Vacuum Cleaners Discussions |
|
HARDSELL
Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Points: 1293
|
|
Re: Shark Navigator - a flagrant Dyson copy at 1/3 the price?
Reply #36 Dec 16, 2009 1:49 pm |
|
Obviously HS if you are comparing a strictly upright mode lightweight to full size vacuums with attachments then you are going to be disappointed. I see you like the HOOVER Platinum lightweight much better than ORECK. Tho you despise and impughn Consumer Reports vacuum ratings, CR gave it number 2 overall in the upright class. And you seem to agree so far. I personally and professionally think CR was generous in the rating/ranking and rate/rank both ORECK and Platinum lightweight comparable overall. But each stronger than the other in different areas. Carmine D. Why should I be disappointed. Oreck advertises to compete with the big boys. More deceipt according to you. I have not found an area where Oreck was stronger.
I never make a buying desicion based on Clown Reports.
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
|
|
Re: Shark Navigator - a flagrant Dyson copy at 1/3 the price?
Reply #37 Dec 16, 2009 1:56 pm |
|
You are welcome. However it was not flattery. Simply a reference to your opinion. I used Dyson simply to indicate the infomercial to which I was referring. Being you usual self you think that Oreck was cheated but Dyson could not possibly be. My comment was not more a streteh than yours. Get over it. You proved nothing. My experience with Oreck is as valid as yours. I think it is a POS and we both are entitled to an opinion. What validates an independent?
I didn't take it as flattery. I took as a statement you made out of context that needed further clarification especially since you used me as the source. As I recall from the Garry infomercial compares Garry and a dyson ball strictly on the lower vacuum profile not performance. No cheating on that issue. It is what it is.
Look up the definition of independent in the dictionary and you have Webster's answer. It is my answer to your question too. Tho I suspect if I were to respond to you independently, you will have your doubts. Carmine D.
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
|
|
Re: Shark Navigator - a flagrant Dyson copy at 1/3 the price?
Reply #38 Dec 16, 2009 2:10 pm |
|
Why should I be disappointed. Oreck advertises to compete with the big boys. More deceipt according to you. I have not found an area where Oreck was stronger.
I never make a buying desicion based on Clown Reports.
Marketing, HS. ORECK is 9/10 pounds. That makes it easier and better for alot of folks who for whatever reasons are not inclined to pull out a full size vacuum with attachments. That's a strength. Simple operation. My 5 year grand daughter uses it. That's a strength. One of the largest if not the largest dust bag on the market. That's a strength. Just to mention a few.
I don't make buy decisions based solely on CR ranks/ratings either and advise others the same. We agree on that point. Carmine D.
|
Lucky1
Joined: Jan 2, 2008
Points: 271
|
|
Re: Shark Navigator - a flagrant Dyson copy at 1/3 the price?
Reply #39 Dec 16, 2009 2:32 pm |
|
COMPACT POWER The Electrolux Intensity upright vacuum, $300, offers plenty of suction and folds into a neat package. This is the EUREKA LUX Intensity. Now selling new for $90. It is in the running along with SHark Navigator and DC24 Ball dyson. Since I am primarily interested in the upright, not attachments, the Intensity at the price is the leader. With 80 percent of ceramic tile floors, the ball model would be a nuisance to clean using the attachments vice the SHark and Intensity which could be used in the upright mode for the task. Carmine D. I've had an Eureka/Lux intensity on the sales floor for 2 years and can't sell the thing, (though I'm not down to $90 dollars). Seems like it would work well, but has a very small bag and I think the electronics of all the Eureka/Luxes I have dealt with, are POORLY done. As for the Art I have 1 on the floor and 1 in carton. I've sold a few and have used it personally on my wood floors and liked it. Small bag as well. They are both cool stylewise in their own ways. I would say the Elux (when working) would be better on carpet but I seriously doubt long term reliability. The Art seems very well made in comparison.
|
Severus
If my vacuum can remove even one spec of dirt that yours misses, then mine is better than yours - even if there's no proof that mine would have picked up as much dirt as yours...
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 397
|
|
Re: Shark Navigator - a flagrant Dyson copy at 1/3 the price?
Reply #41 Dec 17, 2009 12:03 am |
|
SEVERUS The Electrolux Intensity wasn't much cop here in the UK. Sold at £299 before being dropped like a hot potato. Not only the appearance put it off but the actual fact that owners have to bend down to change the bag, pull the cord out and pay through the nose for the small capacity bags. Miele Art is the same; it may have done well in consumer testing companies, but sales have been flagging and Miele discontinued it a couple of years ago because of a lack of power (1000 watts) and no roller bar assisted brush rolls. Pure suction and very poor on carpet pick up. Miele Art seems to be a favourite appearing on EBAY by previous owners and the tool storage/hose thing seems to get broken easily too. Artistic yes but not very practical for both "uprights." On another note the heavy Electrolux Professional upright arrived 2 years ago selling at £199 but it has dropped in price massively to £59-99. Styled very clearly in the form of Sebo's BS commercial uprights, UK consumers have been slow to pick up on its Arm and Hammer coated dust bags too. vacmanuk, I've been fairly pleased with the Arm and Hammer dust bags that I bought for my Royal Powercast. I have a long haired dog, and the exhaust was fairly stinky with regular bags. The Arm and Hammer bags seem to do a good job of absorbing the stinky dog smell. I haven't noticed any drop off in suction, but then again I think the dog hair likely turns into extra filter material.
The smart tyrant writes his own story to ensure that it is favorable. The lazy will repeat lines from the book without fact checking.
|
|
|