Royal Heavy Duty Commercial Find

[broomvac]

Years back, I had a Royal 880 upright, but I wished I had one of the commercial models. I imagined that the perfect Royal for me would have been:
-commercial
-without headlight (I much prefer this look.)
-with “adjust-o-rite” front cover
-with the infinite height adjustment screw
-with brush stiffeners
-with a high current motor (One which also doesn’t require oiling, because who likes maintenance anyways?)
-with a “type B” bag system
-with wide rear wheels
...but what would be the chances of finding one like that in the wild, and for cheap? Against the odds, I stumbled upon exactly that vacuum today at my usual recycling center. For $5, it came home with me. Now my Royal 501 hand vac has a companion.

I was surprised to find that it in a relatively polished state. Usually, the aluminum vacuums I spot are tarnished as hell. This one, not so much. Thankfully, the bag had no damage either. It’s a bit dirty, as you can see below, but I’ve seen worse.

@ben: 10 amps, no oiling port, 9 blades, double rows with stiffeners, 3 prongs, 1020Z, serial J98D 00003901, made in USA at plant A. Please give me the low-down on my new Royal. When was it made, 1990, 1993, 2001, or none of the above? Presumably, its motor has ball bearings on both ends, no? It does run very smoothly. Also, what is the spring-like thing (see picture 8) on the height adjustment screw for? Is it a stop?

I’m excited to re-join the “Royal” family!

 

[kirbyclassiciii]

broomvac

This 1020Z was built in October of 1998.

The motor assembly is of the drop-in type.

Yes, that spring there is a stop for the height adjusting screw. I read that the "Rite-Hite" adjustment is far superior to the toe-touch type: more control over height than the newer one with 5 positions.

~Ben

 

[broomvac]

Thank you for the info! I suspected 1998 based on the "J98D." How does one read the month from this as well?

 

[kirbyclassiciii]

broomvac

The leading letter in the date code says so.

Since 1971, the first 12 letters in the alphabet are the respective months of the calendar year (until 1985, the letter "I" was skipped, using "J" through "M" instead to denote the months of September to December, respectively). Hence...
A = January
B = February
C = March
D = April
E = May
F = June
G = July
H = August
I = September (skipped over in the years 1971-1984 to avoid confusion with the number "1")
J = October (September from 1971-1984)
K = November (October from 1971-1984)
L = December (November from 1971-1984)
M = December (1971-1984, and for some unknown reason in 1985 and 1987 as well)

~Ben[this post was last edited: 1/26/2019-19:38]

 

[broomvac]

Thanks again for sharing your knowledge! I hope you don’t mind if I pepper you with one last round of Royal-related questions. Your knowledge is an excellent resource.

Which style/part number of belt does my 1020Z use? It should use the same belt that Royal’s current household and commercial all-metal models use, correct? Also, can I install a brush roll from one of the new Royals in mine? Although the original is very wrapped in hair, it looks to still have lots of life left. I may seek a spare to keep just as a precaution, and I figure that getting a replacement for one of Royal’s current models may be the best route.

 

[kirbyclassiciii]

broomvac

Here you go:

Yes, the belt used is the current Style 8 (part no. 1-672260-001).

And as to the brush roll, yes you can install one of the latest available types in it. The exact one you want is part no. 2-673273-000 (double bristle with stiffeners, but w/o the magnet for the brush indicator light).

~Ben

 

[broomvac]

@ben: Thanks for taking the time to help me. I’m glad to know for sure what supplies go with the machine rather than relying on potential misinformation out there.

Everyone: At some point, I’ll get a chance to get this Royal looking better and I’ll come back with updates then. Usually, when I get a new [to me] vac, I will take it apart, but only as far as is “necessary.” However, since this is a relatively simple vacuum with no mechanical issues I could detect, I don’t actually see myself undoing a single screw. This’ll make its cleanup pretty quick.

 

[kirbyclassiciii]

broomvac

You're welcome!

~Ben

 

[kirbyklekter]

Amazing what people throw out,

our gain of course. Kind of sad thinking of all the ones that didn't get saved. You did real good finding this one. 5 dollars, wow.Congrats! I would be curious about the condition of the roller bearings given the amount of strings,hair etc. wrapped around it, I know you had mentioned it. Very nice, enjoy!

 

[broomvac]

As promised, I'm here again with the post-refurb update! My new Royal didn't require much beyond a cleaning and a basic service to make it tip-top. The only damage was on the cord. In two spots, the previous owner of the vacuum managed to munch through the outer insulation without disturbing the insulation on the inner wires. To make it right, I detached the unwieldy fifty-footer and slipped electrician's heat shrink tubing over the damage. Thankfully, the cord was straightforward to remove.

