Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Someone is asking me this but I have no clue. So what would you recommend to someone that has $200.00 to spend on a vacuum cleaner.

Hi Mole and Lucky1,

I agree completely with what both of you said about CR leaving out certain brands, as well as the quality of other brands.  One thing I've noticed is that in the past few years they seem to be pitching Sears products in their ratings.  Also, some brands or machines they have tested in the past they no longer include, so in a way, CR has some control over their ratings as far as what models or brands they choose to test. 

Case in point:  The vacuum report in the March 1996 issue I have did a very extensive test of uprights and canisters, with a much more detailed outline of each machine than how it is now.   They tested 56 machines in all (vs. 70 in last October's issue).  But what's interesting is the machines chosen and rated.  Top rated for the canisters is, get this, the Nilfisk GS90, followed by the Miele White Pearl.  Two Eurekas (the Excalibur and World Vac) and one Hoover (PowerMax) follow it.  Kenmore wasn't seen until the 41st position, or the 8th machine down the line in the canister rankings (a Kenmore also occupied 43rd place).  For uprights, it was Sharp that topped the ratings with the Twin Energy, followed by the Hoover Power Drive Supreme, then the Kirby G4.  Kenmore uprights occupied #8 (Whispertone) and #10 (the PowerPath).

Kirby has always done well in the tests, but CR has never cared for them ("too pricey" and "too gimmicky" were some remarks).  Rainbow and Aerus (former Electrolux) have always received a low or marginal score even though I know from experience that they're both capable machines.  Why didn't they ever test recent Air-Way models, or Filter Queen?  I like the Royal metal line as well, but the last it was tested was in 1992-93 or so.  I know one of their excuses is that they prefer big-box store brands or brands readily available in most independents, but that didn't stop them from testing the Nilfisk back in '96.  And I'm wondering if the reason they're sticking to the lower-end Miele is to make sure it doesn't occupy first or second place in the canisters area like the White Pearl did.  In fact, since I noticed there is going to be an upcoming vacuum report, I wonder if they'll ever get around to testing the Dyson DC21?

One last thing I noticed is that recently, they seem to be testing the same machines over and over again.  Before (like in the 1996 reports and others around that time frame), they tested different machines each time.  The Kenmore Progressive and Eureka 4870 have been there for at least 5 years straight, not to mention the Hoover WindTunnels.  

I don't dispute that the Hoovers and Eurekas have done well through the years, as evidenced above and in even earlier reports they always have.  But it's the ratings of other machines which can't be that perfect, or low ratings of capable machines, that cause me to take a second glance.

-MH

EDIT:  Reading Mole's post about vac shop owners being like "snake oil or used car salesmen", while (like I said before) I'm not in the business, I've known people who give very honest opinions and "push" good machines to customers.  So, in that respect, as far as what should influence consumers on what vacuum to buy, I would say the opinion of a good, honest vacuum salesman who knows what is best for the customer rather than what makes the best sale would much better than reading any ratings in CR.

Motorhead wrote:

For all the reasons you describe [I excerpted a few above], I have never subscribed to CR and never will.  I was in the vacuum cleaner business all my life [and I am long in the tooth].  I must say over the years the CR ratings and rankings always gave me a good laugh on occasions.  Being in the business, I had to know what CR was saying in order to respond to customers' comments and questions about the CR vacuum information.

I can justify the expense of an occasional monthly CR magazine whether for vacuums and/or vehicles [as I recently did to assist with a new car purchase].  However, I never would waste my hard earned money on a long term CR subscription.  This is especially the case now with the wealth of information available on the internet free for the asking. 

Carmine D.

Hi,

Though I don't consider it the ultimate word, I relied on CR now and then and got a good result.  Back in the '70s a dear friend of mine had moved into an apartment in Manhattan and happened to show me the new Hoover Swingette she'd just bought.  I looked and her and said,"Uh-uh."  I explained, for the size of her place, the choice was just not worthwhile.  CR at the time recommended the Sunbeam 635 (I believe) as a "best buy" and after my explaining the downside, it's noise level, she didn't mind and got one and had it for years.  The rating offered a very clear picture of the item planned to be bought thus there were no surprises.

I also bought a set of Marantz speakers, absolutely without audition, on CR's recommendation and positively loved them.  I had them for about eight or nine years before I left the country and the friend I gave them to had them another four or five and loved them too until they just got too old to use.  The periodicals assessment of food processors, food mixers and even wall paint proved beneficial to me too.

