Abby's Guide to Vacuum Cleaners
Username Password
Home Discussions Reviews More Guides
Abby’s Guide > Vacuum Cleaners > Discussions > bagless kirby conversion

Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Search For:
Severus


If my vacuum can remove even one spec of dirt that yours misses, then mine is better than yours - even if there's no proof that mine would have picked up as much dirt as yours...

Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 397

bagless kirby conversion
Original Message   Jan 16, 2009 1:51 pm
I'm not very impressed with the design, but there's a guy who offers a way to convert Kirbys from bag to dirt canister.  Unfortunately, it doesn't offer dual cyclone or better technology.  It looks like you clean the pleated filter after every use.  I think I'd rather pay for bags than this gimmick.

http://www.kirbybagsneveragain.com/

The smart tyrant writes his own story to ensure that it is favorable.  The lazy will repeat lines from the book without fact checking. 
Replies: 23 - 32 of 135Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #23   Feb 18, 2009 5:53 am

Carmine,

 If you want the bag, just keep the one that comes with the Kirby. If not, buy the conversion.



If you want a bag, it comes standard with KIRBY.  If not, buy a bagless and don't worry about a conversion!

Carmine D.

Trebor


Joined: Jan 16, 2009
Points: 321

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #24   Feb 18, 2009 10:07 am
Carmine,

You're being obtuse,my friend. You realize the Keeler conversion on a Kirby will outclean any dimestore bagless unit. The brushroll, the height adjustment , the large fan all contribute to much better cleaning ability. And if your Kirby needed a new outer bag, the cost is about the same as a conversion.

Mole,

Originality consists largely of creating new applications for existing devices, which precisely describes the Keeler conversion, because It is the first marketed bagless conversion for an open fan upright.

DIB,

Thank you for reminding me, I had totally forgotten about Dyson's prototype, which is pretty silly since it was the starting point and underpinning of my vision of how Dyson could have conquered the vauum world for at least the duration of his lifetime.

Trebor

This message was modified Feb 18, 2009 by Trebor
DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #25   Feb 18, 2009 12:09 pm
Re:  cyclonic exhaust

If Dyson is the first with this type of exhaust separation, then he has a monopoly.  Any manufacturer, government, university, etc. that may be interested or in need of such separation must first purchase or license *patents from Dyson. - That's not a bad investment of [little] time and money.


DIB

*If they exist.
This message was modified Feb 18, 2009 by DysonInventsBig



CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #26   Feb 18, 2009 1:09 pm
Trebor wrote:
Carmine,

You're being obtuse,my friend. Trebor


It is obtuse to buy a new KIRBY then add an after market non-Kirby unsanctioned bagless converter for $150.   If you are fortunate enough to own a KIRBY but decide to go bagless then buy a bagless.  

Carmine D.

Trebor


Joined: Jan 16, 2009
Points: 321

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #27   Feb 18, 2009 2:47 pm
Carmine,

Are you of the opinion that a bagless BigBox vac will outclean a Kirby with a conversion on it? I don't think anyone specifically mentioned putting this on a brand new Kirby Sentria. There are plenty of G-3,4,5,6,UG and UG Diamond units out there, and owners are buying the conversion at a rate that means Jim Keeler will not be able to keep up with demand by manufacturing all of the units himself. The market rules, for better or worse, it's just the way it is.

Model 12

As to the warrany, technically it would violate it, but who is going to know? Put the bag on when you have to take it in for service.

DIB,

I do not know if Dyson patented his exhaust fed cyclonic separation chamber, and even f he did, the patents would have long since expired. This was in the R&D stage before anything hit the market

Trebor

CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #28   Feb 18, 2009 3:19 pm
Trebor wrote:

As to the warrany, technically it would violate it, but who is going to know? Put the bag on when you have to take it in for service.

Trebor


Does this reasoning apply for revolving brushes and uprights used on shag, frieze, and berber carpets also to preclude the voiding of the rug makers' warranty?  Just say you used the straight suction mode.  Sounds obtuse to say the least.

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #29   Feb 18, 2009 3:29 pm
Trebor wrote:
Carmine,

Are you of the opinion that a bagless BigBox vac will outclean a Kirby with a conversion on it? I don't think anyone specifically mentioned putting this on a brand new Kirby Sentria. There are plenty of G-3,4,5,6,UG and UG Diamond units out there, and owners are buying the conversion at a rate that means Jim Keeler will not be able to keep up with demand by manufacturing all of the units himself. The market rules, for better or worse, it's just the way it is.

Model 12

As to the warrany, technically it would violate it, but who is going to know? Put the bag on when you have to take it in for service.

DIB,

I do not know if Dyson patented his exhaust fed cyclonic separation chamber, and even f he did, the patents would have long since expired. This was in the R&D stage before anything hit the market

Trebor


Trebor,

I do not remember seeing Dyson exhaust patents here in the U.S. - true.  If he was first to patent, it would be a gamble which could have a payday somehow or someway.  It could very well of been a simple and inexpensive experiment and nothing more.

It has been a long while since I read the autobiography, so I can't remember when he/his team worked on them.

You’re welcome (for the pics).

DIB


Severus


If my vacuum can remove even one spec of dirt that yours misses, then mine is better than yours - even if there's no proof that mine would have picked up as much dirt as yours...

Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 397

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #30   Feb 18, 2009 4:17 pm
Model2 wrote:
I apologise if this question has already been asked and answered (I can't find it if it has!), but wouldn't using this device on your Kirby void the guarantee, since it's not a genuine Kirby part?

Also, with regard to Dyson's cyclonic 'pollution remover' for motor vehicles - surely this is flawed thinking; what do you do with the sticky, carcinogenic carbon deposits it removes? The poison is out of the airstream, sure, but it has to go somewhere. I believe this, and the general apathy of the motor industry, is the reason Dyson gives in his book for why the device has never been developed further.

If the Kirby conversion used at a minimum dual cyclone technology, it might not be so bad.  I do agree with James Dyson that the purpose of the bagless design was to get away from the problems with bags, i.e. that they clog.  Switching from a bag that clogs to a filter that clogs doesn't seem like a very good trade.  The Kirby has huge bags with huge surface area.  Switching to a pleated filter seems uncivilized.    I'd bet that 8 out of 10 conversion purchasers don't use the thing after 6 months. 



The smart tyrant writes his own story to ensure that it is favorable.  The lazy will repeat lines from the book without fact checking. 
Venson


Joined: Jul 23, 2007
Points: 1900

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #31   Feb 18, 2009 6:00 pm
Severus wrote:
If the Kirby conversion used at a minimum dual cyclone technology, it might not be so bad.  I do agree with James Dyson that the purpose of the bagless design was to get away from the problems with bags, i.e. that they clog.  Switching from a bag that clogs to a filter that clogs doesn't seem like a very good trade.  The Kirby has huge bags with huge surface area.  Switching to a pleated filter seems uncivilized.    I'd bet that 8 out of 10 conversion purchasers don't use the thing after 6 months. 

Well said Severus.

Venson
Trebor


Joined: Jan 16, 2009
Points: 321

Re: bagless kirby conversion
Reply #32   Feb 18, 2009 7:32 pm
Carmine,

A rug would show damage if it were vacuumed with a rotating brush when it should not be. If you take a Kirby in with the bag on it, who is going to question the owner about whether or not they used a bagless conversion unit? The bagless cylinder only violate sthe warrany because Kirby wants to sell their bags. The same could be said of using off brand bags in the Kirby.

DIB, Severus, and Venson,

If you have ever seen a Kirby demo, or done one yourself you know that even in that small cavity there is a cyclonic action of sorts. What makes you think there is not some cyclonic action in the bagless conversion? The Kirby is producing at least 50% more ariflow than a bagless vac, with the possible exception of Dyson. Maybe the filter doesn't clog as quickly as you think in this application. People with large homes and multiplr pets are a large percentage of the people purchasing the bagless conversion. At the cost of the hepa bags, I can see where this could save them money.

Replies: 23 - 32 of 135Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
Vacuum Cleaners Guide   •   Discussions  Reviews  
AbbysGuide.com   About Us   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Contact Us
Copyright 1998-2024 AbbysGuide.com. All rights reserved.