Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

I am thinking of getting either the Kenmore 29715 or the new 28014 to replace my dying 30-year-old Electrolux.  The reviews online of the 29715 say, mostly, that's it's durable.  Does anybody have experience with the 28014?  Does anyone know if the manual tools from the old Electrolux will fit on the Sears models?  And, for the money, are their better choices? Sears has them on sale this week at $100 off.  (One concern I have is that I'm used to a separate manual floor brush and motorized rug attachment.)

CarmineD wrote:

I think it's all a game I think Carmine but I can't quite draw a bead on how it's played.  You buy a high-priced Miele and they guarantee you forever.  You buy an upper-line non-niche brand vacuum and they make you pay forever. 

The Miele cans with Vortex motors are warrantied for seven years but the regular price for the S5980 runs at about $1,195.00.  A top-of-the-line Kenmore can sells for about half that and only carries a one year warranty BUT Sears makes it quite clear that you can always buy a "Protection Agreement" at $30.00 for two years or $50.00 for three thus for all inent and purpose increasng the cost of the vacuum.

If  it is a game, then basically its the LAST machine in need of a trip to the repair shop that wins,

Best,

Venson

My only input here is a strong suggestion to watch this video before buying the Kenmore.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqJhGqZg7uI

But if you are dead set on either the Kenmore or keeping your current machine, keep the Lux.  It may be old, but if serviced completely and you get a new hose for it (if you still have the braided saran hose I guarantee it leaks like a sieve by now) it will have just a bit more power than the Kenmore, and be much better built and last quite a few more good years in it.

Hi Vacuuman,

Most respectfully --  I've been told that the "magic" in a magic act happens while the magician gotten his audience to focus on the hand that's not involved in executing the trick.

This guy understands amgic and schmaltz  but that's about all.  What was obvious is that  the Miele bag was empty ornear empty when he opened the machine.  This was neither  indicated nor clearly shown as regarded the Kenmore.  You've have to state and show that hard to capture material has already been collected in the machine to make these particle counter tests really mean something. I would not expect a vacuum that has only picked up a bit of kapok to have much of anything carried in its exhaust air.   And I lost all faith in this guy's pitch when he went running for the crevice tool to pick up the missed rice when merely a pass with the end of the hose would have done the job. That had to be done to make the things appear more of a chore than they actually  had to be with alleged "Brand B".  Actually, if his usual approach to cleaning requires a special little thing for this and that, this man is the kind of person who "cleans" all day and accomplishes little. To me his show displays that things were being staged to look more difficult than they were were.  Miele, Kenmore or Hoover you still make several passes on your carpeting even when there's nothing to be seen on top.  Where's the tragedy?

Having had both in my in my home, I do acknowledge that Miele has fantastic dust capture qualities but why not considering the price.  Nonetheless, Kenmore -- properly maintained and not allowed to over-fill -- is still satisfying for purposes.

As for filtration, emissions remain and will remain a moot point.  If having perfect air quality prices at $900 or more there are lots of folks who have learned to live without.  I keep repeating this ad nauseum, it's a big world and not all of us feel we'll falter and die because our vacuum didn't didn't capture the last iota of dust in the house.

As for the good old Electrolux involved, there's no harm in going for what you know if it can be had.  My point was that if someone has had a vacuum for thirty years we might reasonably assume he or she likes it and has been reasonably satisfied with it.  We also know that repair may still restore its efficiency and usefulness.  Why not suggest the lest costly choice first if its actually of worth?

Best,

Venson

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson:

If the 30 year old Lux is counted in with the Miele and Sears, it wins hands down.  Remember when the warranty was the grace period for finding defects in parts and workmanship.  Now it's a selling feature!

Carmine D.

Vacuuman and Venson:

Interesting You Tube demo of the Sears and Miele.  Thanks for sharing and posting.  Impressive but the devil is in the details.  Several observations:  First, a question:   Did the demo-er block the flexible tube on the particle counter by pressing it up against the Miele filter screen wire and not the exhaust openings for the Miele test?  [Which I believe is your point Venson that the SEARS may have had a full bag and the Miele a brand new one].  A zero partcle count reading?  Very unlikely and suspect.  Why not test the air particle counts after the demoes?

The demo-er passed more slowly over the carpet with the Miele power head demonstration than the Sears.  Both for the kapoc test and the edge cleaning using rice.  BTW, the SEARS power head has a rug height adjustment and the Miele does not.  I did not see/hear the demo-er adjust the SEARS height adjustment on the carpet demo and mention the fact that it has one and Miele does not.

Granted, Miele is quieter and probably better too for filter exhaust and hose construction.  But like you say Venson, the buyer pays for it. 

The 30 year old Lux, once restored to new, would fare as well as the Miele in the same demoes IF the demoes are performed objectively IMHO.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Hi Carmine,

I've watched the video before, and I don't really put much stock in the particle counter hype.  My main focus is on cleaning performance, and the Miele wins hands down, both in the video and from my own personal experience.  The 217 powerhead used on the Miele doesn't do it any justice either, it's the entry level version that to me is basically a motorized turbo brush.  If I were doing this I would have used it with the 236 which is much more aggressive.  Even so, the Miele is the clear winner.

It would be worth it to pay the extra $200 or so for the Miele (compared to the Kenmore), depending on the model that is.  I may have mentioned this before, but new Kenmore canisters aren't what they were 30, 20, or even 10 years ago, and DEFINITELY not worth the $300+ that Sears is asking for them.  The motors are non-serviceable single-fan (read: noisy and prone to overheating due to high speed), the general construction and lack of quality is downright appalling, and they have been plagued with electrical problems in the hose and wands.  The only advantage Sears has now with Kenmore *anything*, is the fact that they are in cahoots with CR to give their products consistently high ratings.  Which, likewise, should be taken with a grain of salt. 

In the March 1998 CR vacuum test, the Miele White Pearl comes in first (as it had the previous two years), and rated dead last is...surprise surprise, a Kenmore canister.  They claimed it was bulky and difficult to use.  Ironically, that was when Kenmore canisters were still very good vacuum cleaners, the design at the time hadn't changed since the late-1980's when Panasonic began producing them.  I saw that exact same machine at Sears the time of the report and had no idea what they thought was wrong with it.  That was before I tried a Miele.  A 90's Kenmore canister is by no means difficult to use, it's not a vacuum where you feel like the handle or power nozzle neck is going to snap off in your hand, but it is still not as nimble as a Miele.  Now, 10 years later, the horrendously flimsy Kenmores (more like Crapmores) come in first place, and the Mieles rank in the middle.  All I can say about that is, "you've come a long way baby." 

-MH

According to Consumer Reports SEARS/Kenmore captures 25 percent plus of the new cann vacuum sales in the USA every year and has done so consistently for many years.  CR reports on the reliability of the SEARS/Kenmore uprights and canns along with the other makes/models based on the vacuum consumers' completed surveys.  The reliability data is respectable for a big box store vacuum product.  CR can't finesse and finagle these findings since the consumers complete and submit them.  It is what it is.

Carmine D.

Thank you all for your thoughtful replies.  I'd think twice before getting the Electrolux rebuilt--who rebuilds them, now, anyway? --because what's going now is not just the motor (that's been replaced one) or the hose (I'm on hose #4), but (1) the handle you carry the monster around with broke (cutting my hand) and is now patched with duct tape; (2) the furniture brush is dying, and the "replacement" I bought at the vacuum cleaner store is useless; (3) the cord retraction mechanism died; (4) the power attachment (I'm on #3) is dying; and (5) the floor brush attachment is dying (I replaced the bristles once, with parts bought from an electrolux store when they still existed).  So mentally I've placed a big "DNR" sticker on the machine.  My impression is that, as good as 30-year-old electroluxes are, they are not the machines they were 20 years before that.  If I were to get the thing rebuilt, would it be as good as new?  And how much would it cost?

I have yet to kick the tires on a Sears--you're right; I need to do this.  One of my concerns is that my wife had a Sears sewing machine, and Sears was singularly unhelpful when it needed repairs.  I saw that Consumer Reports doesn't seem to think very highly of Miele machines.  Does anyone know why?  And there's a Simplicity dealer not far from here; Im thinking of checking them out too.

Elioto wrote:

Hello Elioto:

I'm not a huge fan of SEARS, save their tools.

Consumer Reports likes to test the big box store vacuum brands and rate/rank them vice the vacuum store brands.  It's just a bias in CR for many years.   I suspect that CR believes most American vacuum buying customers will shop/buy at the big box retailers and not the independent vacuum cleaner stores.  Hence the emphasis on the makes and models in the big box retailers.

SIMPLICITY makes and markets an excellent line of canisters which hold their own against the likes of the Miele-s.  The RICCAR 1700 series and SIMPLICITY S36 canns are rated/ranked by CR in the October 2008.   Respectably rated and ranked, by the way.

Carmine D.

Elioto wrote:

Hi Elioto,

If you can access CR online, also check out the user reviews. Lots of folks yack right back at CR to the contrary regarding certain brands and models.   Also see if you can take a look at epinions.com.

However, I do think that CR ratings are inclined toward the total picture of things not just regarding ability but price and practicality as well.  Yes there are cleaners that cost near a grand or more but there are still many vacuums that do just as good jobs at far less price -- more fitting the everyday consumer.  Forgetting Miele, Kirby which is a great carpet cleaner has gotten a good deal of praise from CR over time for its abiltiy to deep clean plus its good emissions standards but has also normally borne CR's caution to readers that just as good service could be had for less.

That said, as mentioned before, you basically have two ways to go.  You can buy an expensive that will bear a longer warranty period or a less costly vacuum that you can buy two- or three-year service contracts for.  Either way you may find yourself spending a good amount of money.

Best,

Venson