BREAKING NEWS: Shopsmith, Inc. Has A New Owner

[BigSky]

P.S. Speaking of "new" designs from Shopsmith, I guess no one has any clue what the Shopsmith X-6000 design was in the pic that I posted from the Shopsmith museum (very briefly hinted at that interview Scott did)...sure would like to know more about it and why it didn't come to market.
viewtopic.php?p=311607#p311607

I'd like to know more about it also. Other design concepts must have been considered even if they didn't make it to that level of prototyping. The original Shopsmith was a feat of engineering to make an affordable variable speed device. It was heavily dependent on the speed changing mechanism which involved a large number of parts. The PowerPro has made the headstock design much simpler while increasing power, speed range, and programmability which has barely scratched the surface of it's capabilities.

I could go on too long easily on this subject. I hadn't even mentioned the possibilities of a PowerPro module mounted on a gantry or XY mechanism as an overhead routing and milling spindle. The world of tool users includes wider needs than the traditional woodworker. Shopsmith needs to expand it's experience and knowledge base for plastics, metal, and composite materials, including the tooling for those purposes.

I mentioned the smaller motors which could reduce the cost of the machines. Different grades of machines could be made for better price positioning. This is why I think the headstock design should mount all the components on a strong, compact central frame and use lightweight covers that could be made in both heavy stamped steel or inexpensive {gasp} plastic. The plastic covers may break some day but the parts underneath will retain their value and you can always upgrade the plastic. A simple cabinet based version could provide table saw, disk sanding and other rotary tools, horizontal boring, and bowl turning capability at a lower entry price. A simpler stand based version like the Work Station might not have the table saw capability but still power a band saw, scroll saw, and other SPTs.

I would love to see the day when the Shopsmith web page opens on an array of the various of Shopsmith multi-purpose tool configurations and not just the latest version of the basic Mark V design.

I've already gone on too long and haven't even talked about the cosmetic changes that in the X-6000. Mr. Cupps talked about different colors with Scott. It also needs a standard color scheme that isn't gray on gray. Even if prices can go down some Shopsmiths will still be expensive products and need to look like it. The documentation needs to look like it belongs with expensive tools also. And while it's reasonable to charge something for hardcopies of manuals there's no reason they shouldn't be available online at no charge, or at most some basic entry fee included with a new machine purchase. And then there needs to be service available that doesn't involve expensive shipping charges and long waits. I'll just stop now or I'll go on all afternoon.

Just don't overlook the fact that redesign involves redesign and tooling costs as well. Those need to be recovered near the front end.

[edma194]

Just don't overlook the fact that redesign involves redesign and tooling costs as well. Those need to be recovered near the front end.

It's up to the new owner when those costs need to be recovered. There clearly will not be anything to recover without a significant investment though.

[thedovetailjoint]

I think the headstock should be redesigned around the PowerPro components in multiple forms. One form would replace the conventional headstock. The auxiliary spindle can be eliminated reducing the parts count,

Ed, how would you accommodate the Jointer with such a design? In my opinion it's high enough already, so unless the machine was lowered for table sawing. Also, when the machine is running at Sawing speed the jointer is running at the proper speed for a jointer, thanks to the 1.6X speed variance between the two drive hubs. If we are voting I would vote for the continuation of a high-speed lower PTO, but it could be driven differently with a Smart Motor. Scott

[edma194]

I think the headstock should be redesigned around the PowerPro components in multiple forms. One form would replace the conventional headstock. The auxiliary spindle can be eliminated reducing the parts count,

Ed, how would you accommodate the Jointer with such a design? In my opinion it's high enough already, so unless the machine was lowered for table sawing. Also, when the machine is running at Sawing speed the jointer is running at the proper speed for a jointer, thanks to the 1.6X speed variance between the two drive hubs. If we are voting I would vote for the continuation of a high-speed lower PTO, but it could be driven differently with a Smart Motor. Scott

Speed wouldn't matter with the PowerPro. It will be programmed with the correct speed for the joiner which could be further refined based on specific wood characteristics.

For the height, how difficult would it be to have a pair of pulleys and a belt that connects the joiner to the upper spindle on either side of the headstock? This could be an integral part of the joiner including a full housing so the belt is never exposed.

BTW: The PowerPro controller should allow you to program the type of SPTs you have mounted and on which side. For example you could set up a bandsaw on the left side of the headstock and when you select bandsaw speeds it will know the proper direction to run.

[thedovetailjoint]

Speed wouldn't matter with the PowerPro.

When I use my Mark V for sawing and jointing I am going back and forth from the saw to the jointer, jointing between rips. I don't stop the motor between operations. Using the PowerPro as you describe would necessitate changing the speed between these two operations, or live with a slow jointer, which is one of the reasons I don't run my jointer on the Power Station.

[edma194]

When I use my Mark V for sawing and jointing I am going back and forth from the saw to the jointer, jointing between rips. I don't stop the motor between operations. Using the PowerPro as you describe would necessitate changing the speed between these two operations, or live with a slow jointer, which is one of the reasons I don't run my jointer on the Power Station.

First, a belt and pulley drive used to connect the joiner to the main spindle could provide the same speed differential as there is between the main and auxiliary spindles. So the joiner and saw can be run at different speeds.

Also, for the PowerPro this could be handled in software. The motor doesn't have to be stopped to change speeds. You don't need to do anymore than push a button on the control panel to change speed between operations. If the Gen 2 software doesn't allow that to be done with a single button push then Gen 3 should.

[RFGuy]

Wait...I thought it was a "smart" motor now? Shouldn't it know what is connected and how?

Be careful the monikers one ascribes to a product.

[HopefulSSer]

When I use my Mark V for sawing and jointing I am going back and forth from the saw to the jointer, jointing between rips. I don't stop the motor between operations. Using the PowerPro as you describe would necessitate changing the speed between these two operations, or live with a slow jointer, which is one of the reasons I don't run my jointer on the Power Station.

First, a belt and pulley drive used to connect the joiner to the main spindle could provide the same speed differential as there is between the main and auxiliary spindles. So the joiner and saw can be run at different speeds.

Wouldn't that essentially be an aux shaft that adds back the parts count that had been removed?

[edma194]

Wouldn't that essentially be an aux shaft that adds back the parts count that had been removed?

Yes, some of the parts. But it's moving them out of the headstock and adding them to the joiner.

It would also eliminate the idler bearing assembly which is a weak point in the PowerPro headstock because of the high belt tension, and also being an unnecessary part.

That just assumes the headstock hasn't changed more and placed the motor spindle at the same position the auxiliary spindle had. The motor could then drive a joiner directly and maintain the same speed differential between the main and auxiliary spindles.

[edma194]

To recap and clarify:

I propose that the PowerPro headstock be redesigned. It currently fits the PowerPro components into the conventional headstock housing which was designed for the mechanical speed changer. A design around the actual physical and functional characteristics of the PowerPro motor and electronics could be very different. I don't think the large aluminum casting as an exostructure is necessarily the best approach for a system concentrated on a single variable speed motor component like the PowerPro, and it restricts the versatility of using the core components in different configurations. Removing the idler assembly and auxiliary spindle are just possible ways to reduce the parts count and cost of a headstock.

Scott has asked about the use of the joiner if no auxiliary spindle was available. Unlike other SPTs the height of the joiner is significant. Because operating it requires holding down the workpiece as it is moved over the cutting head raising the joiner would make it more difficult to use and I agree with Scott that should be avoided.