Brother CS-80 sewing machine bobbin winder not winding.

[David Farber]

I don't know much about sewing machines but this does not seem like a
complicated problem.Here are the pictures of the problem:

http://webpages.charter.net/mrfixiter/images/Electronics/CS-80/CS-80-bobbin-winder.jpg
http://webpages.charter.net/mrfixiter/images/Electronics/CS-80/CS-80-bobbin-winder-2.jpg
http://webpages.charter.net/mrfixiter/images/Electronics/CS-80/CS-80-bobbin-winder-3.jpg

The symptom is when you maually engage the bobbin winder assembly on the top
of the machine and press the button to activate it, you can hear the motor
turning inside but the winder does not turn. The first two photos show the
faulty drive assembly removed from the machine. The last photo shows the
assembly loosely installed in the machine. There is some mysterious black
slime (could it just be lubricant?) which I thought must have been some kind
of belt or idler that started disintegrating from age but the machine is
only about 5 years old. The main belts are in very good condition so it
doesn't make sense to me how this could have happened. If you poke the slime
with a small screwdriver it doesn't make a really big mess on everything it
touches like an old rubber belt does. You can see in the third picture that
the area surrounding the part is fairly clean. I think that small black mark
on the large gear to the left happened when I removed the part. By the way,
the part in question is mounted on a plate that can be manually shifted up
against the main gear assembly to get it to turn. I searched around for a
parts diagram for this model but no luck. I know some of you that frequent
this board have delved into sewing machine repairs and was wondering what
this part is and how it interfaces with the drive mechanism to make the
winder rotate.

Thanks for your reply.
--

David Farber
Los Osos, CA

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 6 May 2012 18:42:04 -0700, "David Farber"
<farberbe...@aol.com> wrote:

Brother CS-80
<http://www.brother-usa.com/homesewing/modeldetail.aspx?PRODUCTID=CS80>

>http://webpages.charter.net/mrfixiter/images/Electronics/CS-80/CS-80-bobbin-winder.jpg
>http://webpages.charter.net/mrfixiter/images/Electronics/CS-80/CS-80-bobbin-winder-2.jpg
>http://webpages.charter.net/mrfixiter/images/Electronics/CS-80/CS-80-bobbin-winder-3.jpg

Yuck. What you have there is a bad case of decomposing rubber. That's
when the vulcanization (sulfur cross links) fail and the rubber
returns to a sticky, gooey, messy blob.

>The last photo shows the
>assembly loosely installed in the machine.

Ummm... it's totalled and is not going to work. Replace the bobbin
winder assembly.

>There is some mysterious black
>slime (could it just be lubricant?) which I thought must have been some kind
>of belt or idler that started disintegrating from age but the machine is
>only about 5 years old.

The black slime is what's left of the rubber bobbin drive. I can't
tell from here what caused the disintegration, but the most likely
cause are aeromatic hydrocarbon solvents found in cleaning solutions.
Furniture stripper, carbeurator cleaner, and such might cause it.
However, if the rubber was properly make, it should be impervious to
solvent attack. However, if the rubber was badly made, it might
happen.

>The main belts are in very good condition so it
>doesn't make sense to me how this could have happened.

If the other belts were properly cured, they would be impervious to
solvent attack. Looks like the bobbin winder drive wheel wasn't made
so well.

>If you poke the slime
>with a small screwdriver it doesn't make a really big mess on everything it
>touches like an old rubber belt does. You can see in the third picture that
>the area surrounding the part is fairly clean. I think that small black mark
>on the large gear to the left happened when I removed the part.

Wrap the mess in cellophane plastic wrap to keep the sticky mess from
migrating. The stuff is very messy and difficult to clean.

>By the way,
>the part in question is mounted on a plate that can be manually shifted up
>against the main gear assembly to get it to turn. I searched around for a
>parts diagram for this model but no luck. I know some of you that frequent
>this board have delved into sewing machine repairs and was wondering what
>this part is and how it interfaces with the drive mechanism to make the
>winder rotate.

This looks like the correct assembly. Please verify before ordering:
<http://www.vacsew.com/brother-sewing-machine-bobbin-winder-xc3601121.html>
<http://www.sew4less.com/product_details.php?ProductID=6440>

>Thanks for your reply.
--

Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[David Farber]

Hi Jeff,

This machine was never opened before so I'm going to say that the wheel was
made as cheaply as possible. It was stored for a while and maybe sitting
around in the garage may have exposed it to temperature extremes. In any
case, thanks for the great links. That allowed me to search for the rubber
ring
http://www.sewingpartsonline.com/bobbin-winder-tire-brother-x55238051.aspx
($4 + $3.25 shipping) instead of the whole assembly (~$19 + $11 shipping).

Thanks for your reply.
--

[Jeff Liebermann]

I don't think that will work. That's for a babylock series machine.
The CS-80 is not listed on the list of compatible sewing machines for
the rubber tire. There was also a note on one of the pages I listed
indicating that the rubber tire was NOT available seperately. Unless
you want to experiment, methinks you will need to purchase the entire
assembly.

Nothing useful in the manual:
<http://homeappliance.manualsonline.com/manuals/mfg/brother/cs_80.html>

If you want to go cheap, measure the size of the rubber tire and visit
your local plumbing or hardware supply store. Dig through the pile of
rubber faucet gaskets for something similar. The exact shape and size
is not very critical, as long as it makes contact and doesn't slip. If
you're really cheap, get a slightly larger o-ring, cut it to size, and
glue the ends with cyanoacrylate adhesive. There might be a slight
bump as it turns, but it won't affect anything.

[N_Cook]

David Farber <farberbe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:jo79du$fob$1...@dont-email.me...

I've never sen te like of that, gooey rubber plenty of times.
So all that model will go the same way. Presumably the result of
over-plasticised plastic rather than a rubber formulation as you say it is
non tacky. Whenever that happens with rubber then there seems to be a
contagion that affects all the rubber bands in a piece of kit, perhaps not
the case with what you have there
I would get some small neoprene O rings and stretch 2 or 3 over the pulley
to take up the width , if not enough diameter then 1 or 2 more stretched
over that underlying layer.
Then perhaps look out for a proper replacement

[David Farber]

Hi Jeff,

I actually did a bit more research after my last post to make sure I was
getting the correct part. This place lists the tire as compatible with the
CS80 model so I purchased it there.
http://www.mysewingmachineparts.com/sewing-machine-bobbin-winder-tire-ring-x55238051-baby-lock-brother/

I really don't expect Brother, like many other companies, to make it easier
for you to buy one small part off of an entire assembly when it can make
more money selling the whole thing. This has been going on in the service
industry since the beginning of time. I don't consider myself being really
cheap. I consider it being smart. Speaking of cheap, how cheap was it of
Brother to use a tire like that in the first place?

[David Farber]

I may have to resort to a home made repair as you suggested if the $4 tire I
bought isn't a good fit.

[N_Cook]

David Farber <farberbe...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:jo8u5g$mn3$1...@dont-email.me...

And is the "proper" replacement going to be plastic also?
If you burn a bit of the gooed original is it a rubber or plastic smell?

[David Farber]

I assume before the tire morphed into the tacky mess, it was made of rubber.
The replacement I ordered will also be made of rubber. After a bit more
research, this is the website where I placed my order.
http://www.mysewingmachineparts.com/sewing-machine-bobbin-winder-tire-ring-x55238051-baby-lock-brother/

I already cleaned off the mess so I don't have any sample left to burn. The
plastic pulley that supports the tire looks good and does not appear be
deformed in any way.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Mon, 7 May 2012 09:27:37 -0700, "David Farber"
<farberbe...@aol.com> wrote:

>I actually did a bit more research after my last post to make sure I was
>getting the correct part. This place lists the tire as compatible with the
>CS80 model so I purchased it there.
>http://www.mysewingmachineparts.com/sewing-machine-bobbin-winder-tire-ring-x55238051-baby-lock-brother/

Ok. That should work.

The fun part will be getting the sticky rubber goo off the plastic
spindle. Have your latex gloves and noxious solvents handy.

>I really don't expect Brother, like many other companies, to make it easier
>for you to buy one small part off of an entire assembly when it can make
>more money selling the whole thing.

