Thread Number: 17150
What Does Anyone Think Of The Hoover Turbopower 2?
[Down to Last]

Vacuumland's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 184064   6/3/2012 at 14:19 (2,859 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

I hear from a couple of people that the Turbopower 2 is such a bad cleaner, it is not a patch on the turbopower 1 but it was hoovers first clean air upright and still cleaned very well in my opinion. It is way better that a purepower even though a purepower has more suction.
I have heard people say that nobody likes the turbo 2, they are poorly made and just terrible cleaners. I strongly disagree.
What do you guys think?





Post# 184066 , Reply# 1   6/3/2012 at 14:32 (2,859 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

Sorry Hoovers fist clean air upright with on board tools. :)


Post# 184068 , Reply# 2   6/3/2012 at 14:51 (2,859 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Well... here's my tuppence worth - I was a big fan of the TP2 and 3 series, even the base model TP2's are good and I'd take them over any Purepower, if offered. Here are my pros and cons of the TP2/3.

 

I wouldn't say personally that the TP2 is a bad cleaner and I don't know anyone who mocks them, personally. Infact I've seen more TP2's still in use than a lot of other Hoover uprights and owners keep them because they're cheap to maintain and do the job intended.

 

Pros/Advantages;

  1. Easy to use hose and tools, some models benefit from longer stair hose.
  2. Easy to use on carpets and performance is pretty excellent all round.
  3. Easy to maintain, changing belts, bags and filters.
  4. Powerful but reasonably quiet compared to Purepower.
  5. Much better built structurally, exterior plastics seem to last longer and feel better made.
  6. Spares are usually better to get for these older models, but dependent on the type of spares.
  7. Dust capacity is pretty good and I found that the bags would last a long time before needing to be replaced, but this depends very much on the type of dirt you're picking up. 

 

Cons/Downsides:

 

  1. The TP2/3 series is heavier - this is more apparent when trying to lift the vacuum, or even when using it to clean carpets.
  2. For those who are 6ft or over, the height of the vacuum can be liable to make you stoop a little.
  3. The rear wheels are too thin, often leaving track marks and wobble.
  4. Due to its age, the micro filters and carbon filters can only do so much when picking up after pet hair and keeping odours in. Purepower benefitted from higher grade filters, even if the holder was liable to fall off at the back with extended ownership/constant removal. Also of course due to age, no additional modern turbo brush for stairs was made available (as far as I know) but that's not stopping you from using a 3.2mm sized universal one.

Post# 184083 , Reply# 3   6/3/2012 at 16:38 (2,858 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

The TP 2, 3, and 1000 are not bad cleaners at all. If you compare them to their competition, the quality was far superior to the Electrolux contour cleaners, and on a par with the Panasonic. The downside, as mentioned already, was the weight. However the build quality exceeded that of the original Turbopower immensely. Let me put it to you like this, you would go a long way to find a TP 2, 3, or 1000 with a broken or worn chassis, or main body unit. The whole design of the original TP was flimsy to say the least, although I strongly suspect a lot of it was designed that way so as to limit the life of the cleaner.

One thing which I did not like about the TP 2 and 1000 was the narrow bore hose, which would clog up a lot. Great for people like me who were paid to unblock them, but bad news for the user. Hoover did change this to a wider hose, I have said so many times and am sorry to repeat myself (well I don't mind if you don't), this in the fullness of time was changed again when Hoover reverted to the original narrow bore hose towards the end of production of the TP2. Also the back wheels of all these cleaners were very thin, the whole wheel was no bigger or thicker than a crunchy style biscuit and combined with the weight of the cleaner would sink into the carpet pile, making turning the cleaner more difficult than it might otherwise have been.

To some extent comparing the TP 2,3, and 100 to the original TP is like comparing apples to oranges, as the two ranges had only the names in common. Though I am not saying I personally lust after such features, it always surprised me greatly that none of the TP 2, 3, and 1000 cleaners ever had a head lamp or automatic flexwinder. This effectively made the cleaners a 'lesser' range when compared to both the original TP line up and the Panasonic cleaners which competed with the Hoover.


Post# 184143 , Reply# 4   6/4/2012 at 01:52 (2,858 days old) by vacuummorgan (Chagford Devon England )        

some times with mine when the head goes on the floor the brush bar just cuts out
then when i lift it up again it stats spining again don't no if it was hoovers fault
or the women i got it from


Post# 184144 , Reply# 5   6/4/2012 at 01:53 (2,858 days old) by vacuummorgan (Chagford Devon England )        

some times with mine when the head goes on the floor the brush bar just cuts out
then when i lift it up again it stats spining again don't no if it was hoovers fault
or the women i got it from


Post# 184150 , Reply# 6   6/4/2012 at 03:35 (2,858 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

That is the drive belt at fault. The belt is old and stretched and needs replacing. It will be fine after you change the belt.

