Shopsmith Forums

Thanks for that JPG. I have found it strange that that dial won't actually ever line up with the slow, (and) fast both to the machines arrrow.

roneg wrote:Better news. It is all back together and running fine...so far New power cord, new main belt, new re-built control knob. Because I stripped the cheesy aluminum gear on the old one!. Lastly new on/off switch. Oh..all new belt cover,motor pan, and motor mount screws. All I can say is who ever designed these greenies must of had needle nose hands! Long ones!

Is it safe to conclude, after all of this, that the interference between the motor belt and the way tubes was eliminated by changing out the motor pan?

Whatever. It is good to know you can now make saw dust.

Honestly I believe the issue is not unique to me, or even this machine. After purchasing this newer model, I notice it also has a very close tolerance in the belt , and way tube. On my particular machine.. I noticed a simular very close tolorance between the motor. Pan, and power cord. Just not enough room allowed (in my opinion). Resulting in a very tight motor to pan mount that could effect the geometry. After installing the new power cord and mounting the motor, I noticed the strain relief had pushed back out a eighth of a inch on one side. It refused to go back in completely. Indication to me, it is bound against the motor/pan.

If you have the correct strain relief it will be very difficult to maneuver and especially so unless you have the appropriate tool for that strain relief. A pair of pliers or long nose is not the correct tool. I posted a diagram that shows how close the belt is to the way tubes. About 1/2" or so. Close, in this case is not an issue.

You could drop the motor pan (with motor mounted) and perform a visual inspection. There is no excess of space in the pan with the motor installed but the space is adequate.

I do assume (of course you do) that you have an appropriate motor. One built for a Shopsmith. I don't know of any suitable substitute.

dusty wrote:If you have the correct strain relief it will be very difficult to maneuver and especially so unless you have the appropriate tool for that strain relief. A pair of pliers or long nose is not the correct tool. I posted a diagram that shows how close the belt is to the way tubes. About 1/2" or so. Close, in this case is not an issue.

You could drop the motor pan (with motor mounted) and perform a visual inspection. There is no excess of space in the pan with the motor installed but the space is adequate.

I do assume (of course you do) that you have an appropriate motor. One built for a Shopsmith. I don't know of any suitable substitute.

Yea, correct motor. I posted pix earlier..somewhere in this thread. (post 258019) I'm pretty sure of the strain relief, as it came from another Mark V, had to drill the pan out to 3/4 hole, but yea you never can tell! What is the proper tool pray-tell? You listed the two favorite go to tools for me to install the strain relief. BTW, with the motor mounted... I can visually inspect about nothing on this old greenie! Adding the access hole under the logo plate, was one of shopsmith's better ideas!
I can't even see that there is only 1/16 inch between the quill and the on/off switch with quill extended! with the motor mounted, I have to fish the control sheave loop off the "pork chop" with a stick!..small stick.. Geese! I had the motor/pan combo on, and off for the better part of a day, till I finally got it workable. Turns out, I had not enough wire between the strain relief and switch, when it was in it's original position. (that's when the needle nose , and slip-joint pliers came into play) Don't know how the previous owner used it this way. I never did find a suitable place to attach the ground wire!! Ended up adding a nut to the top motor pan screw (on the user side).

I have done very little work on any of the older Shopsmiths so I can not say I understand. I just know (I think) that a great deal of the infrastructure is similar.

The important issue for me to understand is whether or not the motor pan was bent to the point the motor belt rubbed on the way tubes. If not here I said to myself "No Way". Was I dead wrong?

If you are real curious about that 1/16" between the quill and the on/off switch, you could always drop the motor pan and peer in the understands. Oh, power cord and switch. To avoid the need to disconnect wires from the switch when I want to drop the motor, I installed inline connectors in the power cord. Still disconnects the motor from power but I don't have to work up inside where the swich is.

As for a convenient place to connect the ground wire...my first thought would be to drill a hole in a convenient location.

Yes an "A" headstock can be a challenge.

I would attach the ground wire to the motor under one of the tie bolt nuts.

As for switch/quill clearance, switches with terminals extending out the 'back' were not intended way back then.


I would absolutely use quick disconnects between the switch and the power cord as well as between the switch and the motor. The ground wire is an exception to that. Less necessary with later headstocks.

The historically correct power cord strain relief is quite small. The cord had a small molded grommet retainer molded onto the cord.

JPG wrote:Yes an "A" headstock can be a challenge.

I would attach the ground wire to the motor under one of the tie bolt nuts.

As for switch/quill clearance, switches with terminals extending out the 'back' were not intended way back then.


I would absolutely use quick disconnects between the switch and the power cord as well as between the switch and the motor. The ground wire is an exception to that. Less necessary with later headstocks.

The historically correct power cord strain relief is quite small. The cord had a small molded grommet retainer molded onto the cord.

It is interesting. The Magna 10E and maybe very early 10ER's had no hole in the head stock behind the ID plate. Most (?) 10ER's do. Then Magna produced the MK 5 with the "A" head stock and no hole. I wonder what the thinking was there.

jsburger wrote:
It is interesting. The Magna 10E and maybe very early 10ER's had no hole in the head stock behind the ID plate. Most (?) 10ER's do. Then Magna produced the MK 5 with the "A" head stock and no hole. I wonder what the thinking was there.

I attribute it to lack of forethought. Since there was little to no reason for access in the 10(other than replacing the power switch and the motor was easily removed) no thought was given to access for lubrication etc.. I do not think user lubrication was either since they did not have an oil hole in the movable sheave hubs either.

I am curious what the first Greenie manual had to say about lubricating the movable sheaves.

JPG wrote:

jsburger wrote:
It is interesting. The Magna 10E and maybe very early 10ER's had no hole in the head stock behind the ID plate. Most (?) 10ER's do. Then Magna produced the MK 5 with the "A" head stock and no hole. I wonder what the thinking was there.

I attribute it to lack of forethought. Since there was little to no reason for access in the 10(other than replacing the power switch and the motor was easily removed) no thought was given to access for lubrication etc.. I do not think user lubrication was either since they did not have an oil hole in the movable sheave hubs either.

I am curious what the first Greenie manual had to say about lubricating the movable sheaves.

I agree, but that begs the question why did they put the hole in the model 10 in the first place?