I just purchased an Adler 467. It seems like a pretty amazing machine. It originally had the Efka V720 control system and the pneumatic controls for reverse, presser foot lift and It has the needle position sensor. It has magnetic solenoids for the thread cutter and tension release, and a DC servo motor. The machine has been simplified by removing the components, and now has a generic servo motor. I have read through gottaknow's thread troubleshooting an Adler 467 and learned a ton about the oiling system and what it took to get the machine going. Amazing resource and knowledge there.
The previous owner removed the Efka system and installed a servo motor because the original control system requires a 230V AC, single phase input, as well as an air line and I don't think those were an option for him. Now that it has been converted, there is no knee lift, the needle position sensor is not able to be connected to the current servo motor for needle-down stopping, and the thread cutter is hooked up to anything. Also, the automated bar tacking / stitch reversing programs do not work. I have these features on my Juki N5550-6 and they are awesome!
My short term goal with this machine is to get the machine cleaned up, oiled, and working with the generic servo motor and getting some generic knee-lift system working The machine does not have a knee lift for the presser foot as one of the pneumatic cylinders did that duty. Now that the air system is not hooked up, there is no way to raise the presser foot without using the lever behind the hand wheel. It's in an awkward position.
In the long run, I would love to get it working like it was originally configured with the thread cutter, needle position sensor, automatic back tacking, and the pneumatic reverse and knee lift working.
Any info on the Efka v720 that was on this Adler 467 would be awesome. I don't know if the motor and control system can be converted work on 110V, or if the entire control system and motor would need to be replaced to work on 110v. I can't imagine that would be cost-effective.