Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Dusty:

Once again with highlights and excerpts: A new category for testing has been added to the CRI approval.  CRI tests ALL the vacuums to see if they are worthy too of the green label.  I assume that the CRI is making the green label a standard for its seal of approval.  Why?  Because CRI does not have two separate lists for vacuums: One list for the CRI rug recommendation and one list for the green label.  It's both and/or nothing.  Do I know that for a fact?  No, I don't.  It is my personal and professional opinion.  [I suspect that is the reason you did not find ORECK-s vacuums.  But ORECK is listed as a member with a link to its Web Site.

Here's an excerpt from the CRI Web Site:

Tough standards for soil removal and indoor air quality

CRI combines the indoor air quality protection of its Green Label vacuum program with enhanced cleaning standards of its Seal of Approval programs to identify even better performing vacuum cleaners than the previous program. Under the Seal of Approval/Green Label vacuum program, manufacturers must meet higher performance standards and are rewarded with Gold, Silver or Bronze ratings. This program tests two general categories of vacuums:

• General-purpose vacuums approved for use on all conventional carpet styles
• Vacuums specifically approved for use on carpet with a low pile, or surface texture, measuring approximately a quarter inch or less

To earn the CRI Seal of Approval/Green Label certification, vacuums must pass the following independent laboratory tests:

• Soil removal — CRI uses NASA-enhanced x-ray fluorescence technology instead of traditional gravimetrix testing to measure the precise amount of soil removed from carpet — either 30 oz/sy commercial cut pile carpet or 30 oz/sy loop pile carpet.
• Dust containment —  The vacuum must not release more than 100 micrograms of dust particles per cubic meter of air, keeping dirt and dust locked tight in the vacuum —not escaping back into the air where it can be breathed.
• Carpet fiber retention —The vacuum must not affect the texture of the commercial cut pile carpet (900 passes with sample rotated every 50 passes) more than a one-step change based on one year of normal vacuum use.
• Carpet fiber retention —The vacuum must not affect the texture of the commercial cut pile carpet (900 passes with sample rotated every 50 passes) more than a one-step change based on one year of normal vacuum use.
• Carpet fiber retention —The vacuum must not affect the texture of the commercial cut pile carpet (900 passes with sample rotated every 50 passes) more than a one-step change based on one year of normal vacuum use.
• Dust containment —  The vacuum must not release more than 100 micrograms of dust particles per cubic meter of air, keeping dirt and dust locked tight in the vacuum —not escaping back into the air where it can be breathed.
• Carpet fiber retention —The vacuum must not affect the texture of the commercial cut pile carpet (900 passes with sample rotated every 50 passes) more than a one-step change based on one year of normal vacuum use.
• Carpet fiber retention —The vacuum must not affect the texture of the commercial cut pile carpet (900 passes with sample rotated every 50 passes) more than a one-step change based on one year of normal vacuum use.
• Carpet fiber retention —The vacuum must not affect the texture of the commercial cut pile carpet (900 passes with sample rotated every 50 passes) more than a one-step change based on one year of normal vacuum use.
• Dust containment —  The vacuum must not release more than 100 micrograms of dust particles per cubic meter of air, keeping dirt and dust locked tight in the vacuum —not escaping back into the air where it can be breathed.
• Carpet fiber retention —The vacuum must not affect the texture of the commercial cut pile carpet (900 passes with sample rotated every 50 passes) more than a one-step change based on one year of normal vacuum use.
• Carpet fiber retention —The vacuum must not affect the texture of the commercial cut pile carpet (900 passes with sample rotated every 50 passes) more than a one-step change based on one year of normal vacuum use.
• Carpet fiber retention —The vacuum must not affect the texture of the commercial cut pile carpet (900 passes with sample rotated every 50 passes) more than a one-step change based on one year of normal vacuum use.

Dyson is not a member of CRI as of yesterday's list. 

As a CRI member, your vacuums had to have passed the CRI rug tests by meeting the previous criteria for CRI approval and certification.  Being a CRI member, does not automatically bestow the new green label.  If it were automatic, ORECK-s vacuums would already be listed.  I presume if ORECK vacuums [any member's vacuums] do not meet/pass the green label requirement, they will be dropped from the CRI members' list.

An aside, on politics.  It will be a close Presidential election.  Whoever wins will be a one termer. BTW, a Commander-in- Chief, a title Americans use for the President of the USA, should not be allowed to send American troops to fight in wars, unless and until he/she has walked the battle field of the dead and wounded.  By this standard, only one candidate is qualified to make that call.  

Carmine D.

Hello Dusty:

By your posts here you put me in mind of another past dyson fan who defended and praised the dyson brand by citing professional organizations' certs and tests for dyson.  Then, in the next post he'd kow tow any/all certs and tests for other vacuum brands.  When pressed on his apparent contradiction, he would word smith just like you.  A common characteristic among dyson sales dealers?   

Like you, who defended the dyson sales by the $200 dyson mark up, he'd brag about paying his monthly mortgage just with new dyson sales.  Laughing all the way to the bank while other stores/dealers refused to sell dyson vacuums.  When pressed on his statement, he'd refer to other vacuum brands that made him more money.  He said, like you, he liked these brands better than dyson.  A common characteristic among dyson dealers?

You now and and he then are character witnesses to attest to the truth of my statement:  Where one stands, oftentimes depends on where he/she sits.  Thank you.

Carmine D.

Dyson working on new generation of fast, green cars

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/dyson-working-on-new-generation-of-fast-green-cars-852023.html

Not a huge news story, in that it's merely confirmation that they're actively working on projects in this area, as are lots of people around the world. They're hoping that the work they put in to the DDM, along with research in to solar cells will help them. Anyway, to show that those 400 engineers aren't just working on the vacuum cleaners.

