Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Lordy, lord ol' Jimmy D's cryin' again. He has instigated the banning of Miele S7 adverts . . .

http://www.which.co.uk/news/2009/10/miele-ads-banned-for-vacuum-cleaner-claims-186889.jsp

Venson

mole wrote:
Mole,
It’s your position…the prototype Dyson DC07 running hard for 10 years is unimpressive.  But is it not also your position and obligation to bad-mouth the competition at every step and at every corner?  Lets see…when James Dyson launched the DC07 and backed it by a two year warranty – the competition said the Dyson ain’t no good.  When James Dyson answered the price-to-warranty value criticism and padded the warranty by three more years (and other mfgs. followed), bringing the warranty to 5 years – the competition said the Dyson ain’t no good.  Now when it’s learned Tom had a looks-like, works-like DC07 prototype two years prior to the U.S. launch and ran this “No bags to buy-No Loss of Suction” vacuum for 10 years and ran it hard – the competition rhetoric continues to be…the Dyson ain’t no good.  Is that about right?

DIB

dyson DiB:

Dyson offered a 2 year warranty, not 3, on full size vacuums up to Aug 15, 2006 when it extended to 5 years.  Which? magazine rated dysons worse in reliability for 8 consecutive years until dyson extended its warranty to 5 years.  Which? did an about face and began recommending dysons, in large part according to its own account, because of the 5 year warranty. 

BTW, dyson handhelds were/are still 2 years on warranty, tho battery packs, I believe, are excluded.

The Royal powercast mentioned above came with a 6 year motor [free parts and labor] warranty.  Actually had the start date for the warranty stamped on the serial number plate. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine,

The fact is...  Dyson’s made in the UK have proven less reliable than the Dyson’s manufactured in Malaysia.  If my memory is correct, Which Magazine did not make this distinction.  Which Magazine like CR will continue to control information and posture so to save face and keep subscribers subscribing.

TTI, Bissell and Hoover UK responded to Dyson’s 5 year warranty.  In addition to the warranty, they take their marketing and innovation que’s from Dyson.

DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

I'm at a loss dyson IB where you got the 3 years in your post and I posted in part to set the record straight on the dyson warranties.  Your take, I believe, on Which? is wrong.  Which? specifically said in its publication in 2006 that dyson product reliability was better as witnessed by dyson itself with the extended 5 year warranty for product sales after Aug 15, 2006.  Tho, some here would argue that the dyson product reliability, despite the longer warranty, is no better. 

Not uncommon for one vacuum maker to follow another, especially when the products are sold side by side in the same venues.   WRT innovation, as I keep posting to you, technique and performance trump innovation every time.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Cameron,

Don’t you think Which Magazine giving a better reliability rating to Dyson only after Dyson up'd their warranty to 5 years is a weak position and misleading to it’s readers?  Using Which Magazines logic...then Euro Pro could also receive high marks and rankings with a 5 year warranty, although this does not remove the hassle and frustration when the appliance fails.  And when it fails so does this readers subscription support.  No, no, no, make no mistake, Dyson products (overall) work and hold up as they should.  Of course they could strip it down to nothing (few parts, few moving parts), make it choke on a bag, make it 1950 compliant, charge 3x's more...and call it a Kirby.


DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

dyson DiB:

"What if's" and hypotheticals about Euro Pro have nothing to do with the facts about Which?, warranties, and dyson reliability, except perhaps for you, to digress from the subject.  

Carmine D. 

CarmineD wrote:
So it’s settled...  Which reliability ratings cannot be bought, but earned.  Since Which rates vacuums fro 0-6 years old they can no longer include British made vacuums.

Did you read?...  “Despite the problems, Dyson owners remain the most likely to recommend the machine to a friend, Which? reported. “ ....this is what T.G. told Trebor too.


DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

dyson DiB:

Like Consumer Reports here in the USA with regard to vacuums and reliabilty, Which? is a consumer guide not the gospel.  Both leave much to be desired, but they are a consumer reference and starting place for the uninformed.  The best source of facts and information about vacuums are the pros and experts in the industry. 

WRT your reference, words are meaningless.  Actions speak louder than words.  The best recommendations for a product/brand is buying another one for yourself and/or for your friends, family and the people you influence.    

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
I would suggest... Which is gospel/close to gospel to millions of readers (paying customers).  CR claims to have 19m [total] sets of eyeball’s per month.  Which and CR have the responsibility and a self-burden of getting the real-world facts straight.

As for most (not all) independents...  would you suggest a buyer going to one of your friends...perhaps the guy who’s nailed his Dyson’s to the floor and bad-mouths them (per you)?  Most vacuum buyers haul-as past their local independent and onto a big box out of distrust.

DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

dyson DiB:

WRT CR and Which? Just because you say that's the way it is/should be, doesn't make it true for all vacuum buyers.  The world is not ruled by cold hard facts alone, despite your beliefs.  Judgement and experience also factor into the facts.  The pro's and experts in the industry provide the wisdom to correctly interpret and apply the facts. 

WRT nailed down dysons, I know of no cases to back this up except your saying so here on many occasions and attributing wrongly to others.    

Carmine D.