Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

DysonInventsBig wrote:
Hi DIB,

A powered nozzle of any kind is not necessary for large or small expanses of bare floor. A plain old bare floor tool does just nicely. Generally, air-turbine nozzles are great at making impressive noise but not much else. They are usually sold by demoing them with yours, mine and everyone's favorite substance -- kapok -- which really wows a crowd as it ever so easily whooshed up.

The usual air-driven turbine nozzle has a narrow air inlet in the brush chamber that leads directly to the turbine blades. The inlet is deliberately made narrow so that it intensifies the air stream that enters the turbine area to allow more force against the blades. The fly in the ointment here is that these devices require constant airflow to keep the brushroll running at a decent speed. To accomplish this vents are place in spots to allow air to enter the nozzle above floor level. (Without the vents they stall easily.) Yes the brushroll spins nicely but suction at floor level, where it's needed most, is sacrificed. Thus, "deep cleaning" is not possible.

The only turbine nozzles I've seen that might be of some worth are the rather large type used with central vac systems. Their turbines are large and act as flywheels whose inertial energy is used to enhance strength of motion. These of course are powered by central vacs which have much higher airflow and suction strength than a regular household vacuum.

Electric power nozzle only need one form of power to drive their brushrolls and suction delivery does not have to be double-tasked or compromised. This allows for far more effective brushroll designs and results in far better cleaning ability.

Venson

Venson,

Thanks for the central vac info, etc.

Agreed, large hard surfaces are vacuumed by floor tools, and for some the turbo nozzle is a secondary tool.  And is a less expensive alternative to the Motorhead.

It is my understanding turbo nozzles are popular in humid climates here in the U.S. and popular in Europe, Japan, etc., although I do not have those numbers.  The turbo nozzle typically is a dog, we will have to wait and see how the DDM married to a turbo nozzle performs.  Yes suction is sacrificed and is typically not “the way to go”, but we are not talking of the antique any longer...  we are talking of the worlds only 5 to 7 years until pre-filter cleaning vacuum, powered by a digital motor - the DDM DC22.  The “air-leak” or the air dedicated to drive the turbo nozzle is a “plus” for the cyclonic’s (more/fast air, the better it filters).  The air-leak can be offset by the nozzles opening but we will have to wait and see.


DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:
DIB, you're concentrating too much on form over function and may be also be missing the point as you have someone to come in and clean. I like your cleaning lady want to get tackle the job and get with the sense there has been real accomplishment for the effort. The mechanics of whatever is going on inside my vacuum is not half as important to me as what is going on at floor level. Spin the dirt bounce or mash it, whatever -- I want a clean result for my effort. Power is not necessarily an issue in that case. There have been vacuums that excel at getting and helping keep households clean at no more than 500 watts power usage.

By the way, the marriage of a high-powered vacuum and a turbo nozzle has already been tried (Black & Decker VN1400P). The cleaner has phenomenal suction but the does nothing spectacular on carpeting. I know because I bought one. However, it only took $200 to learn my mistake.

When you get a chance to check out one of these new Dysons I'd wager that your gong to find soft long brush tufts that allow for easy turns of the brush roll while in use. Not helpful. As well, air leaks don't help in that agitation and good suction are needed to bring up as much of the trampled in grit and dirt in carpeting as possible.

A digital motor means little to me unless due to it I can have the trade-off of greater collection capacity (meaning less frequent emptying) and anticipate longer motor life. As for filters, 5 to 7 years filter life without cleaning has yet to be seen. REgarding this too I'd bet there'll be a good number in back in the shop for repairs. There is no way to universally gauge what's going to work user by user.

For the price being asked, Dyson could easily afford to supply an electric power nozzle and be done with it. The purpose of a PN is to allow a canister to make the effectiveness and efficiency of an upright vacuum. Dabbling in between is a waste of the consumer's time and money. I'd have far less to say about this if we were only talking about an expense of $300 or so.

Venson

PS -- Do me a favor. Some time tonight check out your carpeted high traffic areas at home. Just get down on the floor and use your thumbs or fingers to separate the pile here and there to see what's at the base of the carpet's tufts. If there is a lot of grit and dirt down there -- not so good. If little is found then things are pretty much okay. Doing okay is what's the fuss is all about.

Best,

Venson

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson:

I'd say your observation of DIB is true across the board of dyson's products to date.  And the proof is in the rug, as you pointedly make.

Carmine D.

Lucky1 wrote:

Now heres a guy thats looking out for his customers,It sounds like he's in it for the long run,He will do well for himself,and live a long and happy life,

Im looking at a start up company, its called VAC-SU$K - A LOT.

Anyone notice the Halos on E-BAY for 69.95......HA,HA,HA,..........

regards

mole

mole wrote:

Hello MOLE:

But when they need parts and service, ORECK's the only one that's got them.  He who laughs last..............

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote: Venson wrote:
Venson,

Dyson is simply answering and entering the established Miele w/ turbo nozzle niche.  The Motorhead answers and enters the established Miele w/ power nozzle niche.

Pay high dollar for old or expired ip or buy something that is a quantum leap, far superior and provable science.  The better science is indeed the selling features, benefits and what separates itself from tired - same-old-thing so-called technology...  the sack, brushroll and motor that are common place in the industry (industry standard).  I expect Dyson to put a hurt on Miele.

The DDM DC22 no cleaning the pre-filter until year 2014-2016 is a [great] guiltless up-sale because folks are paying for superior intellectual property.  The DC22‘s (turbo or pn’s) benefits require no conning from independents.

I think “sincere Dyson Dealers” should print out Dyson’s DDM and Root + Core patents and then the Miele patents that related to pulling, filtering and storing dust and debris.  The Miele is tired and can be demonstrated via it’s patents and lack of [measurable/better science] patents/ aka in the public domain [available to all mfgs.] patents.  Hype vice better science/user beneit ip.

Dealers can easily can set up a Hoover Tempo in their shops and slap on a 3M bag and say the Miele filters no better than the cheap-o.  For that matter the other hyped vacuums can be demonstrated that way too.


DIB

P.S.  In due time the consumer magazines will judge and get the DC22 DDM's benefit-message out.

DysonInventsBig wrote:
Hi DIB,

Miele really has no business trying to gull the public with turbo-nozzles either and it was not my intention to have it thought I was making exception in even the slightest way. I've tried Miele's turbo-nozzle and feel they are not worth the time and money.

As for demos, they don't mean much to thinking buyers. You throw a bunch of junk on top of rug and and the vacuum sucks it. That doesn't really tell the weekly vacuumer how much worked in grit and dirt "X" machine will pull out of the rug at home.

Shoppers go for what they like. There are five Dyson uprights that have recently been rated by Consumer Reports and all only get high ratings for bare floor cleaning and emissions. Ratings for carpet cleaning, pet hair removal -- save for one model -- and tool suction weren't exceptional. On the basis of that, Dyson is a machine I would not buy BUT when you read through user reviews the larger part of the owners think they're just fantastic. This also applies to several other brands that I personally see as impractical or poor performers.

This same unswayed customer solidarity prevails with Kirby, Aerus/Electrolux, Rainbow and bunch of other very highly priced vacuums. To be fair I took time to go through ratings for Dyson and Miele canisters by way of CR test for this March

MIELE

S5280 -- carpet/good; bare floor/excellent; tool airflow/very good; noise/very good; emissions/excellent; handling/good; pet hair/good (Overall score: 66)

S251 -- carpet/good; bare floor/excellent; tool airflow/good; noise/very good; emissions/excellent; handling/good; pet hair/very good (Overall score: 65)

S514 -- carpet/good; bare floor/excellent; tool airflow/very good; noise/very good; emissions/excellent; handling/good; pet hair/good (Overall score: 62)


DYSON

DC23 - carpet/good; bare floor/excellent; tool airflow/very good; noise/good; emissions/excellent; handling/fair; pet hair/very good (Overall score: 60)

DC21 - carpet/good; bare floor/excellent; tool airflow/very good; noise/good; emissions/excellent; handling/fair; pet hair/good (Overall score: 59)

There are slight differences by way of performance but from my viewpoint performance averages out to be about the same. There's nothing about Dyson, cyclones and all, that particularly sets its product apart from Miele's bagged machine. I still maintain it's all about function and not form.

Venson

Venson wrote:

5 points for handling.  Another CR way to rank as they see fit.

HARDSELL wrote:
Must of tested it on a road race coarse. It must be all wheel drive, with Konis at the 4 corners.

How foolish C.R. can be.

regards

MOLE