A really cool insight to the workings behind the company and how they develop what I believe to be some the most well designed vacuums with overall good-great build quality in history.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpXQpRYxUCY

I need to reply to my own thread because Safari on the Macintosh has messed up ways of not allowing my to space down any of my content in the same posting >:/ Anyways.

ANYWAYS, here's another video showing a testament to their quality of filtration; which is most likely due to real world, high quality filtration from the Dyson and not placebo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IihL6Jmk1XA

ENJOY :D

Hertz wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IihL6Jmk1XA doesn't show actual filters, Hertz and if anything only shows the amount of dirt picked up. All it has is a lady who has reviewed her Dyson and says much of her old vacuum cleaner which apparently didn't pick up very much ( I wonder it it was bagless or bagged and how she'd summize to think that way). If the Dyson is used every two days then the amount of pet hair picking up says a lot for her home! How she can have a dog and a daughter who has allergies and still maintains that her cyclonic vacuum cleaner is "healthier" is nuts. Alright, she isn't going to empty the thing in front of her daughter.. anyway I'm allowed to disagree and will say this that the example you give here doesn't really promote the Dyson's filtration, but rather the capacity of dust and the amount collected.

vacmanuk wrote:

No, you obviously didn't watch the whole video or at least pay attention to the key parts: Her daughter is "very asmatic" and the Dyson has "really helped her breath better." - 'nuff said. And no, if she empties the container within a limited radius or outside or in a trash bag then only an *EXTREMELY* minute might escape back into the air, but certainly exponentially less than what was captured and/or filtered out.

Hypothetical case:  Very asthmatic daughter grows into a very asthmatic woman.  Decides to live on her own and needs a vacuum.  She liked Mum's DC25 ball but Mum can't dump it anymore.  She lives alone now and on her own.  Should she buy a dyson bagless?  Anyone can answer with their reasons for/against.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

How do all these asthmatic people clean the lint filter on their clothes dryer?

CarmineD wrote:

For or against is hard. After all it's Ameriica.  We're supposedly allowed choice as to the altars we kneel before and the vacuuum cleaners we use.    It's all boils down to the matter of perceived worth. 

One mother has an asthmatic child and does a little reading that suggestts that a decent bagged vacuum is more the ticket.  Minimal dust exposure and easy disposal.  Another, buys a bagless vac due to hype and possibly because of hopes to save money on bags. Yet, she does not see a loss in having to use a "bag" albeit plastic to dump the thing into if she empties the machine inside or having to run out to the garbage can to do it. (Not fun on rainy or cold days.)  I also assume the brand in question always dumps out cleanly without need for handpicking dog fur and fluff off the shroud and other internal parts.

As for the kid.  How many of them do the larger part of what you tell them to anyway?  When the little girl in mention here grows up AND she has to empty a vacuum cleaner herself, if she still has a high sensitivity to dust she'll probably follow the least path of resistance and get the best bagged vac she can afford.  Right now she's a lucky so and so.  "But Ma you know I can't clean my room."

Venson

Here we go again Hertz, you're believing what the manufacturers are telling you or in this case through some person's video of the use of their Dyson.

ANY bagless system is unhealthy whether it has a down drop system for taking the dirt out, or top empty system. Bags are better in this respect and you have agreed on that point before. So what if she empties the machine outside? Does she take out the filters too when they get clogged? You want me to be pedantic I can go on. Does she take the Dyson outside each time it clogs or if something needs to be opened up?

Where is the convenience aspect of having to dispose of dirt outside your home?

speaking of Dyson, the prices have been tumbling lately.  Costco.com has the dc14 with mini turbo brush for $299.99. 

http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11504379&whse=BC&Ne=4000000&eCat=BC|103|4716&N=4000044&Mo=34&No=2&Nr=P_CatalogName:BC&cat=4716&Ns=P_Price|1||P_SignDesc1&lang=en-US&Sp=C&topnav=

Severus wrote:

Brand new and with a 5 year warranty.  Yet, interesting SEVERUS, dyson's official web site in the USA sells remanufactured DC14 models with only 6 month warranty for $299.  Why would dyson permit its authorized retailers like COSTCO [and others] to undercut prices?  Doesn't jibe with dyson's policy/MAP of enforcing artificially supported retail prices that we use to know so well just a few years ago.  Things change.

