When, in September 1934, Cecil Moore founded the Myford Engineering Company by occupying a spare room in a 5-storey lace mill in Beeston, Nottinghamshire (the address in the early sales sheets was given as Neville Works) few could have foreseen the day when, 10 years later, he was to occupy all but a fraction of the same building and his firm rise to pre-eminence amongst the then many competing makers of small lathes.  The foundation of this success was a range of just four lathes: the ML1, ML2, ML3 and ML4, all designed and priced to appeal to the model engineer. Often confusing as to the exact model - because of the foundry marks A1, A2, B1, B2 (etc.) sometimes found cast into their beds - the lathes were all of almost identical design, but of different capacity and with many detail differences. The first known catalogue makes no mention of a Model type, just the "Myford 3-inch", but this single models was to develop first into the ML1 and ML2 (Myford Lathe 1 and 2) both with  a 31/8" centre height and admitting 15" between centres, and then, a little later, into the  31/2" x 24" models ML3 and ML4. Both ranges were built from the early 1930s until, in 1941, instructions were received from the (war-time) Government's Machine Tool Control Rationalisation Board to stop production and take over from the Drummond Company (busy with the important Maximatic production lathes) manufacture of the Armed Services' standard small lathe the M-Type . The official directions relating to Myfords own lathes were undoubtedly cancelled, for sales literature continued to be printed with a brochure for ML2 and ML4 appearing in November 1941 and another in March 1943 with the former containing an official Machine Tool Control Price List. The lists stated that "for the duration" the ML1 and ML3 would be withdrawn from sale. It was intended, according to a letter written by the company's sales department in September 1946, that production of the ML2 would resume in the late summer of 1947--and the ML4 a little later. However, in the event, with the factory fully occupied building the new ML7 (and with materials of all kinds still in short supply and production of the M-Type continuing as well) this option was never taken up. However, it is possible that a few machines were constructed from spares for those with the "right connections" and so avoid the cripplingly-long 60 to 100-week waiting list for both M-Type and ML7.
Although the ML2 and ML4 models were listed as "Superior" - and the ML1 and ML2 as "Standard" - the precise specification was not stated. Two important differences were that the ML1 and ML3 were cast with bed and headstock as one and lacked a tumble-reverse mechanism - though just to confuse matters separate-headstock ML2 and ML4s were also built without tumble reverse. A wide range of useful accessories was listed for all types including a foot motor" (a self-contained treadle-powered flywheel and flat-belt cone-pulley assembly), cast-iron stands that varied from the flimsy to the robust, countershafts for bench, stand and ceiling mounting, plain and swivelling vertical milling slides, steadies, machine vices, V-blocks, thread-dial indicators, a wood-turning hand rest, 4-way toolpost and even capstan units and cut-off slides to convert the lathes to light-duty production work.  All versions of the ML1 to ML4 were lightly built, on flat-top, "cantilever" beds of box-form section (and with the same width of 60-degree edge ways), and did not differ greatly in quality or accuracy from any number of pre-WW2 competitors. However, the machines proved immensely popular and the Myford Company, based on their reputation of offering value-for-money accuracy, went from strength to strength. All models were fitted with a 6 : 1 ratio backgear and a gap bed; the ML1 and ML2 were constructed until (probably) 1942 with headstock and bed cast as one - these models running alongside those with detachable headstocks. Individual specifications varied over the years but by the early 1940s all models ordered with tumble reverse were also supplied with a larger headstock spindle with the bore increased in diameter from 3/8" to 19/32 and with a No. 2 instead of No. 1 Morse taper in the nose. Lathes with the smaller I-inch diameter spindle carried a 7/8" diameter 8 t.p.i. thread whilst the larger were equipped with a 11/8"12 t.p.i nose identical to that used on the post-war ML7. By 1943, in a rationalisation of production, the tumble reverse and larger spindle appear to have become standard fittings.
Like many contemporary small lathes the guarding of belts and gears was either rudimentary or non existent. However, by the late 1930 several designs of changewheel cover appeared, obviously in search of a simple but economical solution. The first was a rather crude hinge-up guard that lacked an inner cover; this was replaced by an assembly that used a cast-iron plate bolted to the end of the bed with the cover located by a dowel at the back and a knurled thumb screw at the front (just like the ML7) and finally, but very rarely found, a cover (together with an inner plate) that hinged open in the manner of that fitted to the Super 7.
Continued below:

