Record CL3 - new or new old stock?

[matt_southward]

Sorry, more questions!

After losing faith in my new Axminster lathe, which is going back tomorrow, I was thinking of replacing it with a Record CL3. But I wondered on your opinions on whether the new CL3 is better than the old? There are some interesting spec changes on the new one, and I don't have enough experience to know how significant they are. There is a supplier near me with some of the older ones, which would be convenient, but if the new machine is better I'll look in to getting that. Thanks.

 

[stewart]

I've got an old stock CL2 which I upgraded to CL4 standard with a speed genie converter - the electronic speed control is fantastic and I wouldn't go back. I've not seen the new spec lathes but MT2 is a definite improvement and a bigger thread on the headstock is also a good improvement. Having said that, I still turned 12-14 inches comfortably on CL2 ( I also have the bowl turning rest for turning larger than 12 inches). The sealed bearings might be a good improvment too but it wasn't too onerous putting a drop of oil in the oil cup every so often. I no longer use the CL2 as I was fortunate to purchase a second hand Wivamac lathe.

Have fun deciding!

 

[Phil Pascoe]

New - larger thread and morse taper. Hollow spindle (iirc). Sealed bearings. A better machine all round ... unless of course there's a huge price difference that justifies the older older one.

 

[woodbrains]

Hello,

I had the old CL3 for many years, but when I left my old job, having it bolted to the floor etc, my boss asked me to leave it for the price of a replacement. So I now recently got the new CL3 and can compare.

My old CL3 was a British made one, but green, so reasonably recent. The later green ones were Chinese, so it wasn't identical to the new old stock you will be talking about. However, I do think the 2MT head and tailstocks are better. The bed bars are thicker, but not as long, you have to get extensions if you want the 36in between centres. My old CL3 didn't have cam operated banjo or tailstock. I find the cam ones on the new model good, though the old ones worked fine. The later old stock will be cams anyway.

The ball bearings are heavy duty, but noisier than the old bronze bearing. I think I preferred the silent, smooth old model here, but I think the 2MT and heavier spindle nose trumps the old, so on balance, I think the new model is better. The TS on the new is self ejecting, the old needing a knock out bar, whereas the new needs a knockout bar for the HS taper and the old had a threaded ring to remove the taper, so swings and roundabouts there. The new does have a winding handle on the TS which I thought ' yay' that's better, but then it rattles anoyingly when turning so I need to see if I can put a rubber ring on that to silence the thing, it really irritates me. The tool post is heavier, so better for stability. I do like the new Record chuck which I got at the same time.

Overall, I'm happy I swapped for the new model, but if there is a good deal going on the new old stock, I dare say I'd be happy with the old one.

Mike.

 

[Dalboy]

Hello,

I had the old CL3 for many years, but when I left my old job, having it bolted to the floor etc, my boss asked me to leave it for the price of a replacement. So I now recently got the new CL3 and can compare.

My old CL3 was a British made one, but green, so reasonably recent. The later green ones were Chinese, so it wasn't identical to the new old stock you will be talking about. However, I do think the 2MT head and tailstocks are better. The bed bars are thicker, but not as long, you have to get extensions if you want the 36in between centres. My old CL3 didn't have cam operated banjo or tailstock. I find the cam ones on the new model good, though the old ones worked fine. The later old stock will be cams anyway.

The ball bearings are heavy duty, but noisier than the old bronze bearing. I think I preferred the silent, smooth old model here, but I think the 2MT and heavier spindle nose trumps the old, so on balance, I think the new model is better. The TS on the new is self ejecting, the old needing a knock out bar, whereas the new needs a knockout bar for the HS taper and the old had a threaded ring to remove the taper, so swings and roundabouts there. The new does have a winding handle on the TS which I thought ' yay' that's better, but then it rattles anoyingly when turning so I need to see if I can put a rubber ring on that to silence the thing, it really irritates me. The tool post is heavier, so better for stability. I do like the new Record chuck which I got at the same time.

Overall, I'm happy I swapped for the new model, but if there is a good deal going on the new old stock, I dare say I'd be happy with the old one.

Mike.

