Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Having another topic mentioned some new vax machines on a Littlewoods website, I had a look around to see what else might be new and came across the 'new' Dyson DC27 Upright, see link below:

http://www.littlewoods.com/rf/s.do?Np=1&Ns=&Ntk=littlewoods_search&Ntt=dyson&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&Nty=1&Nu=this_product&pageSize=12&Nao=0&cmEvent=page_navigation

They have 2 Models on their website 'Animal' and 'All Floors', first look suggests an update version of the US DC17 but for the UK\Europe markets.  This will be the replacement for the popular DC14.  I thought a separate motor for the brush bar like the DC17 would have been standard, but looks like it uses the DC04\DC07\DC14 clutch setup!   Not sure as the website doesn't say if it just has a slim root cyclone technology or the core is included!   It does look like it has more small cyclones than the current DC14 and DC15 and DC25 models.  See picture of DC27 All Floors model below!  DC18

 

Model2,

I always enjoy hearing from the UK, especially when information is presented accurately.  Does Which Magazine rely on hand outs (free money) to survive as does Consumer Reports?  If my memory is correct, I believe Consumer Reports takes in million[s] of dollars in free hand outs annually.  Neither do they pay any sort of income tax, yet they still come up million[s] short every year.  CR is a bias rag when they can get away with it.  CR does not publish the names of individuals or corporations who “donate” monies.

Does Which Magazine ever talk of the benefits of Dyson’s filtration vice bag filtration?  CR refuses to compare Dyson filtration or its benefits against bag filtration.  This is a disservice to their paying customers and those who believe CR’s statements of being non-bias.

DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Hi DIB,

the Which? Magazine slogan is: 'No advertising. No bias. No hidden agenda.'  According to them, 'We do not accept advertising or rely on freebies. Everything bought for testing is paid for at full price.' It is funded entirely by subscribers to its magazine and website.

With regards to the bagged vs. bagless debate, the same issue from which the excerpt I posted above was sourced states:

'Our tests have found no link between the presence and absence of a bag, and cleaning ability.' It does, however, mention that the bags for the 'Best Buy' brands are often expensive.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Then why dont you tell us about the dyson filtration and its benefits over a bagged machine that uses filtrette bags and carbon activated after filters.I know that these machines are priced the same,For every spinned reason you throw out there i can give you reasons and answers [OH and by the way it never looses suction remember that line, why dont you tell us about that LIE and advertising deception again.

This is getting VERY OLD , why dont you promote a vacuum that  gives the public its moneys worth.................

MOLE

Hello Model2:

Thank you for giving me the opprtunity to clarify my above post comment.  The point I made in the above post was that despite the favorable comments here about new dyson ball models, Consumer Reports is not as kind/impressed with a DC24 [MSRP $399] in its October 2008 tests.  Nor does a new DC25 [MSRP $499] look promising to CR.  BTW, both ball models tho new are being heavily discounted by all retailers along with assorted buyer incentives.  Recall when dyson introed the DC15 it was $599.  But within several months of launch dyson at the urging of several retailers, dropped the price by $100 to $499 and still.  I was told by the BEST BUY store with the reputation for selling the most dysons on the east coast that dyson's DC15 ball was its worse selling model.  Recall my friend DIB bought a DC15 for $300 a few years ago.  Since 2004 with a DC15 ball, CR has been very critical and negative about the benefits/advantages of dyson ball technology.  In fact, CR has been critical of all dysons generally for the last 6 years save a DC17 which is the only dyson model in the USA to manage a top 10 rank by CR. 

WRT Consumer Reports since you asked, IMHO is an excellent reference source for new vacuum buyers.  It should be used as a reference guide to acquaint new vacuum buyers with most of the available brands, models, features and prices for comparative shopping purposes.  In the final analysis, it is a guide, and subjective at that, not the gospel.  I always recommend that serious and conscientious vacuum buyers should, whenever in doubt, refer/defer to the industry experts and professionals for the best advice. 

FWIW, the HOOVER Fusion bagless upright [MSRP $109] was consistently rated a DO NOT BUY by CR for faulty emissions.  However, Wal*mart stores, which had the exclusive sales FUSION rights for 2 years, claim it to be one of the best selling vacuums in their sales history.  In fact, stores complained that they couldn't keep the FUSION-s stocked on the shelves because they sold so quickly.  Customers who bought and used FUSION-s were impressed with their performance and capabilites.  The buying vacuum public spoke with their pocketbooks and CR be darned. 

Carmine D.

Hi CarmineD, thanks for the reply!

Out of interest, then, which brands/models do Consumer Report generally favour as being the best on the US market? With Which? Magazine, Miele canisters generally top everything for performance, and have been consistant 'Best Buy' canister models for years.

Model2:

Without providing the specific details, I believe that Consumer Reports weighs in more heavily on the side of the big box retail store vacuum brands that are most affordable to the average consumers' household budgets.  I suspect this will especially be the case now in hard economic times.  BTW, I don't subscribe to CR.  Never have save receiving as gifts over the years.  However I do pick and choose monthly CR editions off the newstands for purchase; i.e the biannual vacuum editions [March and October]. 

Carmine D.

Reading the Which Report clips that Model2 posted Which says the Dyson DC14 Orgin is not as good as the DC14 All floor at retaining allergens!  Not sure where they got that information from!  Only difference between these 2 models in the UK is one has the clutch setup to turn the brush bar off the another is a standard motor driven brush bar direct from the motor using a standard rubber belt!  The cyclone and filter setup is the same! Both don't have HEPA filters, as it mentions there is HEPA models available (Allergy and Animal). 

DC18

DC18 wrote:

I noticed that too - I thought at first it was a printing error, but the full score-grid gives the All Floors four stars out of five, and the Origin three! I guess it could be a testing error, a human error, or possibly they really did get different scores from the different models, although it would seem impossible. One thing testing of this kind - using just one example of each cleaner - doesn't allow for is anomalies. For true accuracy, a random sample of several examples of each model should be tested, but it's just not practical or economical, I suppose.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

mole wrote:
Mole,

I would like to see the Filtrete go against Dyson filtration.  So why hasn't the $24b 3M Corporation bellied up with some data disproving the $1.5b Dyson claims?  And why does 3M insist on using the technobabble language of “low pressure loss” as apposed to “clogging”?  The masses understand “clogging” not “low pressure loss”.  And/or why does not 3M publish results from testing standards to determine if clogging occurs as Dyson freely does?

DIB

It's not 3M's job to advertise for vacuum cleaner companies.   Their customers are the vacuum manufacturers who are provided with evidence of the superiority of 3M products.   The actual implementation of the vacuum bag inside the vacuum matters for both air flow and filtration. 

As for Consumer Reports, they do note that the problem with Dyson is during the dumping of the dirt in the canister.  The dirt is contained in the 3M bag when the bag is removed.  With the Dyson canister, it is recommended that people with allergies wear a mask because the very small dirt particles are likely to float up into the air during the dumping process. 

DysonInventsBig also wrote:  "I always enjoy hearing from the UK, especially when information is presented accurately.  Does Which Magazine rely on hand outs (free money) to survive as does Consumer Reports?  If my memory is correct, I believe Consumer Reports takes in million[s] of dollars in free hand outs annually.  Neither do they pay any sort of income tax, yet they still come up million[s] short every year.  CR is a bias rag when they can get away with it.  CR does not publish the names of individuals or corporations who “donate” monies."

Consumer Reports does list the names of donors in the magazine.  It does not accept any corporate donations, so you are wrong on both counts.    It is utter nonsense to claim bias just because your favorite vacuum didn't do well in Consumer Reports. 

DysonInventsBig wrote: