Hi! I truly appreciate your thoughts on this matter, this conversation is important to me, and it's complicated. No apology needed! You've given me a lot to respond to, so forgive the lengthy and rambling reply. First, I want to take exception with two points here. One, I take exception to your statement that "it's my understanding," as you put it, "literally means nothing." When I say "it's my understanding," I am letting the listener know that I am reporting what I believe at that time, and that it's possible that I don't have the complete information, could have been mislead, could be wrong, etc. I am letting the listener know that they should take what I say with a grain of salt and not consider my words to be the final authority on the subject. (Which is good advice whether I say "to my understanding" or not, lol.) I'm honestly not entirely sure what you are attacking by bringing that up, but I stand behind my use of that qualifying statement. Second, the video you are commenting on is 4 years old. While I have NO expectation that anyone viewing this video at any time will follow up by watching every video I have made since that time, it might interest you to know that my opinion of using the term "clone" has shifted dramatically in the last several years as I have gotten a better understanding (I hope) of the PWF story. This illustrates a problem that, while not unique to KZbin, is a problem with KZbin videos; it's likely that nearly every video I have ever made has some mistake, misstatement, or other issue that I would like to correct, but there is no feasible way for me to do it. Years ago, there was a way to add text into a video that was already published, so I could add text saying "don't listen to what I am saying here it's a mistake," but that functionality was removed many years ago. I can add pinned comments or write in the video descriptions, but those go almost entirely unread. Over the years I have read on many sites various things about the Sailrite/Thompson/clones situation, and I am guilty of believing things I read that may have been nothing more than the imaginings of a keyboard expert. As I have learned more, I have adjusted my thoughts on the matter. It is a fact that some of the details of what I said in this video are not accurate; they were what I thought I knew about the subject at that time. Short of deleting the entire video, there's not much I can do about it now. (Much like print journalism, everyone reads the article with the big mistake in it, no one reads the correction that gets printed after the fact.) So, to your larger point. I have adopted the practice of trying to refer to ALL of the PWF machines as "variants" of the PWF design, originated by Thompson. I agree that the Sailrite is as much of a "clone" as any other variant of the same design, at least in the broad strokes. To the best of my knowledge (here we go again), Sailrite does not and has not ever owned Thompson (or Datho, to be more accurate). I have no formal affiliation with Sailrite and don't want to speak out of turn, but I have spoken informally with Matt Grant, and I think at some point Sailrite and Thompson were both cooperating and competing simultaneously, and when the patents on the original Thompson design expired, Sailrite started producing the machine and evolving the design. I have no information available to me that the other variants of the design are violating any patents owned by Sailrite or anyone else, but anecdotally that subject came up in discussion with Matt, and I think there have been instances of some of their intellectual property being copied. But the general PWF design seems to be not protected by patent any longer. I want to emphasize that I am writing off the top of my head, recalling a few minutes of conversation from several years ago, blended with stuff I've read on the internet over the last 12 years. When I spoke to Matt, I wasn't taking notes for my doctoral thesis on sewing machine intellectual property. The actual facts are somewhere in the ballpark, what I am saying is "my understanding." You mention the 9" variant produced by another manufacturer. In one of many videos discussing this topic, I mentioned that very machine, and acknowledged that it is, in fact, an innovation on the original design. (Frankly, I also think it blurs the line between "portable" and not, and isn't something I find particularly attractive, but for some it might be the perfect machine. I can certainly imagine why Sailrite might not see it as something worth pursuing, given they already market a full-size machine.) You ask why no automatic needle up/down; that would certainly be an attractive feature, although no other PWF that I know of offers it either. Why doesn't Sailrite add that to the WorkerB? I don't know. I suspect that the Posi-Pin clutch system makes an industrial-style needle synchronizer not possible, but I don't know how the computerized domestic machines perform that capability. Maybe it would be an easy thing to add, or maybe it's nigh on impossible. Likewise, I would absolutely LOVE for Sailrite to be able to add a knee-lift. If they could add a knee-lift and auto needle up/down, I might not need my Consew 206 anymore. Is that possible, or reasonable? I have no idea. It is somewhat irrelevant to the point, though, as no other PWF manufacturer offers these features. You acknowledge the significance of the WorkerB but seem to claim that the innovations Sailrite has made don't count because they didn't make a flat needle plate and auto needle-up/down (which, again, no other PWF manufacturers do, either)...? I have very limited exposure to non-Sailrite PWF machines. The limited exposure I do have leads me to believe that Sailrite has much higher quality standards, and the innovations they contributed to the design, specifically the Posi-Pin, the EZ Set stitch length lever (which I think is FAR better than the original, but I take your point that perhaps there are ways it could be better), and the WorkerB motor make it a no-brainer for me. Add to that the customer service experience and support, and I still heartily recommend Sailrite to anyone who is seeking a PWF machine, and still urge anyone looking to save money by purchasing a different variant of the design to choose carefully and keep expectations realistic. Just like Sailrite, the other companies are for-profit businesses, and there is a reason they can sell their machines at much lower costs. Whatever that reason (or reasons) might be, it is, in my opinion, highly unlikely that they are reducing their price to be nice to the consumer. I don't know if you are directly referring to me, or this is just a general statement, but I try to be pretty careful about how I express my thoughts, and I have never tried to make anyone feel like they are "supporting some sort of criminality or immorality if they decide not to pay 3X the price for the most polished pig in the poke." What I said in this video, and I believe I have been pretty consistent on this for many years, is that I personally don't recommend any of the other variants of the PWF design, and for those who choose those variants for budgetary or other reasons, I recommend a "caveat emptor" approach. I have read and been told many anecdotes of people who have had great experiences with non-Sailrite PWF machines, and I have read and been told anecdotes of people who had poor experiences. I have personal experience with 3 different Sailrite machines, two Thompson machines, and one unknown brand variant of unknown vintage. The difference in quality of manufacturing between the unknown machine and the Sailrite was obvious and significant. Whether that difference is consistent among all of the other manufacturers is completely unknown to me, but since I do not know, I cannot recommend them. My personal ethical position makes me lean solidly to Sailrite, but that position can be changed with exposure to contrary evidence. In a perfect world, I would buy multiple examples of every PWF machine on the market, hire a team of researchers to trace the source of manufacturers, quality control methodology, etc., and come to some kind of firm conclusions that are unquestionable. Unfortunately, this isn't that world. I hope that helps clarify my current position on the subject. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, and I welcome further discussion!

