Quick-change Chucks, anyone?

[Dan Case LR]

I'm only aware of two quick-change chucks on the market, the Nova Infinity system and Easy Wood Tools' Easy Chuck. Anyone here had hands on with one or both that can offer comments?

The Easy chuck looks interesting. I like the Speed Ring and the prominent "Made in USA". It's also the most spendy chuck in its class at $399, and it appears that the best price around is $379 (Amazon Prime).

The Nova Infinity looks interesting because I have 2 nova G3 chucks that I use with my midi lathe (lathe and chucks about to go up for sale, so upgrading then to the quick-change system isn't a consideration). The G3 chucks have served me well, and speak well of Nova's product, evbe though it's made in China. Lists at #329, commonly available for $269.

So the Easy chuck is $100 more. Is it worth the money?

Thanks!

D.

[Reed Gray]

I haven't used either, but I saw Carl Jacobson demo the Easy Wood chuck. I was impressed at how fast it changed out, and he said it was quicker and smoother than the Nova. I don't really need another chuck, but have been considering it.

robo hippy

[Dan Masshardt]

I've heard from 3-4 folks who are happy with the easy wood chuck. If I was only going to have one chuck, that might be it. But what fun would that be. :-)

There are several jaws available but not as many as nova.

[Dan Case LR]

I've heard from 3-4 folks who are happy with the easy wood chuck. If I was only going to have one chuck, that might be it. But what fun would that be. :-)

There are several jaws available but not as many as nova.



The Infinity jaw range doesn't include the full Nova jaw range, only a portion of it. Other old-style jaws can be used if you add the retrofit kit at $35 per jaw set. Only cost-effective if you already own the jaws.

D.

[John K Jordan]

I thought about the Nova then decided against it. The reason? I sometimes leave several partially finished projects or jam chucks held in jaws of several chucks. I would far prefer to buy two more chucks on sale than one expensive one with quick-change jaws.

I think I have 11 or 12 in my shop at the moment, with some loaned out. I usually keep several with identical jaws, the ones I use the most.

JKJ

[David Walser]

I thought about the Nova then decided against it. The reason? I sometimes leave several partially finished projects or jam chucks held in jaws of several chucks. I would far prefer to buy two more chucks on sale than one expensive one with quick-change jaws.

...

If you're going to invest in a lot jaws and swap the jaws often, going with one of the quick-change chucks is a good idea. That's just not the way I work. I'd much rather have several chucks and only change jaws occasionally. To that end, I bought Record Power's SC4 chuck to check it out. I bought their pen turning and long nose jaws to go with it. It's a well-made chuck and the jaws are sturdy and grip well. At $200, the SC4 is a little less money than a Vicmarc 120 and half the cost of an Easy Chuck. I might need to add to my chuck collection.

[Shawn Pachlhofer]

VM120 runs $289 with standard dovetail jaws.

the Record SC4 with dovetail jaws is $200

that's quite a bit more than "a little less"


plus, they aren't comparable chucks.


the VM100 chuck is comparable to an SC4 - and is only $40 more than the SC4

[Thom Sturgill]

If my information is correct, the Record SC4 is a jaw compatible clone of the Nova SN2.

I have 4 SN2s each with a separate jaw set. Three are used pretty heavily and keep the same set of jaws. The fourth gets changed out as needed. I have strongly considered adding an infinity chuck and a few jaw sets and leaving that chuck with one set of jaws, but since I already have jaws that match most of the infinity range, I probably will NOT buy one. Since there are two different jaw sets that I swap out most often, I may add just a chuck body and keep both mounted. That would eliminate most jaw changes for me.

The infinity jaws appear heavier and they claim the jaws tighten to the chuck body as it spins, but can not be used in reverse. They may increase the rpm at which the chuck is labeled to be used, I have not seen the tables on that.

[Dexter Harris]

I bit the bullet and sprang for the Easy Chuck along with the 16" Big Easy cole jaws. I needed another chuck and love this one. My lathe (go733) has 18" swing so I routinely need to finish bowls up to about 15.5 ". For some reason, it seems cole jaws top out at about 12 " or less. The Easy setup, while pricey, works great, although those more experienced turners probably jam chuck it.

