Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

ORECK - The business, the history, the machine, the man and related.

(Below: Oreck 1979 to 2008)

  < yr. 1979  < yr. 5/2008

CarmineD wrote:
Hi Bertha,

It should be obvious that separation of rug fibers are irrelevant to the performance of a particular machine, but I guess to you it is not.  If that were the case we would all still be using carpet sweepers because we wouldn't know any better (sort of like those who use Orecks).   Yes chances are the Oreck will have enough power to pick up *some* dirt from the rug, but not much.  The point is that it understandably takes a lot more for the rug to actually *be* clean than it does to simply *look* clean.  If one were to follow up with a Kirby, Miele, DYSON, or any other good full-sized cleaner after first using an Oreck, those cleaners would pull up quite a bit of embedded dirt and grit out that the Oreck missed.  There's a fine line between being light weight yet powerful, which is why the DYSON DC24 is and will continue to be a good competitor against the Oreck.

And as I've said before, the so-called "Dirt Sensors" are also not a clear indicator of a machine's performance, even CR has mentioned this in past articles.  The rug may not necessarily be clean, it's just that the WindTunnel isn't detecting any dirt from it.  Just because the Hoover WindTunnel shows the rug is "clean" doesn't mean the others will, the dirt is still very much there.

-MH

Motorhead wrote:

I find it very amusing that Carmine has always contended that following behind a previouusly  vacuumed area  with a different brand will still result in dirt being picked up.  Now he is saying that a Hoover will not pick up behind an Oreck. 

I tried and XL21.  The carpet looked beautifully groomed.  However, following behind it with a DC07 produced prodigious amounts of dirt.

I am no pro, however I have always contended that an excelent brush will only bring dirt to  the surface and scatter it if the vacuum has poor suction.

Hello Tom:

You can call me by any name you please.  I KNOW who I am.  So do all who post here.  Because I've always used my name and true identity on all vacuum Forums for over 10 years.  I'm proud of who I am, unlike you, who hides behind names on Forums. 

If I take my well working ORECK and go over the same area as you with any vacuum you use, I will pick up more rug dirt.  Why?  A rug can hold its weight in dirt and still look clean.  That's the reason I vacuum daily, having pets and grand children too.  And the ORECK is ideal for daily usage.   

I also disagree with you on the embedded dirt finding lights.  If the HOOVER WT is working properly, new belt, bag and filter, the readings are accurate and precise.  The bone of contention with Consumer Reports with this feature is that oftentimes the vacuums are not well maintained by users.  This leads to false/irrelevant readings.  Right?  That's why I said to look into the deep rug fibers by separating with your fingers.  Especially after using an ORECK regularly.  You'll see the fibers and backing are clean with no tell tale signs of dirt left in and behind.  If the rug is still dirty, you can see the dirt in the fibers and backing.  That's the best proof!  Easy even for you to do.

Keep your facts on focus and straight or I will for you.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

Hello HARDSELL:

I agree with part of what you said and I highlighted it.  ORECK has an excellent brush roll and turns at high speeds.  With that combination, it draws the embedded dirt up to the surface where little or no suction will carry it into the vacuum.  The latter is the principle on which non-electric carpet sweepers worked for cleaning surface dirt on rugs and floors.  Brush action.  They had no suction at all.  Add the rug suction power of most full sized uprights of yester year to the ORECK brush roll, and you have the 2 key ingredients for a good rug cleaner and groomer.  Add a huge paper bag, like the ORECK's, and you the third factor for the making of an excellent upright.  That's why ORECK has the lock on the market and others can only copy.

Recall, if you can, that ORECK specifically matches its rug cleaning performance against the dyson DC07 and DC14.  Both of which you owned.  You didn't like the DC14.  But did the DC07.  Both have the same identical brush roll.  And power!  That leads me to doubt your findings not just for the dysons but ORECK too.

Visit your local ORECK store and YOU can perform the rug cleaning tests using the ORECK and dysons DC07/DC14.  Try the kapoc test.  This has been an industry standard test since Tom Gasko was walking on all fours in diapers and crying dyson.  ORECK will pick up most if not all the kapoc in 2 passes.  Forward and back.  Dyson will take 9 or 10 passes back and forth and still leave traces behind. 

Carmine D. 

Motorhead wrote:

Tom:

This is an absurdity.  If ORECK can pick up some dirt, it can pick up all.  It doesn't distinguish between what it can and can't pick up.  If it's only picking up some dirt, then the ORECK needs a new belt/bag.  They don't last forever.  These have to be changed, just like the dirt bin on the dyson has to be dumped frequently and the pre-post- motor filters have to washed/changed.  If you don't do the latter, dysons will only pick up some of the dirt too and not all. 

HARDSELL:

The same is true for carpet sweepers.  If you don't dump the dirt trays in these and they fill up [like bagless dirt bins], they don't pick up.  Regardless of how many passes you make back and forth.  

Carmine D.

ORECK, as an 8/9 pound  lightweight vacuum is and always has been an equal contender with all the full sized vacuums on the market for the last 45 years.  That's the reason its still the best in its class and others try to imitate/compete.  Not many can/do.  The jury is still out on the DC24.  Which is 4 pounds heavier.  Almost the same weight as the ORECK compact canister.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Hello,

My understanding of getting an extension - only if there was some sort of delay in the obtaining/getting approval for a patent and mostly drug related patents.  And I think it is no longer than 5 years at most.

 

I do not know the answer for sure.  My guess is no, society comes first and inventors come second.  Q:  Can an inventor prevent society from *benefiting from a widget if the original inventor keeps tweaking a product and locking up (monopolizing) the entire widget for an additional 20 year patent period.  My guess is no.  I'm sure James would of loved to have been able to tweak his dual cyclone and extend the patent life vesus competing against his own work in the market place.        DIB

 

*After a patent expires others can make for sale said widget and society “benefits”.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Hello DIB:

With drugs the period is 3-10 years after the drug is publicly marketed.  More time with extensions if the maker claims the drug is tweaked.  Wonderful case currently being heard.  The drug is TRICOR.  The maker is trying to keep generics from market after patent expiration dates by arguing it's changed the drug along the way.  Competitors have taken the maker to court.  I predict the competition will win.  TRICOR's maker will bite the dust.

Carmine D.

Motorhead wrote:

Hello TOM:

Sort of like Air Way!  Is that brand vacuum still around and in business like ORECK and KIRBY?  What ever happened?  Who knows?  Who cares?   Topic unworthy. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine,

That’s just it!  If society benefits, patent extensions for life saving or bettering drugs are given, but I do not believe it is the same for non-drug patents.

.

Can you link me 1 or 2 good articles that talk/follow this Tricor story?  Thanks.        DIB