Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Did anyone notice that the DC11 is back on some of the Dyson websites... Here's one that I thought was gone forever...

I just checked the UK web site...It's there alright! I also noticed the DC15 has made a comeback as well. I would appreciate it if someone can elaborate why they older models are suddenly reappearing. Also, it looks like the DC22 Motorhead is making a comeback as well. It is listed on Best Buy as a "coming soon" item. I'm wondering if the DC22 being pulled off the Dyson US site coincides with the recent UK recall of it because of excessive hose wear/motorhead cable exposure issues?

iMacDaddy wrote:

Hello iMacDaddy:

As part of the yearly audits, dyson has an independent accounting/audit firm do an inventory of merchandise on hand beginning and ending the year in order to determine the Cost of Goods manufactured and sold.  I suspect, just a hunch, that the accounting/audit firm after seeing this same old DC11 and DC15 inventory on hand year after year suggests to dyson management that something be done with it.  First option always is to try to sell it off.  Then, depending on the sales, proceed with other options.  I recall right before dyson pulled the DC11 from the USA market. Oprah Winfrey had a truck load from BEST BUY that she gifted away.  Since BEST BUY and dyson formed the USA partnership to launch dyson in the USA in 2002, BEST BUY was probably stuck with a warehouse of new unwanted DC11 merchandise that it didn't want sitting in its inventory.  So, not selling, BB opted to gift away to ABC's Oprah Show. 

Carmine D.

The reason to why "older" models are back has nothing to do with speculating about Dyson reliability, but simply over supply. Catalogue brands in the UK tend to sell a mix of old and new Dyson models, and in this way Dyson have to mention that on their site by giving information about all the models that all stockists in the UK sell. This is why Miele's old S380 series is still on Miele's website even though most sellers/high street shops have stopped selling this model to make way for the smaller S4 or bigger bag S2 model.

vacmanuk wrote:

Hello vacmanuk:

Interesting.........gives new meaning to the category of "discontinued."   Not produced new anymore but still around for years due to over production/stock.

Carmine D.

For many years, you have been stating the DC11 has been discontinued...  yet and all the while this vacuum was selling and continues to sell in other countries.  Additionally, the DC11 type nozzle continues on and is the nozzle for some DC20 and DC23 vacuums.

The DC15 continues on too.


DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:  I take the credit for being the first here to say that dyson's DC11 would be off the BEST BUY store shelves by October 2004 and I was right.  Subsequently, dyson pulled its DC11 from the USA market officially in Feb 2005 tho by that time they were essentially gone and forgotten.  I also said based on its 9 month production [launched in the USA in May 2004] in the USA, dyson's DC11 was the shortest selling vacuum ever produced and sold in the USA in 100 years of vacuum history [and still].  

A vacuum may be for sale in other markets and countries but still not sell.  The two [being for sale vice selling] are two quite different and distinct things.  If you have sales numbers to prove your statement that they are selling, please share them with us.  I would like to know what countries [other the UK] and customers are willing to buy a $500 straight suction cleaner with a air turbo tool in a global recession [other than a MIELE]. 

Carmine D.

Hello Carmine,

The DC11 is built on exclusive only to Dyson technology (at that time), multi-cyclonic’s.  Additionally many wanted and still want his Telescopic Wrap.  These 2 systems have contributed to his companies wealth.  The weakest link was the turbo brush...  a U.S. train wreck no doubt.  Your anti-Dyson contributions make it/could make it sound like new technology they’ve developed and launch was a failure.  There was no such failure.

I do not have these numbers you ask for.  Common sense says the vacuum was selling/continues to sell only because the vac has been for sale for many years in other countries.  If you did your homework you would know.  If it was a universal disaster as you imply, then why would it be for sale for years?  The DC11 was/is a money maker in other countries.

Of your Dyson shortest production run in the vacuums 100 year history...  pure comedy...  I love it!!!  Certainly, if Dyson felt he could do no wrong (believing all product will sell well), having this embarrassing and costly (turbo nozzle) failure was an expensive lesson for certain.  So...  you claim in 100 years of vacuum history ONLY Dyson has such a short production run...  there is no way you can back this up.  Although I’d like to see you try.

Somehow, someway you cannot except it is a Dyson or Dyson copy-cat vacuum industry (roughly 50%) now.  Have you seen the TTI VAX UK web site?  Their front page is plastered with Dyson innovations, Dyson illustrations and Dyson terminology, including the double tank Dyson DC11 styled cylinder and Dyson dual cyclone.  Like I’ve said...  Dyson carries the entire “innovating big things people want and want to buy” vacuum manufacturing industry.  Giants and much bigger companies like Samsung, TTI, Hoover UK, and on and on are lost without Dyson leading the way.

At the rate Samsung is patenting... they look to be launching Dyson copy-cat vacuums in a big way, including a in-function copy of the "a less expensive" DC18 (if they can get it to work).

http://www.vax.co.uk/

DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

WRT dyson's original ball DC15, within one month of its launch in the USA, I was the first here to post that BEST BUY stores would reduce its MSRP by at least $50 by the end of the year.  You recall a DC15's All Floor original price was $599.  Many of the posters here with dyson rosy glasses laughed at my post.   Except Venson.  He agreed.  Well, I was wrong, dyson dropped the MSRP by $100 in September 2005, within 3 months of its launch. 