[David Walser]

VM120 runs $289 with standard dovetail jaws.

the Record SC4 with dovetail jaws is $200

that's quite a bit more than "a little less"


plus, they aren't comparable chucks.


the VM100 chuck is comparable to an SC4 - and is only $40 more than the SC4

You're correct. The VM120 and the SC4 are not directly comparable. Here are the meaningful measurements:


VM100: Body size -- 3.5" Compression range with standard jaws: 1.25" - 2.75"
VM120: Body size -- 5" Compression range with standard jaws: 2" - 3.125"
SC4: Body size -- 4" Compression range with standard jaws: 1.9375" - 2.75"


Note that the SC4 has a smaller range of jaw movement, just over 3/4", than either of the Vicmarcs. One thing you cannot tell from the numbers is the weight of the chucks. The SC4 is a very substantial chuck. It weighs much more than the VM100 and is about the same weight as the VM120. (More weight isn't always a good thing.) Bottom line: I love my Vicmarcs. They've served me for over a decade and show no signs of stopping. But, if I were starting a chuck collection today, I'd be very tempted by the Record Power SC4.

[Shawn Pachlhofer]

I'm also a fan of Vicmarcs. I think I've got 3, plus I have 2 additional Bulldogs (which use VM jaws)

I think it's a bit odd that Record does not give a recommended "work holding" size like other manufacturers tend to do. I certainly wouldn't try to grip a 16" bowl on a VM100, though I bet it would do it if there were large enough jaws to do it.

CSUSA lists the compression range of the SC4 from 1 5/16" (1.3125) - 2.75" - which puts it more "in-line" with a VM100 as far as grip range.

if I had Nova chucks, I would consider adding some Record chucks as "backups" (like my Bulldogs that backup my VMs)

but all this does not answer the OP's question...


my answer: pick a brand of chuck and stick with it...and have more than one chuck. :D

[Justin Stephen]

I bit the bullet and sprang for the Easy Chuck along with the 16" Big Easy cole jaws. I needed another chuck and love this one. My lathe (go733) has 18" swing so I routinely need to finish bowls up to about 15.5 ". For some reason, it seems cole jaws top out at about 12 " or less.

Vicmarc makes a set that go up to 15" plus (385mm), but I cannot think of another one that is that big. It does also look like that Teknatool does make extension plates for their 12" jaws also that get them up to 15" or so. I have never seen them in person that I know of.

[Michael Mason]

Craft Supplies sent and email that said all Easy Wood Products including Chucks are 20% off today if you are wanting one. To me, if you have a big lathe it is too small, the manufacturer says up to 12" bowls. I would'nt trade my Vicmarks for anything, but I agree, pick a brand and stick with it.

[Dan Case LR]

Craft Supplies sent and email that said all Easy Wood Products including Chucks are 20% off today if you are wanting one. To me, if you have a big lathe it is too small, the manufacturer says up to 12" bowls. I would'nt trade my Vicmarks for anything, but I agree, pick a brand and stick with it.



The Easy Wood Tools sale at Craft Supplies is in effect for the entire month of December, so I don't need to rush onto anything today (opportunity to control tendency to impulse buy).

Where are you getting your information on the Easy Chuck's limit of 12" bowls? I can't find that in any of their literature. I could see a 12" limit using the stock 1 3/8" dovetail jaws (just common sense to me) but not with the 2 3/8" or 3 1/2" dovetail jaws. They make Cole-style jaws up to 20" for the easy chuck, so the 12" limitation is suspect.

D.

[Michael Mason]

QUOTE=Dan Case LR;2497908]The Easy Wood Tools sale at Craft Supplies is in effect for the entire month of December, so I don't need to rush onto anything today (opportunity to control tendency to impulse buy).

Where are you getting your information on the Easy Chuck's limit of 12" bowls? I can't find that in any of their literature. I could see a 12" limit using the stock 1 3/8" dovetail jaws (just common sense to me) but not with the 2 3/8" or 3 1/2" dovetail jaws. They make Cole-style jaws up to 20" for the easy chuck, so the 12" limitation is suspect.

D.[/QUOTE]I clicked on the largest jaws they offer, and here is what it stated:


For bowls and platters up to 12" diameter.
With the Easy Wood Tools™ Easy Chuck™ changing an entire set of jaws takes about 30 seconds. Easy Wood Tools™ patent-pending Snap-Lock Technology eliminates the need to remove jaw slides and jaw screws saving you time and money. Simply insert the small t-handle wrench into the small hole located in the jaw and press to unlock the jaw from the jaw slide. To install, simply slide the jaw into the chuck. When you hear the snap, the jaw is locked in place and ready to go!
Compression range: 2-3/8" - 3-3/8"
Expansion range: 3" - 4-3/16"
Quick and Easy: No changing screws or removing jaw slides
Safety Corners: Rounded corners of the top jaws reduce chance of injury to knuckles
Durable Components: Easy Jaw components are hardened and corrosion resistant for extreme durability.


