Was this Concept One with Power Drive better or just cheaper
Tom,
I'd like it if a Hoover aficionado like Fred S, would answer this, but I am going to give it the old college try from what I'v heard from various "well-informed Hoover sources" long ago.
The jist is: After many years pushing the Dialamatic 1963-1978, and longer in the UK, Hoover USA decided that they weren't pleased, and never WERE pleased with the cleaning ability, of the Dialamatic and decided NOT to develop it any further. The engineers in N. Canton decided that a clean-air machine would NEVER clean carpets as well as a direct air type " think Convertible" which was still a "gold standard" that some were still trying to beat in 1979.
Hoover then foolishly as various folk attest, then sold the designs and right to the Dialamatic to Panasonic Company, or Matsushita Electric. Who corrected the few issues with the design, and began producing the machines very shortly thereafter. Enter the Jet-Flo Panasonic's, the first really good clean air vacuum cleaner, proven by history and MHO.
Hoover thereafter in 1979 introduced the first Concept One Series, that used a different setup including the direct air fan system. The machine cleaned beautifully proving the Hoover engineers right, but also wrong as history would attest later.
Several things differentiated the two that made one better than the other :
1. The QuadraFlex agitator, rather than a revamped and inappropriately spiraled 'Triple Action"-Convertible style brushroll, that was later corrected on the Dialamatic during it's production run, but still did not clean as well as a Convertible. (I'm sure that this MYSTIFIED" and confused the poor Hoover engineers to no end).
2. A horizontal motor like the Dialamatic before it, but with a fan at the end, coupled to an larger air intake from the brushroller cavity back to the fan. Better Airflow to the carpet, means better clean.
The Hoover Dialamatic in response used that small hose running back thru the nozzle housing and up to the back bag housing casing. And the way it jutted into the nozzle housing of the Dial was wrong dead straight ahead. Panasonic corrected that Immediately by slanting the intake a bit allowing the suction to move almost all the way across the nozzle housing.
3. Because the direct air Concept did not need alot of suction seals to get the air from start to finish. The air got dumped into a HUGE top fill bag like three times the size of the comparable Convertible C bag. The D bag that The Dialamatic used was smaller like that C bag and had the same width, and was UPSIDE DOWN From what Panasonic did later. the bag filled from the bottom like the Convertible. In a pressure system like the Dialamatic that was a stupid mistake. But the engineers never caught on. Panasonic engineers did.
4. IN almost every Dialamatic I have used they always suffered from weak, or anemic seals in many places, causing the suction to leak out in some places. This got worse as they aged and the seals dried out. How is a vacuum supposed to clean without suction. I have personally beefed up a 1178 with thicker seals around the bag compartment, and in the dial adjustment mechainism, and found that a properly sealed and maintained Dialamatic pulls quite a bit of air, and in the Automatic Adjuster ones, pulls that nozzle right down to the Carpet like a Convertible does, and gets the job done VERY well.
But, Hoover stubbornly stayed on the direct air bandwagon way after most other manufacturers, besides literally Kirby and Royal to their detriment. Once they decided, or were FORCED to make the decision that they COULD make a clean air/bypass system work for their 1997 introduction of the Windtunnel systems; their technology that THEY introduced was copied by nearly everyone. And just think for a second.
Imagine if you will that Hoover DID revamp the Dialamatic, with a more powerful motor, or dual fans, they improved the seals in the unit so there was little or no suction loss. They redesigned the suction opening in the agitator cavity a'la Panasonic to have more complete coverage of the cavity; then turned the bag fill spot upside down, (history has proven that It needs to be). AND then threw in the new Quadraflex agitator in the revised cavity. Never mind the possibility of on-board tools. And you can see where Hoover IMHO seriously missed the boat. And now that they're gone, we can only chew on the "what if's". Glad you liked the vac porn. I'm glad that a few people are liking it......
Chad