If I have a problem with CR today maybe it's because there's a whole new crew of research people whose values I can't quite align myself with.  Reflecting our very busy, on the move society CR seems to have changed its prior view of the acceptable allowed for shortcuts.  In past it might well have made note that an upright either had or lacked tools for bare floor cleaning but today freeely give the okay to use an upright on bare flooring sans attachments -- a method I'd only suggest for quick, light duty manuevers around the house.  Issues re the bag size of bagged vacuums no longer seem of consequence and no particular fuss is made over lack of cord length. I guess what I'm trying to convey is that in past CR seemed to offer a little less condensed opinion with clearer whys and wherefores that lent to ones confidence to trust the judgements it set forth.

Regards,

Venson

Yet another example I'll point out in the October '07 issue, that I just noticed.  I know The Maytag Legacy and Hoover Duros are identical machines (aside from the color), however, there are two machines scored between the Hoover and Maytag, and the Maytag received the better score.  The Maytag scored "fair" for noise, and the Hoover scored "fair" on handling.  They are the same...how could they handle any different!?

I believe these also are Sanyo-made.

Venson wrote:

Hello Venson:

A recent episode for a product and industry wide evaluation/review that CR was on top of:  Air cleaners/purifiers and in particular the Ionic Breeze.  Despite threats and actual lawsuits by the manufacturer, CR took the product head on criticizing it for performance, safety, and making false claims.  CR was right on the money all the way up and down.  Ionic Breeze was slapped with a class action lawsuit and finally settled by paying out money to all the buyers. 

Wins like this for CR enhance its stature and credibility among readers.

Carmine D.

Lucky1 wrote:

I agree on the Synergy, I have the Riccar version, the Radiance Premium and I love it.  I haven't found another portable vacuum that can outclean it.  I also have a Miele Solaris Electro Plus which is great also.  I think if some of these customers would really stop thinking that we are out there to sell them the most expensive vacuum on the market and rip them off, they would really see how much better the vacuums are that are showing them.

Acerone wrote:

Hello Chris:

I was at the local Wal*Mart today and scoping out the vacuums.  The HOOVER Cann S3755 was on display and in stock on the shelves.  The retail price marked is $258. 

I never really took a close look [bagless are not by bag] but your comment made me curious.  I looked more carefully.  I agree with you.  It's not worth $258 and I have my doubts about $158.  Why?  The canister is cheaply made and assembled.  I had difficulty with the dirt bin removal and reinstalling.   I had to really slam it in to seal the bin in the machine well.  All the parts were there.  The automatic winder worked well.  The wands, hose and power head, especially the brush roll, were decent.  Add the cann, and it loses its appeal.  Unless the display model was faulty, I would say Consumer Reports doesn't get this pick right.  Even for $158 retail.

On the contrary, next to the HOOVER S3755 Cann was the "old" GE canister [made by Eureka with the GE name exclusively for Wal*mart].  It's been around the industry for over 6 years.  Bagged.  And for $140.  In comparison the GE is much better, although now superceded by a new version which is a coppertone color.  This particular Wal*Mart store was sold out of these.  Not even a display.   I didn't ask if more were due in, but it looked like many of the vacuums were out of stock.  Except the two dyson models which were stacked full in all the space provided.  The DC07 Original for $378 and the DC 07/14 Animal.  I'm not sure which model.  I didn't look closely and there was no display model and price except for the DC07 Original.  

While I was there a couple selected the EUREKA BOSS Smart Vac upright for purchase.  It was located right next to the dyson.  I overheard the man's comments about some of the bagless vacuums on display.  I can't repeat them here.  The comments would be censored.  He was quite satisfied with the Eureka Boss Upright and he put it in their cart.  He told his Wife [I presume she was] that the Eureka was the best....AFTER he made sure there were replacement paper bags available for sale.  There were.

Carmine D. 

Now Carmine,

The Hoover is made by LG correct... I seen the LG online and it looks a lot like the Hoover canister...

I don't know that for a fact.  The LG may be sourced too.

Carmine D.

Consumer Reports gives this Hoover canister [S3755/65] a best canister rating again in the March 2008 ratings and rankings.  Maybe due to the lack of cann competition.  I don't feel it is worth the retail price and/or the best canister title based on my limited review of it.  In fact, not even at $150. 

Missing from the CR cann reviews are the new and/or old GE canns sold exclusively by Wal*mart and made by Eureka.  The old GE cann, around about 6 years, was consistently rated high by CR.  This and the latest version are bagged canisters and in my opinion worth the $150, if you are so inclined to want to buy a cann in that price range.

Carmine D.