Sometimes, in the heat of the moment, we all make errors of judgement. With hindsight, I now realise that I made an error when I fitted a new motor to my Singer 99K. The motor should have gone onto my Singer 201K. Here is my reasoning, with the benefit of hindsight.
Although my 99K was motor driven when I received it, the motor wiring was very dodgy so I removed it from the machine and replaced it with a hand crank. By the time the crank arrived the machine was working quietly following a thorough cleaning and oiling regime. With the crank installed their was a real improvement in the machine. But we can all do daft things. This was what I did. I fitted a new 0.45 watt YDK motor and pedal.
What? That was just a replacement for the original motor that had seen better days. Whats wrong with that, you may ask. Well, nothing really but it was not MY best option. Here's why.
I had a hand cranked 99K, a hand cranked 201K and a new YDK motor and foot-pedal. My thoughts were to keep the machines as near as damn it as I originally received them, which meant the motor goes to the 99K.
It proved to be a wrong move, for me. The 99K noise level went up several notches, when run at speed as I have found over the past 10 day. I have been piecing quilt blocks with Diane. Though it is not a big deal in itself, one other issue, totally unrelated began to become obvious.
The 99K is a 3/4 size machine. It is in fact smaller that the sought after Singer 221 Featherweight but it tips the scales somewhat more as its a cast iron rather than aluminium machine. That makes it a reasonably portable machine that errs on the heavy side. With a hand crank as its source of "power"
it becomes a "go anywhere" machine, even to sewing in the garden during a spell of fine weather. The thought of lugging my 201K up and downstairs is not something I would relish. Its a big, heavy lump certainly not a portable. Given that the 201K is running really well with the sound of the tension spring ticking distracting from the almost inaudible sound of the machine's works, I assumed that fitting the motor to this machine would work really well and re-purpose where the 99K sits in my scheme of things as a portable machine. The switch out took a few minutes to complete.
Now I have a motor powered Singer 201K, and a hand-cranked Singer 99K. The 201K is outstandingly smooth and quiet in operation, and the 99K with its re-installed crank is now a far better and more portable option for me than it was. So, I guess I now have a win/win situation.
Although my 99K was motor driven when I received it, the motor wiring was very dodgy so I removed it from the machine and replaced it with a hand crank. By the time the crank arrived the machine was working quietly following a thorough cleaning and oiling regime. With the crank installed their was a real improvement in the machine. But we can all do daft things. This was what I did. I fitted a new 0.45 watt YDK motor and pedal.
What? That was just a replacement for the original motor that had seen better days. Whats wrong with that, you may ask. Well, nothing really but it was not MY best option. Here's why.
I had a hand cranked 99K, a hand cranked 201K and a new YDK motor and foot-pedal. My thoughts were to keep the machines as near as damn it as I originally received them, which meant the motor goes to the 99K.
It proved to be a wrong move, for me. The 99K noise level went up several notches, when run at speed as I have found over the past 10 day. I have been piecing quilt blocks with Diane. Though it is not a big deal in itself, one other issue, totally unrelated began to become obvious.
The 99K is a 3/4 size machine. It is in fact smaller that the sought after Singer 221 Featherweight but it tips the scales somewhat more as its a cast iron rather than aluminium machine. That makes it a reasonably portable machine that errs on the heavy side. With a hand crank as its source of "power"
it becomes a "go anywhere" machine, even to sewing in the garden during a spell of fine weather. The thought of lugging my 201K up and downstairs is not something I would relish. Its a big, heavy lump certainly not a portable. Given that the 201K is running really well with the sound of the tension spring ticking distracting from the almost inaudible sound of the machine's works, I assumed that fitting the motor to this machine would work really well and re-purpose where the 99K sits in my scheme of things as a portable machine. The switch out took a few minutes to complete.
Now I have a motor powered Singer 201K, and a hand-cranked Singer 99K. The 201K is outstandingly smooth and quiet in operation, and the 99K with its re-installed crank is now a far better and more portable option for me than it was. So, I guess I now have a win/win situation.
Comments
Post a Comment