|
Thread Number: 19015
Just bought a Royal 880 |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 209605 , Reply# 1 12/11/2012 at 20:38 (4,146 days old) by kirbykid (Horseheads,New York 14845) | ||
|
i wanted it a bit but i dont have any money really. well any money that i can spend. | ||
| Post# 209608 , Reply# 2 12/11/2012 at 21:01 (4,146 days old) by Nubz3760 () | ||
|
I had second thoughts after i bid (money wise), but twas too late. I really expected to be outbid, i must have paid too much. Oh well, its my xmas present :-) | ||
| Post# 209625 , Reply# 3 12/11/2012 at 22:30 (4,146 days old) by kirbykid (Horseheads,New York 14845) | ||
|
if you really dont want it, ill take it. if you talk to the seller you might be able to arange that i pick it up and pay cash | ||
| Post# 209633 , Reply# 5 12/11/2012 at 23:28 (4,146 days old) by kirbykid (Horseheads,New York 14845) | ||
|
ok thanks. | ||
Post# 209634 , Reply# 6 12/12/2012 at 00:34 (4,146 days old) by KirbyClassicIII  (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 209635 , Reply# 7 12/12/2012 at 00:35 (4,146 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
The 1984 Royal 880 I Thought of Bidding On | ||
| Post# 209645 , Reply# 8 12/12/2012 at 01:40 (4,146 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
Indeed it is. now that I look at that headlight, this machine may be missing the cover for the deodorizer chamber | ||
|
Post# 209651 , Reply# 9 12/12/2012 at 02:14 (4,146 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
1988 Stark Deluxe 5000NA
Nick,
Just for curiosity's sake, here is a picture of my 1988 Stark Deluxe 5000NA (serial #L87B001599). It is based on the Royal 889. This machine has a 6.0 amp motor. Also for your curiosity, I have a video of this machine running. Like with your 801 videos, the belt was going out on it (it's been replaced since), hence the higher-pitched motor sound. ~Ben CLICK HERE TO GO TO KirbyClassicIII's LINK 
| ||
| Post# 209654 , Reply# 10 12/12/2012 at 02:26 (4,146 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
I believe I have seen that video. probably every royal video on youtube lol. you you have any experience with the 4.5 amp royals? Im very curious on the improvement over my 801 which is a quiet little 3 amp | ||
| Post# 209655 , Reply# 11 12/12/2012 at 02:28 (4,146 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
is that a 9100 I spy on the right? | ||
|
Post# 209658 , Reply# 12 12/12/2012 at 02:36 (4,146 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
Nick,
No, it's a 6103 because it's no headlight (it does have the same bag as the 9100; the 9100 would have the same flip-top headlight and deodorizer as the 5000NA and the 880). Like the 5000NA, it also has a 6.0 amp motor (the 9100 has the 7.0 amp motor), but the impeller fan in it has nine blades instead of six. ~Ben | ||
|
Post# 209659 , Reply# 13 12/12/2012 at 02:40 (4,146 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
Nick,
About those 4.5 amp motors, they are average in power if you line it up between the 3.0 amp and the 5.4, 6.0 and 7.0 amp machines. Perhaps you may have seen this video of a 1982 Royal 608 Heavy Duty Commercial which uses the same 4.5 amp motor as the Stark 880 you just won. This video is a modified version of Chase Hines's video. ~Ben CLICK HERE TO GO TO KirbyClassicIII's LINK | ||
| Post# 209660 , Reply# 14 12/12/2012 at 02:42 (4,146 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
oh, I was gonna say.. the 9100 is my dream dtd royal. nine blade fan, most powerful without being excessively loud, no drop in motor and made in USA! I would consider working something out for a 9100 haha | ||
|
Post# 209706 , Reply# 15 12/12/2012 at 13:09 (4,145 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
Nick,