The BEST BUY store that is the largest seller of dyson vacuums on the east coast says the dyson DC15 is [was] its worse seller after dyson's DC11, which had the highest return rate of all its vacuums.  Consumer Reports consistently rated a dyson DC15 ball as the worse of all dyson uprights.  That is up until DC24 baby ball model, which now has the infamous ranking of the worse of all CR's dyson ratings.  As I recall, you boasted paying only $300 for your DC15 ball from BEST BUY, well under the MSRP.  The only way BB could sell them.

Carmine D.

Carmine,

The DC15’s Ball technology is genius and a huge money maker and is being copied (although not nearly as good) by some of the worlds biggest.  The DC15‘s weight, the heavy feel when turning, the intentional air-leak/suction killer in the nozzle - (designed to prevent a strong grip - so easier to turn), and the price point, look like they were not as excepted as hoped.  Although many love the DC15 and post their praises on HSN and many other review sites.

Dyson’s experimenting and turning these experiments into product have proven to be money makers.  Even the Model-T of vacuum manufacturers, that is...  Oreck, played around with a steerable upright, although only somewhat-steerable.

DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

Dyson's inability to equip its very first canister model in the USA, a $500 DC11, with an adequate rug nozzle for US carpets is as you say  " a train wreck. "   Logically speaking, removing the rose colored dyson glasses, train wrecks, whether waiting to happen or after the fact, are best described as huge failures.  You're left with an out of the pocket expenditure of $500 and useless meaningless words.  I'd say the latter is the reason for a 9 month product life, the shortest in US vacuum history.

Carmine D. 

CarmineD wrote:
You were also the first (and likely only) to post that several Hoovers would be the demise of Dyson.  I was the first to tell you that you were wrong.  I was right.

HARDSELL wrote:

Hi HS:

In case you missed it, I have ONE ally which I strategically predicted here in January 2009 would agree with me: Consumer Reports.  HOOVER received 7 of the top 20 upright winners per CR, including spots 1, 3, 5, 8, 15, 18 and 20.   Your favorite brand got 13 and 19.  That's a death/funeral knell.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote: I hear the wind blowing again.

HARDSELL wrote:

Must be the Holy Spirit coming to welcome home your favorite vacuum brand!  

Carmine D.

Sorry guys I MUST concur here. Its simply not enough to rely on statistics, believing ALL the hype that consumer reports do = after all Im sure some of you have vacuums that have been slated in the past and yet they give you sterling service. Granted, some statistics are worth relying on but they don't create a whole picture. &lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;I'll give you an example; on here (and I can't remember whether it was a review or not) someone mentioned that the Sebo Felix gave poor carpet performance. Not in my home! If I go over the whole carpet with the Felix and then a bagless vacuum with no dirt in the bin, hardly any other dirt comes to the surface which the cyclonic system produces. This isn't a lab test but purely one that's done by me. <BR><BR>Similarly I got a surprise when I did the same testing with a claimed "best performance" Panasonic bagged upright and the bagless test- the cyclonic vac produced a lot more dirt after the Panasonic had gone over the same carpet.

Here's a good video with a Dyson in it!

http://fwd.five.tv/videos/jon-tests-vacuum-cleaners

vacmanuk wrote:
I had your same experience.  I brought several vacuums home to demo before making the final purchase.  One was a highly rated Kenmore and one was an Oreck XL21 (there were others).  When I used the DC07 I was amazed at the dirt that all the others failed to remove.  I had been using them daily for a few weeks so they had the opportunity to clean the carpet before the Dyson arrived. 

HARDSELL wrote:

And pray tell what did you eventually do with your DC07 that you are so fond of bragging about here?

Carmine D.

vacmanuk wrote:

Hi vacmanuk:

If I recall correctly, SEBO's felix was not given a poor rating for rug performance by Consumer Reports.  But I'd have to verify and confirm with certainty. 

Carmine D.

I once put together a compact c5 with a electrolux p/n 5 and did my own demo on  a 9x12 carpet, using basic junk yard parts,adapted my filterqueen dust scope to the machine hose end, put in the black demo filters and it blew way every vacuum i own. So anyone want to opine about what caused this revelation was it the compact or the p/n 5.

I must say you guys are getting warmer.

Hey venson please set these guys strait..........

regards

MOLE

CarmineD wrote:

Sold it.  Did not have to give it away like your brands.  Why do you use Oreck as opposed to Hoover that you bragged about so many years?

HARDSELL wrote:

Hi HARDSELL:

You were gifted a repack/refurb dyson DC07 for hawking dysons here [the relevant words of your post are highlighted].  After less than 2 years you sold the free DC07 since it didn't have a warranty, among other reasons.  Much to the chagrin of the DC07 donor who no longer posts here.  What did you do with the DC07 proceeds?  You bought a new Royal Emminence bagged upright.  Not even a new dyson.  Why?  Actions HS speak louder than words. 

