Jordan Holland

Jay Angler wrote:The picture's a little fuzzy - would it give away too much if there was something for scale??? Or is there a back side we could see?

My first thought is that it's part of the belt buckle or strap adjusting gizmo where the small ball traps something under pressure, but releases easily when needed.

Yes, I had to zoom way in and crop the picture to keep from revealing easily identifiable features. The length of the "T" is 1", the width is 1/2", and the steel balls are 1/4" in diameter. The entire item can be picked up with one hand. I will add that the balls are spring-loaded, and you are on the right track that they are meant to easily capture/release another item.

This is a feature on an item which is very common and I'm sure pretty much everyone here owns. I have never seen this particular incarnation before, and no one at the auction house seemed to have, either. It is quite ingenious, in my opinion. I have seen more modern versions, and thought it was a modern invention, but this patent apparently dates back to 1927! It appears to me to be a better design than the modern versions I have seen.

😂

Speaking of Mike Tyson...

I like millet in ground beef, especially in Mexican dishes. Most people don't think of it. It's similar to quinoa, but has a milder, nuttier taste to me.

I bought one pair of the Heat Holders socks and they are very good, but expensive and need larger shoes. The plush piling is unbelievably thick. The best thing to keep my feet warm I've ever found is the military intermediate cold weather "mickey" boots. If you shop around, they can be had for $20-$30. They require no heavy socks either; I just wear short cotton socks. I've seen some complain they make their feet sweat too much, but I've never had that problem.

It seems the Janome 712t has a pretty good reputation, but then again there's not a lot of competition in the treadle market for modern machines and maybe that's just what people use because it's their only non-electric option. I haven't used one myself, but I doubt there's many people wanting a treadle machine who would settle for a fu-fu light duty machine that needs repairs often. Definitely all electrical maladies would be ruled out.

The old iron workhorses from the early to mid 20th century were definitely built before the era of "planned obsolescence," and can be considered for all practical purposes impossible to wear out under normal use. I hear that many sweatshops in Asia are still using many of these old machines to this day. Even the little aluminum Singer Featherweight is known for being extremely powerful and dependable, especially compared to modern machines. There's a guy on youtube who rebuilds old singers with heavy flywheels and bigger motors to sell for upholstering and even leather work. People definitely had a dirrerent way of looking at tools back them. And to top it off, look at how beautiful they were. Beauty and toughness...most modern stuff can claim neither!

Unless you work in retail, you simply have no idea just how much/what type of stuff people have been buying this year.

First is my Singer 66. Pretty typical "Red Eye" model. I think I finally got it working right.

Next is my favorite, the Minnessota Model H. In my opinion, it is much better than the famous 66. I think it's form and function is the epitome of beautiful simplicity. I like the leaf tensioner on top much better than the knob on the 66. The way the thread travels is much more logical to me, not flopping around in front like most machines. The bobbin winder is down on bottom, out of the way of the handwheel, unlike the 66. The stitch length adjuster is so much better thought out! Just slide it all the way down to start or finish a seam, give the wheel two or three flicks, slide it up where you want your stitch length, and drive it like you stole it! And to top it off, it's a vibrating shuttle...smooth as silk, rarely misses or jams (even if you accidentally run it backwards, which I would NEVER do), easier to clear if it does, doesn't collect lint, doesn't need oil. I don't see how a rotary hook was considered an improvement.

r ranson wrote:
My sewing machine looks like this



It sews forwards in a straight line, and if I put the buttonhole attachment on, it makes buttonholes.  That's what it can do.  It doesn't go backwards unless I change direction by swivelling the cloth the other way.

It made me happy to see that I wouldn't require a zig-zag stitch to do this pattern.  

Only, lesson one of the class has us using a zig-zag stitch to finish the princess seams.  Either that or a serger.

There was no mention of this PRIOR to purchase.  

It's actually a big deal for me and might break the entire project.  Unless I can find a different way of finishing the seam edges?  I love enclosed seams, but how to do that on a princess seam?  I can't see it.  Could I bind the seam?  

Help?!?

Is that a 127? The Singer attatchments 160985 and 161102 should fit it for a zig-zag if you run across one for a decent price. I don't think they ever made a back-tacking lever for it like they did the 66. There's nothing wrong with turning the fabric 180 degrees, but from what I've seen, back-tacking and zig-zaging are considered "low quality" by the professionals.🤷‍♂️