Advice Needed On Cylinder Arm Machines

[amy847]

Hi all,

I'm wondering if anyone can offer me any advice on what cylinder arm sewing machine i might go for or if any of these are best avoided...?

I am making bags using layers of thick leather 3/8 of an inch in total. I want to buy an old machine rather than a new model and have a limited budget of about £700. I'm based in the UK.

I'm looking at a Singer 133k8 and a 133k9 and wondering why the k8 goes for so much more money. Does the k9 not have a walking foot? Can anyone recommend either of these for the purpose?

And how does a Singer 45k compare?

Also anyone know anything about old Necchi cylinder arm machines and how they might compare to equivalent Singer models in reliability?

Any advice greatly appreciated. Thank you!

[Jimbob]

Not a pro, but I have an Adler 105 cylinder machine, I would guess these are still around in Europe and in parts of your home country!? These machines are nearly indesctuctable and often still in good shape....there are many other good cylinder machines and some have walking foot....I love my Adler and will never part with it.

It is a none walking foot, but a huge needle fed machine....all my three dimensional bags are made with this machine....most of them 5/8 or so....just a thought...

james

[Trox]

Hi all,

I'm wondering if anyone can offer me any advice on what cylinder arm sewing machine i might go for or if any of these are best avoided...?

I am making bags using layers of thick leather 3/8 of an inch in total. I want to buy an old machine rather than a new model and have a limited budget of about £700. I'm based in the UK.

I'm looking at a Singer 133k8 and a 133k9 and wondering why the k8 goes for so much more money. Does the k9 not have a walking foot? Can anyone recommend either of these for the purpose?

And how does a Singer 45k compare?

Also anyone know anything about old Necchi cylinder arm machines and how they might compare to equivalent Singer models in reliability?

Any advice greatly appreciated. Thank you!

Hi Amy847,

I do not know the different between the Singer 133K-8 or subclass 9. I know that some of them have a so-called walking foot feed.

I will try to define the term walking foot as simple as possible: Every machine that has a foot that feeds the material can be called a “walking foot”.

However, when leatherworkers talk about a “walking foot machine” we mean a compound triple feed machine. Bottom, top and needle feed working together and adjusted with one stitch-length regulator.

In Europe, we simply call this a triple feed machine; this is what works best on leather and thick materials.

I believe the 133K with a walking foot is a double feed; bottom and top feed (the bottom feeder is called a feed dog, and the top feed is a feeding foot). I might also have two presser feet’s; one is a vibrating foot and the other the feeding foot. (That alternates; called alternating top feed) It still only is a double feed because it misses the needle feed. The class 133K will sew up to about 3/8 max ½-inch thickness, how thick thread it will take I do not know.

Explaining the feed systems are not that simple, however that’s what adds value to a used leather sewing machine. The number behind 133k is called subclass number. Subclass 9 has a better feed system than the subclass 8; it makes it more useable for leather or other heavy work. (It might help you to read the pinned topic about choosing a leather sewing machine, on top of this forum)

　

The 45K is a heavier rating machine, it comes in many subclasses, however none of them are triple feed. How thick they will sew depends of the feed; 12 to 15 mm material thickness. It will take a much thicker thread than the 133K and has a bigger bobbin.

The Singer 45K and the Adler class 5 (the machine I believe Singer copied to make the 45K) was the saddlers choice of heavy stitcher for more than 50 years. It is the forerunner for today’s heavy triple feed stitchers, like the Adler 205-370 and the Juki TSC 441.

These machines and copies of them (called clones) are today’s industrial standard of saddler’s heavy lockstitch machines.

The class 133K is popular in the UK, Australia (used to sew horse blankets) and in Asia for sewing jeans. I would choose a 45K before any 133K, because its heavier rating, heavier threads capacity and bigger bobbin.

Some medium weight cylinder arm machines with triple feed will also sew up to 3/8 of an inch maybe more, they will not take the same thick threads. Some of them can be found in Europe, within your budget. Examples are the Adler 69 and 269 (not commonly cheap machines) Pfaff 345 H3 and H4, Pfaff 335 H4 (H4 is the heaviest version of old Pfaff) And Singer 153W with triple feed.

About Necchi, It is an Italian made machine. The Italians make fine machines; Necchi makes copies of Adler and Singer machines. I have seen several Necchi 45K copies and some 29K (Adler 30) copies. They are big on domestic machines too. I have never own or tried a Necchi so I cannot tell you anything more about them. However I would choose the Singer 45K before a Necchi copy, although the 45K is an obsolete model parts are still available around the world.

Post pictures of the machines you thinking of buying, it makes it easier to help you value them.

Good luck,

Trox

[Art]

Hi Amy,

The 133K8 and 133K9 are pretty much identical Except that the 8 has a bigger bobbin. The 153k101 and 153k103 may be reasonable alternatives for you. The 45k had so many subclass variants it could be a flat bed or a cylinder arm; they were used a lot in harnesswork and I know saddlemakers that still use them. Most of the older machines won't have reverse and some could have parts problems, but the 153s are ok and the 45s pretty much so. These machines should be relatively inexpensive.

Art

[amy847]

Thanks so much everyone for your responses and for taking the time. I think things are becoming a little bit clearer now. I'm thinking I'll probably go for the 45k, hoping that it works well on a variety of thicknesses. Although my budget is relatively low it's still more money than I've spent on any one thing before so it's quite daunting.

Amy