Recommendation for machine

Hi,

I need to purchase a sewing machine for occasional use.The machine will be used for minor garment repairs and perhaps some craft projects. I don't want to spend more than $200 on a machine.

Thanks in advance.

Reply to
Chambers
Loading thread data ...

There is a "what machine should I buy" FAQ.

formatting link

With that budget, I'd recommend you look for a gently used top-of-the line used machine from the 50s-60s. More specifically, a Singer 401a.

Beverly

Reply to
BEI Design

I second Beverly's recommendation! The Singer 401 is a joy to use!

-Irene

-------------- You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.=20

--Mae West=20

--------------

Reply to
IMS

A friend suggested I consider the following machines:

BL16 an BL22 from Babylock Bernette 65 from Bernina

I really would like a new machine. What do you think about my friends suggestion?

Reply to
Chambers

I bought the Singer 117 Featherweight II for my mum last year. Compact, light weight, easy to operate, nice little machine (I tested it thoroughly so I could teach her how to use the bits she wasn't familiar with). This year my dealer is selling the Frister & Rossman Cub SP in that slot as he thought the newer 118 wasn't as good as the 117.

I'm not keen on the Bernette range: there are better machines out there for the same money. The current crop of Brothers look encouraging.

Dunno anything about the Babylocks: we don't see many of their sewing machines here in the UK, though the sergers/overlockers are quite popular. Talk to your dealer, and don't forget to look carefully at what he/she has in the pre-loved department as well.

Reply to
Kate Dicey

I think your friend isn't doing you any favors. If you had $1000 to spend on a car, would he/she advise you buy 'new' schlock/yugo or a high-end well-maintained *used* Mercedes? Your choice, of course.

Reply to
BEI Design

I've been looking at older machines too, as a backup for my modern machine, and also, because they are so very cool to own. (I already have a treadle just because it is so pretty.) I'd better watch it. I'm going to end up as a collector if I'm not careful.

Right now I'm looking at one described as a Singer 401 and another as a Singer 401a Slant-o-matic. Is there a difference? Is it significant? They look the same in the pictures...

Rosefolly

BEI Design wrote:

Reply to
Rosefolly

That's the same machine. It is an excellent choice.

I hope that you use your treadle from time to time. I find treadling ideal for those long, boring, straight seams. I get into the rhythm of treadling, and am involved enough not to become so impatient that I just race to the end, willy-nilly, waving back and forth across the seam line. It is also very good for piecing -- quilts, gussets, doll clothes, tricky little bits. Not to mention that when the power goes off in the middle of a storm, that treadle will sew like a dream.

Reply to
Pogonip

I love my treadle too, and my two old hand cranks, and my other machines... I don't collect old sewing machines. Oh, no - not at all. I'm actually famous for buying NEW ones, two at a time! But somehow I seem to have accumulated some older darlings as well...

Reply to
Kate Dicey

I haven't used my treadle yet, though I've had it for several years. Mostly I admire it. I did buy some bobbins for it, and a replacement shuttle because the one in the machine looked vaguely rusty. Probably needs a new belt. I think I'm a bit intimidated by it, but I'll get it going one of these days.

Rosefolly

Kate Dicey wrote:

Reply to
Rosefolly

Please give me the facts that your opinion is based upon.

Reply to
Chambers

Jump in! With both ...... or one .... feet!

Seriously, if you have never treadled, start without thread, and sew on paper -- lined paper is good to start on. Then you can progress to curved lines, after you have confidence in your ability. The needle will get dull, punching paper, so either start with an old needle or discard this one after it loses its point.

If you have not used the treadle for a while, check the belt. It may (or may not) need to be replaced. If it doesn't snap when you tug on it, it's probably fine. If it breaks, check with your local sewing machine repair place. They tend to stock new belts. Depending on quality, you should be able to replace the belt for between $4.00 and $10.00.

Reply to
Pogonip

Seriously, a Singer 401 will sew rings around a brand new $200 machine and can be passed down to your grandchildren. The mechanical models don't go bad -- they just need regular oiling and possibly servicing, and the 401 was made in an era when sewing machines were tools, not toys, and people valued quality and were willing to do without until they could afford it.

