P_Budzik

In the past I've always used just Unimat, both the SL and Unimat 3.  The old 3 with a cast bed and ways is far superior to the SL.  I now only use a pair of 3's and an SL head mounted on a home made mill.
 

 
I wouldn't recommend going with an older machine that is no longer manufactured because of the limited availability of parts and accessories.  Last year I bought a Proxon 250 because I wanted something a little bigger.  It is a terrific machine.  You get an actual geared power feed and real compound.  Gears are metal and the machine is made in Germany.  It bears a striking similarity to my Unimat construction.  I called the company and was told that one of the design team came from Unimat.  It is a beautiful little machine.  It would be my current first choice for a small lathe.
 

Paul

In the past I've always used just Unimat, both the SL and Unimat 3.  The old 3 with a cast bed and ways is far superior to the SL.  I now only use a pair of 3's and an SL head mounted on a home made mill.
 

 
I wouldn't recommend going with an older machine that is no longer manufactured because of the limited availability of parts and accessories.  Last year I bought a Proxon 250 because I wanted something a little bigger.  It is a terrific machine.  You get an actual geared power feed and real compound.  Gears are metal and the machine is made in Germany.  It bears a striking similarity to my Unimat construction.  I called the company and was told that one of the design team came from Unimat.  It is a beautiful little machine.  It would be my current first choice for a small lathe.
 

Paul

I had a long history with Floquil.  It was the only hobby paint I used.  Awhile back I put up a web page just about Floquil.  I have a PDF of the original "little red book" that Floquil published explaining their paint and how to use it.  I also have the original railroad color chart up as well.
 
The web page is here: http://paulbudzik.com/tools-techniques/floquil-paint/floquil-paint.html
 

I had a long history with Floquil.  It was the only hobby paint I used.  Awhile back I put up a web page just about Floquil.  I have a PDF of the original "little red book" that Floquil published explaining their paint and how to use it.  I also have the original railroad color chart up as well.
 
The web page is here: http://paulbudzik.com/tools-techniques/floquil-paint/floquil-paint.html
 

In the past I've always used just Unimat, both the SL and Unimat 3.  The old 3 with a cast bed and ways is far superior to the SL.  I now only use a pair of 3's and an SL head mounted on a home made mill.
 

 
I wouldn't recommend going with an older machine that is no longer manufactured because of the limited availability of parts and accessories.  Last year I bought a Proxon 250 because I wanted something a little bigger.  It is a terrific machine.  You get an actual geared power feed and real compound.  Gears are metal and the machine is made in Germany.  It bears a striking similarity to my Unimat construction.  I called the company and was told that one of the design team came from Unimat.  It is a beautiful little machine.  It would be my current first choice for a small lathe.
 

Paul

In the past I've always used just Unimat, both the SL and Unimat 3.  The old 3 with a cast bed and ways is far superior to the SL.  I now only use a pair of 3's and an SL head mounted on a home made mill.
 

 
I wouldn't recommend going with an older machine that is no longer manufactured because of the limited availability of parts and accessories.  Last year I bought a Proxon 250 because I wanted something a little bigger.  It is a terrific machine.  You get an actual geared power feed and real compound.  Gears are metal and the machine is made in Germany.  It bears a striking similarity to my Unimat construction.  I called the company and was told that one of the design team came from Unimat.  It is a beautiful little machine.  It would be my current first choice for a small lathe.
 

Paul

The twisted wire method has always worked well for me.
 

The twisted wire method has always worked well for me.
 

The twisted wire method has always worked well for me.
 

Here is my solution for adding direct readout to my Unimat 3's ... but the same idea can be applied to other miniature lathes ...
 
 

Here is my solution for adding direct readout to my Unimat 3's ... but the same idea can be applied to other miniature lathes ...
 
 

Here is my solution for adding direct readout to my Unimat 3's ... but the same idea can be applied to other miniature lathes ...
 
 

Here is my solution for adding direct readout to my Unimat 3's ... but the same idea can be applied to other miniature lathes ...
 
 

Here is my solution for adding direct readout to my Unimat 3's ... but the same idea can be applied to other miniature lathes ...
 
 

Here is my solution for adding direct readout to my Unimat 3's ... but the same idea can be applied to other miniature lathes ...
 
 

Here is my solution for adding direct readout to my Unimat 3's ... but the same idea can be applied to other miniature lathes ...
 
 

Here is my solution for adding direct readout to my Unimat 3's ... but the same idea can be applied to other miniature lathes ...
 
 

Not quite sure you fellas realize how small the part is, check out the reading on the caliper ... I think you would find it very frustrating to make it out of plastic or wood and keep it sharp.  Second, because it's so small, material loss really isn't an issue.  Third, you don't start with square stock because the part is transferred to an indexing head on a milling table, so it is much easier than trying to recenter the stock.
 
The point of the video was to demonstrate a method and develop the concept of putting together multiple processes.  It started by first thinking how are you going to accurately locate the part, so you need a pin (gluing a free floating piece of plastic is hit or miss).  You need convenient way to hold the part when you are doing the free-hand work.  So turning the part off on the lathe solves both those issues.   Using rod stock gives you a center to work from.  The basic shape is generated on the mill and the depth was only .050".  Because it's so small, it only takes a few file strokes and sandpaper to work out the shape.
 
These techniques are not new and have been used by professional model maker machinists and taught to me nearly a half century ago.  I made the video to answer questions from modelers, with no experience in machine work, who want to purchase a lathe or some single machine that they think will be useful.  They don't understand that the majority of parts that they see I've created involve multiple process, not only related to the machines, but also tools like a grinder.  You don't just buy a magical machine and start spitting out great parts ... there's a pretty steep learning curve ... even for setting up the machine.   So when someone asks me about getting into miniature machine work ... I have a simple example that I can point to and say to them, "do you really want to go down that road?"  Especially in the day of 3D printing, which you know will only keep getting better.
 
It's an homage to classical technique that I like to keep alive ... and I had hoped that people could see it for that.
 

Paul
 
 

Not quite sure you fellas realize how small the part is, check out the reading on the caliper ... I think you would find it very frustrating to make it out of plastic or wood and keep it sharp.  Second, because it's so small, material loss really isn't an issue.  Third, you don't start with square stock because the part is transferred to an indexing head on a milling table, so it is much easier than trying to recenter the stock.
 
The point of the video was to demonstrate a method and develop the concept of putting together multiple processes.  It started by first thinking how are you going to accurately locate the part, so you need a pin (gluing a free floating piece of plastic is hit or miss).  You need convenient way to hold the part when you are doing the free-hand work.  So turning the part off on the lathe solves both those issues.   Using rod stock gives you a center to work from.  The basic shape is generated on the mill and the depth was only .050".  Because it's so small, it only takes a few file strokes and sandpaper to work out the shape.
 
These techniques are not new and have been used by professional model maker machinists and taught to me nearly a half century ago.  I made the video to answer questions from modelers, with no experience in machine work, who want to purchase a lathe or some single machine that they think will be useful.  They don't understand that the majority of parts that they see I've created involve multiple process, not only related to the machines, but also tools like a grinder.  You don't just buy a magical machine and start spitting out great parts ... there's a pretty steep learning curve ... even for setting up the machine.   So when someone asks me about getting into miniature machine work ... I have a simple example that I can point to and say to them, "do you really want to go down that road?"  Especially in the day of 3D printing, which you know will only keep getting better.
 
It's an homage to classical technique that I like to keep alive ... and I had hoped that people could see it for that.
 

Paul
 
 

Not quite sure you fellas realize how small the part is, check out the reading on the caliper ... I think you would find it very frustrating to make it out of plastic or wood and keep it sharp.  Second, because it's so small, material loss really isn't an issue.  Third, you don't start with square stock because the part is transferred to an indexing head on a milling table, so it is much easier than trying to recenter the stock.
 
The point of the video was to demonstrate a method and develop the concept of putting together multiple processes.  It started by first thinking how are you going to accurately locate the part, so you need a pin (gluing a free floating piece of plastic is hit or miss).  You need convenient way to hold the part when you are doing the free-hand work.  So turning the part off on the lathe solves both those issues.   Using rod stock gives you a center to work from.  The basic shape is generated on the mill and the depth was only .050".  Because it's so small, it only takes a few file strokes and sandpaper to work out the shape.
 
