Vintage Attachments for Straight Stitch Singers

 

Back in the day, if you had a straight stitch machine like this 222 Featherweight, you had to install a clunky attachment which moved the fabric in various ways to accomplish the zigzag, buttonhole, blind stitch or decorative stitches.  

We don't have to use any of these today if we don't want to, but they are actually really fun to use, and are quite ingeniously designed. 

(All the attachments I'm showing are for low shank machines so would fit the Singer 66, 99, 15-91, 201, 221, and 222 among others.)

First up is not really a sewing attachment, but works with a sewing machine.  It is the Automatic Pinker (as opposed to a similar hand cranked version.) If you like to pink your yardage before washing it prior to sewing, this will accomplish it quickly and easily.  Theoretically you could use it to finish seams, although I'd probably run the raw edges through here before sewing the seams, to make it easier. 

Here's what I believe is the oldest of the Singer buttonholers (as far as I know, anyway.). It doesn't take cams like the later Singer Automatic Buttonholer, but with this attachment you can make adjustments for your length of buttonhole, stitch width, and width of the buttonhole opening. You can "fine tune" it to get just the size you want. 

The blind stitch attachment is really a game changer for hemming on a straight stitch machine. It makes perfect blind hems quickly and easily. 

 

This is a very early zigzagger, and doesn't do any fancy stitches.  But if you have a Featherweight, this fits right into your case, and is no bigger than a ruffler foot.

For more zigzag options, you have the Singer Automatic Zigzagger which does beautiful decorative stitches.  It is big and clunky, because it holds a large cam for the different stitch patterns.  

There are sixteen different stitch patterns in all, although only four came with the zigzagger and the others were sold separately in sets of four.

It's amazing what beautiful stitches you can make on a Featherweight with the Automatic Zigzagger.  

Singer 127 Treadle

 I decided to finally sit down and make an actual project with my Singer 127 treadle machine.  So I started with these quilted baskets.  There is a learning curve to using a treadle, and this project gave me lots of practice with handling the machine, what with piecing and quilting the fabric and constructing the baskets.

This is a machine I've rarely used because it is in my foyer rather than in my sewing room upstairs.  (I've never been able to convince anyone to carry it upstairs for me - and I don't have room there anyway.)

The Singer 127 differs from the 27 in a few ways: the bobbin winder is higher up and uses a rubber tire to run off the hand wheel.  It has a button to eject the bobbin case, and an automatic tension release.  It is the upgraded version of the 27. 

This machine has a "vibrating shuttle" with a bullet shaped bobbin case and a cylindrical bobbin. 

And winding the bobbin is very cool to see, if not a bit slow and clunky.  You have to pedal a LOT!

Starting the machine takes a little practice, you first have to spin the wheel toward you and immediately start pedaling.  If you don't time it just right, the wheel will sometimes spin backwards and mess you up.

It is kind of like when you drive a car with manual transmission where you have to let the clutch out and give it gas at the same time - not too much, not too little or it will stall out.  But with practice it gets to be second nature. 

There are some other challenges with this type of machine, but you figure out how to work around it.  The stitch length and tension knobs aren't calibrated, for example, so you just have to turn them until you find the sweet spot and there is no way to "save your place."  And there is no back tack, so you have to fasten off your seams in another way.  

I Started with piecing, which is straightforward and no back tack is necessary

Then did straight line quilting, which is also simple and straightforward and doesn't require back tacking

Sewing it all together was the last step, and by that point I was getting more used to the machine.  It handled well through the thick layers of fabric, batting and stabilizers.  I was able do more precise sewing to make the handles - I was getting proficient enough to turn corners while sewing and also to do topstitching.

Free Motion Quilting on 301

I don't quilt a lot, and would rather make smaller projects when I do.  So yes, I subscribed to Mrs. Quilty which I know isn't something "real" quilters would do.   But it works for me, because I get an assortment of fat quarters and a few patterns for small projects in each box and it's fun.  