Carmine D. 

vacmanuk wrote:

Like I said, if you do it CAREFULLY in home, it's not an issue at all comparative to how much your actually DUMPING IN THE BIN! This is a video testament from a USER! Have you seen Miele's tests?! A Dyson filters better than a SEBO upright or a Riccar, and I can EASILY believe it with Dysons high quality seals and BEEFY filters. BAM!: http://www.mieleusa.com/products/benefits/filtration.asp?nav=30&snav=24&tnav=26&oT=272&benefit=119 Carmen, the clutches aren't what break on a Dyson - there has probably never been more than 5% of the clutches breaking in America - it's the BELTS that wear out and ARE replaceable w/o replacing the clutch; I just talked to a Miele Diamond & Dyson dealer that I bought my used Solaris from, and he said in ALL his years (about 12 at least) he has NEVER seen a broken clutch, but the BELTS wear out. The clutch is a great idea, but when people use a vacuum on thick shag area rugs the belts burn up faster, thus the belts just needed to be beefier is all.

Hertz wrote:

Didn't dyson claim the belts were lifetime?

Carmine D.

Hertz wrote:
You know Hertz, people like you turn me off forums like this. Its time to act your age. Your viewpoint suddenly becomes ** law ** and you dont seem to take on what others are saying. I suggest that you start growing up and stop trying to start fights. You are NOT discussing the original post you put on here, but rather trying to get your viewpoint across whilst other members don't get a viable chance to offer a viewpoint.

I suggest that you get yourself a particle meter and test it in conditions. Put in on You Tube when you put the particle meter near the rubber seals of the Dyson bin. Then you'll see if you think that the Dyson filters better than ANY bagged vacuum cleaner that has better filtration. Never mind relying on others videos when there's not a grain of truth scientifically to prove their point.

Hertz,

 Back in 1976-1984 Electrolux(Aerus) had clutches on their uprights and I have not replaced one belt while they had them to this day. They had abetter clutch system as well as a better belt system.

                                                                                                                               Procare

http://www.epinions.com/review/Oreck_XL_Platinum_Pilot_Vacuum/content_509893578372

A member who feels particularly strong about the bagless idea. I rather like this quote:

"...one of the reasons I hate bag-less is because of the mess and bacteria that is clinging to the container...in my opinion this is a health hazard with anyone who suffers from allergies..."

vacmanuk wrote:

I've read this review before.  What I noted right off before reading the narrative is the discrepancy in the rating.  On the 4 rating factors the user rates 3 of the criteria as 4 and one a 5.  Yet, overall rates the product 3 Stars.  I would have thought based on the detail and doing the math, it should be 4.5 Stars.  Unless the user has no intent to tie the individual raatings to the overall rating.

On your note of interest, the user's comment hits the nail on the head about bagless.

"...one of the reasons I hate bag-less is because of the mess and bacteria that is clinging to the container...in my opinion this is a health hazard with anyone who suffers from allergies..."

I agree with the user's statement.  Anyone who uses any semblance of reasoned argument has to agree with the statement.  It is incontravertible whether you are a fan of bagless or not.

Carmine D.

A vacuum could rate 5 stars on each of the categories listed and still be a poor performer.

None of those categories reflect the performance on multi surfaces, cost, or deep cleaning.

How would the reviewer know if the machine was durable when it was returned within 30 days.  He disliked it enough to return it so why give 5 stars overall when looks were the best rated category?

HARDSELL wrote:

I suspect you're right.  BUT, it seems counterintuitive to me from just looking at the ratings/stars [without reading the narrative].  Which if you do [read the narrative], the user states in two places that product is high for quality of its construction/warranty and even states that ORECK's water lift [for suction] trumps dyson easily.  User says [on quality]:

"I liked many of the features and based on the data it is a good solid machine!"

"Do I think Oreck makes a good machine well...yes!  They give you 30 days to try it out and return it if you don't love it!  Additionally this bad boy comes with a 10 year warranty and free annual tune ups too!  So yes, I think they make a good machine...but not for me."  

But we digress and divert.  The comment of interest as vacmanuk points out here is the user's observation on the leftover debris in the bin after dumping. 

"...one of the reasons I hate bag-less is because of the mess and bacteria that is clinging to the container...in my opinion this is a health hazard with anyone who suffers from allergies..."

Incontrovertible using any semblance of reasoned argument.  I agree with the user's conclusion and vacmanuk's rationale for posting the review to prove his point on bagged versus bagless. 

Carmine D.

I dont think ratings tell the right truths most of the time though, Carmine and after all, it is individual which is why I posted the original post, and to show to Hertz and others that one consumer's ideas are different to another- after all how can a consumer give 50% out of 100% with just 5 stars? 6 stars would prove a point, an even number, or even 4 stars so that consumers could fairly rate if star ratings are used. Reviews or opinions in written content are a safer bet, particularly in depth content.

It is completely acceptable that an owner may feel durability to be an issue within 30 days, Hardsell. Hell, I even returned an Electrolux cylinder vac after 5 days use when a bin lid lock broke off that shouldn't have happened.

vacmanuk wrote:

Dude, this isn't starting any fight, it's simply empirical data that Dyson's own rivalry even admits. Just accept the truth and move on. I totally listen to what others say, but when data and testimonials say otherwise then that's what I tend to believe. Miele already tested the DC25 THUROUGHLY, if you would read the sheet you would see it's high quality in filtration, thus I needn't do my own testing (though I would love to myself). As for bacteria growing in the bin; it's just as bad as having a bag that doesn't filter and have it puff out dust, and you don't lick the bin, you simply shut it closed, and Dyson's filtration would take care of enough of the bacteria to where if any DID come out, then it would be extremely negligible. Also, you can rinse out the bin, it's really quite hygienic if one takes simple preliminary actions to maintain the easy cleanliness of a Dyson dirt cup. I find it's easy for me and I'm sure it's easy for others.

Hertz wrote:

Can rinse the bin.  Even put it in the washer.  Or just wipe it down and dust off.  BUT, how aboutb that nasty shroud that gets plugs with dirt and pet hair.  And the cyclones that clog up with the same.  Can't rinse them.  Dyson says don't use water on the shroud and cyclones.  We have a poster, a MIELE dealer, maybe even Diamond, that shows him blowing out a dyson cyclone outdoors.  He was fortunate he was not fined and ticketed for air pollution.  Dyson repairers will tell you this build up of filtered dirt in the cyclones is the equivalent of operating your vacuum with a overfill bag.  The difference is you can see the dirt in the bag and change the bag.  With dyson cyclones, $70 a pop for new one or $30-$50 to blow out the old. Requires high powered blower. 

Carmine D.

To my MIELE dealer friend: 

Hope you don't mind me posting this Youtube video which you produced and shared here awhile back.  Drives home the point several posters have made here time and time again much to the denial of dyson fans who boast dyson is different.  Seems they come and go here.  Having contracted pneumonia from airborne bacteria [most likely dirt in my vacuum store repair after 40 years in the business] and now forever susceptible to it, I recommend to you and others who perform these blow out bagless cyclone cleanings that you use a face mask to prevent inhalation of dust blow/flare up.  Warning:  Not for the dirt and dust squeamish. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnad0yuASec

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Haven't seen anything like this since the Mummy's Tomb.  I sat gripping the arms of my chair the whole time I watched.  . . .

Seriously, I wonder why they don't make these so they can be separated in half and washed in a sink.  This should definitely be a user manageable task.  There should be no need to go through all that to clean one.

Venson

CarmineD wrote:
You'd think the guy doing that blow out would know better than to breath all the particles that are loosened up and blown out with the compressed air. 

On the other hand, he did clearly make his point that stuff stays inside a bagless vac's inner workings.

Hertz wrote:
MMMM DOUBLE STANDARDS HERE METHINKS.. Let me cast your young mind back to the conversation we had on here concerning the actual vacuums you own? Your reply was;

"...A Kirby Heritage II, Kirby G4 (rebuilt by me and a buddy of mine for NINE hours straight! Bought it in good working condition w/ nearly all attachments for TWENTY FIVE dollars! From a young 14 year old (I believe was the age) kid who happens to be passionate about such products, as well) Electrolux Silverado rebuilt by me and me alone, and a FilterQueen D 31X. GORGEOUS products all of them, but alas you just can't beat the A.) Suction power, B.) Design, C.) Filtration, and D.) Useability of these newer *HIGH* end brands like Miele and Sebo. What about you my man? YOUR TURN! Haha.."

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but where in this list is there any evidence of your actual ownership of a Dyson? How can you believe everything that the marketing people would have you believe? What do you say to those who are against Kirby vacuums? Do you agree with them or go with your own experiences? I will say this and say this time and time again - unless you have actual experience where you can justify that your Dyson is cleaner than a bagged vacuum, bring it on. Otherwise stop posting crap on this forum about marketing. otherwise we'll be here all day long fighting out a lost battle.

Frankly the taste of the pudding is the in the eating. Not the blurb on the packet.

vacmanuk wrote:

Yeah, I JUST GOT MY OWN DYSON TODAY. Twelve DC14's in fact. Not only did it pick up very FINE dust that the Miele SEB217-equipped Solaris of mine left behind, BUT I swear my home feels cleaner and more breathable than when I run my Miele with an Air-Clean filter. Fact is: Dyson makes high quality vacuums the filter the air damn well, and you can choose to believe that fact or not. I find emptying the dust bin is very easy and clean overall, and if there's a build up of debris in the bin I simply seal the trash bag over it and shake vigorously, which is, whilst not as EASY perse´as a Miele bag, the benefits DEFINITELY outweigh the "downside" of such an action.

CarmineD wrote:

As long as you don't suck up moisture or anything that would cause the dirt to stick in the cyclone units, there's really no need to blow it out. DYSON IS DIFFERENT for A.) For the INCREDIBLE design and engineering that Sir James produces and invigorates to happen, the high quality and revolutionary vacuums he produces - from my own personal experience here, not just from reviews I've seen all over the place and the obvious performance and quality of his products given empirical data - and the other incredible and revolutionary products he produces (Dyson Digital Motor, for example, yes there are other brushless motors, but HIS IS DIFFERENT, and BETTER: http://www.mycncuk.com/forums/showthread.php?940-Dyson-Digital-Motor-(Vacuum-Cleaners) I just worked on a relatively FILTHY DC-14 I bought used "as is" for $30 that runs GREAT - and I bought TWELVE of them based on an add on Craigslist - "as is" from a recycling/product re-using plant and the cyclones I believe where relatively FINE, yet I took a $6.00 bottle of Teflon/Silicon lubricant and my Miele vacuum and a rag and EASILY cleaned out the cyclones to *VERY CLEAN* condition. I do agree they should make the cyclone unit washable, there's no need, and if they really do ever need cleaning, one can do it realistically by doing what I did: Vacuum, spray lubricant, wipe-down. Quite doable, at least on DC14's.

Hertz wrote:

Your statements and the conclusions you draw thereon are contradictory in my way of thinking.  If these dysons, which are still active models and currently sold, are of such high product quality and performance and require nothing more than a quick once over with a vacuum, wipe down and some spray lubicant [as you claim], why are they tagged for recycling?  

Carmine D.

Hertz wrote:
12 Dysons? Lordy, wouldn't one be enough? Oh.. wait a moment.. are these all broken/drop for spares/need repaired vacuums delivered on a palette by any chance?