Thanks!

Hi, I appreciate the critique, I am aware the camera work in this video wasn't the best, but the purpose here was not to make a visually stunning piece of cinematic art, but to give a quick demonstration. I generally do the best I can as a solo content creator, sometimes it just has to be "good enough." Thanks for watching!

Thanks so much! Your words mean a lot, I appreciate it. Happy new year to you as well!

People were hand sewing before sewing machines were invented, so, yes! There are an infinite number of one-time-only repairs, modifications, etc. where it would make a lot more sense to struggle through hand sewing something rather than buying a sewing machine. Most people who sew as a hobby (or more) are always finding new reasons to sew (the same is true for woodworkers, welders and probably every other craft out there). I personally got into sewing to make entire projects, and the occasional hemming of pants and other small repairs are just ancillary. I do very little hand sewing, but it is definitely a handy (no pun intended) skill to have, whether you have a sewing machine or not. If you're in doubt, starting with hand sewing is really cheap, and if you find that you love joining fabric but want to do it MUCH faster, then you might start shopping for a sewing machine. I hope that helps, thanks for watching!

This project turned out to be easier than I expected, but there is always added pressure when doing something like this. For instance, if a component was visibly damaged in the disassembly process, how do I replace it with no access to the original fabrics and not make it obvious? There is definitely a point where the cost in time of disassembly and reassembly of an existing bag would exceed the cost in time and materials of building something from scratch. If this had been a $35 bag, it would not have been worth the time I put into it. As the person doing the work, I think there is a value to doing jobs like this. I can't tell you the number of times I've been 75% finished with a bag and realized I forgot something that requires significant disassembly and reassembly. Being proficient at doing this is a helpful skill. Economically, it's more complicated. As to your question about which is easier, that's complicated, too. In the case of this Tumi, I didn't have to design the bag, measure and cut the pieces, then assemble the pieces together. So in that way, this was easier. However, the pieces of the Tumi were already trimmed down and finished, and the margin for error was much slimmer than if I were working from scratch, and that adds stress, if not difficulty. An added point that I left out of the video might be helpful; the friend who brought this work to me brought a manufactured pouch that needed to be disassembled, reduced in size, and reassembled to be used with the velcro loop in the pack. I strongly urged him to just find a pouch that fits. Am I willing to modify the existing pack? Yes. Is it worth what I would charge? No. I hope that makes sense, thanks for the question and thanks for watching!

Nope. Still running the same one for about the last 10 years.

Yeah, if I didn't have a "close enough" match sitting on the table I might have made more effort to get that original one back on, although there is a limit to how many times you can get away with sewing and re-sewing leather lol. But it ended up working out. Thanks for watching and commenting!

There's a pretty funny video back in my catalog of my wife using this machine, she would agree with your assessment! 😂

Thank you!

O'connor bag sorry. Bredan was amazing. I'd love to see the O'connor bag.

I haven't actually seen the film (I don't watch many). Prop recreations aren't really my thing, but I'll have to look into the bag just to check it out, at least!

@@thejasonofalltrades it's a pretty cool bag.

Thank you, Bill!

