VL175 - first impressions and changes over time

[rsser]

As you've prob read I've gone back to this lathe after using a Stubby and a DVR XP. Elsewhere I've explained why.

So over the time between the first marriage and the remarriage a number of significant improvements have been made.

Key ones are

* the jump from 1hp to 1.5hp;
* a graduated quill;
* a remote control box (On, Off, speed dial; covered reverse switch);
* a separate electronics box that now reads out the RPM;
* and a somewhat improved belt change arrangement (2 settings; hi torque 10-1000 RPM; high speed 30-3000 RPM).

The quality of manufacture is first class. The only wrinkle is that the tailstock clamp lever needs a good deal of pressure and an extension tube helps.

Having come down from larger lathes I'm having to change my mindset about bowl blank sizes and find myself sometimes wishing for just another 2cm centre height above bed.

A couple of changes have been made to the outrigger. It now has an offset toolpost holder which increases options for tool presentation. And also has a sleeve at the post bottom which makes it a bit easier to get some preload to avoid post chatter. It's still a heavy piece of kit and a bit of a work-out to set up but does the job over a generous range of travel.

In use, headstock and tailstock line up nicely and stay lined up so for drilling spindle pieces I no longer have to factor in slop.

The change which puzzles me most is that with bowl turning there's less flex at the rim with hollowing.

It could be tighter manufacturing tolerances or perhaps more likely the tapered roller bearings. The Stubby had a dual race ball bearing on the inboard side; not sure about the DVR XP.

Re the stand: it's the VM fabricated from 3mm steel sheet. With vers. 1 I had a stand made out of RHS made to my design and never got any wobbling. With the VM so far there's some wobble at one speed. No drama.

In short, I've found this a tool to make friends with to quote a phrase.

It's not the cheapest but it will see me into my grave given its quality and excellent local support.

I don't say it's the best lathe because 'best' for one turner will vary from that for another, depending on application, budget and willingness to fettle and fiddle.

[jefferson]

Ern, a very interesting report.

My 175 is now almost 12 months old and, like you, I'm very impressed with the machine. In fact, I turn on the 175 in preference to the VL 300 LB for almost everything, except for large platters etc.

I haven't had the need to use the outboard turning jig as yet - it seems from your comments that it works fine so all is good there.

One thing I am still thinking about is using the spare banjo from the VL300 - with some modifications - on the VL 175. The longer reach has some benefits going for it. No idea what a spare banjo is worth, so I better find out before I do anything hasty.

Must be good QC at Vicmarc. My head and tail stocks line up perfectly, same as yours! :2tsup:

[rsser]

Yeah, IIRC succinctly called them a 'nice jigger'!

A longer banjo would definitely be a good investment in my book, so as to minimise faffing around with the outrigger.

Can you get out there and tell me what mods the 300 banjo might need. Bed gap, bed thickness.

[pommyphil]

Good update Ern

I bought a 2001 model 175SH about 4 months ago and am delighted,superlatives

fail me, my only possible quibble was the straight outboard tool post and a possible

lack of power to drive a bowl saver. $40 to crank the tool post locally, still unsure re

the bowlsaver. As Ern says the new model has fixed my quibbles.

You soon forget the price when your constantly pleased. Phil

[rsser]

Actually, perhaps the sensible thing to do is to talk to VM.

Might be trying to pour quarts into pint pots :-{

[Ozkaban]

Thanks for the report Ern, Always interesting to hear about how lathes change over time. I'm happy with my VL200, but would like more turning capacity, so oneday will need to invest in the outrigger, I think.


It's not the cheapest but it will see me into my grave given its quality and excellent local support.

Awww, C'mon Ern, we all know you too well for that :D:D:D

Cheers,
Dave

[ticklingmedusa]

Ern,
your tool reviews are always good to read because of your analytical approach.
That makes you a reliable and respected source.
Thanks for taking the time to share them with us. :2tsup:

[RETIRED]

I wouldn't go modifying the 300 banjo.

The height of the 300 tool post holder is considerably higher than on the 175.

