What's your opinion on the Hoover Purepower?


Forum Topics & Rules Manuals & Literature	New users Click-here to sign-up

Thread Number: 37128 / Tag: Recent Vacuum Cleaners from past 20 years
What's your opinion on the Hoover Purepower?

[Down to Last]

Post# 396605 8/11/2018 at 11:04 (2,078 days old) by mikanic (Leeds)
Checkrate/Likes I just wondered what other people thought about the Purepower series from Hoover, rather than just hearing from myself. I'll give you my view first. Personally I prefer the 2014 EU regulated model, which is the PU71 PU01001, because it is 750w in power input, and yep, I don't like vacuum cleaners with huge inputs of power. Yeah, you will get more power, but I'm more about efficiency, which is certainly what a lot of manufacturers forgot about in the late 2000s. The Purepower is pretty famous for having an input of over 2kw, which meant it needed a soft start motor. This was done to its half-brother, the Dust Manager. Both were very inefficient because they heated up very quickly and also made lots of noise- brushes in the motor? Even though the PU71 Purepower is 89dB loud, it is a nicer version of the Purepower to use, even though it uses a paper bag (you can get fleece bags for it though) and its plastic is delicate. The main reason it is better to use is it has a lower power input so you don't use lots of electricity through the mains. If you are wondering, I care for not only economy, but the environment too. When the UK leaves the EU, I just do not want to see ANY manufacturer design another cleaner that has an input of 2kw. We've learnt lots from these EU regulations, and it would be so 'older generation' if we ditch all that knowledge when we leave. Saying that, it was the P.R.C that made such power-reliant vacuums. Anyway, I'll hand the say to you! :)

Post# 396608 , Reply# 1 8/11/2018 at 13:24 (2,078 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)
Checkrate/Likes 1 I can't say I'm a huge fan of the Purepower. THe earlier ones were better when they still had the activator brushroll but they've steadilly got cheaper and cheaper over the years which lets them down. The handle release is horrible too, you really have to put some force into it and the brittle plastic is prone to cracking around the handle release. The Purepower was the first Candy-made Hoover and in my opinion was a huge step backwards from the Turbopower 2 which it replaced.

Post# 396658 , Reply# 2 8/12/2018 at 12:34 (2,077 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *I agree with both of you!* The 700 Watt motor is much more sensible than the 1800/2000W nonsense of before. That dangerous hose 'pull-back' had been reduced, and a suction release valve has been fitted. The Chinese version is flimsier, and has been successively downgraded - no bag check indicator, now no bumper, no air freshener, and the motor cover seals are very suspect! Edge-to-edge cleaning is not what it was on the Cambuslang models. Electrostatic fleece bags are very efficient, but Hoover's H74 ones are madly expensive - for four bags. Pattern spares are much more reasonably priced for five bags. Standard H20 paper bags can be used - and the pattern equivalent is just as good - and cheaper. The Purepower hose is useably and sensibly long. Upholstery tool has quite gentle bristles, but the dusting brush weirdly has scrubbing-brush stiff bristles! Crevice nozzle is of the long type. Extension tube is fine. Flex length is a little meagre though. Oh and these soleplate rubber sealing blades are hopeless bloody things. I ripped them off. All in all, the machine cleans carpets quite well, carpet pile is reactivated, and the machine isn't too heavy. The tools are fairly sensible. But it won't be a museum piece.

Post# 396689 , Reply# 3 8/13/2018 at 03:59 (2,076 days old) by mikanic (Leeds)
Checkrate/Likes *Does it seriously have those awful squeegees?* My father has a Hoover Whirlwind vacuum at home, and that has real noticeable squeegees on the bottom, with NO height adjustment. The suction is really heavy so you have to life the cleaner with both hands for easier pushing. It also means the brush roll makes easier contact with delicate floors! Back to the Purepower, Rolls_rapide, please show me a picture of the brush roll unit at the bottom! Just interested. If I could improve these Hoover uprights, I would make the squeegees raiseable if you can't turn the brush roll off. If you had all carpets, I would just have a fixed sole plate. Another Dyson fault! And a big positive shoutout to Turbo500 for pointing out the Purepower was a huge step back. It's pretty much due to the fact that someone else made their cleaners instead of the actual company. That reminds me of that awful 'the ONE' model. The Junior Deluxe would have definitely been 'the ONE'.

Post# 396708 , Reply# 4 8/13/2018 at 15:25 (2,076 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)
Checkrate/Likes I don't have any pics of the soleplate. Suffice to say, the soleplate has been cheapened, and it has lost the smoothness of the Cambuslang designs. The rubber squeegees are hinged, thus move back and forth. It is possible to pry one end out, and slide the rest of it out. Both of the squeegees act as brakes - making it impossible to move the machine The edge cleaners were just stuck on litter-pickers - which soon came adrift.

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