Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

  < yr. 1979  < yr. 5/2008

The Booth saga is ancient vacuum history.  My memory is not that good. 

Up to the time [late 1890's], cleaning dust was done by blowing the dirt out and catching it.  Save the push and pull carpet sweepers by BISSELL and the like that were around in the late 1800-s.  And the hand pump suction style cleaners around the early 1900-s/turn of the 20th Century.  The latter hand powered carried a 1907 'vacuum' patent by law.

Booth got the idea of suction and described it to an American inventor who had a 'blowing' contraption demoed at the London's Empire Music Hall.  It was used to clean railway carriages.  Booth was a fairground wheel engineer and got the idea to add a fan creating vacuum which sucks dirt rather than blows.  He used petro to power the motor.  He patented his vacuum cleaner in 1901 and launched the British Vacuum Cleaner Company to market the Puffing Billy.  Red box on wheels.  Like a fire engine.  Uniformed men did the cleaning by passing flexible tubes [hoses] through the windows of residences and sucking out the dust.  Booth didn't want to market just hire out.  To my knowledge that was the first usage of the word 'vacuum.' Belongs to a Brit.

Spangler and HOOVER united in the USA in 1907 and mass marketed the HOOVER uprights in 1908 including in Great Britain by 1912.  HOOVER were the first mass produced vacuums for sale [$75] in the USA .  Royal in the USA was earlier [1905] with a tank not an upright.  Electrolux too [in Sweden] around 1913 with a tank, the Lux 1.  Not sure about Kirby being around that early in the game  First, I recall KIRBY, was the early 30's.   Tueck was a push power fan operated upright.  Primitive.  Better than the pump suction hand vacuums at the time [around turn of the 20th century].  The latter similar to insect and vegetable sprayers were produced in cities that had metal and iron foundries for local sales and use.

We have a poster here with hereditary links to Kirby and is the owner of an Ohio Tueck.  Maybe Jim Kirby can assist with some of this vacuum history.

Carmine D

Oreck XL21. It's destined to become the standard by which all other vacuums are judged because it comes with an unprecedented 21-year Guarantee and 21 years of FREE tune-ups! From the bottom of its double-helix, high-speed, pile-lifting roller brushes, to the top of its redesigned comfort fit Helping Hand Handle, the XL21 delivers unsurpassed power and maneuverability.

http://www.bestbuys.com/p24159261-Oreck-XL21-Bagged-Upright-Vacuum--reviews.html

Carmine D.

Hello Dusty:

Thank you again.  You are correct.  I was wrong.  Interesting rating for the ORECK XL 21.   Of course only 40 reviews, but still an 80 percent overall.  Not too bad.

Carmine D.

Please correct me if I'm wrong [As Dusty did].

It appears that the notice of the trademark is published for comment and in particular for "protest/opposition."  I presume the reason for this is to allow ORECK to stake its claim as originator and/or others to protest/oppose as originator.  During this time of notice, why didn't the supposed originator protest?  And if he fails to do so, isn't he/she preempted from doing so after the due date? 

In other words, anyone could say they were first.  But, if you didn't record/protest the official recordation within the time period allowed, you are preempted from any legal recourse.  In other words, you're out of luck.  ORECK wins by virtue of recording first and not meeting with any official protest in the alloted time to do so.  Is this correct from your perspective?

Carmine D.

I would add one more observation to make the ORECK XL 21's star rating interesting based on 40 epinions.  Consumer Reports typically and consistently rates this ORECK model above all the dysons save one: the DC17.  So while each their own sounds good, the epinions and CR reviews for ORECK are congruent.  I can't say the same for the epinions star ratings and CR reviews for other brands like dyson which typically gets fair to middlin from CR.

Also Dusty if you don't mind me saying: When you put parens around the http site as you did in your post above, the site can't be found.

Carmine D.