Post# 184390 , Reply# 7   6/5/2012 at 13:19 (2,857 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        
Re: TP 2 and 1000 narrow bore hose

sebo_fan's profile picture

HI VR et al.

 

In all my years I think I only ever had one clog with the narrow bore hoses on the TP2 models, and that was with a rather large piece of ripped paper envelope. I found more success with this type of hose compared to the one on the TP1 based "Total" models with the hose connection to the side and would need manually switching off when using the hose in the upright position. The one aspect I adored about the TP1's was that the wheels at the rear were just so much better. Also, on the TP3 model, I'm sure the T shape upholstery tool with lint pickers had one row of thick red brushes on one side and lint pickers on the other. Lesser Hoover models just got twin lint picker strips and the tool could also be slipped onto the end of the crevice tool/scabbard tool due to two channels of plastic inside the main dust channel of the upholstery tool.


Post# 184405 , Reply# 8   6/5/2012 at 14:07 (2,857 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well I have seen a good deal of them blocked, often when something was stuck and bridging the hose. The debris got caught around that.I agree the same hose on the original TP was prone to blocking too, especially where it fitted into the cleaner.

Post# 184511 , Reply# 9   6/6/2012 at 05:28 (2,856 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Infact, the same narrow bore hose was an extension hose that Hoover shortened and made available for the Junior stick vacuum. I had one of those for my black stick vac and it worked okay, but not of much help.


Post# 184518 , Reply# 10   6/6/2012 at 08:38 (2,856 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

I like the narrow hose on the turbo 2, having the wide purepower (or pureshit) lol, hose on a turbo 2 just looks so silly and way to big for the machine.
It would of also been nice if they had put two extension wands on the turbo 2 and kept the short crevixe tool, as you have to use the long crevice tool as another extension wand and useing the tools on the end of the crevice tool, or even just the end of the hose, it makes a loud pssssssshhhhhh noise because of the little channel in the tools. Though the long and short crevice tools have there uses.


Post# 184562 , Reply# 11   6/6/2012 at 16:36 (2,855 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well I cannot argue about the benefits of two extension tubes, but again I come back to the same thing (and on another thread someone in the USA raised the same issue), the cleaners were designed to give the consumer what they were wanting. We on here are not the vacuum cleaner consumers, we are in one way or another lovers of these appliances. Vacuum cleaners were not of course built for us, or with our thoughts in mind.

Panasonic had a massive share of the UK vacuum cleaner market back in the 1990's. They had a few innovative features on them, especially the tools, which were taken on-board (do please excuse the pun) by other manufacturers. Hoover began producing cleaners with an extra long crevice tool stored inside the extension tube, and attachments which were capable of fitting the crevice tool to make two tubes. This was a Panasonic idea. Electrolux went on to produce cleaners with tubes which fitted inside each other for storage, and in 1996 began a range of cleaners which had true floating heads, just like the Panasonic always did.

The idea of on-board tools was to supplement the main upright cleaner by having the facility to do quick cleaning jobs which required a hose. When you take into account the small size of a good deal of British homes, a cleaner like that was probably enough to satisfy your average consumer.


Post# 185255 , Reply# 12   6/12/2012 at 08:08 (2,850 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Panasonic may have started the trend but I found their dusting brush is nasty and cheap. I much prefer the vintage butterfly Electrolux tool - such a novel and enterprising design.


Post# 185264 , Reply# 13   6/12/2012 at 11:24 (2,850 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture
Alex, is your whole argument for not liking to use the long crevice tool as an extension tube just "because it makes a loud pssshhhhhh noise"? Do you really think your average vacuum cleaner user gives a toss whether or not it makes a "pssshhhh" noise as long as it does a good job? There are far too many people around these parts that do not consider the market, target audience and average users of old vacuums when making an opinion on them. Try and consider what your Mum would've chosen in a new vacuum - I find putting myself in the mind frame of the average day to day vacuum user helps a lot when forming opinions on such things :)

Post# 185279 , Reply# 14   6/12/2012 at 14:46 (2,850 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I must suggest that a good deal of people probably never knew that the crevice tool on the Hoover and Panasonic cleaners could double as the extension tube. Sebo-fan. the Electrolux combined dusting brush and upholstery nozzle must be one of the few products in life which combines two features in one and does both of them as well as separates. One doesn't see that often. My mother had a pale brown and white coloured tool with her Electrolux 504, and a white one when she bought a 302 later on. Both of them were so very well used, I remember how one of the wings eventually broke off one of them and mother kept that tool until the very end as she used it for suction dusting the more dirty surfaces. She kept the intact one for cleaning furniture and so one and so forth.

