In Defence of the 4-Way: Myford Toolholding 

Making multiple 4 way tool holders allowed me to give away my quick change as a birthday gift for my son. With 5 of the 4 ways I can't remember when I last changed a tool.

Well I'll be! I have a new respect for the 4 way tool post. That shim gauge measuring device you have is brilliant!

Yes, there's a lot to be said for "old" 4-way tool posts. For production runs they are so much faster than quick change types. On the other hand, I use different tools for different materials & with different sized boring bars, internal as well as external threading tools, different grooving & parting tools, quick change systems are far more versatile when you have lots of different jobs to do.

I have used the old lantern style tool posts a long time a go and they worked just fine; however, if you want repeatability when doing tool changeouts then forget it. I presently own a four way tool post and a wedge style tool post and they each have their pros and cons.

Thank you very much. I have always been a fan of the four-way toolholder. I enjoy your videos and look forward to many more.

after years of using the four way post, I ditched it and use a quick change. LOVE, LOVE, LOVE it. Never going back.

Yes, yes and thrice , Yes! It's quite refreshing to see someone aknolodging the 4 way tool post. But I have to say that, you really got me with the shim measuring gauge, absolutely fantastic. For those with tool holders (for HSS or carbide), I've seen a lot of Japanese folk (who seem to like the 4 way) tacking the shims to the holders in order to keep them together at all time. Brilliant video, thanks for sharing and take care!!

when i got my ML7 it had the standard Myford clamp toolpost, the shims drove me to make my own quick change tool posts like the Len Mason design, all I had was a photo, and I am still happy with these tool holders. The problem with the 4 way is that I would be cutting my hands on the tools all the time, not a problem for some, but my hands bump things.

I agree. My main lathe came with a QCTP, admittedly a size too large for the machine, and because of the (substantial) overhang parting off was a no go. The company I bought the machine from only did non-ferrous metals and probably plastics on a collet chuck of max. diameter 25 mm or thereabouts. So the overhang etc. was probably never an issue. So I changed back to the indexing toolpost I had from an identical machine and it makes a world of difference. A major drawback indeed is the tool center height which is 17 mm on my mid size machine. I have plenty of 25 mm carbide insert tools (from a previous larger machine) that I want to use. This would only work when the compound slide is eliminated like Rob Renzetti and Stefan Gotteswinter have done, with the 4-way tool post this is the only way to get enough 'meat' underneath the tool (more is better, the current 15 mm definitely looks too flimsy. Meaning I will design and make my own). At the same time I can then eliminate the 25 mm overhang of the compound over the cross slide the machine has by default. Not sure why this is BTW. A rear tool post for parting off can then also be mounted right on the edge of the cross slide with no overhang. Already I am using fixed stops for auto feed cutoff and hard stops with micrometer dial, which is pretty much a must with no compound as well as an important safety feature. Lastly, the jaws must be bored like Rob shows in his last video and all of this combined should lead to a very stable and effective setup. I also have a few turret lathes so it really depends how far one wants to take it, but in my case accuracy is a major driver and tool life will increase with more stability. The way I see it, there should be metal-to-metal interfaces all the way down from the tool mounting interface to the machine bed. Thanks for the great video. Love the tool height measuring gauge. Final note: I have watched a LOT of Japanese machining videos and never ever have I spotted a QCTP. Go figure.

So far as I am concerned, you are preaching to the choir! I made the GHT four way many years ago and see no reason to change now. I now mainly use tools with exchangeable tips which once set to centre height require no further adjustment. I was interested to see that your large boring tool holders are vertically split rather than horizontally as shown by GHT. Thank you for putting the case for the four way. I was interested in your relative repeatability point; as you say, a comparable QCTP is always going to be dearer if only because of the need for multiple holders.

Quite the coincidence. I just spent a half an hour looking for the original 4 way for my Mini Lathe. I was thinking of doing what you showed here even though I just purchased 5 more quick change tool holders last week. They can be a pain. That dial indicator gizmo is just genius, I will be looking forward to that video!

And here I am using the old rocker tool post.