I would talk to Vicmark and see if they have a longer banjo with the tool post holder at right height.

[rsser]

LOL. No Dave, I lost 2 grand on the DVR XP so no more off-hand ventures for me.

There are stand-alone outrigger stands out there; VM have one but you might do better to make friends with a metal hacker. Couple of slabs plus materials might do it.

TM, thanks. I was trained to be analytical and your feedback means a lot to me.

That said, there are a lot of intangibles with lathes and tools so try before you buy is as always good advice if you can. You soon see what you'll 'make friends with' as Charlesworth says.

Phil, you'll have the 1 HP model at a guess. Looking at a bowlsaver, that'd be the min power necessary and you could research web posts about how to make that work (pulsing, from memory). When I did that research, I found that the Kelton offered the best options for shapes but the toolgate height was too great for my old VL175 and something needed to be cut off the banjo top. I seem to recall that that was possible but in relation to the benefits I didn't think it worth the risk. But your mileage may vary as they say.

, good advice as always. There's always the question of the suitability of a bed casting for an extended banjo. No question about an axe-weilding mongrel I'd have said .... "send him down that VB36!"

[Jim Carroll]

To give you guys an idea on cost of extra parts
Toolrest Banjo for the VL175 AUS$220.00
400mm toolrest AUS$61.00
600mm toolrest AUS$84.70 requires second banjo
1000mm toolrest AUS$128.75 requires second banjo.

[WOODbTURNER]

Heads up on VL 175 on Ebay (wood lathes)

[jefferson]

I wouldn't go modifying the 300 banjo.

The height of the 300 tool post holder is considerably higher than on the 175.

I would talk to Vicmark and see if they have a longer banjo with the tool post holder at right height.

is quite correct - you would have to cut several and more inches off the VL300 banjo to make it fit the VL175.

The simple fact of the matter is that I've never used the long tool rests requiring 2 banjos on the 300. ( did once, but that's another story).

So I basically have an unused banjo almost going to waste. Question is, will it do any damage to the VL 175? I don't think so - the lathe beds are identical as far as I can tell. And the 175 is no baby either.

Anyway, Ern. When you're up at Xmas we'll compare notes and see where we go.

[artme]

Great report Ern!!

Like all of your reviews and comments I found it very enlightening.:):):)

[Tim the Timber Turner]

I have a spare VL300 camlock (replaced it with a Oneway).

It is off an early version VL300 (no 17) and is 150mm high, 30mm hole.

No problem to shave another 15mm off the top.

More if you drilled and tapped a new hole.

PM me if interested.

Cheers

Tim:)

[NeilS]

Phil, you'll have the 1 HP model at a guess. Looking at a bowlsaver, that'd be the min power necessary and you could research web posts about how to make that work (pulsing, from memory). When I did that research, I found that the Kelton offered the best options for shapes but the toolgate height was too great for my old VL175 and something needed to be cut off the banjo top. I seem to recall that that was possible but in relation to the benefits I didn't think it worth the risk. But your mileage may vary as they say.



These were among the factors that help me decide on the Woodfast CX1000 instead of the then VL175.

The CX1000 has just enough power with 1.5HP to pull the larger Kelton bowlsaver and the toolpost height just snuck in under the minimum clearance for some of the bowlsaver systems.
.

[rsser]

Yes, I've pondered a bowl saver and can see the benefits. As a 'gentleman'* turner however the return wouldn't justify the cost.

I should also add that between versions of the 175, most handles have been replaced by captive spanners which I really like.

...

* not in the sense of manners or social position, just in the sense that I'm free to choose to turn or not

[NeilS]

* not in the sense of manners or social position, just in the sense that I'm free to choose to turn or not

Always found you to be gentle in manner, too...:)

Agreed about the cost/benefit of bowl savers. They take a while to pay for themselves.

Unless you are using rare or expensive woods it takes a long time to get your return.
.

[rsser]

:-

I should say that GJ brought around his virgin WoodCut a while ago, and it was impressive how clean it cut dry/brittle Blackwood, and how easy it was.

