|
Thread Number: 21830
"Carpet Lifting" With Various Uprights |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 244264 8/7/2013 at 14:00 (3,914 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
 Today I made a short video trying 3 different Dirty air upright vacuums lifing up the edge of the carpet and then I tried 4 different clean air upright vacuums lifting up the edge of the carpet, you may or may not be quiet surprised.
The Dirty airs I used were as follows: Hoover Turbolite U4527 - 1989 Hoover Turbopower U2194 - 1985 Hoover Junior U1012 - 1976
The clean airs I used were as follows: Hoover Turbopower 3 U2880 - 1995 SEBO X4 Extra - 2007 Hoover Purepower U3330 - 2001 Electrolux 502S - 1982
They all did quite well I think...Apart from the Purepower, look at the carpet edge being vibrated violently by them! | ||
| Post# 244274 , Reply# 1 8/7/2013 at 14:29 (3,914 days old) by thekirbylover (Warrington, cheshire ) | ||
They all did quite well I think...Apart from the Purepower | ||
| Post# 244276 , Reply# 2 8/7/2013 at 14:32 (3,914 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
Non no, no, no, no | ||
| Post# 244277 , Reply# 3 8/7/2013 at 14:33 (3,914 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
the purepower did quite well, what are you on about? Well, as stated, look at how all but the Purepower seemed to shake the carpet. It may have lifted it well, but it didn't give it the frantic shaking which the Turbopower did. I enjoyed watching this Alex, thank you. | ||
| Post# 244289 , Reply# 4 8/7/2013 at 15:34 (3,914 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 244294 , Reply# 5 8/7/2013 at 16:02 (3,914 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
Did you not see it shaking the carpet violently, it would probably of stuck to the carpet better if the cleaner head didn't lift up in the 3/4 possision at an angle, I think it is cause the chassis is heavy and the handle release catch is on one side, obviously so because it lifts up at an angle it breaks the seal from the carpet.
Rob, I do NOT want a bloddy Hitachi Powerhouse I have no interest in them, I have doubt the Hitachi would of done similar at lifting the carpet accept it probably wouldn't shake the carpet like that. | ||
| Post# 244296 , Reply# 6 8/7/2013 at 16:05 (3,914 days old) by beko1987 (Stokenchurch, United Kingdom) | ||
|
Great video! Activator for the win! Now you need to fix the carpet clamp lol | ||
| Post# 244299 , Reply# 7 8/7/2013 at 16:07 (3,914 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire) | ||
|
Where did the attitude come from?
Its clear as day that the tp2 isnt vibrating the carpet as much as the tp1 is. Hence why we explained that it was not that great when fitted in the tp2 as the motor runs too fast for the brushroll to achieve the brushrolls purpose. Its pointless me videoing the Hitachi as I dont have the same piece of carpet to offer a true comparison - it was merely a tie in topic from previous threads and you provided the evidence to back it up. If you dont like comments about comparisons dont post videos of comparisons. Cant handle a conversation dont join a forum! | ||
| Post# 244303 , Reply# 8 8/7/2013 at 16:21 (3,914 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
Where did the attitude come from? I don't know, for that I am sorry.
It is just like one of those things...URGH here we go again! Hehe. :P
What you have to understand is I may sound serious, but the people who know me know that I am just being flippant and say things in a jokey sort of way.