From box #4 was this woodland print collection and the pattern for this runner (although I changed it up a bit.). 

FMQ has always been a challenge for me, but I keep trying.  I don't have a long arm or quilting frame for the small amount of quilting I do, so I use my regular machines.

Of all my machines, the best for FMQ is the 301.  The feed dogs drop, it has a vertical bobbin (which I think is best for this kind of work) and it sews fast and smooth. That doesn't mean it's easy, though, mostly because I lack any kind of drawing skills whatsoever which includes "drawing" with a sewing machine.

The piecing and binding I did on my Featherweight 222.  So easy to get a tight, perfect straight stitch with this machine. 

Tracing a branch of the Family Tree - Mid-Century Singers from Featherweight to Touch & Sew

Featherweight --> Touch & Sew

Here is an interesting evolutionary path of one branch of Singer sewing machines. It might be fun to follow along and see the common threads that connected them (no pun intended!) 

Everyone knows the 221/222 Featherweights which debuted in the 1930s, reaching peak popularity in the 1950s.

Besides the portable size, these machines had a few features that elevated them from the earlier Singer models - they had an aluminum body, a flip up extension bed, and a vertical Class 221 bobbin with a full rotary hook. This made them lightweight, compact, and smooth sewing…in that order. Then ran on an external motor and belt.

Then a new model hit the scene in the 1950s, which incorporated some of these features but then added an important new one. This was the 301 - a full size portable machine, with an aluminum body, Class 221 bobbin/rotary hook, and a flip up extension bed like the 221.  But what made it stand apart was the revolutionary new “slant needle” design.  And it had a direct drive, no belt. Yes, this is the first of a long line of slant shank machines, it all started with this one.

Singer 301

The slant shank is proprietary to Singer and was intended to give better visibility as you’re sewing.  It proved to be so popular that Singer then launched a line of “Slant-O-Matics” with the flagship machine being the 401. (There are some other variations in 400 SOM series, but I’ll focus on this one.)  Now, however, they went to a Class 66 horizontal drop-in bobbin, but it was still a full rotary hook because this was the TOL series of the day.

Singer 401 

But Singer couldn't leave well enough alone, and thus began the gradual decline towards what we know today as the "Touch & Sew."  It all began with the changes to the bobbin winder system. First, they launched a new generation of Slant-O-Matics, which were the 500 machines (known as the Rocketeers - 500/503.). They added some styling features which reflected the mid-century "space age" aesthetic, and then attempted to improve the design with a bobbin winder located on top of the machine and hidden under a hinged lid which also served as a cam cover.  Without going into detail, suffice it to say that this was NOT an improvement for a number of reasons.  The machine looks cool, but suffers from a case of "Function Follows Form" when it should be the other way around. 

Singer 503

Which brings us to the 600 series in this line.  Like the 301, which bridged the low shank straight stitchers and the slant shank zigzaggers*, the 600 was a pivotal model. It is both the LAST Slant-O-Matic and the FIRST Touch & Sew which makes it rather unique.

Singer 600e Touch & Sew on left/Singer 600 Slant-O-Matic on right 

Again, the main change was with the bobbin winder - Singer was DETERMINED to hide that bobbin winder!  And now they had an entirely new concept: the "wind in place" bobbin. To this day the bobbin winder gets mixed reviews because it works GREAT until it doesn't. (This machine also did chain stitching, a feature already available on some of the German 400 models.)

While the 600 was called a Slant-O-Matic, the 600e (which had one slight change in where the button was located for the bobbin winder) was rebranded as a Touch & Sew - and thus launched a new line for Singer in the early-mid 1960s.

And here is where this particular branch of the Singer family tree began to devolve. While the 600/e was mechanically identical to the 401 - a well built machine with all metal gears and direct drive - it wasn't long after this that those steel gears were replaced with nylon.  Cheaper, lighter, and theoretically "smoother," but not nearly as durable.  Once the 700 generation of these machines was introduced, the Touch & Sew that people love to hate was born.  These are the machines with the bad reputation and the ones which give a bad name to ALL of them. 

