Brush Holders For Royal Model 993 or Similar?

[rlp123]

Does anyone know a source or a generic part number for the brush holders & caps used in the Model 993? I say generic because I would find it hard to believe that Royal would have specially made brush holders just for a few lines (assumed) of vacuums. There must have been other products using the same brush & holder+cap? (Commercial distributors like Grainger, Newark, Mouser, Avnet, Arrow etc?)

Or were they 'Royal specials' only?

Not critical but holders are brittle & cracked. They may shatter & drop into the motor housing along with a likely arcout....

 

[kirbyclassiciii]

Until recently, one could get a complete carbon brush replacement kit for these machines, part no. 3-672105-000.

The individual part numbers were:
1-672021-000 - carbon brush
1-672103-000 - screw cap
1-801034-000 - protector cap
1-801019-000 - carbon brush holder (Buckeye: 81-8422-01)

If replacing carbon brushes, on pre-1990 units, the original screw cap (1-080103-000) must be replaced with the new style (1-672103-000), since if you use the 1-672021-000 carbon brush on the old-style screw cap, it may be burned when the motor is running.

~Ben[this post was last edited: 5/7/2020-22:55]

 

[lesinutah]

Ben

Does the 505-515 Kirby brush caps fit royals pre 1990 machines. I know carbon brushes for both models are close to the same size.
Les

 

[rlp123]

Outstanding!

Thank you for the parts breakdown. That's problem with being an old DIY'er taking up a new line of projects (for my wife). No diagrams, no information. Only screw cap I could find was all solid plastic without a brass insert for the brush spring seat. I fear the solid plastic cap will apply too much pressure to the brush and cause it to be beat to heck when the rotor is running.....I think I will take a drill bit and hollow out a seat for the brush spring cap.

Now, if you needed some old semiconductors I just might have one on hand (industry part numbers, not mfr house numbers). And if not on hand, I could probably identify a suitable replacement. I have semiconductor data books from the 60's, 70's, 80's. If you had the specs for a house number part, could also probably find a generic replacement given enough information. I know this isn't vacuums, but you never know.

Robert

 

[lesinutah]

No

You don't want to do that. Look inside the motor housing. You will see the brush holders are held in place by one of the coil screws.
Put the screws in and it won't move.
If you have Kirby carbon brushes for any kirby older than 1970 those brushes will fit.
If you want royal parts uptowngirljenni on eBay and evacuum.com is where to get them.
Ben is where you get part numbers. He won't like me suggesting Kirby brushes on royals but they are the same dimensions if motor is either 5.4-6.0 amps or smaller.
Les

 

[rlp123]

Not Sure I Follow

The original screw caps were molded around a small brass seat (cylinder) that the cap on the end of the brush spring fit into. The new screw cap I ordered and received has no seat for the end cap of the brush spring. It is solid the full depth of the screw. I think that will put too much pressure on the brush....

What do you think?

 

[lesinutah]

Um

That doesn't look like a replacement part.
I'm trying to follow what you are saying. The black brush cap the inside is what your showing. The outside is notched in the center for a flathead screwdriver.
I'm guessing you are saying that the pic on the right looks the same on both sides?
If it's a solid non threaded piece you could rig something up but it would fail.
Check these two links out.
https://www.toolpartspro.com/superi...s-skil-1619x01268-3603463500-ridgid-512010001
The second is the entire assembly. You will have to get out measuring calipers.
Ill check tommorow and compare kirby and royal parts with my caliper to check.
The links probably will help. The piece you bought is trash.
Les

 

[lesinutah]

Wait

I seen the pics on eBay. I think they will work. The cap holds brush inside. The one you ordered doesn't have the copper protusion. That means if the original you cut off copper excess it would be the same size. If you got a cap on it it's the same amount of force.
I apologize it's first I've seen of them.
Les

 

[rlp123]

BETTER PHOTOS

Finally learned how to use my cell phone for a good photo with a little fix up done in paint shop. It should be eminently clear that the original screwcap had a brass cylinder insert for a spring seat. I would say it might be about 3/16 deep.

The replacement is solid. I was going to drill out the bottom of the replacement screw cap to a similar depth and diameter as the brass insert in the original otherwise I'm afraid it would put too much pressure on the brush when screwed down.

Do yo agree?

 

[lesinutah]

No

I wouldn't cut the new replacement. You will crack it. You can take 3/16 off the spring. The spring won't break.
It makes perfect sense but plastic breaks. You could argue the metal resistance is greater than plastic and that's why theres no place to seat on plastic.
I'd put new everything on measure the carbon brushes. Use the vacuum for a couple weeks and look at the wear. The spring dicipates the tension. Sometimes you have longer carbon brushes on one side. The brushes would still wear out at a similar pace.
I'd try it and I bet the spring and plastic will make replacement as good as original.
Les

 

[rlp123]

Thanx Les & Ben

I will mull it over....

BTW I liked that toolpartspro store. I will probably be looking there for a few things.

Robert

 

[madman]

3/16" is nothing. I wouldn't worry about it. Spring tension is not super critical, since the tension already changes from high to low as the brushes wear down. There is a tolerance already built into the design for such things. Also, McMaster probably has parts like this for next time.