The perfect cue building lathe

Coos Cues

Coos Cues

Coos Cues
Sitting here new years eve pondering this question.

Lately it seems like these little Chinese lathes are in vogue but still require a bunch of mods as they are not made specifically for cue building. Little taig lathes like Chris' and Todd's are but they are not really ideal either.

So I was pondering what an off the shelf lathe built exclusively for building cues would look like if money was no factor in development and being a niche market didn't matter.

This is what I have come up with so far.

A tool room type of metal lathe in a 40 inch between centers. 1.5" through hole with a built in rear chuck about 23 inches from the front. No need for much more than 5-6 inches clearance on the bed. Threading gears in quick change with a standard variable speed reversible motor. A high quality six jaw chuck. No need for different gear ratios. Just direct drive with a single belt for ease of turning by hand. Speed should go as low as about 50 rpm for easy threading and finishing and about 2k max. Built in dust collector scheme. No DRO but built in dial indicators for cross slide and carriage. Dials are way better than DRO. Anyone who has used both I can't see a disagreement. MT2 tail stock. AXA tool post.

Basically it would be like a light duty metal lathe with all the mods we like only better. I can see it in my head.
 
If you check out Clough42's mod on his small Grizzly, I would just scale that up to a quality 13x40 lathe, like a Harrison or similar well built lathe, which essentially does what a Hardinge does, threading is separate from RPM. BXA gives you more flexibility in terms of turning tools you can use. Some sort of integrated dust collector for sure. I have a DRO on my lathe, I use it all the time, I think it's all about what you are comfortable with, dials do give you a better visual representation than numbers counting up and down, so why not have both?
If you're using the lathe for turning round stock or tapering, a quality taper bar setup is a must. Most importantly I think a really good dust collector system for both sides of the spindle when coring is what I would spend quite some time perfecting as that's the messiest process by far.
 
I like the Hardinge building block/mix 'n match components system of the second op lathes.
The headstock is almost ideal, too bad the rest of the components are on the small side. :(

Cost is usually reasonable, have a half dozen in various stages of assembly here, and the average price with tooling (cross slides, turrets, TS's) is under $200 each lathe. However, only a couple have threading and it is a system that most cue-makers would not like.
The beds are too short, but beds are not overly difficult to make...:)
Also, #2MT TS's exist (I have one), but most are only MT1.

Limited to 1-1/4" through a stock spindle if you want to keep the integral 5c collet system.

I am gradually modifying one that has been my primary cue lathe. 1-1/4" through the spindle has not been too inconvenient, but kind of at the point of considering boring (hard turning) out the spindle to at least 1-3/8" which would eliminate 5c. However, there are Jacobs rubberflex collet chucks here to add over the spindle nose, as well as several adjust-tru chucks i already use.

6jaw chucks are not my favorites, but some like them. An accurate one only holds on more than 3 or 4 jaws if the work is perfectly round. Otherwise the work is slightly compressing, or slightly distorting to match. Not a factor at the level of cue work, but are you really getting benefit of the rather high cost of a somewhat delicate accessory. I'd rather use collets. Or bored soft jaws on a 3 or 4 jaw chuck. For many people, though, a 6 jaw seems convenient.

Hardinge second op headstock, bored out, adapted onto a South Bend 9" or 10K A-model lathe with 54" bed could be sweet.
 
Kim Bye said:
Most importantly I think a really good dust collector system for both sides of the spindle when coring is what I would spend quite some time perfecting as that's the messiest process by far.
Click to expand...
My coring dust collection is zero leakage. It's a tool post attachment and I core with my tailstock.

Here it is if you skip ahead to the 11 minute mark. This is why I order my gun drills with extra shank length to accommodate the dust collection. I have seen pipe type of attachments but I like this because you can clearly see what's going on. Even without the magnetic lid it doesn't leak chips.

rumble.com

Pool Cue Building-Coring The Forearm On A Coos Cue

How I core my forearm wood for Coos Cues Please like and subscribe to my channel!
rumble.com rumble.com
 
Last edited:
Coos Cues said:
My coring dust collection is zero leakage. It's a tool post attachment and I core with my tailstock.