Yes, I gift away some my vacuums after I use them.   On occasions I even buy more of the brands and models I particularly like and think others will too and gift the new ones away.  I gift to persons/places who may need vacuums and will appreciate them.  Not for them to resell, like you do.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Hi HARDSELL:

You were gifted a repack/refurb dyson DC07 for hawking dysons here [the relevant words of your post are highlighted].  After less than 2 years you sold the free DC07 since it didn't have a warranty, among other reasons.  Much to the chagrin of the DC07 donor who no longer posts here.  What did you do with the DC07 proceeds?  You bought a new Royal Emminence bagged upright.  Not even a new dyson.  Why?  Actions HS speak louder than words. 

Yes, I gift away some my vacuums after I use them.   On occasions I even buy more of the brands and models I particularly like and think others will too and gift the new ones away.  I gift to persons/places who may need vacuums and will appreciate them.  Not for them to resell, like you do.

Carmine D.

Think what you like Carmine.  I already told you how I won the new DC07 from an Oreck salesman.  To my knowledge he has never been on this forum.  Likely too embarrassed.  I sold the DC07 because I wanted to try something different.  Warranty was not a factor. I did have a three year warranty FYI. Your story adds more credit to my accusations of you making up fiction as you post here.

Yes, I bought a Royal and a Kirby.  Good vacuums but not as good as the DC07. 

No doubt you gift yours since they have no used value.

HARDSELL wrote:

HARDSELL:  Dysons don't come with a 3 year warranty?  It's 2 and/or 5 years FYI.   What did Shakespeare say?  What a web this mortal doth weave when deception he decides to conceive. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

HARDSELL:  Dysons don't come with a 3 year warranty?  It's 2 and/or 5 years FYI.   What did Shakespeare say?  What a web this mortal doth weave when deception he decides to conceive. 

Carmine D.

$19 for a warranty at Best Buy.  No deception.  Just facts.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

Sure thing!  The ORECK store employee, after supposedly losing a bet to you on a matchoff of the ORECK and dyson IN AN ORECK STORE, springs for an additional year warranty on the dyson!  Right!  You're wearing the same rose colored dyson glasses that your cohorts here wear to post their praise for failed dyson products pulled off the market for not selling.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

HS:

Sure thing!  The ORECK store employee, after supposedly losing a bet to you on a matchoff of the ORECK and dyson IN AN ORECK STORE, springs for an additional year warranty on the dyson!  Right!  You're wearing the same rose colored dyson glasses that your cohorts here wear to post their praise for failed dyson products pulled off the market for not selling.

Carmine D.

Are you implying that a matchoff in an Oreck store would favor the Oreck.  I always knew they were using a stacked deck.  That was my reason for using baking soda.

We can see through those rose colored glasses.  You can't see through those blinders you wear.  Otherwise you would know that Dyson slayed Hoover in spite of your BS.

HARDSELL wrote:

No implication HS.  Just giving you the same you give here.  ORECK stores nationwide typically use several new dyson models including a DC07 in customers' tests with its own ORECK models for carpet cleaning.  All types of dirt, litter, hair, thread, sand, kapoc, baking soda, candy, cereal and other such things routinely found in/on household rugs.  ORECK uprights always win over dyson.   Makes the ORECK sales for all those who ask about dyson.

Carmine D.

vacmanuk wrote:

Hello vacmanuk:

I went back into the Consumer Reports archives several years and can't find a ranking/rating for the SEBO Felix.  However, I noted going back to 2005, that CR routinely rates the SEBO Automatic X4 as GOOD and EXCELLENT in carpet and floor cleaning.   Tho a different SEBO model, quite similar in brush roll design and function, the CR results and yours are congruent.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
How can they be congruent and different?

CarmineD wrote:

No implication HS.  Just giving you the same you give here.  ORECK stores nationwide typically use several new dyson models including a DC07 in customers' tests with its own ORECK models for carpet cleaning.  All types of dirt, litter, hair, thread, sand, kapoc, baking soda, candy, cereal and other such things routinely found in/on household rugs.  ORECK uprights always win over dyson.   Makes the ORECK sales for all those who ask about dyson.

Carmine D.

Oreck's don't always win.  Same with the Kirby.  The DC14 passed every trick the salesman tried.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

I was temporarily diverted by your dyson cohort.  I didn't forget this analogy which you used and is worth more commentary.  In light of GM and Chrysler's recent bankruptcy filings and billion $ bailouts by the Feds, note that Ford, as in Henry and the inventor of the Model T and assembly line production, is the only profitable American made car maker in the USA after 100 years.  In fact the recent retro Mustang outsold HONDA's newest and latest hybrid "Insight" in May despite rising gas prices and the worse car sales in decades.  Like me, if David ORECK and his family members and employees read your post, they would most probably say they are doing things right from a US manufacturing perspective.  ORECK's icon lightweight uprights are still made in the USA.  ORECK's 2008 sales results, while other vacuum makers' sales were plummeting, prove their business model is successful even in good times and bad.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS, as usual you are wearing your dysoin-issued rose colored dyson glasses.  DC07 and DC14 are kaput, discontinued, being sold at discount prices.  They are getting bandied about, new and used, on sale by all dyson retailers.  If winning is a function of longevity, as in the last vacuum still selling, ORECK beats your fave brand/model in that matchoff too. 

