Here is one of the earliest review of Vacuum Cleaners that I've sound so far...
The 1936 Vacuum Cleaner Report
- Thread starter unimatic1140
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
hismastersvoice
Well-known member
Very interesting, thanks for posting!
vac-o-matic
Well-known member
Excellent read! Thanks for sharing!
dysonman1
Well-known member
I've only found, ever, one older magazine ratings on vacuums. That was in 1933.
This particular 'report' is incorrect in many ways. The Vacuum Cleaner Museum actually has one of each model tested for this article. After all these years, the Air-Way Twin Motor's "motors" are still perfect. Their bearings are in excellent condition. The dirt removal ability of the Twin Motor "Chief" model is certainly every bit as high as the Hoover 150 (which received the LOWEST rating of the "acceptable" class).
The AV1 General Electric, on the other hand, does NOT clean as well as a Hoover nor an Air-Way. The ball bearings are noisy and the machine doesn't have what anyone would term "good suction". The Premier may have a slightly smaller motor, but the brush bar is fully tufted, and will outclean the AV1.
Another thing I find odd, is why they claim a rebuilt U.S. built model 12 Electrolux was slightly better than a brand new U.S. built model 12 Electrolux? Anyone care to explain that one? The only thing I can think of, is the screw-in hose connector had been replaced, by 1936, with the model XXX (30) type machine end hose connector. Everything else remained unchanged.
Great article, very telling how it DOES NOT go along with history. If everything this article said were ACTUALLY true, then history would show it. History, on the other hand, arranges the machines in a far different order. Note how the article didn't mention even once that Air-Way had the disposable bag, and therefor the greatest convenience of any cleaner tested. No other cleaner had the hollow handle for instant above-floor cleaning. No other cleaner's motor allowed it to swivel (like a Shark Rotator does today). I think that Air-Way refused to pay any money (as did Hoover) to Communist Reports.
This particular 'report' is incorrect in many ways. The Vacuum Cleaner Museum actually has one of each model tested for this article. After all these years, the Air-Way Twin Motor's "motors" are still perfect. Their bearings are in excellent condition. The dirt removal ability of the Twin Motor "Chief" model is certainly every bit as high as the Hoover 150 (which received the LOWEST rating of the "acceptable" class).
The AV1 General Electric, on the other hand, does NOT clean as well as a Hoover nor an Air-Way. The ball bearings are noisy and the machine doesn't have what anyone would term "good suction". The Premier may have a slightly smaller motor, but the brush bar is fully tufted, and will outclean the AV1.
Another thing I find odd, is why they claim a rebuilt U.S. built model 12 Electrolux was slightly better than a brand new U.S. built model 12 Electrolux? Anyone care to explain that one? The only thing I can think of, is the screw-in hose connector had been replaced, by 1936, with the model XXX (30) type machine end hose connector. Everything else remained unchanged.
Great article, very telling how it DOES NOT go along with history. If everything this article said were ACTUALLY true, then history would show it. History, on the other hand, arranges the machines in a far different order. Note how the article didn't mention even once that Air-Way had the disposable bag, and therefor the greatest convenience of any cleaner tested. No other cleaner had the hollow handle for instant above-floor cleaning. No other cleaner's motor allowed it to swivel (like a Shark Rotator does today). I think that Air-Way refused to pay any money (as did Hoover) to Communist Reports.
eurekaprince
Well-known member
I love Consumer Reports! Thank you for this great article, Robert. Keep 'em coming... 
Tom is 100% correct..
I have had a copy of this for many years, thanks to Charles Lester, how on earth anyone could down rate either a 150 Hoover or an AirWay is beyond my comprehension...they both were, in differing ways, many years ahead of anything on the market, and I would still say the 150 will equal or better any upright today at rug cleaning, its that good!
I have had a copy of this for many years, thanks to Charles Lester, how on earth anyone could down rate either a 150 Hoover or an AirWay is beyond my comprehension...they both were, in differing ways, many years ahead of anything on the market, and I would still say the 150 will equal or better any upright today at rug cleaning, its that good!
