4.25" x 20" gap-bed Winfield of the 1930s. The bed was substantially improved in comparison with the flimsy types used on the rebadged Randa lathes shown below.
Continued:
Like Portass in Sheffield, Winfield built their lathes in small batches and, from the selection that has passed through the writer's hands, a guess could be hazarded that each set was slightly different to the previous and incorporated, at the whim of the foreman or factory owner, such modifications or alterations that seemed, at the time, most appropriate. Little-used examples that have come to light in recent years show they were produced on a shoe-string budget with low-quality castings, an indifferent cosmetic finish and evidence of hand-work being necessary to get everything working properly. It is not known which was the company's first lathe but two obviously early examples have been discovered one with flat-belt drive and the other with V-pulleys. The V-belt machine is known from just one photograph of an example perched on an oil drum outside the factory door  and a (so-far) single surviving example that carries a tailstock of different design. Non of the company's advertising literature mentions these early lathes but instead features the Randa lathes bought in for resale from Ross and Alexander in London. The Randa was, for an inexpensive machine, reasonably well specified: the 3-inch centre height by 10-inch between centres machine could be had as two distinct (Winfield) models: the better-equipped 20-inch between centres "R" and the very much more basic "H" (a model listed by Randa as their Type "A"). The 90 lb. "R" had a bed and headstock cast as one unit and with a foot at both headstock and tailstock ends. The 6 : 1 ratio backgear was a full-width type mounted on an eccentric engagement shaft and with cast-iron guards; the gears were in steel with the bullwheel locked to the 3-step flat-belt pulley by a quick-release, spring-loaded pin. Tumble reverse was fitted as standard and  proper double clasp nuts (running in V-guides) were used to grip the leadscrew - with the latter carrying a "balanced" handle on its end. A short cast-iron guard was bolted to the left-hand side of the apron to afford the leadscrew some protection from swarf and dirt. Instead of a rack-and-pinion the carriage was driven along the bed by a gear that acted directly on the leadscrew (a method still employed into the 1980s on the Myford ML10) the only advantage of which was the engraving of marks on the handle's collar that acted as a thread-dial indicator. The 1.125-inch diameter spindle ran in simple split bronze bearings, was bored through 5/8" with its 1.125" x 12 t.p.i spindle nose carrying a No. 2 Morse taper socket. Whilst early versions of the "R" had a rather short 3 T-slot cross-slide later models had a slide some 2 inches longer with an extra T-slot and a greater travel. Both cross and top-slide screws were square-section and ran directly in the castings without the benefit (to subsequent owners) of replaceable nuts - nor were there any micrometer dials. The tailstock carried the expected No. Morse centre and (on examples seen) could not be set over for taper turning. In the early 1930s the "R" cost £7 : 15s : 0d. Complete with faceplate, catchplate, chuck backplate and a set of 10 changewheels.
A later, slightly heavier (110 lbs) version of the "R" (listed by the makers as a "Heavy Duty" model) had its headstock mounted as a separate unit with the centre height raised 35/8" - but the between-centres capacity reduced slightly to 18 inches. The saddle was better supported by the use of small wings at each side, the tailstock was considerably beefed up with its spindle diameter enlarged sufficiently to carry a No. 2 Morse centre and a separate sole plate fitted that allowed the top to be set over for taper turning. The increase in centre height allowed a longer changewheel bracket to be fitted that enabled a double instead of single compound gear train to be set up reduction that gave the carriage a much finer rate of feed whilst also permitting a wider range of thread pitches to be generated..
Continued below:

Continued:
The Model "H" (shown below) was of similar appearance to the "R" but differed in almost every detail of its construction. It could be ordered as either a 12-inch machine with a cantilever bed or as a 20-inch between-centres model - in which case a foot was provided at the tailstock end so the owner could do his best to introduce distortion as he bolted it down to an uneven wooden workbench. The headstock, cast integrally with the bed, carried split bronze bearings in which ran a 1-inch diameter spindle bored through 3/8" with a 1" x 12 t.p.i nose and No. 1 Morse taper socket. A simple 6 : 1 backgear assembly (in cast-iron) was clustered at each side of the left-hand headstock bearing and mounted on an eccentric shaft. No tumble reverse was fitted (nor offered as an extra) and the engagement of the leadscrew was (as standard) by a simple (spring and ball-bearing) snap-in-and-out ball-ended lever operating a single-sided nut. Whilst the long-bed version was illustrated fitted with a proper compound slide rest the short bed model was shown with just a single tool slide mounted on a small boring table with two 2 slots. Both  feed screws, as on the "R", were bereft of micrometer dials and their square-section feedscrews ran direct in the castings. The lathes could be ordered with various options including an upgrade to proper leadscrew clasp nuts, a compound slide rest on the short-bed model, a cast-iron stand and both ceiling and bench-mounted countershaft units - though the latter had no form of belt-tension adjustment other than something rigged up by the owner himself. A "foot-motor" was also listed and consisted of a self-contained floor stand with flywheel and treadle that an owner could position beneath his own workbench.
The Model H was priced at £5 : 10 : 0d in short-bed form complete with a compound slide rest, 6.5-inch faceplate, 3.25-inch drive plate, a part-machined chuck backplate and 10 changewheels. The long-bed model, with similar equipment, was listed at £19 : 18 : 6d. An extra 8 shillings bought the advantages of a double clasp nut on the apron.
Continued below:

The cheaper Randa/Winfield Model "H" 3" x 12" short-bed recognisable by its backgear clustered around the left-hand headstock bearing, single tool slide and a spring-indented lever to engage the leadscrew clasp nut.

Randa/Winfield Model "H" 3" x 20" long-bed , snap-in leadscrew engagement lever -  but in this case fitted with a compound slide rest.

Rear view of the Randa "R" with Winfield badging
Contimued:
The most commonly encountered Winfield today is the  later and much-improved 4.25" x 20" gap-bed model (illustrated below) that was based on a strongly-built 'cantilever' bed with a deep box section between the mounting feet. The headstock casting was stiffened by having its front face drawn up level with the lower edges of the simple, split, bronze bearings - and was fastened solidly to the bed by four substantial studs and nuts. Although the spindle nose carried the same thread and No. 2 Morse taper as the late-model Myford ML4 and the Series 7 lathes, (11/8" x 12 T.P.I.) it did not, at least on the versions inspected, have the same "step-up" register between the thread and spindle-abutment face.
A rather wider than normal  (a useful 1.25" rather than 0.75" or 1") flat-belt drive was standard, but a V-belt option was listed in the sales sheets as a "no-cost" option; surprisingly, this cannot have been taken up my many buyers, for I have only ever seen one so equipped.  Both stand-alone and integral countershafts were offered as extras; the latter unit consisted of a substantial box-form casting bolted to the back of the bed and carrying a swing-head unit with the belt tension set by a simple cam-action lever which worked on only one side of the unit. The countershaft bearings were in plain bronze, split on one side for adjustment.
Tumble reverse appears to have been part of the standard specification but, whilst later machines were fitted with a heavy cast-iron changewheel cover, early lathes, in the spirit of the times, had them completely exposed.
The whole of the carriage assembly (even to the little leadscrew swarf guard) was very like that of a Myford ML4, with the thread for the cross-slide screw being formed directly in the metal of the saddle and a simple rectangular thrust plate fitted to the end of the T-slotted cross slide.
The top slide, again very ML4-like, was held in place with a single bolt, around which it could be swivelled. In standard form no graduations were fitted to either top or cross-slide feed screws - though a graduated handwheel could be purchased, as an accessory, to fit the latter.
The hollow-bored tailstock barrel, with its square-section thread, carried no ruler markings, but was fitted with a 2 Morse taper, a considerable improvement on the No. 1 Morse normally found on small lathes of this vintage; unfortunately, the barrel was clamped by a screw which closed on a slot cut in the tailstock casting - an arrangement which might have worked adequately-well when the machine was new, but not so perfectly when everything had bedded in and worn a little a few years later……
Several other models were also produced by the company, including one with a 5-inch centre height and two 3-inch versions. Although no information is available about the larger machine, the smaller types differed considerably and it may be that the earlier of the two, with bed and headstock cast as one, a backgear clustered at the left-hand end of the headstock and two bed-mounting feet, was badged as a "Lineker & Winfield". The other appears to have been produced in at least two versions, both with single long bed foot and bolt-on headstock, with one pictured outside the Winfield works proudly displayed on top of a battered oil drum..
Like many other makers Winfield were not above buying in other makers products and marketing them as their own with examples found of Randa lathes (Ross & Alexander, of London) with beds carrying the Winfield name. If you own an example of any type of Winfield, and could take some suitable photographs, or have any Winfield advertising literature, the author would be very pleased to hear from you..
Tony Griffiths

Recent pictures of a Winfield without its tumble reverse mechanism and changewheels fitted. Note the generous size of the gap bed - cut back even more in this example - and the large-diameter handle on the tailstock barrel.