The 4-way tool=post is a wonderful way for careless operators to gouge their hands to pieces - it leaves tools sticking out in all directions (I have seen several people do themselves damage, and I even had to take one to hospital once). A skilled operator may not have this problem - but the risk exists. At least a QCTP means that only one tool is in action, and it points out of harm's way,.

As with most things, which tool holder is the best depends on what you are doing. The indexable holder along with an indexable holder for the tail stock quill is just the thing for a run of repetitive parts. The downside is the time it takes to set up. It is a law of the Universe that the tools you need to use aren't the ones in the in the tool holder. The bulk of the indexable tool holder can be a problem too. The size of the quick change, though smaller, can also be a nuisance as well. This is where you still need your American standard lantern holder to get into the tight spots you often run into doing repair work.

4 way toolholders are also technically more rigid though that depends a lot on the lathe itself too wether that will be a factor. I have a good quality reproduction multifix properly sized for my 4.5kW lathe and it’s plenty rigid. I’ve done 8mm diameter cuts in 42CrMo4 steel with nice blue C shaped chips at about 0.15mm feed/rev. The thing I love the moet about my multifix is the cylindrical holder. They make 30 and 40mm bores for my size post and I usually keep an ER 32 collet chuck in there for drilling and small boring bars. If I take the chuck out I can put a 30mm boring bar in there and let her rip, very rigidly clamped in the bore holder. Max diameter boring bar would be 25mm in a comparable 4-way holder while I can do 40mm, much better for large holes. Tool changes on multifix can be pretty quick too. On repeatability, I’ve never seen anyone actually test the 4 way holders. Have you done such tests? I’d be curious to know how good they are for DRO use. I’m aware there are CNC 4 way holders with automatic indexing but those are built way better than normal ones I imagine.

I'm not a machinist, though I very much enjoyed using wonderful high quality machine tools at college. I had family who were machinists in the '50s. I find watching machining videos entertaining, engrossing and relaxing. I hadn't seen a rear tool holder, in this case for a parting tool and it's a great idea. Thank you for all of the hard work that you put into making such high quality videos. All the best from sunny Scotland.

I've always liked the idea of the Dave Lamas three-way tool post, you lose a tool, but gain clearance around the tailstock.

The only snag with a four way toolpost is that after time they wear and the indexing becomes inaccurate, indeed many are not accurate when new.

I changed my subscription (Bell) setting from personalized to ALL. I don't want to miss the next installment of that Dial Gage Center Height fixture! Personally, I think your comment about the 4 way providing less overhang was quite understated. Its geometry has far less overhang and its rigidity is also superior to the QC. Hey, I would never dream of giving up my old lantern post either. They'll get a tool into places that no other design will! Wakodahatchee Chris

Well, I can’t compare as I’ve not tried the four way. But I can say that one of the forest projects with the quick change setup is to build a rack for all the holders!

With insert tooling and a QCTP I find it much quicker to shuffle through 8 tool holders. I keep one empty for random tools. I only pull the 4 way out if I need to run a 1 inch boring bar and even then, I'm thinking about making a thick bar that fits the qctp.

Very interesting. Never owned a quick change, but I did build myself an adjustable holder which I set with a height standard with each change. I have identical ones on all 3 of my lathes. I guess it's just what you get used to? I agree that your method is definitely faster.

Machine close to the chuck with a four way toolpost and the unused tools will at some point snag the chuck. The unused tools have the potential to take a chunk out of your hand. Lantern or QCTP are infinitely better than four way.

I agree with you completely. That’s why I’ve resisted offers of qc tool posts. All my tools sit in their own place with their own shims ready to go.

You could also make or buy a second or even a third four way holder and have it all set up so you only have to unscrew the centre nut and change the whole lot over .

Interesting video. I do however disagree with the speed of the 4way, compared to the quick change. The range of tools that can be stored in tool holders, already set at the correct center height, is far greater than in the 4 way. But this is just my own opinion. Thanks for a great video

Very interesting! I use carbide inserts, so the height is always the same- I have milled a 'shim' for each carrier, so no selection required. I know that some people have multiple four-way units, so can change four tools at a time!

I have an ML10, which doesn't have enough centre height above the compound slide for a QCTP without being restricted to 1/4" square tools. And they're so expensive & bulky with all those extra holders taken up for each tool. So I just use an aluminium L section spacer machined to suit each indexable tool I have, which is as close to 'quick change' as I can get. The main reason I've stayed away from a 4 way toolpost so far is because I didn't fancy having a sharp not-in-use tool pointing towards my hands. But after watching this encouraging video, I think I'll give it a go, and get some silicone rubber tube to make tool covers. And the rear toolpost parting tool looks like worth making, as well as the centre height measuring jig for my spare clock. A great video, thank you.

My four way Smart and Brown tool post uses square headed clamp screws. These self clean themselves of swarf. Problem with hex socket head cap screws is that their recesses ALWAYS fill with swarf. So for the parting off tool holder which came standard with socket head cap screws I finally made two square headed clamp screws form 4140 high tensile steel with the same across flat dimensions as the rest of the tool clamp screws. The "T" wrench tightening tool now fitting all tool clamping screws.

The QTTP allows the entry of tool data into the DRO. If you don't use this function of the DRO then you are missing out.

The 4 way post is usually more rigid that most import quick change posts, too. Less overhang.

You don't need to lock the quick change height adjuster screw for each cut. back the screw all the way out and just lock it when your height is set and you are needing to actually remove and remount the tool holder. Yeah i know locking it down will twist it slightly but its insignificant

To make a generalized statement that the 4 way toolpost is better/faster than a QCTP is ridiculous, because it is NOT! What wasn't shown was the set-up time for the tooling in the 4 way tool post, chasing for shims, adjusting, etc. By the time that was done the lathe with the QCTP would have finished the job! I do agree that for batch production the 4 way post is quicker, in which case a 4 way post may be kept populated with the appropriate tools, ready for the next batch. For one-offs or 2-offs, the QCTP shines.

With indexable carbide tooling, you can superglue your shims to the tool so it stays with the tool if you need to swap it in and out.

I built a 4-way toolpost that indexed at 15° intervals. I served me well. So well that I wasn't motivated to go to a QCTP for 30 years. But eventually I built a QCTP which also indexes at 15° and a dozen tool holders. I'm never going back, and I should have done it 25 years ago. But then, I just have a Taiwan Jet lathe, so what do I know?

Subscribed. Great video and advice. I will dig my 4-way post out to try it as I almost immediately swapped it for a QCTP. I look forward to your DTI video. Finding shims will be the hard part to start but I I can gain rigidity, it is well worth it. Just thought about it and some inexpensive feeler gauge sets would work.

I'm glad you mentioned the overhang on QCTP, I find it excessive on majority of small lathes and swapped back to 4 way. On 'industrial size' the weight of QC tool holders starts going up pretty quick. I would estimate swapping a 4 lbs tool holder every couple of minutes when I worked in manufacturing (before the days of CNC) At least it kept me fit and saved on gym fees 😁

I made my own design quick change tool, to achieve a heavy chatter resistance tool post, this way I also can made myself any number of tool holder (of course can be done with commercial qct). The rigidity I got was miles away from the commercial ones for the small lathe I have.

I'm intrigued by your watch makers lathe. Ive looked back through your video library with no luck. Could you make a video about it please.

Superb video Mr Chronova, I guess it's the old saying 'Horses for courses' both have their merits, and downsides, but thanks for another superbly produced, and entertaining video

I used the 4 way for years but found the QC was overall better and gets even better for every holder you have past 4. The 4 way cannot be effectively used with a longish boring bar, neither can it be used with a tangential tool and it has to be rotated only in 1 direction. My QC can also be set to any arbitrary angle while some 4 ways cannot. Ideally I'd like a 4 way quick change tool post, it does exist.

In my opinion: DRO with tool library, a good quality holder system and enough holders are hard to beat. We use Parat holder system in one lathe (Harrison Alpha "semi cnc-lathe") and "Malcus"-type on a fully manual Harrison lathe with a Newall DP 8 DRO. The Alpha with Parat keeps inside +/-0.02mm changing tools (have ~15 holders, would need/like som more) and with the cam making parts is "a breeze". I use ∅8-∅32 mm tools and like the fact that I have different holders for different sizes. Then I just change inserts depending on material and preferences. DISCLAIMER: ALL of our qctp:s hold three or four tools! I turn my Parat 90° for one tool, 90° for the next and so on. I have no experience in using toolposts where the holders have to be changed between every operation!

I made two for my 9" SBend for left hand and right hand tools plus four way post for drills and boring bars two ecentric sleave give tool hight adjustment too the boring bars should have made them a bit smaller as I mainly use M6 blanks

I think the main downside with the 4 way in my experience is I always end up catching my hand on the unused tool sticking out to the side. Quick change doesnt have that. Also, with the 4 way if you have a mill, find the size of shim for each tool and mill a piece of metal to size and stamp it, makes it even quicker to swap tools

That's just silliness. QC toolposts are worlds faster than 4-ways. It's easy to make plenty of toolholders for a wide assortment of holders. Boring bars, threading toolbits, left turners, facers, right turners, detailers, cutoffs, knurlers... each with its own holder, all preset to its own height. Slam slam slam. No shimming. Even adjustment need not be by trial and error, since you know the thread size of your height adjustment screw / thumbnut. Make one low quickie test cut, measure the diameter of the stem nipple, divide in half to get radius, and you know exactly how far to turn your thumbnut to be exactly where you want to be. It's even super-easy to set a tool high or low to compensate for a top rake that isn't ideal for the cut being made. And... a QC toolpost can be rotated just as easily as a 4-way can be. With NO tools. A QC toolpost is also nearly always smaller in "diameter" than a four-way is, which places the toolbit nearer its center, which minimizes tool stickout and hangover, which maximizes rigidity. No need for any shim rack or external space-consuming shim calculation dial/test indicator rig. I own four-ways, lanterns, and QC toolposts. I nearly always reach for the QC. One last point: a four-way's detent stop is seldom very repeatable. That's a serious weakness. Every time you change tools, you need to verify that it's oriented correctly or it'll be at the wrong angle so it won't be repeatable. Compare to a QC toolpost; make a cut, remove the tool, change to a different tool, replace the first tool, and your zero will still be exactly zero. Full repeatability. Say... a left turner, a knurler, back to the face turner. You won't want a different zero for the knurler, so you can leave your zero alone. If you have one of those T-slot tables on your cross-slide, bueno for you. Most of us do not. Either way, make up a zero testing rig on the back side of your cross-slide. Move to the right of your workpiece, slide forward "too far", test your height, adjust quickly, back up, and make your cut. Bang bang bang. Seconds. SECONDS. I'd rather cut metal than shim stuff.

Makes a lot of sense, as I too have a lack of toolholders for my QCTP. What metric dimensions has your 4way holder for the Myford, as I use a S7 ? Best wishes, Kijs 🇱🇺

Interesting! I drifted in on the algorithm tide…I’ve never used the four-way post that came with my Myford. I note that it has a simple ratchet for indexing, and wonder whether it is repeatable enough for those tools that really must address the work at a right angle.

I think it also taking load direkt in to the compound and not hanging of to the left side like QCTP. Especially using a Parting tools

There is another consideration you haven't mentioned about using a fully tool loaded 4 way indexing toolpost and that is user safety. with a fully loaded 4 way there are razor sharp tool ends poking out in every direction and that in itself is undesirable from a user safety aspect. Way back in my tech college days the shop teachers did not like to see a 4 way post with any more tools loaded other than the one doing the actual cutting operation for this safety reason as there had been several instances of students injured on the other protruding tool ends when reaching in to measure a workpiece with a mic or calliper or make other adjustments.

Is your rear tool post also indexable? Looks like it. It would be cool to have a second tool post in the back. In fact I have a special book by the Vereinigten Drehbank-Fabriken (VDF) in which a machine is shown that has two cross slides mounted on the same dovetail, each with their own turret tool post and leadscrew with handwheel. Pretty awesome. I was thinking how nice it would be to have an (inverted) chamfering tool mounted in the back as well, to be used while the machine keeps running in the same direction. In fact I have seen a very nice example of a parting-off rear tool post in a Colchester manual which also has the clamping system inverted, bolts coming from below and the fixed clamping surface on top. For parting off it may be less ideal because it appears to me the forces will try and lift the cross slide instead of pushing it down. One last thing I noticed is that the compound slide is very often mounted in a position where it overhangs the cross slide a little bit. I wonder why this is. The added moment load will put much more pressure on the left cross slide guideway. It may have to do with clearance of workpieces of certain dimensions, but I have not encountered such a use case yet.

Hi I have subbed to your channel to help it grow. Nice video presentation. I have the Super 7B that i do my youtube stuff on. Great little lathe. Regards. Steve.

except I dont want to cut down my tools to fit 4 in to the 4 way tool post, all of my tools would protrude to far out the front if you allowed space for the intersecting tool behind, meaning you cant have more than 2 tools in the 4 way holder at any time.

Kinda ridiculous to say it is faster to use a four way compared to your quick change just because your quick change doesn’t have a incorporated handle. I haven’t had any repeatability problems with my quick change. It does however suck that the tool holders are so expensive. Considering they are just a block of milled and ground steel.

Google reads my thoughts. The recommendations are scary accurate.

I recently bought an old lathe and started learning to use it. It came with many quick change tool posts. I find the center height to be very dependent on exactly how I drop the new post into place and tighten it. This thing they show where it's "you just drop the new tool in, tighten, and away you go, perfectly aligned!" seems a little misleading to me. At this early stage, where I'm teaching myself about cutters and how to grind and sharpen them, I find myself almost always replacing the tool in the quick change.

I have 3 lathes and all have 4 way toolposts too much overhang on quick changes I keep each tool with it's own shims ready I was given a genuine Dixon but prefer the 4 way any day less overhang,great video thanks

I use a Multifix in my Myford but I use the knurling tool in the rear tool post but on my Pultra P type I use a four way.

Mine is the opposite I need a Spanner to change the 4way and the quick change has the the turn leaver on top 😂

I now believe in the BELL CURVE..... The shims are killer

I don't have an engineering lathe but the only one I have ever had an eye out for is the Myford..

really interesting i,m going to give it a go

Go to any Car Boot sale and you will see umpteen old feeler gauge sets for very little cost; provides ready-stamped shim stock.

3:40 What do you mean by not having enough tool holders I've got 18, +3 for boring bars and one with a MT2 and a 5/8 keyless chuck. Also I ditched the compound and built a solid riser block so my tool post won't swivel anymore and is set square. I marked the cross slide so the drill chuck is on center. Now I drill, ream and tap with power feed. That fore way is what I learned on, however sometimes I would have to remove a cutter I just spent 10 min getting on center because it was in the way of the tail stock. In my 1943 Machinist hand book ( the Bible) says it's A-OK to plunge straight in while threading. That 29.5deg business is needed for big coarse threads. With 1-1/2x8TPI you will be just fine. Another trick for hard stuff or S.S single point it most of the way then run a die nut over it. Same for taping.

Great video! Subscription added.

The 4-way dies without access to a good variety of hardened shims, if you always have to improvise and find pieces to adjust the center height, you are done for. If you have a bigger machine you will also find that the shims will die rather quickly because of the clamping force you will need to apply. If you have a small lathe the 4 way will work, a bigger one, no way. The forces are much higher and the shims, hardened or not wont last long. I've also found that the Multifix system is much better than the style of quick change shown, though the multi might be to big for small machines.

Awesome video

I’m new to this, but why does the tool holder moves not only rotation but also in the thrust direction , even though the cross feed and carriage can adjust the tool position?

Everyone talked about the 4 position tool post. What about the rear tool post???? Make one or purchase?

