开云体育

It Seems that a Slitting Saw & arbor would be prudent additions to my
accessory order but there are soooo many to choose from. For general
work (not slotting), what size would prob. be best (most common, most
economical)? What arbor size is the most common? I expect I'll be doing
mostly alum. but might need it for steel too.

Seems that an arbor might be a good first project. Thanks.

Rance

Ed,

Thanks. That's exactly what I needed to know. I don't plan on buying
the commercial QCTP, I plan on making my own. Prob. build it for the
3/8" tools. I do like the idea of using the 4-way that comes with the
lathe. For now I may buy a few 1/2 AND 3/8.

Rance


--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Ed Boysun" <boysungran@...>
wrote:

If you intend to use the OEM 4-way toolpost, it needs 1/2" bits.

All it

takes then is .022 shim to bring the cutting edge to the center. The
smaller bits would need quite a bit more shimming. If you intend to

put

a QCTP on the lathe, then 3/8" seems like a better choice, as folks

say

the tool holders don't quite go down far enough to center the

cutting

edge with 1/2" bits. For my uses, I find the 4-way post and 1/2"

tools

quite acceptable.

Ed B
--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "rancerupp" <rupps@> wrote:

In getting my tool order together I can't seem to find out what

size

tool bits my 8x12-to-be takes. 3/8 or 5/16? Even if it will hold

a 3/8

should I just use 5/16 for some reason? Thanks.

If you intend to use the OEM 4-way toolpost, it needs 1/2" bits. All it
takes then is .022 shim to bring the cutting edge to the center. The
smaller bits would need quite a bit more shimming. If you intend to put
a QCTP on the lathe, then 3/8" seems like a better choice, as folks say
the tool holders don't quite go down far enough to center the cutting
edge with 1/2" bits. For my uses, I find the 4-way post and 1/2" tools
quite acceptable.

Ed B

G'day Mike et al.
CHUCK GUARD.
You have to seriously wonder at the value of the chuck guard.
Somewhere in OH&S regs they say all rotsting pats must be guarded. On
automatic machines its presence is justified but on manual machines
it adds little to safety and may in itself create a hazard. It
obscures you vision when sighting how close the tool is to the chuck
and puts you at risk of crashing the tool into the chuck.

My lathe has a guard, thankfully without a kill switch so it is
always up; I only put it down if coolant is being flung about by the
chuck.

I have seen others in this group advocate leaving the change gear
cover off. I do not endorse this because it would be easy to let your
fingers stray towards the gears when using the lathe. The chuck guard
is another matter.
Let's do a JSA (Job Safety Analysis)
First danger: leaving the key in chuck; this should be overcome by
developing good habits; also starting slowly means the key drops out
rather than is flung out (this is inherent with the speed control
needing to be reset.
Second danger: clothing being caught in the chuck dragging in the
operator; overcome by wearing correct clothing, short sleeves, no
ties ec.
Third danger: ring finger getting caught, ripping off portion of
finger; overcome by taking rings off.
Forth danger: Swarf etc flung from chuck into eyes (it does happen);
overcome by wearing safety glasses.

The list goes on but each risk can be controlled by correct practices.

IMHO, take off the chuck guard and bridge out the limit switch.

As a professional I am safety focused, here is a very recent example.
I had a family from our church over for a meal. The son is doing
metal work at school and together we turned up a quicky widget on the
lathe. The corners need rounding so I showed him how the file must be
used left handed and stressed that your arms must not cross over the
chuck and the file should be on a line passing outside the body. Next
day he went to school and was using a lathe with a file. He
apparently followed my instructions much to the surprise of his
teacher who asked how he learned the correct way. Response, "The
pastor of our church showed me!"

My point. We must learn SAFE PRACTICES along with the skills we
master and, using groups like this, we must pass them on. the chuck
guard does little to enhance safe practice, it is appropriately
named, chuck it away!

One good turn deserves another.
Regards,
Ian




--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Mike Payson" <mike@...> wrote:

I'm not sure if it's standard to all of the 7x's now, but the HF adds

a chuck saftey shield that is only 3" from the center of the chuck,

so

without removing it, somehow moving your work 3" or so from the

spindle, the

largest work you can possibly turn is 6".

