Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 22 of 22

Thread: Westcott chuck for Felder fd 250 Horizontal Mortiser

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Beantown
    Posts
    2,831
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Holcombe View Post
    .002” is a significant amount of runout for an application that will take a side load.
    Not to try and stir the pot or anything, but IMHO if your within two thousandths on most woodworking machines your in good shape. My 2 larger shapers, which are vastly heavier built pieces of equipment than the slot mortiser, both have about that much spindle runout. It does not affect the fit of joints in any perceivable way. IME your going to get at least that much in flexing of the bits being used on the slot mortiser.

    Anyway thats just my opinion and to each their own. Not trying to disrespect anyone else's opinion, just feel its worth saying that you don't need the precision of a new Bridgeport mill in order to do fine woodworking

    good luck,
    JeffD

  2. #17
    No dog in this fight, just a few observations:

    -I've never actually checked runout on one of these setups but surely, 0.002" is enough to get a good slot mortise, right?
    -I don't use an FD-250 much, though it's a popular Felder machine. I do, however, have a decent amount of experience with the mortising ATTACHMENT for combo machines from my Italian days, which probably used the exact same Wescott chuck as the FD-250. Sold a bunch to customers, used a bunch in-house. I would venture a guess that running off the cutterhead of a jointer/planer probably has inherently more runout than a dedicated machine would. Literally never had a complaint about accuracy during all those years.
    -Do I remember right that the OP has a 20-year old machine? Folks order replacement parts for older machines all the time. You could always order a brand-new chuck if it's that big of a deal, right?

    It's a good machine, been a staple in the lineup. Hope you get to get to enjoy creating some projects with it.

    Erik
    Last edited by Erik Loza; 04-08-2020 at 12:05 PM. Reason: cleaned up typos
    Ex-SCM and Felder rep

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Central WI
    Posts
    5,666
    Just a few additional comments. In addition to the chuck itself, the motor frame mount to the table is important. Brian here has a whole thread on the subject. The good news is the 20 year old machine had a little more stout mount so that should be good. The bearings are probably at their end though and arbor bearings also are a factor. New decent C2 bearings would be on my change list if I were chasing run out and reworking the machine. I would not use standard motor bearings in this application. Dave

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    7,296
    Blog Entries
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Duncan View Post
    Not to try and stir the pot or anything, but IMHO if your within two thousandths on most woodworking machines your in good shape. My 2 larger shapers, which are vastly heavier built pieces of equipment than the slot mortiser, both have about that much spindle runout. It does not affect the fit of joints in any perceivable way. IME your going to get at least that much in flexing of the bits being used on the slot mortiser.

    Anyway thats just my opinion and to each their own. Not trying to disrespect anyone else's opinion, just feel its worth saying that you don't need the precision of a new Bridgeport mill in order to do fine woodworking

    good luck,
    JeffD
    I think we can divide this up into:

    - Is this an acceptable situation for the machine itself

    - can it still make accurate joinery.

    A spindle is typically quite precise, even a typical handheld router is going up measure pretty tight TIR inside the taper.

    My comments are mainly directed at the dismissal of need for consideration but then Rod says he was thinking in metric. .002mm is a heck of a lot smaller than .002”.

    To me, it’s borderline, if it were a drill Chuck it’s fine but in this setup searching for an improvement is not a terrible waste of time.
    Bumbling forward into the unknown.

  5. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by David Kumm View Post
    Just a few additional comments. In addition to the chuck itself, the motor frame mount to the table is important. Brian here has a whole thread on the subject. The good news is the 20 year old machine had a little more stout mount so that should be good. The bearings are probably at their end though and arbor bearings also are a factor. New decent C2 bearings would be on my change list if I were chasing run out and reworking the machine. I would not use standard motor bearings in this application. Dave
    Just tuning back in to this thread after a break. Thanks for all the comments everyone.

    Do you have a link to the motor frame mount thread? I tried searching, but no luck.

    While I have no run out on the motor shaft, I did notice strange noise a couple times while running. I guess bad bearings could be an explanation.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    7,296
    Blog Entries
    7

  7. #22
    Great! Thanks much.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •