I am still researching different sewing machines , This is one I have been recently told was good . Does anyone have any feedback on this ? its called ..Reliable I haven't heard of it
Lc
I have a protable reliable machine that i have found very good
I had to fine tune it first though and i added a monster wheel
Would i buy another one?
Yes
Allan
I know nothing about them. I have a Juki and a Chandler and prefer my Chandler because it is a bottom loading machine. If I forget to pull the thread on initial start no problem. If I do that on the top load Juki...BIG problem.
Others like the top feed. It is all based on what you use the most. All my habits were developed using the Chandler so I compare everything against it.
All the machines out there now days ( unless they are a major brand like Consew, Juki, etc. ) are all copies of another machine. My Chandler is a copy of the Seiko. Myself if I was buying another new machine I would buy a Consew 206 RB.
Whatever you buy make dang sure you first check parts costs and availability as well as the cost of attachments. I bought the Juki second hand and thankfully all of my attachments and needles, etc. are interchangeable on the Chandler. The Consew, Chandler and Juki models have readily available and the cheapest attachments and parts.
Chris
I agree with Mojo, I have a Consew 206RB5 and love it, I have never used a reliable, but personally like name-brand over copies in most things....price-wise the copy is more affordable, but maintanence on offbrands are usually more expensive due to cheaper parts breaking more often
i use pfaff and have no probablm did have a consew but did not have a reverse . it was the same as a singer 111W.
The Chandler sounds intriguing to me ., I wasn't aware of a bottom feed machine . I am still happy with my new repair work on my Juki . I am going to do lots of research before getting a back up...is there a web page to see how the Chandler works as far as the feed ?
Normally, when we think about buying an off-brand machine to use as a backup, we're looking to save a few bucks.
I don't know whether you guys consider the Reliable to be an "off-brand" or not, but one thing is for sure. They arent' much cheaper than the comparable model Jukis. Maybe $100.
Compare prices of Reliable model MSK 8400 (top load) to Juki LU-1508.
OR Reliable MSK 1541 (bottom load) to Juki DNU-1541.
The Reliable models certainly don't have "off-brand" pricing.
Here you go Elsie:
http://www.tolindsewmach.com/chandler-406rb.html (http://www.tolindsewmach.com/chandler-406rb.html)
If you have more questions let me know or give Bob Kovar a call. He always makes time for
us members here to answer questions.
Chris
The Chandler doesn't seem to be bad as far as price according to the link you sent Chris . I paid aroud 3600 for my Juki a few years ago.
I will look up the Reliable as well . I think the newer machines are more cumbersome now. The old Juki I was trained on was a small machine and easier to move around ..it was a good work horse .
The new machines the heads on them are huge , and some of the new ways they are threaded never makes sense . What happened to just slip looping the thread through the slots to thread right through till you get to the needle ? Quick and easy.
My new Juki you have to feed the thread through closed bars ...I hope I'm making sense here .heh heh too fiddly .
I wish there were trade shows in Ont. where you could go and try out different types of machines . There is a big convention you have over in the states that I would love to go to sometime , I am having a brain bubble here trying to remember the name . IFAI ? Have any of you gone to it ?
Adding my two cents adler is a fantastic machine but for the money you cant beat a console 206rb
lc
what model juki did you purchase at 3600 and is that canadian
have ya thought about auto needle positioner options with a newer machine or is this going to be a handy machine of sorts.
thanks
I did some research on Sailrite machines. Seem to be good machines they have videos of them on youtube of them sewing leather 10 layers thick. Might want to look them up