About the missing deodorizer cover: my 5000NA is also missing that. I wonder what you think of the 1986 Royal 880 by @thevacuumman (also justiphi555 on YouTube) with its 5.4 amp motor? At the beginning, you'll hear that the belt is going out due to the slightly-higher pitch. Getting back to your 880, a replacement headlight is available under part #1880629000 and will work with all Royal metal uprights with lights, including your 801. A replacement belt for your 880 is part #1043260001 which like I said earlier also works with your 801. So, too, does the brush roll, part #2059721000 although you can upgrade to a #2060221000 beater bar brush roll or a #2080221000 double-bristle brush roll. ~Ben CLICK HERE TO GO TO KirbyClassicIII's LINK | ||
|
Post# 209967 , Reply# 17 12/14/2012 at 17:09 (4,143 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
| ||
| Post# 209973 , Reply# 18 12/14/2012 at 17:45 (4,143 days old) by Nubz3760 () | ||
|
Ben, I havent received it yet. It wont be here till next week. I sure hope it doesnt get damaged, At least its all metal so theres less chance. Has anybody purchased a machine from that seller to know how well they pack things? | ||
| Post# 210108 , Reply# 19 12/15/2012 at 22:49 (4,142 days old) by hygiene903 (Galion, OH) | ||
Hey Nick,
Think you'll enjoy the 880 when you get it. I have two of them, one is a Royal 880 made in 1973, and the other is an Electro-Hygiene 880 made between 1966 and 1968. Both look and run great. The Royal 880 is almost identical to your Stark except for the bag, and the Electro-Hygiene has red bumpers, cord, and handle grip with a white bag with red lettering.
Here's a pic of the Royal 880. Jeff 
| ||
| Post# 210109 , Reply# 20 12/15/2012 at 22:50 (4,142 days old) by hygiene903 (Galion, OH) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 210110 , Reply# 21 12/15/2012 at 22:57 (4,142 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
I love the blue color! I cant wait to see mine in person, I like the stark bag better than the royal. | ||
| Post# 210383 , Reply# 22 12/18/2012 at 12:35 (4,139 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
Its in my state! I do hope it arrives tomorrow and undamaged. I cant wait, darn you usps hurry up! | ||
|
Post# 210439 , Reply# 23 12/18/2012 at 18:01 (4,139 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
1985 Stark Royal 880 | ||
| Post# 210446 , Reply# 24 12/18/2012 at 18:43 (4,139 days old) by Nubz3760 () | ||
|
Ben, Where did u pick that up? Please do post pics and maybe a video | ||
|
Post# 210447 , Reply# 25 12/18/2012 at 18:46 (4,139 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
I got it via a local Craigslist auction that Brandon Dorney (animebsd) referred to me from a Facebook post. Seller wanted $50 or B.O. (best offer), and I opted to pay 50% of her asking price, or $25. She accepted it, and now I have this 880.
Here is a picture of the 880 from before I bought it. Will post newer pictures of it later on. ~Ben 
| ||
| Post# 210449 , Reply# 26 12/18/2012 at 19:46 (4,139 days old) by Nubz3760 () | ||
|
I just love that blue Stark bag. Is yours also a 4.5 amp? | ||
|
Post# 210451 , Reply# 27 12/18/2012 at 20:03 (4,139 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
Nick,
Yes, it is 4.5 amps. Upon closer inspection, there was no inner dust bag in it (which would be the Royal "A" bottom-fill type that is NLA from TTI; the Eureka "F/G" type dust bags will work). The metal deodorizer cover is intact. When I originally turned it on, it also sounded like the belt was stretched on it, and the brush roll may need to be replaced since I heard no significant beating down on the carpet. A replacement belt is part #1043260001 and the brush roll is part #2059721000 (single row w/ serviceable sleeve bearings) or #2675221000 (double row w/ ball bearings, no stiffener). The seller also had attachments in the form of two extension wands, but they are useless until I find any Royal hose with a converter on it, and also a floor nozzle, preferably in the same baby blue trim color as the main unit. ~Ben | ||
| Post# 210572 , Reply# 29 12/19/2012 at 23:28 (4,138 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
Its Here! Well it finally came, My Stark Deluxe 880. Heres a few pics 
| ||
| Post# 210573 , Reply# 30 12/19/2012 at 23:30 (4,138 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
and another 
| ||
