gmerkt
New member
At least from my viewpoint. As I've mentioned here before, I acquire cast-off vacuum cleaners to refurbish and sell. To this end, I've learned to concentrate on certain abundant makes/models to maximize experience factor and minimize labor. Into this formula I try to imbue ease and economy of parts acquisition. Of course what will sell is a major factor. So I wind up working on lots of plastic Hoovers and Kenmores that are between 4 and 10 or 12 years old. Rarely do I work on any of the later, Chinese Hoovers. There are the odd Kirbys that come along and some others. Only a couple of Eureka models, and only one Bissell (the "Lift Off") which sells well. Don't want anything to do with working on Oreck or Dyson. Anyway, lots of Hoovers and Kenmores.
Once in a while a machine will come along that I haven't worked on before and I don't know anything about. Since I get the cast-offs for very little cost, sometimes I will buy this to me unknown machine just to see if it has potential to be fruitful in my work. The other day, the matter of the Hoover Windtunnel 2 bagless came about in this fashion.
The specific model number of the machine was U8351900. It was made in 2006. It was the "Extra Reach" model that came with an accessory hose and floor attachment. I use the past tense here because most of the machine went to the dump today with a bunch of other vacuum cleaner husks from parts donor machines. My post mortem quickly convinced me that the Windtunnel 2 isn't something I want to refurbish.
The Windtunnel 2 is a combination of other Hoover designs, none of their best in my own opinion. To start with, Hoover's advertising says "Self-cleaning HEPA filter cleans itself every six seconds to maintain cleaning power. You never have to touch or replace the filter." This just isn't true. The self-cleaning feature is derived by having the filter rotate in contact with a pawl that trips along the pleats of the filter. This is supposed to vibrate the dust back down into... where? The dirt cup has a hard, primary screen to keep the big stuff in the cup; it also tends to block such dust that might otherwise want to fall downward. The only other filter this machine had was a very basic little foam exhaust filter. Where was all that dust supposed to go? It goes back up into the filter again until it clogs. This isn't just my opinion; there is a video on Youtube where a disgruntled owner shows how he must clean the packed filter out manually every so often with a screwdriver. The filter cannot be removed by the owner for regular maintenance. Oh, and when the filter gets so jammed full, it binds and ruins the little motor/gear drive that turns the filter for "self-cleaning."
Now this rotating, supposedly self-cleaning filter idea came from the Hoover Z series, but those could easily be removed for manual cleaning (required). If you're handy enough to get to one on the Windtunnel 2, a replacement filter costs around $70.
Next there is the rather complex floor nozzle. The brush roll design on this takes after that of the Hoover Windtunnel self-propelled in the U6400 and U6600 series, both of which take two belts. The Windtunnel self-propelled takes a flat belt which drives the power drive unit, which in turn drives the brush roll via a small v-belt. Since the Windtunnel 2 has no power drive, it has an intermediate pulley driven by a serpentine belt off the motor capstan; the intermediate pulley in turn drives a v-belt that turns the brush roll. I've worked on quite a number of Windtunnel self-propelleds and this rigging is the downfall of the design. On the Windtunnel 2, Hoover advertises that the machine has a "lifetime belt." Which one? Certainly not the v-belt that drives the brush roll. Is the lifetime belt like the lifetime filter? Anyway, the bottom end on these machines is rather complex with lots of parts.
Now for the third design feature adopted from a previous Hoover model. That is the clear plastic brush roll housing. The Windtunnel 2 has taken this design, in part, from the ill-starred Windtunnel Dual V/V-2 models, the U8100 series. The plastic used in both cases is of poor composition. It embrittles at an early age, breaks apart, and components cannot be held together. The screw holes crack, break off, and fall away. I've gotten pretty good at Mickey-Mousing repairs using epoxy putty on the U8100 series from time to time, but why take on another model with this problem?
Hoover has made a bagged version of the Windtunnel 2, and this no doubt lacks the filtration problems inherent to the bagless design of the same machine. However, without having examined one, they likely use the same bottom end as the bagless and therefore have the same issues there.
