View Full Version : new tool holders not right.

j king
11-28-2010, 02:47 PM
Bought a couple tool holders for my bxa size tool post.

These things have the same number on them.They are totaly different in physical size but fit the tool post.They fit as they should but the tool needs to stick out over 1/2" just to clear tool post. Anyone else see something like this?



I am not too happy....Get what you pay for I guess.

11-28-2010, 03:17 PM
I don't understand your description and problem.

I like the looks of newer version better. My tool post is an AXA size. I mount only one tool in a holder. That new version looks as if it would accomodate both a turning and facing tool in one holder better.

j king
11-28-2010, 04:28 PM
Sorry byron. I suck at communication. thats why I work best alone .LOL. The new holder is the little one.. I bought 2 of the Shars holders. The big one was one that came with the tool post...The seller had dimensions listed on site but since it was for a bxa and had the same number I didnt think twice about needing to measure what I had. Since he did have the dimensions listed I assume responsibility. Just seems strange. Looks like a toy one next to the original...

11-28-2010, 04:40 PM
The ones that came with my set were larger than the replacement/extra holder blocks, I bought. I asked and was told, they were made by a different Chinese manufacturer, using the same part number. The said its like a tire, not all P245R75/15 tires are exactly the same size. They asked if it fit, I said yes, his next comment was something similar to "well what else do you want".


j king
11-28-2010, 04:46 PM
"The said its like a tire, not all P245R75/15 tires are exactly the same size. They asked if it fit, I said yes, his next comment was something similar to "well what else do you want"."

Heck..Tires should be fairly close to the stated size..That was a stupid statement they made. How much difference is too much to be acceptable?If it has 100 tho past the dovetail ok? It is just kinda cheesy..

J Tiers
11-28-2010, 06:51 PM
it looks to be 25% shorter, which is going to affect the ability to use multiple tools in a similar manner by swapping. One will hang out a lot more, which may affect chatter etc.

The thing "fitting the toolpost" is only part of the deal..... you'd kinda like it to be the same as the others so they are "interchangeable" with respect to the tool and work also....... otherwise what good is a QC toolpost?

it could fit the post and fail to hold a tool.... do they think THAT is "OK" also? Which brings up the point... the smaller one also looks as if the toolspace is not as high..... is that so?

bob ward
11-28-2010, 06:59 PM
All of my 20 or so BXA holders are like your small one, its interesting that the longer ones are around.

With 16mm holders, for most of what HSMers do I don't think you will see any difference in how the 2 lengths perform. The longer ones may be an advantage at the extremities of machining endeavour.

11-28-2010, 08:00 PM
I suggest you post pictures (top view) of the two tool holders mounted on your tool post. I think I see what your problem is but some others won't. I.E. the original (top) holder is long enough to at least be flush with the body/other set of dovetails on the tool post but the new (bottom) ones are not, thus adding 1/2" to the unsupported length of the tool.

Note that while shars gives some dimensions, they leave out the ones which are relevent to this issue and also don't show pictures of the tool holder assembled on the tool post.

11-28-2010, 08:33 PM
I've experienced the inverse of your circumstance:

The original bxa holders that shipped with my 12" Grizzly lathe were small, similar to your Shars holders.

The extras I purchased (both from Grizzly and Tools4Cheap) were large - similar (seemingly identical) to your larger holders.

11-28-2010, 08:51 PM
I wouldn't worry to much about it. You may find a use for the short holders in a tight spot so keep them. I think you can get the larger Chinese holders from CDCO for $9 each but you have to replace the set screws as they are to soft.