SIGNUP - FREE Membership and 1 FREE Sewing Lesson
| FAQ | Login
 

Platinum Sponsor
PatternReview.com
PatternReview.com

Forum > Sewing Machines > Janome HD3000--Any ancestors? ( Moderated by Sharon1952, EleanorSews)

Please LOGIN or Join PatternReview
Go to Page:
Janome HD3000--Any ancestors?
Is the HD3000 the first of its kind?
bestgrammy
star
bestgrammy
Oregon USA
Member since 8/29/06
Posts: 3556
Send Message

      



Date: 4/6/11 3:16 AM

Hi Everyone!

As I was thinking about the current HD1000 and its various incarnations I wondered about the HD3000 having any previous colors and names.

Has anyone seen it in person and maybe sewn with it?

Also for those who have which ever ancestor of the HD1000...what is the motor's amp #.

Thanks ahead of time to everyone who replies.

Happy sewing to all.

Mufffet
starstarstarstar
Mufffet  Friend of PR
Intermediate
Vermont USA
Member since 8/14/05
Posts: 11185
Send Message

      



In reply to bestgrammy


Date: 4/6/11 4:47 PM

It's like the Janome 4618LE. The HD1000 you know about.

Janome 4618
-- Edited on 4/6/11 4:48 PM --

------
"Be kind whenever possible. It is always possible."
--Dalai Lama

I have sewing machines

Betakin
star
Betakin
Advanced
Arizona USA
Member since 4/22/04
Posts: 7282
Send Message

      



In reply to Mufffet


Date: 4/7/11 0:46 AM

I think that there was an older model, the NewHome model MX3123 that looks like it was the first model before the 4618 in Muffet's link. I think the My Excel was made in Japan then the other similar models (and there have been several) came about with the Janome name instead of New Home and I think the newer models have since been made in Taiwan. That My Excel 3123 had really good ratings and reviews and I think there are several reviews on it here on PR.
I wanted the MX 3123 but never did purchase it. I like many features about it and it also had foot storage in the top of the machine.

bestgrammy
star
bestgrammy
Oregon USA
Member since 8/29/06
Posts: 3556
Send Message

      



In reply to Betakin


Date: 4/7/11 4:46 AM

The HD 3000 has foot storage in the top of the machine...did the 4618?

sewfrequent

sewfrequent
Intermediate
Texas USA
Member since 6/27/03
Posts: 3243
Send Message

      



In reply to bestgrammy
thumbsup 1 member likes this.


Date: 4/8/11 9:15 AM

Bestgrammy, i just went in to check my TB-12 (1008 clone) to see motor size and am STUNNED...it has a 1.0 amp motor!! could not believe my eyes...thought i was misreading! no WONDER i love that lil sucker. i was expecting to see .6 bc all janomes are .6. Now here's the interesting part--my Elna 7300 (same as janome 6600) is also .6 as well as the 16231 !! all 3 of those machines have more power than is typical even within janome's line. I am not sure if motor amps alone are a factor in determining a machine's strength bc i believe this 16231 might be the strongest of the 3!! Now I haven't put them to the test but those 3 models do have impressive muscle over bulk. Now here's another interesting fact--the mini ultra ($99) kenmore also has .6 amps. and it is not in the same league power-wise to the others but i did use one to hem wrangler jeans and it managed. I typically do NOT like computerized (vs electronic/mechanical) janomes bc they don't have enough power sometimes even for simple jobs like intersecting terry or even denim. The electronic models perform better in this area based on my experience as well as the mechanicals. I personally love the foot-storage feature and i do also love the metal body on these. I don't know if the 4618 had the foot storage or not but i'm going to guess it did. I think Janome is piloting some new technology with both the Horizon and the new 3xxx series and we're seeing these re-runs of the work-horse models they've sold in some form for years now while they decide what consumers really want and fine-tune the changes. A dealer told me recently Janome was unsure how the "accu-feed" concept would be received with the 6600 and waited to continue it until they saw it was very popular. The mid-line is normally their pilot series for new features changes then it migrates up or down the line if it works well. Speaks highly of the 1008 and 4618 as well as the 16231 clones that they appear every year virtually unchanged but this is the first time i've seen the 4618 incarnation. It should be a fine machine and I don't dare look at it bc i love my TB 12 even the graphics have grown on me some.

ThePadre
ThePadre
Advanced Beginner
Pennsylvania USA
Member since 1/27/09
Posts: 835
Send Message

      



In reply to sewfrequent


Date: 4/8/11 9:41 AM

Quote: sewfrequent
Bestgrammy, i just went in to check my TB-12 (1008 clone) to see motor size and am STUNNED...it has a 1.0 amp motor!! could not believe my eyes...thought i was misreading! no WONDER i love that lil sucker. i was expecting to see .6 bc all janomes are .6. Now here's the interesting part--my Elna 7300 (same as janome 6600) is also .6 as well as the 16231 !! all 3 of those machines have more power than is typical even within janome's line. I am not sure if motor amps alone are a factor in determining a machine's strength bc i believe this 16231 might be the strongest of the 3!

Motor current ratings (in amperes) are a good indicator of power in an all-mechanical machine, but the design and geometry of the mechanical linkage has a large influence on how much power the machine appears to have at the needle. There's both power AND torque involved. (Consider how a large truck engine, often rated over 500 hp - 375kw - performs compared to a seemingly lower powered engine, like 200hp - 150kw - in a sports car.)

A lot of the machines that use stepper motors for some of their stitch functions don't need the main motor to be very heavy, since the stepper motors take some of the load.
tgm and Kittys
star
tgm and  Kittys
Advanced Beginner
USA
Member since 3/8/10
Posts: 8100
Send Message

      



In reply to ThePadre


Date: 4/8/11 9:44 AM

How does this compare to belt driven sm? Sometimes it seems to me that my Singer 306K has quite the power compared to the other ones with regular motor ... Kenmore 24 stitch or Hello Kitty Kate both run on motor only ? ????
Always appreciate your posts & information here on PR Father.

------
Home of the adorable Baby & Mittee girl >^,,^<
Mittee birthday 10/5/2009, The Baby 11/2/2000

Oh my..here we go again, no job...Sighing allot..almost 3 months & counting ...

Home to Hello Kitty Kate, Hello Kitty Valerie, Dottie Kenmore


sewfrequent

sewfrequent
Intermediate
Texas USA
Member since 6/27/03
Posts: 3243
Send Message

      



In reply to ThePadre


Date: 4/8/11 9:52 AM

Fr Basil, this is interesting bc you wonder how the 7300 big-boy can have same motor as the little mini. So I guess the take-away here is that you can't assume much based on motor size UNLESS you are speaking of mechanical machine (vs computerized/electronic)? I know of a few mechanicals and also a few computerized newer models that have 1.0 amp motors that are impressive in the power department and it isn't subtle difference either. yet some with .6 motors are very weak and some aren't. I guess its just not so much a function of motor size, afterall...something i've long suspected and been mystified by! Thanks for explaining this in easy terms.

ThePadre
ThePadre
Advanced Beginner
Pennsylvania USA
Member since 1/27/09
Posts: 835
Send Message

      



In reply to tgm and Kittys


Date: 4/8/11 11:08 AM

Quote: tgm and Kittys
How does this compare to belt driven sm? Sometimes it seems to me that my Singer 306K has quite the power compared to the other ones with regular motor

Subjectively, I notice zero difference in power between belt-driven and gear-driven sewing machines. Belts can slip, but that only happens when it's improperly adjusted or the machine is being used on too heavy of a project. In the former, just adjust the tension (the motor's weight should provide the needed tension). In the latter, well, the belt is saving the machine by slipping instead of forcing the machine to do more than it can handle. (Always remember: use the right belt for your machine, not a generic round-section tension belt.)

If you doubt the power of a belt, note that belts drive a number of accessory assemblies on most cars (alternators, power steering pumps, water pumps, air conditioner compressors, etc.) not to mention the valvetrain on most overhead-cam engines. Then there's the continuously-variable transmission (CVT), which is also a belted contraption found on some cars today. Belts are found in many washing machines (but not mine, FWIW). Belts also drive all my woodworking equipment. All of these things have much, much greater power transfer requirements than a sewing machine.

