Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Has anyone seen this yet?  It just hit the shelves a couple of weeks ago at Wal-Mart (not even on the Hoover or WM website at this point), I picked one up around that time after speaking to Tom G. (who was the first one to tell me about it) but had neglected to post about it on here until now.  I finished posting a review in the Reviews section, needless to say I am very impressed with the machine now that I have been using it for a couple of weeks and highly encourage everyone to at least head to Wal-Mart and check it out. 

For those of you who haven't seen it, TTI/Hoover has finally jumped on the multi-cyclone bandwagon after experimenting with dual-cyclone for a couple of years with the Mach series, and only recently getting *that* right with a redesigned shroud for the Mach 3.  This Whisper is completely different, it's a copy of a Root Cyclone Dyson and a damn good one at that.  At $120 I am blown away by the type of machine it is, very substantial and not cheap-feeling by any means.  It's a completely new design, and appears to contain elements of the Mach series, the failed "One" cleaner in the UK, and, oddly enough, the LG/Kenmore Premalite.  At first glance it appears to be a dual-cyclone machine, until you either look at the side of the box or separate the two halves of the cyclone assembly.  Indeed, there are 6 high-efficiency cyclones hidden above the bin, and they look just like a Dyson's.  You will also notice the cyclonic "arrows" on the Hoover logo in front, for added emphasis

Carpet performance is good, it handles very nicely (positive weight) and the double-chevron brushroll helps pull the machine along; the bristles are soft but still effective.  What sets it apart from the Dyson though is above-floor cleaning convenience.  You push a button and the handle wand releases, you do not even have to let go of the handle; you're using the SAME ergonomic handle you just vacuumed the carpet with.  The wand is long as well, and does not need to be inverted for use.  There are only 2 attachments, and the wand isn't adjustable, but the brush/upholstery tool is, I presume to reach tight spaces.  I suppose if worse comes to worse other standard 1 1/4" attachments could work, it appears to be the same though I have not tried it.  I'll check that out further and post the findings.  The motor is soft-starting (like the Hoover Z), and the brushroll (driven by a separate motor) automatically starts and stops when the handle is lowered or raised, if the brushroll switch is on.  There are also 2 indicator lights showing when the brushroll is on, and when the suction is blocked.

This machine is basically a Dyson DC07 or DC14...at a third of the price.  Being a Dyson fan I hate to say it, but Dyson may be facing some competition with this machine as far as regular uprights are concerned, once it is more widely available and more people find out about it.  It's no match for the DC17 in terms of performance, obviously, but I can't see any reason why the 7 or 14 would be more desirable, as strange as that sounds.  If it was inexpensive and worked well but cheaply made, then it's obvious the Dyson would be the clear winner (as it usually is), but that's the thing...this machine does not seem to be cheaply made at all.  Definitely no WindTunnel here and I can't see why it wouldn't last a reasonable length of time.   On the other hand, while possibly not-so-good news for Dyson this could be some positive news for Hoover, perhaps the first of many machines to come?  It will be interesting to see what the future holds.

-MH

CarmineD wrote:
Actually I was pointing out the fact that manufacturers market the claim in the biggest boldest print followed by the * and the very fine print.  Most people don't bother with the fine print, they just see the claim and buy based on that.

The 4870 cleans plush carpets better than the Dyson.  I don't think many would disagree.  Does this automatically make me a Eureka groupie and a Dyson hater now?  That does seem to be the way it works around here. Different vacuums for different applications, it's as simple as that.

Air watts is purely a mathematical formula that equates to squat when it comes to cleaning. Didn't Hoover start that trend btw? I seen to recall them using "cleaning amps" or something along those lines.

Dusty

dusty wrote:

Well Dust Man,

Would you care to explain your reasons for saying that the EUREKA Boss Smart vacuum will outclean a dyson DC07 by 60 percent on plush carpets?  Is it the brush roll?  Is it the height adjustment?  Perhaps both?  Expound for us. 

Air watts are meaningless.  Good to hear you say it too.  MOLE and I told dysoners here for years that air watts is a farce.  They [and I'd be happy to tell you who they are if you ask] didn't believe it until dyson started skimping on the air watts as it improved the design and performance of its brush rolls.  Air Watts was the dysoners' battle cry.  Now, dyson and its fans avoid any mention of air watts.  Farcical measure.  Don't mean a thing if all the dyson brush rolls can do is sing [clutch chatter and ratcheting noise are the technical terms].   

BTW, the cleaning amps are useless too.  No doubt the reason they are long gone.  Same for amps.  Nothing to do with rug cleaning performance.  Not a thing. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

"wonder why the DC07 still our performs all the newer Dysons."   Written by HARDSELL the xxxxxxx.

HS, in his infinite lack of vacuum wisdom, believes a DC07 is the signature dyson model.  But wait, he doesn't stop there.  No, not HS.  After 6 years, 450 dyson engineers, and a swat team/task force of 12 high paid and powered designers, HS states that the new dysons don't measure up to the DC07 in performance.  But wait it gets worse:  HS says $399 for a DC07 is too much money.  He refuses to buy one for that amount. 

