Popularity of uprights
- Thread starter fan-of-fans
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
vintagerepairer
Well-known member
Those Rangers were very good cleaners. Does anyone have one? smiles.
vintagerepairer
Well-known member
No? We're in luck then.
gsheen
Well-known member
ranger who has one
Me i have a ranger
Me i have a ranger
sebo_fan
Well-known member
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">VR - Good points and well thought out!</span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">Sadly the Ranger was the one model that took me a few years to "forgive." The baby sitter used to chase me around the house with my parents Hoover Ranger. It took me a few years to even touch the Hoover, well before I ever got into collecting vacuums. You could say that I was very much emotionally disturbed by the mere sight of a Ranger and learnt to live with it past the age of 10, eventually!</span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">Thing is though, Anthony - as much as the Hometek is hellish, it can still be compared easily to the Junior at best - it is cheap to buy, cheap to maintain and relatively easy to use. The whole design principle that it brings to the table is that its an upright vacuum only with no tools on offer - and lets face it - by the time the Junior U1104 came out of production, not many bought the tool kit knowingly because of the lack of power. </span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">Hoover UK did try and pull a fast one with their continental "Athyss" stick vac by renaming it "Junior" a few years back. I had two of them, both the red stick vac and the black one. They didn't last, both suffering from seemingly poor hinges at the top of the handle where it is supposed to fold over to make for space. It did the job well, but it was cumbersome and the red model's lack of variable suction made it hard to push. That and the hopelessly small 1.5 litre dust bag made it appear as a total non-relation to the Junior upright proper.</span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">Infact, thinking about Hoover UK in general and the tat that they sell these days, I think customers in the UK have been burnt for far too long from the products from this company. I don't think Hoover will ever recover unless they separate from Candy and go with a different company, but even at that, they would have to produce a higher amount of quality and precision into floor care products. I think the damage has already been done - Hoover were good </span><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">once upon a time</span></span> <span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">but not any longer, sadly. </span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">
</span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">Sadly the Ranger was the one model that took me a few years to "forgive." The baby sitter used to chase me around the house with my parents Hoover Ranger. It took me a few years to even touch the Hoover, well before I ever got into collecting vacuums. You could say that I was very much emotionally disturbed by the mere sight of a Ranger and learnt to live with it past the age of 10, eventually!</span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">Thing is though, Anthony - as much as the Hometek is hellish, it can still be compared easily to the Junior at best - it is cheap to buy, cheap to maintain and relatively easy to use. The whole design principle that it brings to the table is that its an upright vacuum only with no tools on offer - and lets face it - by the time the Junior U1104 came out of production, not many bought the tool kit knowingly because of the lack of power. </span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">Hoover UK did try and pull a fast one with their continental "Athyss" stick vac by renaming it "Junior" a few years back. I had two of them, both the red stick vac and the black one. They didn't last, both suffering from seemingly poor hinges at the top of the handle where it is supposed to fold over to make for space. It did the job well, but it was cumbersome and the red model's lack of variable suction made it hard to push. That and the hopelessly small 1.5 litre dust bag made it appear as a total non-relation to the Junior upright proper.</span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">Infact, thinking about Hoover UK in general and the tat that they sell these days, I think customers in the UK have been burnt for far too long from the products from this company. I don't think Hoover will ever recover unless they separate from Candy and go with a different company, but even at that, they would have to produce a higher amount of quality and precision into floor care products. I think the damage has already been done - Hoover were good </span><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">once upon a time</span></span> <span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">but not any longer, sadly. </span>
<span style="font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino;">
</span>
vintagerepairer
Well-known member
Thank you Sebo fan. To be honest though, I don't think people are as worked up now about the whole Hoover-Candy thing and that terrible business over the airmiles, now that a good 20 or so years has gone by. I think that for many consumers Hoover is just another name and at least one generation of purchasers these days would probably have no idea just how much market domination, loyalty, and quality was attached to Hoover as we know it. I'd go so far as to say that there are probably young people out there who think Hoover is the actual name for a vacuum cleaner and that the 'brand' Hoover took their name from the product. Especially when you hear so many people saying 'Dyson hoover' instead of Dyson vacuum cleaner. I'd refer to it as an oxymoron were it not for the fact that it too sounds like a model of cleaner, if not something for removing stains at low temperatures.
What I would really love to know and see would be what the vacuum cleaner market would be like today had Dyson cleaners not gone on sale.
What I would really love to know and see would be what the vacuum cleaner market would be like today had Dyson cleaners not gone on sale.
sebo_fan
Well-known member
What the market would have been like without Dyson...
Well, I think someone would have done a bagless upright before long - when you look at Black and Decker with their dust buster - the original cordless idea with a filter to catch the dust, or early Hoover tub vacuums that could be used without a bag - certainly a "bag-less" vacuum was around in the late 1970's and look at Hoover's Powerplus with the dust box at the bottom.
Brands were evidently thinking of offering the bag-less idea along the line, maybe the next step up from shake out permanent bags. I think the idea of going bag-less was certainly catching on without Dyson promoting the cyclone idea. I know the Goblin Laser could be used without a bag for example - but I have a feeling it was out on the market just before Dyson's DC01 in 1993, though timeline info on the Laser seems to be 1995, two years after Dyson came to the UK with the DC01.
