My very small collection

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

@Christopher:
Not a problem. Raymond Lowey started development of the S series Singers in the late 40s, I believe. I thought I saw an ad for the S1 dated around 1951 somewhere. I believe I read that it ran for about 12 years or so.

@Erik:
Belts stretch and snap, and can usually be replaced without much difficulty (unbeknownst to the average consumer). That equals part sales and maybe a service charge. Today people probably throw away vacs that just need a belt anyway. But another aspect of belts that might be the real reason for their use is that a belt can more easily sieze a motor than a gear: in case of an object jamming the brushroll (a sock or maybe a toe, even) a gear will not stop the motor as easily (a flat belt can slip, a cogged belt can stretch, but a gear has no flexability).

@dave:
The pressure relief side slot & valve you mentioned is the first thing I noticed, oddly enough. I looked at it and wondered why the plenum didn't connect on the one side. The S shaped pathway into the side chamber also looks a lot like a venturi (think carborator) which would create a vacuum in the vacuum in some way. Just a guess.

It's also the only PN I've seen with the motor mounted to the top portion of the nozzle. Shame they had so much room around the actual brush roll.

Also... This is claimed to be a beater sweeper design... so where does the vibration come from? Could that pressure relief rubber valve have had some other role? I don't see a beater bar and the bristles look balanced on the brushroll...
 
Just adding a little video to this beautiful thread:

Here's a television commercial from the 1950's featuring Loewy's revolutionary upright design, plus the Singer version of Eureka's Roto-Matic canister...enjoy!!!



 
Hi Brian. Thanks for that video link. It's a wonderful find. I'm embedding it into my website's Singer page.

Dave - I missed your post on the GE Silhouette when I replied above (we must've been playing tag again).

That design does look strickingly similar to the Singer and looks fantastic, though I'd like it better if it had a headlamp. A cord winder would've been nice too, but it's still a neat looking machine. The lack of visible wheels is also a nice feature (or are the rear wheels somehow around the motor casing?).

The Dial-A-Matic is a nice machine, too. I remember friends' families having them in the 70's but I never did figure out their arrangement: is a DAM a dirty air fan machine or is it a clean air?
 
You are very welcome Michael!

The DAM took the Loewy Singer upright one step further and if I am not mistaken is indeed the first bag-first upright. It kept the side facing fan configuration of the Singer, but put the motor in a separate canister-like casing that stood upright. Singer's side facing motor at the bottom of the DAM's bag casing allowed a motor axle to protrude into the lightweight base to hook up with a belt to drive the brush. So the fan-side of the motor sucked in air from the bag compartment, and the drive side of the motor spun the brush. I think it was ingenious to align the drive spindle with the axis that rotates the handle up and down - allowing the motor to drive the brush even though it was contained in the "upper" part of the vacuum.

The icing on the cake of the innovative DAM was placing a canister-like hose between the bag casing and the floor nozzle to suck up the dirt agitated by the revolving brush!

The combined innovations of the DAM and Loewy's Singer upright gave us the configuration of most upright vacuum on the market today! :-)
 
Michael, here's a bottom shot of the GE.
Indeed there is a wide central tire that is free to rotate around the twin fan motor. Two small front wheels keep it level and two small bumper glides on the motor aid the anti-tipping (but did not prevent scraping paint off the casing).

Lack of a headlight and cordwinder are a step back but then it was 10 years later, and still a dirty air upright. This was their way of avoiding Singer/Loewy patent infringement.

Another claim to fame is that the GE motorhead has 4.5" clearance over the Singer's 5".[this post was last edited: 3/15/2013-19:26]

aeoliandave++3-15-2013-19-10-13.jpg
 
I take respectful exception to any suggestion that Hoover's DAM was a vast improvement; other than being the first clean air bagged upright with a hard case bag compartment, it abandons the best features of the Singer and GE. Of course, cylinders and tub canisters already were clean-air designs.

No headlight, no cordwinder and the plumbing to achieve the clean-air design dictated a single side fan. I can say from experience that the DAM is not as powerful an airflow as the Singer.
The tools and hose are a nice touch but the GE Silhouette could be had with a brushplate blank to which a hose & above the floor tools could be attached.

The Twinfan Singer and GE have twin balanced dirt paths that join up at the exhaust port and also have an extended motor axle to turn the brushroll.

But then again, by 1963 the Loewy/Singer 1947/48 patents would have expired so Hoover was free to 'borrow' any innovation already worked out for them.

All three uprights have the horizontal motor as the main pivot point around which the handle and brushroll head are free to rotate, it's just that the DAM combines the motor and bag compartment/handle into one unit.

