Thread Number: 10618
Royal Vacuum Amperage - Does Higher Always Mean Louder?
[Down to Last]

Vacuumland's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 114739   11/15/2010 at 23:46 (3,256 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon)        

kirbyclassiciii's profile picture
Hi,

Does anyone here remember when Royal kept upping the wattage of some of their classic upright models?

As far as I know, these were the historical motor power ratings of the Royals:
350 watts = mid 1950s to 1969
400 watts = 1969 to 1975
3.0 amps = 1975 to 1982
4.0 amps = 1982 to 1985 (except commercial duty vacuums which were rated 5.0 amps)
5.4 amps = 1985 to 1987 (commercial duty vacuums rated 6.0 amps)

FOR EXAMPLE:
Model 880 was rated 350 watts from its 1965 inception, then changed to 400 watts by 1970; to 3.0 amps by 1976, 4.0 amps by 1982 and finally 5.4 amps from 1985 to end of production.

Model 888 - the one with the removable head - had the 400-watt and 3.0 amp motors, but were there any with the 4.0 amp motor?

Now to get down to the nitty gritty of this topic: does higher wattage/amperage necessarily mean a louder motor???

~Ben





Post# 114743 , Reply# 1   11/16/2010 at 02:13 (3,256 days old) by mercuryman ()        
My Thoughts...

Hey Ben,

In my experience, vacuums that draw higher amps and higher wattages tend to be "screamers"...meaning, they make a lot more noise than their lower wattage counterparts.

However, their higher current draw and subsequent louder sound doesn't necessarily mean that they are truly more effective machines.

I own an Electrolux canister vacuum that is very quiet and only draws 5 amps...and it has the same suction power as my friend's Miele canister vacuum, which draws 9 amps and is considerably noisier.

Air flow/"air-tightness" is what truly determines the effectiveness of a vacuum cleaner. I suspect that my friend's Miele draws more current, because its motor spins faster to compensate for other shortcomings in the machine's design...which in turn, causes faster wear on the motor brushes (and in turn, shortens the motor's life).

The true testament to a vacuum's effectiveness is its actual suction...not how noisy it is or how much current it draws. I'd rather buy a "soft" sounding vacuum with decent suction than a "screamer".

I hope this "sort of" answers your question!


Post# 114745 , Reply# 2   11/16/2010 at 02:20 (3,256 days old) by mercuryman ()        
However...

On second thought, you were talking about uprights. I'm not so sure if what I said in my previous post applies to them.

Post# 114747 , Reply# 3   11/16/2010 at 02:26 (3,256 days old) by mercuryman ()        
Although....

At the risk of seeming like a crazy person, making a second addendum to my post:

What is so different about the floors and rugs that were being vacuumed 40 years ago and those that are being vacuumed now? It seems that vacuums are becoming more and more powerful...but, truth be told, they only need be as powerful as to lift the dirt out of a rug...not create a wind tunnel in your living room. A vacuum that had enough power to clean well 40 years ago would undoubtedly clean well enough nowadays.

If vacuums were made to draw more watts or amps than they do nowadays, we'd have to have dedicated circuits for them in our houses. How can you run a 13 amp vacuum on a shared circuit without blowing a breaker somehow?


Post# 114748 , Reply# 4   11/16/2010 at 03:38 (3,256 days old) by Sablekid ()        

Probably another selling point or gimmick to get people to buy the most "powerful" or in my opinion wasteful.

Plus, Ive notice not only are the higher amped machines louder, but they burn out a lot faster than their older counterparts. More bang, more buck.

Although, I might be wrong!

But some machines just seem rediculous...like 22 amps and the like...those are the noisy beasts!!!

But to add to that, Ive used some older machines that had very low ampage and just poor suction quality all around...especially when you add the attachments. It seems like there is a happy medium of ampage between 5-7 that is not too loud and provides ample suction power.

But wattage and amps is just how much the cleaner uses to run...the higher the wattage/amp machines tend to use ALL of the power...the lower ones return a bit back which could be considered "wasteful" but in relation the higher ones suck up more all around and consume more.

k done hah


Post# 114784 , Reply# 5   11/16/2010 at 13:37 (3,256 days old) by DysonAnimal ()        

Miele's cleaners are extremely quiet, despite using 1200w motors in the US, and up to 2200w motors in the UK. Vax's Mach Zen uses 1600w and produces 74dB of noise. AEG-Electrolux UltraOne uses 2200w and produces 72dB, and UltraSilencer uses 1800w and produces 68dB...

Post# 114792 , Reply# 6   11/16/2010 at 14:49 (3,256 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon)        

kirbyclassiciii's profile picture
I would also think the Royals became louder after they went from using 6-blade fans from the 1950s through well into the early 1990s, to the 9-bladed ones.

Now does anyone remember the Royal model 8000 and 9700 Preferred collection uprights from circa 1990, which were tagged as "MCP Special - More Cleaning Power"? I believe it was those that marked the debut of the 9-blade impeller fan.

~Ben





Forum Index:       Other Forums:                      



Comes to the Rescue!

Woops, Time to Check the Bag!!!
Either you need to change your vacuum bag or you forgot to LOG-IN?

Discuss-O-MAT Log-In



New Members
Click Here To Sign Up.



                     


automaticwasher.org home
Discuss-o-Mat Forums
Vintage Brochures, Service and Owners Manuals
Fun Vintage Washer Ephemera
See It Wash!
Video Downloads
Audio Downloads
Picture of the Day
Patent of the Day
Photos of our Collections
The Old Aberdeen Farm
Vintage Service Manuals
Vintage washer/dryer/dishwasher to sell?
Technical/service questions?
Looking for Parts?
Website related questions?
Digital Millennium Copyright Act Policy
Our Privacy Policy