Many consumers have no idea what the patented Windtunnel name implies. The Windtunnel design only refers to a certain way the channels in the brush roll housing area are made. The Hoover idea (if I'm not mistaken) was to equalize the force of the vacuum across the width of the floor nozzle. So many modern vacuum cleaners have a vacuum intake port biased to one side or the other, with the exception of a few dual port designs. Hence there are a great many Hoover products that bear the Windtunnel name, with many variations in other design features. Their common feature is in that one specific area of the floor nozzle.
Once in a while a machine will come along that I haven't worked on before and I don't know anything about. Since I get the cast-offs for very little cost, sometimes I will buy this to me unknown machine just to see if it has potential to be fruitful in my work. The other day, the matter of the Hoover Windtunnel 2 bagless came about in this fashion.
The specific model number of the machine was U8351900. It was made in 2006. It was the "Extra Reach" model that came with an accessory hose and floor attachment. I use the past tense here because most of the machine went to the dump today with a bunch of other vacuum cleaner husks from parts donor machines. My post mortem quickly convinced me that the Windtunnel 2 isn't something I want to refurbish.
The Windtunnel 2 is a combination of other Hoover designs, none of their best in my own opinion. To start with, Hoover's advertising says "Self-cleaning HEPA filter cleans itself every six seconds to maintain cleaning power. You never have to touch or replace the filter." This just isn't true. The self-cleaning feature is derived by having the filter rotate in contact with a pawl that trips along the pleats of the filter. This is supposed to vibrate the dust back down into... where? The dirt cup has a hard, primary screen to keep the big stuff in the cup; it also tends to block such dust that might otherwise want to fall downward. The only other filter this machine had was a very basic little foam exhaust filter. Where was all that dust supposed to go? It goes back up into the filter again until it clogs. This isn't just my opinion; there is a video on Youtube where a disgruntled owner shows how he must clean the packed filter out manually every so often with a screwdriver. The filter cannot be removed by the owner for regular maintenance. Oh, and when the filter gets so jammed full, it binds and ruins the little motor/gear drive that turns the filter for "self-cleaning."
Now this rotating, supposedly self-cleaning filter idea came from the Hoover Z series, but those could easily be removed for manual cleaning (required). If you're handy enough to get to one on the Windtunnel 2, a replacement filter costs around $70.
Next there is the rather complex floor nozzle. The brush roll design on this takes after that of the Hoover Windtunnel self-propelled in the U6400 and U6600 series, both of which take two belts. The Windtunnel self-propelled takes a flat belt which drives the power drive unit, which in turn drives the brush roll via a small v-belt. Since the Windtunnel 2 has no power drive, it has an intermediate pulley driven by a serpentine belt off the motor capstan; the intermediate pulley in turn drives a v-belt that turns the brush roll. I've worked on quite a number of Windtunnel self-propelleds and this rigging is the downfall of the design. On the Windtunnel 2, Hoover advertises that the machine has a "lifetime belt." Which one? Certainly not the v-belt that drives the brush roll. Is the lifetime belt like the lifetime filter? Anyway, the bottom end on these machines is rather complex with lots of parts.
Now for the third design feature adopted from a previous Hoover model. That is the clear plastic brush roll housing. The Windtunnel 2 has taken this design, in part, from the ill-starred Windtunnel Dual V/V-2 models, the U8100 series. The plastic used in both cases is of poor composition. It embrittles at an early age, breaks apart, and components cannot be held together. The screw holes crack, break off, and fall away. I've gotten pretty good at Mickey-Mousing repairs using epoxy putty on the U8100 series from time to time, but why take on another model with this problem?
Hoover has made a bagged version of the Windtunnel 2, and this no doubt lacks the filtration problems inherent to the bagless design of the same machine. However, without having examined one, they likely use the same bottom end as the bagless and therefore have the same issues there.
Many consumers have no idea what the patented Windtunnel name implies. The Windtunnel design only refers to a certain way the channels in the brush roll housing area are made. The Hoover idea (if I'm not mistaken) was to equalize the force of the vacuum across the width of the floor nozzle. So many modern vacuum cleaners have a vacuum intake port biased to one side or the other, with the exception of a few dual port designs. Hence there are a great many Hoover products that bear the Windtunnel name, with many variations in other design features. Their common feature is in that one specific area of the floor nozzle.
