Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson:

You never did get an answer to your question about what's left in the rug after vacuuming and looking.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

And I thought we were friends?

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
I value your friendship.  Friends do not have to be gentlemen.

Bernard Madoff subscribed to the same philosophy and made off  with $60 BILLION of his best friends and family members' hard earned money!

Carmine D.

Venson wrote:
Venson,

I “get” that you do not prefer the turbo nozzle on appliances.  But there is a demand and for Dyson to enter this “demand” (however large or small) and go toe to toe with Miele (who I believe is the current market [niche] leader) is smart and good business.  I would hope Dyson dealers would know who is/is not a good match for a turbo nozzle.

$679 Miele’s Turbo Nozzle canister @ Miele USA online
vs.
$699 Dyson Turbo Nozzle canister.

Hands down... the Dyson DDM DC22 is a far better technology and performing vacuum (filtering, computerized/fast/robust/super powerful/lifetime? motor and a turbo nozzle that does not slow due to [sack] suction loss) and value (no replacement sack costs and no hassle factor - purchasing bags from a dealer).


DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:
Hi DIB,

I also get the gist of, "Well, everybody's doin' it," but Miele should not actually be a major for issue Dyson. Miele's pricing is high and in the real world those who spring way out of budget to acquire one have usually given it careful thought. By the way, why would Dyson be interested in "small demands" now?

It's manufacturers of decent power-team canisters and uprights that sell for $400 or less that Dyson should have greater concern about. People are beginning to catch on and probably will catch on even more speedily by living in an economy challenged society. Per report of a sales rep at a local big box store, the Dysons there are being picked up by shoppers who come in with Dyson in mind. Other shoppers come in take a look at the price tags and end up leaving with far less expensive vacuums.

DysonInventsBig wrote:
That has yet to be shown.

Venson

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Why would anyone want a turbo nozzle for hard surfaces?  I have never used a vacuum that did well on hard surfaces with the brush engaged. They are best used on upholstery or difficult to reach locations that are carpeted. 

Unless JD has an ego problem why offer a useless tool simply for competition with another brand.

Hardsell,

Homes with lots of hard surface area...  The hard surface tool is the primary tool, the turbo tool is a secondary tool (used on area rugs or low pile).  Some rugs cannot handle a powerful brushroll.  Many in Europe, Japan etc. use vacuums w/ turbo brushes.

Do not let the Dyson bad-mouthers distort who Dyson is...  a good man.


DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:
Then one of the plain old combi tools (rug/floor nozzle) should do just fine. For years, area rugs and low pile carpeting fared quite well in households where all there was was just a straight vacuum. Besides which, a vacuum with a PN only requires a speed reduction or opening a bleed valve to to lessen the problem of cleaning small or light rugs. However, due to its lower efficiency a turbo tool might be the answer as to what to clean a delicate "oriental" rug with.

Have you checked out the inflated prices on turbo nozzles? A Miele turbo nozzle can go for $130. Its mini turbo tool sells for about $70. Generic tools like this sell as low as $15 to $20. Dyson is no different in that is ask about $100 for its car cleaning kit -- a small turbo-nozzle and a crevice tool. Somebody's being had. Dealers may or may not choose up camps regarding turbos tools as they don't do harm even though they do little good.

As for turbo-tools in Europe and Japan, during my internet browsing over the years, electric power nozzles are not often offered with canister vacs though regular uprights are on the market. Also after having spent about four and a half years in Europe (Germany, Sweden, Holland, Denmark and beyond), seeing a canister vacuum with anything other than a straight-suction floor nozzle, usually the combination type, is my recall. For what reason the so-called power-team canister is not more common, I do not know but they do things a lot differently.

I have a friend who lived in Munich whose automatic clothes washer heated the water it used. The only connection required was to the cold water line. Many homes and apartments used instant water heaters (usually gas fired) not the big tanked affairs we buy and that cost us a good amount by holding and keeping water hot when it is not needed. I would assume that for some reason no provision might somehow have something to do with some perception of better economy.

Venson

Venson

I'm not too sure how well this machine is going to perform in this market, and I'm afraid we may have another "DC11" flop on our hands. First of all, this machine is perhaps too small for where it is priced at. The debris capacity is dismal, and I would advise people that have pets to steer clear of it; constant emptying of the clear bin would be a problem for them. Second, the plastic telescope wand looks lower quality compared to the aluminum wand used with the DC21 and DC23. I just don't understand why the DC12 uses an aluminum wand, while the DC22 uses all plastic (and they're both similarly sized machines in the same market segment). Third, I really wish they would have used the motorhead from the DC21 and DC23 with the DC22. The motorhead that will come with the DC22 uses a small brush roll spun by a small canned motor at around 3,000 rpm, which I feel will not be good enough for that little brush to properly groom carpet. This motorhead may do a fair job at surface cleaning, but it's certainly not capable of deep cleaning, which is what really matters. My DC23's motorhead picks up plenty of sand from my carpet with its stiff bristled brush roll driven by a large torquey motor; I could care less if its heavy and loud, it works!

Also, with it's DDM motor, the DC22 is not vastly more powerful than its full sized siblings. Both the DC21 and DC23 are rated at 220 air watts, while the DC22 DDM is rated at 230.....that's nothing to brag about. I was expecting to see atleast 280+.

The machine may have features that I would like to see on the DC21 and DC23 such as handle mounted controls, the brushless motor, and extremely long filter cleaning intervals. However, I would not compromise cleaning performance, debris capacity, and materials used just to obtain those features. Also, at $800, that is going to be a tough sell in my opinion. I feel that $500 for the turbine head, and $600 for the Motorhead model would be a far more suitable price points that would allow it to enter the mass market with little resistance. But at $700 and $800 respectively, Dyson has a rather undesirable product with prices that are only suitable for independent dealers. Mass retailers already carry $600 Dysons. However, I see little to no chance of any of them carrying an $800 DC22. I'm going to predict that Dyson will try to sell this thing to the "green crowd", noting how the DDM inside it expels zero carbon emissions. Other than that, I really don't see how the typical consumer would go for the DC22 over a DC21 or DC23, especially if they were to see all three of them lined up together in person. The DDM would really benefit more in their high volume sellers, not just their little niche models. I would rather see a DC21/DC23, DC17, DC25, and DC27 with the DDM over the DC22. I don't really give a damn how tiny my vacuum is, or how light it is, I just want something that can clean carpets well and run efficiently.