Anyone use the OBM surface grinder attachment?

[kuraki]

It is a valid point though. The surface grinder I have set up and in use is a 55 year old doall, and it'll hold a tenth without really trying. (snip)

Flatness? Parallelism? How did you check this? When was the last time you reground your chuck? How did you check the flatness of the chuck?

I see this stated here and there and unqualified it doesn't really mean anything. I also think it's an exaggeration that doesn't need to be made to establish the superiority of a surface grinder to anything involving a belt.

 

[Don Hanson III]

The tricky part will be finding someone that's used both options, and is experienced enough to compare it to a real surface grinder.

Javan, I have both, an old Delta Rockwell with stone wheel for 20+ years & a Wuertz for several weeks. One will not replace the other. The real surface grinder is much more accurate but the Wuertz is much faster! I use the real one for folders & the Wuertz for fixed blades & finial clean up of damascus billets. I would not want to be without either now!

 

[kuraki]

Javan, I have both, an old Delta Rockwell with stone wheel for 20+ years & a Wuertz for several weeks. One will not replace the other. The real surface grinder is much more accurate but the Wuertz is much faster! I use the real one for folders & the Wuertz for fixed blades & finial clean up of damascus billets. I would not want to be without either now!

That's the thing I think these devices excel at.

 

[jdm61]

When the Wuertz came out, I thought it was very cool, but expensive. I also thought that the design compromises necessary to make it fit a KMG made it appear to be a bit less sexy and intuitive than the one specifically made for the TW90. Today, I look at the prices of old beat up surface grinders on EvilBay and think that maybe is isn't so expensive after all.

 

[Don Hanson III]

When the Wuertz came out, I thought it was very cool, but expensive. I also thought that the design compromises necessary to make it fit a KMG made it appear to be a bit less sexy and intuitive than the one specifically made for the TW90. Today, I look at the prices of old beat up surface grinders on EvilBay and think that maybe is isn't so expensive after all.

I have the Wuertz SG on a KMG and like it better than used horizontal. But I like the way Burr King has theirs set up even better.

 

[Ken H>]

OK folks, on the OBG version: https://www.ebay.com/itm/263146335672?

With the grinding wheel mounted to the same tooling arm the adjustment is mounted to, do you think that might make it a bit more accurate than Travis's version with the SG tooling arm in a separate slot than the grinding wheel? No movement to speak of between magnetic chuck and wheel.

 

[Don Hanson III]

OK folks, on the OBG version: https://www.ebay.com/itm/263146335672?

With the grinding wheel mounted to the same tooling arm the adjustment is mounted to, do you think that might make it a bit more accurate than Travis's version with the SG tooling arm in a separate slot than the grinding wheel? No movement to speak of between magnetic chuck and wheel.

It might, but Travis' as no movement there.

 

[Ken H>]

I guess the place I was thinking was installation in tool arm slot. Those are not a machined place at all - usually a good bit of slack there. Once the bolt is tightened down the tool arm is locked and no movement at all. BUT - does that assure the magnetic chuck is in exactly the same plane as when it was trued up with that grinder wheel? By mounting the grinding wheel on the same tooling arm, the magnetic chuck will ALWAYS be in exactly the same position in respect to the grinding wheel. I can see there being some variance between chuck and wheel, but maybe not enough to worry about.

 

[Don Hanson III]

Ken, I see what you mean, but I've not experienced any accuracy issues here. I do disassemble when not using to hang each component on the wall and when reassembled it's dead on. I use it almost every day & it's even more accurate now than when I first used it.

 

[Ken H>]

Don, Thanks for the comments - I've not used my SG enough yet to fully understand if all the ins 'n outs of using it. Yesterday I did use it for a slipjoint blade and backspring.... boy, that sure works slick! They are within a couple of tenths now - MUCH easier than anything I've done in the past.

I've also decided a 2" wide chuck might be better (easier?) to use than the 2.5" wide chuck. When surfacing the chuck, my grinder had problem being able to move the belt the full width of the 2.5" chuck.

 

[Don Hanson III]

Ken, I just took a close look & you are right. It would be more accurate if all mounted on the same arm. But it's not really an issue.

I did two slip joint blades & springs on mine yesterday, but finished on the real SG with stone. The damascus blades were way too thick & the SG attachment took off .030 each side very quick. Blades and springs were all with in a couple thou, but was using a very worn 60 grit belt

Having to track the belt side to side is the weak point for sure. But it beats everything cept a real SG & still way faster than that.

 

[Ken H>]

en, I just took a close look & you are right. It would be more accurate if all mounted on the same arm. But it's not really an issue.

Thanks again for comments Don - your statement is exactly my feeling also, I do think it "might" be a tad more accurate, but not sure it's really an issue. About the ONLY place it would come in is if the wheel didn't stay exactly in same plane as the magnetic chuck. I think they will stay close enough to be just fine. BUT - with the wheel fixed in position relative to chuck, it'd be sure to stay the same.

I sorta like the idea - but does require having an extra wheel. I'm using my 8" contact wheel. It would be easy to try out, just drill a 5/8" hole in tooling arm that holds magnetic chuck and mount wheel. Since there's well over an inch of travel in the adjustment, I think that would work pretty good. I think OBG came up with a good design.

Ken H>