You see what he's trying to do?  He's trying to slicky another free dyson!  Any dysoners and fans of new dyson vacuums want to agree/disagree with HS's emminently brilliant revelation?

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Gotta love fine print.  The reality is the Eureka can only outclean one Dyson, but to Eureka it's a Dyson nonetheless and provides the basis for their (vague) claim.

The only reason the DC07 is used in this comparison is like I mentioned in another thread; it is the proverbial Dyson "whipping boy".  Any other manufacturers, dealers, etc. who want to make a claim for themselves against Dyson will automatically choose either the DC07 or DC14 since they do have a softer brushroll than the rest.  Again, path of least resistance.  Use a Dyson with an aggressive brushroll (like the DC15, 17, 18, 21, 23, 24, 25...) and the claim will undoubtedly be harder to prove. 

As to the idea of air watts, performance has to count in other areas as well.  Good airflow and suction power (more airflow than anything) combined with a well-designed nozzle and brushroll generally means good performance all-around. 

-MH

dusty wrote:
Yes, Hoover used "Cleaning Effectiveness Per Amp" in the 1990s.  Their way of getting around the "amp wars" starting to take place at the time.  While Eureka and others were producing 12-amp cleaners, Hoover would have 6 to 8-amp cleaners with a cleaning effectiveness of 18.0 or something to that effect.  Of course I've always thought all of that was pointless and still do.  Amps don't measure performance, airflow does.  Many older cleaners are proof that you only need 3-4 amps (or less) to get the rug clean, at least before the bag clogs.  It seems to me the idea around more amperage was to compensate for the airflow choking off as the bag filled; (theoretically) the more amperage, the longer it would last without the user having to change the bag (unlike before where frequent bag changes were needed).  Theoretically.  3 amps or 12 amps, it's going to clog no matter what.  Of course now there are the cloth Filtrete bags which have made a huge improvement and allow the cleaner to go for much longer periods of time without clogging, and the reduction in airflow is a lot less than it would be with paper, IMO.

Not all Dysons are 12 amps.  In fact, most are 10 or 11-amp cleaners, and the DC24 uses only 6.5 amps.  Further proof that amperage does not mean better performance.  Why bother with more amps when the airflow will remain constant regardless? 

-MH

Motorhead wrote:

Well well Motor:

Do I see a contradiction in posts?  You say one day that the DC07 puny brush roll is fine and then the next day say the newer dyson brush rolls are better?  What gives here? 

I suspect the DC07 is used because as Consumer Reports says it is the poorest of all dysons for pet hair pick up and removal.  It gets EUREKA the biggest bang for the buck: 60 percent better than a dyson.  SIXTY PERCENT.  Dyson isn't even close.  Shame on the DC07.

I also suspect that matching the EUREKA Boss Smart vacuum against any other dyson would render the EUREKA a more worthy performer too.  But not by as large a degree.  There are straight suction canisters and tanks that would fare better than dysons on rug pick up.  Like the Henry vacuum which outclassed a DC15.  Do your recall?

Carmine D.  

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine,

The deeper you sink the more you lie.  Now xxxxxxx go back and show the forum where I said $399 was too high. While you are searching find where I got a free Dyson.

I think all see what you are trying to do.  When you lose you lie and twist facts. When Dyson kicked you a$$ they damaged your brain.

Do those clients that you were consulting still call and heckle you?

HS Man: 

I've posted info about dyson sales here specifically for you with prices as low as $280 for a new DC07 [before retailers' give backs].  Have you purchased one yet?  No, but you post on another thread that you bought one for $399 [and sold it after 3 years].  You said the prices for the best dyson [DC07] are too high.  Show us where you didn't.  Say it now, if you think the $399 price is reasonable on the DC07!

What do you say about the $500 plus prices on the newer dysons that don't perform as well as the DC07?  Worth the do re me? 

You'll never get another new dyson by posting with these conflicting messages about dyson performance and prices.  We know the real reason you bought a Royal Eminence for $299 with the proceeds from the DC07.  You're trying to slicky another new dyson just like you did before with the DC07.  But, dyson learned you sold the first one.  You told us that's not you!  Why?  Because you didn't sell the free gifts from ORECK when you returned the vacuum.  Shame on you HS.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

I had an $800 Oreck. which is one of the cheapest built vacuums on the market.  The Dyson is worth much more than the Oreck.  It probably cost more to bring a Dyson into the US than it cost to manufacture the Oreck.  I think most all vacuums are over priced as are most consumer goods.  Most are priced at what the public will pay.  COMPARED TO THE $800 ORECK THE DC07 IS A BARGAIN AT $399.

You can refer to my above stgatement about prices.  Again, compared to other vacuums Dyson is not over priced. 

Only an old fool could assume that my Dyson was free.  You contradict yourself.  First paragraph you say that I paid $399 then you say it was free.  Why would Dyson give me another vacuum if I make it known that I sold mine and bought a Royal and a Kirby?  I never got any free gifts with my Oreck.  Can't keep something you do not get.  In fact I bought an Oreck air purifier at the same time.  Never opened it and returned with the Oreck.  I figured that if the vac was such a POS the air cleaner was no better.  The public seems to share my thoughts.

You are digging a deeper hole and your nose is growing.