DYSON do not make high quality vacuums; join up to Which UK and see the reliability data for yourself. Have a look online to data that Dyson has tried to suppress. Their machines are good for the majority of bone idle owners who can't be bothered to buy bags and can't be bothered to empty the bins when they are full even though user instructions clearly tell the owner to empty the bin before it gets full. What happens then? Oh the seals and the filters have to work overtime. Ding dong - the machine starts to weaken.

The company rate average on maintenance and parts. Dyson is not LEXUS or any other comparable company you can pick for things less likely to go to go wrong. Refurbished, reconditioned and repaired Vacuum cleaners sold on EBAY UK appear to be DYSON than any other brand - I wonder why that is? Seriously, are you stupid enough to actually think that by putting a bagless cylinder bin which, by the way, becomes airborne the moment the seal is taken off, that by putting the bin into another bag that the dust you can't see somehow flies down into the bag you're emptying? Get real! Buy yourself a globe water filter machine and see just what happens when you empty your Dyson bin into a bag.

Isn't it ironic that, still at the end of the day you're putting the bagless collected dirt into another bag to dispose of it safely? A manufactured bag with a seal does it quickly, cleanly and efficiently.

You posted this Hertz.  http://www.mycncuk.com/forums/showthread.php?940-Dyson-Digital-Motor-(Vacuum-Cleaners)

Shame on you.  What a disappointment to waste our readers' time and efforts. There's no empirical data here on DDM.  Just a brief short lived blog of old posts going back to August 2007, 2008 and June 2009 on people's feelings and emotions regarding DDM.  Nothing concrete to read/learn except more utter nonsense.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

They were VERY poorly maintained Dysons that simply needed to be FIXED UP. Given the OBVIOUS abuse these machines went through, it's a TRUE TESTAMENT to their quality that they still run and are still in one piece; there's deep gouges in some of the plastic - yet the color of the plastic is not paint, but THE WHOLSE PLASTIC THROUGH AND THROUGH determining quality and pride in making their machines to a high standard - their hoses are still in tact yet are covered internally with soot, and there's some scratches on the bins. These machines went through hell, yet mechanically function fine; I have yet to power all of them on. Vacmanuk; Dyson DOES make high quality vacuums; I've read reviews where they've lasted for over ten years, my neighbor's has lasted three, other other neighbors AT LEAST three - and mine are a good 1 - 2 with careless-cleaning-lady like abuse and their built like tanks; I can stand and literally JUMP on the different ares of the head and base and NOT A SINGLE CREAK! The narrower side will give a SLIGHT creak if I stand RIGHT BY IT, but overall their build like Miele's, or in the main areas certainly are in terms of the plastics and seals. EVERY SINGLE PART is replaceable and these machines are *VERY* serviceable except for the belt and brush roll, but that's even been alleviated by the newer models. Again, I have allergies, and the air coming out of these machines is CLEAN. It smells and feels cleaner than my Miele's Air Clean filter.

CarmineD wrote:

It's sad to see someone not care to educate themselves when there's data at hand; no, it's not empirical data which I can understand the disappointment of, however if you CARE TO READ (which successful people do) then you'll see it's not "just another brushless motor." I was simply posting the link to educate readers that Dyson does seem to have made yet ANOTHER revolutionary product. Oh, and Carmen, I can see why you're so biased against Dysons and bagless machines in general to the point of the denial of the truth it seems like sometimes due to you having a severe asthma problem; they're quite sanitary if one takes the necessary preliminary actions to maintain the emptied dust in a plastic bag.

Hertz wrote:

At the premium retail prices of dysons, and the supposed product quality and ease of repair [as you claim], it seems reasonable that these users, if satisfied with their dysons and since these are still current dyson models, would have had repaired and they would still be in use.  Some of these may still be under the original warranty.  Recycling is like the glue factory for the horse.  It's the end of the line, and a short lived one at that.  Your example shows that unlike your claim, dysons are no different than the cheap bagless disposables that people buy and use for short periods and then dispose.  The only difference is that these dysons are 4 and/or 5 times the prices of the cheap bagless vacuums. 

Carmine D.

