Canuck Panda
I'll Lock Up
- Messages
- 4,708
Is stitches per inch a thing? No is my personal opinion. On my home maker Singer machine, it's as simple as tweaking the stitch length dial, and the tension toggle at the top. I only hem my jeans and pants, so I just follow the user manual and set the stitch length in the middle and the tension in the middle. I did upgrade to a walking foot attachment, it's easier to sew on thicker fabric, like a mini robot doing half of the work for me. My Singer machine is about $200. It does what I need it to do. My dry cleaner charges me $60 for hemming, 4 pairs I've recouped my investment.
Most leather jacket makers will be using something a lot more powerful and at least ten times more expensive, like the Juki machines. And they have this slowing speed thing that allows them to sew at really slow speed with enough punching power and with great precision.
Where as my home maker machine is mostly just my foot. I even resort to hand crank when the jeans seams are too thick for my Singer to power through.
So why am I writing this in a skiving thread? Here it comes. Smaller stitches requires smaller needles, on top of the super expensive Juki machines. And in order to use smaller needles, the seam thickness can't be that thick. Hence the skiving part or however other methods are used for bulk reduction. I use a size 18 needle for my jeans hemming, and I've broke a few needles on those 6mm thick seams. If sewing with a smaller needle like size 16 or size 14, the thickness or bulk needs to be much less.
So does smaller stitch / skived / bulk reduction means "better"? That's up to individual opinion. To me, it's simply what can be done and what is chosen to be done to give a particular looking end product.
And about stitch cleanliness. Again, it's up to individual opinion. But from all my jackets, I can only see two types. One, the maker don't try to hide the beginning and the back locking stitch. The other, is the maker try to hide the beginning and back locking stitch.
Not hiding, with big needles and super thick leather:
Not hiding but with tiny needles and thinned down leather:
The blue jacket most likely used size 19 needle and the red jacket most likely used a size 14 needle with significant difference in leather thickness, like 3.5oz vs 2.5oz.
So even both above jackets technique is the same so to speak, not hiding the locking stitch, the end product has a totally different feel, thick vs thin, big needle vs small needle. Is one better than the other? Again, this would be personal opinion.
Now some example of makers trying to hide their start and locking stitching, all using tiny needles, thinner leather, seam bulk reduction:
The darker the leather and stitching, it's easier to hide. Light color leather and thread not so much. Teacore leather is the worst under microscope photograph because even normal could look flawed with the contrast.
And one more thing... The uber expensive jackets can often be found at half the price or less on the used market... Patience has its own reward.
Most leather jacket makers will be using something a lot more powerful and at least ten times more expensive, like the Juki machines. And they have this slowing speed thing that allows them to sew at really slow speed with enough punching power and with great precision.
Where as my home maker machine is mostly just my foot. I even resort to hand crank when the jeans seams are too thick for my Singer to power through.
So why am I writing this in a skiving thread? Here it comes. Smaller stitches requires smaller needles, on top of the super expensive Juki machines. And in order to use smaller needles, the seam thickness can't be that thick. Hence the skiving part or however other methods are used for bulk reduction. I use a size 18 needle for my jeans hemming, and I've broke a few needles on those 6mm thick seams. If sewing with a smaller needle like size 16 or size 14, the thickness or bulk needs to be much less.
So does smaller stitch / skived / bulk reduction means "better"? That's up to individual opinion. To me, it's simply what can be done and what is chosen to be done to give a particular looking end product.
And about stitch cleanliness. Again, it's up to individual opinion. But from all my jackets, I can only see two types. One, the maker don't try to hide the beginning and the back locking stitch. The other, is the maker try to hide the beginning and back locking stitch.
Not hiding, with big needles and super thick leather:
Not hiding but with tiny needles and thinned down leather:
The blue jacket most likely used size 19 needle and the red jacket most likely used a size 14 needle with significant difference in leather thickness, like 3.5oz vs 2.5oz.
So even both above jackets technique is the same so to speak, not hiding the locking stitch, the end product has a totally different feel, thick vs thin, big needle vs small needle. Is one better than the other? Again, this would be personal opinion.
Now some example of makers trying to hide their start and locking stitching, all using tiny needles, thinner leather, seam bulk reduction:
The darker the leather and stitching, it's easier to hide. Light color leather and thread not so much. Teacore leather is the worst under microscope photograph because even normal could look flawed with the contrast.
And one more thing... The uber expensive jackets can often be found at half the price or less on the used market... Patience has its own reward.
