The Case Against Ratchet Brakes

First and foremost, I am not a production weaver. 

While I weave a great deal, at least ninety-five percent of what I produce are gifts. The remaining five percent, if that, we use in our home. 

However, my time is precious to me. What time I devote to weaving is finite. Thus, it is important to me that time is spent wisely and efficiently*. 

Last week, I picked up my fourth full-size Macomber in Louisiana and brought her home. She is 40" wide with six harnesses and eight treadles. She has a sectional beam with a ratchet brake. 

By comparison, I have outfitted each of the other three looms with a plain beam and a sectional beam. They all have friction/tension brakes, which are my preference. 

All three of the other looms are set up exactly the same way, which allows me to move from one loom to another without having to adjust or adapt to any differences. 

It may not seem like a huge thing, but if you are accustomed to driving a compact car with automatic transmission, then move to driving a jeep with standard transmission, there will be a difference in how you drive, negotiate parking, etc. You may know well how to drive both, but when you switch vehicles, it takes some time and quite a few miles to adjust. 

With the new-to-me loom, I knew with certainty there were a few things I absolutely needed to do:

• Replace the cloth beam apron with new canvas and rods because the existing ones were rusty and smelly.
• Add a lamm depressor.
• Add two more harnesses and treadles to make her 8 shaft and 10 treadle.

The thing I thought I could live with, but five minutes after bringing her home, I changed my mind:

• Switch out the flat steel heddles for inserted eye heddles.

The thing I thought I could live with, but ten minutes of weaving on her, I changed my mind:

• Trading out the ratchet brake for a tension brake.

The single best thing ratchet brakes have going for them is that they absolutely do not slip. Period. 

In my book, that is the only thing ratchet brakes have going for them. 

This is the ratchet brake on Evangeline:

These are the tension brakes on two of my smaller Macomber looms:

Tension brakes can be adjusted where they will not slip, as well. However, for full disclosure, tension brakes are slightly more finicky and do take time to get to know and learn how to adjust it per one's satisfaction. Once this is done, I have not had any issues with the tension brakes on my looms.

These are the reasons I am not a fan of ratchet brakes:

Backlash. 

If one does not release the tension on the cloth beam prior to engaging the brake release, the back beam will spin and release the carefully wound warp in an unholy mess. Ask me how I know. I lost about $80 in linen for a wool rug one time. I may still be bitter...

Lack of precision. 

On this newly acquired loom, she has approximately twelve-inches between the breast beam and the beater. Because of the race on the beater, I need a little over 2-inches of fabric extending over the breast beam toward the loom for the beater to reach the loom. Also, I need at least 3-inches between the fabric and the beater for an adequate shed to throw the shuttle. Therefore, I have about 7-inches of  area between the breast beam and beater to weave. 

With a tension brake, I can position the end of the fabric exactly where I want it when I advance the cloth, which is 2.75-inches in front of the breast beam.

Unfortunately, the ratchet (this is noted as #1 on the top photo) has teeth, which are 2-inches apart. This means the dog (#2 in the top photo) engages to prevent the beam from turning every 2-inches.

Two inches does not sound like much, unless your total weavable area is roughly 7-inches.

On Evangeline, the ratchet catches at the 2.25-inch mark. When I beat, it leaves a half-inch gap between the last pick prior to advancing the cloth and the first pick once the cloth has been advanced. 

Unacceptable. 

Once releasing the tension on the cloth beam and taking up the slack by rewinding onto the warp beam, my fabric line moves to 4.25" in front of the breast beam before the ratchet next catches. 

That is two solid inches of lost weaving area. 

That may not sound like much, but out of a total weaving area of only 7-inches, that is 28.57%.

In other words, this means I must advance the cloth almost 30% (I rounded up) more frequently than I would have to with a tension brake. 

Time Consuming. 

Ratchet brakes require more steps and consume more time to use than friction brakes.

On the three looms outfitted with tension brakes, it takes two steps to advance the cloth:

1. Engage the brake release; and 
2. Advance the cloth.

The ratchet brake requires the following:

1. Release tension on the warp from the cloth beam to prevent backspin;
2. Engage the brake release;
3. Advance cloth beam;
4. Realize the fabric has advanced too far, get up to rewind the warp back onto the rear beam; and
5. Optional: Curse.

Bottom line: The ratchet brake eats up far more of my time than the friction brake because I have to advance the cloth 30% more frequently and each time I advance, it requires more steps and more time. Time I would rather spend actually weaving.

Disclaimer: For come-a-longs, ratchet tie downs, and on rigid heddle looms, ratchets are the way to go. This opinion is restricted solely to Macomber floor looms of which I have the most experience.  

*I make no attempt to assert weaving tea and bath towels, bed coverlets, or baby blankets rather than buying them is more cost effective or efficient in any sense of the word. I weave because I enjoy it.