I have to agree that Gilmore looms are terrific gems.....I own a 32" 8
shaft, non-folding model built in 1968 and it is one of my
treasures.......however, I would not recommend more than an occasional rug
be woven on these looms....they are simply not heavy enough to withstand the
rigors of rug weaving.....transparencies, yes......weft faced weaves yes,
but heavy duty rug weaving....no.......you, the finished product and the
loom, will be better off using a very heavy (large framing members and
extreme weight to the loom itself!) CM or CB loom for rug weaving.
The loom is extremely well built, but simply was not designed to be a rug
weaving loom. They lack the weight necessary to make the loom stay put
while weaving. While they do indeed have a good ratchet and pawl brake
system, it is not nearly as heavy and sturdy as that found on looms designed
to weave rugs. The tension required to weave a well executed rug can
actually pull the mortise and tenon joints on the Gilmore loom apart.....I
have personal experience with this folks.......and a rug woven on these
looms simply is not as high a quality as those woven on a loom more suitable
to the purpose.......I *have* woven the occasional rug on my Gilmore....no
more however, as I can see and feel the difference in the rugs I weave on my
CM loom.......I use my Gilmore for weaving everything, *except*
rugs......and would recommend anyone truly wanting to weave rugs or heavy
tapestry type fabrics consider a loom designed for that purpose......
Not knocking, but rather endorsing Gilmore looms, as long as they are used
as they were intended to be used......

Su Butler :-) apbutler@...
'My mother said to me, "If you become a soldier, you'll be a general, if you
become a monk you'll end up as the pope." Instead, I became a painter and
wound up as Picasso.' - Pablo Picasso

I have to agree that Gilmore looms are terrific gems.....I own a 32" 8
shaft, non-folding model built in 1968 and it is one of my
treasures.......however, I would not recommend more than an occasional rug
be woven on these looms....they are simply not heavy enough to withstand the
rigors of rug weaving.....

Maybe the 32" is different., but my 46" Gilmore is built like the
proverbial brick out house. I wouldn't want to have the loom on slick
floors and try to make very many rugs without attaching it to the floor. I
still say it would last and last and last for rug beating.

I do agree with Su that really heavy framing, such as on the Oxaback along
with its heavy overhead beater, would be even better for rugs. That loom,
however is not to be considered low profile under any circumstances.

Francie

everybody i ever knew who had a gilmore loved it. however, everytime i have woven on one, i wished i hadnt. the shed is so shallow because of that lovely low profile that i had the most painful hangnails. i tried handlotion and gloves with fingertips cut out etc.
beautiful woodwork. nice looking to sit in main room of house etc. but very painful hands for me for week or so after weaving on one