# Beal quality - not!



## Rifleman1776 (Apr 23, 2006)

At my wood turners club meeting yesterday a member demonstrated his Beal buffing system. He was using a lathe belonging to a member that lets us use his professional wood working shop for meetings.
	After the demo he couldnâ€™t remove the shaft from the spindle. Finally, after much pounding on the end of the removal tool with a large mallet, I managed to dislodge it.
	When it did come out we saw what the problem was. The shaft is a large all-thread (apx. Â¾â€ dia.) and the end is simply machined down to fit a #2MT. But most of the threads remain.
	The threads had cut into the interior of the spindle and locked in place. I donâ€™t know how much damage was done to the spindle head. 
	But this is not good. The MT should have been made of smooth tool steel. Beal apparently took the short, quick and cheap fix in designing this set-up. For the money, one would expect them to do it right.

  EDIT: For clarification: This is the three wheel system. The demonstrator said it was a Beal. The taper is nothing more than the shaft turned down to the shape of a #2MT. I believe the lathe spindle can be crocus clothed down to where damage is minimal. But it still should not have happened.


----------



## its_virgil (Apr 23, 2006)

That's exactly why I did not purchase one. I looked the Beall buffing system over a year ago, but did not buy one because of that reason. For the price it could have been done better. I came back to the shop and made one myself for under $20, wheels and all.
Do a good turn daily!
Don



> _Originally posted by Rifleman_
> <br />At my wood turners club meeting yesterday a member demonstrated his Beal buffing system. He was using a lathe belonging to a member that lets us use his professional wood working shop for meetings.
> After the demo he couldnâ€™t remove the shaft from the spindle. Finally, after much pounding on the end of the removal tool with a large mallet, I managed to dislodge it.
> When it did come out we saw what the problem was. The shaft is a large all-thread (apx. Â¾â€ dia.) and the end is simply machined down to fit a #2MT. But most of the threads remain.
> ...


----------



## dubdrvrkev (Apr 23, 2006)

I use a beall and it doesn't have the condition you describe.  It has no allthread in it, except for the drawbar. The taper is machined steel, seems to be decent quality. Was it a Beall or a knock-off of a beall.


----------



## woodwish (Apr 23, 2006)

I'm with Kevin on this one.  I have a Beall and it is not all-thread.  To get it out sometimes I have to "wiggle" it some because it really does fit precisely in the #2 MT, as it should.  I have seen some other brands which are made of all-thread, but not my Beall.  Unless they have changed designs I think this may not be a Beall.


----------



## Rifleman1776 (Apr 23, 2006)

> _Originally posted by dubdrvrkev_
> <br />I use a beall and it doesn't have the condition you describe.  It has no allthread in it, except for the drawbar. The taper is machined steel, seems to be decent quality. Was it a Beall or a knock-off of a beall.



Real Beal. That was the demo. And he paid the big "Beal" bucks for it. El Junko in my estimation. I use a 1/2" bolt with flat washers and a nut to hold my buff wheels in a Jacobs chuck. Works fine and is cheap. The Jacobs, with MT mandrel is used for many tasks.


----------



## Rudy Vey (Apr 23, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Rifleman_
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...



Real "Beal" is not the Beall we are talking about!! Beall makes excellent collet chucks and the Beall Buffing system I have has a precisely machined MT2 taper (sure there is a threaded hole for the draw bar on the small end) and on the front end, a part made from Aluminum has to be attached that takes the different buffing wheels.
Don't know what knock-off you got - remember the real stuff is spelled "Beall" and not Beal, maybe some cheap chinese knock-off to pretend to be the real stuff.


----------



## wood-of-1kind (Apr 23, 2006)

Why bother with a pricey Beall, real or not? Get the 'good stuff'. Mine!![][][].
Need I say further but to purchase the CRIBARI real deal BUFFING SHAFT. Didn't mean to highjack this discussion but I couldn't resist a sales opportunity.
-Peter-


----------



## Mudder (Apr 23, 2006)

Frank is talking about this one:

http://www.bealltool.com/products/turning/threeon.php

I asked this on TPS and I'll ask it here.

What type of lathe was it?
I have the Beall system that you speak of and have had no troubles whatsoever and Iâ€™ve used it a lot. The allthread itself should not have cut into the spindle of the lathe because it is really pretty soft. It should be soft carbon steel and I would be very surprised it is harder than 25-35 on the Rockwell c scale (mine is 28 BTW). The point Iâ€™m trying to make is that for the allthread to cut into the spindle it would either have to be as hard or harder than the spindle and if a lathe spindle is that soft I would be suspect of the lathe quality.


----------



## PenWorks (Apr 23, 2006)

For what it;s worth....my Beall Buff works just fine on my Jet mini.


----------



## RussFairfield (Apr 24, 2006)

I am totally confused after reading Mudders message below. Is this the single wheel adapter or is it the 3 wheels on a shaft? The original message didn't say, or did I miss it. When I read Beall system, I think the one wheel at a time adapter because it has been around for almost 20 years. The other one is a relatively new thing. The messages tell me that others are also confused about which buffing system we are talking about

If it is the single wheel at a time system, then my original message is correct. It is the 3 on a shaft system, I have never seen one of them, have no need for ever taking one out of the box and looking at it, or considering the purchase of one of them. 

What you thought you said being different from what I thought I heard you say is a common communications problem that is further confounded by the Internet. For that reason, one would think that I should have learned to stay out of these negative  discussions about Vendors by now. 

MY ORIGINAL MESSAGE
You are jumping to conclusions and blaming Jerry Beall for something he had nothing to do with. Jerry makes an aluminum adapter for the wheels that is bored to 1/2" on one end so that it can be attached to a motor shaft or a Morse Taper adapter that is provided by the purchaser with two (2) set screws.

Most of the turning catalogs sell this MT with a 1/2" stub shaft as a separate item, and that is what most of us are using. It is not made by Beall. Whoever gave the demonstration chose to go the cheap way and made their own rather then pay the $10 for the MT adapter, or used a cheaper adapter by another manufacturer. Wherever he got it, Beall did not make it.


----------



## Johnathan (Apr 24, 2006)

I have one of Peter Cribaris buffing shafts and it works great. Sorry to hear about the lathe problem. I hope it's not to expensive to fix.


----------



## Mudder (Apr 24, 2006)

> _Originally posted by RussFairfield_
> <br />You are jumping to conclusions and blaming Jerry Beall for something he had nothing to do with. Jerry makes an aluminum adapter for the wheels that is bored to 1/2" on one end so that it can be attached to a motor shaft or  a Morse Taper adapter that is provided by the purchaser with two (2) set screws.



Russ,

You might also be jumping to conclusions; he's talking about the three-on lathe mandrel.

http://www.bealltool.com/products/turning/threeon.php


----------



## Dario (Apr 24, 2006)

> _Originally posted by RussFairfield_
> <br />You are jumping to conclusions and blaming Jerry Beall for something he had nothing to do with. Jerry makes an aluminum adapter for the wheels that is bored to 1/2" on one end so that it can be attached to a motor shaft or  a Morse Taper adapter that is provided by the purchaser with two (2) set screws.
> 
> Most of the turning catalogs sell this MT with a 1/2" stub shaft as a separate item, and that is what most of us are using. It is not made by Beall. Whoever gave the demonstration chose to go the cheap way and made their own rather then pay the $10 for the MT adapter, or used a cheaper adapter by another manufacturer. Wherever he got it, Beall did not make it.



Thanks Russ...this is worth repeating.

I too have the Beall system and as Russ mentioned, it has an aluminum shaft.  Shortly after I bought it I stopped making bowls (thanks to pen making []) so I haven't really used it yet.  I am hoping to put it to good use soon.

Beall makes top-notch equipment...a bit pricey but well worth it IMHO.


----------



## dubdrvrkev (Apr 24, 2006)

It appears Russ and I have the same system. I can't speak on the 3 wheel version, but apparently its not of the same quality as the single wheel set up.


----------



## DCBluesman (Apr 24, 2006)

I have the Beall 3-on system and have no problems with it.  It slides nicely into the headstock MT2 on my Jet and slides out.  Maybe the headstock was gunked up to begin with?


----------



## wayneis (Apr 24, 2006)

I also have the 3-on system and have had no problems at all.

Wayne


----------



## woodbutcher (Apr 25, 2006)

I have the three wheel system and use it regularly  on both my power matc and Delta midi. Mine is a threaded rod turned down to a #2 morse taper. The threads are turned away before they enter the head stock. 
Jim


----------



## Rifleman1776 (Apr 25, 2006)

> _Originally posted by DCBluesman_
> <br />I have the Beall 3-on system and have no problems with it.  It slides nicely into the headstock MT2 on my Jet and slides out.  Maybe the headstock was gunked up to begin with?



No reported problems with the headstock beforehand. The taper had threads almost to the end. I did misspell, Beall. Doesn't matter, I'm not in the market Beal/Beall, whatever. Glad others have not had the problem. We did. I won't.


----------



## its_virgil (Apr 25, 2006)

The Woodcraft store in Ft. Worth had two Beall buffing systems and both had large all thread rods with a 2MT machined on one end. They were in a box labeled as Beall Buffing systems. Maybe that is why they wre on sale. A newer model is made using unthreaded rods.
Do a good turn daily!
don
PS, But now I have my own knock off for a much better price and it works fine. A picture of it is in my photo album here on IAP. Album name is its_virgil


> _Originally posted by Rifleman_
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## scubaman (Apr 26, 2006)

> <br />For that reason, one would think that I should have learned to stay out of these negative  discussions about Vendors by now.


Right, Russ!!!  Especially because sooner or later the original poster will jump in and say he never meant to say anything negative about Jerry Beall or his products - he was talking about a BEAL not a BEALL.  Of course, maybe he simply can't spell ;-)


----------



## Rifleman1776 (Apr 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by scubaman_
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...



I meant Beall and did misspell. Never said anything negative about Jerry Beall. I did report a negative experience with a Beall product. Not a slam, a factual report. The product demonstrated itself to be 'negative'. There is a saying in Texas: "If you are going to tell the truth, have one foot in the stirrup." In other words, most folks would rather live in a world where they imagine what they want things to be and react poorly when the truth upsets those false images. As a former newspaper man, I know, first hand, how badly many people react to facts they just don't like. Facts is facts. BTW, my name is not "original poster". If you want to talk about me, use my name.


----------



## DCBluesman (Apr 26, 2006)

You know, Frank, you trudge out that old chestnut about you being a former newspaper man every time you feel like it might validate your point.  The problem is, the "old school" newspaper men felt an obligation to get both sides of the story.  Did you talk to JR (Jerry) about this experience?  Did you do any further checking to see if this was a fluke?  Had you examined the inside of the MT beforehand?  Or are you reporting on an incident that, for all you know, may be the only time in history that this has happened?  Of course, the "old school" reporters went out of style when Woodward and Bernstein became folk heroes...in my opinion.


----------



## scubaman (Apr 26, 2006)

Well, I wasn't talking about you, I *WAS* talking about the original poster.  Happens to be you, I didn't notice or maybe I wouldn't have posted.  Feeble attempt at a joke...

Simplest thing is to call up JR Beall which I will do if I remember during business hours and have time.  I don't know this particular item, but judging from his other products I would be very surprised if it were as underengineered as this setup you saw sounds.  I remember a machined shaft with stop collars with setscrews, not threaded rod and nuts. I really suspect there was some other factor, like burrs in the Morse taper. It's the thread marks that make me wonder.  MT2 just means a cone with a certain angle.  I can't imagine how threaded rod machined with the right angle can leave screw marks in a spindle.  But of course I know you saw this with your own 3 eye and I don't doubt that they were there.


----------



## woodwish (Apr 26, 2006)

Wow, this went from an interesting technical discussion to ugly in a hurry.  Think I'll just move on to other threads...


----------



## scubaman (Apr 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by woodwish_
> <br />Wow, this went from an interesting technical discussion to ugly in a hurry.  Think I'll just move on to other threads...


Well, I honestly don't see ugly anywhere.  I do see things a little out of sync, since I use the RSS feed I got the post where rifleman corrected the spelling of Beall in a different batch.  So my attempt at humor must look way off, coming later.  Oh well...  I can delete it (I think) if that's what's bothering you or anyone else.

I have no idea whether there was ever a version of JR's jig using allthread, the only one I know of has a polished shaft with stop collars and setscrews.

I am trying to picture a 3/4" allthread turned to a taper.  Only a short section of the taper has threads...  I just can't picture a taper-machined end doing such damage to a spindle, thread marks to the end.  It shouldn't even turn if reasonably well seated in a spindle, and it does not need a lot of friction to drive it.  I don't think we'll ever know, because looking back this is an observation of someone else's machine...


----------



## Ron in Drums PA (Apr 27, 2006)

> <br />Well, I wasn't talking about you, I *WAS* talking about the original poster.  Happens to be you,



[]


----------



## Rifleman1776 (Apr 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by DCBluesman_
> <br />You know, Frank, you trudge out that old chestnut about you being a former newspaper man every time you feel like it might validate your point.  The problem is, the "old school" newspaper men felt an obligation to get both sides of the story.  Did you talk to JR (Jerry) about this experience?  Did you do any further checking to see if this was a fluke?  Had you examined the inside of the MT beforehand?  Or are you reporting on an incident that, for all you know, may be the only time in history that this has happened?  Of course, the "old school" reporters went out of style when Woodward and Bernstein became folk heroes...in my opinion.



  What happened is not a debatable issue. A wreck is a wreck, not always a situation where there are "both sides of the story".
  What happened, happened.
  You may be right about 'old school', much of what we see in today's media is not truth but the story as the producers want to portray it. I'll stick with facts and truth. And, I don't have my foot in the stirrup to help ride off in fear when I tell it. As much as some wish I would.
  We digress. A Beall (two L's) lathe mount, buffing system stuck in the lathe because the Morse Taper was turned from an all-thread rod and some of the threads remaining on the taper jammed into the spindle. Fini.


----------



## Doghouse (Apr 27, 2006)

Ok, I think that this has reached a conclusion.  If nothing constructive is added lets let this die, else it will be locked.


----------



## Mudder (Apr 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Rifleman_
> <br /> What happened is not a debatable issue. A wreck is a wreck, not always a situation where there are "both sides of the story".
> What happened, happened.
> You may be right about 'old school', much of what we see in today's media is not truth but the story as the producers want to portray it. I'll stick with facts and truth. And, I don't have my foot in the stirrup to help ride off in fear when I tell it. As much as some wish I would.
> We digress. A Beall (two L's) lathe mount, buffing system stuck in the lathe because the Morse Taper was turned from an all-thread rod and some of the threads remaining on the taper jammed into the spindle. Fini.




Sorry, I just cannot grasp the logic of this.

Are you trying to tell us all that a piece of allthread; which is generally between 25-35 on the Rockwell C scale cut into a spindle that Grizzly themselves told me was Rockwell 45 C minimum? How does something so soft cut into something so hard?


----------



## RussFairfield (Apr 27, 2006)

I suspect that the missing link in this story is that the inside taper of the spindle was chewed up from either damage or a bad reamer long before the taper on Beall mandrel was inserted into it.

I say, shame on the demonstrator for not checking the taper in the spindle for dirt or damage before using it, especially when it is a strange lathe. Sticking a finger in any inside MT before using it is a good working habit.

All of this only proves that if something can go wrong, it will always happen when 50 people are watching.


----------



## ilikewood (Apr 27, 2006)

> All of this only proves that if something can go wrong, it will always happen when 50 people are watching.



Hey Russ, don't they have a name for this? []  He visits me too!


----------



## DCBluesman (Apr 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Rifleman_
> What happened is not a debatable issue. A wreck is a wreck, not always a situation where there are "both sides of the story".
> What happened, happened.
> You may be right about 'old school', much of what we see in today's media is not truth but the story as the producers want to portray it. I'll stick with facts and truth. And, I don't have my foot in the stirrup to help ride off in fear when I tell it. As much as some wish I would.
> We digress. A Beall (two L's) lathe mount, buffing system stuck in the lathe because the Morse Taper was turned from an all-thread rod and some of the threads remaining on the taper jammed into the spindle. Fini.



Gee--so now I'm suppose to take your observation, which was far less than scientific, as fact.  You've expressed your vantage point and I'm suppose to think the subject is "fini"?  Think again, Frank.  I've witnessed many things in my life that turned out to be pure misperceptions on my part.  Whether you are willing to admit it or not, you didn't gather all of the facts.  You reported on a "point-in-time" observation and decided that the Beall product was at fault.  That's a load of rubbish.  Do a little research.  Ask a few questions.  Maybe your visual observation can become a quantifiable judgement.  Until then, it's claptrap.


----------