Absolutely true about that HOOVER 150
There is a pristine version at The HOOVER Historical Center.... a certified vacuum museum also. That cleaner was considered "over-enginerred". It was YEARS ahead of itself.
Would I want to houseclean an entire house with it now? NO. But, I could, because it would.
There is a pristine version at The HOOVER Historical Center.... a certified vacuum museum also. That cleaner was considered "over-enginerred". It was YEARS ahead of itself.
Would I want to houseclean an entire house with it now? NO. But, I could, because it would.
dysonman1
Well-known member
John
I had NO idea that the Hoover Historical Center was a certified vacuum cleaner museum now. I wonder which models of Rainbow, Kirby, and Electrolux they have on display? When I went, they only had Hoover vacuums on display - which we know are not the only machines (nor the "best") machines ever made.
In any event, Communist Reports got it WRONG and continue to get it WRONG today.
I had NO idea that the Hoover Historical Center was a certified vacuum cleaner museum now. I wonder which models of Rainbow, Kirby, and Electrolux they have on display? When I went, they only had Hoover vacuums on display - which we know are not the only machines (nor the "best") machines ever made.
In any event, Communist Reports got it WRONG and continue to get it WRONG today.
marks_here
Well-known member
Yes they does, got the new book today & very shocked what rated high.
All I will say is this:
Webster Dictionary, PAGE 558, column 1, museum,place for learned occupation,an institution devoted to the procurement, care and display of objects of lasting interest or value.also: a place where objects are exhibited. From the Greek:Mouseiom,
Walsh University is a Catholic college,university, school of knowledge run and sponsored by a congregation of Religious priests and Brothers.
They offer a Degree in "Museum Studies", and have their own museum, The HOOVER Historical Society, once owned by The HOOVER Company. It has a director, Ann Haines, former employee of The HOOVER Company, and has its own curator, Meghan. (I don't remember her last name). In the tannery, one will find the primitive, first non-electric "vacuums". none carry the HOOVER Name. In the archives (located in the basement of the "main house", are the archives.. info,photos of "other makes", info from Models and Samples, (affectionately known as the VAULT). where there was a section strictly devoted to NON HOOVER vacuums. One must handle ALL of this info (NOW) with cotton gloves, in a climate-controlled environment, in acid free tissue or other paper products. These are requirements for museum status. I checked with the infamous "Winterthur Museum in Delaware,owned by the "Du Ponts"
(dated someone who was graduated from their w/ a MASTERS in Museum Studies.
I'm making these statements to clear up any misconceptions about said museum in North Canton, Ohio.I'm in no way judging, bashing, or directing this at anyone specific. I shall not entertain heckling, or engage in battles. I've far better things with which to occupy my time. Lots of things have been written about HOOVER, which were and still are incorrect. Mrs. Anne Haines corrected misinformation, but it was printed anyway. That's the problem: Wrong information goes "out there", and, sadly, becomes Gospel, where it should be only "legend". So, enjoy and run YOUR favorite vacuum. Many people publically say they like a vertain vac Co, yet, in reality, they bash the heck out of them privately.
THIS is a stellar specimen of a 150, which I've operated NUMEROUS times. If you don't like this machine, here's a solution: don't get one, don't run one, and don't bash one.
John
Webster Dictionary, PAGE 558, column 1, museum,place for learned occupation,an institution devoted to the procurement, care and display of objects of lasting interest or value.also: a place where objects are exhibited. From the Greek:Mouseiom,
Walsh University is a Catholic college,university, school of knowledge run and sponsored by a congregation of Religious priests and Brothers.