Actually, they don't want to sell any parts. Most of the parts
available come from 3rd part aftermarket vendors, that either reverse
engineer the parts, or have some manner of arrangement with the
factory. Some countries require manufacturers to provide parts for
anywhere between 5-10 years (such as 10 years for autos in the USA),
which is what inspired this practice.

Incidentally, I managed to find the one Brother sewing machine that
lacked a downloadable manual from their web pile (XL2030). So, I sent
them an email asking for a copy and was rewarded with a free printed
original in the mail. I have access to a very fast Canon document
scanner and plan to scan the manual eventually.
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/CanonImageRunner5000.wmv> (4.1MB)
Notice that it's scanning both sides of each page.

>This has been going on in the service
>industry since the beginning of time.

Yep. However, I've also seen it from the manufacturers point of view.
It's much easier and more profitable to setup a board exchange
program, than to sell individual parts. Brother is not going to get
rich selling $3 rubber tires.

Incidentally, I once calculated what it cost my employer to ship an
empty box. That's a product that costs zero to make, but which still
has to carry the overhead such as purchasing, inventory control,
documentation, billing, shipping, etc. That was $75 in about 1980.
Probably much more today.

>I don't consider myself being really
>cheap.

I consider myself very cheap. If a used rubber tire were available, I
would buy it.

>I consider it being smart. Speaking of cheap, how cheap was it of
>Brother to use a tire like that in the first place?

I haven't bought O-rings and similar parts for many years, but I do
recall paying about 2 cents each for something similar in quantities
of 1,000.

[N_Cook]

David Farber <farberbe...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:jo8vil$ol$1...@dont-email.me...

About 2 weeks ago an audio cassette recorder returned for repair. It was
made in 1986 and I repaired it about 15 years ago using a 2 cents O ring,
stretched onto the take-up spool pulley. Not bad for about 3 hours use a
day, someone who never moved away from cassettes . That O ring had
eventually split but no gooey mess, replacement one a bit thicker and a bit
larger diameter

[Winston]

N_Cook wrote:

(...)

> About 2 weeks ago an audio cassette recorder returned for repair. It was
> made in 1986 and I repaired it about 15 years ago using a 2 cents O ring,
> stretched onto the take-up spool pulley. Not bad for about 3 hours use a
> day, someone who never moved away from cassettes . That O ring had
> eventually split but no gooey mess, replacement one a bit thicker and a bit
> larger diameter

I repaired 16 mm motion picture projectors in my yout.
A *very common* problem was transmogrification of the
neoprene drive wheels and belts into a gooey mess.

A quick replacement, but a slow cleanup first. :)

--Winston

[David Farber]

When I first started out in the business (mid 1970's), I had an Ampex reel
to reel machine come in for repair. Probably this exact model:
www.ebay.com/itm/AMPEX-REEL-TO-REEL-700-1400-SERIES-ROUND-DRIVE-BELTS-/261017952610
I opened it up and I had to ask my boss what the gooey black stuff was
inside the machine. To me, it looked like somebody had spilled sludgy motor
oil into it. None of the belts were recognizable. I soon learned to stay
away from those Ampex machines as every one of them had the same problem.

[Cydrome Leader]

did you work for NASA or some other goverment organization?

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 13 May 2012 04:29:28 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
<pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

>Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>> Incidentally, I once calculated what it cost my employer to ship an
>> empty box. That's a product that costs zero to make, but which still
>> has to carry the overhead such as purchasing, inventory control,
>> documentation, billing, shipping, etc. That was $75 in about 1980.
>> Probably much more today.

>did you work for NASA or some other goverment organization?

I usually ignore one line cute remarks, but since this is a topic that
interests me, I'll make an exception here.

No. I have never worked for the govermint. I did that calculation
working for Intech Inc, in Santa Clara CA, for the marine radio
division.

If you have a problem with my numbers, try doing the calculation
backwards. Take a publicly traded company (so that the numbers are
available), and obtain a number for how much they spend each year on
everything. Then, multiply their approximate parts and labor costs
times the number of units shipped in the same time period. The
difference is the selling price plus overhead, which must be paid by
the customer. Assume break even and zero taxes to keep things simple.
Divide by the number of units shipped and you have the cost of
shipping an empty box with zero value contents.

Yet another way is to use a rule of thumb. Conventional wisdom has it
that in order for a company to grow, it has to sell its products at
about 5 times the cost of parts and labor. That makes the parts and
labor only 20% of the selling price, with the rest going to overhead,
taxes, growth, dividends, and the executive retirement plan.
Therefore, the cost of shipping an empty box would be the 80% of the
average product selling price.

Incidentally, iSuppli has done the difficult part for many products.
For example, the cost of manufacture for the Amazon Kindle Fire is
about $202.
<http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/Amazon-Kindle-Fire-Costs-$201-70-to-Manufacture.aspx>
Amazon sells it at roughly cost. No clue what they're thinking.

[Cydrome Leader]

Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2012 04:29:28 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
> <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
>
>>Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>>> Incidentally, I once calculated what it cost my employer to ship an
>>> empty box. That's a product that costs zero to make, but which still
>>> has to carry the overhead such as purchasing, inventory control,
>>> documentation, billing, shipping, etc. That was $75 in about 1980.
>>> Probably much more today.
>
>>did you work for NASA or some other goverment organization?
>
> I usually ignore one line cute remarks, but since this is a topic that
> interests me, I'll make an exception here.
>
> No. I have never worked for the govermint. I did that calculation
> working for Intech Inc, in Santa Clara CA, for the marine radio
> division.
>
> If you have a problem with my numbers, try doing the calculation
> backwards. Take a publicly traded company (so that the numbers are
> available), and obtain a number for how much they spend each year on
> everything. Then, multiply their approximate parts and labor costs
> times the number of units shipped in the same time period. The
> difference is the selling price plus overhead, which must be paid by
> the customer. Assume break even and zero taxes to keep things simple.
> Divide by the number of units shipped and you have the cost of
> shipping an empty box with zero value contents.

This math is as nonsense as those "calculators" from places that do
backups and datarecovery where you type in numbers and they claim you lose
10% of your annual revenue per minute your computers are down or whatever.

The only way it costs $75 to ship a box is if you factor in your 100
million dollar failed SAP installation as part of your "billing costS" or
whatever, and then blame the box for the expense.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Mon, 14 May 2012 06:01:24 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
<pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

>This math is as nonsense as those "calculators" from places that do
>backups and datarecovery where you type in numbers and they claim you lose
>10% of your annual revenue per minute your computers are down or whatever.

That might be a stretch, but the real numbers are fairly close. If
the sales organization can't take orders for a day, that business will
probably go to their competition. Assuming 7x24 or about 350 working
days per year, the loss of one day sales is 1/350 the of the gross, or
about 0.3% The actual losses will be higher due to repair/recovery
costs, overtime to recover, and loss of reputation. The last is
fairly significant. I know of one shopping web site that went dark
for only about 3 hours. However, there was a dramatic drop in
subsequent sales for about a month due to rumors that the company had
gone out of business because their web site was down. My guess is
about 1% overall loss for a days downtime.

>The only way it costs $75 to ship a box is if you factor in your 100
>million dollar failed SAP installation as part of your "billing costS" or
>whatever, and then blame the box for the expense.

I don't think anyone would be interested in my 30 year old
calculations. Also, I can't disclose number for current customers
because of confidentiality requirements. Sorry(tm).

Perhaps the 16GB iPhone 4S would be a suitable example. It costs
about $200 to manufacture, but sells retail for $500 from various
vendors, or $650 from Verizon. Using the $500 sales price, the cost
of shipping an empty iphone box is:
$500 - $200 = $300
The $300 pays for everything EXCEPT the product. For Verizon, 3.25
times cost is rather low for electronics. 4.0 to 4.5 times cost is
more typical.

The $75 per empty box is problematic, but the reason is not obvious.
If a company shipped just one product, the $75 would be valid and
useful. However, if the company shipped a wide variety of products,
some expensive, and others low cost, the overhead costs would be
distributed unevenly among the various products and quantities. It
would not be possible to assign a single "empty box" price tag to a
single product. It could be expressed as a percentage of selling
price (markup), but is usually more complexicated, having a fixed cost
for fixed overhead, and a variable cost that depends on the product
cost to manufacture. My $75 figure was mostly the fixed overhead,
that was not attached to any particular product.