Maybe I am reading something wrong, I just happened to have seen that and wanted to make sure you knew.

[Dan Case LR]

I clicked on the largest jaws they offer, and here is what it stated:


For bowls and platters up to 12" diameter.
With the Easy Wood Tools™ Easy Chuck™ changing an entire set of jaws takes about 30 seconds. Easy Wood Tools™ patent-pending Snap-Lock Technology eliminates the need to remove jaw slides and jaw screws saving you time and money. Simply insert the small t-handle wrench into the small hole located in the jaw and press to unlock the jaw from the jaw slide. To install, simply slide the jaw into the chuck. When you hear the snap, the jaw is locked in place and ready to go!
Compression range: 2-3/8" - 3-3/8"
Expansion range: 3" - 4-3/16"
Quick and Easy: No changing screws or removing jaw slides
Safety Corners: Rounded corners of the top jaws reduce chance of injury to knuckles
Durable Components: Easy Jaw components are hardened and corrosion resistant for extreme durability.


Maybe I am reading something wrong, I just happened to have seen that and wanted to make sure you knew.



In the Easy Chuck manual at http://easywoodtools.com/media/ewt-chuck-manual-v10.pdf (http://easywoodtools.com/media/ewt-chuck-manual-v10.pdf), the 12" limit is shown for the 2 3/8" dovetail jaws. The largest dovetail available is the 3 1/2" version. The manual states that it is good for bowls and platters up to 24" diameter.

D.

[Justin Stephen]

Where are you getting your information on the Easy Chuck's limit of 12" bowls? I can't find that in any of their literature. I could see a 12" limit using the stock 1 3/8" dovetail jaws (just common sense to me) but not with the 2 3/8" or 3 1/2" dovetail jaws. They make Cole-style jaws up to 20" for the easy chuck, so the 12" limitation is suspect.


Yup, I had not realized this myself. Here are some pics over on Kurt Hertzog's site:

http://kurthertzog.com/articles/easy_jaws_prod_rvw_red.pdf

[Geoff Whaling]

Dan,

Read both the Easy & Infinity chuck manuals very thoroughly.

Being a Queenslander I'm more than a little biased towards our locally manufactured Vicmarc lathes & chucks, but for very sound reasons. Vicmarc make quality products especially their chucks. The VM90/100’s & VM120/140’s have really stood the test of time and are still going strong after 20 or so years use (abuse) in club workshops through out Australia, literally hundreds of chucks. Like many other “traditional” 4 jaw scroll chucks they are a proven reliable and very robust design.

I’m also an advocate of the KISS principle. The Easy & Infinity chucks rely upon a spring operated mechanism to retain the jaws/back in the keeper slide (Easy) or in the keepers /backs (Infinity). Both chucks introduce complexity, more parts & springs, that have the potential to wear or fail i.e. springs notoriously rust, break, or lose “springiness”. Most of us wether turning wet or dry have to maintain chucks regularly to remove the gum / dust from the slides & scroll.

How will the springs perform in the longer term in the harsh turning environment?

Being pragmatic I also wonder how the jaw sets can be released when the spring is fully gunked up? I’m also a “what if?” type of person.

Both also have very prominent warnings in their manuals to “do not use the chuck if any jaw is not fully locked into place.” Easy chuck manual p15. “It is important to locate jaws properly in the jaw slides for the chuck to function safety and accurately.” Nova Infinity chuck manual p10.

“Never turn wood with your lathe running in reverse. Even with the hub set screws, the Easy Chuck can only be used in reverse for sanding, not turning.” Easy chuck manual p7; “21. DO NOT TURN IN REVERSE. Do not use this chuck for reverse turning operations, light reverse operations i.e. sanding are allowed. Speed not above 2000 rpm.” Nova Infinity chuck manual p6. Both chuck manuals have similar warnings, and both also have a recommended limit of 2000 rpm. Very good advice in my opinion.

Why are they so keen to promote these warnings – because they are known safety issues / potential hazards with the design/s. When you examine the jaw & keeper design of the Infinity chuck it uses a dovetail (p18 exploded view) design for the chuck jaws to lock into the jaw slide, that dove tail also provides the centripetal force to prevent the jaw set from flying out of the chuck. This appears fine for normal anti-clockwise rotation (i.e. forward). How will they perform in reverse?

The Easy chuck swaps out a combination backing slide & jaw component which initially appears a better design – but is it??? What happens when the spring / retainer fails? Personally I would like to do some practical testing on this chuck before I could be convinced enough that it is safe to use long term. The design feature that makes these so attractive is also a major potential design hazard IMO.

