Originally Posted by
Mickey2
The manual for my 201K, which I assume is the original, calls for oil, I really can't be way off?
Well, I looked in both the owner's manual I have here and in the service manual. They both say oil, so I'd say keep on with it. I've always used grease but that might be because my first machine was a featherweight (sort of) and that's where I learned G for G - Grease for Gears and it was reinforced through other sources. If the 201 manuals specifies oil, it should be fine as long as you keep an eye on it.
Originally Posted by
J Miller
I have several owners manuals for I believe White and White made Kenmores that actually states to use petroleum jelly in the motor lube pots. So that is what I use in those machines and it works quite well.
For Singers I use Singer motor lube in a variety of vintage tubes. I've amassed quite a few. No two look the same as they come out the tube, but they work.
I haven't bought any of the newly made replica stuff yet, so I don't know how it works. And I've not used any PJ in my Singers as of yet. However I fail to see why it would not work as the Singer motors work on the same principle as the White motors.
When I rewired my first 15-91 I used Singer motor lube as the lube pots lube both the gears and the motor shaft bearings. That has worked well.
Somewhere back a couple years ago someone, perhaps here on the QB, did a test where they melted Singer motor lube, PG and IIRC Tri-Flow grease and measured the temp when it started to melt. The temp for this test was, again IIRC, 115 degrees for the Singer grease and PJ. The Tri-Flow of course never melted.
I do not know much about greases other than what I used in automotive applications. Sometimes, like in drum break type wheel bearings you need a grease that will soften up with heat and flow back onto the bearings. With disk breaks that run far hotter you need a more heat resistant grease that will not melt at as low a temperature.
I think sewing machine motors are more like the drum break bearings than the disk breaks. The temp is lower and needs grease that will soften up at a lower temp.. Hense the PJ as stated in the old White manuals or the grease Singer sold.
I do wish we could find a readily available source of grease that was the same as the Singer grease. It would sure make matters simpler.
Joe
For what it's worth, Joe - I agree with you. I think that a lot of the "PJ BAD!!!!" information is
FUD.
Properly used - there should be no risk with it. i.e. there's not enough put into the grease pots/tubes without seriously forcing it in there to flow as far as the commutator - causing smoke, glazing, etc. A properly adjusted belt should eliminate the issue of excessive heat that leads to over melting as well. If it were put in the brush tubes - as we've all seen and heard about - of course there will be damage - Singer Lube and the other products would do the same.
I can't seem to use the old lead tubes without them bursting at the seams lately, which is what prompted this thread. I'm tired of the cleanup every single time and I've decided to just start using something else. That's when I did that test (the new scientific way - you know, with a result in mind and the testing to prove it.
) and then was shocked by how late the original lube started to melt.
Mickey2 and I were discussing the same thing - the motor shaft shouldn't ever get so hot as to melt a grease that melts at 300F or more. If it does, something has already gone very very wrong. So, a low melting point is needed - that seems an argument for the PJ again. I've heard/read the same things about the Singer Lube and PJ being the same - spread rate and melting points. I suspect there was an additive in the Singer lube to make it look different. That said, according to a video on the lubes from one of the companies I mentioned above with their own formula (who notably doesn't test or mention PJ in the video) - the UK and US formulas have different melting points. That may mean I tested the US version which is why I got a different result than I was expecting.
Technically there is a source for something that's claimed to be functionally identical - you'll have to pay the premium price though. My goal was to find something readily available at, near or below the price of the original.
Here's what I'm thinking:
As far as I'm concerned, I will use the new Singer lube (with tests to new batches as they come in) until it's no longer available - I also have an email in to the supplier to ask the manufacturer if it's still suitable for use in the motors. In a pinch, I will use Petroleum Jelly and when the Singer Lube is no longer available (or the formula changes to be unsuitable) - I will switch to PJ exclusively.