Don't get me wrong, the DAM is a fine machine and indeed all contemporary uprights are offshoots of the Hoover.

Note also that Loewy mounted the brushroll on two long arms whose pivot point is inline with the motor axle. This allowed the brushroll to float and bear down into any carpet depth without relying on the weight of the machine. With decent brush tufts the Singer actually pulls itself forward.

I think overall the Singer, followed by the GE, are more elegant in execution for the times.[this post was last edited: 3/15/2013-20:24]

aeoliandave++3-15-2013-19-55-2.jpg
 
The Westinghouse One-Stroke jumped on the upright bandwagon but clearly did not employ the services of an Industrial Designer. :-)
Besides ignoring the clearly defined space for a cordwinder at least it has a headlight.

I believe at least two of our members have a Westinghouse.

Dave

aeoliandave++3-15-2013-19-59-36.jpg
 
not your 'bag & motor on a broomstick' uprights

The Singer gets the prize here of ahead of its time and solved problems,such as cord coming out at upper area,that todays vacs can not match.It also could use adapter and hose but many would get the hand vac.I think there is a 1949 full page ad that includes mention of Loewy.--The One Stroke was about 1955.Not sure if I am in the '2' but I have one.Here we should wonder at both styling and naming of this vac.I think Eliot Noyes did much WH design work at a corporate level including logo but don't know who did small appls.The One Stroke continued the A frame handle and added ideas such as the handle locking when carried.--The GE was at a time of mostly canister sales.The cord storage was a pouch on bag that was similar to lawn chair material that was everywhere at that time.The hose adapter had a rubber strap that held handle in upright position for tool use.--The DAM added clean air and great tool use.With a certain new book we may understand more of the Hoover family styling of this period.DAM motor was same as Slimline/Portable and Slimline/Portable/Constellation used same bags.Yet another better Hoover idea from this time.A few later DAMs added headlight, height adjuster and tool rack at end of hose making them the ultimate until power drive.
 
Hi Dave! Thanks for that post - I have to agree with you that the Dial-a-Matic was certainly not the best carpet cleaner. It took Panasonic to improve the configuration to the point that these "bag first" uprights could compete with the classic fan-first uprights in terms of carpet cleaning. We all know that a classic fan-first upright can deep clean carpets far better than the clean air versions without all the extra plumbing and high amperage motors. I think it was Kirby that always touted the benefits of having a short pathway from carpet to fan.

That being said, I think I remember reading somewhere that the Loewy Singer actually did not perform very well compared to a Hoover of the era. The two fans also seem to make twice the noise.

Thank you for the close-up look at that beautiful GE Sillouette. In terms of upright evolution, it indeed marks another important point in history: whereas the handle on the Singer was connected to the top of the motor housing, GE took the revolutionary step of making the motor part of the handle. If I am not mistaken, this GE motor seems to be the first to rotate with any movement of the handle! Which is a feature we find in the DAM debuting only a few years later. Placing the motor all the way back "under" the handle allows for a really svelt power head. It also probable reduces the strain on the bag as the bag connection now rotates with the handle.

What a great history lesson here: you can really see the evolution of upright vacuum design from Loewy's Singer to the GE Sillouette to the Hoover Dial-a-Matic to the ubiquitous Panasonic upright design that was bought from Hoover, and even on to the contemporary Hoover WindTunnel uprights that finally succeeded in improving the air flow problems in the DAM's agitator cavity.

By the way, I am also drooling over that Sunbeam Michael!! What beautiful attachments!!! :-)
 
Lewyt

That is a gorgeous restoration on the Lewyt. I never knew they had a power nozzle. What year is that? By the way, that lamp you have above the Lewyt is very valuable.
 
Dave,
The GE's motor attached to the handle is an interesting design, though I notice that the underside reveals what I would think is a poor plenum between the fans and the brushroll. The sharper angles are points of energy loss and turbulance. The Singer S series seems to have a much smoother flow.

The Westinghouse looks like it was designed by a Plymouth engineer who had been fired for lack of style... It's one that I think I would pass up with little thought - just my opinion and not meant to ruffle any feathers. Thanks for sharing the nice old ads, though.

Loewy's floating brushroll was a neat idea and I think it's placement in line with drive shaft is needed to prevent the torque of the belt from dragging the assembly down when running. Standing the vac on end and switching it on proves that the brushroll's position is not influenced by the pull of the belt. I'm not sure if moving the pivot point closer to the front would upset this balance, but I'm sure that moving it behind the motor's axle would.


