Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Look at these gems: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNBxAE1FWyU Seem to get good reviews, too: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bosch-BSG8PRO1GB-Cylinder-Vacuum-Cleaner/dp/B001E5CBRU/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=kitchen&qid=1271175245&sr=1-6 Does anybody here have any personal experience with Bosch? Are they Made in Germany? I do believe these new machines are, like Bosch's REAL products; not their somewhat decent but simply re-badged bagless upright that was supposedly a Vax and Dirt Devil re-name. Not even sure if that's true. But anyways check out that new bagless machine. A German-Made bagless?! This should be sweet. That new technology looks very interesting, too :D Ten year motor warranty, as well. Very impressive!

Dont know the price ranges as yet Carmine - but I'm speculating that since they are based on the expensive Free'e series, they will be highly priced and put into Miele S5 territory.

vacmanuk wrote:

Tough market and price range to launch new products in now.  S2 venue would be more realistic epsecially in current economic times.  Then move up into the S5 territory.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Nope. The Siemens/Bosch have a compact line up already - this series would be premium, sitting alongside Miele S5.

vacmanuk wrote:

That is true for your side of the pond, vacmanuk.  Not here in the USA.  No vacuums at all from Bosch as yet.

http://www.bosch-home.com/us

Breaking into the US market, if Bosch does, at the TOL full size price range [$1000] would be difficult for Bosch but not impossible.  More appropriate to start with the compact $300 S2 range and work up IMHO.

Carmine D.

An advert for the Bosch with the line '50% energy saving with no loss of performance.' has today been banned in the UK by the ASA, due to lack of evidence to back up the claim.

http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/12/dyson-complaint-about-ad-for-rival-vacs-is-upheld-238966/

M00seUK wrote:

Hi M00seUK,

As the main factor re vacuum cleaner energy consumption is rate of use time versus power draw, I think there's going to be a lot of back and forth on the issue. Either a high power draw vac that actually shortens vacuuming time by way of single or double-pass deep clean ability OR a high-efficiency vac that runs at half or less todays standard power draw appears to be needed. We've already had the latter by way of several American brands, especially the Electrolux G and the Hoover Convertible. However, the low-watt vacuum motor has been long abandoned.

I don't think there's any way to seriously broach energy consumption issues without readapting to simply using less power draw.

Having said all that and even though vacuuming can be a lengthy and labor intensive task, I'll never be quite convinced that it puts all that big a hit on an electric bill. People, even the very fussy frequent cleaners, don't vacuum that long. You use far more electricity by way of cooking appliances, refrigerators and clothes dryers.

I'd add be sure to read the consumer reviews included with this article. They were very favorable giving me the feeling that maybe the finger pointing and tattling is just another matter of sour grapes on Dyson's part.

Best,

Venson

Venson wrote:

Agree with you Venson.  Sir James is rattled because Bosch launched several compact canns that give his baby dyson a whupping.  And Which? and consumers praise them and they are affordable.  We've seen this litigation tact by dyson before.  Running to the ASA whenever a competitor whups it fair and square with better products and prices.  Like the boy crying wolf.  After a few times, it loses credibility.  As you say, read the Which? reviews and the Bosch products are notable. 

I like the ASA rationale for banning the claim: "likely to mislead."  What in the heck does that mean?  ASA's rationale is likely to mislead readers too.

Carmine D.

I can see where ASA/advertising bodies are coming from. Bosch has made a claim using a dust bag that maintains suction without evidence yet Dyson for years proved that all dust bags do clog and reduce suction.

vacmanuk wrote:

"Proved," you said? There was nothing to prove. It was and has been common knowledge that bagged vacuums have to be emptied at some point to provide good performance. Some bagged machines are better at it than others. Come to think of it, for quite a while bag size and dust collection capacity was considered a real factor for making purchase decisions. It has been forgotten by consumer periodicals and subsequently by bagged vacuum consumers.

The Miele bags I use are over the four-quart line by way of capacity and do quite well in regard to maintaining air flow/suction power. The multi-layer high-filtration bags do allow for good suction longer and improved dust containment.

Bagged versus bagless, the real advantage for me is not having to either think about or need to make bag changes more than once every three or four weeks and that's just fine by me. Things here at the old corral don't get any cleaner for want of suction that lasts forever.

-Bagless machines, per manufacturers' instruction, require far more frequent emptying. Forgetting that point -- I've raised more dust and gotten my hands dirtier clearing out collection bins than I ever did when emptying even ancient Electroluxes or Hoovers with cloth bags. That should make Dyson feel threatened.

Whatever the case, it still appears to me that Dyson, despite its monetary success, is overly sensitive and a poor sport that will do or try anything to dampen competition. The ASA ruling leaves me cold and also makes me highly suspicious as to whether it is a bedfellow of Dyson. Despite what I think or don't think of its product I can say flat out that I think far less of the company due to its constant yapping and kvetching. Sometimes it's better just to shut up and do your work.

