Excelsior Hub

[exeric]

This is a picture of the turning department at Excelsior in the later teens. Most all of the turning was done on automatic screw machines which were an early, and efficient ancestor of CNC, hence the dimensions were programmed into the cams that moved the X and Y axes. Operators loaded some machines, and others were fed bars stock automatically. Once a machine was set up, it spit out parts by the thousands. It was the responsibility of the operators, and set-up men to monitor, and change out tooling when tools got dull. The human element was integral to production, and skilled machinists were abundant, as well as good engineers. Still, the output of those factories was enormous, and the quality was very good.

[exeric]

I should mention that even with modern CNC machines that can sense dull, or damaged tooling; a human is still required too replace dull cutters, inserts, and drills. Not that much different than 100 years ago

[ryan]

I should mention that even with modern CNC machines that can sense dull, or damaged tooling; a human is still required too replace dull cutters, inserts, and drills. Not that much different than 100 years ago

Eric,
Thanks for posting the factory pictures. I bet you could here this place for a couple off blocks. For production, you cannot beat a screw machine. I was an industrial engineer, on 3 machining lines, at Nissn brake where we made brake calipers. The old (non cnc)lines ran non stop producing 1k machined, from castings, calipers a shift. The problem with cnc is there is too much time loading and unloading parts in production (even if a machine has a rotary table in it)unless you have one machining center with several stations in it.
I agree on not being much different, just no lineshafts.

[BigLakeBob]

Eric,
I sure did miss the cold roll steel call out. The fractional drawings still do not make sense from a machining point of view. The machinist would have to convert every fraction to decimal because the machines read in decimal. From a production point of view, this would not fly because it would take up too much time and they sure didn't have calculators. As far as the tolerances go, the draftsman could call that out in the legend by the number of decimal places.
As far as just having this print around is amazing. I went to the AMA motorcycle hall of fame museum several years ago when they were featuring Henderson motorcycles and there were complete model production drawings hanging on walls. I was amazed when the museum told that the complete engine drawings were just found within 20 miles of the museum.
I know a guy that fast and machined a Henderson KJ cylinder head. He redesigned the ports an rode on the cannonball a few years back. He said it really woke the bike up and he could ride hills in 3rd when the other Hendersons had to drop to 2nd.

Hi Ryan, good to see you back active again.
But I do have to say its a kinda funny statement about converting the fractions to decimals, especially that print. Every dimension on that print I can convert without even thinking twice. Even if 25/32 stumps a machinist I certainly believe the post calculator boys could do the math in about 5 seconds. Older machinists aren't the same as what I call the new 'cad boys'. On a non production basis, one of the more difficult operations to perform on that hub is the spoke countersink on the inner part of the flange.PICT0004.jpgThe left hub I made so I have some experience about what I'm trying to relay here.

[whp]

Bob. Nice Hub! What bearing configuration did you make your hub for? You must have a pretty large lathe to handle the spoke OD. Heck the material alone is probably as much as the old hub is worth...

I'd second the ability of the early machinist to know every 64th by heart and could make that print without even thinking. Generally the shorthand math skills of older generations are much better. Every shop book I have has a math section for the machinist.

Great drawing Eric!

[BigLakeBob]

Eric,
Thank you.
My original plan was to adapt it for timken brgs, hence the deeper bore. Thought about reproducing them but without a cnc lathe the 14 hrs it took to make wouldn't be a profitable adventure. I have an 18" swing Monarch lathe.

[ryan]

Bob,
Thank you, good to be back and not in screaming pain 24/7.
What bike is the hub for? What machine was used to turn it because the sfm sure looks constant. It truly is a good looking part! Is the inside countersink on the hub that critical or is it to just break the edge? Yes, the countersink would be difficult to keep a constant depth.
I was thinking if all the parts were in fractions, not this part alone. I guess I was just trying to make a point about the print in general because I cannot see a production print being in fractions, also the way this part is dimensioned. The location of the material call out and how it is called out with the diameter of the stock seems funny as well.I
I know the draftsmen tools are in fractions, but the production parts are checked with tools that read in decimals, point being is it easier for one man to do the conversion on the prints before it hits the floor. I would like to see some more factory prints from the company.
I just think there is something odd about it, but we will never know the story behind it. In any case, it is still great to have it and I am glad Eric shared it is as well The production photo.
The engineers back then we're way more talented than we are today.

