Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Thought the Dyson discussion board would be interested in reading a small article about the Tacony Museum. Also Carmine's old friend.....

http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/hit-the-road-jack/hit-the-road-jack/2009/08/new-museum-opens-at-st-james-on-historic-route-66/

Thanks Lucky1. I'm glad to learn the new museum's good to go.

Vensom

Carmine:

You may be a barely living legend, however you can rest in peace knowing that there are no questions Tom can't answer and that he appreciates the offer for assistance. 

I'm going to see Tom in a few weeks at a gathering of vacuum cleaner collectors taking place at the Museum, and I will be sure to pass on your good wishes to him.

Sincerely,
MH

P.S. I just noticed that the Oreck came in at 27th place in CR's current ratings of uprights.  I guess they've finally figured Oreck out!

Hello MH:

Well just in case.......I'm an email away.

Give Tom my best wishes. 

Many here in response to the credibility of Consumer Reports and vacuums have criticized that on different occasions the same/similar model will rise/fall in ranks and ratings.  To wit, I say CR is a guide not the gospel.  Experts in the field are the best source of vacuum information.  I've said this many times before, this is an opportunity to say again.  In the final analysis how often and how well vacuum users operate their vacuums are the key to keeping a healthy and clean home.  Not what CR says about the vacuums.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Consumer Reports is what it is.   For the most part, they provide accurate comparisons of vacuums performing the exact same tasks.   The question is always how generalizable the test results are to other carpet/flooring and dirt types. 

Odd vacuums like the Rainbow with the dirt collected in water provide unique challenges to the lab.   I have always wondered how the Rainbow could do so poorly in the lab tests, when they seem to do well in real world tests.  I always wonder if they forgot to hold down the lever to keep the power nozzle operating, or if they don't properly calculate the dirt removed from the rug due to the water collection.  It just doesn't seem right for the Rainbow to get a "fair" score for carpet cleaning and a "good' score on bare floors cleaning (most recent tests - in the magazine that came yesterday).  Heck, the miele art got a "good" on carpet cleaning (way back when it was tested), and it is straight suction. 

FWIW, the Dyson DC28 made the top ten at #10 right above the Kirby Sentria.  Hoover has quite a few of the top spots.

CarmineD wrote:

HI CARMINE

I second that.....its a starting point , gives a general idea as to whats out in the market. ...an overview.  I think the dysons do alittle better than the reviews show...and i kinda sometimes feel the reviews are somewhat biased....or influenced at times and how they wont answer questions...on steam /shampoo vacs. ...ect -

Nothings beats a good vac shop/dealer for advice/knowledge......demos/take homes/maint cost./wrnty.....dealing with folks that actually work on them....thousands of them...not a collector of one brand or someone whos only read about that brand....or its reviews....take home/try out ...wins everytime.

turtle1

Severus wrote:
Hi Severus,

Keeping overall score averages in mind, I think Rainbow's points off via CR are as much due to weight, bulk, convenience and price. I have own(ed) a couple and though I thought they were ingenious in design, buyers have to really be people prepared to make exception for many shortcomings.

For the person who likes to vacuum two or three times a week, set-up and clean-up can be time consuming. They are no fun on stairs -- a consideration for older users and anyone with back problems. As for filtering, I am sure Rainbow meets the mark but there are other vacuums, bagged and bagless, that do as well and make use more ideal.

If you want a laugh, Mr. Ambition here was once so enthusiastic about my last Rainbow that I bought the five-gallon water tank with a wheel set thinking I should have it around for big jobs. Trust me, I have had big jobs to tackle but none so big I ever found courage to get out the super-sized water pan.

The best power nozzle Rainbow had was the Eureka-clone model they started out with when the first D2 was fitted with a PN port. The later two or so PNs that have been made exclusively for or by Rainbow haven't really been all that hot. Matter of fact, I can't quite figure why Rainbow just doesn't take on the Wessel Werks PN that everybody else is using -- including Roboclean, Hyla and Ocean Blue. OR the also popular and effective Panasonic/Kenmore clone PN showing up in central vac tool kits.

Kirby has usually had similar issues with CR. Great cleaner, great dirt and filtration capacity but heavy, bulky and very expensive plus too much fuss is required for attachment conversion. There are many good uprights that eliminate those problems making it hard to praise a machine's one or two virtues.