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

Geometry HS.  Get with in.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

DIB:

Your fave company's founder can take important lessons from the fates of Durant, Sloan, and Smith.  Having 5 car brands going back to 1912, Chevy for the hoi polloi, Pontiac for the poor but proud, Oldsmobile for the comfortable but discrete, Buick for the striving and Cadillac for the rich.  These 5 brand models cannibalize their own sales.  In good times it may not matter.  In bad times, in concert with increasing costs and expenses [read dyson hiring 400 more employees in 2007 an increase of 20 percent on the brink of the worse global recession in over 50 years], it's a train wreck waiting to happen.  Train wrecks are failures.  They lead to bankrupty and foreclosure.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

HS, as usual you are wearing your dysoin-issued rose colored dyson glasses.  DC07 and DC14 are kaput, discontinued, being sold at discount prices.  They are getting bandied about, new and used, on sale by all dyson retailers.  If winning is a function of longevity, as in the last vacuum still selling, ORECK beats your fave brand/model in that matchoff too. 

Carmine D.

IF a frog had wings we know the result.  Oreck lost in performance.  That is what I was buying.  Hoover lost because it is now defunct except in name.  HOOVER LOST.

HARDSELL wrote:

A new innovative dyson product for $500 that sits on the shelf collecting dust. 

I still own and use my ORECK after 2 years in my home and gifted 3 new ones just like it away to others who enjoy using their ORECKs.  You sold your dyson after 2 years and bought a bagged Royal.  Looks like ORECK wins, HS.  Actions, not words, speak loudest.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

A Dyson will collect more dirt/dust on the shelf than your Oreck collects when running.

Glad you like the Oreck.  That still doesn't make it a good performer.I kept the Oreck maybe 2 weeks and the DC07 more like 3 years. I now own a Royal, Kirby and Rainbow.  I booted the Oreck never to have another in my home.  Your usual logic would show Oreck as winner. No one else would see it that way. BTW, that old Z that you predicted to be the demise of Dyson sure left your home in a hurry.Very amusing that you sold and used Hoover for so many years and now you use Oreck.  Actions do speak loudly.

honest curousity...i had read somewhere that  the DDM /CANISTER was a great hit in asia,where  japan[ i think] had bought the rights to it . my question is  if u have a stellar motor then why not bring it market in your top end vacs and crush all who challenge.[ why so long to get here]..im not a big fan of dyson in any way..at all.. but i do like what i hear  or have heard abt the DDM...id ask the same question if my 2 favorites  RICCAR/PANASONIC had a DDM avail. ...and if proven to be better id pull out the current motor and without 2nd thought drop in a DDM ....its like not bringing your fastest car to the big race.

retardturtle1 wrote:

Hello retardturtle1:   This is for HS's benefit too and others here who cry foul whenever I say what I think about their fave brand, company and models.  A dyson I actually liked was the All Carpets which was a Wal*Mart exclusive in 2003.  No gawdawful noisey problem prone clutch.  Sold new for $319 but discounted for $278 and less.  It wasn't the best rug performer sold, due to the whimpy brush, but okay.  Dyson and W*M srubbed it in short order.  W*M scapped it in favor of a 2 year dealer with the HOOVER FUSION [TTI produced] in 2005.  The FUSION was a huge seller for W*M.  Perhaps dyson was pre-empted from reusing the All Carpets due to its contract with W*M.  Sort of like Japan and the DDM.

The DDM DC22 was supposedly launched at the VDTA in Feb 2009 to be a dealer dyson here in the USA.  Best kept secret in the vacuum industry in 2009.  It did a Claud Rains and became invisible.  Did dyson need the money so took the deal with Japan?  Maybe some of the dyson insiders here will say.  Maybe not.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

How many times do I tell you?  You have to turn the ORECK on. 

Carmine D.

I suspect that the reason the DDM motor is not widespread is cost.  If they can get fairly good performance from a proven Panasonic motor that costs $50, why switch to an unproven motor that costs considerably more.  Japanese household are willing to pay a premium for small items.  Space is less of an issue in the US, so we would not be willing to pay a premium for a compact vacuum with a special motor.  As others have noted, it's not the suction that is the weakness of the Dysons, it's the brush roll design. 

on the brushroll, one would  think that DYSON would copy a proven design...i mean if it works with what you got..then it works....btw..is the DDM a 1 fan or 2 fan motor for cans only? but i can see some of the american public buying a limited ed....with DDM....some who wont mind the hefty increase....due to the advanced DDM. i mean we are the land of too much power is never enough....slip it in with a shipment.....coming this way anyway..... i also feel that we all can get wrapped up and  wowed by good edgy advertising..a huge budget  ..and look past the unproven part....running straight for the nearest dealer...just cause its new and first of its kind.

