If I was in the market for a lathe that small, I’d probably just buy a slightly larger mill and work on rotating parts vertically, TBH.
If you were committed to wanting a small lathe and CNC, I’d just put linear rails on some of the larger 8020 profiles and rig a spindle from a cartridge spindle. Honestly, though, an 8x16 lathe is kinda bare minimum for steel parts unless you are working VERY slowly. The 7x14 I had worked, but at that scale, I’d be working hard to implement a clough42 ELS conversion so that threading didn’t suck so bad.
If this is genuinely something you want advice/help with, feel free to email me.
EDIT: I don't really have room for a manual mill which would be large enough for this sort of thing to make the parts I want(the Grizzly would be really pushing its limits).
It's more idle speculation at this point in time --- I did save the electric motor from replacing the garbage disposal recently (cracked housing) and I also have a key duplicator I fished out of a dumpster (working!) and really, it should be workable to fabricate something given the tools I have.
If you did a writeup on making a lathe w/ 8020 profiles and a cartridge spindle (source?) I'd be interested --- what would the total landed cost be?
There’s some other threads in this discussion bemoaning the lack of diy machine builders…and, I am really unclear how this Sherline issue is related? To me, this is a question of value for money. Sherline products were always interesting, but also nowhere near competitive as machines. With controllers like masso and acorn available, converting a mill like a grizzly, precision Mathews or even a Bridgeport are just way more value for money.
The other end of the spectrum is tools like the Langmuir bed mill/router or the avid benchtop routers with available 4 pole spindles.
There’s a lot of options, closed loop steppers are sub $100, servos from DMM or teknic are readily available and awesome.
Sherline has a product set that just felt like a compromise on everything.
In the last decade, I’ve built 3 routers, rebuilt a bed mill, converted a Bridgeport, and am currently building an automated beam saw. All the options in the market are drastically better than they were 15 years ago.
It’s sad to see a fixture of the community going out of business, but it also a reflection that the business is different now. Given the many different kits and options available, it just doesn’t make sense to buy small work envelope machines for most people.
Sherline was good for businesses and labs that needed a light mill for rare use. Hobby users weren’t a good market because they’re always searching for used deals and conversions.
I haven’t shopped the Sherline catalog in a long time but this appears to be a case of a company failing to keep up with changing market conditions. Depending on how old the owners were, that may have been not too unreasonable. Some of these companies get founded by people who put a lot of work into establishing the small business, make their wealth, and then make the choice to let the business continue operating as a lifestyle business with low inputs until the income drops too low to pay the expenses. Not every company is designed to be a multi generational juggernaut.
IMO it all comes down to the desire to have too my "copy" without enough to say. the people who generate it don't value their own output enough to try, which is a great way of intuiting that they have had the requirement to create copy delegated to them without them expecting that copy to be useful in any way.
In other words, "doneness" is the metric of quality for most of this stuff.
Not sure that's the right way to look at it, given that Google's huge head start in capital and talent did not prevent AI competition at all. It's a demonstration of reasonable, non-problematic dynamics between smaller and larger companies. (Of course, there's an implicit risk here, the folks at Cruise probably worked harder and more passionately than Waymo staff too.)
you are right. I guess what I was thinking was that google's bigness was essentially a bad capital allocation strategy, since they were lazy and not motivated by absolute return, but some combination of acceptable risk, politics, personal preferences, etc in a large management team that has seemed...disconnected for quite some time.
They have a structural advantage in cash flow and stability of funding, but stability is also a handicap when disruption is the objective.
It's a notoriously double edged sword. When you create huge absolute return incentives, you get things like the Airtable acquisition, where everyone's sad that you built a $1.2B company because some investor at some point mistakenly thought it was an $11B company.
Yeah, that makes sense. I suppose the flip side of all of this is that neither OpenAI nor Anthropic have made a lot of money relative to their spending. Google is probably just trying to be more prudent. But, AI so far is a money spending contest, more than a money making one.
All the proposals I’ve seen would set the marginal tax rate on the 120 so high that his earnings would end up more like 40k from the 120k job and then he gets his 60. So, still some benefit to working, but a very progressive tax rate on higher earnings. Not sure I agree with this, but that is what I’ve seen.
But, have you any code that has been vetted and verified to see if this approach works? This whole Agentic code quality claim is an assertion, but where is the literal proof?
I think there is plenty of room for innovation in hobby machines, but IME, hobbiest value work envelope maybe even more than pros.
reply