|
Thread Number: 21468
a bargain at 99p on ebay |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 240149 7/15/2013 at 16:24 (3,931 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 240155 , Reply# 1 7/15/2013 at 16:38 (3,931 days old) by vacbear58 (Sutton In Ashfield & London) | ||
Senior | ||
| Post# 240159 , Reply# 2 7/15/2013 at 16:55 (3,931 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
not sure | ||
| Post# 240276 , Reply# 3 7/16/2013 at 15:38 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
its a 652C | ||
| Post# 240278 , Reply# 4 7/16/2013 at 15:40 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
was | ||
| Post# 240279 , Reply# 5 7/16/2013 at 15:42 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
motor out | ||
| Post# 240281 , Reply# 6 7/16/2013 at 15:44 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
fan off | ||
| Post# 240282 , Reply# 7 7/16/2013 at 15:46 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
fan | ||
| Post# 240284 , Reply# 8 7/16/2013 at 15:47 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
brushes | ||
| Post# 240286 , Reply# 9 7/16/2013 at 15:48 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
more | ||
| Post# 240287 , Reply# 10 7/16/2013 at 15:48 (3,930 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 240288 , Reply# 11 7/16/2013 at 15:49 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
all clean | ||
| Post# 240289 , Reply# 12 7/16/2013 at 15:51 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
finished | ||
| Post# 240292 , Reply# 13 7/16/2013 at 15:56 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
noticed
this broken bulb when i was stripping the motor out i wonder how this happend there are no signs that this machine has had any sharp bumps and the bulb visor is not broken it also needs a new bag flange and a belt the brush roll is rusty but thats not a problem . Okthats it for tonight will start spraying tomorrow
| ||
| Post# 240305 , Reply# 15 7/16/2013 at 17:03 (3,930 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240306 , Reply# 16 7/16/2013 at 17:04 (3,930 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 240308 , Reply# 17 7/16/2013 at 17:07 (3,930 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240310 , Reply# 18 7/16/2013 at 17:12 (3,930 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240314 , Reply# 19 7/16/2013 at 17:17 (3,930 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240315 , Reply# 20 7/16/2013 at 17:18 (3,930 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
Well of course Electrolux didn't have 'Hoover' stamped on the front. I do think I missed something here, sorry. | ||
| Post# 240319 , Reply# 21 7/16/2013 at 17:19 (3,930 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240324 , Reply# 22 7/16/2013 at 17:25 (3,930 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240328 , Reply# 23 7/16/2013 at 17:28 (3,930 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240333 , Reply# 24 7/16/2013 at 17:35 (3,930 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
well, certainly in uprights... | ||
| Post# 240335 , Reply# 26 7/16/2013 at 17:35 (3,930 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
I don't think its "class." Infact its a totally inappropriate word where Hoover is concerned. Hoover vacuums in the UK never really exuded class, but rather were better built as VR rightly suggests and went on the back of their "beats-as-it-sweeps-as-it-cleans," selling principle. They were also far more robust than a lot of its peers but they were also traditionally heavier than most of their rivals too.
Electrolux did things differently though and buyers took advantage of more technical features that were more user friendly. If that's called Class, I'll go with it. | ||
| Post# 240337 , Reply# 27 7/16/2013 at 17:39 (3,930 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240338 , Reply# 28 7/16/2013 at 17:43 (3,930 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240339 , Reply# 29 7/16/2013 at 17:48 (3,930 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240345 , Reply# 31 7/16/2013 at 17:56 (3,930 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
i think
some of the earlier Electroluxes [the Zs]were every bit as durable as there Hoover counterparts i have four here considering the youngest of them is almost 50 years old i would say thats durable and if you want to see quality try taking one apart then do the same with say a goblin of the same era youn will soon see what i mean
| ||
| Post# 240347 , Reply# 32 7/16/2013 at 18:02 (3,930 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
Benny... Although the 500's had quiet motors, they had noisy brushrolls...That doubled together, would that not make up to the same noise level as a Hoover Junior? Plus the Juniors sound much nicer to listen to in general, I don't think that growly brushroll noise would of appealed to the consumer, but I could be wrong. | ||
| Post# 240350 , Reply# 34 7/16/2013 at 18:09 (3,930 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
Alex.... You don't need to tell me about the noisy brush rolls, as I repaired a good deal of 500 cleaners in my time and know this. Indeed my own mother had a 504 in 1975 and when using it on the loose carpet squares upstairs, the noise in the room below was outstanding. | ||
| Post# 240351 , Reply# 35 7/16/2013 at 18:11 (3,930 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240356 , Reply# 37 7/16/2013 at 18:58 (3,930 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240357 , Reply# 38 7/16/2013 at 18:59 (3,930 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240567 , Reply# 39 7/17/2013 at 02:52 (3,930 days old) by beko1987 (Stokenchurch, United Kingdom) | ||
|
That senior came up well! You doign a video once it has a new belt and brushes?! It's one machien that I've never had! Prices go too high for me, and I've never seen one locally or on freecycle! | ||
| Post# 240579 , Reply# 40 7/17/2013 at 05:15 (3,929 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
I am astounded that Which? used the fact the dust bags could not be re-used as a negative? I know this was the era of open top bags which could be re-used, but by saying what they did they made it sound like bags SHOULD be re-used!
They most certainly should not. Once a bag has been filled once the pores in the paper are already clogged with micro-dust particleks and emptying the "physical" dirt will not restore 100% of the air flow, thus rendering it a very risky thing to do repeatedly if you wish your vacuum cleaner to perform well and (in the case of clean fans) last a long time. I have to leave now for an interview, but will post more later. | ||
| Post# 240580 , Reply# 41 7/17/2013 at 05:31 (3,929 days old) by beko1987 (Stokenchurch, United Kingdom) | ||
|
I never got the 'reuseable bag' thing either. I'll re-use it if I;ve been vacuuming up shredded paper etc, or more usually with the turbopowers is just swap one bag around them all, thus saving on bags (use non genuine ones too for normal use, saves the genuine bags!) On a machine like a dirty fan, havign a ruined bag must ruin the performance completely! | ||
| Post# 240585 , Reply# 42 7/17/2013 at 06:48 (3,929 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
"On a machine like a dirty fan, havign a ruined bag must ruin the performance completely!" Well there is that, but even more serious would be with a clean fan (such as the Convertible) that a re-used bag will restrict air flow (and thus motor cooling) and could also burst.
Now I know Hoover produced H4 and H18 "twice use" bags, but this was simply to appease people who may have been put off buying or maintaining a bagged machine due to the price of buying bags. The fact they could use one bag twice would have halved their running costs and "sweetened the pill", so to speak. Indeed it worked and many people used the re-usable bags more than twice, often into double figures even (my 1994 Turbopower 1000 had a twice-use bag in it when I got it which looked to have been used for years). Needless to say a couple of years into my ownership the years of neglect took its toll and the motor blew. As I stated above, once a dust bag has been filled to half way the pores are already clogged up with dust and although emptying the bag will restore suction, this is to the detriment of the motor as it will be having to work very hard to counteract the impeded air flow. Much like if you load a car up with heavy cargo then floor the accelerator - it will still accelerate well but the engine and transmission will be working terribly hard to counteract the weight. Of course Hoover knew exactly what they were doing, and that people would use the bags more than twice. This was actually very much in their interests as more broken down vacuums mean more people buying new Hoovers, or at the very least getting them repaired by Hoover contractors. In every sense the introduction of clean fan vacuum cleaners has been a godsend for manufacturers as - by their very nature - they wear out much quicker than dirty fan cleaners (on which having a full or re-used bag does no damage at all, other than to impede performance), but they are also much more practical so consumers will happily buy them all the same. | ||
| Post# 240603 , Reply# 43 7/17/2013 at 11:13 (3,929 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
bag reuse
i am having a quiet little laugh at all this talk about bag usage and thinking of my mum and our old Hoover junior that poor old thing got some hammer the bag was used over and over again till it fell apart or burst only then would a new one be fitted most of my relatives did the same as i got older and learned more about these things i would change the bag when i thought it was getting a bit full i would also get vacs in the shop absolutely full to bursting .Have any of you ever been around a junior when the over full bag bursts theres dust everywhere and its almost as if the machine gives a sigh of relief when its screaming motor starts to suck again
| ||
| Post# 240605 , Reply# 44 7/17/2013 at 11:18 (3,929 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240610 , Reply# 45 7/17/2013 at 11:49 (3,929 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
theres | ||
| Post# 240612 , Reply# 46 7/17/2013 at 11:52 (3,929 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
another | ||
| Post# 240636 , Reply# 47 7/17/2013 at 14:38 (3,929 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
i need | ||
| Post# 240654 , Reply# 48 7/17/2013 at 16:16 (3,929 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
JM, as usual, what a lot of old hoof!
Sometimes your lack of knowledge really amazes me.
Before the disposable bags came along, permanent dust bags were of the shake out variety and at that time "Which" were only going with what they had previously with the design. Are you suggesting then that a material shake out bag on a Hoover Junior was detrimental if it wasn't washed every time? As usual, instead of slating what has gone before, why not try and see things from that point in that period of time? To suggest that a clean air vacuum breaks down far more frequently when its dust bag is reused time and time again which blows the motor is mere opinion - not all brands do the same and its down to the owner who will choose to clean the on board filter as well as the dust bag - and I really wish you would cease making these statements - they are not true given that some brands last longer than others, both of the clean fan variety AND dirty fan variety. As for your cooling of the dirty fan on a Hoover Junior - so what? It still has to pick up stones and natural grit. That breaks the fan unless you have a metal model. Clean fan allows all that to bypass with a sealed motor. | ||
| Post# 240669 , Reply# 49 7/17/2013 at 16:52 (3,929 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
With all due respect Sebo_Fan - there were no shake-out bagged Hoovers (or any other brand to my very low knowledge) on sale at the time of that review, so I don't see how they could be comparing the Convertible to a model with shake-out bag?
I don't see where you have a problem with my statement regarding clean fan vacuum cleaners breaking down more often than dirty fan equivalents? A clean fan vacuum has to pull air through the bag and filters before reaching the motor - at which point it cools the commutator etc... As is going to happen even if you keep the filters clean and bag regularly changed, the air flow is going to decrease and as such the cooling will disipate. Over time that lack of cooling (exaserbated by Hoover producing re-usable bags which were frequently used more than twice) will lead to premature motor failure. I'm not saying they'd break down overnight - indeed it may take years - but they will, generally, break down quicker than dirty fan vacuums which don't rely on 100% airflow to cool the motor. Yes there will be dirty fan vacuums which are poorly made and break down earlier, or suffer damage from picking up stones et cetera, but generally speaking they will last longer (Benny himself said the Hoover Juniors and Seniors could last forever). After posting my reply I actually thought it was free from any contention, but it seems not. Once again I'm sorry that you disagree with what I said and consider it "old hoof". I hope one day I am knowledgeable enough to make a post that you can agree with, but that doesn't look terribly likely. | ||
| Post# 240684 , Reply# 50 7/17/2013 at 17:23 (3,929 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
If you have very low knowledge....
Building up knowledge is by reading and reading between the lines.
If these Which reports are stating that a negative statistic is the lack of shake out bags, then clearly you can tell what vacuums prior to that date of testing had that option. Shake out bags were quite common - I found many with the Junior models I bought years ago. They were not as porous as paper dust bags and they did not ruin those machines when the changeover to paper bags were installed. The cloth was a little porous, evident by the excess dust coating the outer bag inside. You will probably have seen it yourself - a slight downside to the soft bag design in general compared to hard box - regardless I may add, of whether the machine has had a permanent material dust bag or a paper bag throughout its life. Your statement regarding to why brands are now making clean fan vacuums is NOT about wear and tear, or shortage of life etc. Infact the very thought that brands are purposefully producing clean air vacs so that they don't have a long life is foolhardy - clean air vacs were basically introduced so that additional hoses could be added AND also allowing better filtered air. Yet again, as with previous posts, you come back to heralding everything with a positive slant at Hoover's door for their classic uprights. Well, sorry not any more - move on - respect those who have other vintage brands once and for all. | ||
| Post# 240692 , Reply# 51 7/17/2013 at 17:37 (3,929 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
I agree with what you've said there, except this paragraph:
"Your statement regarding to why brands are now making clean fan vacuums is NOT about wear and tear, or shortage of life etc. Infact the very thought that brands are purposefully producing clean air vacs so that they don't have a long life is foolhardy - clean air vacs were basically introduced so that additional hoses could be added AND also allowing better filtered air." I never said manufacturers made clean fan vacuum cleaners for the purpose of minimising service life, but rather that it was a plus for them all the same. | ||
| Post# 240695 , Reply# 52 7/17/2013 at 17:43 (3,929 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
EH?? GO TO REPLY 42: | ||
| Post# 240735 , Reply# 53 7/18/2013 at 02:46 (3,929 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 240785 , Reply# 54 7/18/2013 at 13:53 (3,928 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Do I have to explain this to you?