Keeping the cost of things at the fore, how many many people can really afford to drop $1,500 or more on a vacuum anyway? To my mind CR still points out to prospective buyers good vacuums at decent prices. I do not claim CR as infallible either but in my past experience I have followed CR's lead in regard to purchases of all types and have not been disappointed.

By the way, I like the suction on the Dyson DC28 and am happy to hear it did well. Was there any mention of it being hard to push when set for low pile?

Best,

Venson

Venson,

I was referring specifically to the carpet cleaning score of the Rainbow.   I've never owned a Rainbow, but I've had one demoed and I have several relatives who have owned them.   If we limit discussion to the carpet cleaning test, the Rainbow has the absolutely lowest score of all vacuums tested by CR.  Vacuums are categorized as:  Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, or Poor.  In the canisters, there was one Excellent, 9 very goods, 10 goods, and only 1 Fair.  The Rainbow scored the only Fair.

If you look at uprights, all of the scores were better than Fair. 

As a former Rainbow owner, do you really think the Rainbow is the worst vacuums for cleaning carpeting of all the vacuums tested by CR?  Or do you think that maybe there is a methodological issue that causes CR to underestimate the Rainbow's score?  

I agree with your assessment of the Rainbow - heavy, expensive, high maintenance, etc.  Even with the not so great power nozzle,  is it really the worst at getting dirt out of carpets? 

Venson wrote:

Severus wrote:
Hi Severus,

The performance aspect depends a lot on the kind of situation you're facing and what you have to work with. Everyone's needs are different. In addition, a rug cleaning test is merely applying x-amount of a dirt and debris mixture and ascertaining how much of it has been gathered within x-time frame by the vacuum in use. That said . . .

If I have to take on carpeting that has a lot of embedded dirt I vacuum more - maybe three, maybe four times a week at least at high traffic spots -- no matter the machine. I keep the practice up until I am satisfied that I'm where I should be as far as the condition of the carpeting is concerned. Namely, little or no areas showing matting or "dead" looking pile with minimal amounts of embedded dirt found down at the backing while bearing normal day-to-day traffic. No machine will get me out of the ditch just by way of one cleaning session in such a situation. (A visit from professional carpet cleaning service would also be ideal.) But -- as long as wear is not a major issue you can bring decent but shabby looking carpeting around again but you have to work at it. However, some vacuums may lessen the overall effort.

Personally I don't think Rainbow is an exceptional performer with the PN provided however if all I had was a Rainbow to work with I'd use it more. Unfortunately, testing entities don't explore that perspective much being the nature of the game is about whose vacuum gets the most one time around. I strongly feel Rainbow's solution lies either by way of a redesign of the brushroll by going for a more effective chevron or auger pattern of its brush strips or using an outsourced piece that has a higher performance capacity. That as worked for other brands.

Being that "clean" is in the eye of the beholder, and often beyond it, CR fortunately broaches the issues of of deep cleaning, something we usually don't think about. "Clean" is a thing that most vacuum users take as having been achieved once they look down and see nothing on the surface of the rug.

My Rainbow SE came with the low-profile PN that offered no height adjustment but just a sliding bleed valve to reduce suction and make it easier to push on high pile. As Rainbow's attachments were pretty much standard I merely switched to a PN I deemed a better performer and was quite happy.

Venson

Venson,

Regarding the Dyson DC28, CR said the following:

 CR's Take
Overall, this is a very good, if pricey, upright that was among the better performers at cleaning carpets and bare floors, and for picking up pet hair. It had very good airflow for tools, and was excellent at keeping its emissions low, but it scored only fair for handling. Dyson has been among the more reliable brands of upright vacuums.

Highs
The Dyson excelled at cleaning bare floors and keeping its emissions low. It was also very good at cleaning carpets and picking up pet hair, and had very good airflow for tools.

Lows
This model is pricey and was fairly hard to push and pull.

******

Regarding the Rainbow's fair score for carpet cleaning, you may be right that the power nozzle is the weak link.  I still think it's odd  that the Rainbow has the absolutely lowest score on carpet cleaning among all vacuums tested.  However, I'm not sure how CR determines how much dirt is removed from a rug.   CR considers that information to be proprietary. 

Severus wrote:

Hello Severus:

When CR rated the MIELE Art series 'good' at carpet cleaning W/O a brush roll, I was floored.  And it further reinforced my view that I expressed above about the CR ratings/rankings:  A guide and not the final word.

Carmine D.