Hertz wrote:

Not from reading the blog you posted.  The discourse is mixed for/against DDM and its application to hand tools only, not full sized vacuums.  There are no concrete conclusions on DDM vice traditional motors in this blog, which has posts that are at least one year and even more old.  Quite the contrary varying differences of personal opinions.    Waste of time reading and I supect the reason it's not up to date by these posters who are supposed successful people [as you claim].  BTW, the jury is still out on DDM motors and dyson's handhelds which are consistently rated lower than hand helds with conventional motors.

Correction.  Pneumonia not asthma.  BUT, there are over 70 million persons in the US who suffer from sinuses and allergies, many year round and many with very severe conditions.  Like the "very asthmatic daughter" you posted.  Think she'd buy and use a dyson?  These allergy and sinus sufferers are all susceptible/prone to dirt/dust triggers causing breathing problems.  Allergy/sinus triggers brought on by operating bagless vacuums even dysons, which are no different and no more sanitary, even as you suggest, with the ridiculous procedure of dirt bin dumping inside a bag inside a trash container.   

Carmine D.

Hertz wrote:
Be it on your own head. You clearly haven't read any of the posts Ive discussed with you in the past. 10 year old vacuums are fine if they still run and then I'd consider with the minimum of maintenance to keep them going IF they are longer lasting and worth the expense. With SEBO's X I got that already, 15 years old and one replacement drive belt. Also although Gerry Rubin may well be a pain in the neck his Dyson testing isn't that far-fetched. Since you're a fan of You Tube you've probably seen those tests as well.

PRINCETON, N.J., June 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Miele introduces scientific evidence that proves their vacuums (with an AirClean™ Filter-bag™, certified HEPA filter and Sealed System™ engineering) are more effective at safeguarding indoor air quality than the leading bagless vacuum. In fact an independent laboratory confirmed that Miele vacuums capture and retain 99.99% of harmful pollutants – on average 21x better than the HEPA-filtered bagless rival. "The results clearly demonstrate that Miele vacuums equipped with the AirClean™ Filter-bag™ are the best at eliminating dangerous fine particles released into the air when vacuuming," says Nadine Gast, Senior Product Manager for Miele. On average, the leading bagless HEPA-filtered vacuum emitted over 175,900 lung-damaging particles per minute during the test.

"The evidence shows that a bagless vacuum equipped with only a HEPA filter cannot effectively protect a home's air quality or prevent particle emissions that exacerbate allergy and asthma conditions," explains Gast. "That's just when the vacuum is running... what the test doesn't show is just how many particles are released back into the air when the bagless vacuum bin is emptied. It's an indoor environmental disaster! If you can smell the dust after cleaning the bin, you are already inhaling fine lung damaging particles." A Miele AirClean™ Filter-bag™ with its unique spring-loaded collar locks shut when removed to trap particles and keep them out of the airstream.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), indoor air pollution is a concern for everyone, not just those suffering from respiratory conditions like asthma, allergies or emphysema. Especially considering that 90% of our time is spent indoors with pollution levels up to five times greater than outdoor air. http://www.epa.gov/

The Study

Miele commissioned Interbasic Resources (IBR), a recognized laboratory, to conduct an emissions test comparing their vacuum against four leading HEPA-filtered brands including Dyson®, SEBO®, Riccar® and Simplicity®. The results prove that the Miele vacuum, with its Sealed System™ engineering, equipped with a unique AirClean™ Filter-bag™ and certified HEPA filter, had significantly lower rates of particle emissions than competitive models. "In fact, the particle emissions from Miele's vacuum was next to nothing," says Gast. Each test was replicated three separate times according to the strictest scientific protocols. "Our AirClean™ Filter-bag™ is the best protection we can offer families to safeguard their homes from vacuum cleaner dust," per Gast. Copies of the complete study can be found on www.mieleusa.com.

SOURCE Miele

Carmine D.

Right on Carmine!

Another report I've just found: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/dyson-vacuum-cleaners-fail-to-score-in-reliability-tests-562422.html

"...