By adding the words at the start of the sentence reflecting what you said before, "in EVERY SENSE,." Well, how can it be every sense when some certain brands last longer than others? You can't turn back what you have said Jamie. You can't go back on what you referred to and then try and dodge the issue here - you can't tar every brand's clean fan vacuums with the same brush. In the same breath, IF manufacturers could see into the future of producing clean air vacs just for them to break down in order for buyers to keep buying, it hasn't really worked - Hoover would have greater sales over other brands - but as we know, it's not really the case - either judged by Mintel reports or reports from other actual organisations that collect reliability data etc. Whether or not you want to believe in them is up to you. | ||
| Post# 240979 , Reply# 55 7/19/2013 at 16:26 (3,927 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
its coming on | ||
| Post# 240980 , Reply# 56 7/19/2013 at 16:27 (3,927 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
2 | ||
| Post# 240982 , Reply# 57 7/19/2013 at 16:33 (3,927 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
3
just waiting for the new brushes to turn up and i can get the lid back on .the bag flange is fitted and the bag is ready to go back on you can just see the bottom of it in the pic i also fitted a new bellows the old one hadnt split but it wasnt far off i have polished the hood with chrome cleaner and its looking good but there are one or two deep scratches still cant expect it to be perfect
| ||
| Post# 240985 , Reply# 58 7/19/2013 at 16:53 (3,927 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
This looks outstanding. One point though, the twist in the belt is on the wrong side. | ||
| Post# 241035 , Reply# 60 7/20/2013 at 03:36 (3,927 days old) by vacbear58 (Sutton In Ashfield & London) | ||
|
belt | ||
| Post# 241037 , Reply# 61 7/20/2013 at 03:52 (3,927 days old) by hoover119dude (england) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 241049 , Reply# 64 7/20/2013 at 06:56 (3,926 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 241052 , Reply# 65 7/20/2013 at 07:44 (3,926 days old) by z30soulbrother (West Midlands, UK) | ||
|
senior yes i worked in a pub part time in the mid 80s and the gaffer bought 2 seniors with orange hoods black metalwork and cords and grey shake out bags id never come across them before...in the body of a standard 652! | ||
| Post# 241072 , Reply# 66 7/20/2013 at 11:33 (3,926 days old) by vacbear58 (Sutton In Ashfield & London) | ||
|
652
Si
They actually sound like the commercial version of the 652, I saw them advertised as late as 1992 or so, there was one on ebay a while back. This actually outlasted the commercial version of the power plus I believe. In some ways better than the 912 which beko1987 has posted a thread about in that they were not nearly so heavy and bulky to push around, so ideal for hotel rooms and the like Al | ||
| Post# 241077 , Reply# 67 7/20/2013 at 12:12 (3,926 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 241082 , Reply# 68 7/20/2013 at 13:13 (3,926 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 241083 , Reply# 69 7/20/2013 at 13:31 (3,926 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
gsheen It won't on a Senior, for all the reasons I mentioned before. | ||
| Post# 241085 , Reply# 70 7/20/2013 at 13:38 (3,926 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 241088 , Reply# 72 7/20/2013 at 14:10 (3,926 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 241091 , Reply# 73 7/20/2013 at 14:15 (3,926 days old) by borusa (Edinburgh) | ||
if you haven't already seen nice vid of the back and orange commercial seniors
CLICK HERE TO GO TO borusa's LINK | ||
| Post# 241093 , Reply# 74 7/20/2013 at 14:19 (3,926 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
No it's not gravity that causes the belt to slip off a Senior, it's because of the direction the pulley turns that the belt has to be kept in place. | ||
| Post# 241104 , Reply# 75 7/20/2013 at 16:45 (3,926 days old) by z30soulbrother (West Midlands, UK) | ||
|
guys cheers for that ! the vac in that link is the one i used 2 of at the pub mid 80s im sure we had a hose and tools as well but in white probably 1 off an old senior | ||
| Post# 241232 , Reply# 76 7/21/2013 at 14:46 (3,925 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
i wondered
if someone would notice the belt was on wrong especially when you can see the diagram just under the belt as for the bad suction on the senior some years ago i made a special converter [just for somthing to do]i used a spare senior sole plate with a converter from a later hoover turbo bolted onto it then sealed with bathroom sealant it worked a treat the suction was very impressive a spring loaded clothes peg was perfect for holding in the speed switch why Hoover didnt go for somthing like this instead of the totaly useless converter in the back arangement .Now i know someone is going to say the idea was to fit the tools without stopping the machine yes thats all well and good but why when theres hardly any suction because its escaping somewhere else .I still have that homemade converter somwhere i will dig it out and put a photo on if anyone is interested also if anyone is curious as to how well a senior can really suck heres what to do take out the brushroll and belt put the soleplate back push in the speed switch and turn it on then cover the openings with your hands its quite an eye opener
| ||
| Post# 241264 , Reply# 78 7/21/2013 at 17:51 (3,925 days old) by z30soulbrother (West Midlands, UK) | ||
|
older senior the older senior with the side converter system had better suction than the back slide in type | ||
| Post# 241317 , Reply# 79 7/21/2013 at 22:06 (3,925 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
VR - I agree - of the many Seniors I rescued, only 1 out of the 4 I had at the time had been used with the convertor/tools. Junior models were similar - you could tell by taking off the front faceplate on the Junior and inspecting the channel to the drive belt for the usual scrapes when fitting the tool convertor/hose mount and most of those channels are scrape free. Same with the Senior, but obviously by reverse since the convertor goes in at the back.