M00seUK:

Interesting as cars go.  Dyson is certainly trying every way possible to justify 450 engineers/scientists and 12 designers.  But, it begs the questio: Where's the beef?

Dyson's mainstay is vacuums.  How have dyson's 450 engineers done with the 5 minute run time on the $45 batteries in the DC16 Hand held?   After 2 years on the market, with a new turbo brush version too of the DC16, has dyson progressed to get the operating run time up and closer to 30 minutes?  This is the standard for most of today's cordless [less expensive] hand and stick vacuums in the industry.  

Is dyson still silent on the run time for the DC16 in its product literature and advertising?  Or does dyson state the time period now?    Kind of embarrassing for a maker to admit that a $150 plus floorcare product can only run 5-6 minutes tops on a full charge. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

There's been a lot of talk in the news over the last 6 months, of researchers finding methods to get more run time from Lith-ion batteries :-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_ion#Breakthrough_Research

All very useful for Dyson's long postponed robot cleaner, the DC16 handheld and a car powered by battery power.

James Dyson admitted in a recent interview that the 5min run time of the DC16 was one of the main points in product feedback. He went on to explain that a lot of people were clearly using in a situation as replacement for a full sized vacuum (rather than spot cleaning) and perhaps they'd develop it further with this in mind, in the future.

This is pretty much my experience. Having wood floors throughout, I found the DC16 was great for picking up swept debris, but could do with working a bit longer between charges. Now, I'd never bothered with the small form factor hand vac until the Dyson, so I took a look at another brand of handheld vac my parents have. It is perhaps a 1/4 of the price of the Dyson, but it is frankly terrible. The opening is tiny, to make up for the small motor and filter / bag thing. I can now see why people have been pushing the Dyson handheld to it's limits, this other vac would have problems picking up anything beyond toast crumbs.

CarmineD wrote:
I'm so glad I can take you on a trip down memory lane. It's good to think back about all the fun times once in awhile.

I wasn't aware I was "word smithing".  I thought I was clarifying what I had said

I mentioned the Asthma society simply because during our discussion at the time we were talking about airborne hazards while emptying the bin on the Dyson.  I mentioned it because it was relevant to the conversation and I simply posed the question as to how Dyson could get this rating if it was as bad as you said.  Not once did I ever mention anything about the authenticity of the rating...for that matter, not once did you ever suggest it could be a bogus rating.  You brought up Oreck and the CRI.  I looked it up as a matter of interest (hadn't been to their site before) and saw that manufacturers could be members and have their product rated.  I made comment on the fact, just as you could have done with the Asthma society.

I am curious.  When I make $200 on an Oreck sale, is that a bad thing?  The fact that this is helping pay my mortgage and keep my business running, is it wrong to be selling these Orecks? Should I be sticking with Panasonic and Hoover and taking my $50-$75 instead?

Dusty

Dyson working on new generation of fast, green cars.  Here.

Dusty:

I explained to you that the reason dyson gets the approval from the Allergy and Asthma Foundation is the elaborate 2 pages of directions with illustrations in its Users Manual for the proper dumping of the dyson dirt bin by asthma and allergy sufferers.  The only addition to MOLE's showroom floor bagless display that would drive home the fallacies of bagless dirt bin dumping would be blow ups of the dyson illustrations and directions.   

You my good fellow, just as the dyson fan before you, brought up the profit of $200 on the sale of dysons.  No one asked him or you.  You both volunteered the information about dysons.  Ironic?

My answer to you and to him is the same:  Never sell a product [vacuum or other] for the profit in it.  Not if you are in business for the long term.  Definitely don't boast and brag about the markup.  When you and he do, the message the readers and customers get is that you sell them for the money.  

Instead, sell and brag about products because you believe in your heart and mind that they are the best ones for the money and for your customers.  If you do, all the rest falls in place.

I certainly would never recommend/sell a bagless vacuum, even dysons, to a person[s] who suffers with sinus, allergy, and asthma problems.  Never.  Even If he/she insisted.  I wouldn't.  I'd tell them to buy from another store. 

Consumer Reports and medical doctors advise persons with these breathing conditions to avoid using bagless vacuums.  I do too.  Even dysons, despite the elaborate instructions that are complete with diagrams and illustrations. 

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

M00seUK posted already.  What do you want to do give twice the credit to dyson just because he hired 450 engineers and 12 designers.  Once is enough.

BTW, you may want to read my response to M00seUK and his reply. 

Carmine D.

M00seUK;

Just to pick up on some essential points that I raised.  Dyson and his army of engineers have not found a solution to the run time on the DC16 after 2 years of operations.  Dyson now specifies the run time of the DC16 on its Web Site.  Not sure about the latest dyson product literature in stores that carry the DC16.  I've seen DC16 advertisements and product literature that are silent on the run time.  Is that dishonest?   

I believe if people are told the run time, they wouldn't buy the DC16.  BTW, in the US dyson takes $100 off the DC16 with the purchase of any new dyson vacuum.  In time, retailers, who carry the DC16 and not many do, will do the same.  And then they will be a free giveaways with dyson purchases.

Which begs the question for me to ask:  If dyson can't improve the battery run times on the DC16 hand held vacuum in more than 2 years, what makes me/anyone think they can design and produce a car that operates on batteries?  Just because you boast of 450 engineers, doesn't mean they are gainfully employed, utilized and earning their keep. 

Since we are on the subject of cars, GM employs 400 engineers and scientists to rework all the cars in its 8 divisions to be more fuel efficient.  The US has 435 Congress men/women governing the US with over 300,000,000 people, 50 states plus territories, and a budget of 13 trillion dollars annually. 

Carmine D.