These techniques are not new and have been used by professional model maker machinists and taught to me nearly a half century ago.  I made the video to answer questions from modelers, with no experience in machine work, who want to purchase a lathe or some single machine that they think will be useful.  They don't understand that the majority of parts that they see I've created involve multiple process, not only related to the machines, but also tools like a grinder.  You don't just buy a magical machine and start spitting out great parts ... there's a pretty steep learning curve ... even for setting up the machine.   So when someone asks me about getting into miniature machine work ... I have a simple example that I can point to and say to them, "do you really want to go down that road?"  Especially in the day of 3D printing, which you know will only keep getting better.
 
It's an homage to classical technique that I like to keep alive ... and I had hoped that people could see it for that.
 

Paul
 
 

While this particular example is an aircraft part, I use the same basic principles and techniques combining machine process with hand shaping, for creating all sorts of small details.  I hope you find it useful.
 
 
Paul
 

Not quite sure you fellas realize how small the part is, check out the reading on the caliper ... I think you would find it very frustrating to make it out of plastic or wood and keep it sharp.  Second, because it's so small, material loss really isn't an issue.  Third, you don't start with square stock because the part is transferred to an indexing head on a milling table, so it is much easier than trying to recenter the stock.
 
The point of the video was to demonstrate a method and develop the concept of putting together multiple processes.  It started by first thinking how are you going to accurately locate the part, so you need a pin (gluing a free floating piece of plastic is hit or miss).  You need convenient way to hold the part when you are doing the free-hand work.  So turning the part off on the lathe solves both those issues.   Using rod stock gives you a center to work from.  The basic shape is generated on the mill and the depth was only .050".  Because it's so small, it only takes a few file strokes and sandpaper to work out the shape.
 
These techniques are not new and have been used by professional model maker machinists and taught to me nearly a half century ago.  I made the video to answer questions from modelers, with no experience in machine work, who want to purchase a lathe or some single machine that they think will be useful.  They don't understand that the majority of parts that they see I've created involve multiple process, not only related to the machines, but also tools like a grinder.  You don't just buy a magical machine and start spitting out great parts ... there's a pretty steep learning curve ... even for setting up the machine.   So when someone asks me about getting into miniature machine work ... I have a simple example that I can point to and say to them, "do you really want to go down that road?"  Especially in the day of 3D printing, which you know will only keep getting better.
 
It's an homage to classical technique that I like to keep alive ... and I had hoped that people could see it for that.
 

Paul
 
 

Not quite sure you fellas realize how small the part is, check out the reading on the caliper ... I think you would find it very frustrating to make it out of plastic or wood and keep it sharp.  Second, because it's so small, material loss really isn't an issue.  Third, you don't start with square stock because the part is transferred to an indexing head on a milling table, so it is much easier than trying to recenter the stock.
 
The point of the video was to demonstrate a method and develop the concept of putting together multiple processes.  It started by first thinking how are you going to accurately locate the part, so you need a pin (gluing a free floating piece of plastic is hit or miss).  You need convenient way to hold the part when you are doing the free-hand work.  So turning the part off on the lathe solves both those issues.   Using rod stock gives you a center to work from.  The basic shape is generated on the mill and the depth was only .050".  Because it's so small, it only takes a few file strokes and sandpaper to work out the shape.
 
These techniques are not new and have been used by professional model maker machinists and taught to me nearly a half century ago.  I made the video to answer questions from modelers, with no experience in machine work, who want to purchase a lathe or some single machine that they think will be useful.  They don't understand that the majority of parts that they see I've created involve multiple process, not only related to the machines, but also tools like a grinder.  You don't just buy a magical machine and start spitting out great parts ... there's a pretty steep learning curve ... even for setting up the machine.   So when someone asks me about getting into miniature machine work ... I have a simple example that I can point to and say to them, "do you really want to go down that road?"  Especially in the day of 3D printing, which you know will only keep getting better.
 
It's an homage to classical technique that I like to keep alive ... and I had hoped that people could see it for that.
 

Paul