Universal Grinding machine construction series?

[John Stevenson 1Participant @johnstevenson1]

Diane,

Go for it, it will be well received.

There are three landmarks in the right of passage for a Model Engineer.

The first is screwcutting.

The second is parting off

And the last one is buying a set of quorn grinder parts.

Note I said buy as once you have these parts you are then a member of the clan who owns the castings.

[Peter TuckerParticipant @petertucker86088]

Hi Diane,

I'm very interested. Pleas put it in MEW so I can read it.

Peter.

[NJHParticipant @njh]

Yep Diane

I too would be interested – MEW is surely the right place?

John you are nearly right and I'm at stage 3 – but with Stent castings! ( I don't need to buy the Quorn too to complete the rite of passage do I?) OK there are lots of other bits too as well as castings – all quite interesting to make and it is a project I have a go at from time to time. It's now about 70% done. Who knows, one day I might even finish it. Cost effective? ……… well you can buy an awful lot of cutters for the cost of the components but then USING the thing 'aint really the main objective!

Norman

Edited By NJH on 11/09/2013 19:34:52

[donkeyParticipant @donkey]

I am looking forward to it already. Will it start in the next issue lol.

bri

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

I would be interested, but not inbuilding the complete thing, just getting ideas. I would hope that there is plenty of discussion of whys and wherefores, not just drawings and a few pointers.

My instinct says that this should be a series for MEW, however, although many of use found Stepperhead interesting and useful, some MEW readers have declared their attention span does not exceed three pages, let alone three issues.

From a purely sales perspective, it's ongoing series and writers you get to know (and we have sadly lost several due to the march of time over the past decade) that keep interest, as much as good content.

Neil

[John CoatesParticipant @johncoates48577]

Sounds great and probably something I would build

I would expect it in MEW as that is why I subscribed to this in the first place

Having found that recent a shaper series is in ME has made me think that maybe MEW is not the magazine I thought it would be

If this goes in ME then I fail to see the future relevance of MEW

My 2p worth

John

[Anonymous]

Posted by John Stevenson on 11/09/2013 19:11:35:

There are three landmarks in the right of passage for a Model Engineer.

The first is screwcutting.

The second is parting off

And the last one is buying a set of quorn grinder parts.

Ah well, looks like I'm never going to be a model engineer. Screwcutting and parting off are routine, but I'm never going to buy a set of castings for the Quorn, as I've already got a Clarkson T&C grinder. Does having the 'Quorn' book count?

Regards,

Andrew

[Harold Hall 1Participant @haroldhall1]

There seems to be some considering that MEW is on its way out. I do see a copy of ME every issue but over some 70 years I have only purchased a handful, and then mainly for the advertisments. If MEW did go out of print I certainly would not purchase ME (Sorry Diane you are doing a great job) even if it was split 50 50, modelling/workshop, and I am sure that there are many like me. Perhaps go for Home Shop Machinist, but then probably I am past needing such as my workshop activity is in decline.

Harold

[Harold Hall 1Participant @haroldhall1]

Perhaps I should have added that I feel there is a misconception on the part of some that most readers of MEW are also model engineers.

Unless things have changed, the early surveys showed that less than half had any involvement with model engineering and quite a number of these indicated that other workshop activities, tool making for example, took a larger proportion of their workshop time.

Harold

[RobboParticipant @robbo]

Posted by Andrew Johnston on 11/09/2013 16:56:53:

Posted by CoalBurner on 11/09/2013 16:38:12:

Yep, it gets my vote whichever magazine runs it

Half in one, half in the other?

Andrew

As LBSC might have said, words in one and music in t'other.

Would the CNC bit be used for all functions, or is it an option and manual use available.

Sounds good, and I already believe that MEW is on the way out.

Phil

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

> Does having the 'Quorn' book count?

I claim membership of this elite fraternity!

I started making the 'Trent' grinder but stopped when it got to the point where it does all I need, but is clearly not finished, if that make sense?

Neil

[Martin CottrellParticipant @martincottrell21329]

Hi Diane,

Count me in as interested! I reserve judgment as to whether or not I would build one until reading the preamble to the construction series to assess the features and benefits of the machine. Building aside, I always find well written articles are full of hints and tips that can be applied to other projects.

As for which magazine the article should appear in, the obvious assumption would be MEW but as editor of ME I assume that ME is where you propose running the articles. My personal opinion is that interesting articles have been spread too thinly between both magazines over the last 12-18 months to the point where i find myself reading the odd few pages in each magazine then chucking them aside to join the " might but probably wont bother reading later" pile. I would be happy to drop MEW if a few more quality tooling articles were incorporated into ME. I only subscribe to both mags as I'm afraid I might miss something good if I drop one or the other…..long gone are the days when I used to be banging on the newsagents door to get my hands on the next copy of ME on the day of publication, take it home and read cover to cover in one sitting. Sorry for the off topic rant but others have already chucked in their two pennies worth so I thought I'd chuck mine in too!

Regards, Martin.

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

Many thanks all for your considered responses. i am delighted to see they are, in the main, positive.
Regarding which magazine – as editor of Model Engineer my concern is what is best for Model Engineer, which is why I have asked the question here. I was hoping that I would not get a negative response from those who only take Model Engineer for the model making aritcles and would be averse to such an article. Contrary to my expectations, I don't think anyone has expressed that view. Those who only take MEW and who would be interested in this article will perhaps have to think about a solution to that dilema.
I should have mentioned that if we run this it will only start in the New Year or Spring of next year. The machine in question is not quite finished. I would propose to run it every other issue and either two or four pages each time so it will certainly not overpower the magazine.