I think Hoover knew that they had good metal upright vacs and left it at that as they already had a large amount of cylinder vacs that buyers could buy instead - a bit like the same marketing decision that Oreck followed until the late appearance of a proper sledge canister vacuum a few years ago. | ||
| Post# 241349 , Reply# 80 7/22/2013 at 03:13 (3,925 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
Another thing we have to take into account is that back in the 60s and 70s people weren't looking for a vacuum cleaner to clean carpets, hard floors AND stairs/upholstery. They were happy to have an upright for carpets and a cylinder for hard flooring, stairs and upholstery (or a handheld vacuum where there was no hard flooring).
These days however, manufacturers have to make an upright that can clean carpets, hard flooring, stairs and upholstery or nobody will buy it!! It just shows how greedy we have become that we expext one machine to do the job of two or three. Of course, in order to fullfil these expectations, the manufacturers will cut costs in other places (I.E. fitting cheap high wattage motors instead of designing better airways). You can't have your cake and eat it!! Things were made better when people were less demanding. Yes the old Seniors and Juniors might not have had HEPA filtration, stair cleaning hoses and claims of "2200 Watts!", but they lasted decades with just simple maintenance. These days you have to practically rebuild a vacuum cleaner annually to keep it going. | ||
| Post# 241365 , Reply# 83 7/22/2013 at 04:27 (3,925 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
"You can't have your cake and eat it!! Things were made better when people were less demanding."
It isn't society's fault that we as the consumer have become demanding, its the greed of the brands, Jamie! For example, whereas now today we know that a cylinder vacuum's suction only floor tool is available to clean hard floors, brands went out of their way to claim one thing or another. Hoover were at their best advertising the merits of their polisher upright for example. A few bought into the idea of polishing their hard lino floors expecting the machine to clean the hard floors rather than suck up dirt from it! Similarly when it came to Hoover's shampooer, oh yes it shampoos carpets very well, but what about the dirt that came up? (Link to old 1950s advert) Hoover isn't alone in this marketing and advertising - other brands claimed one machine could do something the other or its rival couldn't and it came from other lifestyle products like cars as technology began to improve. Britain was so impoverished after the war, not even the U.S could save us from massive loans to bolster the UK economy. Please stop banging on about how brands these days are building average vacuums that break annually. It is not the case with every brand - just because your cherished Hoover Europe models have gone down the pan doesn't mean you can tar everything with the same brush. Junior and Senior uprights may have been built well, but their soft bags were hardly reliable requiring replacements the moment the zip broke. VR is spot on with the statement about families with their appliances - not only could many NOT afford to have two machines in the home, many families after the war were offered hire purchase and weekly payments of paying for such appliances too. This is where, effectively the catalogues got the idea from, many of which of the ones that still exist today, weekly payments are still offered for families on a budget with different kinds of appliances. CLICK HERE TO GO TO sebo_fan's LINK | ||
| Post# 241374 , Reply# 84 7/22/2013 at 05:05 (3,924 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
"Please stop banging on about how brands these days are building average vacuums that break annually. It is not the case with every brand - just because your cherished Hoover Europe models have gone down the pan doesn't mean you can tar everything with the same brush. Junior and Senior uprights may have been built well, but their soft bags were hardly reliable requiring replacements the moment the zip broke." I am not "banging on" about Hoovers in particular - I'm talking about the main brands (with the exception of Kirby, Sebo, Numatic and Miele) who manufacture (or rather, get Chinese companies to manufacture) vacuum cleaners for the "general consumer" - I.E. bottom to mid range.
Of course there will always be exceptions, but generally speaking most cheaper vacuum cleaners ARE poorly made and will break down very quickly. I'm not saying this with no experience either - before I started collecting vacuum cleaners I owned a number of cleaners which broke down in less than a year. 2008 PROACTION CV9230 - Lasted 6 months before the thermal cut out kept activating after 10 minutes of use even with clean filters and an empty bin. 2009 PROACTION VC9630 - Lasted 7-8 months before it started cutting out every now and then, until one day smoke started coming from where the flex entered the cleaner and it almost caught fire. 2009 HOOVER DUST MANAGER - Clogged up after only a few uses, thermal cut out kept activating after only a few minutes use and eventually it developed a loose power connection where the flex entered the machine. | ||
| Post# 241429 , Reply# 85 7/22/2013 at 09:06 (3,924 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
fitted carpets | ||
| Post# 241461 , Reply# 86 7/22/2013 at 11:10 (3,924 days old) by vacbear58 (Sutton In Ashfield & London) | ||
|
Multi vacuums
Jamie
You are completely mistaken in your statement that, in the UK, people were not expecting to have one cleaner to do everything - that is EXACTLY what they were expecting! Fair enough, if you had a lot of hard floors then you might tend towards a cylinder, a lot of carpets (or carpet squares if the carpets were not fitted) it was an upright. As Benny says, the cylinder offered a lot more versatility than the upright unless you were going to be very well organised when cleaning. With a cylinder it was so much easy to whip off the wand as you went, to do round the edges of the room rather than pull the front of the cleaner, attach the converter etc. Why do you think Hoover adopted such a compromised system for the Senior tools? By the way, I agree with Simon that the suction out of the side entry Hoovers seems stronger than the back entry. In general the only second cleaner you might have had was the likes of a dustette or Goblin Imp - there were not many women going to trail two heavy cleaners around the house. Back in the 1950s and 60s everything was comparatively more expensive than it is now, and the vacuum cleaner had to compete with that new washing machine, cooker, (fridge if you were lucky) car, TV, radiogram, carpets and of course all the furniture and fittings to go inside what was often a pristine new home. And often on once income as mostly housewives did not go out to work. That is why there was a brisk market in re-conditioned cleaners as well as the bottom of range cleaners like Phoenix, Siroma, Bylock & Goblin which were, in general, cheap and cheerful. But a lot better than nothing - and as much as 50% cheaper than even the mid range Hoover Cylinder and Connie or Lux 64 which came in around £20.00 or so. Even the Junior was a premium cleaner then at around £27.00. If you wanted "the very best" then it was the Lux 65 at £30 or the Senior at £35.00 (there were of course other makes and models as well, I use these for illustration). Al | ||
| Post# 241482 , Reply# 87 7/22/2013 at 12:20 (3,924 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
i agree
with vacbear these things really were expensive back then and dont forget a woman couldnt get hire purchase unless her hubby said it was ok it really was a diffrent world in our house we had a washingmachine but no vac about twice a week i would have to walk round to my grandmas house with my sisters Tansad [thats a vintage buggy for our younger members]my grandad would put the vac in it i would then wheel it back to our house my mum would clean the house then i would take it back it wasnt till 1963 that my mum got her own brand new Hoover junior a grey and white one on monday mornings my grandma would use the same pram to bring her weeks washing round to our house then both her and my mum would do the two households washing in the huge Parnall washer with its electric wringer [it seemed huge to me only being about 7 and not tall enough to see over the top ]even that was second hand we had very fiew electric appliances we did have a radiogram though it was one of my parents wedding presents another very expensive bit of kit at the time [i still have it ]huge shinny thing with BUSH across the front in brass letters here it is
| ||
| Post# 241485 , Reply# 88 7/22/2013 at 13:07 (3,924 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Yet again you trip yourself up, JM. Look to your reply 80. In your closing paragraph you say
"..the old Seniors and Juniors might not have had HEPA filtration, stair cleaning hoses and claims of "2200 Watts!", but they lasted decades with just simple maintenance. These days you have to practically rebuild a vacuum cleaner annually to keep it going..." The first mention of other brands in your opinion just comes AFTER I have asked you to stop banging on about Hoovers. | ||
| Post# 241489 , Reply# 89 7/22/2013 at 13:32 (3,924 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
ok guys | ||
| Post# 241490 , Reply# 90 7/22/2013 at 13:33 (3,924 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
all finished | ||
| Post# 241491 , Reply# 91 7/22/2013 at 13:34 (3,924 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
another | ||
| Post# 241492 , Reply# 92 7/22/2013 at 13:35 (3,924 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
last one | ||
Post# 241499 , Reply# 93 7/22/2013 at 13:57 (3,924 days old) by gottahaveahoove  (Pittston, Pennsylvania, 18640) |
||
You did a BEAUTIFUL job | ||
| Post# 241503 , Reply# 94 7/22/2013 at 14:04 (3,924 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
thanks John | ||
|
Post# 241506 , Reply# 95 7/22/2013 at 14:12 (3,924 days old) by gottahaveahoove (Pittston, Pennsylvania, 18640) |
||
|
That's awful!! | ||
| Post# 241526 , Reply# 96 7/22/2013 at 15:34 (3,924 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 241531 , Reply# 97 7/22/2013 at 15:42 (3,924 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 241616 , Reply# 98 7/23/2013 at 01:31 (3,924 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
thanks guys | ||
| Post# 241621 , Reply# 99 7/23/2013 at 02:01 (3,924 days old) by vacbear58 (Sutton In Ashfield & London) | ||
|
I was right!
I said you would do a bang up job, and you certainly did - it looks like you just took it out of the box!
Love the Bush radiogram, my parents had a Regentone - the radio and amp looked quite similar although ours had a BSR deck. In 1974 it was replaced by a Ferguson - the sort where the top moved back as you pulled down the front. Hmmmm, thinking that we could do a thread of the appliances we grew up with ...... Al | ||
| Post# 241623 , Reply# 100 7/23/2013 at 02:43 (3,924 days old) by beko1987 (Stokenchurch, United Kingdom) | ||
|
That is excellent! I hope to be able to restore machines to that standard one day! You could sell that as brand new and people probably wouldn't know the difference! | ||
| Post# 241652 , Reply# 101 7/23/2013 at 06:30 (3,923 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
the radiogram
cost 102 guineeas a vast amount of cash back in 57 and its an early attempt at stereo i think the ferguson you reffer to Vacbear may have been this one i have just done a refurb on this for a friend as for the senior i do like them to look there best i still get a bit of a buzz when first switching on after a full makeover you can hear the crisp new bag inflate and then theres the Hoover drone as it knocks the living daylights out of the carpet by the way for our younger members benefit a guinnea [sure thats spelt wrong]was 1 pound and i shilling or 21 shillings now i just know someone is going to ask me what a shilling was ha
| ||
| Post# 241653 , Reply# 102 7/23/2013 at 06:33 (3,923 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
vintage appliances | ||
| Post# 241657 , Reply# 103 7/23/2013 at 06:57 (3,923 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
how about this for starters | ||
| Post# 241660 , Reply# 104 7/23/2013 at 07:13 (3,923 days old) by kirbymodel2c (Nottingham, England) | ||
Hi | ||
| Post# 241666 , Reply# 105 7/23/2013 at 07:53 (3,923 days old) by vacbear58 (Sutton In Ashfield & London) | ||
|
Radiogram
The pretty much the one Anthony, ours was slightly later with a Garrard 2025 turntable and had base & treble controls instead what looks like just a tone control.
I often think about getting one, but, realistically, I don't have anywhere to put it. And, realistically, it would not be as good as my current setup anyway. Anyway, lets not let these things take away from the lovely job you have done on the Senior, it would be better to start a new thread in Household Al | ||
| Post# 241681 , Reply# 106 7/23/2013 at 10:14 (3,923 days old) by z30soulbrother (West Midlands, UK) | ||
|
senior that senior looks brilliant mate u can almost smell the newness | ||
| Post# 241698 , Reply# 107 7/23/2013 at 12:44 (3,923 days old) by borusa (Edinburgh) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 241748 , Reply# 108 7/23/2013 at 16:17 (3,923 days old) by anthony (leeds uk) | ||
|
just a little tip guys | ||
| Forum Index: | 
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