Jimmy,
Thanks for sharing all that info. I've never seen an above-floor kit for the Singer. Do you know if ever one was offered? I've always thought that the Hand-vac/Magic Mite was their solution to above floor cleaning (I remember an ad somewhere demonstraiting that for the same price as another brand's accessories you could het a second vac and have help with the cleaning: it showed a mother and daughter team cleaning the house).


Brad,
Thanks for the compliment. Funny you should ask about the video: I work in TV production for a local access station here in Vermont. I could make a video, but I'd end up turning it into a production. Hmmmm...... I think I've already got a jingle in my head.


Brian,
The Singer is actually very quiet: When you lift the nozzle off the carpet there is defintley a roar from the rushing air. When using it normally it has a very nice purr.

The Singer's exhaust is set back from the handle and also angled to match the handle while usingthe vac. It seems that stress on the bag is minimal in any handle position and the space between the exhaust and the handle allows the bag to inflate fully.


Alex,
I'm in Rockingham, Vermont, not too far from Stowe. So, who are your famous friends you're hinting at?


Jeffery,
Lewyt was the first canister vac with a revolving brush in a production model (I think). The first design was actually a carpet sweeper set-up: the brush revolved by being turned by the nozzle's wheels. The handle of the sweeper nozzle was a wand and you could use the nozzle without the vac as a regular carpet sweeper or connect the wands/handle to the hose and the vacuum would suck the dirt out of the sweeper's dirt tray.

I noticed that lamp too. It looks like a FLW or at least in his style.
 
Hi Michael.

The Von Trapp Family Singers, the real family of 'Sound of Music' fame. I was on a first name basis with the real Maria, and spent many summers up there at the family lodge on Luce hill. The colors in the fall were breathtaking, and while I don't ski, loved it in the winter. As I was born and raised in Connecticut, Stowe was not that far away.
 
Michael, I like and recognize the way you think things out, same as I do.
I agree with every one of your astute observations.

I began taking things apart to see how they worked when I was 5 years old and opened up my Christmas present helicopter that flew through a hand cranked cable. I improved its performance. I was forever doing this with machines of every type from typewriters to vacuums to clocks & watches and always - mostly - was able to put things back together. I recall opening up my cousin's Chatty Kathy doll on Christmas afternoon suspecting I'd find a miniature phonograph inside. That didn't go over so well but I had it back together by dinnertime :-)

With my parent's baffled blessings and encouragement, because I had a good track record, that's why I became a mechanical engineer.
-----------------------------
Change the mount point of the Singer brushroll arms and yes, you will introduce out of equilibrium forces that must be counter acted upon. Like a Subaru Boxer engine the Singer/Loewy arrangement is in perfect balance and gently presses the brushroll into the carpet surface. Btw, it takes a round belt and a Hoover is a perfect fit.
-----------------------------
Smooth unrestricted air pathways are essential to prime performance (and that is why I find the Dyson type bagless plumbing routes so perplexing - no wonder they have such screaming powerful motors to overcome the twists, turns and diameter changes).
----------------------------
Hearsay is just that, secondary and repeated information that becomes fictional 'truth'.
This morning up in the bedroom I vacuumed up goose-down feathers, from changing my pillowcases, using the Singer. When the phone rang I was easily able to chat without ear-strain while running the vac. No, the double fans are not doubly noisy being solid metal 3" impellers on each end.
The Hoover of 1949 is not a viable comparison, as it has a large powerful pancake motor, a huge single impeller and the beloved lovely low frequency hum & thump of the Beater Bars.
There's really nothing that compares to the 1949-1960 Singer S (until the GE Silhouette and DAM made their debuts after the 14 year patents expired) other than maybe an upright Air-Way (and they are not all that noisy either considering the motor is totally exposed.
------------------------
I have yet to see any strain damage or tearing on a Singer S bag. The Hoover, on the other hand...
------------------------
The Arts & Crafts lamp is one of my favorite rescues from ~15 years ago. All original, I found literally discarded and discounted in pieces in a box under a table at a lighting store that specialized in Brass parts and restored fixtures only. The brass socket had been removed but that was easy to replace. More scrounging turned up the undamaged glass triangles for the shade (which is missing a 1-2" border edge).
I stripped, cleaned and reglued the pieces with Hot Hide Glue, ran a cloth-wrapped brown cord down the base and as an accent lamp I put a 1.25" 25 watt globe bulb on top. It actually bright enough to read by.

