Carmine D.

Some not so long.  Check snopes under:  "Never clogs, never loses suction."  You should find MOLE's statement posted here many many times in quotation marks:  "Laughingstock of the industry."  ASA got the final laugh. 

Carmine D.

.

I thought they should of changed the colors,then eveything would of had been better.Any one like orecks am/fm/ c/d player attached to the handle??????????

It wasnt me....

MOLE

The question for me and others [which remains unanswered] is how many new dysons were sold to unsuspecting buyers who relied on these false and exaggerated claims.  I suspect many were returned to retailers when their owners learned the truth which accounts for the huge resale market for used/refurbed dyson vacuums. 

It's a moot point now except for the future and the more wiser:  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.  

Carmine D.

I recall a now famous ASA ruling recently against dyson UK.  ASA found and ruled based on the preponderence of test evidence of several vacuum industry professionals that the Electrolux Infinity upright with a full paper bag outcleaned a dyson DC14 by over 40 percent.  And, subsequently, the Infinity was allowed to keep its written advertised claim that it was a better rug performer than a dyson [much to James chagrin, who initiated the ASA action, and your unkind characterizations of the ASA rule makers here]. 

However, I can't recall that the Electrolux Infinity upright was ever a test model in the Consumer Reports in the recent past.  Perhaps I misunderstand/misinterpret your statement.  Would you mind elaborating on your above statement?

Carmine D.

Guys, are we talking about the Electrolux Intensity here? I can find no ASA reference to an 'Infinity'. If so, here's the appropriate report, and the picture's not quite as you painted it, Carmine. They ruled in Dyson's favour...

ASA Adjudications

"We [ASA] noted the independent test data submitted by Electrolux. Although we had not seen up-to-date comparative sales figures to support the market leadership claim made in the ad, we acknowledged that the independent laboratory test data provided by Electrolux showed that, when tested in accordance with International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 60312 clause 2.8, the Intensity did have 50% more suction power than Dyson's DC14 as well as the other vacuum cleaners that Electrolux had tested."

As I stated in reply to DIB, I have not seen a Consumer Reports rank and rating on the Electrolux Intensity, tho I would certainly hope and want to. 

Carmine D.

Carmine D.

Ad

Carmine D.

Clearly the ASA ruling squashes the suction myth for cleaning carpets.  Ironic?  Yes, but also a good ASA ruling.

Carmine D.

'Agitator', with a capital 'A', was certainly a Hoover term orginally, but now it's used interchangably with the terms 'brush roll' and 'brush bar' by many manufacturers; see for example the catalog listing for the Panasonic Icon models below, which references their 'beltless direct drive agitator'. Hoover abandoned the term, at least in the UK, in the early 1980s with the introduction of the Turbopower/Turbomaster uprights, which used the all-new 'Activator', which was a modern progression on the original Agitator design. Hoover UK sadly no longer use any form of beater on their upright brush bars.

I don't have the Consumer Reports findings on the Electrolux Intensity, but here's Which? Magazine's verdict:

Test criteria	Rating
Cleaning
Carpet
Laminate floors
Floorboards
Walls and corners
Performance
Allergen retention
Pet hair
Noise
Ease of use
General use
Emptying
Cleaning stairs
Manoeuvrability

I personally have an Electrolux Intensity, and I can confirm it does do a passable job on carpets. However, the RRP of £286 is laughable for a cleaner with such miniscule bags and no on-board tools. The cord is much, much too short, and it's incredibly heavy to push the bulky motor-unit/nozzle from the rear of the machine, especially when the front is glued to the carpet by the much vaunted suction! Also, it's main party-trick is it's ability to fold up small for storage. However, since you have to purchase an additional canister cleaner for 'above floor' cleaning, you lose the space you save by buying this expensive compact in the first place! It also weighs at least as much as a full-size upright. Save your money and go for a decent all-rounder.

Carmine D.

Panasonic Icons are bagged upright vacuums [not bagless].  WRT the term "agitator", nice to see that HOOVER's legacy is still alive and well in the industry.

Carmine D.

Panasonic made the Icon in 3 bagged models, and 3 bagless. I have two bagged examples (the same models pictured), and a mid-ranged bagless. I wasn't commenting on their performance in comparison to anything else discussed in this thread, I was just saying they were a fantastic machine. I'm pleased to see their Direct Drive agitator is still in use on the market; it's just a shame they were discontinued in the UK in 2001.

WRT Hoover's legacy, every upright vacuum out there can trace its family tree back to the Model O!

Which? give 2 out of 5 stars for allergen retention, CR calls the emission results 'excellent'.