Well, I think someone would have done a bagless upright before long - when you look at Black and Decker with their dust buster - the original cordless idea with a filter to catch the dust, or early Hoover tub vacuums that could be used without a bag - certainly a "bag-less" vacuum was around in the late 1970's and look at Hoover's Powerplus with the dust box at the bottom.
Brands were evidently thinking of offering the bag-less idea along the line, maybe the next step up from shake out permanent bags. I think the idea of going bag-less was certainly catching on without Dyson promoting the cyclone idea. I know the Goblin Laser could be used without a bag for example - but I have a feeling it was out on the market just before Dyson's DC01 in 1993, though timeline info on the Laser seems to be 1995, two years after Dyson came to the UK with the DC01.
vintagerepairer
Well-known member
Hello Sebo fan. I am not sure which Hoover cleaners from the 1970's which you refer to as being able to be used without a bag, sorry. Did you mean Hitachi? There can be no doubt at all that a good deal of consumers were interested in bagless vacuum cleaners, although as paper bags were all the rage, there was little other option, though many cheaper cylinder vacuum cleaners did of course have cloth bags fitted to them and of those which I had brought into my shop, few had been used with a paper bag. Not only this, of all the packets of bags I used to sell, they were mostly for paper bag only cleaners.
However I say this, but I do believe that the true introduction of bagless cleaning towards the late 1980's and early 1990's was because the manufacturers knew that Dyson cleaners were just around the corner. After all, Dyson had taken his idea to what seemed like all of them, and I'm sure they must have known he was going to go at it alone. But I don't think any manufacturer was prepared for the success of the cleaner and the brand. I do apologise for repeating myself, but I must that that I don't like or dislike Dyson, but I do think the sales have been more to do with him making so-called exciting looking products, rather than products which have spent so much time on the design table.
However I say this, but I do believe that the true introduction of bagless cleaning towards the late 1980's and early 1990's was because the manufacturers knew that Dyson cleaners were just around the corner. After all, Dyson had taken his idea to what seemed like all of them, and I'm sure they must have known he was going to go at it alone. But I don't think any manufacturer was prepared for the success of the cleaner and the brand. I do apologise for repeating myself, but I must that that I don't like or dislike Dyson, but I do think the sales have been more to do with him making so-called exciting looking products, rather than products which have spent so much time on the design table.
sebo_fan
Well-known member
Hi VR - yep, I refer to Hitachi - but I also refer to other brands, not Hoover of course, but others who did the fabric bag idea or a central filter where dust could cling onto and then require to be brushed clean and I take your point that companies knew of Dyson beforehand when he approached them with the design. But well before Dyson had started releasing the idea of making a vacuum cleaner, even hand held vacuums, cue Dirt Devil's Handy vac could be used without a bag. Again, although not an upright vacuum, the idea to go "bag-less" or without having to continually replace bags was already being used in other vacuum cleaner applications.
To be honest though I think Dyson had a winning formula from the start with the Dual Cyclone idea. The whole justification behind the vacuum initially was that it didn't need a bag and the bag didn't have to be continually replaced. Dyson didn't bring a new design to the hose or cleaning tools than any other brand, just something that looked different. If you had a patent that could change the way things were done, wouldn't you want to take advantage of promoting the design through something that looked unique and appealing? Certainly when it comes to versatile use with its large hinge and cumbersome tools on board plus the hose, the DC01 isn't as good as other vacuums that have a simpler arrangement but it was a machine I quite liked just for not having to buy bags AND in my hands, my DC01 only began to suffer from poor suction when the filters needed to be replaced. So, yes whilst the vacuums aren't the best practical designed or as versatile, its the early indicators of success that the "no loss of suction" claim and the lack of having to buy bags for it that made it good from a seller's point of view AND largely in the hands of owners.
It is easy now, so many years later to see that in some ways Dyson may have slipped from the quality, or the "no-loss" principle can be questioned, proved false - whatever - but back in the early days, the DC01 was better than most and with it having no direct rival, a unique machine on the market because of its patents.
To be honest though I think Dyson had a winning formula from the start with the Dual Cyclone idea. The whole justification behind the vacuum initially was that it didn't need a bag and the bag didn't have to be continually replaced. Dyson didn't bring a new design to the hose or cleaning tools than any other brand, just something that looked different. If you had a patent that could change the way things were done, wouldn't you want to take advantage of promoting the design through something that looked unique and appealing? Certainly when it comes to versatile use with its large hinge and cumbersome tools on board plus the hose, the DC01 isn't as good as other vacuums that have a simpler arrangement but it was a machine I quite liked just for not having to buy bags AND in my hands, my DC01 only began to suffer from poor suction when the filters needed to be replaced. So, yes whilst the vacuums aren't the best practical designed or as versatile, its the early indicators of success that the "no loss of suction" claim and the lack of having to buy bags for it that made it good from a seller's point of view AND largely in the hands of owners.
It is easy now, so many years later to see that in some ways Dyson may have slipped from the quality, or the "no-loss" principle can be questioned, proved false - whatever - but back in the early days, the DC01 was better than most and with it having no direct rival, a unique machine on the market because of its patents.
fan-of-fans
Well-known member
I believe there was a dual cyclone machine from James Dyson before the Dyson DC-01, known as the Cyclon. It was sold in small numbers in 1984 by a company called KleenEaze. I do agree the idea for a bagless machine had long been considered by then, as attested by machines using reuseable cloth bags.
