I finally have my first nice drill press, a 1 hp 12 speed floor standing model that uses a Morse taper in the spindle (MT3) and a Jacobs taper in the chuck. It came with the arbor floating around loose in the outer shipping container. When I unpacked it, the arbor was under the ribbed bottom of the table, at the bottom of the container.
The arbor is dented in more than a dozen places. Several of the dings are big enough that when I wrap a rag around it, and turn it with my other hand, I can feel the dings traveling around under the rag.
I suspect this arbor is not usable, and I shouldn’t try to seat it. I suspect I could damage the taper inside the spindle if I do.
Can I trust this arbor, and install it without hurting anything?
If the arbor is to mate the chuck with the spindle taper, you are really really likely to damage the spindle taper by using the arbor. (If I understand the situation.) Can the arbor be returned? If the damage is minimal, you could stone off all high spots on the arbor and cross your fingers.
If the configuration is like this Porter-Cable press with the chuck mounted on the arbor then I wouldn’t use it. See page 15, lower right diagram. Anything out of round translates to run-out in the chuck, and even if it seats in the center you could be damaging the parts. It’s new, get a new part, no reason to start out with a flaw.
The arbor is a separate piece in between the spindle taper and the chuck, yes. Very similar to the Porter-Cable press. In fact the whole drill press looks very much like that one, except many of the parts have minor differences.
I presume the arbor can be returned, though it’s only marginally worth doing so, as McMaster seems to sell the right size for only around $30. I hope Shop Fox will send me a new one on the basis of me just calling them, or maybe sending photos.
What I was afraid of was that I would damage the spindle in this brand new machine, and the chuck too. Thank you for the confirmation!!!
Those different drill presses probably come out of the same factory in China with the minor difference made for brand uniqueness. It’s the same with an incredible number of tools now.
I’ve wondered about the “same factory” idea. But I had a test case recently that made me think something different was going on.
I ordered on Amazon a 30 gallon fuel dispenser with pump, for diesel. This is a box with 2 wheels and 2 feet on the bottom, a bar handle, a hand crank vane pump with aluminum castings as housing, a hose, a fuel gage based on a lever arm hanging down inside, and a filling tube with cap. It arrived damaged - the pipe the pump threads onto had been deformed. And small wonder. It was very thin walled, and had bizarrely fine threads, much finer than pipe threads. This delicate tube end was right against the inner wall of the big cardboard box with no padding. So I got its box assembled back together and sent it back for refund.
Then I ordered what I thought would be the exact same thing from the exact same factory, but for pickup at Tractor Supply, asking to make sure that I could open the box when I picked it up, and not accept it if there was damage.
When it arrived I was surprised to find that NONE of the construction details matched. I had photographed the first one thoroughly in case there was pushback on accepting my return, and when I compared the photos with the second unit, everything I could think of to check was slightly different.
But other than the branded label they paste on the front, nothing looked any different in the ordering information. There were no differences that were selling points. The point is, other than the label, they weren’t trying to make any money off of any uniqueness, they weren’t getting any value from it. The information available to the potential customers does not make any of these little things detectable. And yet it would create a great deal of extra expense to design all these trivial differences into the products.
So I have an alternative theory for some of these situations: somebody has a factory, and they see a product selling well for a price they think they can beat, and so they show the description to their engineers and ask can we make this for less than $100 or $400 or whatever, and if it’s a go the things get designed over and over again by multiple factories. It’s reverse engineered, but not to figure out some great secret, just to get in on what they think will be some good action.
There are a number of different cases. They do steal designs from each other as readily as they steal ours. Sometimes new factories pop up, or are simply refitted to make a certain design because it becomes popular. I think it the case of the drill press it’s probably the same factory for the main components, there are a number of well identified cases like that. But it could be just the base, post, table, and head castings made one place, and a different drill press constructed in different factories.
Either way, it’s actually a boon for us, these tools couldn’t be made for these prices here, and these days the quality is a lot closer to the ‘good old days’, and the availability of spare parts is increasing.
Just because somebody might be interested, FWIW, the base, post, table, and head castings are different designs for the Porter-Cable versus the Shop Fox. From across the room they’d look like pretty much the same product (unless they’re different colors).
Ah, that does sound like a clone then. Possibly starting with an even older US designed and cloned multiple times overseas. That does sound more likely for a machine like that.