Eureka and Lincoln Straight Suction Uprights

[madman]

So like I said in the supermarket thread, on a whim I made a low bid on this pair of vacs, from a live auction, but bidding online. I was the only bidder, so for $30 and some change, I got these beauties. (Though I did have to wake up early and drive an hour to get there.)

They're both fairly beat up, and well used, but mostly complete. Wheels are decent. bags have holes. Both motors spin freely.

The Lincoln, I've heard, is a rebadged Royal. The back of the motor kinda looks like it, too. See pic #2. It's model number 1941, serial 190-8889. It has a neat 'stationary' brush, that's suspended by a leaf spring, and it has a disabling lever that lifts it up and locks it. See pic #3. It has an interesting concept in handle operation, it freely* moves up and down, but has a lever to lock it in a couple different positions. The same lever has to be lifted up to allow the handle all the way down.

*I say it's free, but it really looks like it's supposed to have a torsion spring to keep the handle upright, the spring is gone, but the place it goes is telltale. See pic #4. Do more modern Royals have the same type of spring?

The Eureka is just numbered J1847831. It looks like it uses oil wicks for lubrication, like an old fan motor. See pic #5. Those look like oil cups on the bottom that get unscrewed and filled with oil. First time I've seen that on a vacuum.

It seems to be missing the correct component to hold down the nozzle. It looks to have the original screw and spring, but the thing there now is just a random piece of metal. I would assume it's supposed to be a rotating lever or something to make it easy to remove the nozzle. See pic #6. Anyone know what that's supposed to look like?

Now for some comparisons to my first old vacuum cleaner, the Cadillac... the Eureka uses the same cord hooks. The Lincoln uses the same bag clip, and the Eureka uses the same bag clip as my handheld Cadillac. I wonder who got them from who, or where those parts sort of 'off the rack' type of things available at the time. Both of them have that pocket inside the bag to catch the dirt (a Cadillac/Clements patent), and the Lincoln uses a height adjustment that's a blatant knockoff of another Clements patent. Clements sued Kirby, Eureka, and someone else, for various patent infringements, but I'm not sure if any cases were about these.

That's about it. I won't be restoring these any time soon. I'm still in the middle of my Cadillac's restoration, and I've got a lot of stuff on my plate as it is.

 

[madman]

I spent a little time on them, cleaned the bags, and lubricated. They both run, but the Lincoln's carbon brushes are stuck in the holders so I'm not going to run it for any period of time until I refurbish it, just in case the brushes aren't thick enough. The Eureka was sparking like crazy, but it seems somebody took out one of the brushes and put it back 90 degrees off. Also, the oil cups had only a tiny bit of grease in them... not sure if any kind of grease is thin enough to get wicked up into... the wicks. I cleaned them out and refilled with oil. I'll have to do a little research on what its proper lubricant should be.

Had a little fun running the Eureka. It has pretty good suction, and the bag isn't nearly as leaky as it looks, most of the holes were previously patched. So it's actually usable as is.

 

[lesinutah]

Hey

I don't know but I'm pretty sure Kirby carbon brushes fit royals meaning it would fit your vacuum.
Les
How much you get them for?
Les

 

[broomvac]

@madman

Those are neat. It’s interesting to see the same distinct Royal “DNA” in machines as old as your Lincoln. They really have not changed much over the years. Royal must have saved a ton on R&D over the years! They might be even more predictable than Kirby in this regard, and that’s hard to do.

Growing up, I had a second-hand Royal 880 to play with. It had virtually the same pivot assembly, and I do vaguely remember a (rather weak) torsion spring. I’d bet that was the spring you need. I’d also bet that the same spring was used by Royal for decades.

You could probably even fit a brand new Royal Type B bag system to your Lincoln if you wanted HEPA filtration.

 

[bikerray]

The Lincoln is a rebadged Royal, I have a Packard that was made by Royal.
The Packard Vacuum was a premium that was given away when you bought a Packard Car, I would guess that the Lincoln was a gift that was given away when you bought a Lincoln car.

I use 3-in-one Motor Oil, it's an SAE 20 for electric motors, I also use it in my Hoovers from the 20's.
As for carbon brushes you can get them at the local hardware store, the older Royals use the same brush as Miller Falls, Black and Decker and Milwaukee power tools.

Here's a couple of pics of the Packard.

