How much power should I expect?

[HopefulSSer]

I'm pretty sure the belt is not slipping. (Gilmer belt )

My rationale for "slow" was that if we want test a "lower gear", let's try a "rock crawler gear"! (And yes that's "slow" as in the word "slow" on the dial -- the lowest speed).

Funny that they'd make a thin-kerf combo blade if you wouldn't expect that configuration to work, but I guess marketing triumphed over engineering. Wouldn't be the first time that happened. Sounds like a blade or blades are in my future. But this one does seem to crosscut ok so it's not trash. And that also happens to suggest the blade is the issue, not the machine!

Thanks!

[edma194]

Also make sure your fence and the blade are parallel.

[JPG]

One seldom appreciates the difference a "rip" blade makes until they obtain one!

Ever used a hand crosscut saw to rip? With a hand saw it REALLY matters.

AMEN re the fence/blade alignment.

Do not overlook the effect internal stresses have.

[RFGuy]

I'm pretty sure the belt is not slipping. (Gilmer belt )

Note that I said "drive belt". ALL Shopmith Mark V's have a standard V belt for their drive belt as far as I know. If not, how would it work inside a variable pulley system like the sheaves? The Gilmer belt is the "other" belt in the headstock, but the drive belt would be the one that "might" slip. I would definitely check the "drive belt" for slippage.

MarkVHeadstock.jpg (71.97 KiB) Viewed 878 times

[JPG]

Gotta disagree with that 'also'. I prefer referring to that belt as the motor belt. I think it has more functional driving area than a poly-v belt. As for the gilmer belt not slipping, that is why a friction clutch was added to the drive sleeve.

I am pretty certain the only time I stalled out the quill shaft was caused by the poly-v belt slipping. Adjusting the tension corrected(reduced) that. Severe binding due to crazy man sawing a walnut log (max depth) using a steel 9" rip blade on the SS.

P.S. not the first(nor last) time I disagree with SS's nomenclature.

[HopefulSSer]

I'm pretty sure the belt is not slipping. (Gilmer belt )

Note that I said "drive belt". ALL Shopmith Mark V's have a standard V belt for their drive belt as far as I know. If not, how would it work inside a variable pulley system like the sheaves? The Gilmer belt is the "other" belt in the headstock, but the drive belt would be the one that "might" slip. I would definitely check the "drive belt" for slippage.
MarkVHeadstock.jpg

I misunderstood -- you said check & adjust the tension on the drive belt but there's no way to adjust the tension on the v-belt, correct? Therefore I understood you to mean the other belt since its tension is adjustable.

Regardless, I can bring the motor to a full stop if I feed too quickly so it can be slipping only so much, if it is slipping. But I don't get the impression that it is. The motor seems to slow proportionally to the blade.

[JPG]

So the slippage is total rotating field slippage. :>}

[RFGuy]

Gotta disagree with that 'also'. I prefer referring to that belt as the motor belt. I think it has more functional driving area than a poly-v belt. As for the gilmer belt not slipping, that is why a friction clutch was added to the drive sleeve.

I am pretty certain the only time I stalled out the quill shaft was caused by the poly-v belt slipping. Adjusting the tension corrected(reduced) that. Severe binding due to crazy man sawing a walnut log (max depth) using a steel 9" rip blade on the SS.

P.S. not the first(nor last) time I disagree with SS's nomenclature.

Thanks JPG. Sorry, I was going off of Shopsmith's documentation and didn't know what the accepted nomenclature was here on the forum. I had my "motor" belt slip once when I had binding. Could smell rubber and when I checked the tension I had what I thought was more than enough tension on the poly-V belt, but the "motor" belt was still too loose. I adjusted the eccentric more than I thought I should until I got the proper tension on the "motor" belt. At this tension, my poly-V felt more like a violin string than I would have liked because it was so taut. No more binding after this. Okay, since I opened this can of worms, which belt is MORE likely to slip in your opinion? Are you saying it is impossible for the "motor" belt to slip first in this system? Asking because I am trying to understand here. Apologies if I am confusing the OP's issue, but I still think belt slippage could be the cause.

[JPG]

I gotta admit my limited experience may contaminate my thinking. However the floating sheave is designed to maintain tension on the 'motor belt' up to some maximum load design parameter. I simply do not know if that is more or less than design slippage of the poly-v belt.

The few times quill stalling has occurred over the last half century was due to poly-v belt tension even when the motor belt was severely over worn(3/8").

BTW wearing it to that extreme WILL result in belt jamming between the sheaves eventually.

[RFGuy]

I gotta admit my limited experience may contaminate my thinking. However the floating sheave is designed to maintain tension on the 'motor belt' up to some maximum load design parameter. I simply do not know if that is more or less than design slippage of the poly-v belt.

The few times quill stalling has occurred over the last half century was due to poly-v belt tension even when the motor belt was severely over worn(3/8").

BTW wearing it to that extreme WILL result in belt jamming between the sheaves eventually.

JPG,

Thanks. I definitely have limited experience here, so it is possible I have got something wrong. In the couple of times that I have dealt with the belts on my Mark V (poly V, not Gilmer), what I remember is that once it bound while trying to cut some 8/4 cherry. As soon as it started happening, I stopped the machine and detected a small hint of burnt rubber smell near the headstock. So, I opened it up (no bits of rubber in the motor pan thankfully). I believe the poly V was tensioned at like 1/8" deflection when pushed with a finger and the "motor" belt was well over 1/2" deflection (hence the slip). Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the rule of thumb to tension the "motor" belt to no more than 1/4" deflection? So, I went about adjusting the "motor" belt until I got to 1/4" deflection but at this point the poly V deflection was I don't know how much. Let's just say it was tight, much tighter than 1/8" deflection at that point. I finished my cuts without binding and ordered new belts. Even with new belts after this, what I have noticed is that my Mark V always has much larger deflection on the "motor" belt than on the poly V belt. The problem, as I see it, is there is no independent way to adjust belt tension on the poly V belt relative to the "motor" belt. Is all this normal, or is it possible that something is wrong with my Mark V since I can't get what the expected tension is on both belts with the eccentric adjustment alone?