I believe neither design is a “good design" however the Infinity is probably the “better” design of the two designs (Easy vs Infinity). Both designs require a fair degree of user awareness, constant maintenance and checking to monitor the potential hazards.

However I really do not see any need for quick change jaws when it comes to introducing needless complexity, potentially another point of failure, or another potential hazard (jaws not seated correctly). The KISS principle and a tried & proven design rules for me. Personally I much prefer to reduce potential risk by eliminating or reducing potential and known hazards. I would not put either design into a club environment.

My opinon only.

[Stan Smith]

I have Vimarc, Oneway, and Easy Wood Chucks--acquired over 20 years. The Easy Wood is the most recent and my favorite due to the quick jaw change feature. The Vicmarc is my favorite quality. I bought my Easy Wood chuck from CSUSA in January, for $319, and then had to wait 4 months to get it due to backorder. I had wanted one for awhile from when I first saw them, but the price was $499 then. Everyone has their favorites and reasons fpr the chucks they have. Just sayin....

[robert baccus]

You might consider instead several faceplate rings which screw to the wood and are held by the dovetail on any chuck. Been using them for 25 years. Cheap enough to leave on a piece while curing. On and off the chuck in 5 seconds. I had some made by a local(cheap) machinest and bought some from Nova. Also available from Vicmark and Packard. Most of mine have glueblocks screwed to them and last 10bowls +.

[Justin Stephen]

You might consider instead several faceplate rings which screw to the wood and are held by the dovetail on any chuck. Been using them for 25 years. Cheap enough to leave on a piece while curing. On and off the chuck in 5 seconds. I had some made by a local(cheap) machinest and bought some from Nova. Also available from Vicmark and Packard. Most of mine have glueblocks screwed to them and last 10bowls +.

Frankly, I am and continue to be surprised that:

1. Faceplate rings are not more popular.

2. That EWT doesn't sell them.

[Reed Gray]

Justin, I am the other side of that argument. I don't know why any one would use a face plate ring. One reason is that the top of the blank would have to be pretty much dead flat. The other reason for me is that on standard bowl blanks, I drill a recess with a big forstner bit to fit my chuck. I expand into that, use the tailstock for support, and turn the outside before reversing. I never have to use screws ever again. I did once for a blank that was 22 inch diameter. I don't know if I could even find a forstner bit big enough for my big jaws, about 4 inches...

robo hippy

[Justin Stephen]

Justin, I am the other side of that argument. I don't know why any one would use a face plate ring. One reason is that the top of the blank would have to be pretty much dead flat. The other reason for me is that on standard bowl blanks, I drill a recess with a big forstner bit to fit my chuck. I expand into that, use the tailstock for support, and turn the outside before reversing. I never have to use screws ever again. I did once for a blank that was 22 inch diameter. I don't know if I could even find a forstner bit big enough for my big jaws, about 4 inches...


Sure, but how we choose which of the several methods available to mount blanks on our lathes is somewhat personal preference, somewhat what we are used to, somewhat based on the types of forms we turn and somewhat based on the limitations of our equipment. In other words, we are a real mixed bag, we woodturners. For many, yourself included, faceplate rings are not an attractive option. For others, they may be. To my first point, I would have thought that more turners would consider them an attractive option that they would sell better. To my second point, EWT already sells faceplates and a chuck and its not like developing faceplate rings requires any real innovation or research. They could just start making them and selling them. Heck, they might even re-popularize them.

Personally, I am on the fence as to whether or not I would ever use them although I have been tempted to buy some now and again. Virtually everything I turn starts on a faceplate so it would give me the added advantage of more rarely needing to take my chuck off. Not a huge deal but it might be nice, most especially for turners who only own one chuck or use the same chuck 90% of the time (I am in this second camp). I also don't use a forstner bit for recesses because I rarely turn with my tailstock on the lathe since I turn off the end as much as possible. Since I am performing the initial bulk removal with a well-connected faceplate, I don't get nervous about it. Now that I have just ordered a swingaway for my 3520 tailstock, that may change, although I suspect I will still mostly use a berdan for creating recesses.

[Reed Gray]

As with every thing in life, ask 10 different people the same question, and you will get at least a dozen different answers.

Having the tailstock engaged has one big benefit, it saves the headstock bearings. I used to turn with it all the time on my 3520A. I wore out a set of bearings in less than 5 years. It was a bother to keep putting the tailstock off and on. With my Robust, I got the tailstock mount so it is not a bother any more. When the tailstock is engaged, the shock loads are distributed between the two sets of bearings. The shock loads are considerably greater on chainsawn blanks than they are on bandsawn blanks that are pretty close to round. Now, if I had a 2 to 3 inch diameter spindle, and and appropriate bearings, I would probably turn without the tailstock. I have gotten used to having the tailstock up for any bowls over about 12 inches and 5 or so inched deep.

robo hippy

[Dan Case LR]

Wow, what an interesting study in tool taste diversity! Put ten woodturners in a room, ask them how to do something, and you'll get twelve different answers (and at least six who believe their answer is the only one that's correct).

As the OP, I thought I'd weigh in with my decision. After too much time spent analyzing and comparing and consulting, I ordered some1 1/4-8 inserts and am keeping my Nova G3s. They're a little small for the Powermatic that's on its way, but that doesn't mean they won't work. I'll use them and delay the addition of anything bigger until I recover from buying the PM and its accouterments.

And in the mean time I'll continue my research so that when it's time to buy I won't have to ask the questions again.

Thanks, all!

D.

[Jeffrey J Smith]

I really do not see any need for quick change jaws when it comes to introducing needless complexity, potentially another point of failure, or another potential hazard .
I've got to agree with Geoff on this. I've been watching this development from afar, since I've already got plenty of chucks on hand. What I'd really like to know is, what's the hurry. If needed, changing the jaws in a chuck takes less than 5 minutes. It also gives you time to take a good look and clean out or blow out the chuck before putting new jaws on. If you're a production turner it's much faster to just changeout the chuck to what you need.
I'm not a production turner and I just don't get it. What's the hurry. I find that even though I've got 8 or 9 different jaw sets, there are only three I use on a regular basis, and only 2 that I couldn't live without. You still need to buy the jaw sets you need, so just looking at the cost of the jaws, there is no real saving. You can order chuck bodies without jaws or with the jaws you want and you still won't spend as much as the basic EWT chuck.
Where's the rush - is this a solution to a problem that may not really exist?

[John Keeton]

While it really depends on turning style, I think there are many folks that enjoy having multiple chucks - not solely because of the effort of changing jaws, but because one often ends up with one or more turnings and/or components that need to stay chucked for precision until the project(s) are complete. I often do that with lidded pieces, and on most of my lids I will have a disguised chuck recess on the underside and a 7/8" hole for the knob that works very well for a chuck recess for 20mm jaws. So, of the six chucks I have, two of them have 50mm jaws, one has the 20mm, one 25mm, one 75mm, and one soft jaws. I have no desire to give up that flexibility. My total investment is less than one would have in one of the interchangeable chucks with all of those jaws. So, for the same money, I have the speed of no jaw changes and the convenience of multiple chucks.

[robert baccus]

Wrong on the perfectly flat mounting surface. Use the ring in the bowl hole(top) to rough out the bowl. At that time figure out your turn around method.( I glue everything) The ring is strong enough to mount on the side of a log--just use different length screws(great for gravy bowl natural edge bowls). I have turned many 100#+ vases with this method with no problems. Also I seldom have to remove the chuck or chuck rings. I use 50mm rings only. The secret is to use a thick, hard. strong glueblock. I can't remember when I last stuck screws into a pretty piece of turning wood. Also a single screw can do all the above.

[Jeffrey J Smith]

I think there are many folks that enjoy having multiple chucks - not solely because of the effort of changing jaws, but because one often ends up with one or more turnings and/or components that need to stay chucked for precision until the project(s) are complete...
I agree wholeheartedly. I find that it's far easier and ultimately less expensive to have multiple chucks on hand. Besides the convenience of multiple chucks, I find it hard to convince myself that the time required to change jaw sets actually slows down the act of turning so significantly that a means needed to be developed that would cut the time roughly in half while costing twice as much. Seems like an expensive solution to a problem that just doesn't exist.
Maybe I'm an outlier here, but it takes me less than 5 minutes to change out the jaw set when necessary. I'm certainly not a production turner, but I do often appreciate taking a few minutes to fully contemplate my next move on a piece...I also take the opportunity to look over the chuck, blow out anything that's accumulated, etc.

What's the hurry...

[Reed Gray]

Robert, do you screw the ring to the waste block, and then glue that to the blank? How do you solve the wet wood/glue gripping problem. I guess the glue grip problem would also come into play if you glue waste block to end grain. I will admit I have never even seen one of the rings, and maybe if it was 1/4 inch thick or more, then I would consider it pretty secure. For natural edge bowls, I use a big forstner bit and drill a flat spot all the way through the bark, then drill my standard recess, or mount a standard face plate.

robo hippy