Here it is if you skip ahead to the 11 minute mark. This is why I order my gun drills with extra shank length to accommodate the dust collection. I have seen pipe type of attachments but I like this because you can clearly see what's going on. Even without the magnetic lid it doesn't leak chips.

rumble.com

Pool Cue Building-Coring The Forearm On A Coos Cue

How I core my forearm wood for Coos Cues Please like and subscribe to my channel!
rumble.com rumble.com
Click to expand...
Good stuff, I'm 3D printing something similar. I'm thinking of embedding some magnets in the rear lid of the lathe and make some sort of cup that clicks in place over the spindle and suck up everything that comes out when the gun drill goes through the workpiece.
 
PS:
I'm a luddite and don't understand cnc (very little exposure)
However, i do think with the easy systems & practically low cost today, that the feedscrew should have its own motor separate from the headstock (Like Hardinge toolroom lathes) but be linked through an encoder, not gears, and also provide the leadscrew function. IOW, dial in -any- thread (or feed) you want, regardless headstock spindle speed.
 
Ssonerai said:
PS:
I'm a luddite and don't understand cnc (very little exposure)
However, i do think with the easy systems & practically low cost today, that the feedscrew should have its own motor separate from the headstock (Like Hardinge toolroom lathes) but be linked through an encoder, not gears, and also provide the leadscrew function. IOW, dial in -any- thread (or feed) you want, regardless headstock spindle speed.
Click to expand...
I wasn't aware Hardinge toolroom lathes had a separate lead screw motor. This is a pretty good idea.
 
They have a separate infinitely variable _feed_ motor. Since the early 1950's. IOW HLV- __ series

The (original) leadscrew for threading is still through a gearbox.

However, Babin Machine, a Hardinge re-builder, offers separate synchronized threading by means of additional separate servo or stepper motor and some electronic wizardry that allows setting any screw pitch for threading. (No gear changes necessary) I gather that this is becoming more common, and may have started on the Sharp clones of Hardinge?
Prior to the early 50's, Hardinge used a feed rod with gears, like most lathes (to save the leadscrew precision for only threading)
I've got a couple of these, but they are, shall we say, "projects"

HARDINGE Model TL & T10 "split-bed" lathes

Little publicised by its makers - possibly because its manufacture seems to have been confined to the 1940s and 1950s - the ball-bearing headstock late-model Hardinge
www.lathes.co.uk

The ones that used to go cheap, second op lathes, are what i actually use for cue building, set up on a larger platform.
ESM's. Like DSM's but with a split bed instead of a dovetail bed. Along with sometimes a South Bend 10K when i need longer carriage travel.

For me, the problem is that the Hardinge's have no length, and i use the headstocks and components for end-work, ferules, tips, boring, threading for joint screws, etc. The SB has no capacity through the headstock, but it does have a 54" bed & threading anywhere on the length, which is just long enough to get 32" between centers. The Hardinge components are set up on an I-beam with short sections of beds i ground years ago, so can be spread for, say, finishing a whole assembled cue. Or for boring out shafts, etc. Or the parts can be closed up and the butt or shaft held in the headstock with a chuck on each end, and just end-work going on with the short Hardinge compounds.

I have more compromises than you, but like you that has caused me to put some thought into how to combine features.
You may have seen i use a planer for my cone generator and profiler. But it can plane lathe beds, too. Time is so short and the possibilities endless! :)

smt
 
Last edited:
The Porper Q lathe "B" was very close.

Pros:
Lightweight and moveable.
Independent lead screw motor.
Lockable head stock with calibrated degree stops.
Full length taper bar for butts and shafts.
Heavy Duty foot speed control.
Very rugged construction.
I have used one for 20 years and it is still going strong.
Added a left side chuck for good alignment and support.

CONS:
Not good for metal except very light passes on Brass and Aluminum.
No way to sync lead screw to cut threads.
Not available anymore.

A full featured 40" metal lathe is most likely the option for a cue maker wanting the best.
Perhaps even more than one if you had the room and money.
You would still need to do some mods to get it dialed in for cue making.

No doubt about it ... there is still a LOT of craftsmanship, experience, and knowledge that goes into a custom made cue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top