Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Carmine D.

Seems as if the deck was stacked.  39 unsatisfied users and millions of delighted users and the courts favor the 39.  Most likely they clogged it with leaves, garbage or other debris that the vacuum is not designed to clean up.

There is always an exception as in the case of the Intensity.  Of course Oreck wouldn't even challenge with its electric broom.

The ASA is the Advertising Standards Agency of the UK.  It establishes the parameters for truth in advertising by manufacturers of consumer products in the UK.  The ASA is a facilitator between aggrieved consumers and manufacturers to avoid the courts.  In the case, dyson and Sir James agreed to abide by the ASA findings, which upheld the arguments of the 39 users and 2 vacuum companies.  No court proceedings were necessary.   The dyson mantra, never clogs and never loses suction, was scrubbed in all printed dyson advertising and product literature.

If the exception is that truth always prevails over falsehoods, mistatements and exaggerated claims, then I agree. 

ORECK was an interested party along with the 39 dyson users and another vacuum brand against Sir James and the mantra.  So it not only was a "challenger" it was also the winner.

Carmine D.

Truth does not have an IQ measurement.  It just is right.  Idiots can be right and truthful while inventors can be wrong and liars.  Hence, the role and function of the ASA as the ruling body to determine what is true and right versus what is false and wrong.  Not idiots [as you say] and/or inventors. 

Carmine D.

Hi vacmanuk,

Here, cleaning services of notable size don't usually employ bagless machines nor do they often test the work result of either bagged or bagless cleaners.  Speed and efficiency being the issue, workers are expected to do the job and move along. The more they get in the better as time is money. 

I'd also add -- as always -- that all cleaning situations regardless of size are individually different as regards traffic and the frequency of cleaning.  I have seen large sites you could breeze through because of little traffic and use while I've ecountered spaces half the size or less  that I'd have been more comfortable in with a bulldozer than a vacuum cleaner.  The seven passes per square foot, which need only be four with a good upright, is great for high traffic areas but not necessary in low traffic spots where just a few passes will freshen up pile and whisk away surface litter.

As long as decent air-flow and adequate agitation of carpet fibers are in place, things should be great and cyclonics may not necessarily make a difference.  I've been deliberately waiting for the bag change guide to pop out on my very uncyclonic and nearly full Capricorn.  It's still cleaning fine. 

Few commercial cleaning service workers concern themselves or are required to concern themselves with vacuum performance or ability by their employers unless an obvious and visible problem is presented.  Clients do not concern themselves over what they cannot see either.  As long as all -- not just rugs but tile, mirrors, countertops, furniture surfaces and hard flooring -- is visibly clean and bears a shine, the world's a swell place.  The larger part of that accomplishment hasn't a lot to do with vacuuming.

The more important things for commercial vacuums are a rep for less breakdowns plus good warranties/service contracts.  Naming a few, Sanitaire, Electrolux, Kent, Oreck and Sebo and Lindhaus clones remain among brands leading the market here and everyone appears quite happy.  And work is usually executed quickly and satisfactorily.

Venson

Where have I said in any of my posts that the tests that I do should be carried out by others? Severus, I'm not suggesting the test is perfect, but it provides me with a clear answer that Dyson over the bagged vacuums are getting the dirt out of the carpet more than the bagged vacuums. That's my theory and it doesn't matter whether the dirt is fine or thick - if its viewable to my eye line then that tells me there is dirt being taken up from the carpet that the bagged ones are leaving behind. You can all tell me how wonderful material high filtration bags are and I know why I prefer them - they seal the dust in and they are healthier  - but please don't try and suggest that filter bags don't clog the moment they are installed in a vacuum cleaner and used to collect dust in! I prefer Dyson only in commercial conditions where speed is of the essence and where the priority is to ensure everything looks clean to the client.

The ASA is not of my doing, it's the UK adjuducating entity.  If you/others have issues with its authority and rulings, take it up with the ASA and the courts.  Your theories are your own, and obviously we have issues with them, as you can see in the posts in response to you.  You are both entitled and allowed to be wrong with your theories.  That's your prerogative.  The ASA is not and subject to legal proceedings if it is by those who disagree with it's findings.  I don't disagree with them in the cases.  I and others do disagree with you.  But obviously can't sue or care to.

Carmine D.

vacmanuk,

I'm sorry to nitpick, but the last vac always wins in the test you describe.  That is why it is a favorite demonstration tool of door to door salespersons.  I'm not saying that the Dyson doesn't clean better than the Sebo.  More rigorous testing is needed to know.  Given your job, you might be in a situation where you could compare the average weight of dirt picked up with a Sebo and Dyson per hour of cleaning on similar carpeting. 

By the way, I don't think of bagged or bagless as being superior to the other.  It is a matter of personal preference.