In MEW300 I proposed a small adaptable lathe that could be easily changed in stages from a simple basic lathe through to a version with powered axes then finally onto a fully CNC lathe that could also be used manually or a mix of manual/ CNC as desired. The version show has a cast iron bed but this could be simplified with rectangular steel bars. I attach a screenshot. There are many more screenshots in my album.

Alan

Modern lathes aren't that much different to old ones, so there's little point in reinventing the wheel. I suggest that there could be reasonable market for some useful upgrades to a common machine, along with improved fit and finish. Even if that added 50% to the cost of current lathe, the price would still be affordable and reasonable.

So:

start with a 10×22 with a 1.5Kw motor and VFD for reliable variable speed. That takes a similar space to a Myford, but has a more useful range.

Ensure all the controls are properly installed, and work smoothly. I was amazed at how much better mine became after some basic, unskilled work with a scraper.

Paint it well, after adequate preparation.

add an electronic lead screw for all screw cutting and power feeds. This would need a sensible interface, not the four buttons and two-line screen beloved of DIY jobs…

Standard DI chuck fitting.

Branded bearings.

As big a spindle bore as practical.

DROs that don't get in the way of anything.

Increase the cross slide travel so the entire diameter can be turned without any clever setups.

Design some accessories that don't currently exist, like taper turning attachment, milling slide and an electronic headstock divider.

All that would make a good machine even better, and I suspect wouldn't add a huge amount to the manufacturing cost – they already get painted, and the electronic components ought to compare well with the existing mechanical gearing.

The 10 x 22 or even a bit longer that Nick mentions would be the better size and avoid the need for a gap bed like the Myford has. 3.5 ctr height or mini-lathe swing is not ideal for model engineering as so many of the old designs are based on what could be swung in a Myford's gap, that's one reason I got rid of my Emcomat 8.6 as the 200mm swing limited the engines I could make. The American design need a bit more as 10" or so flywheels are quite common and just fit my 280

You could start with the bed casting of one of those, Neils has already shown us that a big bore spindle can be fitted, give the nose of the tailstock a bit more overhang and you are getting close with the main large components, just put them together to a high spec.

Wouldn't a "teach in" CNC make more sense today? As in a CNC lathe with some sensible manual controls.

That would be the next step for my suggestion, especially if you made the taper turning attachment a stepper motor on the cross slide. Then you would have most of the mechanical components for full CNC control, and would only need a viable controller. Which would make a good option.

I think a modern polyvee belt would cure those problems, certainly my 5000rpm spindle on the CNC is smooth and quiet though a new set of matched bearings would set you back a few hundred quid.

The big advantage of separate motor is what most others seem to want here and that is a big bore through the spindle

I think that a woodworking lathe has been made this way.

That is the one I had in mind; I wonder why the idea never caught on.

The lathe allowed a bowl to "embrace" the spindle nose end of the motor.

That would then allow the DRO to operate from the encoders on the servos (an idea I'm not mad about, but would save a lot of cost, separate linear encoders would be an easy add-on though)

Motor mounted encoders are the usual arrangement on most CNC lathes I have come across – all of the 7 CNC lathes at my last employment (ranging from 200 dia. x 500 BC to 700 dia.x 3500.BC) were motor encoder position feedback. Scales are rare on lathes – in 27 years working for a CNC rebuild / retrofit company before my last employment I can only recall a couple of vertical borer installations where the customer requested scales. Occasionally some machines used separately mounted encoders driven directly off the ballscrews (rather than measuring through timing belt reductions) but, in practice, motor mounted encoders work just fine. One advantage of encoders is the ability to use backlash compensation, which isn't available with scales (you can only compensate for the lost motion within the readhead mounting arrangement on the scale) which can give better contouring performance. If extreme accuracy is paramount with an encoder arrangement, most controls made over at least the last 25 years have non-linear axis compensation (pitch error comp) to "map out" ballscrew errors.

Question :

How do you make a small fortune manufacturing manual machine tools in the UK ?

Answer :

Start with a very large one !

Best I can make out at the moment there are only 2 manufacturers of small manual lathes remaining in the UK – Myford (Mytholmroyd) and Cowells (Essex). If you thought that the asking price for a current new Myford S7 was high, have a look at Cowells price list ! That all the others have either stopped making such machines, gone to the wall or sub-contracted manufacture to the Far East says it all, really. The cost of setting up to make such machines here, labour costs (if you could find a sufficiently skilled workforce) cost of raw materials (if you could find a UK foundry capable of making the required castings), plus product certification costs etc.mean it is not realistically possible to come up with a UK made product that could be priced within sight of imported machines.

Talk of going with ELS or CNC systems means going for at least partial (ELS) of full (CNC) interlocked guarding – yet more cost. Harrisons went this route with their Alpha range of machines based on the M series manual lathes. They "got away" with partial guarding on their basic ELS equivalent machines because they were not capable of automatic cycle operatation, but later – more capable – machines that could run programs had to be fully guarded. And they are not made here any more – UK manufacture ceased at least 10 years ago (probably a lot more – time flies ! ) in favour of making them in the Far East.

Integrated spindle motors for lathes are a thing from several manufacturers – they are sold in component form comprising a sleeve with permanent magnets attached to press over the spindle, a stator cartridge with windings fitted into a laminated core that presses into the headstock casting & an encoder to fit the spindle on the outside of the rear bearing cap for commutation and positional feedback to the drive & control system. They can be forced air or liquid cooled. You don't want to ask the price !

The UK machine tool industry is largely gone & is, I feel, unlikely to come back any time soon – if ever. The skills base has gone, the cost of rebuilding the industry is just too high & the returns are unlikly to keep the current crop of "instant gratification" investors happy. If Communist China gets to be too expensive as a mnaufaucturing base, then India is probably the next most likely candidate to take over at the lower price end of the market.

Nigel B.

If I got given a bunch of money and told to make a British based small machine tool manufacturer, well first I'd have a nervous break down.

But once I'd recovered I'd probably go down the Sherline business plan of having highly modular machine tools but at a ML7 size. Gives a wide target market from hobbyist to commercial use. You're product is the perfect match for someone, assuming it has the right combination of parts. The accuracy required for interchangeable parts makes it somewhat difficult for SIEG to wrestle in on your product.

Considering where I've seen Myfords scattered about they must have gotten a steady income from garages and light workshops

All mechanical lathes will still be functional in 50 years assuming reasonable storage. Indeed two of my lathes are more than 50 years old. The circuit boards on my 6” lathe’s DRO, plus both main and control boards on my SX3 mill drill, all have failed, with replacements very expensive. Just now the digital Z axis readout on the SX3 has failed. A not cheap digital calliper failed. So you can see why I would not go near an all electronic lathe.

I don't think it is fair to compare Cowells to Myford or hobby lahes generally. Cowells are high precision machines that are used mostly by professionals. They do show that there is a market for high perormance machines.

Guarding and machine safety is a issue. Doing it full on with all safety certified components is VERY expensive. A lot is down to the safety assesment. These can result in requirements from a swing down guard to full interlocked guarding and injection braking.

Think about why a pillar drill needs a chuck guard but a pistol drill does not. You can generally let go of a pistol drill in an incident.
Possibly a safety line across the front of a lathe would be enough? Assuming a modern motor drive with fast braking.
Asking a consultant is likely to give an overly conservative solution. Most suppliers do not seem too bothered about these things. I've mentioned before that a lot of equipment for sale does not appear to meet basic safety requirements from even a cursory examnation of photos and documentation.

Robert.