Post# 185294 , Reply# 15   6/12/2012 at 16:52 (2,849 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

The problem with copying though is that some brands only go as far to include the long extension tube with the tapered crevice end as the sole tube that comes with the upright vac. The Argos Value bagged upright suffers from that.

 

One point that I forgot to add about the Turbopower vacs that have the straight extension tube AND the scabbard long crevice is to give the tools an added stretch factor. I found it very useful to have, regardless of escaping noise, especially when cleaning dust off the top of picture frames. I could never go far enough with just one straight tube and the hose. 

 

That however brings me onto another issue. The Sebo K1 may be an old vacuum, and whilst it may not look as streamlined as the Miele series, I can't stand using the short crevice tool on my Miele S4, S6 or older machines - far too noisy when used - the Sebo K1 has a proper long extension crevice which is super quiet. I wish brands really thought about the tools they make for their machines rather than just pass off what's been done before. Miele already improved the dusting brushes by replacing the old "clog-dependent" castle cut dusting brushes with proper long bristles; they should do the same with their crevice tool.


Post# 185310 , Reply# 16   6/12/2012 at 19:00 (2,849 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        
Chris (Turbo500)

alexhoovers94's profile picture

I just thought it would of made more sense to have one crevice tool and 2 extension tubes, because why do you need two crevice tools, really?
It also doesn't feel very sturdy using the long crevice tool as another extension wand.
If I was not a vacuum collector and just a general consumer I still wouldn't want that loud "pssshhhhhh" noise, because it hurts my ears and I think it would bother other people when I was using it.
Although the turbopower 2 does make that noise and can get quite annoying when using the tools for a long period of time, it is worse on the new purepowers that really hisses and your ears are crying out for ear plugs!

Alex.


Post# 185311 , Reply# 17   6/12/2012 at 19:09 (2,849 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

The consumer didn't need two crevice tools, which is why the smaller one was discontinued when the TP3 was put on sale and the TP1000 removed. Originally the early cleaners had only one extension tube but Hoover then decided to do what Panasonic did and put a long crevice tool inside a slightly shorter tube, and adapt the smaller tools so that they fitted the crevice tool to make a double length tube. One can only assume that either Hoover were originally not allowed to copy this design, or that they simply never thought of it. Either way, they obviously thought it was worth including at the first opportunity, and rather than leave a hole where the small crevice tool used to be, they put one in as well as the scabbard crevice tool.

Post# 185364 , Reply# 18   6/13/2012 at 06:04 (2,849 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

I thought the Scabbard tool was better than the original crevice though - better for getting under car seats, in between the vents of cooker hoods and getting right down into the permanent filter entrance on tumble dryers. I agree sliding the T shape upholstery tool on the end was less successful no matter if the original tool had twin walls inside in which it would allow the top of the Scabbard to lock into.


Post# 186082 , Reply# 19   6/18/2012 at 14:28 (2,844 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
I saw this thread on my mobile phone and was absolutely fuming that I couldn't put my Tuppence worth in! But now I can.

As you may know, I own two Turbopowers - A 1994 Turbopower 1000 U2812 and a 1999 Turbopower 2 U2016, both of which I love dearly. Which do I prefer ? Now that's like asking a father to choose his favourite child - Ain't going to happen.

Where do I start ?

The new Turbopower range was quite possibly the best model HOOVER ever made.

Lets think, before the Turbopower, we had the original Turbopower which was a dirty fan which meant great carpet cleaning, but as for using the hose (either fitted via a converter or on the Total systems, permanently fitted) the suction was absolutely awful.

And of course, as Benny rightly said, they weren't the most durable of machines.

The new Turbopower range (initially the Turbopower 2 Autosense [short lived - replaced by the 1000], Turbopower 2 [basic] and Turbopower 1000 [with Autosense]) was revolutionary.

It had the brilliant activator brush roll which was known to be quite possibly the best yet, the carpet cleaning was poorer than the original, granted, but still damn good and what's more, the hose suction was immense!

Plus it was a very attractive cleaner and had the practicality of large dust bags with the option of "Use Twice" bags or in later years, Permabag.

Skipping forward in time briefly, the Purepower (the Turbopower's successor, a word which I use VERY loosely...) is widely known for its poor build quality, above all, its shoddy upright mechanism which allows the cleaner to lean further and further back with every use, until it eventually collapses and requires replacement.

The Turbopower 1000, 2, 3 ranges did not have this problem AT ALL, or at least not in my experiences.

Neither my Turbopower 1000 or Turbopower 2 have the slightest flicker of leaning.