Need some new form of tool post. Invention time! 🎉High five!🙌😁

Interesting comparison, but why do you use cap screws for tool holding ? old school square head set screws by far the better option. Thank you.

Do you need to re shim a tool when you resharpen it?

Subscribed for the beautiful lathe.. Super 7? I have a quick change on my ML7 which annoys me more than it helps me, I think - perhaps a four-way is the answer!

Nice video sir. I agree with your points. The one advantage of the QCTP over the 4way, seems to be the option to use the tool inventory of a DRO, if a DRO is available. With some QCTP you can also index your tools in specific angle increments which can be useful too. Keep the interesting content coming and take care. Kind regards from Greece.

hi where can i get a dial guage like the one you use

yes i agree There a lot to be done with a 4- way tool post. i have both but fin i ues the for way a lot one you have the right size Tolls that fall in line with the Centre & i use dedicated old feeler gages for sliming, Or cut the tool to it finish with so no shims are needed Les England. I even have an agitable Lantin post . i mad a a project one lazy after noon.

While a 4-way tool post is fine, the only advantage it has over a QCTP is in rigidity. That is particularly true with smaller lathes, but can matter on larger machines too. In every other way, the QCTP wins hands down. In particular, the argument that adjusting the tool height is cumbersome or slow for a QCTP was complete and utter non-sense. Setting the tool height with a QCTP is dead simple and only takes seconds. As does changing tools, of course. While having a well sorted assortment of shims is obviously helpful for a 4-way, that does not over come having to take the same initial test-cuts to confirm tool height as with a QCTP, or having to deal with the 3 or 4 set screws to hold the tool - vs - a single lever on the QCTP. Now, there is one type of QCTP that looses on all fronts - the type that uses a piston to push out on the tool-holder to hold it in place against dove-tails. Those are only good for very light use. If that. In particular, the little cheap aluminum ones that cost $30 for mini-lathes are garbage. Avoid those at all costs. Now, all the above aside, this was a very well done video. And your other videos look interesting, so I think I'll go watch them. Cheers! :)

On the plus side your coworkers can't steal your toolholders when you are on vacation.

yay a tool post can of worms :) lol... now about the shim dial making ?

Particularly in small lathes, (I have two, both Myfords) for almost all the work I do, as many of three of the four tools will always be in the way. Generally they will foul the tailstock, but often the workpiece, and sometimes the chuck. Particularly this is the case with boring tools, but even short tools take up space which on a small lathe is simply not there. I think this is a false dichotomy: for me, other options are better than both those presented here.

I am wondering why to change from a lantern style tool holder.... All tool holders seem a pain and they all need adjusting capabilities. I'd guess saving time being key. (?)

Aloris wedge style toolposts solve many of the issues you describe. For production work though, the four way has its merits.

Having used a QCTP during the last 60 + years of my working life I wouldn't want to use a 4 way tool holder for any price......anyone who thinks a QCTP is not as rigid as a 4 way is over powering their lathe.

There is a DOGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG at 0:39 ... I just love dog.

Go full capstan?

