If you’re considering buying a lathe, configuration is a much more important consideration than price. Most turners will want to turn some bowls. This article therefore discusses the different lathe configurations, and how well each is suited for bowl turning. This article assumes that you’re right-handed. If you’re left-handed, transpose where appropriate.

Approximately 16 books which include bowl-turning advice have been published in English this century. Almost all show bowls being hollowed inboard (over the bed) with the gouge being presented and traversed as in Photo. 1. In contrast the front cover of the Australian edition my book The Fundamentals of Woodturning shows my then foreman, the late Dale Hageman, hollowing outboard (on the left-hand end of the headstock) as in Photo. 2. This provoked comment. One Amazon reviewer wrote “when you look at the pictures in this book you may feel like the images are backward”. I also received several emails claiming (wrongly) that the cover shot and the bowl-turning photographs inside had been somehow transposed. These emailers had failed to read the statement on page 166 which advised that the bowl-turning chapter’s “illustrations show a bowl being turned outboard”.

You’ll notice that Dale is chuckling in Photo. 2. He’s enjoying hollowing the bowl because his stance is comfortable and unrestricted, and he can readily present and control the gouge because he can keep his right elbow close to his body. Those who hollow as in Photo. 1 often have to lean over their lathe beds, and have poorer tool control because their right elbows have to be a long distance from their bodies.

This fashion for contorted bowl turning has only recently become the norm. It wasn’t last century. In the first two notable woodturning texts published after WWII, the 1956 The Practical Wood Turner and the 1974 The Craftsman Woodturner, Frank Pain and Peter Child respectively are shown turning bowls outboard, like Dale. Nor was outboard turning then particular to Britain. William Klenke, author of the 1937 American book The Art of Wood Turning, states on page 12 that “The lathe you select should . . . have provision for doing inside and outboard turning”.

Until about 2000 if you bought a fully featured lathe it would have had a headstock spindle with two threaded noses like that shown in Photo. 3. With such headstocks the right-hand inboard nose would have had a right-hand thread, and the left-hand outboard nose would have had a left-hand thread.  A facility such as that shown in Photo. 4 to rigidly support and allow the movement of a toolrest outboard was available at extra cost. The Vicmarc lathe Dale was using in Photo. 2 had these features. Thus Dale was able to hollow comfortably and safely because the hollowing force he was exerting tightened the faceplate onto the outboard nose. Note, if your lathe has an outboard nose you can make your own outboard turning facility with a piece of steel plate. Examples are shown in figures Photos. 5, 6 and 7.

The spindle configuration with left- and right-hand threaded noses had a cost penalty: manufacturers had to supply two sets of faceplates, one set with a left-hand thread, the other with a right-hand thread. If lathes could be sold cheaper, more people would be attracted to woodturning, and more lathes would be sold. A simple solution was to machine the same, right-hand thread on both spindle noses, and supply only one faceplate. However when turning outboard the lathe had to be run in reverse to avoid the risk of the faceplate unscrewing. Therefore if you were right-handed you’d still have to hollow much as in Photo 1.

To avoid the high costs of providing an outboard headstock spindle nose and an outboard facility such as that shown in Photo. 4 and some lathe manufacturers have opted increase the swing over the bed. This also, as a bonus, increases the appeal of such lathes to macho woodturners. Unfortunately irrespective of whether you’re left- or right-handed you still have to use an uncomfortable stance when hollowing bowls inboard. Also:

  • the heavier banjo and tailstock are harder to slide along the bed
  • because you have to lift and lower your turning tools further
  • the increased centre-height of 300 mm or more somewhat improving the range of possible tool presentations, and allows larger-diameter workpieces to be turned inboard, but doesn’t improve body positioning.

I’m therefore certain that to turn bowls using the most comfortable stances with maximum control and unrestricted tool presentations you need to be able to turn bowls outboard. You should then prefer to turn bowl outsides with the lathe running anticlockwise and bowl insides with the lathe running clockwise. Therefore whatever the hand of the thread on the outboard nose there will still be the risk of unscrewing, either when taking heavy cuts, during acceleration, or if employing some type of braking.

My first lathe was made by Sydney engineer Peter Scaysbrook in 1975. To solve the problem of outboard faceplates unscrewing he devised the locking-ring arrangement shown in Photo. 8. Another equally-effective solution is the split-ring used by Vicmarc shown in Photo. 9. Wouldn’t it be great if all lathe manufacturers agreed a common standard solution?

There are three other lathe configurations which overcome the problems of contorted, uncomfortable stances and restricted tool presentations when turning bowls. In the first the tailstock is removed and the banjo and headstock (which only needs a spindle with an inboard nose) are slid to the right-hand end of the bed. The American Powermatic is one of the few lathes which offers this facility. The second, and increasingly common solution is a rotatable-about-a-vertical-axis headstock. This usually requires an extra and separate toolrest mounting which has to be bolted onto the left-hand end of the bed. This mounting needs to be removed for turning axially-grained workpieces because you will sometimes have to position your body near the left-hand end of the headstock. The third solution is a pedestal lathe, a lathe which consists of a headstock without a bed, or with a bed which isn’t long enough for most spindle turning. Such lathes are often favoured by specialist bowl turners.

I have shown that if you want to turn bowls comfortably and without having your tool presentations restricted, you should seek a lathe which allows faceplates and other chucks to be locked to its spindle nose(s). This allows workpieces to be safely turned both clockwise and anticlockwise without unscrewing. The facility to turn outboard on a fixed headstock with a rigid toolrest mounting which allows easy and sufficient adjustment is the best lathe configuration. The rotatable headstock and the sliding headstock are less convenient. Obviously lathes with such features cost more than lathes with fixed headstocks which only allow inboard turning over the bed, but you when you turn bowls you won’t regret the extra investment.

I hope that this article will help you to select your next lathe wisely.

Photo. 1. Hollowing inboard with the lathe rotating forwards (anticlockwise).

Photo. 3. A Woodfast headstock manufactured in about 1985. Its spindle has two differently threaded noses.

Photo. 5. An ouboard facility constructed on a Vicmarc lathe.

Photo. 7. A homemade outboard turning facility consisting of a steel plate mounted on timber bearers. You can source an outboard banjo from a manufacturer of lathes with high centre heights.

Photo. 9. Vicmarc’s split locking ring is tightened with two cap screws.

Photo. 2. Dale Hageman hollowing outboard in a comfortable stance with the lathe running forwards (clockwise).

Photo. 4. The outboard turning facility on a Delta lathe.

Photo. 6 An outboard facility added to a Lampard-brand lathe.

Photo. 8. A faceplate machined by Peter Scaysbrook. The thread on the outside of the faceplate boss has the opposite hand to that on the inside of the boss. To lock the faceplate onto the headstock spindle, the locking ring is tightened against the flange of the headstock spindle nose.