"64 to the inch"

[das]

Nick, very interesting stuff. Sadly I've not heard anything about this. Please keep us posted. Maybe others here have direct experience with US bison leather?

[nickb1]

It's a struggle to get good information. Here's something I stumbled on today about the UK. I assume they are referring to Bakers tannery: https://sustainablefoodtrust.org/articl ... h-leather/

[carsten]

Very interesting. I wonder if maybe also gender plays a role for the leather quality. Before tractors were generally available, oxen were used for plowing, pulling heavy loads etc., so in the past the fraction of male born leather was maybe larger than today - or at least more leather was available from full grown adult oxen or bulls.

Well, of course I don´t mean to say that bearing cettle and producing milk is an easy job and leaves a lot of time for skin care - but could it be that maybe oxen gave different hides having slightly different properties? In this case the people may have wanted to track the leather origin during the tanning process. In Garsaults book "the art of the shoemaker", translated by @das it says that oxhide was used for tough soles - so I assume gender was an issue looked into back then. Is it still something attention is paid to today?

[nickb1]

Nick, very interesting stuff. Sadly I've not heard anything about this. Please keep us posted. Maybe others here have direct experience with US bison leather?

Here's keeping folks posted ... I just had an email from Walker Kehrer of 'Thousand Hills Ranch' who raises the animals that provide the leather for Timerbland's 'Earthkeeper' boots using regenerative agriculture (specifically 'holistic planned grazing'). I'd asked him how the leather compares. He says the following:

>I am not well versed in the details in the differences between conventional and regenerative hides but all of the feedback I have heard is that they are much higher quality hides than the traditional leather of today. I don’t have any numbers I can use but I am sure damage from pests and barb wire is a lot less with regenerative hides. I am also sure the fibre density is better due to their healthier lifestyle but again don’t have hard numbers.

What would it take to get this into the general supply chain, rather than being the niche preserve of a particular brand? And how to get some analysis done of the leather? I've asked if any swatches are available. A side by side comparison with Timberland's normal leather would be very interesting, then there is the question of what the characteristics are of the other splits of these hides.

[das]

While there's been a lot of lively discussion here on spi (stitches per inch), this gem on the speed of hand-closing just surfaced (thanks to the Colonial Williamsburg Shoemaking Program) . From: 'The Boys’ Book Of Trades And The Tools Used In Them', printed in 1866; the anonymous author listed only as “One Of The Authors Of ‘England’s Workshops.’” Page 237: a proficient closer stabbing at the pitch of twenty spi should be able to do 15 inches (300 stitches) in 30 minutes, or 50 stitches every 5 minutes:

1866 Closing Speed.JPG

Here a link to the Google book: https://books.google.com/books?id=a7RGA ... rs&f=false

[PhilipB1]

@das Nowadays the upper seams are glued before the closing stitch work is done. How did they hold the seams together in the old days when closing at 10 stitches a minute?

[das]

@PhilipB1 As far as I know the uppers were merely held together/in position in a wooden "clam".

[nickb1]

As far as I know the uppers were merely held together/in position in a wooden "clam".

@das do you know if anything different, either equipment or technique, was used for the closing the rounded parts, e.g. closing the topline at the back of the heel with a stabbed seam, I think it would be awkward to squish that in the flat jaws of a saddler's clam. Thanks.

[das]

Ah, shoemakers' clams are much narrower in the jaws than saddlers.

[nickb1]

Ah, shoemakers' clams are much narrower in the jaws than saddlers.

@das, how narrow is a shoemaker's clam? I've searched HCC and can't find anything on the dimensions, nor does it seem to be covered in Salaman (p242 on) where they are described as 3 inches wide but with an insert for working with narrow bands. If it's just a case of reducing the width across the top, I guess I could simply modify the clam I have acquired which has the Salaman dimensions. If they need to be thinner at the top as well I guess it could be more difficult.
Thanks.

[das]

@nickb1 Stick with Salaman, three inches with a narrower insert should be fine. I've got, or had, one antique clam that was maybe 2" wide at the jaws, but most of the old ones are in the 3" range, the wider jawed, and certainly the longer/taller ones that want to lean over onto one thigh are saddlers/harnessmakers. Shoemakers clams stand straight up from the floor, are usually sprung closed (fastened to a block of wood at the bottom), and just below the top of the jaws the "staves" thin down to maybe 1/4" - 3/8" thickness, leaving a lot more open void between the "staves" to admit of bulkier, irregularly-shaped work with no lever or tightening screw/bolt going across.

[nickb1]

@das thanks, I measured them and they are only actually 2 3/4" across, narrowing to 2 1/2" at the top. These are from Abbey who would traditionally have supplied for saddlers mainly. I wonder if they have become narrower because of a decline in traditional saddlery compared to the handsewn "fancy goods" market, for which wide jaws may be a hindrance? In any case, I think if I need narrower I can make a device to slot in, out of some (cheap) curved wooden spatulas, like a clamp within a clamp. They are on the tall side though.

[das]

@nickb1 Sounds like you're good to go then. The height all depends on the low bench or stool you sit on to work. Salaman's Fig. 9:19 and 9:20 look a wee bit too high for my taste, but try Abbey's out before you fetch your saw, LOL.

[nickb1]

@nickb1 Sounds like you're good to go then. The height all depends on the low bench or stool you sit on to work. Salaman's Fig. 9:19 and 9:20 look a wee bit too high for my taste, but try Abbey's out before you fetch your saw, LOL.

@das what would you recommend for frequency of stitches for stabbed seams on modern chrome-tanned leather uppers, 1.1-1.2mm thick, with a round awl 1.2-1.5mm diameter and 18/3 thread? I think I could do around 12 spi. A few more might look better but I don't want to compromise things by over-perforating the leather. I see others on HCC had hand stitched at a much higher rate (Duncan McHarg) but were using better (denser) leather like Kangaroo...

[das]

@nickb1 I'd do test-closing, stabbing on layers of scrap of the exact leathers you plan to use and see where it's cut-through threshold really is. If it'll take 12 spi, try 14 and see. If it takes 14, try 16, etc. The lining leather might cut through before the fashion layer, or visa versa.

[nickb1]

@das makes sense, thanks. I can see that uppers and linings which seem no denser-fibred than mine are closed at 16 spi on sewing machines, but both the thread and needles seem very thin.

[das]

Also, sewing machines make a lock stitch, which is not pulled-in as tightly as a hand stitch. Just see what the "breaking point" of your leathers is to cut through are and go from there.

[dw]

what would you recommend for frequency of stitches for stabbed seams on modern chrome-tanned leather uppers, 1.1-1.2mm thick, with a round awl 1.2-1.5mm diameter and 18/3 thread? I think I could do around 12 spi. A few more might look better but I don't want to compromise things by over-perforating the leather.

Maybe totally off base and may be not entirely historically correct (if that's what you're aiming for) but have you ever wondered why there is such a plethora of different leather points among sewing machine needles?

Aside from the ability to penetrate hard leathers, some of it is to facilitate closer stitches. If, for instance you could flatten your round point awl to a blade shape and use it perpendicular to the line of sewing (like using a square awl on welt) you would be able to crowd more stitches into any given length without running the risk of weakening the leather than if you use it running in line with the 'line of sewing.'

Also, and a big factor in determining the configuration of a leather point...and often a consideration for the end user...is that some points leave the stitches proud of the surface and some let the thread lay flat.

Additionally, esp. when doing this by hand, the point...whether it be a machine needle or an awl...has a big influence in how the thread lays and how easy it is to control the appearance of each individual stitch relative to its neighbors. For instance, a round point awl or needle will keep the stitches proud and make it harder to achieve a consistent 'rope' effect.

[nickb1]

Aside from the ability to penetrate hard leathers, some of it is to facilitate closer stitches. If, for instance you could flatten your round point awl to a blade shape and use it perpendicular to the line of sewing (like using a square awl on welt) you would be able to crowd more stitches into any given length without running the risk of weakening the leather than if you use it running in line with the 'line of sewing.'
...
Additionally, esp. when doing this by hand, the point...whether it be a machine needle or an awl...has a big influence in how the thread lays and how easy it is to control the appearance of each individual stitch relative to its neighbors. For instance, a round point awl or needle will keep the stitches proud and make it harder to achieve a consistent 'rope' effect.

thanks @dw. I was intending to use a round profile awl because it only minimally cuts the leather, not because of historical authenticity primarily. Though I wonder if that was why round awls were used. (Perhaps @das can shed some light on that?) Are you saying that a "diamond" or "olive" profile awl would make life easier, stitching at high enough spi not to look crude, without at all compromising the strength of any stabbed seam?
I guess if I flattened the sides of the round awl without changing the point I would change the shape of the leather being displaced around the hole without cutting any more leather, making a /// pattern typical of saddle stitching outside of shoemaking. Hard to do that without changing the tip though.