Bosch can probably get around the issue by simply inserting something like "maintains high suction better and longer than other/most BAGGED vacuums" within its advertising text and there would be little or nothing that the ASA or Dyson could say or do. AND -- there'll be far less from its bagged competitors.

Best,



Venson

Venson wrote:
My point is that the bag can't be used twice, Venson. That was Dyson's original mantra. A lot of the old Hoover vacuums in the UK still have reuseable paper dust bags - not to also exclude vacuums that use the reuseable washable fabric dust bags that need shaken out or machine washed to obtain the original strength of the vacuum cleaner. Many don't when either bag material types are put in the second time. That was Dyson's point in his original marketing (not with this recent complaint per se as it deals with "energy performance" results) but I feel the same can be applied to any dust bag - IN MY EXPERIENCE, there hasn't really been one on the market that maintains full suction from the moment it is taken out of the packaging and inserted into the vacuum cleaner because it progressively clogs and reduces the suction. There are SOME bags of course that maintain suction longer in terms of longevity but as we have proved so many other times before in this forum, suction isn't just the only principle that maintains air flow and as you know Miele, Sebo and Bosch have generally excellent sealed suction systems to counteract leaky air/dust emissions and at the same time, protect the bag on board as well as prolonging the suction due to the high filtration and bag structure.

I use the same Miele bags as you Venson - once they get full, there's little suction left over at the lowest power rating I prefer - if I want the dust to be picked up - the vacuum's suction has to be increased to pick up. Why should that be the case? Obviously the vacuum needs more power to let the suction pad the bag with dust! The Dyson cyclonic action minimises that - I've used Dyson vacuums where the bins are bursting out with dust in the cleaning jobs I've done (before I offered the company my Sebo DART vacuum to show them the dust disposal and far cleaner approach - company responded with buying two Darts and a Henry bagged canister vacuum.) whilst still using the Dyson when bags start to run out because of the suction principle that just keeps going - regardless of whether the bin is full or not.

You refer to bagless vacuums as if they all have the same capacity - but not all brands do - and it's a point that UK consumers still go over when buying a vacuum cleaner - bag capacity/bin capacity is still a major factor when it comes to buying vacuums. The Henry tub canister wouldn't be where it is today in terms of popularity - if it didn't have a large bag capacity (generally 7 litres, or in my case 4 to 5 months of general household traffic dust excluding any DIY work that clogs the bags quicker.) whilst the washable fabric shake out bags are used by many in the commercial industry who have to deal with shaking the dust out - let them do it  - I prefer disposable bags because it is cleaner, even though in the back of my mind I know that I'd be spending more money on bags than I would do with any Dyson or the TTI Hoover/Vax/Dirt Devil suction that has been copied from Dyson DualCyclone parts.

As you and I will know, Miele do not recommend using the same bag twice. I ran out of Miele bags for my S140 stick vac (which is being used by my mum) yesterday. I sucked all the dust out of the bag with my Sebo Felix  - there is still suction available from the IntensiveClean bag, but it wasn't as strong as it first was when it was brand new. The HyClean bags aren't any better - infact they seem to provide as much action as sucking through a straw when the vacuum's bag is fully packed with dust AND the vacuum's suction control is lowered to the lowest setting. This occurs on both my old S571, S381 and more recently the Ecoline S4212. It is no different to my SEBO vacuums either when the bags fill up and need to be replaced because the suction is slowly running out due to a clogged bag.

Whilst I agree that Dyson is being sensitive to what brands are advertising, they are simply trying to keep ahead of the game, but the way they have approached and raised the issue is rather vague in my mind and uncalled for. I guess that's just what happens in business but I'm with many who agree that their approaches are underhand for the most part and who ever gave Dyson the right to constantly appear superior? Again I feel this is just what happens in Business.

Bosch haven't done their homework in their own advertising either. When they released that vacuum cleaner on the market, they claim that the motor on board maintains the same power as a full 2100/2400 watt motor. It seems the ad didn't have that particular wording to provide evidence to the original statement of "...50% less energy to maintain performance..." Would that, for example be with the variable suction control being used or relation to the dust bag, or both, or something relating to the motor that Bosch have actually fitted?

And its not as if Bosch are unique in using the eco-marketing consumer grabbing headline that by fitting a lower energy motor to maximise performance, their model is any better than the rest, or as efficient. Electrolux, Hoover and all the major brands including Miele have all done it. In my experience, vacuums that have lower than 3000 watts will never really affect electric bills. I've tried by looking at my own and there is no real difference to using a higher powered vacuum against a lower one where my actual electricity usages are concerned. Just because a vacuum may throw a trip switch or if the electricity load is too high, doesn't point to higher electricity usage charges - and a lot of owners seem to get confused with that a lot of the time. It points more to the actual electricity the whole home is using including the room in question where the vacuum has been plugged into - if it already uses a high source of electricity per room, the vacuum may well overload the system.