I like the way you think and I like the traditional four-way and I will offer to you another way to make life easier and actually it's a little cooler looking as well after all we always enjoy style points don't we? My suggestion is to remove all the socket head screws and replace them with 12 point alloy steel bolts which are very popular with the speed tuning set for mounting exhaust headers intake manifolds and the such. The American fastener manufacturer ARP supplies these type of fasteners in stainless steel and alloy steel I personally stick with alloy steel last chance of galling and it stays in vogue with the entire tool steel family on the lathe Then go buy a corresponding dedicated T-Wrench that has the socket size built-in to match your 12-point bolt head --of course it's a 12-point socket and it drops onto the bolt head extremely easily you don't have to Fumble with loading the Allen wrench into the socket and on top of that since the 12-point bolt head is of male configuration you do not have a cavity that collects swarf and chips and grease and dirt and every other thing including hot dogs and stray fingernail clippings and in turn is much easier to keep things clean on the tool holder itself whilst guaranteeing 100% purchase each and every time you drop the dedicated T-wrench/socket onto the 12 point head. Also keep in mind the 12-point bolt configuration has a skirt at the base of the head that the socket nests into once it's seated. Also being that we are destined to do things right you will eventually be determined to machine a dog nose feature on the end of each Bolt it takes a little time and my goodness if you happen to have a lantern bolt holder that would make life even easier at minimum you will want to dress the end of the bolt because it still has the deformation in it from the manufacturing process and of course you want a nice flat surface to intersect at a right angle with the cutting tools you are securing. Once you go with this configuration you will never go back to socket head cap screws I assure you. I wish I had a way to send you a picture of my tool holder with the 12 point bolts in-situ. Thank you for the wonderful video excellent work it's great to have such an open and easy exchange of information in this type of forum Cheers PS... Please keep in mind I'm referring to the reduced size aircraft style-12-point point bolt heads. Another factor missed by many is that the socket size for this configuration bolt matches the thread body size so for example if you are in the English or SAE system a 1/4-20 lnch 12 Point bolt will then use a quarter inch wrench12-point socket.

Nice video but....The whole thing whit Quick-Change Toolpost is having enough toolholders. So i don,t understand your point when you say "you have to change the tool". The 4 way tool holder is a dino and 4 tools are not enough. And the money argument, I don't understand either, speed wins time. And if you have a lot of time, you can make your own holders. If you throw away your quick changer throw it to me.😄

I have been making chips (with precision) for 50 years and I would not trade my KDK. As for most things, you could twist them around to make them fit your point of view. So you like one type of tool holder, so what!

I’m going to disagree with this. My quick change is considerably faster. Not only do I have an excess of tool holders, but I always have my tools pre adjusted for center height. I have a dial indicator tool a made to set the center height when I do use a new tool. Your QCTP seems to require wrenches, mine is completely tool-less. I made and ground mine myself so it’s especially tight and solid. I engrave tool numbers on my tool holders, and store the tool offsets in my DRO. For your shop with the system you have it may be faster using a 4 way. But in mine with my system, a 4 way is leagues slower.

The 4 Way is not a superior toolpost, it is a superior alternative. A great deal depends on the particular job and the machine to use, just as Aceroadholder states below. In respect to full size lathes, with serious power and job demands, I offer the following, from 50 years in job shops. So for my own equipment, ATW Pacemaker & 10EE those decades say the following; Over the years, acquired (and kept) 3 different sets. #1 toughest QCTH is the Dickson/ Enco/ Feldbach type, similar but not very interchangeable. The wide spacing of locating Vee's, therefore least deflection, is unbeatable. It also grips holders on two adjacent sides. Holders are largest, hence heaviest, using them is a workout. best use is on machines capable of the greatest power and part size. A challenge to duplicate DIY, possible with access to a broad set of equipment. They clean easily with a chip brush; anyone running bronze and brass will appreciate that detail. I like square head clamping cap screws for the same reason. Dang silicon bronze, cast steel and iron. Next, the Kirkelie. It resembles Aloris pattern but the post is female dovetail, occupying 3/4 the width of the post. Entire right side is the clamp meaning pressure of straight turning is directed to solid portion, not the clamp. They made straight and right angle holders but all grip from front, and weigh half that of Dicksons. Both sides of the Vee also clean easily with a brush. You wouldn't be disappointed with a set, not hard creating copies on your own, IF properly heat treated. Multifix is a terrific design, but not very prevalent. They haven't a broad distribution net work or promotion. Nobody would turn a set down. They need ready storage that doesn't allow chips to collect in the splines, a lot of contact area = no repeatability. Next Aloris, most prevalent of all, and widest variety of holders, many not especially feasible in other designs. Yuasa held/ holds rights to a version if not copy that interchange well, of which Chinese copies do not. An easy test, if the lever locks holder at similar angle between brands. Un-tightened and unequally tightened holders detract from repeatability. There are others. Admittedly, Chinese QCTP & TH are an elongated Oooh-kkk, only if bought and KEPT as a set; verify they each lock similarly. It seems they screen groups of holders with posts and match them accordingly, because two sets hardly lock with the same physical effort. Very last is KDK, with exception of #100 & #150 ranges. Easy to manipulate, plenty in variety of holders, in fast jobs on small machines, it's some kind of cruel joke when 250's and larger have same width dovetail as smaller holders. I don't care what some engineers certificate states. Rrigidity and repeatability are direct functions of proportion and mass ALL the other holder designers comprehend.

