts, and then spending inordinate time trying to reload good ammo. Then saying that the good ammo won't make matters worse, therefore it's justified. Well no, it's already pretty bad as is, so it's not gonna get worse, not that we'll notice anyhow. If there are problems with the platform, then fix them. If Al has no confidence in the machine, then it needs fixed.

Bearings... Nice thing about em is they're replaceable. Nobody says you need million dollar ones. If it's a cheapo lathe, then a cheapo bearing will do just fine. They don't need to be ceramic (though that'd be nice!). Preload is adjustable to some extent, much like old car wheel bearings (Timken). If the bearings are not shot, then adjustment is usually possible. If they are shot, then why use that machine for anything important? Somebody above suggested trading up...
 
Dies are threaded. They are not going to repeat dead nuts when you change them. Threads are the worst thing when you want to have an accurate register. Threads are for tension.

This, I would like to hear more about.

IIRC, Jim Borden uses a high-dollar eight jaw for barrel work. After getting the outside of the barrel dead nuts -- I believe he uses a slave on the muzzle end -- they simply put the barrel in the chuck. If the bore is not running true, they need only clean the jaws. Their setup is that good. The chuck is not bucked.
Click to expand...
 
TRA I believe it was in some issue of Precision Shooting after 2000, probably a general one about Jim's new shop.

I've been an IBS member since 1996 or so, but found Precision Shooting was getting me madder an madder as time past. You remember the old joke "Doctor, it hurts when I do this." And the reply "So don't do that." Works for me. Every once in a while I don't write out "No PS" quite prominently on my IBS renewal form, and it slips through. Anyway, long story about why I can't give you the issue number.
 
Charles,

I don't want to say for sure, but more likely you're recalling this incorrectly. I'd be betting on him using a 8" 6 Jaw chuck.

Like this one. Thi's has been suggested elsewhere in the thread iirc (emphasis on iirc!) If not, it was recently in one of Jackie's threads.
http://compare.ebay.com/like/310240717457?ltyp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes&var=sbar

I did a google image search (advanced) for an 8 jaw chuck and could find none. Not to say they don't exist, but that would certainly explain why they are high dollar if they do. They are few.
 
Actually I was not interested with the number of jaws, as I was about the rest of the statement. It appeared to be a different twist to all the hubbub about chambering.
 
I've seen collets with 8 divisions, maybe that's what he is remembering. It would also make sense that it would be more repeatable than a chuck.

And depending on what they are, it might also explain the high dollar part.
 
Best I can recall, and unless my memory is completely shot, it was an article on Jim Borden in PS, after the year 2000. There have been more than two-three articles about Jim and Borden Accuracy in PS over the years. There are a whole host of PS issues I never received (at my request) or threw away. Maybe it was a 6-jaw. The time would be better spent looking at PS annual indexes, if PS has those.

There was also an article in PS on Jerry Simonson (spelling?), including his preferred method of chambering, which is different than all the recent BR Central posts.\

Anyway, the point to Al was that working between centers is not all bad. IIFC, Al thinks quite highly of Jim -- well, so do we all, but Al is harder to please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top