Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Shark is going after the Dyson Ball pretty hard with the Navigator product.  It claims no loss of suction and claims its just as easy to maneuver as the Dyson Ball.  After acknowledging Dyson as the first to offer no loss of suction, they go for the throat.  They do a direct comparison to a Dyson Ball and state that they are equal in all ways (easy to maneuver, no loss of suction, 5 year warranty) but price.  For less than $200 you can get a Shark Navigator with a free steam cleaner thrown in to boot. 

CarmineD wrote:

Hardshell:

Me thinks you had to many nuts to eat.  Your brain is turned to peanut butter. 

If you can wash and clean the cyclones [as in the Shark Navigator] they perform for a lifetime.  No need to buy a $80 dyson cyclone assembly when the dyson cyclones get filled to the brim with dirt and pet odors.  Looks a little like a nut.  Hardshell but can't get it open to eat the inside.  Or clean it as the case may be.  It's like having a permanent sealed cloth bag that just fills and fills with dirt and you can't dump it out.  In time and with use, no air gets through it.  Just dirt in and dirt out.  On a good note after the Shark patent expires on the Infinity technology [washable cyclones] dyson can steal [I mean copy] the design for its use.  $150 Shark bagless upright with easily removable cyclones for lifetime cleaning.  Remarkable.  Why didn't dyson think of that?

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

You make some interesting points:

1. How in the world does Shark get a patent for washable cyclones?  

2. What does the spring do in the Dyson cyclone assembly?   Supposedly there is a spring inside the assembly that will rust if you wash the Dyson cyclones. 

Hi,

Haven't washable cyclones always been there?  My LG clone's bin and the cyclonics system within it are totally washable.  Thanks to my local Best Buy, where staff delegated for floor cleaning detail uses the first thing within reach, it was easy to see that dust did collect in the cyclonics module at the top of the machine and not just the bin. It was obvious that wahing was necessary.  Dyson is designed differrently but I don't doubt that the same issue may arise.

If indeed the Dyson cyclonic system does not lend itself to easy user maintenance maybe  that was not overlooked but intended.  (By the way, I checked ut Dyson online and reviewed a manual for the DC28.  There's no reference regarding cleaning the cyclonics module,  just an instruction to wash the filters with cold water every three months.)

Beyond filters and the occasional belt or broken part, bagless vacs should have less call for consumables that many manufacturers depend upon to boost their revenue. Or so Dyson appears to claim.  Maybe the module in an abstract way is a less obvious consumable.  However I don't kow the data as to how many are replaced or how frequently.

Venson

Severus wrote:

Hi SEVERUS:

Thanks SEVERUS.  Shark, despite its chintziness at $150 has the edge over dyson on the cyclones.  I'm not an expert on patent filing but I presume Shark obtained the patent for its Navigator with Infinity Technology [washable cyclones] the same way as any/all product makers:  Submitted the proper filings and paid the fees.  Infinity means forever as in lifetime and its symbol which never ends [continuous vertical 8].  The cyclones are the first line of defense for filtering dirt in all bagless vacuums.  Cyclones get clogged with dirt after use and over time.  It is inevitable.  The cyclone clogging degrades vacuum suction and operations.  Keeping the cyclones squeaky clean prolongs the efficiency of the cyclones, filters, and the motor, hence the vacuum operations.  Unlike dyson which requires/demands filter cleaning every 2-3 months, Shark says just a rinsing 2 times a year for filter maintenance.  Shark Navigator's washable cyclones make the difference.

IMHO, introducing water to a dyson cyclone assembly produces a muddy muck that dries rock hard and kills the operations of the cyclones alot quicker than a rusty spring.

Carmine D.

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson:

To my knowledge Shark Infinity model, now Navigator, is the first and only bagless with washable cyclones [not shrouds].  I'm not familiar with LG's bagless cyclones, operations and cleaning. I have to do further research/review on LG's bagless.

Carmine D.

For what it's worth, I used to wash the cyclone assembly on my Eureka 4885 dual cyclone.   Other than Dyson, what bagless vacuums CAN'T have their cyclones washed?  

Severus wrote:

Hi SEVERUS:

Cyclones and/or shrouds?  In the EUREKA Whirlwind cyclone bagless uprights, the shroud and bins were washable.  The cyclones were contained and sealed and atop the bin/shroud.  Perhaps the difference is Venson's LG bagless clone is a cann vice an upright.  Different dirt path/cyclone operations on canns versus uprights.  Maybe.

Carmine D. 

CarmineD wrote:

Hi Carmine

Had a chance yesterday to look at one already taken somewhat apart  at Wally....ill say that ease of cleaning/cyclones/ect  would be a breeze on it but im not too sure on how well the brushroll/powerhead  will be at deep cleaning  (prefer a full size suction motor driven roller....just me. ) Pretty light....quality of plastic is pretty good for what you pay......not bad for a bagless...anxious to hear some first use feedback on this one.

turtle

retardturtle1 wrote:

Hello turtle:

Agree with you. 

Of note, at least to me, it appears most bagless upright and cann vacuums have disguised/veiled the cyclones from customers' view but clearly let the dirt show in the bins for dumping.  Except Shark Navigator which puts the cyclones behind clear plastic so users can see the dirt in them and also wash clean.  That gives Shark Navigator the edge in bagless from my perspective.

Carmine D.