Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
1936 Hoover Junior 375
89 views
Skip to first unread message
tabb...@gmail.com
Jan 13, 2019, 9:00:33 PM1/13/19
to
I've done the 1940s ones, fairly straightforward. Roller brush bearing cleanout & oil, thorought electrical safety checks & cleanup, wash bag, new belt on one, pad a stripped screw socket thread with a bit of card, new plugs - think that's about it.
I've not started on the '36 yet, so am looking for any preliminary comments. The motor runs but is stiff, so will open that up. It has the original 1930s bag which I absolutely do not want to see damaged - but it's filthy and I assume well clogged. IME cloth bags on old hoovers always need thorough washing, question is how I can do that without degrading the applied lettering or bobbling the cloth? Handwashing in lukewarm water has some tendency to cause such damage.
There's also a much later junior with a seized motor. Other than that it works great ;)
NT
I've not started on the '36 yet, so am looking for any preliminary comments. The motor runs but is stiff, so will open that up. It has the original 1930s bag which I absolutely do not want to see damaged - but it's filthy and I assume well clogged. IME cloth bags on old hoovers always need thorough washing, question is how I can do that without degrading the applied lettering or bobbling the cloth? Handwashing in lukewarm water has some tendency to cause such damage.
There's also a much later junior with a seized motor. Other than that it works great ;)
NT
gghe...@gmail.com
Jan 14, 2019, 1:35:42 PM1/14/19
to
some site called vacuumland.org. I assume you know it already.
George H.
tabb...@gmail.com
Jan 14, 2019, 2:33:23 PM1/14/19
to
On Monday, 14 January 2019 18:35:42 UTC, gghe...@gmail.com wrote:
I saw the vintage section on there, limited info there though. Seen a few youtube vids too, nothing so far on repairing the motors.
I like a lot of old stuff, not just vacs. When people say 'you can't live in a museum' I say 'why?' There seems to be some sort of belief that technology has changed out of all recognition, that living with old tech is not practical. That ain't so at all in many areas. Half a century old is a bit modern for me.
NT
I like a lot of old stuff, not just vacs. When people say 'you can't live in a museum' I say 'why?' There seems to be some sort of belief that technology has changed out of all recognition, that living with old tech is not practical. That ain't so at all in many areas. Half a century old is a bit modern for me.
NT
N_Cook
Jan 14, 2019, 3:06:33 PM1/14/19
to
On 14/01/2019 02:00, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
> I've done the 1940s ones, fairly straightforward. Roller brush bearing cleanout & oil, thorought electrical safety checks & cleanup, wash bag, new belt on one, pad a stripped screw socket thread with a bit of card, new plugs - think that's about it.
>
> I've not started on the '36 yet, so am looking for any preliminary comments.. The motor runs but is stiff, so will open that up. It has the original 1930s bag which I absolutely do not want to see damaged - but it's filthy and I assume well clogged. IME cloth bags on old hoovers always need thorough washing, question is how I can do that without degrading the applied lettering or bobbling the cloth? Handwashing in lukewarm water has some tendency to cause such damage.
> I've done the 1940s ones, fairly straightforward. Roller brush bearing cleanout & oil, thorought electrical safety checks & cleanup, wash bag, new belt on one, pad a stripped screw socket thread with a bit of card, new plugs - think that's about it.
>
>
> There's also a much later junior with a seized motor. Other than that it works great ;)
>
>
> NT
>
On the safety front, no perished rubber sleeving/insulation ?
> There's also a much later junior with a seized motor. Other than that it works great ;)
>
>
> NT
>
tabb...@gmail.com
Jan 14, 2019, 7:44:15 PM1/14/19
to
On Monday, 14 January 2019 20:06:33 UTC, N_Cook wrote:
Mechanically they're in worse shape than I expected, but electrically they're fine. 2 have clearly had their leads replaced, rubber doesn't last forever. The 119s even meet the criteria for double insulated appliances - don't know about the 30s one yet. It's original rubber lead is still serviceable.
What's it like to live with a 1940s 225watt vacuum cleaner? Well, I won't be making any of these my daily machine. Compared to modern vacs the 119s are heavier & metal based, both of which increase the rolling friction significantly. As for suction, the 225W motor with its inefficient dirty airstream fan does the job ok. I think the beater bars are the key to that, a clever innovation. Emptying the bag can be messy if windy. The original instructions said first put down newspaper. I'll stick to emptying them outdoors direct into a bin. I may try using paper bags with them to avoid the bags eventuallly clogging - not that I plan to use them much. They do the job but I'd rather use the Dyson (currently getting repaired).
I've not tried using the handheld hose/wand yet, but everything I've heard & figured out tells me that on the hose they're terrible. 225W with no form of agitation - meh, the 1930s dustette beats that.
Old tech is an eyeopener sometimes. Besides often being ingenious, some of it can do things modern tech struggles to.
NT
What's it like to live with a 1940s 225watt vacuum cleaner? Well, I won't be making any of these my daily machine. Compared to modern vacs the 119s are heavier & metal based, both of which increase the rolling friction significantly. As for suction, the 225W motor with its inefficient dirty airstream fan does the job ok. I think the beater bars are the key to that, a clever innovation. Emptying the bag can be messy if windy. The original instructions said first put down newspaper. I'll stick to emptying them outdoors direct into a bin. I may try using paper bags with them to avoid the bags eventuallly clogging - not that I plan to use them much. They do the job but I'd rather use the Dyson (currently getting repaired).
I've not tried using the handheld hose/wand yet, but everything I've heard & figured out tells me that on the hose they're terrible. 225W with no form of agitation - meh, the 1930s dustette beats that.
Old tech is an eyeopener sometimes. Besides often being ingenious, some of it can do things modern tech struggles to.
NT
Dumas Walker
Jan 15, 2019, 11:15:10 PM1/15/19
to
>I like a lot of old stuff, not just vacs. When people say 'you can't live in a
>museum' I say 'why?' There seems to be some sort of belief that technology has
>changed out of all recognition, that living with old tech is not practical.
>That ain't so at all
> in many areas. Half a century old is a bit modern for me.
In my mind, if you can still repair/get parts for it, and it still does the
>museum' I say 'why?' There seems to be some sort of belief that technology has
>changed out of all recognition, that living with old tech is not practical.
>That ain't so at all
> in many areas. Half a century old is a bit modern for me.
job you require of it, why not? :)
---
* SLMR 2.1a * DalekDOS I/O Err: (I)Obey (V)ision impaired (E)xterminate
tabb...@gmail.com
Jan 16, 2019, 10:18:37 AM1/16/19
to
On Wednesday, 16 January 2019 04:15:10 UTC, Dumas Walker wrote:
> >I like a lot of old stuff, not just vacs. When people say 'you can't live in a
> >museum' I say 'why?' There seems to be some sort of belief that technology has
> >changed out of all recognition, that living with old tech is not practical.
> >That ain't so at all
> > in many areas. Half a century old is a bit modern for me.
>
> In my mind, if you can still repair/get parts for it, and it still does the
> job you require of it, why not? :)
There are plenty of parts available for those Hoovers. For older stuff the usual thing is to repair the parts. It's far easier than it would be to do that on modern kit. And usually quicker than searching for & waiting for a replacement part.
> >I like a lot of old stuff, not just vacs. When people say 'you can't live in a
> >museum' I say 'why?' There seems to be some sort of belief that technology has
> >changed out of all recognition, that living with old tech is not practical.
> >That ain't so at all
> > in many areas. Half a century old is a bit modern for me.
>
> In my mind, if you can still repair/get parts for it, and it still does the
> job you require of it, why not? :)
NT
peterw...@gmail.com
Jan 16, 2019, 10:49:10 AM1/16/19
to
On Tuesday, January 15, 2019 at 11:15:10 PM UTC-5, Dumas Walker wrote:
> In my mind, if you can still repair/get parts for it, and it still does the
> job you require of it, why not? :)
>
What is revealing is going over any given carpet, room or area rug with say... a Kirby in excellent condition, then going over the same location immediately thereafter with something like a TOL Dyson. For many years, we would keep the "new" vacuum at home and transplant the old one to our summer house. Until, 12 years ago, we got a Dyson.
> In my mind, if you can still repair/get parts for it, and it still does the
> job you require of it, why not? :)
>
As to R&M, I have replaced the filters, internal hoses and brush-bar on the Dyson - all in, about 20 minutes work and less than $75 for OEM Dyson parts. Otherwise, it has managed 4,800 square feet, two long-haired cats, a golden and a Scottie without any trouble from purchase to-date.
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
tabb...@gmail.com
Jan 16, 2019, 3:04:48 PM1/16/19
to
NT
peterw...@gmail.com
Jan 16, 2019, 4:00:35 PM1/16/19
to
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 3:04:48 PM UTC-5, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
> I just did that comparison using first the dyson, then the ancient Hoover 119. The Hoover did a better job. Methinks the Dyson is not feeling well. I don't yet know why: the hoses are all clear, the ball sucks great without the cyclone on, the cyclone I washed out, the filters have been washed...
There are two places where a Dyson will accumulate blockages that are not obvious:
> I just did that comparison using first the dyson, then the ancient Hoover 119. The Hoover did a better job. Methinks the Dyson is not feeling well. I don't yet know why: the hoses are all clear, the ball sucks great without the cyclone on, the cyclone I washed out, the filters have been washed...
a) At the slip-joint between the ball and the wand. That will hang up and not transition properly, and sometimes form a tail of crud will extend half-way up the wand.
b) Between the knuckle-joint and the sweeper head. There is a nubby hose there that slips through the articulated head, then snaps onto the upright section. This will often split right at either end, the tear being invisible under normal use.
https://www.amazon.com/d/Vacuum-Hoses/Genuine-Dyson-Internal-Assembly-DY-916579-01/B00DCRERRK/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1546367719&sr=8-8&keywords=dyson+DC18+parts
The other weak spot is the brushes themselves. The ends will fill up with crud and slow the spin way down. Not good. Clean everything out and make sure the brushes spin freely. And if they are 10 or more years old, simply replace them.
Stephen Wolstenholme
Jan 17, 2019, 5:35:30 AM1/17/19
to
down.
Steve
--
http://www.npsnn.com
peterw...@gmail.com
Jan 17, 2019, 7:10:10 AM1/17/19
to
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 5:35:30 AM UTC-5, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
> I have not found Dyson to be reliable while our Hoover never breaks
> down.
>
> Steve
Our upright has a 12-year unblemished track record - 4,800 square feet, two long-haired cats, one golden one Scottie.
> I have not found Dyson to be reliable while our Hoover never breaks
> down.
>
> Steve
tabb...@gmail.com
Jan 17, 2019, 4:15:56 PM1/17/19
to
On Wednesday, 16 January 2019 21:00:35 UTC, pf...@aol.com wrote:
Sorted! I think the main problem was a matchstick-like sliver of wood stuck in the first hose. Each time I unblocked it it quickly reblocked because of that. I also cleaned out the compacted dirt in the brush roller assembly. Cheers.
We used the ancient Hoover 119 as a stopgap. Someone reckons it works better than the Dyson - they've not tried using the hose on it though lol.
It has no carbon bristles left, but the plastic ones are fine.
NT
We used the ancient Hoover 119 as a stopgap. Someone reckons it works better than the Dyson - they've not tried using the hose on it though lol.
It has no carbon bristles left, but the plastic ones are fine.
NT
peterw...@gmail.com
Jan 18, 2019, 8:31:24 AM1/18/19
to
Ladies and Gentlemen, Boys and Girls, and Children of all ages:
That ancient Hoover may pick up everything in sight. Which is then redistributed as microscopic (and often not so microscopic) dust particles throughout the entire area. "Back in the day" a 5-micron filter bag was considered remarkable. Today, HEPA level filtration is the norm.
So, that Ancient Hoover may be the stuff of a Luddite's dreams - but in terms of actually catching and keeping the really nasty stuff (down to 0.3 microns) it is pretty wretched. And if a paper liner is used to 'modernize' its efficiency, the cost of operation goes way beyond that of a modern device.
Note that Luddites were not against technology - just technology that rendered them obsolete.
That ancient Hoover may pick up everything in sight. Which is then redistributed as microscopic (and often not so microscopic) dust particles throughout the entire area. "Back in the day" a 5-micron filter bag was considered remarkable. Today, HEPA level filtration is the norm.
So, that Ancient Hoover may be the stuff of a Luddite's dreams - but in terms of actually catching and keeping the really nasty stuff (down to 0.3 microns) it is pretty wretched. And if a paper liner is used to 'modernize' its efficiency, the cost of operation goes way beyond that of a modern device.
Note that Luddites were not against technology - just technology that rendered them obsolete.
tabb...@gmail.com
Jan 18, 2019, 1:05:40 PM1/18/19
to
NT
0 new messages