Another problem with Vacuum Cleaners of the Turbopower's time was poor handle quality, well, low and behold the new Turbopower range didn't have that problem either.

So lets add this all up, great suction, great looks, great build quality, easy and inexpensive maintenance, impressive longevity...

Hmm, not too bad...



Post# 186084 , Reply# 20   6/18/2012 at 14:42 (2,844 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture
"The new Turbopower range was quite possibly the best model HOOVER ever made"

There is so much wrong with this statement, I don't know where to begin.

"The new Turbopower range (initially the Turbopower 2 Autosense [short lived - replaced by the 1000], Turbopower 2 [basic] and Turbopower 1000 [with Autosense]) was revolutionary"

Hardly. Hoover were all behind the times. By the time the Turbopower 2 was launched in 1992, Electrolux, Panasonic and (to a lesser extent) Hitachi had been making high performing, clean air machines with strong hose suction and (in the case of Panasonic and Lux) on-board tools.

Don't get me wrong, I do like the Turbopower 2 very much, but by no means do I agree that it was the best Hoover upright made.


Post# 186086 , Reply# 21   6/18/2012 at 15:01 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
For all round performance, I would say it was the best.

It was the first HOOVER to have the mixture of good hose suction and good carpet cleaning, everything else had been one or the other.

I'm not saying other manufacturers hadn't made cleaners as good/better, but in terms of HOOVERs, I believe it was the best.


Post# 186087 , Reply# 22   6/18/2012 at 15:02 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Oh I see what you were getting at! I meant revolutionary for HOOVER, not generally speaking.

I should have worded it better.


Post# 186091 , Reply# 23   6/18/2012 at 15:27 (2,843 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        
Well....

alexhoovers94's profile picture

The only thing that was actually revolutionary on the Turbopower 2 (in my opinion) was the "Autosense device"
Call me biased but I would have a Turbopower 2 over any of the clean airs on the market at the time, they were the easiest to use and clean really well for what they were in my opinion.

I wouldn't not say it is the best Hoover upright ever made, the best Hoover upright ever made would have to be the turbomaster; I would have to suggest.


Post# 186094 , Reply# 24   6/18/2012 at 15:38 (2,843 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture
Hi Jamie - ah, ok, I'm with you now.

Hoover's first clean air upright was the Convertible/Dial A Matic from the 1970's, which IMO out-performs a Turbo 2 hands down.

"Call me biased but I would have a Turbopower 2 over any of the clean airs on the market at the time"

Sorry Alex, I disagree. Although good, I'd sooner use a Panasonic 50 series cleaner. They were cheaper, had better suction power and groom the carpet pile better - the activator was never designed to go in a clean air machine. They also have the added feature of beater bar controls, cord rewind and a headlight.


Post# 186095 , Reply# 25   6/18/2012 at 15:39 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
The truly best HOOVER upright was the Senior/Ranger in my opinion for the carpet cleaning abilities, but I'll still be saying in twenty years time that the best all rounder for daily cleaning is the Turbopower 2!

Can't beat the Autosense feature either, it gives you the power you need, when you need it :)


Post# 186098 , Reply# 26   6/18/2012 at 15:43 (2,843 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture
I'm with Alex, you can't beat a Turbomaster.

I much prefer using the more basic T2's without Autosense. Although an interesting feature, I always found the autosense to be more annoying and not very accurate


Post# 186099 , Reply# 27   6/18/2012 at 15:45 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"Hoover's first clean air upright was the Convertible/Dial A Matic from the 1970's, which IMO out-performs a Turbo 2 hands down." Yep, I know, but it doesn't have the great hose suction of the Turbopower 2 which makes it a brilliant cleaner for daily use.

Post# 186100 , Reply# 28   6/18/2012 at 15:46 (2,843 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire)        

turbomaster1984's profile picture
Wow Jamie you have used a DAM?

What colourway?


Post# 186101 , Reply# 29   6/18/2012 at 15:47 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"I much prefer using the more basic T2's without Autosense. Although an interesting feature, I always found the autosense to be more annoying and not very accurate" I understand what you mean, but in my opinion the Turbopowers without Autosense were very loud, or at least mine is.

With the Autosense feature when you're not picking up much dirt the wattage is dropped to the minimum meaning it not only saves energy (which I'm not too bothered about) but makes it very quiet too and makes the activator more effective due to it spinning slower.


Post# 186102 , Reply# 30   6/18/2012 at 15:50 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"Wow Jamie you have used a DAM?

What colourway?" Was that sarcasm or a genuine question ?

Since I don't know I'll answer - No I haven't, but from what I've heard the hose suction wasn't as good as the Turbopower 2. Another thing the Convertible lacked was onboard tool storage.


Post# 186103 , Reply# 31   6/18/2012 at 15:50 (2,843 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture
"With the Autosense feature when you're not picking up much dirt the wattage is dropped to the minimum meaning it not only saves energy (which I'm not too bothered about) but makes it very quiet too and makes the activator more effective due to it spinning slower."

The problem with Autosense, is that it only senses larger particles that actually make a sound when they go up the vacuum. What about pet hair or dust? I want that removed from my carpet just as effectively as the sand, grit and crumbs.

Also, if it's energy saving you're worried about, get a TP1 at 410w :P


Post# 186104 , Reply# 32   6/18/2012 at 15:51 (2,843 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire)        

turbomaster1984's profile picture
Was not sarcastic at all just wondered where your experience to comment about the suction came from.



Post# 186105 , Reply# 33   6/18/2012 at 15:53 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
I just said I wasn't worried about it :)

Anyway, I have my Ranger for efficient vacuuming. All 400 Watts! Blows any modern "Eco Friendly" vacuums out of the water, eh ?


Post# 186106 , Reply# 34   6/18/2012 at 15:54 (2,843 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Jmurray, I must correct you on one point, which is that you said the Turbopower 2 Autosense was replaced by the Turbopower 1000 Autosense. This is not so. I don't have the brochures to confirm what I am about to tell you so bear with me as my memory really isn't what it could be. I know for sure that the TP2 and TP1000 went on sale together, so we're alright there. As I remember it, there were two cleaners in the TP1000 range and both of them were duplicated in the TP2 range, the only difference being that the TP2 motor ran at 800watts and the TP1000 at 1000watts.

If I may be allowed to quote myself from another message, Hoover were the market leaders in doing things for the sake of it. I think that is what I said and if it isn't, it is at least what I mean. Such was the similarity of the TP2 and TP1000 cleaners, one could almost imagine a scenario where two Hoover designers fell out with each other over whether the cleaner should have an 800watt motor or a 1000watt motor, and to settle the matter a higher authority rolled his or her eyes, banged their heads together, and told them to make one of each and stop moaning about it. I joke, yet I can think of no other reason for the two ranges, though I have to stop and remind myself that in the UK Hoover led its self to it's slow & painful death over those airmiles, and you can't find reason in anyone who did the likes of that.

One thing I would like to suggest is that the TP1000 may have been intended to be Hoovers flagship model, as this was the cleaner which featured in the television commercials at that point in time. For me the TP2, TP1000, and TP3 were far superior to a lot of the competition, especially the Electrolux Contour ranges.


Post# 186107 , Reply# 35   6/18/2012 at 15:55 (2,843 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
just wondered where your experience to comment about the suc

turbo500's profile picture
there's a lot of that floating around these parts. I actually thought the Convertible/DAM had quite strong hose suction - enough to effectively remove dust, dirt and pet hair from ones crevices anyway ;).

Speaking of which, Jamie, have you used a TP1 either with or without the hose at all?


Post# 186110 , Reply# 36   6/18/2012 at 15:58 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Thanks for clearing that up Benny.

I thought what I said about the Turbopower 2 and Turbopower 1000 regarding Autosense was correct going from memories of what I read in my Turbopower Information thread, but my memory must be missing a beat again... Wouldn't be the first time!


Post# 186111 , Reply# 37   6/18/2012 at 15:59 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"enough to effectively remove dust, dirt and pet hair from ones crevices anyway ;)." MY crevices are very clean, thank you very much...

Ha ha, I needed a laugh tonight, thanks for providing it :)


Post# 186115 , Reply# 38   6/18/2012 at 16:02 (2,843 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
MY crevices are very clean, thank you very much...

turbo500's profile picture
That's not what I heard Mr. Murray :P

Post# 186117 , Reply# 39   6/18/2012 at 16:04 (2,843 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture


Surely the Panasonic 50 series had a floating head, which is not what you want ideally. (At least for me) The Turbopower 3 would have had a longer hose than a Panasonic 50 series, considerably; in fact, the Turbo 2 would have had a longer hose than any Panasonics? They look really heavy also? The Turbopower 2 is quite heavy but those things look like beasts, lol.
On off brush is a very good feature too, although I bet most consumers just swept the floors?
The Turbopower 2's could have had a headlight, there is just the space for one on the cleaner head, were that little plain patch is, just above the height adjustment.
Cord rewinds would be nice :)


Post# 186118 , Reply# 40   6/18/2012 at 16:04 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Who have you been talking to!?

She's lying I swear...


