-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Gunsmithing Metric Threads
- Thread starter Turd in the Pool
- Start date
- Status
WOW !!!!!!
I was looking to see what direction this thread was going and found out.
This is just MY opinion on this latest subject.
Everyone has the right to do what they want "Right". with that said, I will comment on My beliefs and thoughts.
First= I feel that the Smith owes it to his customer to test fire the rifle before he gives it to him.
Second= From a liability standpoint the Smith should test fire it first.
Third= He should test it with at least a max load to find and eliminate any problems that mite show up under these conditions.
Not everyone does this the same way so my way is no better than anyone else<It is just the way I feel comfortable doing it.
I am anal about checking everything also, "BUT" Shit Happens. So I remote test every rifle with what I call a 'blue pill' (Around 2
grains over the maximum load) I then do a good inspection of the fired case, the bolt, the chamber (With a bore scope) and the action.
By Remote I mean with the rifle secured in a lead sled and at least 30 feet of string to set it off the first time and normally from
behind my truck. I do not expect anything to happen but in case it does I will go home intact.
I have the utmost confidence in my work but owe it to my family and the customer and his family to repeat this process "EVERY TIME".
A good friend and Gun smith blew up two rifles in his career and he was very carefully with his machine work but made a simple mistake
(He used the wrong head space gage because the etching was worn and not clear and looked like the right one). Most of the time if we make
a mistake we do it over and over again (Like if we misspell a word) He did not tell me what happened the first time because he was to
embarrassed and was injured (And knocked out because he was shooting it off sand bags) the second time he remotely tested it (Fortunately)
because he destroyed it.
No one is infallible and I just feel It is an obligation to my self and the owner to take steps to prevent and problems. Beside that some times the metallurgy is off and things that we take for granted fail at no fault of the Smith.
Even the factory's proof test before selling there rifles. and believe me they blow up one every now and then.
Just the way I feel about building rifles for others.
J E CUSTOM
PS: I have never blown up one of my rifles but if I ever do It will be on the end of a Longgggggg string.
I was looking to see what direction this thread was going and found out.
This is just MY opinion on this latest subject.
Everyone has the right to do what they want "Right". with that said, I will comment on My beliefs and thoughts.
First= I feel that the Smith owes it to his customer to test fire the rifle before he gives it to him.
Second= From a liability standpoint the Smith should test fire it first.
Third= He should test it with at least a max load to find and eliminate any problems that mite show up under these conditions.
Not everyone does this the same way so my way is no better than anyone else<It is just the way I feel comfortable doing it.
I am anal about checking everything also, "BUT" Shit Happens. So I remote test every rifle with what I call a 'blue pill' (Around 2
grains over the maximum load) I then do a good inspection of the fired case, the bolt, the chamber (With a bore scope) and the action.
By Remote I mean with the rifle secured in a lead sled and at least 30 feet of string to set it off the first time and normally from
behind my truck. I do not expect anything to happen but in case it does I will go home intact.
I have the utmost confidence in my work but owe it to my family and the customer and his family to repeat this process "EVERY TIME".
A good friend and Gun smith blew up two rifles in his career and he was very carefully with his machine work but made a simple mistake
(He used the wrong head space gage because the etching was worn and not clear and looked like the right one). Most of the time if we make
a mistake we do it over and over again (Like if we misspell a word) He did not tell me what happened the first time because he was to
embarrassed and was injured (And knocked out because he was shooting it off sand bags) the second time he remotely tested it (Fortunately)
because he destroyed it.
No one is infallible and I just feel It is an obligation to my self and the owner to take steps to prevent and problems. Beside that some times the metallurgy is off and things that we take for granted fail at no fault of the Smith.
Even the factory's proof test before selling there rifles. and believe me they blow up one every now and then.
Just the way I feel about building rifles for others.
J E CUSTOM
PS: I have never blown up one of my rifles but if I ever do It will be on the end of a Longgggggg string.
Last edited:
You're not a transplant are you J E? I hate to give fellow Txn's a hard time.
I don't know why everyone's making a big deal over testing. I've previously stated that testing is a good idea. I just don't see the need to test a bolt gun because I already know the outcome. I know it sounds cocky and may bite me someday but I ain't worried. I have confidence in my ability. Thru the yrs, I've fired many rnds through guns that close on a field gauge. They don't blow up. The primer just gets a little flat. I suspect your friend did something else wrong. I also think it's a bad idea to "proof" test with an overload. But, each to his own.
