More vacs I've come across:o)

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

Another pic

<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">Pic 2....</span>


 


<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">James
smiley-smile.gif
</span>


kirbymodel2c++6-14-2013-16-19-19.jpg
 
Interesting James! Goblin either stole or bought the design for Eureka Williams' classic carpet nozzle. When you have a chance, could you possibly post a close up of the underside of the attachment? Would be interesting to see if the bottom is the same design as well - Eureka offered a chrome metal shoe on their 1960's carpet nozzles.
 
Hi James,
Did you ever get a plug put on that goblin cylinder in reply #19? You know the one you stole off me on the eBay auction... Not that I actually bidded, but wanted to!
 
Goblins

702 - " ....for a cheaper cleaner" - not a bit of it!

This cleaner was around from the mid-1960s and was unusual for its time that the case is of all plastic construction. From the Which 1968 report its price is noted at £39/18/- which makes it almost three pounds more than the Lux 100 which it was designed to compete with, although the 100 had actually more advanced features. But this cleaner was defiantly at the top of its price bracket.

Brian - whilst I can see the resemblance with the Eureka nozzle, I doubt that it was copied by Goblin - the impression is heightened by how the body of the nozzle has discoloured differently from the coupling. I would need Doug to confirm but I think this style of nozzle dates back to 1956

Ak
 
The 702

Though few of these cleaners ever came my way for repair, one thing I do remember is they had a by-pass motor, the likes of which one only ever saw on wet & dry combination cleaners. When I first saw this, and I'm going back a good deal of years, I remember wondering if the cleaner had a secondary function, such as a wet sprayer, and the by-pass motor was there as an extra form of protection, should water penetrate the dust bag. I quickly dismissed the idea, because were this so, the motor would almost certainly have required earthing to the mains, which was something this cleaner did not have.

It is also not beyond the realm of possibility that when one considers wet & dry cleaners were not heard of in the UK when the Goblin 702 went into production, that the 702 was a cleaner built to trial the new by-pass style motor under normal dry vacuuming conditions. The first domestic wet & dry cleaner would have probably been the Aqua Vac, built by Shop-Vac. It was Shop-Vac of course who went on to purchase the Goblin company back in the early 1980's, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the connection went back even further than that, with Goblin trialling the motor. This is all suggestion on my part of course, but whatever the reason, making and fitting a by-pass motor would not have been cheap, hence the cost being passed to the consumer.

Goblin were foolish I feel to try and enter the higher priced end of the market, for whatever reason the chose to do so. They had a reputation for making average quality products at below-average prices, and I don't ever remember them struggling to sell to their target consumer. Considering the fact that the 702 didn't even have a cordwinder of any variety (let alone an automatic one), it was rather odd to attempt to sell it for more than the Electrolux 100.
 
702

Benny

Don't forget that the 702 was the second version of this cleaner, there was model 701 before it. I remember very well the first time I saw it which was on the old "Take Your Pick" TV show (with Michael Miles) - it was "Tonight's Star Prize" and how they demonstrated the suction control (air release valve) on the top front of the cleaner. That's how I can date it to 1966, funny how, nearly 50 years later I have such a clear memory of it.

I was very surprised to see that it was still on sale in 1977, as shown in this brochure with the Housemaid

vacbear58++6-15-2013-14-54-48.jpg
 
701

This would have been introduced against the Lux 90, which at the time was a new level of sophistication in the vacuum market. However it was something of a lame attempt as the tools and such were the same as those on the cheaper 601 model, which largely competed against the Lux 65 and Hoover Harlequin (419). The Lux 90 (and the later, similar 100) did not have a serious contender against it until the Hoover Conquest in 1969. There were some other like the Nilfisk and Hoover Portable but neither of these proved to be "mainstream" cleaners.

Al
 
Hello Vacbear

I didn't know there was a 701 as well, so I must suggest that it could have been either or both the 701 and 702 which I have repaired in my time, and I can't say if they all had the same motor. Thank you for sharing this.

I am sure I have seen a photograph on this forum which showed that by 1977 the 702 had dropped considerably in price by that time.

http://ell
 
<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">Hi Adam, I bought both of those gold Kirby's off another collector a few years ago now. I don't think he's on here anymore. My friend Ken won a gold Generation 3 back in 1990 but Kirby would not let him have it till the Generation 3 was on sale over here in the UK. He had it on display in his service center but it got taken when he was broke in to one night...along with all his NIB kirbys as he was a factory distributor still at the time
smiley-cry.gif
My other friend Nick who won the 3rd off the production line Heritage(Which I own now) also won a gold G5.
smiley-smile.gif
</span>



 


<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">Hi Brian, I've took a pic of the underside of that head for you. I just need to up load the pic
smiley-smile.gif
</span>



 


<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">Hi Al, When I said a cheaper cleaner I was basing what I said on the 1976 prices as Goblin always seemed to be the cheaper of options compared to the Electrolux's and Hoover's of the time. As Argos was selling the Goblin 702 £35.95  the Hoover Freedom 1000 at £54.95 and the Electrolux 345 at £48.95.
smiley-smile.gif
</span>



 


<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">Hi Mr G. Nope still not touched that Goblin yet. I'll let you know when I've sorted it.
smiley-smile.gif
</span>



 


<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">James
smiley-smile.gif
</span>



 

kirbymodel2c++6-15-2013-17-55-40.jpg
 
Head...

<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">Hi Brian, Here is that picture of the underside of that head for you to look at. Hope it helps with your question.
smiley-smile.gif
</span>



 


<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">James
smiley-smile.gif
</span>



 


 

kirbymodel2c++6-15-2013-18-15-36.jpg
 
Ahhh...thanks!

You know, it is very similar, but not identical. Yet, the design seems too close to be coincidental. I say there was a contract between Eureka and Goblin at some point....just for this part. Still very interesting... :-)
 
Hi,

<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">Hi, You must of replied as I posted the picture of it lol
smiley-laughing.gif
</span>



 


<span style="font-size: medium; font-family: times new roman,times;">James
smiley-smile.gif
</span>
 
The floor tool

For whatever reason, several of the Goblin floor tools over the years have looked like those from other brands. The hard-floor tool is not massively different from Hoover and their flip-over tool would pass for that of an Electrolux to the uninitiated.
 
Argos

James

Thank you for posting that scan of the Argos catalogue. I don't doubt that by 1976 it would have been cheaper than the Lux 345 or Hoover Freedom 1000 - by this time it was so far behind them in terms of specification that I don't see how they could have charged a similar amount. But eight years earlier the position is very different as you will see below - I have included the 602 just for comparison.

What surprised me was that they were still producing it in 1976 (and actually until at least 1977) as they had the lower line 502 & 602 models (except, apparently, some electricity board exclusives) for the budget priced models with the front mounted handle.

Al

vacbear58++6-16-2013-16-31-36.jpg
 
The price

I can't help but notice that with the Goblin 701, a sprayer and polisher was included as standard. If one was to require the polisher, the Goblin would have been significantly cheaper than the Electrolux was with the separate polisher attachment. Having noted this, I don't think the floor polisher was ever really desired by the consumer of the day, making the Electrolux the better and cheaper choice, realistically.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top