Severus wrote:

Hello retardturtle1:

You may know this already so forgive me if I'm being redundant.  The pano motor that Severus speaks about which is installed in dyson's DC07 uprights is a one fan reversed wired pano motor that has been in the US vacuum industry since the early 70's.   Good motor but standard issue.  Not the TOL tri-force pano motor that's used in the TOL pano uprights and canisters.

I don't know what components and in what quantity are in the DDM.  Interestingly, dyson went from one of the least expensive industry sourced standard issue motors for its first upright launch in the USA to a sophisticated esoteric non-standard vacuum industry motor for the DDM.   The timing couldn't be worse in light of the global recession especially in the USA where dyson at one time boasted two thirds of its vacuum market sales.

Carmine D.

The Dyson Digital motor is a one-fan only design. Apparently the fan is curved in three dimensions, design cues came from the aerospace industry, and it is made out of PEEK plastic.

Below Left: Fan & armature close up.        Below Right: exploded view of motor. Note the combined air intake and exhaust cowl. The exhaust air is expelled tangentially.

Here's a better pic:

Hello Trilobite:

Thanks for the DDM motor schematics.  Very interesting. 

Your pictures pigued my interest.  I checked the official dyson specs of the canisters on the dyson UK web site.  Interesting results.  Dyson's 5 year old DC11 with an encore presentation has 275 air watts.  Newest dyson DC19 T2 cann has 280 air watts.  DDM DC22 has 200 air watts.  200?  That's a far cry from full size power.   I'm even suspect of the nice even 200 number.  Does the DDM motor actually deliver suction power equivalent to industry standard vacuum motors?  Especially at the exorbitant price.  The reason for the smallish 7 inch rug nozzle on the DC22 may be the lesser suction power and not the maneuverability in tight spaces.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Hello retardturtle1:

You may know this already so forgive me if I'm being redundant.  The pano motor that Severus speaks about which is installed in dyson's DC07 uprights is a one fan reversed wired pano motor that has been in the US vacuum industry since the early 70's.   Good motor but standard issue.  Not the TOL tri-force pano motor that's used in the TOL pano uprights and canisters.

I don't know what components and in what quantity are in the DDM.  Interestingly, dyson went from one of the least expensive industry sourced standard issue motors for its first upright launch in the USA to a sophisticated esoteric non-standard vacuum industry motor for the DDM.   The timing couldn't be worse in light of the global recession especially in the USA where dyson at one time boasted two thirds of its vacuum market sales.

Carmine D.

HI CARMINE

nothing to forgive...thats  what the forums all about..Q&A, ...ideas..learning ..fun stuff....anyway, i knew the 7 had a pan motor...but why rev wired...? and i have no clue abt where the other motors are from..but i think the DDM was in one of  his earlier cans .[not sure]..guess the timing is bad at the moment for a chunk of change on a vac... that is an  intresting  looking motor tho...i never seen a motor like that. so whats your take on it ?

Trilobite wrote:

TRIBOLITE...

Yes ,,thank you for the all the info  and i do find it to be an intresting design....but as CARMINE said...200 a/w is ALOT lower than 280...not seeing where this motor is supirior over all the rest...or how it can overcome a 40% a/w loss..

retardturtle1 wrote:
That is only 29% loss.

Carmine failed to mention the UK DC22 uses a carbon brush motor.  The U.S. DC22 uses a DDM...  88,000 rpm, pulls the Baird meter to 10 and sustains this for 4 - 7 years.

DIB

HARDSELL wrote:

awwww..thank  you all over the place.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

I first went to the Japanese dyson site but unfortunately I can't read Japanese.  The dyson UK was the best alternative.  If you know the air watts for the DDM DC22 post them for all of us to know and judge.

I have a HOOVER China sourced cann with a cord winder purchased in August 2007 that I've used for almost going on 2 years now in a couple months.  It's smaller than the DDM DC22 and has full sized suction power with a full size rug/floor brush.  It cost $50.

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:   To date there is no US DDM DC 22.  Not on the USA dyson site.  If retailers have it, I haven't seen it and don't know if it is the UK carbon brush motor [that you speak of] and/or the Japanese DDM, which as was mentioned by retardturtle1 the rights may have been sold by James to the Japanese market exclusively.  I went to the Japanese site but couldn't make out the specs and costs.  Do you read Japanese?  Maybe you can assist here and provide some insight with the issues?

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

Using 'only' with 29.58 percent is logically inconsistent.  1/3 loss/gain of a motor's suction power is not ONLY, unless you are using sarcasm.  1/3 of something/anything is a substantial amount/percentage.  I keep telling you:  Take off those rose colored dyson glasses.

Carmine D. 

DysonInventsBig wrote:
CarmineD wrote:
Carmine,

Indeed, I had a friend translate the Dyson Japanese DDM DC22 web page and packaging after the vacuum launched, it’s the same information (same/near same vacuum) I’ve been posting here.  Anyways...  I appreciate your “unbiased” [retired] independent dealer spin, twist, slant on Dyson, that’s one of the reasons I participate here.