Next, I put a little soft plastic cap on the end of the handle bolt. This is something which would not have originally come with the vacuum, but I thought it was a good addition to protect the bag. Although the bag hadn't sustained any wear near the handle bolt, I thought this cheap insurance was worth it, even if just to make me feel better.

@kirbyklekter: Yes, the brush roll bearings needed a bit of attention, but I don't think hair was the cause. They felt somewhat gritty, but this was nothing a good cleansing with QD Contact Cleaner followed by some Mobil 1 Polyrex EM couldn't rectify. The brush strips have plenty of length remaining.

After that, all it took was just an external wipedown and a new HEPA bag and belt to make it spiffy.

Thoughts: I shouldn't be surprised, but compared to my former 880, this 1020Z seems as though it's from a different planet. It purrs like a tiger or something. I could go on about how powerful this vacuum is, etc., etc., but that would be old news to you all. Bottom line: it's what you'd expect from a 10-amp commercial Royal and it's one of the few vacuum which might could "steal the crown" from a 7-amp Sanitaire.

One feature which really impressed me is the denim bag. Unless Royal has discovered something even more wear-resistant for their current vacs, I can only imagine that, as nice as it looks, the orange bag would be a downgrade.

I suppose the only other noteworthy thing is its finish. I take no credit for the way the aluminum looks. Royal must have put more effort into polishing their vacuums in 1998 than in 2019, because I swear that this 1020Z is still shinier than its NIB contemporary counterparts on eBay.

Not bad for five bucks.

 

[compactc9guy]

Nice commercial machine for 5$ seem its quite the beast . Good job

 

[broomvac]

@compactc9guy & kirbyklekter: Thank you for the kind words! It was really just luck for me to find this. Really just a “right place at the right time” kind of situation. It would have been sad indeed if this got scrapped.

 

[toastermike]

Very nice job on a beautiful commercial Royal. It seems like a great combination of some of the newer Royal features such as the type B bag combined with the earlier look of the gray bag and red belt cover. I agree that the knob adjustment gives a superior fine height adjustment.

 

[lesinutah]

Hey

Hey
Nice catch. I had the 1030z I got for free that is identical to your vacuum. I actually have the royal that bag goes to. Your adjust o rite cap would have been a black flap I believe. The orange bag also different but commercialize the vacuum.
The belts from Kirby vacuums also fit this. It's actually alot quicker job polishing royal newer vacuums. The 10 amp powerplant is insane on suction. It eats any rug and anything in it's path. It is a beast of a machine.
It is a bit loud but it's a commercial vacuum.
Enjoy.
Les

 

[madman]

Nice find.

I wonder if they used a different kind of aluminum / alloy for the later models, or perhaps one run of models. And maybe it retains its finish longer or something.

idk

 

[broomvac]

Hi all. Sorry for the delayed response. Thank you for the kind words.

I’ve run this vacuum through my house a few times now and have been loving it. These days, cyclonic bagless vacuums seem to excite me more than bagged cleaners do, but this is an exception. This vacuum is a spectacularly high performer and handles my plush carpet with ease. The vacuum is not hard to push because I was able to dial in the “Rite Hite” perfectly. In fact, this 1020Z may have cured me of Kirbys; it’s lighter, more maneuverable, and markedly more powerful.

@madman: I hadn’t thought of that. You may be right. Out of curiosity, I dug up pictures of some other commercial Royals from the same era. Whether it’s a difference in alloy or just polishing, clearly, these older ones are much shinier. Maybe Royal don’t bother to shine up the commercial models so much these days because they know the vacuums are likely to get beat up and disgusting before too long.

Incidentally, I’d love to get my hands on one of the matching shake-out bags. I know that they probably do a dismal job filtering, but they do look great!

 

[kirbyclassiciii]

broomvac

Both of those Royal Commercial pics you uploaded: they have the standard plastic belt cover and the five-position toe-touch height adjustment. They seemed to be more popular than those with the Adjust-O-Rite cover and the Rite-Hite (screw type) height adjustment.

Here are some pictures of some much older Royal commercial machines (from the '60s-'80s)...

~Ben

 

[broomvac]

@ben:

I enjoyed seeing those Royals. The one in pic #2 looks exactly like the 1020Z I found.

 

[kirbyclassiciii]

broomvac

Yes, that is a model 660Z.

~Ben