Steady Rest - 3 arm or 4 arm?

[Roger Chandler]

3 Arm or 4 Arm Steady Rest?

I have a steady rest made for me by Jeff Nicols, for my former 18/47 lathe, and I modified the base so I could use it on my 22" swing lathe. I figured I would not turn any hollow form larger than it could handle on that lathe.

The gap in the bed of that 22" swing lathe is 1.5" and I modified the base to fit that gap. My latest lathe, the G0800 is 24" swing and the gap in the bed is 2.5", so I'm thinking of making a shop built steady for it. I made one for my former 18/47 lathe and gave it to another turner back about 4 years ago, so I know how to build a nice one.

My real question is about whether to use 3 arms at 120 degrees apart, or go with 4 arms like my Nicols steady rest. Using a laser attachment on the hollowing rig means the 4 arm design sometimes gets in the way of clearly seeing the drop off the edge where the arm and wheel rub against the side of the form when the wheel is at the 10 o'clock position.

Do you have experience with a 3 arm design, and does it help the form to run as true as you want it to? I'm thinking that if 3 wheels work just fine, then maybe that is the way to go?

[Brice Rogers]

Roger, I like your approach to modifying the base of your 18" steady to work on the 22" G0766. I did something similar when I upgraded. Like you, I figured that I am unlikely to ever want to turn something that needs a steady rest that is at the full capacity of the lathe. If I turn something large in diameter it is unlikely to have an aspect ratio like a bowling pin - - more likely a platter or something of roughly that aspect ratio and a steady would not be needed.

I think that three wheels is adequate and, like you said, it won't get in the way for lasers and camera optics. Also, three points define a circle. But with four points it will only define a circle if all points are perfectly adjusted. Otherwise the arms will have unequal loads.

If I was doing it, I'd keep it simple - - 3 wheels.

[William C Rogers]

Roger, when i built my Steve Nicholes copy I made a extra arm that I could use in any of the flange holes. I thought I could also drill a hole if I wanted it in a certain location, but havent needed to do that.

IMG_1559.jpg

[Joe Meirhaeghe]

I use a 20" center steady from Advanced Lathe Tools. It has 3 wheels the top one is offset for laser clearance. I've hollowed vessels weighing 400 plus lbs. with it with on problems at all. It does have large industrial bearing's and hard wheels, not the soft little skate board bearings and wheels that will actually melt under heavy loads at turning speeds. I've seen this happen with the skate board wheels, there not designed for heavy loads.
Long story short I can't see any reason to have more than 3 wheels on a well built center steady.

[Bill Boehme]

I have a Robust steady rest and it has three wheels. I wouldn't want four wheels. Make sure that they run true and are perfectly round. The wheels should only lightly touch the wood

[Tom Giacomo]

I built mine to run on 3 or 4 wheels but I don't often use 4 wheels.

[Jeffrey J Smith]

I built mine to the nichols design, but used 3 wheels and rotated all three about 7 degrees clockwise to allow a laser or now camera on an arm to pass through unobstructed. Its on a 26” angle flange for the Robust AB - three wheels works fine and its very stable.

[Brice Rogers]

This is perhaps on the tangent of being off-thread. If I chuck something up that has a perhaps 2:1 aspect ratio (that is the length is twice the diameter, I believe that the mortise or taper will hold it. But if I have something looking like a bowling pin that is perhaps 4 times as long as the diameter, then I'd want to use a steady.

So, if I have a lathe that can handle 24" diameter, and I chuck something 2' long, I suspect that the chuck than handle it. After all, it is a 1:1 aspect ratio. But I have to ask myself, when - - if ever - - am I likely to chuck up a 2' diameter x 4, 5, or 6, or 10 foot log to turn? What the heck would I do with something that size?

So, I get a kick out of the multiple people who make their steady the max dimension of their lathe. It is a challenge to get a chunk of wood that size and it is also a question of what utility such a large piece to fulfill?

I recently had a beautiful chunk of Magnolia that could yield a 25" platter. But what the heck utility does a 25" platter have? I ended up turning a 17" diam. platter and a couple of smaller piece.

[Roger Chandler]

This is perhaps on the tangent of being off-thread. If I chuck something up that has a perhaps 2:1 aspect ratio (that is the length is twice the diameter, I believe that the mortise or taper will hold it. But if I have something looking like a bowling pin that is perhaps 4 times as long as the diameter, then I'd want to use a steady.

So, if I have a lathe that can handle 24" diameter, and I chuck something 2' long, I suspect that the chuck than handle it. After all, it is a 1:1 aspect ratio. But I have to ask myself, when - - if ever - - am I likely to chuck up a 2' diameter x 4, 5, or 6, or 10 foot log to turn? What the heck would I do with something that size?

So, I get a kick out of the multiple people who make their steady the max dimension of their lathe. It is a challenge to get a chunk of wood that size and it is also a question of what utility such a large piece to fulfill?

I recently had a beautiful chunk of Magnolia that could yield a 25" platter. But what the heck utility does a 25" platter have? I ended up turning a 17" diam. platter and a couple of smaller piece.

Hey Brice...your aspect ratio info is intriquing. My experience with hollow form turning makes me want to use a steady for vases, hollow forms, and I think added stability provided by the steady is a good thing because of the torque added to the piece. My last hollow form is at the gallery now, made from a large chestnut oak burl. I used a faceplate and 8 screws to mount on the lathe, and even with that the wood wanted to start cracking on me at the base.

The form ended up about 13” diameter in a southwest pottery style, and has figure galore in it. Due to that cracking near the faceplate hold, I was glad I had the steady....it allowed me to finish the form, as with the cracking near the hold [which I was able to turn off at the finish] induced a bit of wobble. That extra hold with the steady provided enough in plane support, that I could overcome the cracking issue at the base area.

[Brice Rogers]

Roger, you have a good point regarding thin hollow forms and the benefits of using a steady rest in those situations. I suppose that it may also reduce chatter. I sometimes experience chatter (squealing) on really thin forms. But that can be minimized with a digital steady (that is, the fingers of my other hand).