But apart from that, I have a surfeit of bowl blanks and of roughed turned ones and actually enjoy hollowing.

Including: hmm, which bowl gouge? the U flute or the V? the swept back wings or the ladyfinger? Which curved rest? What about doing a at the transition and laying the gouge over with the handle over the offside? Or maybe a scraper? Now, there's about 4 so which might be best? :D

All good fun.

[pommyphil]

It just seems ....... prodigal to throw 2 or 3kg of good wood on the lathe and finish

up with a 400gm bowl and a barrow full of mulch :-

[rsser]

Indeed it is prodigal.

But wasn't the 'prodigal son' the one more loved, or at least, at the end, most welcomed?

[NeilS]

... a 400gm bowl and a barrow full of mulch :-

A barrow full of mulch is OK, a dozen has you offering it around your family and friends, and a hundred has everyone avoiding you.... :rolleyes:
.

[rsser]

Yeah, it doesn't rain but it pours, or else there's a drought.

FWIW, with most woods I spread a layer of maybe 50mm on the lawn and it soon breaks down.

Sometimes I put a bag or two on the nature strip with a label saying free mulch but return the bag. Soon goes.

[rsser]

Coming back to the matter of using a VL300 banjo on a VL175:

Tim did the measurements and the clamp side of it will work. The top will need to be shortened and a new post clamp bolt hole will need to be drilled and tapped.

What this will provide is another 75mm or so of 'reach'.

My interest in this is simply to be able to knock off the corners of an octagonal bowl blank without wrestling with the outrigger.

I put this proposition to Vicmarc and they say it will work.

So Jeff, your eyeball assessment of the heft of the 175 ways appears to be spot-on.

[Tim the Timber Turner]

Jees Ern.

Keep it quiet

Don't tell Robo what your going to do.:no:

He told you you shouldn't do it.

He'll be upset.:~

Now you've done it.:oo:

You'll be right in the poo now.

[RETIRED]

Jees Ern.

Keep it quiet

Don't tell Robo what your going to do.:no:Too late.:p

He told you you shouldn't do it. Yes I did but I was uncertain about the hole length in the 300 banjo. I was going to look at Jeffs over Christmas and see if it could be shortened.:wink: Angle grinder and me are on good terms.:D

He'll be upset.:~ Nah, takes more than that.:rolleyes:

Now you've done it.:oo:

You'll be right in the poo now.Deep!!:D

[rsser]

There'll be a chorus of "I told you so!" if damage is done.

I'll have to print out Vicmarc's affirmative email and have a lawyer file it safely.

[hughie]

.



My interest in this is simply to be able to knock off the corners of an octagonal bowl blank without wrestling with the outrigger.


.... and that in it self would be sufficent to do it. A simple mod that increases capability of the lathe. :2tsup:

[Tim the Timber Turner]

Don't worry about the hole depth.

Still have about 3" after you have hacked it around with an Angle Grinder.

3" is probably enough for a couple of old blokes like us eh?:;

Cheers

Tim

[rsser]

Heheh.

Means the 'droop' will foul the bed.

So what's new? :D

[ticklingmedusa]

I'm not sayin' nothin' :D

[rsser]

Some more observations about the new VL175 after roughing a lump of green Elm, blank size about 40cm.

All this was done on the high speed pulley setting and while I don't go in as hard as some there were still wide shavings and the lathe didn't labour at all.

When first mounted there was an ominous rumbling from and run-out with the Titan chuck and a rattle from the headstock.

Turned out that the aftermarket insert for the chuck is not a good match for the spindle shoulder and the machined washer that Mulgabill organised for me years ago was needed again. Prob solved. Thanks again Russell!

The rattle turned out to be the indexing pin fouling the pulley even when retracted. The pin is threaded into the knurled retaining nut and had been quietly backing off. (That's the summary. Won't bore you with an account of how long it took to get there :rolleyes:)

[rsser]

Just to add, I bought Tim's early VL300 banjo and the clamp wouldn't hold.

He kindly took it back for a refund.