 

[lesinutah]

Hey

Bikeray
That's a stunning vacuum. The agitation brush can be ordered?. My agitation brush was nailed on.
The top the model name plate is in great condition. Did it come this way or how did you get it that nice.
Thanks
Les

 

[madman]

bikerray, nice Packard. I'm a little surprised that Royal made a Packard... probably right around the same time that Clements was making Packards as well, lol.

 

[oreck_xl]

I can tell you Clements made the Packard cleaners first, the P.A. Geier models came later. I have a model 1940 Packard made by Clements, the model 1941 was made by P.A. Geier. Unless I'm wrong, the Cadillac was also given as a premium when you bought a new Cadillac automobile. Clements made value-priced tank and upright cleaners years ago. I've seen tank cleaners under other labels such as Remington.

 

[hygiene903]

Hi Madman,

The handle spring should be easy to find, as Royals used the same type of handle assembly with very few changes for many years. And I would guess that it was made in the 40's or later, as earlier models would have had a detachable nozzle, which was actually made as late as the early 50's, especially for Electro-Hygiene.
I have the same model of Eureka, with the same problem, broken nozzle latch. I also have the screw and spring, and there is still part of the broken latch on mine. You are lucky to have the original bag with yours, mine has a replacement bag. Here's a pic of mine.
Jeff

 

[broomvac]

I stumbled upon this while browsing for stuff for my newly acquired Royal. I suspect that this is the spring you need.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Royal-Dirt...:DwgAAOSwshJbFLM0:sc:USPSPriority!79424!US!-1

 

[madman]

Oreck_XL, that's interesting. Perhaps the Cadillac vacs were offered with a new car, I've heard that many times. However, I will tell you that Clements kept using the Cadillac name, point in fact, they STILL use it. Before they got bought out, their website very loudly proclaimed that they trademarked the name 'Cadillac' in like 1914 or thereabouts. Plus they sold their vacs through (vacuum) dealers for about as long as they made vacs, and advertised them in magazines, etc. So maybe they did get paired with cars, but they didn't treat the brand name as something especially for pairing with cars.

They also made a tank cleaner for Admiral at some point.

-------

Jeff, that sure is the exact same Eureka. The nozzle latch must be a common problem. The broken piece on yours, is it aluminum? My guess, without ever having seen one, is that it would be a thin piece of aluminum, meant to be a rotating latch.

 

[madman]

Jeff & Broomvac, Thanks for the info and the ebay link. I already ordered that spring on ebay after looking at several pics of old Royals. Honestly, I'd love to fix the Lincoln, but I don't have the time at the moment. However, it's a major annoyance that the handle just flops around and falls over. So I'll probably just put the spring on it to fix that one problem, so it can just be freestanding in my room, not having to lean against a wall.

-----

Oreck_XL, I wonder if the Packard car company, or perhaps an association of dealerships, commissioned the branded vacuums to be made? That would make sense, right? Why else would two different companies, both with their own brand names (Royal and Cadillac), use another odd brand name, one right after the other? They were commissioned from one manufacturer, stopped, then another manufacturer. Idk, it makes sense to me.

 

[hygiene903]

Hi Madman,

Can't say for sure because I can't get to mine right now, but I'm thinking the original part may have been similar to the nozzle latch on the older Kirby models, kind of a semi-circle with a tab on it.
Jeff

 

[madman]

So I did a little googling, and I found a few pics. Pic #1 is a Eureka for sale on ebay, showing the nozzle latch. However, every single other picture and advertisement drawing shows it without the bow-tie shaped piece of flat steel behind it. It really does look like it's made out of pot metal though, which would explain its common breakage.

Pic #2 shows my humble improvement over the piece of scrap metal my vac came with. It's a plastic window-screen holder, modified a bit and with a couple of select washers behind it. Works like a champ. Not the easiest to rotate, but it's not like I have a hose to use with this machine anyway.

Also, apparently my Eureka is a model 10. The J in the serial number makes me wonder... it's printed on, not stamped like the rest of the serial, and J is the 10th letter of the alphabet. Hmm...

Pic #3 shows the handle spring installed in my Lincoln. Pic #4 shows how far forward the handle is at its rest position. Is that about normal? It did look like it had been loose for a while, I think maybe it wore out the little notch in the handle fork that seats on a screw to stop the handle going any further forward. Oh well, at least I don't have to have the handle leaning back anymore.

Also, I used the Eureka to vacuum my room today. I can see it sucking the carpet up off the floor! Sadly it has no brush, so it has trouble picking up lint, of which I have lots. Stupid socks.