Also, CR describes the weight as 'modest' - empty, it weighs 7.8kg, which is as much as some full-sized uprights with onboard tools.

CR makes honorable mention of the automatic cord rewind on the Electrolux Intensity, a feature most USA ups don't have now let alone in June 2007.  A nice feature on any vacuum especially a lightweight where storage is a concern. 

Carmine D.

Have to wonder if the Which? Electrolux Intensity model included a HEPA filter like the Consumer Reports model.  That may be the difference in the test results by both entities.  2 out of 5 stars given by Which?  And an Excellent given by CR.

Carmine D.

For CR tests, 16 pounds is generally the upper limit for a generic claim of lightweight.  The E-lux Intensity justs makes the weight cut off.  No doubt the reason CR's narrative points buyers to the HOOVER TEMPO up a 16 pounder with TOB for only $75.

Carmine D. 

http://smallappliances.electroluxusa.com/node35.asp?ProdID=37007

Carmine D.

Assuming as I did, that DIB's reference above is to the Electrolux Intensity, the subsequent posters discussions which incorporate several leading vacuum industry authorities, like WHICH?, Consumer Reports, and the ASA [granted 1 and 3 are in the UK], then a third party interested vacuum buyer should conclude that bag surface area is not king [as the bag holds only 3 ounces vice 5 or more for most], but engineering is.

Carmine D.

Hi DIB,

the first large-scale production machine to use casters was indeed the 1908 Model O (I say 'large-scale production'; less than 400 were made!). However, before J M Spangler and W H Hoover joined forces to create the Electric Suction Sweeper Company, Spangler was making a very similar machine himself at a rate of 2-3 per week. These also had the caster wheels, so they were technically the first upright machines to use them. Hoover's earliest machines were just too big and heavy to be used without the rear casters; it would be like trying to steer the Titanic!

Here's a picture of one of Spangler's 1907 pre-'Electric Suction Sweeper Company' cleaners, in which you can see the swivel caster at the rear of the chassis.

The patent for this 'Carpet Sweeper and Cleaner' is filed under the name J M Spangler. However, the cleaner shown in the patent illustration differs from production machines in several ways: the hose for the dusting tools attaches differently, the brush-roll seems to be driven by a sort of axle-system, not a belt, and most importantly for you, the rear wheels are shown as being fixed-axle type, not swivel casters. I guess they came as a slighly later improvement when production began!

Yep, the picture I posted is of one of the machines hand-made by Spangler at his home in 1907, before W H Hoover got involved. In other words, the world's first portable electric upright vacuum cleaner. This would have been the sort of machine Susan Hoover bought from Spangler, before praising it enthusiastically to her husband.

Spangler travelled around North Canton (or 'New Berlin', as it was known until Jan. 1918!) on the trolley cars, collecting parts he'd ordered from various tradesmen and workshops etc. Then he and his son would assemble the machines, while his wife and daughter made the dustbags on their sewing machine!

The example pictured is on public display in the Hoover Historical Center in North Canton, Ohio.

Thanks for pointing out the new thumbnail indexing on googlepatents - it makes everything so much easier! I could have saved myself many hours in research if they'd done this sooner!

Here's a photo of the underside of a 1908 Electric Suction Sweeper Model O - this shows the casters clearly:

Carmine D.

The Center was closed some time ago and the contents are the property of a famous US A HOOVER expert and collector.

Carmine D.

That's incorrect; I visited the Historical Center in August 2008 during the celebrations for Hoover's 100th Anniversary. It's been closed  to the public over the winter as usual, but should be open for business again this month. The Historical Center is the property of the Walsh University, not Hoover, and is still very much an operative organisation. It continues to maintain considerable Hoover Company archives, as well as a large selection of historical machines, spanning from Spangler's 1907 sweeper to TTI's current line-up.

You may be confusing it with the liquidation of the Hoover Factory's infamous Vault of machines  - TTI retained all the pre-1960 contents, but most of the post-1960 machines are now the property of a good friend of mine in North Canton - presumably the expert you refer to. I've personally seen these, and even used a few! My friend spends much of his spare time doing work for the Historical Center. Some Vault machines also went to another North Canton resident, and many of those have found their way onto eBay, and into the hands of other collectors.

The Hoover Historical Center - August 8th, 2008

They certainly have their differences; Spangler's Sweeper used an Emerson motor, whereas the Model O used a Westinghouse motor. Also, the Model O introduced the light blue colour scheme - it was felt that the large, heavy, purring Spangler beast, painted black with gold detailing, might be intimidating to timid housewives not used to electrical appliances of any sort!

Of course, since both the Spangler Sweeper and the Model O were hand-built, little details changed constantly throughout production, as new ways of saving cost and improving quality were discovered. No two were exactly alike.

Carmine D.

Do you want an old Hoover cleaner that I have?

We appreciate your offer, but we have a museum of all the cleaners. You might consider placing an ad your local paper or internet. There are many vacuum collectors across America! You might also contact a local vacuum repair shop who might use it as a display.

Carmine D.

The first cleaner Hoover could really call 'all new', as opposed to a variation on Spangler's original design, would have been the 1909 Model 2 (my user ID here!). Before this came the Model O, Model 18, Model O Improved, Model 1 and Model 1 Improved - all within the 1908-09 period; improvements came thick and fast! Here's a picture of Model 2, on display at the Historical Center - a total departure from the large, bulky Spangler-based machines, and infintely more efficient!

Here are two cleaners patented by Spangler; the 1912 Hooverette (the first compact upright; the Dyson DC24 of it's day!), and the 1915 Hoover Baby. Both of these 'budget' models used a brush-roll driven by the front wheels like a carpet-sweeper, combined with an electric suction-only motor:

To answer your second question, W H Hoover was indeed an ordained minister, and also New Berlin/North Canton's first mayor. He was a very generous benefactor to the town and community of New Berlin/North Canton, and is still held with great respect and affection by the people of the town. There's even a statue and plaque in his honour.

I haven't seen the Modern Marvel video on Spangler and Hoover, but it sounds very interesting! Can it be found online anywhere?

W.H. "Boss" Hoover, owner of a leather goods manufacturing shop, bought the patent from Spangler in 1908, retained him as a partner, and soon had six employees assembling six units a day in a corner of the leather goods shop.

More can be found on BOSS HOOVER on the internet and his charitable ways, i.e. paying the bank owned mortgages anonymously for residents of North Canton, Ohio during the Great Depression of the 30's to prevent home foreclosures. 

The early portable HOOVER models pictured show the iconic features of the HOOVER upright vacuums of the era that continued on all the HOOVER uprights right up to the late 1920's and early 1930's with the intro of the most famous "Greater HOOVER: The 700 series."  The top mounted motor, white aluminum metal base [lighter than traditional metals of the day], fork bail, power switch on the rear of base, large full cloth bag with the signature HOOVER brand name of the era, front name plate on the base, and rubber bumper [furniture guard] all around.  Even appears the electrical plug is of the screw in variety for light bulb fixtures, typical of the electrical sources of the day.

Carmine D. 

Sometimes we even hear the practical ones, like reinventing one's business to survive.  Such was the case with BOSS HOOVER.  Leather goods?  Like horse saddles and gear?  With bicycles and cars rapidly preempting horses.  Good case of reinventing oneself and their business to survive.

Carmine D.

Q) Was Spangler a tinkerer prior to inventing the upright?

A) Yes, he was an inventor. His former, less famous inventions included a grain harvester, a velocipede wagon, and a ‘combined hay rake and tedder’, which he invented when he was just 18! He lived off the proceeds of these devices until his finances were depleted, as he reinvested his earnings into new projects. His financial situation forced him to take a temporary evening job as a janitor, cleaning rugs in the Folwell Building. Lucky for us that he did - this was where the idea of a machine which would sweep up and remove the dust, without stirring it into the air, first came to him.

Q) How long until the vacuum business became successful?

A) Building up sales was a very gradual process; in 1908, Hoover found just 372 customers. During the years 1909-11, just over 2000 a year were sold. But in 1918, 70,000 Hoover cleaners found owners! By 1923, Hoover had sold their 1,000 000^th cleaner. Hoover’s market was severely limited by the price of their product, and most significantly, by the fact that very few homes at this time were wired for electricity!

Q) What was the reaction from people when they saw a vacuum cleaner for the first time?

A) Curiosity, I suppose – as we will be when the first hover-cars appear for sale! When H C Booth first introduced his horse-drawn vacuum cleaner in Britain, society ladies would hold dinner parties while their house was being cleaned, so their friends could witness the spectacle of several long hoses being fed through the windows and doors of the house, while uniformed men did the cleaning! Owning a vacuum cleaner was the height of luxury, and became a status symbol among those who could afford them.

Q) How did Spangler and Hoover get along? How was Spangler compensated? Was he part owner or an employee? 

A) I’m not sure about Spangler’s relationship with Hoover - W H Hoover’s wife was Spangler’s cousin, so he was a member of Hoover’s extended family. Spangler was the Company Superintendent, on salary and royalties. He went on to design several other machines for the company, as well as many small improvements to the suction sweeper design. He died suddenly in January 1915, but his family continued to receive income generated by his many patents until 1925.

Q) Do you have any pictures of Spangler or Spangler working on the vacuums or Spangler and Hoover together?

A) Whenever Spangler is mentioned, online, in books etc, one particular photo is always used. This is the only one I know of:

Q) Did Hoover pioneer DTD or any other business ideas?

A) Hoover did pioneer door-to-door sales, and over its 100 years in existence so far, too many other business ideas for me to list! They led the way.

As the story goes, J. Murray Spangler had severe allergies to dust and dirt.  So he was unable to get up close and personal with the dirt by using a broom and dust pan [the usual tools of the day].  Spangler's first portable vacuum was made of rudimentary objects that he put together into a vacuum.  After he acquired enough money he fitted the electric motor and bag to a manual carpet sweeper of the day.  These were in use for several decades by this time and sold commonly through the SEARS catalogue for just 5-6 times the cost of a broom [2 bits at the time].  Early vacuums even used the generic name "electric sweeper" in deference to its carpet sweeper roots.

Rather a motley looking picture of Mr. Spangler.  Probably in his early 50's. 

Carmine D.

I'm not so sure.  Maybe for sentimental reasons.  Buy for practical reasons?  BOSS HOOVER was a practical business man.  The plant was over 100 years old.  What would it have taken to bring it up to current standards?  Alot.  Too much.  Raze and start over.  It was a good run.  Time to begin anew.

Carmine D.

I can't see 'Boss' Hoover looking kindly on the termination of so many, many loyal workers' jobs. As someone who took such good care of his local community - as preacher, as mayor, as generous (and frequently anonymous) benefactor - I'm sure he would be just as disgusted with what happened as many of the rest of the rest of us were. When he passed away, two services had to be held to accomodate the sheer number of mourners who had travelled to pay their respects. He wasn't your average cold, ruthless 'captain of industry'. He was a real humanitarian, and I don't think he could fail to overlook the human impact caused by the closure of his beloved, century-old factory.

Not for nothing have the North Canton locals branded TTI 'Totally Tradition Ignorant'.

Carmine D.

I'm sure some believed that when J. Murray Spangler died, HOOVER was over.  When HOOVER went from metal to plastic vacuums, HOOVER was over.  When BOSS HOOVER died, HOOVER was over.  When HOOVER went from d-t-d sales and small independent vacuum dealers to big box retailers, HOOVER was over.  When HOOVER stopped making beater bars, HOOVER was over.  When Maytag bought HOOVER, HOOVER was over.  When Whirlpool bought HOOVER, HOOVER was over.  When TTI Floorcare bought HOOVER and closed the HOOVER stores and the NC, Ohio plant, HOOVER was over.  None of them were correct.  These events individually and in total did not make HOOVER over [despite the letters on the smoke stack].  With them over, eras in HOOVER were over.  Traditions were over.  Not HOOVER.  Like Trebor said, in the final analysis, what matters is who's left standing.  BOSS HOOVER can take comfort in Heaven knowing that HOOVER is still standing.  Changed?  Yes.  Different?  Yes.  But alive and doing well and still going strong after 100 years.

Carmine D. 

I think if the Hoover company had made choices true to Boss Hoover's legacy, instead of expediency, the new Hoover factory would be underconstruction right now. I think Hoover would have stayed in the housewares business, and perhaps expanded into lawncare tools, power tools, and sewing machines. I do not believe the all metal beater bar would have been totally abandoned, perhaps remaining as an option. Hoover vacuums would still be found in better stores, where the salesman would talk to the customer about her home and preferences and budget, and taken the right mix of product to show her for total home care, with the Norca name supplying the big box retailers with stripped down bare bones vacs to compete with Eureka and BisselI, and a generous 'trade-UP' allowance on a real Hoover. You can be sure Hoover would have a vacuum approved by CRI and carpet manufacturers for use on frieze. I think Boss Hoover would have grabbed up Dyson's invention of cyclonic technology, and made him wealthy beyond his wildest dreams. Oh, I think he would have produced bagless vacuums, but they would have been attractive, durable and convenient, and properly launched on Hoover's terms in the marketplace. The sale to Maytag never would have happened, and Hoover would be a flourishing multi-national manufacturing corporation, green before it became a buzzword, a model of egalitarian and humanitarian employment and decorum in the marketplace.

Trebor

Carmine D.

Carmine D. 

I can't say with the same certainty as you what comforts him.  I haven't talked to BOSS HOOVER in years or the TTI suits.   When I do talk to THE BOSS, I'll be sure to ask. 

Carmine D.

Carmine D.