dikman

Looks like clone of a Pfaff 335? If you search on that model you should find some pictures as many of them were sold as binding machines. The feet look right but the inner foot isn't lifting, so some adjustment is needed, and as jimi said it's missing the row of guide fingers that mount at the right hand end of the moving plate. Looks to me like someone removed the binding parts so they could sew normally.

Dwight, no argument from me on your reasoning, because I agree with it (which is why I had the idea of a forward cant). Unfortunately, if the powers-that-be running Single Action here in Oz determine that it breaks the rules by pointing the barrel backwards I'm not about to create any dramas for myself over what is a minor issue. Professor, as many here doubtless know Andy Anderson was an early holster maker for tv and movies. He studied the actual action of drawing and firing and developed the rearward canted holster as providing a more natural means of fast drawing a revolver. If you think about it, that works well if you draw and fire from the hip, if however you draw and raise the revolver to a straight arm forward thrusting position it's not as efficient as you are actually pulling the gun back and then have to reverse direction to raise it up. With a forward cant you're drawing it forward and up, which is more natural for a raised arm style. Anyhow, it's been an interesting discussion.

Yeah, it can be confusing. 30 degrees is the maximum cant/angle for a holster, but if it's a cross-draw when drawing you have to twist your body to ensure that the barrel doesn't point back behind the shooting line. " seems the barrel could be straight down as it "leaves leather" even with a forward cant but the cant wouldn't help much " That's the issue, any hint of a rearward facing barrel when drawing could be a problem. Just not worth the potential hassle, imo.

If your business is doing well then the last thing you want is messing around changing a machine to sew thin stuff, only to have to change it back to sew something thicker (as Wiz has implied). From everything I've read while the Sailright is competent enough within it's limitations you will be better off with a "proper" industrial machine. There have been posts where members have made wooden box bases for an industrial machine (the sort you're looking at, typical upholstery class machines) and mounted a servo on top and directly behind the machine. This makes it an all in one unit, except for a cable-operated foot control.

" When drawing a revolver, the muzzle may be oriented into the straight down (180°) as it clears leather; " That is what he's referring to, with a forward cant holster the barrel will be pointing back when holstered, so when drawing it will break that 180 rule.

I was discussing this idea at the last SASA shoot I went to and it was pointed out why it wasn't a good idea. It would point the barrel just slightly rearward, which would break the rules regarding where the barrel was pointing, and dragging it out could angle it back even more. Result would likely be a disqualification! Just as well I haven't started on them, looks like they'll have a slight rearward cant then, no big deal.

You're right, it didn't work on mine. With a speed reducer the NPS wouldn't work at all, just locked up the machine, so I added the extra magnet and this time it ran but I couldn't choose whether it stopped needle up or down, sometimes up, sometimes down. I think the problem is that there is no option within the parameters to change this when using two magnets. Doesn't really matter as I don't need the NPS, I was just curious whether I could get it to work.

Like mike, I too enjoy reading posts like this. I'm impressed, that's some nice delicate machining, particularly cutting the threads!

I agree, they are a loss to the community as a whole.

Yes, please post if you figure something out as it might be of help to others. As most servos use a similar operating lever, which has a relatively short travel, it shouldn't be too difficult to adapt it to hand lever operation.

As mike pointed out the EPS/NPS is really suited to the garment industry where they are generally sewing at high speed. I think it's safe to say that most of us leather sewers prefer slow speed to give better control over stitch placement - on a garment one stitch too many won't matter but on a leather item it can ruin all the good work you've put in! I bought a servo with one because it seemed like a good idea, but when I tried it out I found it was quite easy to end up with an extra stitch, so stopped using it. I use speed reducers (or fit a large pulley in place of the handwheel which achieves the same result) and in my opinion they are far more useful for sewing leather and like mike I consider them a "must have". They also increase torque and make it easier for the needle to punch through thick/stiff/hard leather. Be aware that not all EPS/NPS will work with a speed reducer (mine won't). If you want both you're better off getting them at the time of purchase to make sure that they work together.

Ah, that explains why their links don't work.

Well done, Uwe! You have done all the hard work to show anyone wanting to make an extension just how to do it, and shown how to do it at minimal cost.

This solution was offered by one company, unfortunately the video doesn't work nor can I reach the website? Basically like Pinto said, a bicycle brake lever and cable adapted to fit the control linkage on the servo motor.

I agree. As far as I can tell they are the same machine, the Techsew has extras which bumps up the price - laser guide (questionable value for most hobbyists), flat table attachment, swing down edge guide, needle positioner. It depends if you want/need these extras. If it were me buying it I would go with the Cowboy and save some money, particularly as it comes with a speed reducer, which I have learnt the value of and suit me much better than a needle positioner. Edge guides are cheap and easily fitted, and if you think you need a flat table attachment you can either make something up or buy the commercial unit later. My opinion only, and probably not worth much........

That was my first thought too.

This is what I made - I can see now that I'll be doing as Rodzhobyz said, using my foot to lift the feet and if I want it to stay up just spin the knob around while it's up. If you still want to extend it and don't have a lathe then as he said maybe a piece of steel tubing to slide over the stub on the machine, tapped for a couple of grub screws, a short piece of rod in the other end and the original handle fitted to that. As for looking good, that's the reason I painted it black, besides hiding the flaws black makes almost anything look good!

In a recent post I mentioned making an extension arm for the foot lifter lever on my 4500. JLSLeather mentioned that in his opinion it's not needed and to just use the foot pedal for lifting the feet. I didn't agree, but it got me thinking (always dangerous). The 4500 has a much higher lift than my other machines and also requires a lot more effort to use the hand lever compared to the foot lever, so maybe his idea makes sense after all. Only problem is the foot lever is on the right and I every time I shift my foot from pedal to pedal I have to look down. Hmm, I have a perfectly good left foot that is doing nothing, so this is the end result. Made from stuff I had lying around, so cost =$0. The main bar shaft is galv. pipe, the bearings (doesn't really need bearings but I had them) are from a home-made table that came with one of my machines, a shaft was turned down for each end to fit the pipe and bearings (different sizes, of course!), the foot pedal also from another old table but needed extending (twice!!) to get the movement needed. Trial and error to get the travel right, but now I can get full lift with minimal effort and if needed can still lock the feet up with the hand lever. In hindsight it may have been better to mount the contraption on the back of the upright legs and extend the two arms, but it works so it can stay where it is.

Better to start a new thread if you have specific questions related to the Singer. That servo R8R listed is very nice but at 1100 watts is way overkill for the Singer! A 550w will be more than adequate. Oh, and the hovercraft looks cool!

Looks pretty good to me.

Tony, you might be struggling to get that long a stitch length in a machine. I had an old Singer once that could do long stitches but it was intended to sew basting stitches.

I had a 211G166 for a while, until I decided to rationalise what I had (not enough room!), it was a good machine and would be my choice out of the three. Looks like that one is on a nicer table (with wheels).

I concur, Hildebrand, for most people lugging a 441 clone around is not going to be practical. You'll eventually break either the machine or your body!! A 3200 with a handle fitted to the flywheel might work, however (I don't know the weight difference). I have read a couple of comments from users of the Outlaw/Tippman machines and they said the main drawback was doing long stitching runs, as in belts. Pulling that handle down got tiring real fast.

That's another way of looking at it.

Gregg, perhaps that's the answer to why the generic one is different to the OP's original, being generic it's meant to be adjusted to suit different machines? Makes sense to me.