You’ve been choking (not unlike the vac’s you endorse) on the news that DDM DC22 will sell/is selling here in the U.S.  Online Dyson dealers have been selling the turbo nozzled DDM DC22 for some time (as others have posted).  Best Buy online has the DDM DC22 Motorhead on their site.

Why would an inventor/manufacturer who’s selling/been selling in Japan for sometime, sell or license his inventions to another manufacturer?  Where’s the advantage?


DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:
Hi,

Umm . . . little clarity is called for here I think. Per your mention, I just checked out BestBuy's website. The DC22 slot bears a great big "NEW" blurb but it's page also cites that it is on back order. Does that mean that the first batch was gobbled up by eager buyers or just that they don't have them yet?

Pertinent but being treated as an aside here, the DC22 is selling online only per BB's website. I don't exactly how this works but I have the feeling that as with the $200 Black & Decker VN1400P I bought (BB is selling this online only too) the bet is being hedged somehow. I could be wrong but I have the feeling that either Dyson or its distributors may be handling order on a fulfillment basis -- direct shipment per indiividual order -- as opposed to shipping in bulk to BB stores.

As well, BestBuy hss stupidly posted the following great news along with the $799.99 price.

9" cleaning path
Lets you cover a wide range of flooring with every pass. (This is really fudging things.)

16-3/5' cord
Lets you clean a large area before changing outlets. (A 16-foot cord for $800.)

Hit me with me with a couple more like this -- please. I'll be able to drop right off to sleep tonight without needing Daddy to read me a bedtime story.

Venson

To my knowledge, there are no Dyson cleaners on sale in the UK fitted with the Digital motor. They all have conventional brush motors.

The only Dyson appliance fitted with the Digital Motor is the 'Airblade' hand drier.

Trilobite wrote:
Hi Trilobite,

Thanks.

Venson

CarmineD wrote:

Is that constant or peak air watts?  Air watts are not so important----------unless it is to criticize Dyson.

CarmineD wrote:

You mention the DC11 @ 275 Air Watts. I had one for a spell, but found the suction just barely enough for driving the turbo brush, on short to medium pile, UK standard 80/20 wool nylon carpets. I did notice though, that as the pre-motor filter got dusty through normal use, the turbo brush got even more lethargic.

Also, to get full suction, you had to have the telescopic tubes fully extended. If you tried to collapse them, as you might if you were cleaning a surface close up - like stairs, for instance - the suction dropped as air got in at the joins between each tube section. This caused the turbo brush to run even slower.

Another problem with the DC11 was the failure of the exhaust filter to stay locked in place. The plastic softened with the motor heat, causing the filter click-tabs to become undone - so much for allergy class filtration!!!

Eventually I gave up on it and virtually gave it to a friend. She has laminated floors, and small short pile area rugs.

Dyson really should re-assess their cleaners' efficiencies. All the other manufacturers are perfectly aware of the benefits of 'sealed suction' systems, why not Dyson?

Dyson should manufacture cleaners with more suction power. Variable power would be a good idea too. And they should address the noise of their machines.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

Whenever posters here put the dyson chatter to a scrutiny of confirmation/verification, the dyson posters' response is to impugn/kow tow the questions/questioners.  You, like your dyson cohorts here, suffer from rose color dyson glasses' syndrome.

Carmine D.  

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

I'm using dyson provided air watts data for comparitive purposes about dyson canisters.  I made a conclusion supported by reasonable minds here that a DC22 brush bar motor has 30 percent less suction power than a 5 year old DC11 and newest DC19 T2.  That's constructive criticism based on dyson provided spec data.  Take off the rose color dyson glasses and be honest and objective about the shortcomings of your favorite brand and models.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Are you now saying that air watts are critical for performance?

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine,

Not it all.  We are only a handful nationwide/worldwide who point out the rampant dishonesty amongst many non-Dyson independent dealers and including the false-Dyson dealers (those who enjoy/profit from Dyson’s warranty work and nail/nearly nail their new and few Dyson’s to the floor).

DIB

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

Dyson uses air watts as a measure of performance for his products not me.  I made a logical conclusion about dyson canister models based on dyson's standard of measure for performance.  A 30 percent reduction, if we are to believe dyson's standard as relevant to performance, is significant.  Or, should we believe that dyson's own measure of air watts is irrelevant and insignificant to dyson performance?

Carmine D. 

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

Your [and your dyson cohorts here] defense and support for failed dyson products and the shortcomings of existing dyson models undermines your vacuum judgement and credibility not the nebulous vacuum industry dealers you speak of in the generic sense above.