Semi autos are a diff. story. I test every one if the work I do is function related.
I don't know why everyone's making a big deal over testing. I've previously stated that testing is a good idea. I just don't see the need to test a bolt gun because I already know the outcome. I know it sounds cocky and may bite me someday but I ain't worried. I have confidence in my ability. Thru the yrs, I've fired many rnds through guns that close on a field gauge. They don't blow up. The primer just gets a little flat. I suspect your friend did something else wrong. I also think it's a bad idea to "proof" test with an overload. But, each to his own.
Semi autos are a diff. story. I test every one if the work I do is function related.
Your not giving me a hard time. We are just discussing this thread and I respect your opinion. I just don't want to be around
when something goes wrong.
Springfield armory has/had a list of searial numbers that had problems with heat treat and also some different batches of barrels
that were dangerous And so do Other rifle makers, There are several years of Mauser's that I would not build on ether.
I am sure you do great work or you would not bother to test fire your rifles. I have seen to many failures not to be safe when I am dealing with 65,000 PSI.
The reason I test with a "Over load" (I never load hard enough that I cant open the bolt) is to assure that everything is sound and functioning
properly.
What my point is, There are things that the smith has no control over that can fail and I would rather find out remotely than up close and personal.
And yes I am a native Texan (For 71 years) and you have my permission to give a fellow Texan a hard time
J E CUSTOM
Last edited:
I'm well aware of the probs With Springfields and such. Savage, Browning and Rem bbl problems. Life is risky!
BTW, I like the brakes you're making.
BTW, I like the brakes you're making.
Seems funny to me that no one has mentioned the peculiarity in these pics. Anyone care to point it out?
Great catch! And quick too!;-)
The advantage is being able to go from external to internal threading without changing the position of your cross slide. Bonus; Cutting on the back side of the hole makes it a lot easier to find the threads when truing receiver threads.
BTW, I like the brakes you're making.[/QUOTE]
Thanks. I have a few more test to perform on the Assassin Brake on the larger calibers and will post the results as soon as the video is finished.
These test should conclude all the R&D I wanted to do and maybe enlighten a few people in the process. I have discovered many things that are contradictory to popular belief.
J E CUSTOM
Thanks. I have a few more test to perform on the Assassin Brake on the larger calibers and will post the results as soon as the video is finished.
These test should conclude all the R&D I wanted to do and maybe enlighten a few people in the process. I have discovered many things that are contradictory to popular belief.
J E CUSTOM
I have discovered many things that are contradictory to popular belief.
J E CUSTOM[/QUOTE]
Love your train of thought;-)
Thanks for the correction if it is that. I don't pay to much attn to nomenclature. I'm more of a picture kind of guy. No need to thank me for the tip;-)
I hate to burst your bubble but it's not an uncommon practice to turn the tool upside down.
are manual lathes designed so the cutting forces are pushing down on the vee ways or pulling up?
Guess you've been truing actions that way for years. I don't have any formal machining training to speak of. That post wasn't meant for master machinists like you, but for the aspiring up and coming that have to wing it like I did. Maybe someday, I'll be worthy of cleaning your lathe;-)
Maybe it is going against the grain of the design but it works. Helps to have a heavy machine;-) I doubt cutting a thou or 2 on a pass would be a prob on those old flat way machines.
I'm not claiming to be a master machinist, I'm far from it for sure. I've just been fortunate to have some very good gunsmiths to teach me what I know.
I'm not going to state their names, because quite frankly I don't want anyone on here thinking my comments represent theirs. I don't see how that is relevant any way.
PM me, I won't "out" them. I've just never seen anyone else do it. But then again, I don't get out much;-)
you didn't invent anything here. I remember reading about this technique years ago in some book. lots of people cut external threads using the tool upside down and spindle in reverse when they are nervous about threading up to a shoulder. I personally don't like the idea because you are relying on the weight of your carriage and gibs to control the cut instead of the ways like the machine was designed.
slant bed turning centers are designed totally different than a vee way manual lathe.
Agreed. They are pretty much designed to run tooling this way. In my experience and for many purposes running the tool inverted on a manual causes no problems although on potentially heavy cuts I wouldn't do it for reasons you state.
Last edited:
Just as I suspected. No pm. The relevance is you are a liar.
