Hoover PurePower PU2120

[jmurray01]

That is certainly true for some items, but for my 1977 HOOVER Ranger and 1982 Electrolux 502S, it isn't, as they have never seen a repair shop in their lives and have survived with just new bags, belts and filters.

That's the true meaning of a well built machine, when it survives years and years of use with just simple maintenance.

 

[vintagerepairer]

Oh yes, I am not saying all appliances needed attention, and it sounds like you have two examples where the owners must have told you the history of them. But a lot of appliances would have had at the very least a professional service during their lifetime.

 

[jmurray01]

I think the reason my Lux and HOOVER have survived without any repairs is because they were owned by careful operators (barely a scratch on either) and they are built damn well!

 

[vintagerepairer]

Good care goes a long way if one has the time. Don't forget though, for many they were seen as the labour saving devices they were, with an expectation for them to last about 10 years. For some I am sure it was more convenient to just use them and get as much wear as possible, without taking too much care over them.

 

[jmurray01]

Oh yes, more so these days.

I've seen some people use vacuum cleaners until the bag is filled right up to the input, never clean the filters and not even replace snapped belts.

Then when the thing dies after a year of use they wonder why.

 

[vintagerepairer]

Some of my customers wondered, yes. Most seemed to admit they'd not had the time to worry about it. I can see that point of view. For most people, the vacuum cleaner isn't the first thing on their mind.

 

[jmurray01]

I've got to remind myself of that a lot, because to me, my life revolves around Vacuum Cleaners almost! Ha ha!

 

[vintagerepairer]

I did come to that conclusion.

 

[jmurray01]

Your observance surprises me sometimes! Ha ha.

 

[turbo500]

"Yes, that's true, the 800 and 1000 Watt motors in the two versions of Turbopower 2 were perfect at getting the brush roll to spin at the right RPM"

The Turbo 1 at 410w did a better job than the lot of em, if you ask me

 

[vintagerepairer]

What is the 'right' RPM anyway? What is the 'right' number of brushes and rows of them, and what is the 'right' degree of stiffness? I wish I knew, and I wish manufacturers had spent some time testing this over the years.

 

[sebo_fan]

Whatever is right or wrong Alex - and I know you're young - but you should read up on reviews about Purepower. The Turbopower models were so much better, so much more reliable. Pure Crap isn't a name that is given lightly to vacuums in general, but its what the trade term for the Hoover Purepower. Hoover could have built the Purepower with so much better plastics and "lightweight" at 8kg isn't my idea of lightweight.

 

[jmurray01]

"Pure Crap isn't a name that is given lightly to vac

I seem to remember David calling it something slightly different and after my experience with its sister, the Dust Manager (which didn't manage all too well after one week of light use, bottom line is after 6 months it went on fire, I'll say no more), I 100% wholeheartedly agree.

 

[sebo_fan]

Actually, the Purepower is better at picking up the dirt and keeping it in a bag than the horrendous Dustmanager. Even after Hoover "improved" the box, it still required filter cleaning after virtually every use. Hoover also developed the system in the Telios - a machine I once loved - and eventually the Sensory, re-naming it "Dustmanager," too. Not good machines at all - even at push, the bagged Sensory models are better.

 

[rolls_rapide]

Turbopower 1 activator

I seem to remember that one Turbopower that we had, (beige, tools attached), had stiff grey plastic bristles. It seemed to pick up very well. I got rid of it, because the noise hurt my ears. Also the motor conked out, (Hoover fixed it under guarantee).

The Turbopower 2 & 3 had softer bristles, and I had ordered after a few years, new activators. The new versions had embossed into the plastic "Brush Type 2". I presumed the difference was the bearings; the old Hoover ball-races seemed to have gone, to be replaced by sealed bearings instead. Candy's influence perhaps?

 

[jmurray01]

Well I must have a pre-Candy brush roll in my '94 Turbopower (I actually believe it is the original roll) as it is a ball bearing one.

 

[sebo_fan]

The thing is though, even if my namesake is Sebo, Hoover models were the first I ever collected. Thus the brand has a special place in my heart and the products were also what my parents and grand parents had. I'm just biding my time waiting for Hoover to bring out the next version of a bagged upright vacuum. I had that awful Junior / Athyss stick vac a couple of years ago but it wasn't the same.

 

[jmurray01]

Do you honestly think HOOVER will create another bagged upright ? The only one they still produce is the Pure Power and quite frankly I could see them discontinuing that very soon and just having an all Bagless upright range.

And to be honest, I wouldn't shed a tear, as even if they did keep making Bagged uprights, they would never be good enough (Turbopower standard) to make me spend my money on them.

Paradoxically, as it may be, I am going to buy the new Turbo Power Bagless upright later this year as I've heard good reviews about them and I'd love a modern HOOVER in my collection.

I doubt it'd replace the Turbopower 1000 as my best cleaner though.

 

[vintagerepairer]

I don't think Hoover will stop making at least one bagged cleaner as there is demand for such machines. But I also believe that even if most manufacturers made nothing but bagless cleaners, the likes of Miele and Numatic will always continue with what they have been doing for years - making bagged cleaners. The bagless cleaners which lose suction power are all a load of whatever you want to call it. I hope I never see the day that bags are phased out on new machines.

 

[jmurray01]

Hear hear, if Bagged cleaners go all together, I think I'll lose all faith in modern manufacturers.

As for Miele and Numatic, I am certain they will NEVER expand to Bagless technology, as they have both built up such a magnificent reputation for making good Bagged Vacuum Cleaners and by banishing them they would ruin their businesses.

Isn't it strange though, that (with the exception of the aforementioned brands) Bagged cleaners are getting worse as time goes on, with the best ones being from 20 odd years ago ?

You would think it would be the opposite, but it seems not.

On the other hand Bagless cleaners are getting better (in terms of suction sustainability).

It actually makes sense if you think about it.

They are spending less time making Bagged cleaners as good as they used to be, whereas they are spending a lot of time making Bagless cleaners better, for one purpose only. To subtly try to forbear people from buying Bagged cleaners, so they can have an all Bagless market to make things more modern, which is what everybody seems to want to do these days.

I however, shall never proselyte. I believe old technology is the best for the most part - An opinion that I will take to my grave.