vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
...Model 800 powerhead! 
Hoover Minor with optional...
- Thread starter vintagehoover
- Start date
vacuumkid3
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2006
- Messages
- 974
NICE! 
I just love MonsterVacs!! :-D
~~K~~
I just love MonsterVacs!! :-D
~~K~~
hoover1060
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2006
- Messages
- 1,093
now that
is a powerhead with some BALLS
is a powerhead with some BALLS
charles~richard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2006
- Messages
- 3,021
EXCELLENT!!!
frkirby511
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 210
A classic for sure!
Now thats sweet looking. I'd considered rigging my 541 and 725 together like that but it would never look nearly as good at that.
It's just too bad that there is no real performance advantage that I can see. I think the 800 could actualy move more air than a minor could, even with the brush roll load. Now if you hooked it up to a 541/543 or earlier machine I think it could make for a performance increase.
Performance aside, what you do have is intimidation and wow factor! Between the rarity of the minor and the overall coolness of the rig it is very impressive!
It's just too bad that there is no real performance advantage that I can see. I think the 800 could actualy move more air than a minor could, even with the brush roll load. Now if you hooked it up to a 541/543 or earlier machine I think it could make for a performance increase.
Performance aside, what you do have is intimidation and wow factor! Between the rarity of the minor and the overall coolness of the rig it is very impressive!
rather than anything of any practical use.
Ok, some of you have actual drawing talent. One or more of you should come up with concepts of what a 1920s-30s Hoover canister with a powerhead would look like if such a thing were made then. And the first picture in this thread is superb!
watsonw
Well-known member
Does Jack have a 'Heavy Goods Vehicle' drivers licence for for this essemble ? LOL.
Jack, just how does the suction of the minor compare with that of say....the 800 ?
Regards, W.
Jack, just how does the suction of the minor compare with that of say....the 800 ?
Regards, W.
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
Here's one they patented earlier!
Voila! Genuine patent, filed on behalf of Howard Earl Hoover in 1919, for a powerhead for a central-vacuum system!
Voila! Genuine patent, filed on behalf of Howard Earl Hoover in 1919, for a powerhead for a central-vacuum system!
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
View 2
...
...
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
View 3
...
...
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
A similar design...
...filed a few days later:
...filed a few days later:
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
Side view:
...
...
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
My theory is...
I'd guess the reason they designed and patented their powerhead, at a time when they didn't manufacture any machine that would benefit from it, was to stop other manufacturers using the idea and selling them with their central vac / canister systems. This way, Hoover could ensure they always had the upper-hand over the central-vac design - however convenient a C-V was, the manufacturers would only ever be able to make straight-suction machines, which Hoover had already made largely obsolete.
It's a good technique; think of all the good ideas first, even if you don't intend to use them. Then patent the technology to stop other manufacturers using them, so your machine is always superior!
I'd guess the reason they designed and patented their powerhead, at a time when they didn't manufacture any machine that would benefit from it, was to stop other manufacturers using the idea and selling them with their central vac / canister systems. This way, Hoover could ensure they always had the upper-hand over the central-vac design - however convenient a C-V was, the manufacturers would only ever be able to make straight-suction machines, which Hoover had already made largely obsolete.
It's a good technique; think of all the good ideas first, even if you don't intend to use them. Then patent the technology to stop other manufacturers using them, so your machine is always superior!
collector2
Well-known member
Do we know for certain that they didnt manufacture it? The Bessborough Hotel in Saskatoon Sk, is still using its oringinal 1912 central vac and every outlet has a special plug next to it (Two prong twist lock). I was told by the maintenance guy that they were for the original power heads (which, unfortunately, have long ago been disposed of) so someone must have made them at that time.
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
I've never heard of an early Hoover powerhead being sold
...and I'm sure with the huge amount of shared-knowlege within this forum, it would have been known about before now.
Also, 1912 would pre-date Hoover's patent by some years, so it's possible that Hoover used existing technology which had already been available on the market, and simply patented their own, improved design.
Therefore, it's possible that powerheads were made by other companies, before and after the patent was filed - in the same way Dyson's patent on dual-cyclone technology doesn't prevent other manufacturers offering cyclonic machines. It just makes sure no one else can use the most efficient design, giving Dyson the clear selling point over competition.
As with the Hoover/Airway battles over Hoover's patented beater-bars and Airway's patented dustbags, it is possible to get away with using a design similar to one that's patented, as long as it's different enough to be considered not to be an infringement. Airway's beaters were not distinct enough from the Hoover Agitator, so they lost the case. Hoover's 'Hygenisacs' were different to the Airway design, because they were re-useable, so Hoover won.
I know little about central vacs, since they're almost unheard of in this country. Maybe someone else would be able to give a definite answer?
...and I'm sure with the huge amount of shared-knowlege within this forum, it would have been known about before now.
Also, 1912 would pre-date Hoover's patent by some years, so it's possible that Hoover used existing technology which had already been available on the market, and simply patented their own, improved design.
Therefore, it's possible that powerheads were made by other companies, before and after the patent was filed - in the same way Dyson's patent on dual-cyclone technology doesn't prevent other manufacturers offering cyclonic machines. It just makes sure no one else can use the most efficient design, giving Dyson the clear selling point over competition.
As with the Hoover/Airway battles over Hoover's patented beater-bars and Airway's patented dustbags, it is possible to get away with using a design similar to one that's patented, as long as it's different enough to be considered not to be an infringement. Airway's beaters were not distinct enough from the Hoover Agitator, so they lost the case. Hoover's 'Hygenisacs' were different to the Airway design, because they were re-useable, so Hoover won.
I know little about central vacs, since they're almost unheard of in this country. Maybe someone else would be able to give a definite answer?
collector2
Well-known member
LOL - I find that funny considering that some of the earliest central vacs (then called stationary cleaners) were made by the British Vacuum Cleaner Co. (Goblin) with the first ones being installed in Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace according to the Goblin history brochure I have. Alot of the larger homes in England and even department stores and other large buildings (Notably the Houses of Parliament, Savoy Hotel, Empire, Leicester Square and Gaiety Theatres) had them in the earlier years. Strange that the practice seems to have died off there now.
Similar threads