Singer 750 

This is what those gears look like today - even on the most well-maintained machines - and this is why most VSM enthusiasts shun the Touch & Sews. 

*An oddball machine was the Singer 404 which was a Slant-O-Matic straight stitcher (also the 604 which was the Touch & Sew straight stitcher.). Neither of these could match the ORIGINAL slant shank straight stitcher which was the 301. 

Mamma Mia! Costumes

Donna and the Dynamos

                                                                       McCalls 8534

More Jelly Roll Bags

Just a short post to show some more "jelly roll bags."  By that I mean that the exteriors are entirely made of jelly roll strips (the interiors are made from yardage.)

I made these three items and STILL have more than half the jelly roll bundle.  I don't know how I'll use it all up!

The middle bag is a pattern from Yoan Sewing Studio, the other two I just made up on my own.  

I used odd mismatched leftover strips on this one

BTW, Yoan has tons of cute bag patterns, and some of them are similar to the ones I make myself.  But since she has already done the "work" for me, I enjoy using her patterns once in a while.  And her videos on You Tube are a joy to watch.

This is my new "secret weapon."  My Singer 222 free arm Featherweight.   With a small bag like this, that tiny little free arm is a game changer.  I top stitched around this lickety-split.  

Sewing bag together at final seam - this would be much more difficult on a flat bed or even a free arm with a bigger diameter than the Featherweight. (If you watch Yoan do it in the video, you can see how fiddly it is to do on a flat bed machine.) 

The White Featherweight - Why Would You Want One?

 I never really wanted a white Featherweight until one just "happened" to come my way.

I tend to go through phases in sewing machines: 

• The Black Straight Stitching Singer phase (15-91, 201, 99, 221, 127, 301), 
• The Slant-O-Matic phase (401, 403, 404, 500, 503), 
• The Style-O-Matic/Fashion Mate phase (237, 328, 338)  
• The Touch & Sew phase (600, 600e, 603.) 
• The Swing Needle Phase (a couple of 319s) 
• The oddball model here or there - an Atlas, an Elna, a Wizard
• Countless Kenmore 158 machines

(Recently, I've begun clearing the decks and I've sold all except a handful of my all time favorites.)

But a White Featherweight has never been on my radar until I started going through my current phase which is compact size machines.

Already having the black 221, the Genie 354 and the Mini Kennie 1050, I kind of wanted to round out the collection with a white Featherweight just to see what all the hype is about. 

I'll make this short and sweet, it is VERY pretty.  But it isn't of the same quality as a black Featherweight.  It does not sew quite as nicely - and you'll have to take my word for that, it's like driving a car, you just "feel" it.  There is a kind of cheaper feeling to the whole machine which isn't to say at ALL that it isn't high quality, but it's a step down from the original 221. 

Verdict: the "WOW" factor is the looks - this is one really pretty machine.  It sews fine, nothing wrong with it, but it just doesn't send me. 

Singer Featherweight 222k

 It's been a while since I featured a new machine here.  Mostly I've been selling them, not adding them. I'm trying to downsize. This post shows my "skeleton crew" of machines that made the purge.

But then I added just one more because no collection is totally complete without THIS ONE. Singer Featherweight 222K

These aren't readily available in the U.S., they were never sold here so when you find one it came in from Canada or the U.K. where they were made. Many of them have the 220v motors which need to be replaced, rewound for 110v, or used with a step down transformer.  

Happily, this one is from Canada so it has a 110v motor and no revisions were needed.  

Basically the appeal is twofold, the main thing being this: a tubular free arm.  There were few, if any, Singers of that era that had a free arm (the Singer 320 was one of them, but I don't know if that came before or after this model) so for the most part you had to get a European branded machine (Bernina, for example) if you wanted a free arm in the 1950s.  