Post# 186122 , Reply# 41   6/18/2012 at 16:07 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
The only thing I'd have changed about the Turbopower 2/1000/3 would have been to make use of the space Alex just mentioned and I mentioned at an earlier date to fit a Hedlite (sic).

Post# 186127 , Reply# 42   6/18/2012 at 16:18 (2,843 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

The comments that the debris had to make a noise in order to activate the higher setting on Autosense, and that the debris which needed the extra power, like hair and dust, would not engage it, is so very true. We need to remember that this all comes down to making something which the consumer wants. I mentioned it before. So let us focus on the TP2 standard model and the TP2 autosense. Why the two models? Well, the TP2 Autosense was of course more expensive. I have no idea what the additional cost of the parts and assembly was, but I think we can assume that the cost difference was considerably less that the extra revenue Hoover made on selling this model over the standard.

Hoover probably knew that a good deal of people would get incredibly excited over the autosense featured and that it would be bought by those who were swayed by gadgets, or who liked to buy top-range products. No other cleaner offered such a gimmick at this time and so it would have crossed the line of brand loyalty too by enticing consumers who would normally not buy a Hoover. Hoover probably also knew that a good deal of people would only ever run the cleaner at full power, rendering the autosense feature null & void, but that would have been no concern to them once the machine had been purchased.

However I think Hoover must also have known that plenty of buyers would see right through the autosense and realise they were paying a good deal more for something they were unlikely to use. So for those consumers Hoover made the standard TP2 in an attempt to ensure the purchaser did not switch to another brand. There will of course have been people who's budget did not stretch to the Autosense model, and they too would have taken advantage of the standard machine.

For me I think the autosense was a complete waste of money, but for Hoover it made perfect business sense and I think it was a novel & unique feature.


Post# 186130 , Reply# 43   6/18/2012 at 16:21 (2,843 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
Panasonic 50 series..

turbo500's profile picture
According to Argos, the Panasonic MC-E53 weighs 16.5lb, where as the Turbo 2 is 17.4lb.

The floating head design works considerably better on the 50's due to the increased weight of the machine. I find it grooms the carpet way more effectively than the Turbo 2.

With regards to the hose, the original 50 series came with an optional extension hose to rival the longer-hosed uprights that were coming out at the time. By the time the turbo 3 came out, Panasonic had launched the 500 series which included a much longer hose AND 1000w motor.

It is recommended in the user manual to switch the beater bar off whilst using the tools to protect the carpet


Post# 186135 , Reply# 44   6/18/2012 at 16:25 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"It is recommended in the user manual to switch the beater bar off whilst using the tools to protect the carpet" So I take it there is no automatic lift mechanism fitted to the cleaning head ? Otherwise there would be no issue with the brush roll damaging the carpets.

Sorry to nit pick.


Post# 186136 , Reply# 45   6/18/2012 at 16:25 (2,843 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I said it before, I was surprised that the TP2, TP1000, and TP3 never had headlamps or cordwinders. I do wonder if it was because only Panasonic was really offering those features at that time and that Hoover considered that they only needed to be as featured packed as the rest of them? The Panasonic floating head was not publicised as much as it could have been and I know that of those which came to me for repair many people said that it was the ease in which they cleaner could be pushed which they particularly liked. The hose was indeed amongst the shortest available, but for many years Panasonic cleaners had been supplied with an additional rigid extension hose as standard.

Post# 186139 , Reply# 46   6/18/2012 at 16:29 (2,843 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Jmurray, the Panasonic did have the facility to raise the cleaning head when locked upright, but the suggestion that the user swithces off the roller brush was a belt & braces approach. Prior to this, Panasonic had come under much critisim for having open-ended roller brushes in which small children had been injured when their parents allowed them to roam around whilst their back was turned as they cleaned with the hose. The children liked to push their fingers and other body parts into the rotating brush. This is why Panasonic began fitting metal guards to each side of the cleaning head. Because some models had brush control, the attitude was you may as well use it to its full potential, and turn off the brushes manually when using the hose.

Post# 186141 , Reply# 47   6/18/2012 at 16:30 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Nothing compares to a good long stretch hose.

Both the narrow bore and wide bore hose in my Turbopower 2 and Turbopower 1000 stretch sufficiently to vacuum 10 stairs leaving the Vacuum Cleaner at the bottom.



Post# 186142 , Reply# 48   6/18/2012 at 16:31 (2,843 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
Sorry to nit pick.

turbo500's profile picture
I wouldn't say nit picking - seems like a perfectly valid question.

I think it does have a lift feature of sorts, actually. It was more of security thing. If you vacuuming with the hose and it gets stretched, the floorhead could easily be forced down into the carpet by accident which could damage both the carpet and cleaner.


