Thread Number: 7403
Kirby Tradition - Recalled Safety Switch |
[Down to Last] |
Post# 81670   9/30/2009 at 16:20 (5,313 days old) by kirbyclassiciii (Milwaukie, Oregon)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Is it true that for all the early Kirby Traditions out there with the recalled safety switch, I wonder how many of these were left unmodified after Kirby issued a recall over said units in 1980? The safety switch is on the headlight cap, itself of which must be in the "locked" position before you can be able to turn on the motor (provided that you have already properly attached the floor nozzle or hose). It is identified by a blue sliding cap lock button. This switch is on units from serial #s F000001 to F500500 (approx. production from July to September 1979). After October 1979 (serial #F500501+), Kirby went back with the older toggle-type setup (Classic III and earlier) where the safety switch was mounted on the fan case housing. This also coincided with the first use of the Lexan fan. ~Ben |
Post# 81737 , Reply# 2   10/1/2009 at 05:17 (5,312 days old) by kirbyclassiciii (Milwaukie, Oregon)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Yes, Lou, this model is my favorite. The recalled safety switch are what made these the first issues, along with the metal fan that was to give way to the Lexan fan. Yes, these are getting rare as many of them had been factory or dealer-converted to the toggle-type safety switch setup. The limited-edition Golden Trophy versions (same trim color as the Classic Omega) do have the provision for the slide lock mechanism on the headlight cap, but the mechanism isn't actually there. However, I believe these used Lexan fans, also. In the instruction book to the first season production (1979-80) Tradition, the new plastic attachment case was white in color, although that photo aside, Kirby was still using cardboard for the attachment box. At most, we didn't actually see the plastic case until the 1980-81 season, by which point it was colored blue, along with the Miracle Head and Rug Renovator heads. I remember the "Roo-Bag" also. ~Ben |
Post# 81750 , Reply# 3   10/1/2009 at 11:21 (5,312 days old) by a007kirbyman (--->> Originally My Mom <<--- (now Wisconsin))   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 81934 , Reply# 4   10/5/2009 at 15:58 (5,308 days old) by thevacuumman (Borger, TX)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
why was it recalled |
Post# 82041 , Reply# 6   10/7/2009 at 17:30 (5,306 days old) by a007kirbyman (--->> Originally My Mom <<--- (now Wisconsin))   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 429202 , Reply# 7   7/29/2020 at 06:18 (1,358 days old) by 2011hoover700 (owosso michigan)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 429208 , Reply# 8   7/29/2020 at 10:29 (1,358 days old) by texaskirbyguy (Plano, TX)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Yes, he does have it and he posted it to this site a while back (but do not remember where). I had originally received it from an old Kirby shop that liquidated and I scanned and sent him a copy. If no response I can post it also - let's wait and see. |
Post# 429277 , Reply# 11   7/30/2020 at 15:17 (1,357 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Steve,
That must explain the changes the Dual Sanitronic 80 had after June 1968: the armature, field and foot switch were all redesigned to remedy these problems associated with the prior design of field and armature used on the Dual Sanitronic 50. I think part of the problem with the D50's motor (and all D80s built prior to June 1968) was due to some of the parts that were carried over from the single-speed motors, including the foot switch which had two terminals (in the form of brass screws, one below and one on the left-hand side) with which to attach the neutral and live wires; with the D80's new foot switch, there are now marked terminal slots for each wire (3 green, 3 white and 2 black). Attached is the original version of the D50/D80 parts list from September 1967, when both machines had the D50's field and armature. ~Ben
View Full Size
This post was last edited 07/30/2020 at 15:35 |
Post# 429286 , Reply# 12   7/30/2020 at 17:01 (1,357 days old) by Lesinutah (Utah)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
The armature and fields were renumbered because Kirby changed manufacturers of the motor and coil. It had nothing to do with it having issues.
I remember when I rebuilt my d80s I had to use comparable parts. The new manufacturer of the motor made it almost identical to prior manufacturer. They had slight variation so they didn't infringe on the old manufacturers patent. Les |
Post# 429293 , Reply# 13   7/30/2020 at 19:55 (1,357 days old) by kirby519 (Wisconsin)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
It was the D50 at the time the armature wires were not glued or varnished together like they are today. There for the increase in RPM of the armature pulled the wires loose and the motor would fail. |
Post# 429294 , Reply# 14   7/30/2020 at 20:21 (1,357 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Steve,
Looks like that was a flaw in the machinery the manufacturer of the armature was using. But I think that had been fixed early on, about 1966. The D50 was also the last machine where two different field/armature combos were available: one with west magnetic fields (13311 / 13312) and one with east magnetic fields (5BA45FN27); I believe the problems you describe lie with one of these two fields. ~Ben This post was last edited 07/30/2020 at 21:13 |
Post# 429302 , Reply# 15   7/31/2020 at 00:02 (1,357 days old) by Lesinutah (Utah)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I'm not buying this was an issue. The d50.and d80 had the same motor setup. I have talked to a few dealers in great depth.
It never was broken it was a different manufacturer. I'm not trying to be rude but the research which was quite thorough and this I'v motor issue is a non issue and there were no modifications other than what I mentioned. I'll believe what you say when there is something saying so. If you have it come forward with it because I'm not believing it's true. Les |
Post# 429312 , Reply# 16   7/31/2020 at 09:03 (1,356 days old) by 2011hoover700 (owosso michigan)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 429322 , Reply# 18   7/31/2020 at 13:13 (1,356 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 429327 , Reply# 19   7/31/2020 at 17:41 (1,356 days old) by Lesinutah (Utah)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 429331 , Reply# 20   7/31/2020 at 19:10 (1,356 days old) by Lesinutah (Utah)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
G is for Genoa.
I have alot of catalogs for vacuum cleaners. Hesco,avac,buckeye etc. I'm trying to find the exact magazine. I believe it's my 1961 catalog I got from Kent oyler. The sewing and vacuum site vacuum devil mentioned and tom Gasko has 130 or so publications. I seen something changed recently with the 2 manufacturers. Fyi I'm not stating false information. I'll look and post when I find the catalog or catalogs. Les |