Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

In the press today:-
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23711862-details/Dyson+with+more+revs+than+F1+racer/article.do

Product details:-

• Motor goes at 106,000rpm 'three times faster than any other motor'
• 200 watt motor
• 65/38 air watts (switchable power??)
• £129.99 GBP RRP, powered brush version £149.99

I think the devil will be in the other details, as we learn them. Presumably it's using the Dyson Digital motor? From the photo, the collection bin looks slightly deeper and has a more prominent release switch. It has improved max suction (DC16 has 36 air watts) so I'm presuming (nay hoping) that it can run in standard mode for more than 5mins and switch to a 'turbo' mode as needed?

I have prefectly good DC16, but I could be tempted by something with a longer run time and twice the already impresive suction for car cleaning.

DysonInventsBig wrote:
DysonInventsBig wrote: Severus wrote:

Hello Severus:

I agree.  Please allow me the liberty to answer DIB's question for you WRT cyclones clogging quicker in handhelds. 

DIB:  If you can take your head out from under James/dyson, the Youtube video that vacmanuk posted comparing a dyson DC16 to the Black & Decker pivotvac.  The fine flour test was done first.  Then followed by the larger pieces of wet kitty litter.  The user was manually helping the dyson pick up the litter with the oblong cleaning nozzle by using his hand to push it in.  So holding a DC16 in one hand and pushing the litter into the nozzle opening with the other.  Both hands occupied.  Then the user removes the nozzle and uses the larger dyson suction opening.  Still, dyson's DC16 stumbled and runs out of charge with the job just been completed.  Why, DIB?

Dah!  The cyclones were clogged by the fine flour just as Severus opines.  And dyson always warns in its literature.  When these clog, suction effectiveness diminishes.  I suspect if the wet kitty litter were done first, a DC16 would fare better but not for long.  A DC16 would choke on the next cleanup job.  Since the same methodology is used for the B&D pivot vac as the DC16, the test is valid.  Dyson chokes and B&D wins.  Any wonder why so many of these high and over priced excuses for a handheld vacuum are returned?

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Back at you DIB.  I have no interest in betting cheaters, welchers and fools with silly offers.  I bet for cash.  Stay focused.  Why didn't the DC16 pick up the wet kity litter as quickly and easily as the B&D pivot vac which still had a full charge more than a DC16 after the job was complete? Let's see: $150-$200 versus $50?  Remember your sign and the good Pastor's words?  

Carmine D.

Hello Severus:

Looks like DIB by his lack of responses here is conspicuosly MIA and absent.

In concert with your reservations about the cyclones on dyson's handheld, the Popular Meachanics test complicates the clean-up scenario further with the "wet" kitty litter.  Water is tabu for dyson dirt cyclones.  Speeds up the clogging process in the cyclones.  Hence dyson's warnings about never ever using water and washing the cyclones.  Moral of the story, if you want a handheld that looks innovative but only works for 5 minutes on limited clean up jobs, and you have $150-$200 to flush down the toilet, DC16 id the one.  If you are looking to buy a real hand held cordless with a 30 year history of product performance and only $50, Black & Decker is the one. 

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:
You can also overwhelm the cyclonic separation by taking in too much dirt at once.   I suspect that most of the dirt that goes into the pre-motor filters is from start up and/or overwhelming the cyclones with too much dirt at once.   

Dyson users have reported dirt and sand getting into the pre-motor filters.   This is why.  With a much lower powered hand vac and users cycling them on and off, I suspect it will be much worse. 

Severus wrote:
Dust overload and/or lack of proper airflow are the primary ways the cyclones do not filter well.

I’ve seen little evidence of dust reentrainment (the few models I’ve studied) at startup and shut down.

The handheld by nature, brings much airflow to the cyclones and this is why the separators work (filter) so well.  Carmine could have informed you of this - if he could only get his head around the science of cyclonic’s.  Perhaps if he quit spending so much time rambling and smothering, and instead pick up a book - this may help.  Then again, more likely not.


DIB

Hey DIB:

I thought you decided to bail out of the dyson camp after getting overwhelmed here by all the posters for your illogical and hypocritical praise of dyson's DC16.  DId any poster here agree with you that's it's a solid performer in its class let alone worth the ridiculous high price?

BTW, how many of those 3 DC16 handhelds did you actually buy new and pay full price for?  I'm betting none.  Notta.  Want to take my bet?    If I'm right and win, I get a free all expense paid vacation to dysonland.  If I'm wrong and lose, I get a free all expense paid vacation to dysonland.  Either way, I'll pay your way too.  What do you say? Take my bet?  [Can you see and hear me laughing as I post this.  Not with you.  At you!].

Carmine D.

Talking about science DIB, one of my favorite topics.  Have you ever heard of the High School course called INtegrated Science?  2 years.  It combines the disciplines of physics and chemistry together into one study.  The instructor who invented the course and taught is Dr. Morris Lerner [now deceased but the course goes on and advanced into some of the most prestigious universities in the USA.]  Twenty five years after I had his course, he met a relative of mine with the same last name as me.  He asked if there was a relation to me.  The relative said yes and queried how would you remember Carmine's name after 25 years?  Dr. Lerner said:  I remember the names of all the students who I gave A's in IS.  They were a very small number.  Nice thing about the story is that it is 100 percent true [I threw that in for HS who hates half truths].

CarmineD wrote:
I suppose you have proof to validate this story.  I mean proof that you can show us.  If not there is no reason to belive it coming from you. 

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

Ye of little faith.  

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

HS:

Ye of little faith.  What part of the story would you like me to prove?

Carmine D.

You could start with proof of anyone who would claim to be your relative.