For some holders, it is the thickness of the area where the clamp fits into the woodruf slot.

Others , it is the ground Vee profile is too thick or too far from the woodruf slot.

Mine, I got a carbide single point milling insert cutter, will cut Oring grooves etc on a lathe, and recut the slot area that the clamp fits into. On one of the holders, the slot was not only too thick by about 0.8mm, it was too narrow by more than 1mm .

I have the Original Dickson blocks , and the holders have a W stamped on them. I did buy a copy one from a supply place in Auckland, and all it’s holders also interchange superbly.

It appears to me, that unless you get them from who ever originally made them, the copy sets are a gamble as to if they will fit.  Getting a generic block, and it’s holders from the same supplier, they should all fit.

It is very frustrating when they are not made correctly.

The Myford units with a W stamped on were made by a fellow down in the west country for Myford. I bought some tooling off him, an interesting fellow. Noel.

If you have a milling machine it’s not so difficult to make your own, I made some from EN8 for my Emco 5 cnc lathe and have not found any problem with variable tool references when changing tools within a program run, link below to the Youtube video for those interested, mostly at actual speed so quite a long video but it’s simple to skip over.

https://youtu.be/KNo82KCiGdo?si=Fgqtp09ScPrKRRE1

Emgee

Dave, Mgnbuk was talking of the size of toolpost and holder heights not the size compatability of originals and copies.

Oh and Dickson never made them, they were made by Wessex Engineering hence the “W” mentioned above.

On 21 November 2024 at 12:40 SillyOldDuffer Said:

[…] Another is to buy from a seller like Myford, who maintain consistency over time.   But their holders are on the pricey side, making it oh so tempting to look for cheaper on the web…

Dave

This is a delicate matter, and I will not be surprised if my post is deleted by the Moderators … but here goes:

’cheaper on the web’ was in this case a purchase from RDG

I believe it is common knowledge [it certainly should be] that although RDG and Myford are separate Companies, some individuals are involved in both.

I have no idea what, if any, inter-company trading occurs; but it is tempting to think that some items are ‘made’ by RDG and the best of those are selected to become Myford items. … I hasten to add that there would be nothing inappropriate or unreasonable in this !

MichaelG.

Apologies for my misunderstanding, Jason.

… I regret the subtlety of the Amazon listing must be lost on me 🙁

MichaelG.

.

On 21 November 2024 at 17:35 Michael Gilligan Said:

Apologies for my misunderstanding, Jason.

… I regret the subtlety of the Amazon listing must be lost on me 🙁

MichaelG.

.

You image is also lost to me and the members.

A close look at the offerings on the Myford website and the RDG Website will show the differences but I’ll take a photo tomorrow which will be clearer and make it obvious that the “Dickson style” are not made with the same process as the originals or those on the Myford site.

I have been able to modify one batch (Chronos) with a belt sander and another (RDG) with a Woodruff cutter but it did render the cutter not much use for anything else.

outweighed 2:1 by “Myford size” and “Dixon style” Not even DICKSON

I await clarification in due course

Can’t personally get excited about any of this nonsense

I still have a boxed set purchased from Beeston, as-yet unused because of domestic and health problems.

[ all the parts fit together as they should ]

There are more important things in life.

MichaelG.

I hope Nigel (mgnbuk) will be along to help icon soon.

Naughty Dave !

As Jason has already pointed out, you are taking a quote about one aspect of QCTP selection (measuring up the lathe to determine most suitable size of toolpost) and using it in another, completely different, aspect (inter-operability of components from different manufactures). Tut Tut !

I guess I must have been lucky with the latter – toolholders purchased from RDG & Chronos at various times fit both the original Myford supplied (W marked – bought from the Beeston Spares Counter) toolpost and an RDG purchased rear mounted QC toolpost just as well as those supplied with the Myford set. So it would appear that any tolerance or dimension differences there may be between my examples don’t interfere with normal operation. Same goes for the Indian made Ebay purchased larger set I bought for the Warco GH600 – not all the holders came from the same maker by the looks of them (many detail differences from those supplied with the basic set), but they all fit and function just fine.

Nigel B.

As this thread has come up again I took the photo I mentioned several posts back.

On the right is an original “W” marked tool holder, on the left two differently sourced similar style holders.

The green shows the obvious differences which would seem to indicate that each has been made on a different production line in a different factory so unlikely that cheaper ones are just rejects that do not meet the standards of the best ones which get sold at a premium with a premium name on them.

The red indicates where I have found the problem of fit is. The original is quite a bit thinner. Some of the similar style I have been able to thin the surface where the two are touching on a belt sander as that surface touched the post before the clamp was tight. Others have needed a woodruff cutter to get into the back as the piston would not extend out enough to allow them to fit. But all are usable and as the last lot cost me £50 for 4 that is a lot better than Bison or similar prices.

The original is also a couple of MM shorter which does give a wider adjustment range so touching on Nigel’s comments don’t make use of the established suppliers who publish the tool post sizes and then go and buy “the same” cheap one from elsewhere as it is unlikely to be the same. Also if shoping for additional holders visit the supplier or a show and take your post with you to test the fit.

It would also seem that Pratt Bernerd have the “Dickson” name and use it on their version, although they don’t do the small myford size the prices of what they do make are considerable.

If you are of a sensitive nature about your 4-way tool post don’t read this

On 27 November 2024 at 18:49 JasonB Said:

[…] obvious differences which would seem to indicate that each has been made on a different production line in a different factory so unlikely that cheaper ones are just rejects that do not meet the standards of the best ones which get sold at a premium with a premium name on them. […]

Just curious …Do you have an example of what Myford is currently selling, to compare with what RDG is selling ‘for Myford’ ?

… That is the question

MichaelG.