Obviously I have suddenly come accross the wrong person who does take everything seriously. lol :) | ||
| Post# 244304 , Reply# 9 8/7/2013 at 16:23 (3,914 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
Obviously I have suddenly come accross the wrong person wh | ||
| Post# 244309 , Reply# 11 8/7/2013 at 16:32 (3,914 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
ok, ok... | ||
| Post# 244311 , Reply# 12 8/7/2013 at 16:35 (3,914 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
Forgive me, but I could NOT resist! | ||
| Post# 244312 , Reply# 13 8/7/2013 at 16:35 (3,914 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 244314 , Reply# 14 8/7/2013 at 16:37 (3,914 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
Hello Rob. Well blessed are we for our maturity that we can rise above it all. It is down to us to take control and see the comments for how they are. | ||
| Post# 244316 , Reply# 15 8/7/2013 at 16:49 (3,914 days old) by thekirbylover (Warrington, cheshire ) | ||
|
considering he tagged an insult after the apology Im not qui | ||
| Post# 244325 , Reply# 16 8/7/2013 at 17:29 (3,914 days old) by parwaz786 ( ) | ||
|
No offence, but does that Hoover in reply #12 easily clog up because it has a narrow suction channel compared to a DC01, and that has large ones but I have seen LOADS of Clogged DC01's, Just wondering | ||
| Post# 244328 , Reply# 17 8/7/2013 at 17:37 (3,914 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 244329 , Reply# 18 8/7/2013 at 17:39 (3,914 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
Parwaz, yes it does clog easily, which is why Hoover had to redesign the plastic cover so that it could be taken off without the need of a screwdriver, unlike the previous design. | ||
| Post# 244374 , Reply# 19 8/7/2013 at 23:16 (3,913 days old) by vegassucks () | ||
|
Sebo X4 You can see why some question the Sebo x4's ability to deep clean. Like the Electrolux 502s | ||
| Post# 244393 , Reply# 20 8/8/2013 at 02:22 (3,913 days old) by beko1987 (Stokenchurch, United Kingdom) | ||
|
I'm more impressed with the lark/turbolite! Great performance from such a little machine! | ||
| Post# 244399 , Reply# 21 8/8/2013 at 03:24 (3,913 days old) by vegassucks () | ||
|
Socks? How about some socks for the next video. | ||
| Post# 245097 , Reply# 22 8/10/2013 at 22:42 (3,910 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 245131 , Reply# 23 8/11/2013 at 07:32 (3,910 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
Ryan...
I wasn't trying to “prove“ anything really, I just wanted to show how well different vacuums in my collection grip to the carpet, the agitation bit just got thrown in with the deal, I guess.
It is pretty dissapointing from the Turbopower 2/3, the suction is powerful enough, I think it is because the cleaner head lifts up at an angle when it goes into the 3/4 possision and breaks the seal from the carpet, as the chassis is rather heavy. I LOVE the juniors, I have 4, the U1012 you saw in the video, a Dirtsearche 1354, a refurbished 1346 and a Junior 1334E...the 4 Juniors, the Turbolite and the Kirby Legend ll make up my softbags. :) | ||
| Post# 245133 , Reply# 24 8/11/2013 at 07:55 (3,910 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
I think you should get a Senior BTW - I had one for many years and adored the noise and the cleaning action. Only used it once with tools but wasn't that impressed. I also had a Powerplus upright but found them to be too bulky and a tad ugly- even though that one and the Ranger are all based on the Senior underneath.
Maybe its psychological but I much preferred the light grey colour of the Powerplus as opposed to the awful dark toffee and brown Powerplus. | ||
| Post# 245144 , Reply# 25 8/11/2013 at 09:29 (3,910 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
I have used a Senior at my friends house, it is odd really because it is a cross between the powerplus and the ranger which I think both luck UGLY! I love the 652 in green, what a beauty, I can't wait to get my hands on one of those some day. The hose suction from what I have seen was pretty poor, although, I was quite impressed with the hose suction on the 70's Juniors, I thought it was very powerful for such a small motor.
I couldn't own a Senior Ranger for somewhat obvious reasons but I would love one of those gorgeous 60's, 652 Seniors, they are one of my all time favourites from Hoover. Slightly off topic but I think the Hoover Turbomaster U5096 was the best cleaner Hoover ever produced! | ||
| Post# 245145 , Reply# 26 8/11/2013 at 09:35 (3,910 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 245146 , Reply# 27 8/11/2013 at 09:38 (3,910 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
I, too, would love to own a 652 but since they usually go up to around £60 on eBay auctions, I'm not going to be buying one any time soon.
Bottom line is though, the Senior 652 and Senior Ranger are both the exact same vacuum cleaner just with a different hood fitted, so you can't say one performs worse than the other. As for the looks of it, that is down to personal preference entirely. | ||
| Post# 245148 , Reply# 28 8/11/2013 at 09:39 (3,910 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 245149 , Reply# 29 8/11/2013 at 09:43 (3,910 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
I don't think the Turbomaster was an American design, I imagine it was a British design, they only had two modles of Innovation and the Turbomaster was very similar in design to the Turbopower, it had the same motor, same on-board tools layout and similar bag compartment and bag, plus the Turbomasters were made over here...Sorry, Ryan but I don't buy it.