Hard disagree on all points, but a very interesting perspective and video.

Honestly, I'm a noob, but I think you have it wrong. For a beginner, there is nothing easy about obtaining or making a variety of shims, measuring the required height, or making a special tool height/shim measuring device. It's much easier to mount the tool in the qct holder, and adjust the height of the tool to a center mounted in the HS or TS. Now for someone with the shim and measuring setup, the 4 way may be more efficient if you're able to plan the tools you'll need to mount in advance, but this is not realistic for my level of experience or my current work types.

Just a thought... The video quality is great, the narration is great with great sound, the background music is great as was the sound editing, the content is fine.. But. 1.-The picture itself doesn't contribute much. 2.-The thumbnails are missing at least 25% and aren't informative enough. Video conetnt-I really did enjoyed the video but i found that I didn't feel the need to look at the screen and was mostly interested in the sound content. Like listening to a good audio-article with some background sounds. Cutting stocks to width is nice and part of the process but it can't be the main content. 2-3 minutes is abit much in my opinion. The 0.6mm screw is a great example of the opposite and the success it brings. The story is great, you must watch every move because it's amazing how miniature it is, the cutting is fast,angles a nicer. Thumbnails-I'll just refer to the 0.6mm video again. Great thumbnail that also telss a story of what to expect. The black background with the title is a choice but maybe at least without the blue on the side onto the actual thumbnail? The story in the picture is important to cause people to click and the last video thumbnail compared to the rest is noticeable. I do believe that if you'll continue in that route its gonna be a very successful channel. You have everything that is very high quality , just need to learn the tricks of using it.

I do not like the overhang of the quikchange

Shimming each cutter sounds like stone age especially when the cutters need the different shims. Buy tool holders when the price is favourable. I've got 30++ of them that way. Bringing the cutter, the tool, to center height is a one time job. Using a good method it's done very quickly. The so called QCTP was developed for a reason and got its name for a reason. The four way coming with the lathe was removed before the first cut. That ancient technology was used during school time 55 years ago and really disliked. Do what makes You satisfied. I disagree completely with You.

Je ne comprends pas l'anglais

Another vote for the 4 way. I have three of them with 10 tools mounted in them leaving me with two spare mountings. Each four way costs about the same as a quick change tool holder. In my opinion a quick change tool post is a costly way of making a small lathe worse. I really don't know why so many think fitting one is a must do upgrade.

QCTP are gimmicks to sell you something new, as always

The whole premise of this video is dumb. You have your quick change tool post "cartridges" right in front of yourself in arm's reach. The seriously prehistoric 4 tool holder are dangerous as you have razor-sharp tools sticking out on 4 sides and one of them pointing straight at you! The only use these old school 4 tool holders have was for mass production of fast-machined parts. But CNC has taken this job away completely. Most manual lathe machining is for one-offs, prototyping and repairs jobs.

You're taking the very worst of one and the very best of the other. Its like one of the infomercials were they say stuff like "Are you sick of your pillow being so heavy you need 3 family members just to flip it over? Well worry no more. Our pillow is made of FEATHERS!" At the start you complain about having to use a spanner of all things just to change a tool over. Yet later in the vid you are undoing and redoing 3 bolts with a hex key to change a tool that didnt need shimming apparently. Furthermore, my DRO is the cheapest I could get and it gets 10 microns just fine. Your claim is entirely dependent on the quality of the dials put on the lathe which in my case is laughable. Silly video that probably had legitimate points to make but was mired in biased fluff for the sake of a stronger premise. Six thumbs down.

Agreed fully QCTP is a gimmick sold to a market of more gimmicks