Hi! To the best of my knowledge, it does not. If it does, it is not apparent to me, anyway. I am not a quilter (free motion is often used by quilters and embroiderers), but many of my vintage machine have free motion capability, and nothing on this machine suggests that it does. I have not read through every page of the manual to examine every feature of the machine, so it's possible there is some alternate way of accomplishing it that I am not aware of, but there is no control to drop the feed dogs that I can see. In case this helps in your search, sewing machines move the fabric being sewn by means of "feed dogs," the toothed gear-like mechanism under where the needle inserts into the fabric. In machines with free-motion capability, these feed dogs can be lowered so they do not move the fabric, allowing the user to move the fabric in any direction while sewing, rather than only forward and back (using reverse). I hope that helps, good luck, and I'm sorry for taking so long to reply!

Glad to have you as part of the channel! Your comments often contribute greatly!

Hi! Sorry for the delay in replying. Berninas can use standard household sewing needles. I do not know much about Berninas in particular (I sold this machine shortly after this video was published), so I am not sure about dating the machine. Bernina still has dealerships around, so if you can find one near you, they might be able to help you with that. There are probably some groups on the internet, as well. Sorry I don't have an answer for you. Thanks for watching!

The white is just the backside of the X-Pac V21RS fabric. This material is not particularly thin (WAY thicker and sturdier than, say, 1.9oz ripstop nylon, for example). Thin ripstop can be a challenge!

The zipper is #8 YKK continuous coil. I have no idea what the length was, I almost never measure that kind of thing. In this instance, I decided about how much I wanted the opening to open and fit the zipper to it. This video might help explain it a bit better - kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z4HOopJvrpeens0

😂

Hi! What you have is a "needle-feed" machine, meaning the needle bar itself moves not only up-and-down, but forward and back (the elliptical motion you describe) in order to assist with transporting the work being sewn. The hierarchy of sewing machine transport systems is (in order of my personal preference in terms of capability): drop feed - no walking foot, only feed dogs transport material, needle goes up and down and doesn't assist with transport needle feed - no walking foot, feed dogs transport material, needle assists with transport walking foot - feed dogs and walking foot work together to transport material, needle does not assist with transport compound feed (aka triple feed and possibly other names) - walking foot, feed dogs and needle all contribute to transport of material being sewn I'm sure there are oddball machines out there with no feed dogs, there are also machines with rollers that pull the material behind the foot, etc., but the ones I listed are the most commonly seen. I haven't personally used a needle-feed machine, but it seems like they can be quite capable. I hope that helps, thanks for watching and commenting!

Not particularly, but a walking-foot machine helps, especially in thicker layers.

Hi, It is a Sailrite Ultrafeed LS-1. Also available in the LSZ-1 (with zig-zag). I have both now, they are not cheap but amazing machines. I have several videos on my channel about them if you want to go down a rabbit hole :)

Hi! This one is a 6360M, but the model numbers are almost irrelevant. There are essentially two flavors of the mechanical "HD" machines; a 23-stitch and a 32-stitch (I'm going from memory here, but if it's not those numbers exactly it's very close). Otherwise, they appear to all be identical, and the model numbers indicate what accessories come with the machine. Performance-wise, they should all be exactly the same. I have a year's worth of evaluation videos on the Singer HD - kzbin.info/aero/PLvZ5V0bfiAfSeLwnxAj4JleQTtu0j3tjY I hope that helps, thanks for watching!

Hi, The bottom is closed by sewing the pocket to the bag. Sorry I didn't specifically mention it, I realize that what seems obvious to me isn't always obvious to others, but if you sit at a sewing machine with the pocket and the gusset you're sewing it to, it should be quite apparent how this works. Good luck!

Hi! I think I replied to you on Instagram, but for the benefit of viewers here, I didn't do anything special at all here, just set the stitch length at its maximum length and stepped on the pedal. Stitch length can be adversely affected by the machine's ability (or lack thereof) to smoothly feed material. If you are using, for instance, a leather with a gripper surface than what I used, the leather may "stick" to the presser foot when the feed dog tries to advance it and cause a shortened, inconsistent stitch length. A teflon foot and in some cases a "walking-foot attachment" can help, as well as improvised solutions like sewing through newspaper, Scotch tape on the bottom of the presser foot, etc. This is the primary reason I tend to use walking-foot sewing machines more often. I hope that helps, good luck!

I'll have to check out that soft start, sounds like a great improvement! Thanks for watching and commenting!

Hi! I probably can't adequately answer this in writing, but here's my attempt. I sew the top seams first, first right sides together, then double fold the seam allowances (kind of) and topstitch. I do this in pairs of parallel seams (so front and back, then each side, if that makes sense). When I sew up the sides (same procedure), I just smash the assembly down as flat as I can, and on the topstitch try to get the needle to land on the stitchline at the corner intersection. That's the only part that is challenging. If your machine struggles with feeding, you may need to hand wheel to keep the stitch length consistent. That's the best I can describe it, I hope that helps! Thanks for watching!

Aaaand I just realized that what I described is different from what I do in this video lol. To answer your actual question, I just sew the 1/2" seam allowance all the way to the ends, making sure they intersect the existing seams. The corners are sewn shut. Sorry for my confusion!