[exeric]

I think you are over thinking this, Ryan Other than the bearing housing bores, a front hub is not a precision part and fractional dimensions are more than adequate. Machinists, set-up men, and checkers can convert fractions to decimals in their sleep. At the end of the day, it has always been the accountants that tell you how accurate, what material, and what degree of finish a part will have because mass production is always about profit. Even short run production is about money because people aren't doing this for love. . . . Well, apparently I do it for love, because I damn sure don't make money making Henderson, Merkel, and Excelsior parts The drawing below is another Excelsior/Henderson part. Bear in mind, this part was no doubt stamped, and formed, then drilled in a drill fixture. I had 2 other Ex drawings but I traded them away, (for who knows what?).

[ryan]

Eric,
I understand what you are saying about tolerances and the bearing i.d. as well. You are right, I have to change my hats. In my production machining lines the only floor prints were in the parts quality area and they were very seldom touched. They just did their line checks per list. Any adjustments were made by a line leader and it they had issues, they came and got me.

[26fhead]

Eric,
You may have this one as well.


DSC02559.jpg

Steve

[exeric]

That is the Timken bearing hub that started in 1924 on the last Big Excelsior, and continued with the Henderson and Super X.

[BigLakeBob]

Bob,
Thank you, good to be back and not in screaming pain 24/7.
What bike is the hub for? What machine was used to turn it because the sfm sure looks constant. It truly is a good looking part! Is the inside countersink on the hub that critical or is it to just break the edge? Yes, the countersink would be difficult to keep a constant depth.
I was thinking if all the parts were in fractions, not this part alone. I guess I was just trying to make a point about the print in general because I cannot see a production print being in fractions, also the way this part is dimensioned. The location of the material call out and how it is called out with the diameter of the stock seems funny as well.I
I know the draftsmen tools are in fractions, but the production parts are checked with tools that read in decimals, point being is it easier for one man to do the conversion on the prints before it hits the floor. I would like to see some more factory prints from the company.
I just think there is something odd about it, but we will never know the story behind it. In any case, it is still great to have it and I am glad Eric shared it is as well The production photo.
The engineers back then we're way more talented than we are today.

'27-'29 JD rear. 18" Monarch, manuals can turn constant!! The edge break on the flange inner is a chamfer for the spoke conical, consistence depth is probably not that critical, but on a one off part with the holes staggered from one flange to the other the machinist must come up with a way to countersink that area from a right angle point of machining. The tool holder and cutting tool must be larger than the c'sink and still not hit the recessed OD of the main body. Thats' all I meant about it being difficult for a one off, not impossible, obviously.

[ryan]

'27-'29 JD rear. 18" Monarch, manuals can turn constant!! The edge break on the flange inner is a chamfer for the spoke conical, consistence depth is probably not that critical, but on a one off part with the holes staggered from one flange to the other the machinist must come up with a way to countersink that area from a right angle point of machining. The tool holder and cutting tool must be larger than the c'sink and still not hit the recessed OD of the main body. Thats' all I meant about it being difficult for a one off, not impossible, obviously.

I am very impressed with the finish for sure. My old Sheldon lathe sure doesn't turn constant, pull out the crocus cloth.
You guys are really getting me interested in the centurian bikes. Going to have to talk my dad's cousin out of one some how. He has a barn full of jd bikes in various states of disrepair. He has other makes as well hanging from the ceiling. Really neat place.

[bbinns]

Dan, I don't think the basic dimensions of the Excelsior double brake hub changed, but I have seen early rear hubs that had more narrow spoke flanges, and smaller spoke holes. The 1915 Excelsior used a Mussleman hub, and 1916 and later were in house Excelsior hubs. I haven't seen a rear hub drawing, but I would suspect that the hub was beefed up when the Excelsior offered the military fork, and in anticipation of the heavier Henderson. My parts books show the following rear hub shell #s:
XE 3783..........Series 16
XG 3783..........Series 18-19
XK 801............Series 20

Just one small correction Exeric, the 1915 used the Excelsior hub as well, although the Big Valve Roadster of that year is likely a Mussleman hub as the back end is essentially from a 1914 X. Gearbox models are Excelsior hubs front and rear from 1915 onwards.

You are correct in the spoke flange thickness and spoke hole diameter changing through the years on these hubs. The grease nipple hole was also deleted later on, and by 1923 there was a taper bearing conversion kit available for the rear hubs. In fact I have some evidence that the factory was using taper bearings in this hubs in 1923 for the Deluxe Henderson (prior to what we know as the Timken bearing hubs). I have a complete original wheel and a rusted out hub with these taper bearings in the pre Timken style hub. The quill on the hub only suits the late 23 and 24 style wide rear brake as used on the Deluxe and last of the Big Xs (prior to the change to the flat bar type brake as used on late 24 onward Deluxe and Super X).