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

As I opined,  dyson needs the M-O-N-E-Y!  Cash.  Capital. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

I asked what you think and not what Dyson advertises.  Are you going to tell us what you think or continue to twist around the question?  If you are afraid to answer just be honest and tell us that.

i honestly thought that  airwatts was about as close as you could get ...a combination of waterlift and airflow.....an overall output i guess you could say. if im wrong then what is the correct way to get the overall output,,

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

Would you like me to repeat myself.   Here it is once again:  200 airwatts for a DC22 is a far cry from full size power when and if compared to a DC11 's 5 year old 275 airwatts and the latest DC19 T2 with 280 air watts.  The dyson site calls a DC 22 full size power.  I didn't.   A reduction in performance by 30 percent is not ONLY a loss of 30 percent, as you would have us believe.  It's a loss of a huge 30 percent of performance.  As I opined before, the smallish 7 inch cleaning swath on the DC22 rug nozzle is not for the sake of manueverability [as some dyson fans here would like us to believe] as much as its due to lesser performance power.  The rose color dyson glasses are obstructing your reading and comprehension.   Not to worry.  I can repeat myself for you until it sinks in.

CarmineD wrote June 19, 6;34 PM:

Carmine D.

retardturtle1 wrote:

Air flow and air watts can be skewed.  There are many variations in the resistance to air flow that should be considered when measuring air flow. Air flow may not be a measure of system performance. In addition to the resistance within the power unit, there is resistance caused by air turbulence in the hose and tubing, restriction where the cleaning nozzle contacts the floor, as well as increased resistance within the filtering system as the unit fills with dirt. High output (air watts) is not the only factor to consider in determining performance.

I would think that sustained air watts is a better indicator of performance than is peak air watts.

Carmine, Mole, Venson, Dusty and many others are much more qualified to answer this than I.  Carmine is just being timid or cantankerous.  I suspect the latter. 

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

I have always maintained that air watts plus proper brush agitation are critical for rug cleaning performance.  Always.  The dyson supporters here, going back to the beginning of dyson's DC07 launch time when I first criticized the sub-par petite non-industry standard brush bar in the DC07, claimed the higher air watts more than compensated for the whimpy brush.  An opinion that I disgreed with.  Put the 2 shortcomings together: Lower air watts and a poor brush roll design and you have a formula for poor performance for cleaning and grooming rugs.

Carmine D. 

CarmineD wrote:

Agreed, a 30% loss is substantial.  However, others and I believe you have contended in the past that Dysons high air watts were useless as factor in determining performance.  I believe that this may have been said because Dyson higher air watts than some favorite brands.  Perhaps the 30% loss will affect performance if the vacuum is designed properly in other ways (which I doubt that it is). 

These rose colors are better than the drab ones you see. 

CarmineD wrote:

Poor suction and a fantastic brush will only cause the dirt to be pushed out of the vacuum path.  Looks like a double edged sword.

Now quit posting until I am finished.  Go to the casino or ride the roller coaster.  Have a good week end too.

HARDSELL wrote:

Not news HS.  The persons you name, including me, have said for years here that both brush roll design/function and air watts are critical to rug cleaning and grooming.  You and your dyson cohorts kow towed and impugned our conclusions.  You are just believing and claiming an epiphany.  See what happens when you take off the rose color dyson glasses.  You agree with us and claim it for yourself.

Carmine D. 

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

It's not a double edged sword.  It's a dual combination [good suction and industry standard brush roll] for a winning vacuum success.  Even dyson now agrees after a number of years and tries.

Don't ride roller coasters.  Already been to the casino today and did very well.  Thank you for asking.  Tomorrow is another day.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

I can't recall saying that a good brush was vital.  I would still take straight suction and NO brush as opposed to a great brush and NO suction.  The latter is like the old bissell sweepers or an Oreck.

All carpets do not require the same type brush.

HARDSELL wrote:

thank you H.S  for the info...i thought airwatts was measured at the hose end ,in the brushroll chamber...for a truer reading  and not at the motor....thought thats how the cent vac industry did it....at the end of the hose...for a true reading?

retardturtle1 wrote:

I think that I read that central vacs are measured without a hose.  Length of hose will impact air watts.  No wonder my air watts are low.

retardturtle1 wrote:
This is once again a case of, "If you dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with BS."

Even machines with the best suction lose something in the translation by the time you get airflowing at the hose end or floor nozzle. Body seals may not always be tight enough, hose connections may also allow for leakage and even friction may diminish suction. (One of the reasons that household vacuums never usually have overly long hoses.) Badly designed wands and attachment locking mechanisms may also attribute to the same.

Not many manufacturer are up to the challenge of honsetly stating what suction measure as at the motor's air inlet and the final percentage of a hundred percent that finally arrives on the floor or at the end of your hose.

If we had vacuums that could deliver a close percentage of hte motors actual draw, we could again use machines that use less power

Venson

HARDSELL wrote:

I can't recall saying that a good brush was vital.  I would still take straight suction and NO brush as opposed to a great brush and NO suction.  The latter is like the old bissell sweepers or an Oreck.

All carpets do not require the same type brush.

HS:

I would take both on rugs over one or the other exclusively.  Fortunately in today's vacuum market both are offered by all brands and most models.

Carmine D.

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson:

The advantage of the fan first uprights of years gone by and ORECK and a few others still today. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Such words of wisdom.  I am impressed----------by your twisting.

HARDSELL wrote:
Airwatts, cfm x waterlift divide by 8,5

My F,A,S,T, intake throttle body has 1100 airwatts, it doesnt clean very well though.