In getting my tool order together I can't seem to find out what size
tool bits my 8x12-to-be takes. 3/8 or 5/16? Even if it will hold a 3/8
should I just use 5/16 for some reason? Thanks.

Sounds great,

Anyone know if that promo includes international freight? I put the
code in and their web software seems happy. Then again, I know
international is all a big kludge on their web site. They manually set
me up weird account settings that force manual processing via a
specific office. I'm not game enough to commit the order. Very nice
thought though!

John


--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "selbycruz" <danselby@...> wrote:

"Today through Friday, get Free UPS Shipping* when you purchase from

use-enco.com.

Take advantage of this exclusive 4-day offer by entering promo code

WBCM7 in the promo

code box on the shopping cart page and then click Apply.

Hurry, this offer expires on Friday, March 23, 2007, so act today!"

Dan Selby, Santa Cruz

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "MZT.Groups" <mzt.groups@...>
wrote:

Would it be possible to cut off part of the rod and modify the guard

in a

way it would fit safely on the remaining piece? That would let you

keep that

'safety feature' of the machine during normal work, to have it quickly
removed only when it prevents you from doing the job.

Marcello

Hi Marcello,

I reckon you could easily fabricate a bigger mounting block for the rod
and microswitch to place the rod further out. Say 3 1/2" from spindle
centre. The problem is the clear plastic guard itself. Perhaps you could
heat form some clear polycarbonate over some large pipe or turn up a 7"
wooden former (with the guard removed). The original is semi-enclosed on
the h/s end with a partial reinforcing web. That's easy for an injection
molding machine but less than easy to fabricate. I guess transparency of
the end isn't so important so you could improvise with sheet aluminium.
Here in Oz we have some 3 litre soft drink cans about the right size to
do the whole thing in tinplate.

At the end of the day it's gonna look real ugly no matter how you go.
You'd have to be really committed to keeping a chuck guard to go for it.
Yet it would have been so easy for Sieg to mold one the right size.
Perhaps if we all pester their tech support they'll put out a 7"
accessory guard. And if we all returned our machines to suppliers for
refunds (not 7" as advertised) they'll fit them for free! Dream on...

John

On the HF, the lathe guard mount itself is 3" from the chuck center.
In order to turn something larger then 6", you would need to permanently
remove it.

Thank You, Mike, now I've got a clearer picture of the machine.
That would mean you cannot simply unscrew the guard because the rod would
stay in place.
Would it be possible to cut off part of the rod and modify the guard in a
way it would fit safely on the remaining piece? That would let you keep that
'safety feature' of the machine during normal work, to have it quickly
removed only when it prevents you from doing the job.

Marcello

--- In 7x12minilathe@...
<mailto:7x12minilathe@...> , "Mike Payson" <mike@...> wrote:

According to LittleMachineShop
(

<> ) as well as the

Homier website, the compound on their 7x has only 1.38" travel, vs.
2.165" for most of the others. Can anyone confirm whether that's
accurate or not? I'm assuming that it's an error on Homier's part,
but I'm hesitant to get one without confirming it.

Thanks!

Hi Mike,

That's a pretty rubbery parameter. It just depends how much dovetail &
gib engagement is adequate for what you're doing.

The fully advanced position of the compound is a hard stop with all 3
gib screws contributing to toolpost rigidity. As you crank the compound
back there is less and less dovetail engagement. My manual (pretty well
a stock Sieg C2) says "55mm (effective)". That's probably about right.
At that point you still have 2 of the 3 gib gib screws within the
dovetail. Rigidity degrades rapidly beyond that point. However, there's
no way one could specify travel to 3 decimals of an inch!

I think these lathes are natively metric with imperial specs and
leadscrew a concession to the US market. So you're asking whether the
spec should be 35mm or 55mm. That's a more probable typo and the latter
figure looks more like the hardware. Perhaps Homier made a typo and LMS
copied it or both fell victim to a Sieg typo. Either way, I can assure
you there's little degradation in rigidity between the 35mm and 55mm
points.

John

According to LittleMachineShop
() as well as the
Homier website, the compound on their 7x has only 1.38" travel, vs.
2.165" for most of the others. Can anyone confirm whether that's
accurate or not? I'm assuming that it's an error on Homier's part,
but I'm hesitant to get one without confirming it.

Thanks!

At $299 for the 7x12, the Homier is really tough to beat. You'll
probably want to get their lathe starter kit as well, which includes a
nice selection of accessories. You'll still need some extra stuff,
most notably tool bits, which you can get from littlemachineshop.com.

Thanks for the explanations Ian and others. This makes sense.


--- In 7x12minilathe@..., andrew franks <andyf1108@...>
wrote:

Rance, the address is www.mini-lathe.org.uk , and then go to "Lathe

pictures".

Now it's my turn to hit the sack.
Andy
steam4ian <fosterscons@...> wrote:
Good Morning all.
The bed hardening diagram can be seen on the tailstock end of the
bed; it is simply a foil transfer. Look
up "www.minillathe.org.uk/pictures" to see a photo of the end of a
Chester Conquest lathe which shows the diagram.
Like most things in this world hardening of the ways has both up
sides and down sides. The upside is that it is resistant to wear

and

because it has to be ground after the heat treatment it is likely

to

be to a closer tolerance. The downside, and hence the need for the
diagram is that the ways are brittle. That means dropping your

chuck

on the ways could cause a piece to chip off; see below for my
comments on chuck handling. Don't drop or bang other tools against
the ways either.
Cast Iron is inherently porous and absorbs lubricants, in addition
the carbon particles tend to assist lubrication. The hardening
process binds up the carbon and reduces the porousity making
lubrication more critical.
In summary, the heat treatment of the ways improves resistance to
wear, probably means better accuracy, but requires more care and
lubrication.
Chuck handling: beg, borrow or steal a length of aluminium bar or
tube (note the spelling, aluminim won't work). In Oz, tube is
available quite cheaply from major hardware chains. Its diameter

must

allow it to go through the spindle, and the chuck and into the tail
stock taper; the length must be such that it can support a chuck
between the headstock spinndle and the tail stock. When removing

the

chuck place a piece of wood on the ways under the chuck. Pass the
tube or bar through the spindle and into the tail stock. You can

then

undo the chuck retaining nuts without the risk of it falling onto

the

bed. When the chuck is free from the spindle, grasp it securely in
one hand and pull back the bar. Obviously to put a chuck on you
thread the chuck through the bar and locate it on the spindle face.
This method gives you at least one and a half hands to fiddle with
the chuck retaining nuts and washers. This is particularly useful

if

during the process you have to grovell round on the floor to the

god

of clumsiness to sort out the nuts from accumlated swarf!
At least our chucks can be picked up in one hand. The larger chucks
have a hole for an eye bolt and a change out involves dragging over

a

hoist or whistling up a crane. As trainees we each ahd a bar beside
out lathe for the chuck/face plate changes.

I have now finished my coffee and had better reply to yesterday's
business phone messages.

One good turn deserves another.
Regards,
Ian

Thanks, Chuck.

I just read those posts. I already knew that many people love them for
their value vs. cost. I have heard others call them toys though. Anyway,
I'm sure I'll have much fun with one, as it will be my new toy! [:D]

So, who's got the best deal on one right now, and what features are the
most popular? Also, what kind of tooling should I be looking at? I'll be
cutting aluminum and brass alloys, mostly.

Cheers, Duane


--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Charles E. Kinzer" <ckinzer@...>
wrote:

The worth of these lathes was just discussed about two days ago on

this group. Look in the group archives starting on March 18 for posts
titled "7x12 vs. DB200 Unimat".

Quite a few on this list and the 7x10minilathe list have machining

experience and/or own other lathes. I don't think any will say the
mini-lathes are a toy.

Chuck K.

----- Original Message -----
From: D.K.
To: 7x12minilathe@...
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 3:16 PM
Subject: [SPAM] [7x12minilathe] New Mini Lathe For The Newbie...


Hey folks, I've just joined the group, and I'm looking to buy a new
mini lathe for turning some R/C model engine parts... I want to make
my own head buttons, cooling jackets, carb parts, etc. for nitro
powered model race boats I play with.

I understand that many people consider the Chinese mini lathes to be
"toys", but If I can get some parts made and learn a bit at the same
time, I can always step up to higher quality unit later on.

Since I haven't yet decided on my new mini lathe, what's the best
deal/brand name going right now? Looking to spend under $500 for the
lathe itself...

Thanks in advance for your advice. :)

Duane Kennard

Still, replacing the screws with decent quality ones is a
worthwhile "someday" project. "Real" socket head screws are
significantly harder/stronger than their no-name Asian clones.
Similarly, good quality hex keys are significantly stronger & better
fitting than the cheapies.

Roy

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Herb" <hwederma@...> wrote:

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Herb" <hwederma@> wrote:

I'm in the process of "lapping" in my dove tails etc and have
discovered that one of the gib screw heads are stripped out where

the

allen wrench goes into it. The threads are fine, it's just that

the

allen wrench just spins in it. Can I "slot" it with a small

dremel

wheel so that a slotted screw driver will work on it? Or should I

just

order a new one? thanks, Herb W.

Problem Solved !!! The problem wasn't the screw at all, it was
the "Harbor Freight" "T-Handle" allen wrench itself. I was about

to

go the hardware store insearch of new screws when I tried a regular
allen wrench instead and it fit fine. I measured the two tools

with a

micrometer and it turns out the Harbor Freight tool is .0016

smaller

than the other allen wrench. So I'll have to use a regular allen
wrench to make my gib screw adjustments from now on. Thanks all,

Herb

W. : )

When I straightened mine, I used the drill press as an arbor press
with a dial indicator to show quill travel. It took deflecting the
gib strip about 0.015" to remove the 0.005" curve it initially had.
Since I was measuring quill travel I used relatively large risers to
support the piece. Using calibrated supports would eliminate the
need to measure actual quill travel.

I lapped with the strips in place, instead of lapping them
separately. Since I was trying to improve the overall contact area
it seemed logical to lap with them in their assembled location. By
the same token, I only lapped until I had reasonable surface
contact. By minimizing the amount of lapping I avoided much risk of
making the gibs convex; the actual lapping was consistent with
loathing of the process. (Used to have to do it on relatively large
steam fittings in a previous incarnation.)

Roy

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Paul Moir" <paul.moir@...>
wrote:

There isn't much to add to the instructions at mini-lathe.com.

Begin

by determining if the the gibs are straight enough to be lapped and
first unbend them as necessary. It is pretty easy to get an idea if
your gibs or surface plates are flat. Just place a decent all-steel
ruler's edge up against the surface and hold it up to the light.
0.0005" error will be very obvious.

I cannot find the original source, but someone here suggested using

a

drill press as an arbor press to straighten the gibs. Support the
ends with pieces of sheet metal and press down on the centre. By
using progressively thicker pieces of sheet metal, you don't risk
over-bending or breaking the gib. I found this works well.

It's hard to lap the surface of the gibs so that they don't become
convex along their width since they're thin and hard to hold (not to
mention sharp!). I found it was very much worthwhile to make a

holder

for them. I just ran a short scrap block of oak through a table

saw,

with the blade set to cut about 3/32" or so depth, with an angle to
match the gib's sides, and then widened it until the gib could be
tapped into the slot. Naturally the same could easily be done with

a

sharp chisel, etc. Could even superglue it to a block and release

it

later with acetone.

I hope this helps. If your gibs are not straight, this will
definitely make a big difference on the machine.


--- In 7x12minilathe@..., Dennis Thompson <dbt@> wrote:

I need to lap the gibs on couple of my machines I recently
purchased, (with little time to use/clean, etc., 'till now).

I've

never lapped gibs - any particular tips?

Dennis (really new at some of this)

Cummins Mini Mill, freshly unpacked
HF 7x10
Cummins 7x12

The worth of these lathes was just discussed about two days ago on this group. Look in the group archives starting on March 18 for posts titled "7x12 vs. DB200 Unimat".

Quite a few on this list and the 7x10minilathe list have machining experience and/or own other lathes. I don't think any will say the mini-lathes are a toy.

Chuck K.

Their next version will probably satisfy all the safety requirements
by making it impossible to cut anything;-)

Roy

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "born4something" <ajs@...>
wrote:

Sorry Gerry,

I can't let 'em off that easy. They could have added a chuck guard
that retained the rated capacity of their product. I agree a chuck
guard is mainly nuisance value BUT SIEG STUFFED UP.

John


--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "gerry waclawiak"
<gerrywac@> wrote:

It is only relatively recently that Health and Safety regulations

on both

sides of the pond have led to the fitting of the safety guard on

a

machine

that was never designed with it in mind and this makers "bodge"

has affected

the capacity. My 3 YO machine came without and the full 7" is

useable and I

dont think that the lack of a guard is an issue.

All machinery is inherently dangerous for the careless and unwary.

Gerry
Leeds UK

From: "Mike Payson" <mike@>
Reply-To: 7x12minilathe@...
To: 7x12minilathe@...
Subject: Re: [7x12minilathe] Re: mini laths
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 00:58:17 -0700

I'm sure it would be easy enough to remove the chuck guard, I'm

just

annoyed
that I have to in order to use the advertised capacity of the

machine. I'm

sure there is some bizarro world where the 10" part makes sense,

but there

is no way that this should be sold as a 7" swing when the only

possible way

to use it as such is to permanently disable the safety features

(granted, I

think the chuck guard just gets in the way, but that's beside

the

point).

On 3/19/07, born4something <ajs@> wrote:

Hi Mike,

And I think you'll find they will happily supply a 6 1/4"

face

plate

to fit this lathe despite the fact that the guard and

associated

kill switch must be removed to use the faceplate. That's what

I was

sold to go with my 7x12.

John



--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "Mike Payson" <mike@>

wrote:

FYI, I bought the newest incarnation of the HF 7x10 (93212)

with

the recent

30% off coupon. It's bad enough that it is 4" shorter then

any of

the others

(& two inches shorter then advertised), but it actually

only

has a

6" usable

swing. I'm not sure if it's standard to all of the 7x's

now,

but

the HF adds

a chuck saftey shield that is only 3" from the center of the

chuck, so

without removing it, somehow moving your work 3" or so from

the

spindle, the

largest work you can possibly turn is 6". I'm taking it

back,

though I

haven't yet decided whether to replace it with the Homier,

the HF

9x20

(which they will honor the 30% off for, so $560) or the

Griz

G0602

10x22,

which is really more then I should spend, but a much better

(and

better

equipped) lathe.

Decisions, decisons... Any suggestions?

On 3/19/07, Ed <edo@> wrote:

I just ordered a Homier for which based on my research

was

the

best

buy I could find. It costs $299 and the only accessory it

comes

with

is a fixed center.

Cummins sells the same machine but it comes with extras

for

$399. For

the extra $100 you get (1) Tailstock Drill Chuck 1-13mm

(with

key, (2)

Moving Steady, (3) Fixed Steady, (4) 6 1/4" diameter Face

Plate,

(5) 5

piece cutting tool set. Bought separately, these total

$103, so

unless

you need all of them, I didn't see it as worth it.

Homier also sells an Accessory Kit for $99 (which I got

for 10%

off at

their eBay store). It includes (1) Tailstock chuck, (2)

Face

plate,

(3) Lathe dog, (4) Rolling center, (5) Knurling tool, (6)

Follow

rest,

and (7) Spindle center. I figured these would cost $128

separately, so

I thought it a better deal than the Cummins with

accessories.

Shipping for the Homier was $6 cheaper ($49 vs $55), but

what

really

swayed me to Homier was the customer service. Cummins was

real

slow to

answer emails, 3 - 4 days, and never did tell me if the

lathe

was in

stock.

I ordered the Homier on-line Friday night when I saw they

went

from

Out of Stock to Supplies Limited. I called this morning

(Monday)

to

see if they got the order and was told it was being

shipped. Got

email

with UPS tracking number this afternoon and it's

scheduled

for

delivery Wednesday.

If I had the money, my first choice would have been the

MicroMark

(82710), $673 delivered. It's 2" longer, has inch lead

screws,

and a

digital speed readout.

Other options are the Grizzly (G8688) at $700 delivered

(some

think

it's worth it for the better customer service) and Harbor

Freight

(33684) which is a 7x10 (2" shorter). It's $419 but is

available

in

stores and with a 30% off coupon can be had for $293 +

sales

tax. (The

coupons come out every few months.)

Hope this helps, and let us know what you decide.
Ed








Be sure to check out for

small

mills and

lathes.
Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Be sure to check out for

small mills

and

lathes.
Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

_________________________________________________________________
Solve the Conspiracy and win fantastic prizes.

Andy
The indexing plate itself is maybe a little bit pricey, at 60 bucks,
but it's also a very convenient size, very light weight and it doesn't
require removal to run the lathe. It tucks very nicely inside the
profile of the gear box and tool rail, keeping it out of the way.
You'll have to fabricate an indexing pin arrangement and I made my own
expanding mandrel so it was a custom fit for the plate and the spindle
hollow.

The indexing plate is offered at
and was originally
designed for the tiny Taig lathe. They told me I was the first 7x--
mini lathe owner to attempt using their plate. I supppose I really
should invite them to see the end results too.

I looked at a number of indexing plate options before I put my money
down and this one just made sense for what I was looking to do.

I'm pretty sure I was just bragging on the higher accuracy of your
version over this one.... LOL

Steve

--- In 7x12minilathe@..., andrew franks <andyf1108@...> wrote:

Steve, I'm a bit "that's near enough" myself, but I'd be interested

to know where you sourced those particular indexing plates. They don't
look expensive, and would involve less calculation, and suffer from
less backlash, than my crude detent in a geartrain (alias "peg in the
cogwheels") method.

Andy
cedge11 <cedge@...> wrote:
I recently enjoyed the thread showing one owner's approach

to indexing

the spindle of a mini lathe. His method was probably a lot more
accurate than my approach since mine doesn't allow for adjustment in
minutes and seconds. This one is a bit more down an dirty, for those
of us who still have the "About" marks on our measuring devices...(grin)

You can have a peek at it at


The commercially available, predrilled indexing plate is mounted on an
homemade expandable mandrel which has an oversized taper designed to
center things against the opening edge of the lathe's outside spindle
end. The opposite end is designed to expand against the spindle
interior when the outer aluminum knob is turned, making for a solidly
centered tool position. This takes only a minor few seconds to install
or remove.

There is a fresh mounting rail on top of the gear box cover where the
hinged indexing pin assembly is mounted for easy removal. The indexing
pin assembly allows the pin to slide up or down as needed to match up
with the desired ring of holes. Pretty basic, but it's saved me hours
of time when I needed to scribe dial marks or create a radial hole
pattern for a small cylinder head.

I'll seldom need more than 60 holes in one of those, but a huge range
of numerical combinations are made quite easy by the indexing plate
and any error induction has not been noticable so far.

Just another way to get there I guess...
Steve






---------------------------------
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all

new Yahoo! Security Centre.

Forgot to post the link for the updates, sorry.

Marty

Steve, I'm a bit "that's near enough" myself, but I'd be interested to know where you sourced those particular indexing plates. They don't look expensive, and would involve less calculation, and suffer from less backlash, than my crude detent in a geartrain (alias "peg in the cogwheels") method.
Andy
cedge11 <cedge@...> wrote:
I recently enjoyed the thread showing one owner's approach to indexing
the spindle of a mini lathe. His method was probably a lot more
accurate than my approach since mine doesn't allow for adjustment in
minutes and seconds. This one is a bit more down an dirty, for those
of us who still have the "About" marks on our measuring devices...(grin)

You can have a peek at it at


The commercially available, predrilled indexing plate is mounted on an
homemade expandable mandrel which has an oversized taper designed to
center things against the opening edge of the lathe's outside spindle
end. The opposite end is designed to expand against the spindle
interior when the outer aluminum knob is turned, making for a solidly
centered tool position. This takes only a minor few seconds to install
or remove.

There is a fresh mounting rail on top of the gear box cover where the
hinged indexing pin assembly is mounted for easy removal. The indexing
pin assembly allows the pin to slide up or down as needed to match up
with the desired ring of holes. Pretty basic, but it's saved me hours
of time when I needed to scribe dial marks or create a radial hole
pattern for a small cylinder head.

I'll seldom need more than 60 holes in one of those, but a huge range
of numerical combinations are made quite easy by the indexing plate
and any error induction has not been noticable so far.

Just another way to get there I guess...
Steve






---------------------------------
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.