There were no official maker's marks on it other than some rough hand-tool marks on the inside surfaces and a few unmistakeable coping saw errors in the cutouts but a few years later I came across a pre-WW1 Mechanix Illustrated article on making your own Mission-style table and floor lamps. This design was one of many patterns so I assume this is a home handyman project of the time. A few years ago I took pictures of the lamp down to the Roycroft Campus Museum in East Aurora NY. They tried very persuasively to acquire it from me but I just couldn't. Likewise David Rudd of Dalton's American Decorative Arts shop wanted to add it to his inventory at an astonishing consignment price and again, I had to say no... :-)

Decades before when Roycroft Campus was nothing more than a derelict bunch of second-hand junk shops (before being discovered, spruced up and turned into a Tourism Destination and before the Roycroft Inn was restored) I picked up quite a few Mission bits and pieces for peanuts. A number of Stickley style chairs and tables among them; I certainly couldn't afford them today, once Barbara Streisand drove prices to the Stratosphere.
Back then you could pick up a Stickley armchair for $200.

Dave



http://www.daltons.com/
 
I am curious as to why the Singer / Loewy design did not last more than decade or two.

I know that it evolved into the commonly-seen Singer/Lewyt/Kenmore Twin-Fan upright. These later versions seem to be quite noisy if you listen to some of them in clips on YouTube. Theoretically, it seems like a good idea to have two fans to spread out the suction to both edges of the powerhead. But for some reason, the concept was dropped - even in commercial fan-first uprights. Not sure why this twin-fan concept disappeared. It seems to have only survived in the Tacony "tandem air" uprights, in a modified form.
 
Alex,
I've heard that Maria Von Trapp lived here in Vermont in the Stowe area. The family runs a small Inn somewhere on the outskirts of town. I haven't thought about looking up more information on them but I will do so now.

Dave,
That project lamp, though maybe made by an avaerage Joe, points to a time when people actually did things that could be handled - unlike the virtual accomplishments of today. Both of my grandfathers used to do little projects from the various "popular Mechanics" type magizines. Grandpa Elkins had actually made a color-separation glass plate camera back in the 20's that got him a job in the New York Daily News: His modifications made plates that were ready to go to press for printing full color pictures for the Sunday magizine. The plates are long gone (they got erased/reused) but we still have lots of negatives ofall the Broadway & Movie stars from the late 30's to the 60's.

Sadly, I only ever met him once or twice when I was too young to appreciate who he was; but he did give me a Premiere hand vac one of those times, and I remember playing with it and taking it apart and putting it back together. I think it went out in a garage sale a few years later when I was about 12.



Brian,
Things change for several important reasons. The most obvious is that there is a finite consumer base and you need to sell your product over and over again or you will go out of business. "Planned Obsolescence" dates back as early as 1932 with Bernard London's pamphlet "Ending the Depression Through Planned Obsolescence" but I've read that the phrase was first popularized in 1954 by industrial designer Brooks Stevens who titled a keynote talk using the term.

I believe that in the Vacuum Cleaner Industry, the PO concept didn't kick in until Mr. Lewyt adopted the practive in the mid 1960's. Until then the Industry relied on the next generation product being superior and - hence my website's focus - all kinds of new accessories to go with the latest model.


Another important factor in the demise of a model is the factory itself: These are machine parts made by machines that wear out themselves. Factories need to be retooled after making X number of parts, so I guess that many companies figured-in new model designs into their plans.

There was a flow of money around model design, too. Many plants got private and government stipends for employee hiring as well as for tooling a factory, all of which created jobs and companion industries which probably had private investors in inside the plant's themselves.

Of course everyone wanted a bigger piece of the pie. I won't get into what that turned into... We already know...
 
"if ever an above floor kit was offered"?

You mean like in a grey cardboard caddy with a place for everything similar to the caddy for hand vac and atts?You mean like the one in the antique/thrift store nearby that I was in about 1983?In the back,in the basement,behind the furniture,next to the books?Near the vintage magazines that had full page color ads for Hamilton Beach Hat Box vac and more?Across from the first Nero Wolfe mysteries by Rex Stout that I read?You mean like the kit for an upright I didn't have at the time?You mean like the one I thought I might get next time?And then next time the books were upstairs and the basement was EMPTY as a dealer with a truck cleaned it out!You mean like that?--Yes,a kit was offered.
 

Similar threads

kirbyman65
Dirt Devil Broom Vac
Replies
1
Views
337
huskyvacs
huskyvacs
J
Can I replace the motor on my Electrolux L (1979)?
Replies
10
Views
564
vacdude
V
D
Electrolux 'E4' Z300 bags no longer available? Nope. Going to start making them myself.
Replies
14
Views
369
centralsweeper63
centralsweeper63
J
Does anyone know the name of pigtail plugs?
Replies
6
Views
357
sweeperboy
S
A
INFO: Replacing your Eureka/Sanitaire Lower Bearing? Read first!
Replies
4
Views
631
huskyvacs
huskyvacs

Latest posts

Back
Top