More than 5,100 people with different brands of upright cleaner and almost 2,600 with cylinder models were questioned about their reliability.

Overall, 79 per cent of upright vacuum cleaners and 91 per cent of cylinder models up to six years old had not needed repair. But among owners of Dyson cleaners, only 75 per cent with upright models and 81 per cent with cylinder versions said their machines had not needed attention in the first six years.

The best performing upright makes were Sebo, Hitachi, Oreck, Panasonic and Electrolux, while Morphy Richards, Bosch, Numatic and Miele came top among owners of cylinder cleaners.

Despite the poor results, owners of Dyson upright cleaners - brainchild of the British inventor James Dyson - were among the most likely to recommend them to a friend.

On upright cleaners, Which? said: "Yet again, Dyson is the only brand with below average reliability. So think twice before buying one." It said of Dyson: "It may design the most effective cleaners around but how well it puts them together is open to question."

HOOVER also get a pasting in this report, and I'm not entirely surprised. They have struggled with build, reliability and innovation since the U.S company pulled out in 1993.

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine, you are so biased and short-sided and blind sometimes it's hilarious. They were POORLY MAINTAINED. Do you not realize what that implies? They have been through HELL and back and STILL WORK. The plastic is till there (with on at least two the cord clips broke, but there are Miele's with even more concrete components that have broken with enough or even less abuse from what I've heard), again, they have NEVER been cleaned out, the filters have NEVER been washed or cleaned, and the brush bars have *NEVER* been freed of hair. One of them even looks like a cylindrical spool of yarn w/ barely ANY visible appearances of the brushes!! These machines are *FAR* better built than any other retail vacuum besides Riccar/Simplicity and some German brands (also Lux of Sweden's higher end canisters are decent, too), but I've personally put ALL my force into applying pressure to the sides of the cyclone assembly where the filter goes, and the plastic doesn't even break a sweat - and I'm big, strong, lengthy armed dude haha - and not to mention I can stand and JUMP on the cleaner HEAD, the two sides where they are JOINTED, and RIGHT ON TOP of the filter cover which filter is FAR Better quality than all but german brands and some Lux machines. Also, the dust bin itself is of VERY high quality polycarbonate - I can bend it to where it's nearly touching inside from one side to another and it doesn't even creak! I pity those whose bias blinds them of facts, such as yourself CarmineD. I'm not trying to be insulting, but everything you say about Dysons (almost) is simply FALSAE and biased, and I'm SAYING this because I OWN one and use one every day now and I have TWO Miele's and a Kirby G4 in my current possession to compare them and it to.

Hertz wrote:

Buying a dozen dysons from the junk heap doesn't prove your claim that they are different.  Let alone that dysons are better.  To the contrary, it proves just the opposite in my opinion.  Dysons are the same as all the less expensive vacuum competition on the market today, if used and abused.  Similarly, I can cite numerous brands and models of vacuums at lower prices that last and perform just as well as dysons when maintained and used properly.   No difference.  At one time dyson enthusiasts here pointed to the fact that holding prices high/steady made dysons different [read better].  BUT, prices of dysons are tumbling lower, and lower, and lower.  Just like all the other vacuum brands.  No different but the same. 

Carmine D.

Lousy vacuum cleaner or good vacuum cleaner, it looks like Jimmy D's doing alright.

http://www.yachtingworld.com/supersail/news/491898/nahlin-visits-the-river-dart

Venson

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson:

Here's a brief history of the Nahlin for those interested, albeit it has nothing to do with vacuums except now Sir James the marketeer who made his brand the "it" of vacuums now owns it. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nahlin_(yacht)

Perhaps it's a floating salvage yard for all the recycled vacuums he plans to trade in for the sales of his brand?  NYC recently uncovered a ship's hull buried in the ground as land fill.  Must be nice to have the money to buy and restore one.  Interestingly he decided on an old one rather than the purchase of a new one and had it rebuilt by a renowned German firm.  Wonder if that's an indication that bad economic times are befalling dyson and its founder?