The new CL3 also has the hollow head stock which means that you could adapt it to use a vac chuck system

 

[Blister]

I would stick with the 1416VS , Ask Axminter to replace it but fully check the replacement before dispatch
The members who have this lathe love them

The C L range of lathes ( order ones ) are all re branded Coronett Lathes that Record purchased / re branded and had made in far off lands

Just my opinion :wink:

 

[woodbrains]

I would stick with the 1416VS , Ask Axminter to replace it but fully check the replacement before dispatch
The members who have this lathe love them

The C L range of lathes ( order ones ) are all re branded Coronett Lathes that Record purchased / re branded and had made in far off lands

Just my opinion :wink:

Hello,

Since the Axminster lathes are also made in far off lands, I'm not sure what point you are making. I'm sure the Axminster us a fine machine, but so is the Record. For the money, I think the Record is fine value for money considering the capacity, build quality and versatility.

Incidentally, Record made these lathes in the UK until relatively recently. I think they were only forced to move overseas because of EU regs made it impossible to make things in this country.

Mike.

 

[selectortone]

Having owned a CL-1 and then upgraded to an Axminster AT1628VS, I would suggest you look at the Axminster Trade Series lathes. The AT1416VS and the AT1628VS are both really good lathes for the money, and much more modern designs compared to the Record Power CL series lathes. If the AT1416VS had a swinging headstock it would be my ideal lathe.

I would be looking at the DML320 if I wanted a Record Power lathe. M33 x 3.5/2MT is pretty much standard nowadays so for that reason I wouldn't entertain 3/4" x 16tpi/1MT. (yes, I know the new CLs are M33)

With the greatest respect to Record lathe users, and I have fond memories of my old CL-1, I wouldn't go back to bed bars again, and variable speed, while not essential, is such a great feature to have I wouldn't want a lathe without it.

I have found both companies' customer service to be fine.

edited for splelling

 

[woodpig]

Having owned a CL-1 and then upgraded to an Axminster AT1628VS, I would suggest you look at the Axminster Trade Series lathes. The AT1416VS and the AT1628VS are both really good lathes for the money, and much more modern designs compared to the Record Power CL series lathes. If the AT1416VS had a swinging headstock it would be my ideal lathe.

Agreed. I'm well please with my AT1416VS. Give Axminster another try or check out the JET range.

 

[Keithie]

If its any help, my final decision line up for buying a lathe was :

machine I want : powermatic 3520B (jet branded) ..but at £2.8k couldnt justify
upper end justifiable (just) : axi 1628vs vs record maxi 1
lower end (min spec) : record dml320 vs jet 1221 (£500 vs£700)

I went for the dml320, feeling that while the jet might be fractionally better (bed etc) the £200 diff was too much
I decided the dml305 wasnt really up to what I wanted but couldnt give you a good reason tbh. Jet 1015 not a contender.

I had a lathe with bars (old coronet) ..they're great but flat bed is better than bars (as I understand it)

Have fun deciding !

 

[Sheptonphil]

I would stick with the 1416VS , Ask Axminter to replace it but fully check the replacement before dispatch
The members who have this lathe love them

The C L range of lathes ( order ones ) are all re branded Coronett Lathes that Record purchased / re branded and had made in far off lands

Just my opinion :wink:

The original was a hobby 1218, not the trade 1416, so the quality wasn't there to start with.

I would say the Record, either new or new old is of a better build quality than the 1218.

Phil

 

[matt_southward]

As ever, thanks for the advice and opinion. I'm not sure it's possible to enjoy choosing unless your budget is very healthy, for me (and no doubt others) it's often a painful "arghhh which one, which one?!". #-o though very much a first world problem I realise, which bears remembering!

So after the advice from you guys I decided to take the machine in myself to Axminster tomorrow, rather than have them just pick it up. I will then be able to take a closer look at the build on the trade series there (the 1416 does look tempting) as one of the issues - to me at least - with the Axminster hobby/trade branding, is that if you have a bad experience with the former, it can colour your judgement on the latter (which I realise is a different level). I know the hobby stuff is cheap, and I wasn't expecting much, but I was expecting it to be somewhat better than I got! Plus Yandles are only down the road from there.

With regard to the Record CL series though - is there something of a love/hate sentiment out there towards the twin bar bed lathes? They do seem to polarize opinion! What is the main problem (perceived or actual) with the bar set up? Is it rigidity, mass, vibration or something else as far as I can tell, and I'm no expert of course, but provided you have a good motor, spindle/bearings and accurate enough bed - a lathe is a lathe, whether new or old - or am I missing something?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Some bar beds flex, some don't - mine (an old 28 - 40) didn't noticeably but I concreted them anyway. Some Records have hollow bars and some solid. They do however make the adjustments harder - the clamping surface is much smaller so needs to be pulled down tighter or the tailstock/tool rest will drift in use. If I were upgrading (which, for what I use my lathe for would be difficult (realistically impossible )to justify) I wouldn't even dream of a bar bed (not that I can think of a better lathe with one).

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

The record CL series are something of a classic design. They're old and ugly and many believe they're out of date. Personally (I owned a CL4 with the older spec) I think they're excellent machines. They're reliable, in fact close on bullet proof and have a great 2nd hand market. Almost without question the most popular lathe design ever sold in terms of numbers of units out there (just look at E bay on any given week).

The issue with the bed bars is interesting and it's to do with flex primarily and perhaps secondarily with the lack of convenience of not being able to stick a tin of MC wax, or sanding sealer on it easily! The flex issue is that because they're spanning a long distance, if you mount a heavy piece of stock, then they could in theory sag in the middle and help vibration once it's spinning, particularly if it's out of true. The thing is that with a 12" swing, you shouldn't really be sticking big lumps of tree on it anyway. So as long as it's used within the capacities that make sense, it's a terrific lathe. I must say, I really liked the older style bronze bearing too, a veritable Rolls Royce of a bearing although less convenient than a hollow spindle for knockout bar use and as Derek said, for a vacuum chuck.

As for the newer spec's viz-a-viz MT2 and M33. Well that's a no brainer. Of course they're better, bigger, more robust and of course clearly the emerging industry standard which means you'll have wider compatibility with chucks, centres, Jacobs chucks and all manner of more exotic accessories.

So I suspect there is some truth in the bed bars thing but I don't personally believe it's any where near as big an issue as it often comes across and the other strengths more than make up for it (if the price is right). Having a headstock that swivels is an immensely useful thing when hollowing deep bowls.

 

[andygc]

Just a small question. Why does anybody think a sealed ball bearing is better than an adjustable plain bearing? The Rolls Royce of lathes, the VB36, uses plain bearings, albeit rather bigger than that in the CL lathes. Of course, plain bearings require more accurate machining than ball bearings, so there's a cost advantage to Record. And "lifetime sealed" does not mean "long-lasting" - it means that the bearings are likely to last longer than the warranty period without needing any maintenence.

I'm not questioning the other changes.

 

[SVB]

Matt,

Apols if you've said earlier, but what is you preferred type of turning? If it is mainly spindle work then go for either and poss the record gives you more between centres for your money. If it is larger or out of balance faceplate work such as bowl or hollow forms then for me a big lump of cast iron and variable speed is a must if you can afford it and I'd be only looking at APTC range.

My 2c anyway.

Simon

 

[matt_southward]

Apologies chaps, I had meant to get back to this sooner, but Christmas kind of got in the way! Happy Christmas all. Anyway...

Matt,

Apols if you've said earlier, but what is you preferred type of turning? If it is mainly spindle work then go for either and poss the record gives you more between centres for your money. If it is larger or out of balance faceplate work such as bowl or hollow forms then for me a big lump of cast iron and variable speed is a must if you can afford it and I'd be only looking at APTC range.

My 2c anyway.

Simon

Hi Simon, that's a fair question and not one that I'd actually answered yet. I'm likely to be turning a fair range of stuff from chair legs to bowls (and out of balance green bowls too) - so yes, a big lump of cast iron with VS would be handy, and what I'd really like. However, at the price I can spend currently (I have a house to finish renovating), there's nothing that can come close to the Record for build/spec/price IMO. I bought the hobby 1216VS as an intro to electrical turning (I would have loved that Jet of yours if I could only have found a bed extension for it), after starting on pole lathes and would have been happy with it if it had been put together right. However, it wasn't and here I am.

Anyway, thanks to everyone's input on here I did take the lathe back to Axi on Friday and had a look at the trade range - which I liked, but not as much as the Jet stuff (nice build and finish), but I couldn't justify the huge extra expense on that I'd already planned because of the aforementioned house, so...I then went on to Yandles and bought a CL3! Though I think I'll be saving for an Axi 1628VS or Jet 1440VS - but that won't be any time soon.

The CL3 is a beast compared to the lathe I took back. It might not be full cast, but it's damn heavy - I have a cracked rib to prove it (don't ask!), the hobby lathe I returned is a toy by comparison. Of course, I'm already peeved with changing the belt over, but I daresay I'll get used to it. Overall I'm happy with what I have for now and I'll see how I get on with it.

Thanks again to all.