Thread Number: 29766
/ Tag: Brand New Vacuum Cleaners
Arguement over new Royal vs. new Kirby |
[Down to Last] |
Post# 331537   8/12/2015 at 11:08 (3,150 days old) by FantomFan (Rochester, New York)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
So on one of the Kirby threads on facebook, someone gets the idea that Royals were simply cheap copies of Kirby? Hasn't Royal been in the business LONGER than Kirby? And then, the Royal is like an old Kirby Sanitronic and EVERY Kirby since the 500 series outperforms the Royal. You have got to be kidding me. Most of the people on that page were Kirby salesman.. suprise? I think not. I stated as a collector that Royals have better agitation and are much lighter. I got blasted for simply stating my opinion. The worst part is, one user stated that Royals have not changed much over the past fifty years. Um... and the Kirby has? I guess I shouldn't be suprised. Any salseman wouldn't want to make their product look bad. I'm sticking with the Royal.
|
Post# 331539 , Reply# 1   8/12/2015 at 11:59 (3,150 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Well, respectively you're only 17, you still have a lot of years to embrace both past and future vacuums. There may even be vacuums before Royal came along, and before Kirby, that offered the similar blue print.
Sadly in the UK metal Royal uprights are like gold dust. I have only ever used one but I was very impressed. |
Post# 331543 , Reply# 2   8/12/2015 at 12:17 (3,150 days old) by dysonman1 (the county)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Royal started making vacuums in 1910. This picture is the Royal model 1 - serial number 1296. Jim Kirby wouldn't meet Scott and Fetzer until 1917. Making the Kirby very late to the game. Jim Kirby's first production model vacuum was the frantz premier in 1911, they also made the Ezee "grasshopper" vacuum - WAY before Scott and Fetzer even knew what a vacuum cleaner was.
View Full Size
|
Post# 331545 , Reply# 3   8/12/2015 at 12:52 (3,150 days old) by HVRVACLVR (Altoona PA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
Royal has been in buisness longer. So wouldn't that make Kirbies a more expensive copies? JK! I don't know which one is better than the other, but I do know they are both great at deep cleaning. They are both very similar in style, which really hasn't changed in the past 50 years, well other than the colors. Both are built like beasts that will take a beating and last a long time.
But the Royal has a few things that makes me like them better than the Kirby. They're lighter, and they don't come with a bunch of useless attachements like massagers and sanders. They have an all metal fan. And they don't cost $1500 |
Post# 331546 , Reply# 4   8/12/2015 at 13:00 (3,150 days old) by charleskirby66 (Manteca, CA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
Jim Kirby invented his first vacuum in 1906. Kirby received his first vacuum patent in 1911. According to the link below, Kirby had already began informing Franz Premier's vacuums in 1910, before acquiring his first patent on his vacuum technology. Given the way information is leaked and traded, isn't it possible that Royal Vacuum had access to Jim Kirby's technology right in the same town of Cleveland?
CLICK HERE TO GO TO charleskirby66's LINK |
Post# 331554 , Reply# 6   8/12/2015 at 14:07 (3,150 days old) by kenkart ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Is they are Chinese built, that is a DEAL BREAKER for me! |
Post# 331557 , Reply# 7   8/12/2015 at 14:28 (3,150 days old) by FantomFan (Rochester, New York)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 331563 , Reply# 8   8/12/2015 at 16:08 (3,150 days old) by suckolux (Yuba City, CA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 331567 , Reply# 9   8/12/2015 at 16:47 (3,150 days old) by kirbyg6 (York)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
I have never used a royal but I like the look of their simple design. They look lighter than a kirby and less things to go wrong on them. And for kirby my grandma brought a heritage 2 when it came out and now they have the availr and what an improvement it's the best vacuum cleaner I have ever used that's my opinion :)
|
Post# 331636 , Reply# 11   8/13/2015 at 14:55 (3,149 days old) by sptyks (Skowhegan, Maine)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 331651 , Reply# 13   8/13/2015 at 16:57 (3,149 days old) by Vinvac (Dubuque IA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
I have Royals and Kirbys and love them both. I personally think the Kirby cleans better but like the weight of the Royal.
The newer Royal Everlast series are awesome cleaners. My only complaint is the noice level. Performance is awesome. You can't beat the filtration on the new Kirby's . If you keep the bags installed properly there is little to no dirt leakage. Royal even with their Hepa Media bags still leak. The metal tools on the Royal I personally like and feel are much better quality than the Kirby. However, I have never broken a Kirby tool...so they are built to last even though made of plastic. No matter, they are all fun to use and work well. |
Post# 331660 , Reply# 14   8/13/2015 at 18:13 (3,149 days old) by suckolux (Yuba City, CA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 331671 , Reply# 15   8/13/2015 at 21:33 (3,149 days old) by sptyks (Skowhegan, Maine)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
The older 7 amp U.S. made Royals were equivalent in performance to the Kirby Heritage II Legend and Legend vacuums. I've heard that the new Chinese made 10 amp Royal Everlast is equivalent in performance to the 7 amp Kirby Sentria thru Avalir systems.
I once owned a 1997 Royal which I thought was pretty good , but it didn't come close to my 2009 Sentria in cleaning ability. It was more on par with my Heritage II Legend which was made in 1988. |
Post# 331758 , Reply# 17   8/15/2015 at 12:33 (3,147 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|