Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

The Achilles heel in every vacuum since the dawn of electricity has been the dirt removal/filtration dichotomy. Increase one, decrase the other, with a few notable exceptions-water filtration machines (with a separator and an electric power head) the Airway and Electrolux multi-layer bags, and now the 3M filtrete bags. No, they are not perfect, but they are a vast improvement over any other cloth/paper filtration system. More dust trapped with higher airflow over a longer period of time, that is the goal.

Dyson and Rainbow (Hyla-et al) are beating a dead horse. They keep comparing their filtration systems to the most popular, (not always the best) competition AT THE TIME OF THEIR INVENTION.

Over sixty years ago Electrolux and Airway figured out that multiple-layer bags gave better cleaning and filtration over longer periods of time, and  3M filtrete is the next logical step in the advancement of that technology. Older cloth bag vacuums leaked, but in light of the quality of air with coal burning factories, tanneries, meat packing and rendering plants, the vacuum was a quantuum jump in cleanliness. But today, bagless hepa is an oxymoron, like 'military intelligence'. If you need the standard of hepa filtration to avoid going to the ER with an asthma attack, what are you doing with wall2wall carpet in your home anyway? The person who is thus afflicted should not be vacuuming, EXCEPT with a central vac, or a Miele canister, or something like a Rainbow. Alas, Airway is no longer with us.

Once the filtration is determined to be satisfactory, issues of nozzle design, user friendliness, type and quantity of soil to be removed all come into play. Filtration is one of the primary considerations, but, if a vacuum cannot pick up the dirt, it cannot filter it. A 100.00 bagged Big Box vac with proper and frequent enough use and maintenance will do a respectable job of removing a buildup of dirt and keeping it at bay. Every vacuum needs maintenance. A 100.00 Dirt Devil and a 2000.00 Kirby both need bag and belt changes and the roller brushes cleaned to perform at optimum efficiency. This is how and why the purchaser of an expensive vacuum (name your brand) can be sold another of the same, or a different, brand just a few years later: infrequent use, improper use, and neglect of the three B's (bag,belt,brush). Allergy symptoms will be drastically reduced with any vacuum provided the buildup of dirt in the home is removed and kept from accumulating. Less dirt = reduced symptoms. I have seen the customer's vacuum emerge victorious, not often, but often enough to prove the point that frequent use, proper use, and appropriate maintenance are more important that the brand of vacuum one owns, cheap big box bagless units notwithstanding.

Hi Trebor,

Your points are well taken however I'd like to throw in that most of us have an idea of the ideal as well -- the like we'd like to live as opposed to the life we're living.

High filtration vacuums are great but let's not forget that since their coming to the market we've had several generations of humans across the world who have lived with or without vacuums and there is yet to come note of castrophe. The result is not kindred to dropping the bomb Hiroshima.

The seatbelts in our cars were not a given in past times but now are mandatory.  A vacuum cleaner is a tool just like an automobile.   Many of us own at least one and many of us own none at all.  There will always be those among us who are privileged enough to spend high and there will always be those who have no choice except to buy low.  Even in a compromised economy, it is better to think on what may be realistically anticipated regarding health and safety by way of vacuum manufacture and begin to demand it.

What's required is that consumers decide upon and begin to demand the observance of a certified and monitored standard by vacuum manufacturers.  The same way -- to my knowledge -- electrical appliances may not be placed on the market without some observance of electrical safety, vacuums should have a set minimum level regarding emissions if they are to be considered acceptable for release on the American market.  BUT-- that's not going to happen.

Central vacuum systems are a luxury.  High-filtration vacuums are a luxury.  There are less and less among us in present times able to indulge.  Thus, we make do with what we can have.

What vacuum do we recommend to a household with a tight budget where any extra money is better used tending to maintenance of matters beyond the living room rug?  There are not many realistic solutions.

Venson

Venson,

Thanks for the reply, but I think I covered your points when I mentioned that even low-cost vacs will deliver adaquate performance with sufficient use and proper maintenence. I did mention that those factors will cause a relatively modest vacuum to perform better than a high-price, infrequently used and poorly maintained vacuum. The initial cost of bags to remove the buildup of dirt from the average size, but really dirty house is the cost of a case, usually 24, three packs, along with half a dozen or so belts and a brush roll or maybe two. Asuuming a discount on the case purchase, and other consumables purchased at the same time, we are talking maybe $150.00 on top of say a 100.00 to 150.00 vacuum purchase. The comparison of the costs of consumables to the cost of the vacuum IS THE WRONG COMPARISON, just as the cost of oil changes as opposed to the cost of the vehicle is the wrong comparison. Cleaner carpets, longer life and reduced professional cleaning of said carpets, reduced allergy symptoms are the payoff, (along with making the Kirby guy really work and getting a really good deal should you opt to purchase) It does take the desire to get the dirt out, and a bit of time is involved over say, a 90 to 120 day period, but the end result is less dirt to remove, less time spent cleaning, and the enjoyment of a cleaner indoor environment. The consumption should drop to no more than one bag per months, two or three belts per year, and a brushroll every 18 to 24 months. Is it true hepa? No. Is it better than what the average person does and lives with out of laziness or ignorance, abso-freakin-lutely.

Once the dirt is removed, the Kirby will require consumables too, but fewer of them. Asumming the Kirby lasts 20 years, and the lower cost vac lasts maybe five, with a 7.5% inflation cost per year, five vacs to the one Kirby are just about even, equal to a monthly payment of 89.00 over 24 months. In the past this would not have been a valid comparison because as manufacturing moved overseas, and quality dropped, prices dropped as well. I think we are seeing the bottom of the curve now. This is assuming the five other vacs all last 5 yrs and do not need any repairs. I know it does not cost 2100.00 to make a Kirby. You think it costs 3.00 to make a tube of toothpaste? Or 125.00 to make a Hoover Whisper. My point is that the expenditure for a high quality vacuum can be justified for most families who would invest in a modest quality vacuum every five years.

The emissions from our vacuums becomes ever increasingly important as we seal our homes more tightly to squeeze the most out of our energy dollars. While most of us do not suffer from the emissions of our vacuums, that we are aware of at least, it has been documented that the only place in the home to tie or exceed the inside of our toilet bowls for filth is the inside of our vacuum cleaners. How gross is that? I see your points, I hope you see mine as well. Thank you. It is refreshing to participate in a forum where opinions can be exchanged between adults without sinking to a level of adolescent purility.

The replacement bags being sold for Airway are paper I am told, so I am assuming they are not the multi filtration ones.

I have a Vita-Vac and am looking for replacement bags. I called the Vita-Mix Corp. and they said they have theirs on back order but they are a multi filtration bag, not just paper, but made of something else that does multi filtration.

Are there replacement Airway bags that are available that are allergy level? The Vita Vac bags should fit the Airway.

One true story supporting Trebor's filter comments;

Years ago I owned a Hoover Flair, which was a $50 stick vac with decent suction, surprisingly good brush roller, and an abysmal thin cloth filter cone dirt collector that would choke on dust after 30 seconds of use on my rugs.
After adding a shroud of Miele Filtrette-style bag over the cone, the same vacuum could go 5 minutes on exactly the same rug and dust without choking itself off.

The added, thicker dust collection media enhanced dirt collection, and made an otherwise unusable vacuum work well.

As for the merits of bag .vs. bagless, I'll leave that for others to discuss.

Same applies bag and bagless: Filtration.  Bagless vacuum filters clog despite what one maker claimed.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Fact that one makers filters do not take as long to clog as the bags.  And they perform better clogged thatn the bagged do when cloged.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS, another ID10 T dyson comment.  Why?  The fact that constantly escapes you dyson fans is that most retailer bagged uprights filled with dirt usually outclean and groom rugs better than a bagless dyson, choose your model, with brand new filters.  Every single industry source says so.  Of course with your dyson color glasses, you can't see it.  At least you don't use a dyson anymore.  What more proof do you/we need?  Your actions speak louder than your ID 10 T comments, which are deliberately stupid.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine;

Stop w/the "hidden" words.  I am sure people are tired of this "One-Upping" they are reading in the posts, from this forum.  Eventhough this post is addressed to Carmine, I want everyone to follow it.  There is this back and forth conversation going on that is so tiring.  If the topic is about filtration, discuss it.  Continuing to  make someone look ignorant does not help the flow of the forum.

Mike W.
Moderator

"...Over sixty years ago Electrolux and Airway figured out that multiple-layer bags gave better cleaning and filtration over longer periods of time, and 3M filtrete is the next logical step in the advancement of that technology..."

Really? I thought it all had to do with cost. Because back in the 1970s when multi fitration bags were largely unheard of, brands decided to use the high filter bags to make extra money. This is certainly apparent in the UK with Electrolux bringing out Miele type fabric disposable bags that cost twice as much as their standard 2 layer filtration paper bags.

A 100.00 bagged big box (as you put it) vacuum will keep in dirt IF it has proper sealing textures and that points to hoses, pipes, tools and everything that the dirt goes up before it reaches the bags. Even having a high filter bag system and an additional pre filter built in doesn't neccessarily promise 100% filtration.

Mike W.

If you mean your advce to be for everyone, then why did you address to me only. I can't help if one poster here asks ID 10 T questions and makes ID 10 T comments and does not get warned about being deliberately stupid.

Carmine D.

Mike W.

I tried to send you a private message with the above but apparently it didn't go thru.  Not sure why.  So I posted it here above for all to see and read.  Just like you did to me.  BTW ID10 T stands for idiot.  Now it's not hidden word anymore.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

I made a comment with no inuendos.  You didn't.

HS:

It ws an ID10 T comment, which now has no innuendo.  I gave you the benefit of the doubt by saying your comments are deliberately stupid.  Else the alternative is true.

Carmine D.

Technically, Hardsell is correct about Dyson's filtration system.  If you follow the directions, you should be able to maintain constant suction with a Dyson.  As CR says, the suction may not be as good as some bagged vacuums.  It is a clever system that is way better than most other bagless dirt collection systems.  It certainly is a shame that the brush roll and nozzle aren't quite as well developed.  And Carmine is also right that even with the advantages of constant suction, the Dyson does not clean as well as some bagged vacuums.

I can remember vividly my sister's Hoover Foldaway vacuum - a first generation hoover pleated filter bagless design.   It was a terrible design - she would have been much better off with a bagged model.  She wondered why it didn't pick up.  She had no idea that it had a nasty filter that had to be banged against the garbage can after almost every use.  She just thought bagless meant no bags to buy with no price to pay in filter maintenance.  I cleaned the filter and despised that vacuum.  Dyson provided the ideal as far as bagless was concerned - very little maintenance and constant suction.  I think people enjoy seeing the fruits of their labor - at least at first.  As time passes, it becomes less appealing to see the nasty filth in the dirt canister.     

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine;
You showed your real intentions and that you are not paying attention to what I want.

Severus wrote:
Severus Snape,

Technically, is the dust, dirt, human hair and pet hair collected from the average home via the Dyson vacuum’s *unstoppable separation technologies more “filthy” or less “filthy” than the dust, dirt, human hair and pet hair collected by way of enchanted forests, castles, dungeon's and from the floors of other-lands-of-make-believe?


DIB

*If maintained properly.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Dustmite,

You tell me. You seem to be confused about who I am. When you put your personal information on your profile, feel free to criticize my arbitrary choice of an anonymous username. Naturally I try to shoot for a name that is unique and easy to remember. Severus is also the name of a Roman ruler. Sorry but I don't act out fantasies or dress up like characters, I live a full and productive happy life as myself.

I would disagree with you about Dyson having unstoppable technologies. The cyclones can be made to fail if the cyclones are overloaded. Dirt and sand have been shown to load the premotor filters. I won't even get into the clutch failures. People are accustomed to paying a couple bucks for a new belt. Consumers don't like having to pay $100 to replace a clutch. The early flat brush rolls were another source of failure due to the accumulation of pet hair. The tiny brush rolls had greater odds of accumulating pet hair than those vacuums using industry standard size brush rolls. The complicated air flow in the Dyson does limit air flow. A short direct path is much more efficient for air flow. That is why many bagged vacuums have considerably greater suction than the Dyson. Dyson uprights are poorly designed for going under furniture. Carmine has described the problem his DC07 failing miserably on carpet in his home - and the screetchy clutch noise that scared his pets. For people without a staircase, the long Dyson hose is more of a liability than a feature. The strangest thing to me about Dysons is that with each successive model and increase in price, there is a decrease in airwatts.

It is certainly less filthy to remove a bag from a vacuum and drop it into the garbage, than to empty a plastic bin. As I stated previously, the Dyson dirt collection system is fairly good as far as bagless goes. If you want to look at the nasty dirt, dust mites and their feces, and human hair, by all means get bagless. If you take good care of it, a Dyson can be a good household vacuum. I have owned both bagged and bagless, and I will likely never buy another bagless vacuum. As Trebor has said, bags have come a long way.

Mike_W wrote:

Gee Mike, I never had a course in college on mind reading, so I can't read poster's printed words and know their real intentions like you.   Can you suggest a course that would endow me with psychic reading abilites like you?  The closest I've seen to date here, save you of course, is dyson DIB.  Surely he failed since his is psychotic reading.

Carmine D.