Page 1 Advertisements Column 6

Star (Christchurch), Issue 4749, 20 July 1883, Page 1

Business Notices FINAL NOTICE. W « Xto BIN 8 O N TXTISHES to inform all his old Customers and Friends that he has REMOVED THE WHOLE OF HIS LASQH STOCK OF Jlloots and fenoia To those Premises Lately ocoupied by MILNSR & THOMPSON, High street, Next Doob to Dustnihg'b, Fbttitbbbb. BE-HIVE JOOOT UEPOT. _ 864 COFFEE. GILLBSPIH'S ELEPHANT BRAND COFFEE HAS lons been recognised as the most suitable breakfast beverage, it being delicious in flavour and thoroughly wholesome. Bold by most grocers in 1, 2, 4, 7, 14 acd 251 b tins, And Whombaxh bx all Mhbohaktj And at ThbMihb, High street. 217J NOT QUITS BO DECISIVE AS IT WAS, BUT A LITTLE MOBB OVERWHELMING. WE Challenge the representative of the Singer Sewing Maohine Company, cr any of the jurors on Sewing Machines at the Exhibition who voted for the report coming from that body to controvert the following statement of facts. Messrs Modelings, Gunnington, Dale, and Kirk, we call upon you to defend yaur report. E. 0. FISSS & 00. Christoharoh International Exhibition, June 15th, 1882. BBPOBT 01 COHMITOBB 07 EXPERTS. To H. 0. Fiske and Co. T\EAR SIR,— In acoordftnoe with your re--3IJ quest, we have eiaffl!!}?? 1 fcno $** Da?iß and the New Singer Sewing Machines, for the purpose of comparing them. In our comparison we have taken into consideration— 1. The meohsnical principle involved. 2. She quality of the material used. 8. The degree of workmanship exhibited. 4, The faoility for doing a good and varied class of work. After taking both machines asunder, carefully examining every piece, and fully testing their capabilities, we have ns hesitation ia saying that we consider the Davis far the superior maohine of tha two. Our reasons are as follows : — In both machines the same method is adopted for actuating the seedle bar—- viz., a crank with roller working in a cam. This cam in the Davis machine is cut out of a solid piece of steel and hardened, while in the Singer it is not only very much ligkter, but is made of common cast iron. The feed apparatus of the two machines are very dissimilar. That of the Singer is the usual slip feed. The Davis has the vertical feed peculiar to itself. In thio arrangement the preseer foot holds the material firmly down till the needle has roaohed its lowett point. The pressure is then relieved and transmitted to the foed bar. Feed bar, needle, and material are then, by a very simple contrivance, moved forward simultaneously tbe required length of stitch. Motion Is ziven to tbe shuttle in Davis' maohine as follows :— An eocentrio at the wheel end of the main spindle gives motion to a vertical lever. Thia in "turn tracmtits it through a ball joint of ingenious construction to the only moving part under the machine, a pivotted lever havuiK at its end an adjustable shuttle carrier. In the Singer Machine a pair of mitre wheels drive a vertical spindle, having at it* lower end a crank. A connecting rod from this crank moves a sliding shuttle carrier. It will be uen that in the Davis there are between tbe main, spindle and the shuttle four points of friction, the pivot carrying the vertioal lever, the ecoentric, the ball joint, and tha pivot of horizontal lever. The two principal movements the eocentrio and bail joint, are adjustable, and tha parts moel liable to wear are made ef hardened steel. To compass the eamo work Uie Singer employe bb points of friction tha teeth of the mitre wheels, the two journals of vertical spindle, the two ends of tho connecting rod, and the eliding ehuttlo carrier. Nose of these places are adjustable. The small wheels are common cast iron, having a certain amount of baoklash, and consequent tendo&cy to rattle and break. The connecting rod is a thin bar of iron, with a hole in each end. The end which rune on the crank pin is one of the prmoipal joints in the maohine, bavins a considerable amount of work to do with small bearing surface, making it very liable to wear, while, as before remarked, there are no means of compensating for any wear. It will be noticed that the shuttle of the Singer Maohine is carried in a slide, to which a lateral strain is given by the driving rod, causing a certain amount of friction, vrhilo in the Davis it is carried by the lever quite free from friotien. With the exception of the small roller working the needle bar, there is not a sisglo piece in the Singer Maohine, not even excepting the shuttle, that cannot be cut with an ordinary pocket knife, and there are no means of adjusting any wearing part. In the Davis, oot only are most of the pieoes made of iteel, and tempered, but at every essential point means are provided for taking up any wear. On this point, we may say that where we had any doubt about tbe quality of the material employed the piece was broken a&d the fracture carefully examined. Having examined the mechanical arrangements of the two machines, we tested their adaptability for work, and we noticed the very peculiar feed of the Davis. In this respect we have been f oroed to the conclusion that for all purposes, s ewiag from the thinnest muslin to even through a metal spoon, the Davis has D 9 parallel for grasp, cr for avoiding that puckering often the effect ef the preesuro on a fore motion feed. We must in common honesty express our astonishment at the range and variety of work accomplished by the Davis, whioh we are satisfied oannot be dose by the Singer. In summarising cut report, we repeat that we have no hesitation in saying that we regard the Davis as very superior to the Singer m workmanship, material, and the meohanioal principles involved, and also in performing a greater ranee of work. We found the Davis to work with equal ease from the lightest to the heaviest fabric. I JOHN LEE BGOn (Soott Bros.) Heohanical Engineer. K. GLUYAS PASCOS, Manager of the Kaiapoi Clothing Factory. GIO. P. ANTHONY, lftohsaioal Sxpert, from Nettlef old's Birmingham. • 6717