| Post# 210575 , Reply# 31 12/19/2012 at 23:31 (4,138 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
Father and Son My Royal 801 and Stark Deluxe 880 
| ||
|
Post# 210578 , Reply# 32 12/20/2012 at 00:07 (4,138 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 210582 , Reply# 34 12/20/2012 at 00:33 (4,138 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
Nick,
Several brush rolls were available for the 4.5 amp Royal machines: #2059721000 - single row w/ sleeve bearings #2060221000 - beater bar w/ sleeve bearings (NLA) #2080221000 - double row w/ sleeve bearings (no stiffener) (NLA) #2675221000 - double row w/ ball bearings (no stiffener) Belts #1043260001 - for 5.4 amp and lower machines w/ sleeve bearing brush rolls #1044260001 - for 4.5 amp and higher machines - is also the only recommended belt for the ball bearing brush rolls ~Ben | ||
| Post# 210583 , Reply# 35 12/20/2012 at 00:46 (4,138 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
Ben, Is the belt for ball bearing brushrolls the knurled belt, or is that a different belt altogether? | ||
|
Post# 210585 , Reply# 36 12/20/2012 at 01:23 (4,138 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
| ||
| Post# 210586 , Reply# 37 12/20/2012 at 01:34 (4,138 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
Thats why my 801 belt doesnt seem tight enough!! The vacuum shop sold me the smooth belt for ball bearing brushrolls. I noticed my 880 belt is alot more difficult to get on | ||
|
Post# 210587 , Reply# 38 12/20/2012 at 01:41 (4,138 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
Nick,
To make myself clearer on my lists... BRUSH ROLLS (PRE-1992 MODELS - SQUARE ENDS) #2059721000 - single row w/ sleeve bearings (not for machines rated more than 5.4 amps) #2060221000 - beater bar w/ sleeve bearings (NLA) (not for machines rated more than 5.4 amps) #2080221000 - double row w/ sleeve bearings (no stiffener) (NLA) (not for machines rated less than 4.5 amps) #2088221000 - like #2080221000 but also w/ stiffener (NLA) (for 6.0 and 7.0 amp machines) #2675221000 - double row w/ ball bearings (no stiffener) (not for machines rated less than 5.4 amps) #2675227000 - like #2675221000 but also w/ stiffener (for 6.0 and 7.0 amp machines) (all ball bearing brush rolls must be used with belt #1044260001) BRUSH ROLLS (1992 AND LATER MODELS - HEX ENDS) #2655225000 - double row w/ ball bearings #2673273000 - double row w/ ball bearings and stiffener #2673274000 - like #2673273000 but also with magnet (all three of these rolls must be used with belt #1672260001) ~Ben CLICK HERE TO GO TO KirbyClassicIII's LINK | ||
|
Post# 210591 , Reply# 40 12/20/2012 at 02:14 (4,138 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
Nick,
I should have said there (for #2675221000) "not for machines rated less than 4.5 amps." About the bearings: that is a tough question. I wonder if you direct this question to Mike Rogers of the Henry Company. ~Ben CLICK HERE TO GO TO KirbyClassicIII's LINK | ||
| Post# 210595 , Reply# 41 12/20/2012 at 02:35 (4,138 days old) by nubz3760 () | ||
|
Do you think they could do the work too? haha I dont think im qualified for bearings as skilled as I am. I really want to avoid swapping the motor even though it would be way cheaper/easier | ||
|
Post# 211167 , Reply# 43 12/25/2012 at 20:07 (4,132 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
Here's My 1985 Royal 880 at My Home | ||
|
Post# 211244 , Reply# 45 12/26/2012 at 20:20 (4,131 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
Nick,
If you were to send your thoughts to TTI about your machines, I am pretty sure they will agree with me. In the meantime, if you scroll down to page A58 in the link below, you will explicitly see that all of the ball-bearing-equipped brush rolls, those with the square ends, are only to be used with belt #1044260001. ~Ben CLICK HERE TO GO TO KirbyClassicIII's LINK | ||
|
Post# 226745 , Reply# 47 4/5/2013 at 12:03 (4,031 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon) |
||
|
| ||
| Forum Index: | 
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