Continued:
Although the availability of small V-belts more or less coincided with the founding of the Myford Company in the early 1930a all their early lathes used flat-belt drive; by the late 1930s the option of V-belts was available (at extra cost) and then finally as standard when the ML4 was fitted to the late-type 12-speed stand.  The flat-belt cone pulleys had either 3-steps each 0.75-inches wide or, as found very occasionally, with 2-steps each 1 inch wide on lathes fitted with capstan units. The first lathes were supplied with flat-belt drive from motor to the countershaft, a difficult arrangement to get running satisfactorily on a fast-running motor with the pulleys set close together. Whilst for use today, with modern belting, it is not necessary to change the headstock drive to a V belt, the drive from the motor is definitely a candidate for change, a small-diameter flat pulley on the motor will simply not transmit enough power to make use of the lathe's turning power. Although all early versions (of all variants) have been found without guards over the changewheels by the late 1930s a more sensible attitude prevailed and first the option a simple "hinge-up" cast-iron cover was offered and later (generally seen on examples with tumble reverse) a full bolt-on cover and inner plate both in cast iron - not unlike the (aluminium) ones on the later ML7.
Although not mentioned in any of the (rare) catalogues customers could choose either a spindle running directly in the cast iron of the headstock (an excellent situation if the spindle is hard and carefully finished) or, for 10 shillings extra (in 1937), fitted with bronze bearings. In the latter case one owner of a new ML4 reports that he found the headstock bearing housings to be roughly finished and alignment obtained by pressing the bushes in and then boring them true. Whilst this method might have been an excellent expedient to quick and easy production it did nothing for the owner who subsequently wished to replace the bearings - just fitting new bushes resulting in hopeless misalignment of the spindle. The bearing housings were "split" on one side and with a pinch bolt to provide a form of initial adjustment and care must be taken not to over-tighten the clamping screws as the assembly wears - it is very easy to snap the headstock casting and an effective repair is both difficult and expensive. If the "split" bearings on your early Myford (or other small lathe) are worn, it is much better to bite the bullet and have the spindle hard chromed, ground to size and a new pair of bearing made up and carefully bored true by your local precision engineer.
In the 1930s, when money was tight, many lathes were sold without countershafts, the owners preferring to construct their own from handy scrap. If you were lucky enough to be able to afford the real thing Myford offered two basic units for bench mounting: a simple, non-adjustable affair and a rather superior one, not dissimilar to that offered for the 6-inch Atlas in the USA. The latter that resembled a tall angle plate with a hinged top and bearings held by pairs of opposing screws that allowed then to become "self-aligning". 
Continued below:

A later Myford ML2 with the headstock and the left-hand leadscrew support bracket both bolted on. The top slide has a bolt at the front as well as the back, tumble reverse is fitted as are graduated dials on the compound slide-rest feed screws - whilst the changewheels completely enclosed by a bolt-on cover. In this publicity picture the tailstock has been air-brushed to resemble the later, much-improved type.

Continued:
Every ML1, ML2, ML3 and ML4 had a carriage of similar construction with a simple, lightweight apron secured to the saddle by two screws and a direct rack-and-pinion drive from a balanced handwheel. The direct gearing led to the carriage travel being very high geared and when taking a cut by hand a small movement of the handle produced a disproportionately large travel of the cutting tool. To solve this problem the makers offered a handwheel for the leadscrew end by which means the carriage could be advanced more slowly and a steadier cut taken. All versions were given a  T-slotted cross slide and a swivelling top slide with, on early lathes, a simple etched micrometer dial fitted to just the cross-slide feed screw - although very occasionally an original lathe is found where the owner must have pushed out the boat and ordered one for the top slide as well; later versions, from an indeterminate date, appear to have been fitted with both dials as standard. The slides (which were hand scraped "and fitted only by experienced slide fitters" ) carried square-thread feed screws of 12 t.p.i. with proper balanced ball handles; unfortunately the screws, instead of being fitted with replaceable nuts, ran directly in threads tapped in the castings. The "printed" feed-screw micrometer dials showed 80 divisions - so giving 0.96 thou per division.
Retained by just a single stud that passed through its pivot point, the first lathes had a top slide that was obviously inadequate and the familiar curved slot on the front, to provide an extra clamping point, must have been introduced very quickly judging by the very few examples of the first type encountered. Although precisely dating a Pre-war Myford can be difficult other pointers to early machines are a very short guard over the spindle bull gear and a lack of knurling on the tailstock handwheel.
The changewheel ran directly on their mounting studs and were joined together with a pin when built up in a compound drive. The drive gear on the end of the smaller diameter headstock spindle simply pushed on and was retained by a stop collar and grub screw, with the two joined with a pin (in a similar fashion to that employed on the Drummond M). On the large-spindle lathes, the ones always fitted with tumble reverse, the gear had to be a fixed distance from the tumble unit and, in effect, non-removable. To achieve this Myford (thankfully) avoided forming the gear as part of the shaft but instead made it a close fit on the (turned-down) end with a grub screw inserted on the longitudinal axis between gear and shaft. The leadscrew was 5/8" diameter and with a square thread clasped by cast-iron nuts running in short V-edged guides.
Continued below:

1938 3.5" x 23" ML3. Note the lack of tumble reverse, the bolt-on  headstock-end leadscrew bracket and top slide still retained by just one bolt at the back
Continued:
As a point of interest the writer has seen many examples of early Myford lathes where an owner has attempted to engage backgear by disengaging the bull wheel from the spindle; unfortunately this quickly wrecks both gear and spindle and the correct method is to release the pulley from the spindle (look for a grub screw through either the bottom of a V-groove or through the pulley's end boss).
Unfortunately the only ML1, ML2, ML3 and ML4 parts that can be replaced by those from the later ML7 lathes are the screwcutting changewheels, the complete tumble reverse assembly and (thinned down) the backgear "Cluster" - the pair of gears carried on an eccentric shaft at the back of the headstock on the older machines, and under the spindle on the ML7. If the older lathe is a late-model ML4 with a 1.125" hole through its bullwheel (the large gear carried on the spindle) this item can also be adapted, in a thinned-down form, from that used on the ML7. Although the ML7 and Super 7 changewheels are the same D.P. as the ML1/2/4 type, they do not run directly on their mounting studs; instead, the centre of each gear wheel accepts a keyed bush that runs on a hardened stud, a vastly-superior system and one that can easily be adapted - with a little judicious filing of the banjo slot - to work on the ML2 and ML4. If necessary the later gears can be run on the original plain pins but the additional cost of the keyed studs is so small - and the improvement in the drive so great - that this should not be considered. To use the existing changewheels on new studs requires means filing a keyway, a job made easy by buying a good quality square-section needle file just a little smaller than the size of the finished slot.  Because the (stronger) ML7 tumble-reverse assembly is a direct replacement for the (flimsier) unit used on the ML4, there seems to be no good reason why a lathe without this facility could not re retro-fitted with it - though care would be needed in positioning the mounting stud and to marking out the indent positions for the location plunger.
The tailstock was the weakest part of the lathe, with its alignment entrusted to a flimsy side plate using an awkward adjustment by two screws; unfortunately, operating the lever to clamp the tailstock to the bed caused the plate to flex and the in-line setting was lost. In fact, so poor was the original tailstock that Myford issued a sales leaflet extolling the virtues of a much-improved replacement. One good point about all Myford tailstocks, both old and new, was and is the locking arrangement provided for the barrel. Unlike the horrid split in the casting, closed down by a bolt that has featured on so many other inexpensive (and occasionally expensive) machines, all Myfords have a proper split-cylinder clamp that acts directly on the barrel - and with its mounting stud screwed deep into the casting.
Two stands were available, early and late, both of cast-iron construction. The older model was lightly built and is easily recognised by the large decorative letter M cast into each leg; it could be fitted with either a treadle and flywheel drive or a countershaft that bolted to the underside of the chip tray with the drive section cantilevered backwards behind the headstock. The motor was hung from a bar, bolted between the rear of the legs near floor level, with the flat belt tensioned by the motor's weight. The later stand was of  more rugged construction and, with its deep chip tray and three sheet steel shelves resting on cast-in plates was, in effect, a miniature version of that used on the Myford/Drummond M-Type. The long countershaft, also a smaller replica of the type used on the M-Type, was heavily constructed and pivoted from a plate bolted to the back of the headstock end leg; fitted with double-step motor and top pulleys (and in conjunction with backgear) 12 spindle speeds were available. Adjusted by an over-centre lever the headstock drive belt was fitted with a left-and-right-hand threaded turnbuckle provided to allow fine adjustment - a system still used years later on the ML10. . Most ML1 to ML4 lathes were supplied as standard with a 6.5" diameter faceplate, 10 changewheels, a chuck backplate and two Morse taper centres in tool steel. Happily, large numbers of these popular machines are still in use and, whilst many are now seriously worn, some model engineers are able to produce the most amazing work on them.  Myford lathes of the early 1930s were painted black but at some point towards the middle of the decade the makers switched to what they described as a "grey/blue" finish but which, in fact, resembled a dreadful shade of "vomit green". 
Myford have no spares for these models and, unfortunately, cannot supply any written or illustrated material about them. Instead please email for details of the interesting literature pack available from lathes.co.uk.
It is interesting to note that a version of the ML4 continued in production until as late as the early 1980s in the guise of the Perfecto in the UK and as the "Advance" in Australia, though in the latter case only until (it is believed) the late 1950s. Both these latter machines sold into a niche market offering enthusiastic amateurs the chance of a new, good-capacity small lathe at a price considerable below that of the (admittedly far-superior) ML7.
During the 1930s, when Myford were manufacturing their early lathes, Atlas in America were offering the well-guarded 3-inch centre height "6-inch", a machine whose neat design may well have inspired several design used on the post-war ML7. A comparison of these models, and their drive systems, makes for interesting reading.
Copyright: Tony Griffiths

Of light construction the early stand is easily recognised by a large decorative letter M cast into each leg; it could be fitted with either a treadle and flywheel drive or motorised  countershaft that bolted to the underside of the chip tray with the drive section cantilevered backwards behind the headstock.