We bought a new $279 machine about 5 years ago for my son, and after about 5 uses, it wouldn't keep a tension setting.

Around the same time, I purchased an 80s era 30-stitch New Home at a dealer for $129 (it came with a 90-day warranty and all the telephone and in-person consultations that I needed for its use), and it's been glorious, a total joy. So has my Singer 401, which I have no idea how it arrived in my home, and so have my other Singers that I purchased at thrift stores.

The technology for mechanical sewing machines has not changed in the past 50 years, and adjusting for inflation, the good-quality basic sewing machine that I got in 1978 for $120 would now cost about $500, which is actually about what it costs to get a good-quality basic sewing machine.

You might get an el cheapo mach> Please give me the facts that your opinion is based upon.

Reply to
Melinda Meahan - take out TRAS

You really should give serious consideration to the good advice that has been given you... Today's inexpensive machines are just that, inexpensive.. They are primarily plastic, but even more importantly, many of the working parts are simply not made all that well. These machines tend to suffer from thread tension problems that no technician can really solve, because the thread tensioning discs are just plain old cheap. Their motors are cheaply made, and won't take much grief.

The machines that have been reccommended, For example, the Singer

401a, are all metal, and are not belt driven, but gear driven. They run quiet,strong, and smooth (unlike the new cheapo machines which are far too lightweight, and tend to jump around, as they frequently are slightly off-time). Trying to sew with a machine that won't stay in place is NO joy, believe me.... I guess my biggest problem wth newer inexpensive machines is that they simply are not precison machines.. The quality is lacking.

I purchase a Janome made machine from Sears a few years ago because I wanted a free-arm machine... To make a long story short, the machine made a very good doorstop. It was an absolute piece of junk, would not hold a proper thread tension, and pulled the fabric to one side when sewing... It was not the bottom of the line at all, but mid-range..

I am certainly not saying that all Janome's are junk, but I surely got one that was.. I am also saying that this is typical of the less expensive machines of today, no matter what their nameplate..

Singer 401a's cost over $400.00 new decades ago, and good used ones (well loved) can be picked up usually in the $150.00 range. Other "good" used Singers to consider might be the Singer 500a ("Rocketeer", This was the top of the line), as well as the Singer 403a (This is very similar to the 401a, but uses separate cams to make the fancy stitches, instead of an internal "cam stack") If you check eBay, you will find that people acually do battle over these very good, reliable, precision quality machines.

These machines were very expensive when new, and it is frequently better to buy a pre-loved and well taken care of Rolls Royce or Cadillac than buy a brand new Yugo.

My primary machines at this time are a Singer 401a and a Singer 403a, and I would not trade them in for anything. Yes, I tend to reccommend them over other equally good other-branded machines, mainly because the are easier & cheaper to get parts and accessories for, and more sewing machine shops can maintain them in fine tune for the average person. Other brands which are very well thought of may cost much more to get parts and service.

me

Reply to
me

Despite numerous searches, I have been unable to find out which machines came first--- belt driven or gear driven. Does anyone know? And are most machines still belt driven or not?

Reply to
Phaedrine

I'll have to look at my treadle and seen The main turning wheel is belt-driven, of course, but I don't know about the innards.

Reply to
Melinda Meahan - take out TRAS

The innards of my old machines are gear driven. There is an access hole on the back of the pillar - on newer machines (I don't mean current machines, but the electrified oldies) that cover is removed and a light is attached. If you peek in there, you can see the gears.

Reply to
Pogonip

Oh I was talking about the main wheel, not the innards. My Grandmama had a Singer treadle and it was belt driven... was a long belt too.

Reply to
Phaedrine

I suspect the belt driven machines came out first as before electricity was readily available and were hand cranks and treadles. Treadles, of course, used a belt. Then later, when small motors were more readily available, they were designed to convert treadles and hand cranks to belt driven models. =20

-Irene

-------------- You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.=20

--Mae West=20

--------------

Reply to
IMS

Thanks for the info. So it seems that the beltless machines are the newer technology I guess....

Phae

Reply to
Phaedrine

InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.