|
Thread Number: 7931
The Glamorous Hoovers - Part II the 1950's |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 87963 1/3/2010 at 17:18 (5,225 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
The next generation of the bad asses... 
| ||
| Post# 87965 , Reply# 1 1/3/2010 at 17:19 (5,225 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
Glam Hoovers II From left, Model 63, Model 634, and Model 62 
| ||
| Post# 87966 , Reply# 2 1/3/2010 at 17:20 (5,225 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
Glam Hoovers Part II Shots from the rear :-) 
| ||
| Post# 87967 , Reply# 3 1/3/2010 at 17:22 (5,225 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
Glam Hoovers Part II The 62 was the last model to use the Handisac bag 
| ||
| Post# 87968 , Reply# 4 1/3/2010 at 17:23 (5,225 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
Glam Hoovers Part II The 63 and 634 were the first cleaners to use the C-type bags 
| ||
| Post# 87969 , Reply# 5 1/3/2010 at 17:25 (5,225 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
Glam Hoovers Part II These were manufactured in the early 50's, like 1950 to '55 
| ||
| Post# 87970 , Reply# 6 1/3/2010 at 17:27 (5,225 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
Glam Hoovers The last of the side-conversion cleaners, these were definitely some workhorses! 
| ||
| Post# 87971 , Reply# 7 1/3/2010 at 17:28 (5,225 days old) by vintageroyal611 () | ||
|
Your 63 is to die for! MINT! One of my "must-find" machines. Congrats on such a beautiful collection of Hoovers | ||
Post# 87973 , Reply# 8 1/3/2010 at 17:33 (5,225 days old) by bagintheback  (Flagstaff, Arizona) |
||
 | ||
| Post# 87977 , Reply# 9 1/3/2010 at 17:54 (5,225 days old) by electrolux~137 () | ||
|
The 634 is a beautiful machine, and you've sure got a fine specimen there! | ||
| Post# 87991 , Reply# 10 1/3/2010 at 19:20 (5,225 days old) by vintagehoover () | ||
|
>>> 
| ||
| Post# 87992 , Reply# 11 1/3/2010 at 19:20 (5,225 days old) by vintagehoover () | ||
|
>>> 
| ||
| Post# 87993 , Reply# 12 1/3/2010 at 19:21 (5,225 days old) by vintagehoover () | ||
|
>>> 
| ||
| Post# 87994 , Reply# 13 1/3/2010 at 19:21 (5,225 days old) by vintagehoover () | ||
|
>>> 
| ||
| Post# 88006 , Reply# 15 1/3/2010 at 20:28 (5,225 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
wow! Very cool - thanks Jack for posting | ||
| Post# 88040 , Reply# 16 1/3/2010 at 22:02 (5,225 days old) by portable (Corvallis, OR) | ||
Beauties, All! | ||
| Post# 88042 , Reply# 17 1/3/2010 at 22:06 (5,225 days old) by portable (Corvallis, OR) | ||
|
Jack -
What is the title of that publication/article you posted here? Once upon a time, I found a Dreyfuss-published book in a "Mid-Century Collectible Salon" in San Francisco that was mostly about his design of these series of Hoover vacuums (Model 29 on up). The darn thing cost $150, and I foolishly passed it up. Is that what this publication is??
| ||
| Post# 88157 , Reply# 21 1/4/2010 at 21:56 (5,224 days old) by portable (Corvallis, OR) | ||
|
Jack | ||
| Post# 88254 , Reply# 22 1/5/2010 at 23:28 (5,223 days old) by hygiene903 (Galion, OH) | ||
3 More Beauties! | ||
| Post# 88512 , Reply# 23 1/8/2010 at 21:27 (5,220 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
Hoovers in the 50's I always think of Lucille Ball fiddling with a Hoover 62 on "I Love Lucy". I wish I could find a clip of that episode! | ||
| Post# 88547 , Reply# 25 1/9/2010 at 10:07 (5,219 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
Those rayon bags.... just didn't wear well, I guess. You are right, it is hard to find the 61, 62, and 63 with original bags, or if you do, they are all ratty looking. The 64 Citation did have a much sturdier type outer bag. | ||
| Post# 88621 , Reply# 28 1/10/2010 at 12:26 (5,218 days old) by indyhoover () | ||
|
You are correct.... about the model 29, it was the lower priced model (at the same time as the 62) that didn't feature the "handisac" bag. The 634 was a promo model and they seem to be much rarer than the 63, for example. | ||
| Forum Index: | 
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