The belted machines are, in many ways, constructed in a way that makes them very easy to keep running for decades. Replacement motors are STILL available for them, and will be for a long time. The gear-driven drive trains are stuck with salvage parts (i.e., what can be taken from existing stocks of parts and used machines). Having said that, I don't think gear-driven machines are going to die off any time soon, as long as they're kept lubricated and otherwise maintained. I expect my Singer 15-91, 201-2, 403, and 500 to run for a long, long time.
-- Edited on 4/8/11 11:10 AM --
ThePadre
ThePadre
Advanced Beginner
Pennsylvania USA
Member since 1/27/09
Posts: 835
Send Message

      



In reply to sewfrequent


Date: 4/8/11 11:24 AM

Quote: sewfrequent
Fr Basil, this is interesting bc you wonder how the 7300 big-boy can have same motor as the little mini. So I guess the take-away here is that you can't assume much based on motor size UNLESS you are speaking of mechanical machine (vs computerized/electronic)? I know of a few mechanicals and also a few computerized newer models that have 1.0 amp motors that are impressive in the power department and it isn't subtle difference either. yet some with .6 motors are very weak and some aren't. I guess its just not so much a function of motor size, afterall...something i've long suspected and been mystified by! Thanks for explaining this in easy terms.

Basically, I guess. I've never been all that driven to make the motor's amperage rating the deciding factor. The vintage Singers I have run with .6A (or so) motors, and they get their work done just fine. If I were stitching Sunbrella or layers of heavy canvas very often, I might care. However, none of my machines has any problem with regular canvas at all.

When I speak of geometry of the linkage, I'm speaking of the size and length of the crank journals, connecting rods and the like. Adjustments in the length of the rods can radically alter the torque (the number you really care about, most of the time; just ask Carroll Shelby), similar to adjusting the stroke of a piston engine (the length of the connecting rods between the pistons and the crankshaft journals) to tune it for more or less torque on the wheels. However, increasing the stroke to increase torque can make the machine "rougher". To smooth things out, designers can add more weight to the flywheel (those weights usually found near the handwheel), but now there's more mass to accelerate. Race cars use light flywheels, but they're not very smooth at all.

All of which reminds me that machine lubrication is critical. You can lose a LOT of machine power by wasting it by forcing it to overcome friction coming from dry linkages. That thin film of oil everywhere drops the coefficient of friction, requiring less power to move the works. That leaves MORE power for driving the needle and feed dogs. I think a lot of reports of poor machine performance is because one or more oiling points is still dry. This can be especially problematic for the oiling points at either of the motor shaft on most machines.

It's all a big flexible equation. For me: how does the machine work? Is it pleasant? We know which ones are the big winners among the classics. Does anyone think the Singer 201 is anything less than mechanical perfection? (Although the venerable 15-91 must feel slighted by the comparison.) My lowly Janome L-108 (the HD1000's earlier twin) just works, and I don't think I know how big its motor is, off-hand.

-- Edited on 4/8/11 3:15 PM --
Go to Page:
Please LOGIN or Join PatternReview

printable version Printable Version

* Advertising and soliciting is strictly prohibited on PatternReview.com. If you find a post which is not in agreement with our Terms and Conditions, please click on the Report Post button to report it. Sewing Machines >> Janome HD3000--Any ancestors?

 
adv. search»
pattern | machine | member
        
Online Class
Blueprints to Blue Jeans
Blueprints to Blue Jeans

Class Details

Online Class
Clone Your Favorite Garment
Clone Your Favorite Garment

Class Details

BurdaStyle Downloadable 140

photo
by: Samantha82

Review
Christine Jonson Cuff Pant

Christine Jonson Cuff Pant

More Info
Jamie Christina Lark Paper Pattern

Jamie Christina Lark Paper Pattern

More Info

Conditions of Use | Posting Guidelines | Privacy Policy | Shipping Rates | Returns & Refunds | Contact Us | About | New To PR | Advertising

Copyright © 2014 PatternReview.com® , OSATech, Inc. All rights reserved.