Further comments would be welcome but for now, once again, thanks to those who have taken the time to post.

Diane

[NJHParticipant @njh]

Hi Diane

How about a bit of warning here when you are about to start the series? I will then review my allegiance !

Norman

[Gone AwayParticipant @goneaway]

Posted by Diane Carney on 11/09/2013 22:19:58:

Those who only take MEW and who would be interested in this article will perhaps have to think about a solution to that dilema.

At $228 a year for the two paper mags ($142 digital) , it didn't take long thinking about it. I don't think my interest runs that high.

[John Stevenson 1Participant @johnstevenson1]

Posted by Robbo on 11/09/2013 21:05:45:

Sounds good, and I already believe that MEW is on the way out.

Phil

Hope someone tells David so he can switch the lights out……….

[Gray62Participant @gray62]

Diane,

How about giving us a 'taster' of what may be to come, maybe a short article giving an overview of the machine and its capabilites, along with maybe a few pictures of the machine as is or a General Assembly drawing.

CB

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

Hi CB

That's a reasonable idea. Maybe once we get our new website template an intro would make a good website article. I'll think on that, thank you.

Diane

[_Paul_Participant @_paul_]

A long drawn out and neccessarily complicated article, might that be better as a stand alone publication rather than eat up valuable Magazine space?

Are you looking to expand readership? as I can imagine it being rather off putting for a new reader picking up the Mag in Smiths and flicking through it only to find many pages of a complicated part article.

Paul

.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Posted by Diane Carney on 11/09/2013 22:19:58:

I was hoping that I would not get a negative response from those who only take Model Engineer for the model making aritcles and would be averse to such an article. Contrary to my expectations, I don't think anyone has expressed that view.

Diane

Thats because I am too nice to say it I subscribe to ME as I like to make models if I was interested in making workshop equipment I would take MEW, if I liked both then I'd subscribe to both.

I can put up with the odd couple of pages that you have introduced recently but would not want to see more.

As for all those that say thay want to see the article yet also say they feel MEW is going down hill would this not be the type of article that could bring it back from the edge rather than more variations on tool height gauges, vice modifications etc?

J

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Following Jason's comments …

I do not make "models" and have therefore never subscribed to ME; although I do have a collection of old issues, purchased at an average of about 10p each. (At which price, of course, they are great value!)

When MEW was launched, I presumed that this would provide the range of articles more relevant to my own interests, and that ME would focus on models.

200+ issues later … it is evident that I was wrong.

MichaelG.

[jason udallParticipant @jasonudall57142]

As I have said previously. Weather I renew my subs to mew is under review. This muddies the water…should I be considering taking me INSTEAD?
(Esp. Since renewing mew seems to be against the flow on the website. …)

Edited By jason udall on 12/09/2013 09:21:59

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

Posted by JasonB on 12/09/2013 07:57:27:

Posted by Diane Carney on 11/09/2013 22:19:58:

I was hoping that I would not get a negative response from those who only take Model Engineer for the model making aritcles and would be averse to such an article. Contrary to my expectations, I don't think anyone has expressed that view.

Diane

Thats because I am too nice to say it I subscribe to ME as I like to make models if I was interested in making workshop equipment I would take MEW, if I liked both then I'd subscribe to both.

I can put up with the odd couple of pages that you have introduced recently but would not want to see more.

As for all those that say thay want to see the article yet also say they feel MEW is going down hill would this not be the type of article that could bring it back from the edge rather than more variations on tool height gauges, vice modifications etc?

J

A fair enough comment, Jason, and it might be more representative than has come across so far. This is what I am trying to establish. Although I think that if it were to run it would have to be, as I said, every other issue at most, with 'one-off' Workshop Topics in the alternates. Model making is always going to be the primary concern of Model Engineer, don't worry. We also have some first rate model making series on the stocks. It's a struggle to fit it all in these days!

Diane

[ZiggarParticipant @ziggar]

Posted by Diane Carney on 11/09/2013 22:19:58:

 

 

It's a struggle to fit it all in these days!

Diane

 

 

really ?

then why has DC1 been begging for at least the last year for more articles ? if its that difficult to fit it all in then why cant you let some of the workshop topics you've just mentioned be published in MEW rather than in ME ? MEW is more akin to a trade mag now than a hobbyist mag. Especially when even the Eds special section contains nothing more than blatant adverts.

looking back through this thread im seeing the majority of answers are saying that MEW is the right place for an article like this. But obviously that doesnt have any bearing on the matter. Its going in ME no matter what anyone says.

Why not just merge the two mags together now, rather than in the future. Get the uproar and complaints over with now and merge the two as im pretty sure that thats the intent anyway. Gradually introduce workshop/tooling articles into ME [as your doing] so that the change over is hardly noticed in ME land. Then all your left with is just a load of MEW subscribers left out in the open without the mag they paid for.

 

Z

 

PS. i also think this article should be in MEW…….

Edited By Ziggar on 12/09/2013 11:40:08

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

Posted by Ziggar on 12/09/2013 11:39:22:

looking back through this thread im seeing the majority of answers are saying that MEW is the right place for an article like this. But obviously that doesnt have any bearing on the matter. Its going in ME no matter what anyone says.

Really? You obviously know more than me. Mind you, I'm only the Editor…

Can I just remind all readers that I am not responsible for MEW and have no say in, or responsibility for, its content. The two are completely independent magazines. The purpose of this thread is to gauge the acceptibility of an article for Model Engineer only.

Diane

[Author]

Posts