Mod Marv's Lantern vise

[Frank S]

I like to say that the difference between me (or whoever I am speaking with, if applicable) and a _________ (insert Machinists, Mechanics, and other Builders from Engineers, etc.) is that they have had the training, and I (or the other person) have/has not. The way I learned most of this stuff is to jump in and try things, and of course get help from good folks like you when I am at a loss. I can't imagine what trying to do this hobby would have been like before we had the internet. if I can get good instructions and the right tools, I will attempt all kinds of jobs. Probably comes from growing up on a small farm in the 60s, where we had to be our own mechanics and tech support.

In my opinion that was the best way to grow up and learn also grew up on a farm in the 50's & 60's

[Toolmaker51]

I like to say that the difference between me (or whoever I am speaking with, if applicable) and a _________ (insert Machinists, Mechanics, and other Builders from Engineers, etc.) is that they have had the training, and I (or the other person) have/has not. The way I learned most of this stuff is to jump in and try things, and of course get help from good folks like you when I am at a loss. I can't imagine what trying to do this hobby would have been like before we had the internet. if I can get good instructions and the right tools, I will attempt all kinds of jobs. Probably comes from growing up on a small farm in the 60s, where we had to be our own mechanics and tech support.

Well, it's not as different that it seems. Few schools provide what a family farm gives, self-sufficiency. Trial and error is keystone of deduction. You jump in where your interests are drawn. Only where we get 'the bug' varies. Most show up hungry, but nibble. Others stay for the buffet. Our 'training' barely different; our mentors were physical beings; we may have asked about A or B, or been assigned to do so. This works for lateral minds, but better initially as a linear. I see the internet as lateral, utilizing A or B is linear, until an issue pops up. So a search (lateral) starts; you screen for linear info, bombarded by lateral. Some stick in deeper.
I hadn't been near a farm until late teens, none in family are tradespersons, no significant reason for me being drawn in at all. Until I happened upon a certain book; literally that was it. Hooked, but reeled my self in, lol. Positive a huge percentage have some equally pivotal occurrence.
Ego-wise, I have little regard for most non-trade occupations. Ego isn't best term; psyche-analysts might label as id. But reward part is when I feel the "did it, it's right, it works". I get no satisfaction from intangibles and rarely share "did it's" with outsiders. They don't give a whit.

[Metalmuncher]

You are more than welcome. Good job. I should have said +/- 1/16" because this was totally TLAR or ETS( engineer to stock) and was surprised it was so close to actual measurements. But your dimensions are much more legible than my chicken scratches. But hey, you said rough estimation so rough it is. Sorry I couldn't get it exactly overhead.

No worries at all! I am quite happy with your provided info! Thanks!!

Truthfully, I find it very hard to ever get a photo directly perpendicular to an object on a flat surface. Every time I try, I end up with the shadow of my phone, camera, etc. on the object. So I deliberately take a lot of close up photos like this on an off-angle to get better lighting. I just wanted to explain the mechanics behind how I did the process in case the info would be useful to anyone else. And how to compensate for the variance in angle. It may not be a perfect way to get dimensions from something, but it will get you close. My first attempt was with a photo of a real helicopter, to determine the diameter of its wheels and the dimensions of its landing struts, in order to size them realistically for a model. (It was a USCG H60 ). I got some dimensions for the helicopter fuselage and its rotor blades online, and was able to use that to scale the wheels and struts, since I couldn't find info on them. It worked out very well. I hope someone else can make use of this technique someday, perhaps to duplicate something when they have only old photos of it.

[Metalmuncher]

metalmuncher it looks like you have a handle on it, however most things unless they need to fit someone else's previously made items are pretty much up to the maker's requirements as to size
Marv does a lot of model making therefore his tools are sized relative to his needs C-bag sees something then duplicates it as per his requirements and has come up with some really good mods to tools others have made. I rarely use fasteners smaller than 3/8 16 and most usually 5/8 11 or larger some of my projects might weigh in at several tons while most folks projects will fit in the palm of my hands.
That being said there have been times when even the smallest tools made here such as this lantern vice would be a bit on the largish side when I am repairing or making parts for an old revolver or rifle which I haven't done in quite a while

The reason this tool interests me is that I do quite a bit of projects with SH Capscrews, which can't be cut to length with things like crimping pliers, even though they are the same size and threads, because they are hardened. I find its cheapest to buy them by the box online rather than pay high dollar for a few at a store, and I often need some a little shorter than the ones in the box. So I cut a lot of them down to length. Usually by locking a pair of nuts on the right spot, sticking the assembly in a vise, and using a pneumatic cutoff tool. Then cleaning up the end of the thread, if unscrewing the nuts didn't do that for me. So I thought something like this lantern vise might simplify that process.

One idea simmering in my mind is to modify the tool so that it incorporates a standard 1" hex thread die where the screw is held, such that when I remove the cut or ground down screw, it cleans the threads. Obviously would only work for screws longer than the die thickness. Just an idea....still thinking about the practicality of that one.

Actually, this Lantern Vise rather reminds me of the Rike Vise I made from plans I got on LMS, only on a smaller scale.

[Metalmuncher]

Well, it's not as different that it seems. Few schools provide what a family farm gives, self-sufficiency. Trial and error is keystone of deduction. You jump in where your interests are drawn. Only where we get 'the bug' varies. Most show up hungry, but nibble. Others stay for the buffet. Our 'training' barely different; our mentors were physical beings; we may have asked about A or B, or been assigned to do so. This works for lateral minds, but better initially as a linear. I see the internet as lateral, utilizing A or B is linear, until an issue pops up. So a search (lateral) starts; you screen for linear info, bombarded by lateral. Some stick in deeper.
I hadn't been near a farm until late teens, none in family are tradespersons, no significant reason for me being drawn in at all. Until I happened upon a certain book; literally that was it. Hooked, but reeled my self in, lol. Positive a huge percentage have some equally pivotal occurrence.
Ego-wise, I have little regard for most non-trade occupations. Ego isn't best term; psyche-analysts might label as id. But reward part is when I feel the "did it, it's right, it works". I get no satisfaction from intangibles and rarely share "did it's" with outsiders. They don't give a whit.

An interesting vantage point. I like to think that knowledge is far more valuable as a shared commodity than it is when it is hoarded. The ones for whom I have little regard are the ones who try to hide knowledge from anyone actively seeking it. What good is knowledge that dies with you in your grave? I'd rather leave a knowledge legacy to those coming along after me, and help them feel the same accomplishment that I feel when I finally find the solution to a stubborn situation, and, indeed, "it works". I've been totally frustrated too many times to ever wish that on anyone else. It is why I like to "leave bread crumbs" on my travels through forums just like this one. I find answers here, and hopefully provide a few myself.

[C-Bag]

Cutting these bolts off with the band saw doesn't make the big mess a cutoff blade does. I used to do the nut thing too, but with this vise I just clamp the head in the jaw after trimming it up and use the disc grinder to bevel/chamfer the whole end of the cut bolt. No problem starting the nut afterwards.

To each his own, but for me threading the jaw would not make it grab small bolts.

I don't know if you have metal cutting verticle bandsaw, but I converted an old Harbor Freight 14" wood band saw with a double reduction to get it down to around 120ft per minute and it's turned into one of my most used tools. Much safer than using the horizontal bandsaw in vert mode or any kind of abrasive cutoff wheel.

[Frank S]

When it comes to the scale of a photo I have several times spotted an object of a known size near or preferably on the subject itself otherwise scale can become askew. any object in the fore ground will make the subject appear smaller than it is likewise the opposite can occur when the standard is behind the subject.
I've met a few who thought everything they knew was an intellectual secrete when the knowledge they thought was their's and their's alone was usually something they had obtained form others in the first place I don't have much time for those either.

[Metalmuncher]

Cutting these bolts off with the band saw doesn't make the big mess a cutoff blade does. I used to do the nut thing too, but with this vise I just clamp the head in the jaw after trimming it up and use the disc grinder to bevel/chamfer the whole end of the cut bolt. No problem starting the nut afterwards.

To each his own, but for me threading the jaw would not make it grab small bolts.

I don't know if you have metal cutting verticle bandsaw, but I converted an old Harbor Freight 14" wood band saw with a double reduction to get it down to around 120ft per minute and it's turned into one of my most used tools. Much safer than using the horizontal bandsaw in vert mode or any kind of abrasive cutoff wheel.

The threading die addition is still just an idea. It would still need the clamping action in addition to the die.

I do have a horizontal/vertical metal bandsaw typically sold by HF or farm stores (I got mine years ago at Tractor Supply). It just hit me that this vise design could be easily clamped in the saw. I guess I was still thinking of the hand operated cutoff method. My only other issue is that I like to keep a rather coarse blade in that saw for cutting stock, so I would have to change the blade back down to a higher TPI to cut small screws. Most of what I use are 4,6,8,10, and sometimes 1/4 diameter. And, of course, their metric counterparts. I never had much use for metric stuff until I got that 7x10 lathe years ago, followed by a mini mill. You learn really quick to deal with metric sizes on those. I started buying the metric screws to do machine repairs, upgrades, or mods where I am fastening to a stock metric hole on the machine. Eventually I recently broke down and got metric spiral flute taps to go with my SAE ones, so now dealing with metric screws is no biggie anymore.

This will probably sound funny to you guys, but the biggest thing I have against that little pneumatic cutoff tool is......the noise! I like quiet machines. The band saw is much easier on the ears. So worth the time to swap out a blade, I think.

[Frank S]

Metalmuncher I was giving you r threading die some thought . If you used a split die and removed the expander screw and made the lantern type vice one piece or a simple die stock that instead of having handles to turn it with it could be made long to fit in the jaws of a vice or tool post or about anything when the die is clamped it would hold the screw tightly when released the bolt/ screw could be removed cleaning the end thread as it came out

[Metalmuncher]

When it comes to the scale of a photo I have several times spotted an object of a known size near or preferably on the subject itself otherwise scale can become askew. any object in the fore ground will make the subject appear smaller than it is likewise the opposite can occur when the standard is behind the subject.
I've met a few who thought everything they knew was an intellectual secrete when the knowledge they thought was their's and their's alone was usually something they had obtained form others in the first place I don't have much time for those either.

For sussing out the dimensions, I try to get the actual dimensions X and Y of something on the image. Otherwise it would be all guesswork. Even if it is only a part of the image, it should still tell the scale well enough. You're right about the optical illusion stuff though. I recently saw a show talking about some salt flats in South America which for part of the time each year are covered with shallow water. They showed how, when you have no background to use for a scale reference, you can play optical tricks that make sizes of foreground and background get way out of whack. Makes for some funny looking photos.

Then there's that guy hoarding his "intellectual secret" (he got from someone else) which isn't even true.