H.S. all the numbers can be manipulated,all depends how they want to market the product,

In the central vacuum industry any thing over 400 airwatts is considered powerful ,its just a # game............


regards

MOLE

HARDSELL wrote:

What can I say?     HAPPY FATHER'S DAY.

Carmine D.

mole wrote:

Would it be legal to put one of those 6500 rpm Oreck motors in the exhaust to help the flow?

THanks for saying what I was trying to get others to say.  Manipulation exists in all industry.  The best test is hand on experience.  Forget the marketing hype.

mole wrote:

when you use  that formula , say on a 750 w lamb motor with 112cfm and 63 in w/l it comes to abt 830 aw....yet there chart says 190aw...what gives

retardturtle1 wrote:

Hi turtle,your getting very quizy about the #, the formula the rest of the story goes like this,cfm x W/L divide  by 8.5 take that # and divide that by the fan case opening most are 2'', now your at the right #,still means nothing in real life applications,

Do you really think a Z06 corvette puts 505 h.p. to the ground?Its just a  engine dyno number thats never achived in real life. The lamb/ametec electric motors are rated the same way, strip the fans off the motor throw a 240 volt charge into it and blow it up,but the motor made 4 hp, do you see the game yet?

Do you realize that the most overlooked piece on the vacuum are the attachments............

regards

MOLE

HARDSELL wrote:

H.S. you know something now i think you could be on to something here,An sts turbo set up looks a lot like an oreck fan, how do you think it would handle the methonal shot?. I'm still trying to tune in my 2 stage nitrous system into my dyson dc14,

My ls1 motor could be used as a starter motor for your HEMI.

mole wrote:

thanks mole

just like to know how they come up with the numbers they do...where xactly they came from.. why  something was designed the way it was and how if possible can it be improved on.....a what if.....thing. im a way long way from what you guys know and have seen....and admire and respect that.  i learn something everyday on here...i have a question i ask....from those who know...[id rather not ASSUME]  ..but ive always believed that a true reading is at the brushroll chamber. and am aware of the loss of engine power thru the driveline....i do love cars..and working on them, as i do all my own maint. on my  TRAILBLAZER SS......a tru beast....altho not a Z06..HEMI....she can hold her own.

Venson wrote:

Quite.

I think I read somewhere that vacuum cleaners in Europe are the next range of appliances to get energy efficiency labels by law. Witness Bosch and Electrolux:

Bosch BSG71266GB

Filtration:

HEPA filter

Self-sealing hygiene dust bags

Tools:

Adjustable floor tool for carpets and hard floors

On-board tools: crevice nozzle, upholstery nozzle

and dusting brush

Other features:

Compressor motor

*1200W with performance of similar 2400W cleaner        

Electrolux Enviro Vac bagged or bagless uprights are lightweight and easy to manoeuvre and easy on energy consumption. Picks up 20% more than compettitve models whilst using up to 30% less energy, saving you money and also the environment.

Hi Trilobite,

Eureka, now owned by Electrolux is putting out an Envirovac series as well. Link follows.

http://www.eureka.com/index.php?option=com_family&view=family&from=mainmenu&task=getproductsbyfamily&familyid=4&categoryid=1

Best,

Venson

mole wrote:
Mole,

Like I keep saying/posting here, at its core the great majority of bagged vacuums are made with off the shelf parts and designs....  you just demonstrated this.  If anyone can assemble a vacuum made with junk parts and get it to work as good or better than many of “todays” (bagged) vacuums...  Is it any wonder Maytag dropped Hoover?  IMO, Maytag like many other manufacturers believed there were no more “big” and exclusive innovations left in the tired vacuum cleaner.  Dyson exploited this belief.

DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

All product oriented industries, not just vacuums, have companies that lead with innovations which over time become less expensive to make and sell.  Off the shelf purchases, as you say.  This phenomenon is good for consumers allowing affordable prices for all.  Probably the best examples of this in recent years are cell phones and computers and more ago color TV's. 

Second, MAYTAG's management did not understand the vacuum industry.  It's focus for 75 years before HOOVER was laundry equipment.   The huge success of many HOOVER products kept MAYTAG profitable even with soaring laundry equipment product costs [for metals and shipping] with little MAYTAG management oversight of vacuums.  The best example of MAYTAG's disregard for HOOVER and vacuums is epitomized by the HOOVER WT switch problem.  MAYTAG's failure to inform the CPSC timely about the HOOVER WT switch problem cost MAYTAG/HOOVER $750,000.  That was one of the heftiest fines ever paid by a company to the CSPC.   Especially in light of the fact that the switch defects resulted in no consumer injuries and/or property damage other than the vacuums.

Carmine D.

WRT to dyson's exploitation of the vacuum indutry, I would say it caters only to bagless vacuums and consumers so inclined. Whereas, HOOVER/TTI is a full floorcare product line for home and commercial applications.

Carmine D.

HOOVER TTI is exploiting the latest 2009 Consumer Reports ratings and ranks fro vacuums by including this on its web site: