Thread Number: 23223
Why the Kirby Commercial Vacuums May Have Failed... |
[Down to Last] |
Post# 260078   12/18/2013 at 19:37 (3,772 days old) by KirbyClassicIII (Milwaukie, Oregon)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I'm theorizing as to exactly why all the Scott Fetzer commercial vacuum cleaners that were based on the Kirby household line, be it the Kirby Janitronic or the Comvacs, or of the American-Lincoln Super-Sweep (Super-Vac in 1982) might have failed. My theory is written below:
The two Comvac uprights sold from 1982-84 were based on different designs: the 1300 used the 516/Sanitronic motor design and internals (as did all of the American-Lincoln derivatives), whereas the 1600 used the Classic/Tradition/Heritage design, which leads me to ask: were the fields, armatures and bearings really the same (or not) for both Comvacs? It may have been a problem for Kirby dealers at the time (especially those who'd handled both the household and janitorial lines), if one had to specify exactly which Comvac model was meant in regards to field, armature and bearings. Furthermore, the Kirby Janitronic and all the American-Lincoln derivatives used an 18" wide brush roll peculiar to these models. Motor sets for Janitronic/Super-Sweep/Super-Vac/Comvac (for those of you here that have any of these vacuums mentioned, please correct me on these if I'm wrong): 103960 field / 114967 armature (Janitronic, Super-Sweep pre-1973) 103960 field / 114973 armature (Super-Sweep 1973-82, Super-Vac 180, Comvac 1300) 103982 field / 114973 armature (Comvac 1600) ~Ben |