Lathe Choice

[Stark Suggs]

That's a great reference David. Thanks for sharing.

SWS

[bob pfohler]

That's a great reference David. Thanks for sharing.

SWS

I agree. I’ve been thinking about the Laguna 1836 but after looking at the sheet I may look closer at the Jet 1840.

[Alex Zeller]

If it was me I wouldn't get a non-variable speed lathe. I think I would shy away from a reeves drive as well. VFDs are cheap enough now that it's really the only way to go.

[ChrisA Edwards]

I got very close to pulling the trigger on the Laguna 1836, while it was on sale in January, but after talking to a few folks, they persuaded me to 'Buy Once, Cry Once', so I went for it's bigger brother, the Laguna 24/36 and bought the 20" extension at the same time. I've had it about 3 weeks, but haven't even turned it on yet.

[Thomas Wilson80]

I got very close to pulling the trigger on the Laguna 1836, while it was on sale in January, but after talking to a few folks, they persuaded me to 'Buy Once, Cry Once', so I went for it's bigger brother, the Laguna 24/36 and bought the 20" extension at the same time. I've had it about 3 weeks, but haven't even turned it on yet.

I did similar - have had the Laguna 2436 for about 8 months and love it! Can't imagine going back to a smaller lathe with fewer features.
Tom

[Dave Keele]

Hi Pete, I'd invite you to check out my "big list of lathes" spreadsheet to get more ideas. You can winnow down the choices by going to Data > Create new Filter View.

Mr. Peters. I, and a friend, are looking at lathe options and we found your spreadsheet very interesting and most helpful. I do have a question. Can you please tell me what the "score" number is telling me? I see the formula used, but must admit that I don't understand it.

Thank you.

[David M Peters]

Mr. Peters. I, and a friend, are looking at lathe options and we found your spreadsheet very interesting and most helpful. I do have a question. Can you please tell me what the "score" number is telling me? I see the formula used, but must admit that I don't understand it.

Thank you.

I'm glad you've found it useful! The score is something I did for fun, it's kind of like the NFL Quarterback scoring system. Positive points for HP and weight, negative points for cost:

HP x 33+Weight ÷7.5-Cost ÷60

I fudged the scalars so that each category would be roughly 100 points, ish. Here's a link to the data sorted by score, basically it puts heavy, powerful, imported machines like the Grizzly G0800 on top. My "boutique" (credit to my sister for that description) American Beauty doesn't fare very well in this system!

[bob pfohler]

I did some research on the Jet 1840 EVS. The headstock only slides and does not pivot .

[Dave Keele]

I'm glad you've found it useful! The score is something I did for fun, it's kind of like the NFL Quarterback scoring system. Positive points for HP and weight, negative points for cost:

HP x 33+Weight ÷7.5-Cost ÷60

I fudged the scalars so that each category would be roughly 100 points, ish. Here's a link to the data sorted by score, basically it puts heavy, powerful, imported machines like the Grizzly G0800 on top. My "boutique" (credit to my sister for that description) American Beauty doesn't fare very well in this system!

Thank you.

[Robert D Evans]

I went to the spreadsheet and pulled up the formula for the score.

Horsepower x 33 + lathe weight/7.5 - price/60.

I can't really tell if a higher score is better or not. The spreadsheet is full of good information and would let you narrow down your search. I like the cost per pound stats.

[tom lucas]

Scoring is a common practice where spreadsheets are used to create a "forced choice matrix comparison" whereby characteristics are weighted based on importance, then added or multiplied to yield a composite score. One has to be careful with the weightings and aggregate scores so that the intended outcome is really achieved: best choice. In the formula listed bigger numbers are better; it's basically HP+weight-price. The values are weighted to bring them near equal values for "nominal" metrics (3 HP, 750 lbs, $6000). One would likely get similar outcome without the weights. I didn't look at the spreadsheet, but I would include swing, number & size of bearings, warranty, bed length, and banjo/tailstock quality factor in the matrix.

[John K Jordan]

Scoring is a common practice where spreadsheets are used to create a "forced choice matrix comparison" whereby characteristics are weighted based on importance, then added or multiplied to yield a composite score. One has to be careful with the weightings and aggregate scores so that the intended outcome is really achieved: best choice. In the formula listed bigger numbers are better; it's basically HP+weight-price. The values are weighted to bring them near equal values for "nominal" metrics (3 HP, 750 lbs, $6000). One would likely get similar outcome without the weights. I didn't look at the spreadsheet, but I would include swing, number & size of bearings, warranty, bed length, and banjo/tailstock quality factor in the matrix.

I've used similar methods in spreadsheets but I put arbitrary weighting factors in cells as variables. This makes it easy to adjust the weights and see the effect. In a lathe evaluation spreadsheet this would let users adjust weights on things that may be important to them, such as bed length over weight, HP and swing over cost, etc.

JKJ

[William C Rogers]

The spreadsheet is fine except for the $/lb and score. Neither of these columns add anything in the decision making and IMO are misleading. However it is not my spreadsheet.