[dw]

I don't do much hand sewing on uppers, but @das gave me some awls years ago that were purportedly used for sewing uppers, IIRC. They were essentially very fine, miniature sewing awls--curved and flat bladed. I have use them (or actually something very similar) for round closing.

Now, having established that, I know a little something about machine closing. Most of my work is done at 14-16spi. Yes, the thread is thin and yes, the needle is very small in diameter. But that's probably the fundamental difference between hand sewing and machine sewing in terms of appearance, at any rate. I think with a smaller needle and the correspondingly appropriate thread, frequencies of 22spi could be achieved without 'postage stamping' the leather.

I suspect that the thickness of the awl and the thread are the critical limiters for hand sewing, as well. 'Stabbing' is, mechanically. no different than sewing welt (inseaming) or stitching outsoles. I think one could use a large, common sewing awl as a model to make an awl that will do more refined work. Maybe make it out of a fine needle such as is used in dressmaking.

As for thread...silk is the the right way to go, IMO, and depending on the quality and the way it is spun, maybe even as few as one strand.

Again, I'm not an expert in hand sewing but the principles are not unfathomable nor that hard to implement. After all, at one point in time the Elder Shoe Gods did 64 to the inch, by hand and by eye, on uppers as well as on outsoles.

[nickb1]

Thanks @dw. I've discussed awls a bit with @das and IIRC he says the curved ones like mini welting awls are only for edge closing, not stabbing. Though it seems historically that edge closing may have been the most common form of closing at least before linings came in. I have a round awl, 1.2-1.5 mm in diameter at the business end depending how far you drive it. I'm aware that there are others on the market with various kinds of flat profile, but I think I don't want to make slits if I can make do with minimal holes. If it proves too hard to control the lie, which I can do at 8-10 spi at the moment, perhaps I could get a flatter one and make it more of a point at the tip..?

[dw]

I am sure @das knows more about it than I do. And I'm sure that if you follow his advice, you'll do fine. But of course, the same principles apply to straight awls and stabbing--smaller, finer, maybe a bladed tip, making your own, etc.. I mentioned small sewing awls because that's what I have.

And i mention all of this simply to point out that you're not limited to what is available commercially. Shoemakers have been making their own tools time-out-of-mind.

And to draw the discussion back to the concept of 64-to-the-inch....if only for the perspective.

[nickb1]

you're not limited to what is available commercially. Shoemakers have been making their own tools time-out-of-mind.

For sure. Another thing I'm considering is using an embroidery needle in a pin vice. Wouldn't cost anything really to modify to a blade shape. Edit: actually I see you suggest this above ... :-)

[das]

The only (shoe) awl blades I've seen for closing are either: 1) curved closing awls of various flavors (miniature and micro-mini curved versions of welt sewing awls) oval section with a sharpened "spoon" like point that cuts, and 2) stabbing awls, straight with a round point, or very occasionally an mild oval section sharpened point. Since I think you're trying to stab stitch uppers to emulate machine stitches, for finer spi I'd try the embroidery needle in the pin vice myself. A round hole will always be much stronger against cutting through between holes than any slit, or the various hole shapes, "twist", "wedge", "reverse twist", "tri(angle) point", etc. sewing machine needles make, but experiment. No harm in that.

[dw]

I have mounted embroidery needles in a pin vice and as long as you don't expose so much needle that it can flex, it seems to work very well. And yes, that is what I had in mind when I suggested making your own.

The one thing I would say...not that it isn't 'solvable'...is again, that controlling the lie of individual stitches becomes somewhat more problematic with the round point. and often, esp. if your thread is waxed, correcting a stitch that is askew is near-as-nevermind impossible.

I was never taught the nuances of controlling the lie of the stitch and had to more or less teach myself. So, the way I do it is a little bit tedious.

If it were me I'd flatten the end of the embroidery needle, sharpen it and make the 'holes'/cuts perpendicular to the line of sewing. Like this: ||||| Yes, a 'piercing' will be strongest but 'cuts' aren't gonna be any wider than the width of the embroidery needle (which shouldn't be that much of a concern) and they'll be directly in opposition to the 'pull' of the stitches. So how much stronger, is perhaps open to debate.

But hey, again, heed the man who has done it. I can't claim any real authority in this regard.--just an opinion. The good thing is that you can make a series of test runs.