I've never done this, but I think if you had to sew a badge on a sleeve, you could do it really easily with this tiny little free arm! Ditto if you had to add patches or darns on the knees of jeans

It has already come in handy for sewing bags - the tiny free arm is PERFECT for this.

Also, this model, unlike a 221 Featherweight, has a feed dog drop that is actually quick and easy to accomplish.  No fiddly knob underneath the machine like the other black Singers, but a super easy lever to go up and down. 

This machine came equipped with a free motion foot, and it truly does beautiful FM work.  I do NOT have skills at free motion, so disregard my clumsy attempts to doodle a design and focus instead on how smoothly and beautifully it stitches.  Of course you couldn't get an entire quilt in there, but you could do FM quilting on small projects in addition to darning and embroidery.

So by my own set of rules, there is no reason to have both a 222 and a 221.  Every machine has to have a unique purpose, remember?  But since I made the rule, I can also bend the rule. They are both beautiful, dontcha think?

Singer 221 (1950) and Singer 222 (1954)

And the first thing I sewed on the 222 was a dust cover for her case. That is pretty much the first project I sew on every new machine.    PATTERN HERE

Also made the hokey, but popular mini Dresden plate spool pin doily.  I felt compelled because it seems expected of every Featherweight owner.  (I didn't buy the pattern, but just figured it out.)

My Sewing Space - Updated for 2024

 

I change it up often, moving things around to suit me, but this is the latest arrangement.

I have downsized my collection of machines - no really!  Yes, I have pared it down to the ones I really use and no more.  (Okay, I don't really USE my Featherweight 221, but that is the one "collector's item" I allow myself - well that and the Singer 127 treadle which is a display piece elsewhere in the house.) 

Singer Featherweight,  Singer 127 (inside treadle table)

 ***********************************

And okay, I don't really NEED both a Kenmore 1050 and a Singer Genie, but I am a sucker for "miniature" items.  Those are both the coolest small size sewing machines in their neat molded cases and I can't resist...after all they don't take up much room.  They're so CUTE!

Kenmore 1050,  Singer Genie 354

***********************************

I keep both the Kenmore 1760 and Kenmore 1774 because they each bring some different applications to the party:

Kenmore 1774,  Kenmore 1760

The 1774 does a chain stitch - only machine I have that does it now that I sold the Touch & Sew 600e.  It is also my FMQ machine.  I like a vertical bobbin machine for FM work which rules out the 201 and 401.  I can't do it on my 1760 because I have never been able to find an embroidery (hopping) foot for SHS.

The 1760 is my only free arm machine, and my Go-To machine for about 90% of my sewing - hence the position of "honor" in my space.  

***********************************

The 201 and 401 don't cancel each other out, either.  Both are rotary hook drop in bobbin machines, so technically the 401 usurps the 201, all else being equal.  But even though I don't do a lot of quilting, I have found that piecing is a joy on the 201 with its narrow feed dogs and dedicated straight stitch. 

Singer 401, Singer 201

The 401 is my only slant shank machine and it is just about the Best Overall sewing machine Singer ever made.  The only thing it "does" that is unique for me is that it takes the Singer Deluxe Monogrammer which is about the coolest thing ever.  Kenmore has a monogrammer attachment as well, but it doesn't make letters as beautiful as the Singer version. 

***********************************

The Kenmore 16641 serger doesn't have to justify its existence, of course.  While it's not technically "vintage" like all the other machines (I don't think any home serger falls into the "vintage" category at this point) it is an older model that I bought on Shop Goodwill for $60 and it is a most excellent machine. I've gotten my money's worth 10x over on that one. 

***********************************

If anyone is counting, I think that tops out at NINE machines.  Well, and the 301 I have at my Mom's house which I may bring back home later... so we can call it an even TEN. 

