Looking back at Samuels opening post, I can understand the reasoning behind why he has chosen to utilise the SC4 faceplate and standard 3-Jaw 125mm chuck on his mini-lathe.
For what I am about to say, my comments are born out of safety concerns.
The SIEG mini-lathe headstock is designed to support a specific spindle length through ball raced bearings used to support an 80mm chuck, with related expected loads. Similarly, the box section of the headstock casting ‘should be’ 16mm~18mm thick or a little more,.. enough to support ball, angular contact, or taper roller bearings of thickness 16~18mm. To support larger diameter chucks, usually the headstock design should be such that it is longer, to hold a longer spindle, or incorporate angular contact/taper roller bearings to support 100mm chuck, and/or combined with a thicker box section, to support thicker/wider bearings…. all dependent on increase in loads spread over the length of the spindle shaft to obtained better balance and accuracy.
The weight of the mini-lathe castings are therefore designed for light weight hobby use. The positives being that it can be moved easily. If used within its designed limitations, the machine should work fine. When used outside its limitations, probabilities of mechanical and/or electrical failure increase depending on various factors.
ELECTRICAL FAILURES: Below are examples of failure probabilities, based on which version of SIEG mini-lathe this installation is put on:
C2 brushed motor or similar – without overload protection – probability of failure over time > 80%
C2/C3 brushed motor or similar – with overload protection – Probability of failure over time > 60%
SC2/SC3 brushless motor belt drive – with overload protection – Probability of failure over time > 50%
By putting on heavier chucks, you are drawing on more power to drive the chuck. Then if you add heavier stock which you wish to turn, once again requires more power. So again, motor and board will need to work harder. Then there is intermittent load / shock load and power surge (U.K. dirty un-regulated power) to add to the mix.
Note: I am not prepared to give this comparison for competitor brushless versions – most of which have belt and gear drive with high/lo gears. SIEG brushless motor mini-lathes do not have hi/low gears.
MECHANICAL FAILURES: Mini-lathe is designed for use with an 80mm chuck. Higher the weight of chuck, the more the chance of breaking hi/low gears if using a mini-lathe which has such an arrangement. Vibration can increase, and if ball bearings are installed – they will wear quickly. With abnormal loads/shocks, over a prolonged period of time, probabilities of fracture in components/casting can also increase.
I am aware that ARC sells a 100mm backplate and 100mm chuck for use on mini-lathe. This is based on demand, but at the same time, if one considers to make such a modification, ARC would suggest replacing standard ball raced bearings to angular contact ball bearings or tapper roller bearings, if the machine is to be used with a permanent change to 100mm chuck, rather than intermittent use with a 100mm chuck.
Above points relate to machine safety. One should also consider one own personal safety. So if a user decides to consider installation ideas outside the designed limitations, then they need to be aware of issues which can arise, especially from prolonged use of such modifications.
I hope that Samuel has or will consider/keep these issues in mind when using his machine after having made these modifications.
Ketan at ARC