dikman

Someone tried to weld the ferrule? Good grief!! JCUK, the idea of wrapping the handle is probably your simplest option. You can even use your sewing thread if you want to. Fishing rods use thread wrapping to hold on the guides and as decorative wraps, so you could get some nice coloured thread from a fishing tackle supply place. The thread is usually sealed afterward, often with a clear two-part epoxy or acrylic resin. Knife and sword handles are sometimes wrapped with wire wrap - one method is to tightly twist two thin strands together and use the resultant twisted wire as the wrap, but because your wrap area is pretty small I'd go with thread myself. Lots of options, and it needn't be expensive. Nor need it be difficult.

fasn8ya, my Pfaff 335 didn't have a pin, it has a manual lever to release thread tension. On the advice of a member I removed the tensioning unit and lo and behold, there was a hole behind it for a pin. I found a suitable piece of rod that fitted the hole and by operating the foot lift lever I could work out how long the rod needed to be, cut it to length and I then had automatic tension release. Might be worth having a look if you can remove the tensioner (one screw on mine is all that held the plate on).

That's what's known as a teaser, TT. I, for one, look forward to some details? In the meantime this is the initial device that I cobbled together (it lacks the finish of Uwe's, mainly because I wanted to see if it would work first). Which it does, but it's slower than Uwe's. To speed it up would require using a pulley converter on the output shaft, which seems to defeat the purpose of gearing the motor down in the first place, or removing the gearbox completely, which then creates more problems as the gearbox housing is the actual mounting point for the motor assembly. While it winds ok, if using #69 thread it would take a while to wind, which means I'll need to fit a cut-off switch so that it stops when wound (then it would be a "set and forget" device). I reckon a micro-switch, set so that the arm trips when the bobbin is full (like the mechanical arm on a normal winder) should work. I do have some smaller 24v motors, but they are high speed and may not have the torque when running slow. More experimenting, I suppose. But at the moment I now have a slow speed, high torque winder.

Now that is a beast! A wonderful piece of mechanical history. I love that first photo, with the Autumn trees in the background.

I guess it would depend on whether they're hardened steel (if a file slides over it then it's hardened). As mentioned, an angle grinder with a thin cut-off wheel is what I would use. If it's hardened then keep dunking it in cold water as you cut so you don't destroy the temper.

I looked at a couple of youtube vids of the machine, and didn't think it was a needle feed 'cos the needle didn't look like it was moving back and forth but I wasn't sure so didn't want to say anything. The company appears to be a fairly big manufacturer of machines, and I thought that this one looked pretty good for the money, given that it has a servo motor with it.

Looking good, Uwe. A lot of work has gone into that.

While rummaging around in my garage I came across a motor that was used for a height-adjustable table. It has a gearbox on the end and runs off 24v. In fact, when I checked this thread it looks very similar to Uwe's. Hmmm, thinks I, this looks promising. I had the transformer that powered it, but of course nothing was connected or labelled. After connecting the power to the wrong windings the first time (50/50 chance, and Murphy's Law says I'll get it wrong!) and tripping the cct breaker I re-connected it and got 28v AC. A 10 amp rectifier bridge gave me 25v DC. When I connected the power, however, I found it runs a bit slower than Uwe's (the gearing is obviously different). Guess I won't be needing a speed control. Tomorrow I'll rewire it properly and use a reversing switch, as well as make up suitable bobbin holders. And a box to put it in. And a spool holder. And a thread tension device.

I agree with Constabulary about checking the timing. If it's sewing with much shorter needles the only way that I can see that would work is by mal-adjusting the timing?

Skylark, it's hard to say. Servos certainly let you run slow and with much better control than a clutch motor just as they are. Mine was actually quite usable without fitting the reducer, but I decided that I wanted it as slow as possible to suit my needs (and abilities). You will have to try it first and see how it feels. Fitting the smallest pulley possible on the motor helps a lot, and I believe the best way to reduce it further is to replace the handwheel with a larger pulley. Worked well on the Pfaff, but unfortunately it would be a major job to fit one to the Singer. Pulley reducers are pretty expensive to buy, and if I hadn't been able to make one I would have just used the servo as it is. (All I had to buy were the two pulleys - cheap on ebay - the rest is from my accumulated scrap stuff).

I think I've finally got this thing to where it should do what I want (the phrase "famous last words" sprang to mind when typing this!), courtesy of my speed reducer. The servo motor has a 45mm (1 3/4") pulley, going to a 120 mm (4 3/4") pulley which drives another 45 mm which goes to the handwheel (about 3" I think). This lot, coupled with the servo, lets me run about 1 stitch per second and can drive through 1/4" hard veg with no effort at all. I'm pretty sure it will do 3/8" (if I want to) but the limiting factor is probably going to be the height of the presser foot. No matter, it should be more than adequate for my needs.

I've done the same trick using a screwdriver, place the blade on the object under scrutiny and stick the handle against your ear-hole! (Don't try it the other way around, not a good idea).

I like it, a nice little piece of gear. If the price was right I'd buy it too (just in case? ). Probably worth it just for the pulley stack.

That Juki sounds nice, no belts to worry about. My little servos have a few parameters in the "manual" that look interesting, but there doesn't seem to be any way to access them (which makes me wonder why they put them in!!).

Makes my 8" pulley look awfully small!!!!!

Oops, you're right about the needle plate (and feed dog). It's a bit hard to tell about the feet, though, but they look a bit on the small side. The fact that it has that arm cover plate, however, suggests that it was originally used as an edge binder. It also has the flip-down edge guide (which you wouldn't need with the binder). A peculiar mix, but could be a good buy if the price was right.

Further confirmation that needle positioners don't like speed reducers being fitted! I can't fit a larger pulley to replace the handwheel on my Singer 211G166, so although the servo has slowed it right down I figured that fitting a reducer would help with low speed torque. I made a reducer and using what pulleys I had handy gave me a 2.2:1 reduction. I fired it up and the needle moved a couple of times, went clunk and it all stopped. Turned it off, tried again and this time tripped the cct. breaker in the shed plus the bigger one feeding the shed itself!! (That one had me worried). The display showed an E5 error message, which indicated a needle positioner fault. I reset the breakers, disabled the positioner and tried again and this time it worked. It was about this time that I recalled this posting...... I have a choice - needle positioner and whatever speed setting I can get from the servo or no positioner + speed reducer + whatever setting I can get from the servo. I have another pulley coming that will give me a 2.7:1 reduction, so I'm thinking that I will be better off with the reducer and the reduced low speed and increased torque it will give. (Plus I put too much effort into making the reducer to not use it.....).

What they said. From my limited experience the cylinder arm has greater overall versatility.

Also, that one is set up as an edge binder. Unless the other parts are included you may have to buy extra feet, needle plate etc.

Very neat! A lot neater than mine, but then my machine has been well used, so what I made suits it .

Clamp the awl blade in a vice, between lead sheeting to protect the blade, and carefully use two screwdrivers, one either side, to lever the handle away. It's a pretty safe bet that the blade is only driven in to the handle as a friction fit.

Another great idea! I didn't think of using the buffing wheel cone!

Ferg, in my case it is a reverse thread - one end of the grinder shaft is a right-hand thread, the other is left-hand so anything screwed onto the threads will tighten with the rotation (this appears to be normal, as all my grinders are like this). I made a couple of these burnishers and haven't had any problems with them. They don't need to be ultra-tight, so the thread in the wood doesn't have to be deep.

Eric, that's a mind-boggling array of......things.

Thanks Eric, good enough reason to not waste time on it.