They offer a Degree in "Museum Studies", and have their own museum, The HOOVER Historical Society, once owned by The HOOVER Company. It has a director, Ann Haines, former employee of The HOOVER Company, and has its own curator, Meghan. (I don't remember her last name). In the tannery, one will find the primitive, first non-electric "vacuums". none carry the HOOVER Name. In the archives (located in the basement of the "main house", are the archives.. info,photos of "other makes", info from Models and Samples, (affectionately known as the VAULT). where there was a section strictly devoted to NON HOOVER vacuums. One must handle ALL of this info (NOW) with cotton gloves, in a climate-controlled environment, in acid free tissue or other paper products. These are requirements for museum status. I checked with the infamous "Winterthur Museum in Delaware,owned by the "Du Ponts"
(dated someone who was graduated from their w/ a MASTERS in Museum Studies.
I'm making these statements to clear up any misconceptions about said museum in North Canton, Ohio.I'm in no way judging, bashing, or directing this at anyone specific. I shall not entertain heckling, or engage in battles. I've far better things with which to occupy my time. Lots of things have been written about HOOVER, which were and still are incorrect. Mrs. Anne Haines corrected misinformation, but it was printed anyway. That's the problem: Wrong information goes "out there", and, sadly, becomes Gospel, where it should be only "legend". So, enjoy and run YOUR favorite vacuum. Many people publically say they like a vertain vac Co, yet, in reality, they bash the heck out of them privately.
THIS is a stellar specimen of a 150, which I've operated NUMEROUS times. If you don't like this machine, here's a solution: don't get one, don't run one, and don't bash one.
John
dysonman1
Well-known member
Oh how they got it wrong...
The two highest - and two lowest - rated vacuum cleaners in Communist Reports, 1936 article. The Hoover 150 and the Air-Way Sanitary System are still in perfect working order today, as are the General Electric and Premier cleaners. When tested for Dirt Removal, the Hoover far out cleaned the GE and Premier, with the Air-Way slightly out cleaning the Hoover. The Air-Way also has the highest hose suction of all four machines and is the only one with a separate motor (and bare floor shut off switch) for the brushroll.
The two highest - and two lowest - rated vacuum cleaners in Communist Reports, 1936 article. The Hoover 150 and the Air-Way Sanitary System are still in perfect working order today, as are the General Electric and Premier cleaners. When tested for Dirt Removal, the Hoover far out cleaned the GE and Premier, with the Air-Way slightly out cleaning the Hoover. The Air-Way also has the highest hose suction of all four machines and is the only one with a separate motor (and bare floor shut off switch) for the brushroll.
dysonman1
Well-known member
The secret to the 150's height adjustment is to never push the lever while the machine is running. Only when it's off. It does work beautifully. While Hoover was not the first to have the side tool connection (Air-Way did that first on the DirtMasteR), the model 150 was the 2nd machine to have convenient ways to attach the hose to the machine.
The fact.........
that Air-Way patented the wood pulp cellulose bag says it all. The Hoover cloth bags leaked dust, the Air-Way disposable bags did not.
The Hoover 150 may have removed more, "stuff", in tests. But, the fact can not be denied that the bag, which was like a pillow of about a 200 thread count at that time, leaked dust. The Air-Way was using the patented disposable wood pulp cellulose paper bag that did NOT leak dust.
The truth is the truth. Both were great vacuums. However, the educated and health conscious person would have opted for the Air-Way. They were both about the same price. And they both have lasted the test of time. There are far less surviving Air-Ways as they appealed to a more elite audience and less were manufactured.
These details may be argued until my generation is gone. And, in the great scheme of things, who cares?
that Air-Way patented the wood pulp cellulose bag says it all. The Hoover cloth bags leaked dust, the Air-Way disposable bags did not.
The Hoover 150 may have removed more, "stuff", in tests. But, the fact can not be denied that the bag, which was like a pillow of about a 200 thread count at that time, leaked dust. The Air-Way was using the patented disposable wood pulp cellulose paper bag that did NOT leak dust.
The truth is the truth. Both were great vacuums. However, the educated and health conscious person would have opted for the Air-Way. They were both about the same price. And they both have lasted the test of time. There are far less surviving Air-Ways as they appealed to a more elite audience and less were manufactured.
These details may be argued until my generation is gone. And, in the great scheme of things, who cares?