| ||
| Post# 245150 , Reply# 30 8/11/2013 at 09:52 (3,910 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire) | ||
|
diffrences
The Turbomaster DIDNT have the same
motor it had a more powerful one. Nearly 50% more powerful. It also had 2 belt drive system with one toothed belt whereas the tp had one flat belt. The Turbomaster has a slightly wider suction channel creating better airflow. The turbomaster also had a wider bag fill tube that also meant for better airflow and less blockages. | ||
| Post# 245151 , Reply# 31 8/11/2013 at 10:01 (3,910 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 245152 , Reply# 32 8/11/2013 at 10:04 (3,910 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 245153 , Reply# 33 8/11/2013 at 10:08 (3,910 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 245156 , Reply# 35 8/11/2013 at 10:16 (3,910 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
The suction power difference is largely due to the higher wa
I disagree entirely, Benny. The increase in suction power on the TM, I have always viewed as a combination of higher motor power and larger, more efficient airways with greater surface area.
I have also put a TM Total System and TP standard motor next too eachother. Whilst they're similar, they are actually a different design, especially around the top half of the motor - it's much wider than the TP standard motor. | ||
| Post# 245161 , Reply# 37 8/11/2013 at 10:26 (3,910 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
Yes, Benny, I remember now! | ||
| Post# 245169 , Reply# 38 8/11/2013 at 12:20 (3,910 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Funny, I thought the original Turbomaster came directly from Hoover in the U.S I don't ever recall it being Made in Britain other than having the Queen's approval stamped on it or Made in Britain stickers.
End of the day Alex - it was an original design - and unlike the TP2 and 3 series, I rather liked the fact that there was a soft bag Turbomaster version too. | ||
| Post# 245170 , Reply# 39 8/11/2013 at 12:30 (3,910 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire) | ||
|
Ryan I can see your train of thought - I just had to check the TM cleaners I have here as you rightly mention they dont have 'made in britain' on them.
Im quite sure they were made in cambuslang though. i think it was american in design - considering the elite etc are very similar where tool fitments are concerned. | ||
| Post# 245176 , Reply# 40 8/11/2013 at 13:35 (3,910 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Did I say the that Powerplus and others based on the Senior had less performance, JM? No. Don't add words to the topic please unless I've directly said it.
In terms of the Senior - I must point out one thing I forgot to mention - the hood though tall was enough to get under my parents bed for cleaning whereas the Powerplus got stuck. Where the Powerplus excelled was better edge cleaning - Hoover evidently improved on that design along with the redesigned Hoover Junior U1104. I might source out another U1104 at one point if I can get one - those ones are super machines IMHO. | ||
| Post# 245187 , Reply# 41 8/11/2013 at 13:53 (3,910 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
Rob...I think your right, I am sure they were made in Cambuslang, although, like you say, it doesn't say "made in Britain" but, to be honest, I don't think any of them did and after checking all of my Turbopower 1's and 2's most of them say "made by Hoover plc, Great Britain" which is what your Turbomaster says there.
So, I would say that for deffinate, the Turbomasters where made over here, and wheather they were aimed at the American market or not, they are still British Hoovers.
Regarding the Tool cadys, well, the Turbopower Total Sytems and Turbomaster Total Systems had the same tools layout, apart from the hose end that plugs into the cleaner and the way you convert it was a little different...The Elites did have a similar hose set up too, but the Elites with hoses didn't come out until 91 or 92, I believe, but don't quote me on that, where as our Turbomaster Total Systems and Turbopower Total Systems came out in 87 or 88.
I know I didn't ask, but thanks, Rob, for the picture, that enabled me to confirm my theory. 
| ||
| Post# 245213 , Reply# 42 8/11/2013 at 15:00 (3,910 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Rob has an excellent post on here with all his TMs. Very impressive and yes I must have got confused - the TM was made in Britain and sold in the U.S from the U.K under the "Innovation" tag.
www.vacuumland.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-... | ||
| Post# 245219 , Reply# 43 8/11/2013 at 15:22 (3,910 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
Ryan... | ||
| Post# 245223 , Reply# 44 8/11/2013 at 16:12 (3,910 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 245224 , Reply# 45 8/11/2013 at 16:14 (3,910 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
"Did I say the that Powerplus and others based on the Senior had less performance, JM? No. Don't add words to the topic please unless I've directly said it." I assume you refer to the reply directly under yours?
If so, I did not read that - in fact it only appeared AFTER I had replied (I was typing my own at the same time you were) and it most certainly wasn't aimed at you. I am very sorry if I inadvertently offended you. | ||
| Post# 245225 , Reply# 46 8/11/2013 at 16:16 (3,910 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Forum Index: | 
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