[Cydrome Leader]

Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2012 06:01:24 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
> <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
>
>>This math is as nonsense as those "calculators" from places that do
>>backups and datarecovery where you type in numbers and they claim you lose
>>10% of your annual revenue per minute your computers are down or whatever.
>
> That might be a stretch, but the real numbers are fairly close. If
> the sales organization can't take orders for a day, that business will
> probably go to their competition. Assuming 7x24 or about 350 working
> days per year, the loss of one day sales is 1/350 the of the gross, or
> about 0.3% The actual losses will be higher due to repair/recovery
> costs, overtime to recover, and loss of reputation. The last is
> fairly significant. I know of one shopping web site that went dark
> for only about 3 hours. However, there was a dramatic drop in
> subsequent sales for about a month due to rumors that the company had
> gone out of business because their web site was down. My guess is
> about 1% overall loss for a days downtime.

this would sound more reasonable, but it all depends on what the business
does. Airlines barely function when their computers are running, shut them
all off and they they just don't work at all.

If your business is a tuckpointing company, it's doubyful you'd even know
if your own website was down.

>>The only way it costs $75 to ship a box is if you factor in your 100
>>million dollar failed SAP installation as part of your "billing costS" or
>>whatever, and then blame the box for the expense.
>
> I don't think anyone would be interested in my 30 year old
> calculations. Also, I can't disclose number for current customers
> because of confidentiality requirements. Sorry(tm).
>
> Perhaps the 16GB iPhone 4S would be a suitable example. It costs
> about $200 to manufacture, but sells retail for $500 from various
> vendors, or $650 from Verizon. Using the $500 sales price, the cost
> of shipping an empty iphone box is:
> $500 - $200 = $300
> The $300 pays for everything EXCEPT the product. For Verizon, 3.25
> times cost is rather low for electronics. 4.0 to 4.5 times cost is
> more typical.

this has to be a joke. If you're not from NASA, it's got to be lehman
brothers, enron or arthur anderson to say with a straight face that it
costs $300 to ship an iphone because the retail price is $500 and the
phone costs $200 to make.

[David Farber]

The new tire arrived and it fit perfectly. The dimensions of the unmounted
tire are:

16.5mm o.d.
9.8mm i.d.
3.7mm tire thickness

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Mon, 14 May 2012 17:25:57 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader

<pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

>Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 May 2012 06:01:24 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader

>> Perhaps the 16GB iPhone 4S would be a suitable example. It costs
>> about $200 to manufacture, but sells retail for $500 from various
>> vendors, or $650 from Verizon. Using the $500 sales price, the cost
>> of shipping an empty iphone box is:
>> $500 - $200 = $300
>> The $300 pays for everything EXCEPT the product. For Verizon, 3.25
>> times cost is rather low for electronics. 4.0 to 4.5 times cost is
>> more typical.

>this has to be a joke. If you're not from NASA, it's got to be lehman
>brothers, enron or arthur anderson to say with a straight face that it
>costs $300 to ship an iphone because the retail price is $500 and the
>phone costs $200 to make.

Quite real. The $300 difference between the retail price and the cost
from Apple is a conglomeration of profit and expenses. The profits to
Verizon and its stockholders. The expenses are a mixed bag of
executive compensation, sales incentives, advertising, taxes,
packaging, shipping, distribution, documentation, support, shrinkage,
returns, repairs, political contributions, debt retirement, assorted
bribes, charitable contributions, publicity, lavish product
announcement parties, slush funds, ad absurdium. If you think you can
sell a smartphone with less overhead, you're welcome to try. If you
need reassurance, just take any company and estimate the number of
employees that do NOT directly contribute to the production of the
product. People that do design, engineering, bookkeeping, support,
shipping, warehousing, etc. Now, try to run a company without them.
(yes, I know you can outsource or virtualize an entire company).



--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com je...@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

[Cydrome Leader]

So again, stating it costs $75 or $300 to ship an empty box is just pure
bullshit.

[plastic....@gmail.com]

This is awesome! I have a similar problem with my brother cs-80 and it is great to find this. Thank you so much, this is super helpful. I just ordered a new tire ring for my machine, which also melted, now I'm just waiting for it to arrive. :)