I'm not saying I invented anything. You guys can hash out the semantics of what the best mascara is or how long Gucci has been making purses. All I know is I figured this out on my own. There is a sticky on the top of this forum on truing a 700 action. Quickly scanned the comments and saw no mention of utilizing this method. (one was a retired machining instructor) I don't use google anymore but my dogpile search didn't show this method anywhere on the 1st 2 pages. Went to youtube and only found 1 instance and it was a cnc machine. Hardly applicable in truing pre-exhisting threads unless it's a toolroom lathe.
You f'ers can downplay this all you want. Again, my intent of this portion of the thread is to help the dumbasses like myself that don't know everything.
If any of you bitches had balls you'd post something significant but I can see that that ain't gonna happen so I'll do it myself.
Damned rjb! that's brilliant! Thanks for sharing!
or better yet
You figgered that out all by yourself? Bless your pointed little head;-)
Last edited:
Nice diversion. He's working on his image;-)
Care to throw up something significant?;-)
The only thing that is relevant is that you are a hack gunsmith who doesn't know how to cut a metric thread or even the difference between the cross slide and the compound on a lathe. I'm not going to PM you shit because I don't give a damn about telling some hack who taught me to build a rifle. I feel sorry for any sucker that has you build him a rifle.
Feel free to show us some of your masterpieces! Hack is a matter of perspective. There is no question about the fact that I can cut 1 or 2 metric threads. Look at the pics. If you don't believe your eyes, come down and I will show you.
Back to the turn of the topic of this thread, show us some pics of your setup. You should have your tool inverted by now;-) LIAR!
You are a complete idiot. I don't thread with the tool upside down for the exact reasons 300sniper pointed out. Go look in the AW and Sako TRG picture threads if you want to see a couple I've built. I'm sitting on the side of a mountain on vacation so I'm going to get back to enjoying myself and do what I should have done after I first figured out you were an idiot and block you. Hopefully for everyone else on here Frank will ban you soon.
Sorry your mind is handicapping you and the same goes for 300sniper. You bitches look awful funny climbing over your lathe trying to find the threads on the front of the hole when it's so easy to invert the tool and see what you are doing on the "right" side;-) Try thinking outside of the box.
I really don't give a damned about seeing your work. Just wanted to give you the opportunity to prove yourself. Saw your post on TRG threads and you couldn't remember the pitch. Believe me, I will swear you're an expert if you need me in court;-)
Thx for blocking me. 1 less idiot I have to deal with. Glad I could make your vac. more enjoyable;-)
Question to myself; Who the F would be on the internet while on vacation? Oh yea, Mr. Ward;-)
Hammer Down Frank! Grin
Well fuck me running, RJB has got to be the most arrogant, jealous asshat this board has seen in a long time.
Congratulations, you've taken dumphuckitude to a new level!
hangunnr
Congratulations, you've taken dumphuckitude to a new level!
hangunnr
Heh heh,
I'm not sure if I should be embarrassed or impressed with all of you f'ers running around with boners for me.
In my quest to find an example of someone threading with an inverted tool I came across this.
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...0468-dave-tooley;-send-me-my-rifle-parts.html (sorry Dave)
Makes me wonder how this one made it past the 1st page.
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...462-when-gunsmith-wont-return-call-email.html
Not that I really care but I am amazed that there is not one soul with the balls to admit that they have been doing it wrong like I had for years and thank me for the tip;-)
I'm not sure if I should be embarrassed or impressed with all of you f'ers running around with boners for me.
In my quest to find an example of someone threading with an inverted tool I came across this.
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...0468-dave-tooley;-send-me-my-rifle-parts.html (sorry Dave)
Makes me wonder how this one made it past the 1st page.
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...462-when-gunsmith-wont-return-call-email.html
Not that I really care but I am amazed that there is not one soul with the balls to admit that they have been doing it wrong like I had for years and thank me for the tip;-)
HTF do you see the cutting edge of your tool when it is upside down on the back of the part? you can see the bottom of the tool, sure but guess what? that isn't what you are trying to see when chasing a thread. I think i'll stick to a method that loads the machine as it was designed and I can see the cutting edges of the tool.
as far as inverted tooling being discussed, 2009: http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...ous-about-threading-my-barrel.html#post165793
and thanks for thinking outside the box and inventing the use of inverted tools on lathes. I would have been stuck a couple years ago without your knowledge: http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...ictures-weekends-shop-time-2.html#post1316074
It's not a matter of seeing the cutting edge of the tool. It's a matter of ease of use. (not to mention setup) My lathe is covered with oil and chips. I damned sure don't want to climb on it to index a tool on a receiver thread in the blind side of a hole.
All I get out of that thread and your post is a bunch of guessing, I heard and I think. No one talks about actually applying the method on threads.
Re: Nervous about threading my barrel
one more though if threading to a shoulder is the main concern.
i have not tried this yet but i have heard it recommended a few time and it makes sense. run your spindle in reverse, your threading tool upside down and feed away from the shoulder. this way you can disengage the half nut at your leisure.
since i use triangle threading inserts, if i inverted my threading tool the tip would be away from the shoulder. this made me think about using my internal tool correct side up but on the back side of the part, again with the spindle in reverse and feeding away from the shoulder. it's not as rigid as the external tool but i usually take light cuts when threading anyways.
i have heard people say that with a loose lathe, using an inverted cutting tool can cause chatter since the cutting action is "lifting" on the carriage. i think an internal tool on the backside would eliminate any possibility of this.
I don't get your obsession with threading to a shoulder. Maybe it's your lathe. Mine is a Clausing Colchester. Reverses with a throw of a lever. Back out your tool and reverse simultaneously. Works like a bread slicer;-)
Don't know if you read my post in that same thread but obviously I left the building before you posted your theory.
I don't post much anymore because of crap like this. Please add me to your ignore list as well.
I'd venture to say Berm could fill a small lake with the chips he's cut and a good percentage would be stainless.
Sounds like you and your mentor are working with a piece of taiwanese or a worn machine. Get a good lathe and stainless machines like aluminum. Some 300 series stainless could give you the devil but most bbls are 416. Cuts like butter.
Bottom line is, if you are scared, get a shot out bbl and thread it for practice. Otherwise, go for it. Worst case is stop if it doesn't go right and anyone can that knows what they are doing can bail you out if you don't cut too much metal. Good luck!
Judging from the finish on your threads on the weekend shop time thread, I don't think you need to worry about chatter caused by the inverted tool lifting the carriage. To your credit, it looks like you got better by the bottom of the 1st page.
Get back to me when you can give me some examples of my method in practice. Trust me, I do it. Not just hear about or think about it;-)
Last edited:
What? Now that you've magically discovered inverted tooling all on your own you're now saying that running tooling conventionally is wrong?
As I stated before this is nothing new and certainly not something to pat you on the back for. I've flipped tooling every which way as needed to get a job done as have machinists for I'm sure generations now. Maybe if you had offered up the tip a little more humbly it might have been better received.
Last edited:
Did any of you read this post?
You guys that are ripping me a new one should put your ego and pride aside and try it. You will never true an action's threads another way again. It's easy to pick up the threads because you can see the tip of the cutter/insert without gyrations or a mirror. I know it's hard to admit that you didn't think of it before. I felt really stupid when I finally did;-) The bonuses are that you don't have to waste time changing the "compound" and if your cutting tools are set up right the threads are an exact match as opposed to a possible gnat's ass slice of a degree variance you get when you move the compound.
Frankly Scarlett, I couldn't care less how I or my opinions are received;-)!!! I don't come on here to look for a date. I'm a simple man that looks for simple solutions for the tasks at hand. My point isn't the inversion of the tool but it's application. If this method is so common, (which seems to be the general consensus) it should plastered all over the internet;-) My dogpile search may be lacking so by all means, show me some links of folks doing it this way.
I'm not trying to start crap. Just trying to share a sliver of what little I know before I die. I've said before, I tend to question conventional wisdom. Take it with a grain of salt or just ignore it. It's your loss;-)
If you call moving the compound when changing from external to internal threads "conventional", Yes I say it's wrong;-)
BTW; I just finished a rebarrel on a big name receiver mfg that had tapered threads. CNC ain't all that;-)
You guys that are ripping me a new one should put your ego and pride aside and try it. You will never true an action's threads another way again. It's easy to pick up the threads because you can see the tip of the cutter/insert without gyrations or a mirror. I know it's hard to admit that you didn't think of it before. I felt really stupid when I finally did;-) The bonuses are that you don't have to waste time changing the "compound" and if your cutting tools are set up right the threads are an exact match as opposed to a possible gnat's ass slice of a degree variance you get when you move the compound.
Frankly Scarlett, I couldn't care less how I or my opinions are received;-)!!! I don't come on here to look for a date. I'm a simple man that looks for simple solutions for the tasks at hand. My point isn't the inversion of the tool but it's application. If this method is so common, (which seems to be the general consensus) it should plastered all over the internet;-) My dogpile search may be lacking so by all means, show me some links of folks doing it this way.
I'm not trying to start crap. Just trying to share a sliver of what little I know before I die. I've said before, I tend to question conventional wisdom. Take it with a grain of salt or just ignore it. It's your loss;-)
If you call moving the compound when changing from external to internal threads "conventional", Yes I say it's wrong;-)
BTW; I just finished a rebarrel on a big name receiver mfg that had tapered threads. CNC ain't all that;-)
Last edited:
I've already wasted far too much time with you and this thread, so what's a few more minutes?
1) I'm not a machinist.... at all. I read the gun-smithing board 'cause it's interesting and I learn a lot. I didn't know about running the tool on the backside until now, or about G codes. You clearly want someone to acknowledge you're better-ness. Fine, you could out lathe and mill me on your worst day. I'm not worthy.
2) It does not matter who's better than who or who first thunk it. Unless you're an arrogant attention whore who gets self worth from taking credit (even if it's not due). Then I guess it matters.... to you.
3) You're not special. No really, you're not special. There are tons of very talented folks here (the hide) who discuss what they did, or want to do, or want to learn about, or help someone else do. The difference is that they have humility and respect for their fellow hider. You are a blight in this community, an entertaining one, like a train wreck or a forest fire, but a blight nonetheless. Even you seem to think you should be banned.
I posted some pictures that I thought were funny because they made light of the caddy behavior, but truth be told, I'm appalled, and that's why I'm posting this vs deleting it as I've done before. I'm not a fan of banning people because of poor taste or juvenile antics, and I'll admit it's fun to watch, but I think you convinced me it's not worth it anymore. The spirit of this board is one of collaboration and shared insight or experiences. Am I wrong about that? Why make it a contest? If you can't act like a big boy and stop the needless chest beating (yes that's you) and be civil and constructive, then I for one can live without the entertainment.
1) I'm not a machinist.... at all. I read the gun-smithing board 'cause it's interesting and I learn a lot. I didn't know about running the tool on the backside until now, or about G codes. You clearly want someone to acknowledge you're better-ness. Fine, you could out lathe and mill me on your worst day. I'm not worthy.
2) It does not matter who's better than who or who first thunk it. Unless you're an arrogant attention whore who gets self worth from taking credit (even if it's not due). Then I guess it matters.... to you.
3) You're not special. No really, you're not special. There are tons of very talented folks here (the hide) who discuss what they did, or want to do, or want to learn about, or help someone else do. The difference is that they have humility and respect for their fellow hider. You are a blight in this community, an entertaining one, like a train wreck or a forest fire, but a blight nonetheless. Even you seem to think you should be banned.
BULLSHIT! Why else would you keep posting to this stupid cat fight you've started if it wasn't to swing your dick in the hope everyone else will suck it. That's why it been so entertaining. It's like you're bi-polar, you say one thing, then contradict yourself two posts later. You're not fooling anyone. You're not here to discuss, or to learn, or even to "share a sliver of what little [you] know". You're only here for your favorite form of entertainment, playing the F U game. (i think that's how you phrased it) The predominant tone of your posts is derision. You are a troll. That's lame.
I posted some pictures that I thought were funny because they made light of the caddy behavior, but truth be told, I'm appalled, and that's why I'm posting this vs deleting it as I've done before. I'm not a fan of banning people because of poor taste or juvenile antics, and I'll admit it's fun to watch, but I think you convinced me it's not worth it anymore. The spirit of this board is one of collaboration and shared insight or experiences. Am I wrong about that? Why make it a contest? If you can't act like a big boy and stop the needless chest beating (yes that's you) and be civil and constructive, then I for one can live without the entertainment.
Last edited:
You must have missed the part about me being a simple man. That's a lot for my simple mind to digest. I'll do my best to address some of it;-)
It's obvious that you are not a machinist. If you were, you'd understand the brilliance of my method and appreciate it. Why don't you use some of your brilliance to persevere to perceive what I'm doing and show me some examples of others that apply it? Better yet, pm all of the talent on the hide, ask them how they cut action threads or have them check out this thread and get them to chime in.
I guess you missed the part about my search;-)
It's strange that after all of the mud slinging, all I hear is crickets except a few diehards like you that know little about what I'm saying. The concept is so simple and right in front of every machinist but it gets overlooked.
The reason I keep posting is I hope someone (worthy) will try it and help convince the naysayers.
Good try but I'm not going to take any civility and constructivism advice from you, you slope headed sloppy bitch;-)
Last edited:
I just did something revolutionary, I glued two dildos together end to end making a two headed buttplug for RJBGuns to use with his machining instructor, praise better follow suite for this in this thread or I'm gonna throw a little hissy fit, I got your back rjb
Did you check your work or are you confident enough in buttpluggery to know it's right without checking?
Jeez RJ you make this feel like going to the dentist to get a tooth pulled.
Because pictures aren't on the internet to prove it you think machinists aren't aware of your new discovery? I asked the guys in the shop yesterday if they ever thought of running tooling inverted and they gave me a blank stare like it was a trick question or something. Well of course they've all run inverted tooling at one time or another. Hell there's a slant bed CNC lathe six steps away that's full of it and why wouldn't we run it on the manual if needed? Maybe there aren't as many stupid machinists out there that you think there are. Maybe they just don't find the need to take pictures and post them on the internet to validate their work.
I have tried and do use your new found method. I thought I've stated that already. I don't find running the tool inverted on the backside easier when chasing an internal thread for the simple fact that I can't see the insert as well as I can running the toolholder conventionally on the front side and no I don't have to crawl over my lathe or use mirrors to see it either. It did occur to me at one point in the past that it might be a great way to true an action. I tried the setup and rejected it because of what I just stated. Maybe it's the small IC insert (3/8") on my internal toolholders that makes it hard to see but it's just my experience and my preference.
Here's some parts I made using your discovery. Of course I made them prior to your announcement of your discovery but I can't prove it because I didn't post it on the internet prior to you doing so. The male thread was made first and is a gage for the lock collar (and for future collars). I used the toolholder inverted for the internal threads so I didn't have to move the compound for reasons you have given. I just validated one of your discoveries in case you didn't notice.
Attachments
Last edited:
Heh heh heh,
Nice attempt to save face Scarlett. Unfortunately, I'm going to have to put your ass over there in the LIAR pile with Mr. Ward;-)
Since you've been machining gravity meter parts for so long and if this were common practice, why would you have to ask the "guys in the shop"?
Let me paint a little picture of the way your fake scenario would have really played out.
And in unison, they said, "why the hell didn't I think of that?";-)
Given the fact that your desire to tell the truth is in question, I'm going to have to reject the notion that you cut the internals in this manner.
How the hell do you find it easier to see the insert on the blind side of the hole? All you are doing is kissing a couple thou. off the back of the thread. You don't need to see the top of the insert to set the point on the back of it. I have to use a magnifier but that's beside the point. That reminds me of the "lifting the carriage" issue. How the hell is a .002" cut going to do that?
As far as your opinion about finding it on the internet, you can find everything else there. Is this some deep dark machinists' secret? As much as you bitches hate my ass, if it were out there, this site would have crashed from y'all flooding it with links;-)
Now, over to the pile you go!
Thanks Al. We are not debating inverted tooling sir. The issue is cutting mating id and od threads without moving the compound.
Nice attempt to save face Scarlett. Unfortunately, I'm going to have to put your ass over there in the LIAR pile with Mr. Ward;-)
Since you've been machining gravity meter parts for so long and if this were common practice, why would you have to ask the "guys in the shop"?
Let me paint a little picture of the way your fake scenario would have really played out.
And in unison, they said, "why the hell didn't I think of that?";-)
Given the fact that your desire to tell the truth is in question, I'm going to have to reject the notion that you cut the internals in this manner.
How the hell do you find it easier to see the insert on the blind side of the hole? All you are doing is kissing a couple thou. off the back of the thread. You don't need to see the top of the insert to set the point on the back of it. I have to use a magnifier but that's beside the point. That reminds me of the "lifting the carriage" issue. How the hell is a .002" cut going to do that?
As far as your opinion about finding it on the internet, you can find everything else there. Is this some deep dark machinists' secret? As much as you bitches hate my ass, if it were out there, this site would have crashed from y'all flooding it with links;-)
Now, over to the pile you go!
Thanks Al. We are not debating inverted tooling sir. The issue is cutting mating id and od threads without moving the compound.
Just for the record you keyboard warriors crack me up. Most of your feeble attempts to rag on me and general assassery are laughable. You're a bunch of internet commandos.
Last edited:
- Status