Singer 301

Singer Genie versus Kenmore "Mini Kennie" 1050

 In a previous post I compared the Kenmore 1050 "Mini Kennie" to a Featherweight.  But this Kenmore machine really has more in common with another, lesser known, Singer model - the Genie (aka the Starlet in Europe.)

I'm not sure if this is technically accurate, but I'd refer to these as 3/4 machines as opposed to the Featherweight which is a 1/2 size machine.  That - and zigzag capabilities, plus the case configuration - gives these two machines a greater basis for comparison.  Also, they are both 1970s-era machines.

They both have clever plastic molded cases that conform to the machine (rather than a box such as you use to carry a Featherweight.)  They weigh less than 20 lbs each.

These machines have a few similar features such as a retractable spool pin, low shank snap-on feet, and built in accessory storage.

There a number of differences, though.  

In most ways, the Kenmore is the better built machine.  However, you may be surprised how much quieter the Genie sews.  It is also worth noting that your work is closer to your line of vision on the Genie.

The Kenmore makes an unpleasant whine and I'm not sure if it is something specific to this machine.

The stitch quality is more or less the same 

(I could stand to adjust the tension on the Kenmore - left sample)

The Kenmore with its presser foot pressure adjustment, reverse stretch stitches, and built-in buttonhole stitch covers more bases for garment sewing.  However, the Genie stitches pretty nice buttonholes with the Singer Professional Buttonholer, so it can still hold its own. 

A Genie has the added feature of its funky '70s flower decor which might not make it a better sewing machine, but gives it an undeniable "oomph" factor.

Bottom line is I love them BOTH! 

The Reluctant Quilter Part II - basting, quilting, binding

Continued from The Reluctant Quilter Part I - Piecing the Top 

It doesn't take long to figure out one thing about quilting - piecing the top is the "fun" part.  Well, "fun" if you enjoy cutting out dozens (or hundreds!) of tiny pieces to exact precision, then sewing them together with 1/4" seams to exact precision.  

But it is "fun" and comparatively easy since you are working on small sections at a time.  

Then comes the WORK.  I watched a number of videos about quilt basting methods and finally decided to pin it on the carpeted floor (no pool noodles, ping pong tables, quilting frames or basting spray for me.) 

I pinned the backing onto the carpet with T-pins rather than taping it to a hardwood floor

 Batting hasn't been totally smoothed out yet, but this is the next step

 

Then the quilt top.  I used 200 safety pins to baste it.  It actually wasn't as bad as I imagined. 

On to the quilting itself.  THIS is the challenge.  Yes, I know at this point you can take it to a quilt shop and they will quilt it on a long arm machine with beautiful fancy patterns.  But 1. that is costly, and 2. the whole point of making a quilt is making it myself.

This is the first of what will be MANY lines of stitching.  I am lucky enough to have a SHS walking foot for my favorite Kenmore 1760, and so off I go.  

I used a three-step zigzag stitch to make vertical and horizontal lines across all the squares which are set on the diagonal.  Then I came back and did a straight stitch in the ditch along the diagonal row seams. 

And I'm sorry, CAT PICTURE!  It doesn't make it any easier to wrangle that quilt through the machine when a cat decides it is a cozy spot to sit and look out the window.

Not perfect, but I got the job done

I quilted the border with a stencil, not great but good enough for my first attempt, I guess.

I pieced my binding from fat eighths, so it is multi-patterned.  I did run the edges through the serger to keep it all neat (I tore the strips rather than cut them - don't ask!) and I only had to undo a few inches on the ends in order to do the final join. 

I did the method where you first sew the binding to the BACK of the quilt

And then turn it to the front and machine stitch it down.  I have no time or patience to hand stitch a binding.  No way/No how.

Here's how it looks front and back, almost the same.  2-1/2" binding strips, and I sewed with a 3/8" seam

This is shown on a queen sized bed

.

PS... This quilt has been Kitty Approved