Post# 186144 , Reply# 49   6/18/2012 at 16:33 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"Panasonic had come under much critisim for having open-ended roller brushes in which small children had been injured when their parents allowed them to roam around whilst their back was turned as they cleaned with the hose." If blood could boil (it can't, it would congeal first) then mine would when that subject is brought up.

If you are as inane as to let your children roam around a Vacuum Cleaner which is plugged in and switched on, you shouldn't be complaining to Panasonic, you should be brushing up on your parenting skills.

Rant over.


Post# 186148 , Reply# 50   6/18/2012 at 16:40 (2,843 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Jmurray, don't shoot the messenger! It was big news at the time. It was on one of those televison programmes, I think possibly That's Life with Esther Rantzen.

Post# 186159 , Reply# 51   6/18/2012 at 16:56 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Don't worry, I'll keep Beretta in the safe... For now!

Post# 186168 , Reply# 52   6/18/2012 at 17:09 (2,843 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        
I do believe the autosense is a useful feature, and that the

alexhoovers94's profile picture


I think the autosense is not just a gimick!
Here is a video I made today, not knowing at all what was going to happen, I was right as I suspected.



CLICK HERE TO GO TO alexhoovers94's LINK


Post# 186169 , Reply# 53   6/18/2012 at 17:11 (2,843 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

When I said gimmick, I didn't mean to suggest that it did not do what it promised to do. What I meant was that it was the sort of thing which people paid good money for and never used.

Post# 186172 , Reply# 54   6/18/2012 at 17:24 (2,843 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

Oh ok, I see must of miss understood what you were getting at.
still I think that was quite a cool test that I did :)


Post# 186177 , Reply# 55   6/18/2012 at 17:39 (2,843 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Sorry, I have yet to watch the video. But I will do at some point.


Post# 186178 , Reply# 56   6/18/2012 at 17:42 (2,843 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
still I think that was quite a cool test that I did

turbo500's profile picture
Alex, to quote you in our conversations - "the last vacuum always wins".

Post# 186189 , Reply# 57   6/18/2012 at 18:40 (2,843 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        
Chris...

alexhoovers94's profile picture

Yes, that is the case, however there needs to be enough of whatever it is in the carpet to hit the turbo 2's sensor to engage it into the medium power, it may be sensitive but not that sensitive, a few particles of salt that may of been left over in the carpet would not of turned it into medium like it did here.
There had to be a good amount left there, which clearly there was!
Don't forget, most of the left over salt that is picked up by that turbopower 2 is getting stuck in between the crevices of the hose before it even reaches the sensor.


Post# 186223 , Reply# 58   6/19/2012 at 05:46 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
I watched your video yesterday evening Alex and was not surprised in the least that the mighty Turbopower still found salt to pick up that the Purepower missed.

HOOVER - 1 Candy - 0.

To quote the slogan on your Youtube channel - HOOVER, Who Better ?


Post# 186244 , Reply# 59   6/19/2012 at 11:42 (2,843 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Seeing as this is a thread on about the Turbopower 2/1000/3 I thought I'd mention that I've just spotted a good deal on eBay at the moment for twenty bags at the price of only a Tenner.

I'll leave a link below.

Needless to say I'll be purchasing them next Friday for my Turbopowers - Should keep me vacuuming for 5 years according to my calculations (new bag every 6 months on both the TPs).


CLICK HERE TO GO TO jmurray01's LINK on eBay


Post# 186286 , Reply# 60   6/19/2012 at 15:17 (2,842 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        
Panasonic Brush roll danger

sebo_fan's profile picture

Actually it was initially reported by Which before it appeared on Esther Rantzen's show. I can recall my father commenting on the Panasonic being a poor design, and Im sorry JM but poor parenting skills has nothing to do with letting a child play about on a carpet, let alone the upright vacuum being nearby.

 

As a previous owner of three Panasonic Twin bin uprights which had the removable covers on the side of the brush rolls, I can see why it could have been more of a danger not just with children's fingers getting trapped, but also from personal experience where the brush rolls can catch onto anything loose at the side of skirting boards, getting caught up, breaking the belt and in some cases ruining the brush roll and its entire holding mechanisms. When the brush roll doors were clipped back in, catching stuff etc at the side of skirting boards and carpets were more or less eradicated.

 

Of less importance but still a minor design issue that was later publicly pressured to change the design was on the Hoover Telios and Arrianne handles where the trigger outlet mechanism was located - several owners complained of the trigger catching the back of their hand and causing open wounds. Hoover were forced to change the design and went with a horrible Morphy Richards copied handle complete with grid air outlet switch on the handle. 


Post# 186315 , Reply# 61   6/19/2012 at 16:20 (2,842 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"Im sorry JM but poor parenting skills has nothing to do with letting a child play about on a carpet, let alone the upright vacuum being nearby." Oh by all means let children play on the carpet and even around a Vacuum Cleaner, but not one that is PLUGGED IN! Poor parenting skills does have everything to do with the obvious carelessness in the parents.

As for things getting caught in the brush roll while using the edge cleaning (which only really is edge cleaning when the brushes can actually touch the edges), that is carelessness too, if you don't mind me saying so.

It sounds like I'm trying to instigate an argument but I'm not, I'm just stating my point of view on the matter.

I'd love to own a "open ended" Panasonic some day, because then I'd have a Vacuum Cleaner which really could edge clean!


Post# 186346 , Reply# 62   6/19/2012 at 17:44 (2,842 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Any appliance that is plugged in constantly can serve a hazard to a child. I know many who have the Dyson hand held and similarly cordless sweepers plugged in constantly - but they genuinely have safer parts of plastics where little fingers won't necessarily get a severe wound - and whilst they need it to be constantly charged for use - the Panasonic design, was sadly highlighted by a child having an accident - but then there was no other brand who had an open ended brush roll on the market at the time.

 

Well, the destruction that was caused by one of my Twin bin uprights when I foolishly removed the cover plates resulted in the Panasonic tearing paint off down one side of a skirting board. Is that carelessness? No its a perfect example of where an upright vac is supposed to clean right to the edge. The covers made sense. They prevented damage from happening as much and not as severe.

 

Another time, loose threads from the side of carpets that normally the upright would just brush dirt into the suction channel got wound up at the sides of the brush roll, causing the brush roll to overload, belt stretch, belt broke and getting the tangled carpet thread off the side of the brush bar was harder than getting it off the middle where the two areas of the plastic beater "wave" met. The science behind overloading one side of the roller brush then resulted in the roller brush having to be entirely replaced since it bent out of shape. There is a reason to why Panasonic incorporated grills into the edge brush covers - suction could suck the dirt in as opposed to driving loose threads in and warping the brush roll/damage to the belt.

 

I am somewhat surprised that you need an open ended Panasonic for proper edge brushing - I found, compared to many other uprights at the earliest stage of my vacuum cleaner collecting, that the best ones was the TP2 and TP3 uprights. The Junior U1104 was also pretty good at getting right up to the edge, but both as you know had that design added to their floor heads and chassis.

 

 


Post# 186421 , Reply# 63   6/20/2012 at 04:53 (2,842 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
The Turbopowers are good for edge cleaning, but there are still bits of dirt right up against the skirting boards that they miss, which is why I believe one with the brushes that could actually sweep right up to the skirting board would provide 100% edge cleaning.

Post# 186438 , Reply# 64   6/20/2012 at 10:24 (2,842 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Mmm that's what the on board hose and scabbard tool is for - or at least one cleaning versatile justification.


Post# 186442 , Reply# 65   6/20/2012 at 10:35 (2,842 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Yes, I know and I wouldn't be making an issue of it if manufacturers didn't claim to Edge Clean. But because they do I expect them to perform up to what they state.

Post# 186449 , Reply# 66   6/20/2012 at 10:54 (2,842 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Oh JM. Your idea of edge brushing isn't naturally going to be the same that the brands made all those years ago - at least the TP2/s et al have it compared to the Senior or Ranger. Open brush rolls are more trouble than their worth. If you fancy it, order the screw in Oreck stiff side brushes for the Oreck XL and put them onto your uprights at the sides. You'll soon find in time that the brushes will naturally flatten and no longer remain in their shape to pull the dust in - same as it would happen with a brush roll that would be open ended - and brands would have to go to an effort to offer a replaceable section to the brush roll in order for those brushes to be replaced rather than spending more on one complete brush roll replacement.


Post# 190230 , Reply# 67   7/16/2012 at 19:13 (2,815 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

What is it with everyone an edge cleaning, what is wrong with getting out the crevice tool? if you can't be bothered to get out a crevice tool the why vacuum in the first place :P

I vacuum all the floor first, then, get out the crevice tool, go around the edges, and then after that give the floor a once over again, done. :)


Post# 190232 , Reply# 68   7/16/2012 at 19:36 (2,815 days old) by thevacuumlover1 ()        
Oh jesus christ

From what i've seen the turbopower them selves that means 1 and 2, are great cleaners and can withstand the daily abuse a vacuum cleaner gets. Remember, a vacuum cleaner is a germaphobes best friend. So if they vacuum has crappy filtration, UPGRADE THE FILTERS AND BAGS. If it has trouble edge cleaning, TOUGH deal with it and move on. Remember we are all here because we love vacuums so lets keep the love and stop asking "is this good is that good"




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