Carmine D.

PS:  This does make dyson different as the thread suggests.  Not sure that means better vacuum wise except for the marketing madness that reaped the founder fame and fortune not to mention the 2 lawsuits and their payouts.

CarmineD wrote:
Well said, Carmine. I completely agree here.

CarmineD wrote:

You're again blinded by your bias; no other "cheap" brands could have gone through the abuse these have and still survived. They plastic is *MUCH* higher quality than cheap-china brands, MUCH better performing, and again, LAST LONGER. Any cheap-china piece of junk will last maybe 4 years tops; there are Dysons still going strong after 7-8. BIG difference. Not to mention what usually goes in the Dyson is the motor which is actually VERY user-replaceable. The plastic doesn't crack, break, or fall apart if cared for properly - and as evidence from my experience, if even UNCARED for! Also, you can't even begin to argue that the engineering behind Dyson's cyclonic system is *INCREDIBLE*. Why? Because it works!! Genius to say the least. Also, they're SEALED systems! With VERY high quality motor seals and motor gaskets deep in the motor housing, with VERY high quality filtration. NO other brand - not even some Riccars and a Sebo model Miele tested can compare buddy. That cute link you posted where Miele is "21x" better also contains a nice bit of information where a Dyson DC25 FILTERED BETTER THAN A RICCAR AND SEBO, but again, you "must have missed that."

CarmineD wrote:

Why Dyson is different: http://www.mieleusa.com/products/benefits/filtration.asp?nav=30&snav=24&tnav=26&oT=272&benefit=119 Good try, but this just proves not only that your biased and/or blind against the facts, or just that Dyson makes a VERY high quality filtration vacuum that not even a Sebo can touch *evidently* Good run, but obviously Dyson makes a quality machine and and for the filtration alone, let alone the longevity of their DC07's and on, AND their cleaning ability.

Hertz wrote:

No, quite the opposite.  You missed one of the most salient points of the study.  Despite the vacuum's filtration during operations, once the user removes the dirty bin and dumps the dirt indoors all the vacuum's filtration/indoor air quality is voided.  It's all for nought.  Dirt is back in the air and breathed.  If dumped outdoors, the user is exposed directly to/inhales the dirt from the vacuum.  Lose-lose for both users and household air quality.  Dust/face masks are recommended for the dirt bin dumping and air purifiers for indoor air. 

Excerpt:  ...explains Gast. "That's just when the vacuum is running... what the test doesn't show is just how many particles are released back into the air when the bagless vacuum bin is emptied. It's an indoor environmental disaster! If you can smell the dust after cleaning the bin, you are already inhaling fine lung damaging particles."  

Carmine D.

 

Hertz wrote:
How can you be so naive to suggest that all Cheap China brands last a short time? Where's your evidence? I've rented apartments that have the old LG upright that was made in China and they're easily 8 years old and STILL going. How do I know that? Because the same company Ive rented from for the last five years all have a fleet of these cheap Chinese upright vacs that suck up dirt and dust efficiently. You need to have your head tested, Hertz before you can make fleeting statements!

Hertz wrote:

I laughed out loud when I read this.  You argue the obvious.  You extol dysons for lasting 7 years and berate cheaper brands for lasting 4.  But of course we expect vacuums priced like dysons in the range of $400-$600 to last 7-10 years plus with normal use and routine expected maintenance.  It's a given when plunking down that much money.  Why is it such a big deal for you about dysons.  From my perspective, and probably others, the earliest model dysons are still only 8 years old at the most in the USA [the brand was launched April 2002 with DC07].  The jury is still out on dyson's longevity and durability at least in the USA.  There are some more years to go before a reasoned intelligent decision based on supportable evidence regarding dyson's quality and longevity.  I find it ludicrous to base any credibility on the opinions you formulated over a few days about a dozen dysons bought off the junk heap.  Along with one dyson you bought for $30 and repaired by vacuuming, wiping down and spraying with silicon lubricant.  If I'm paying $400-$600 for a vacuum, I need more reason than that.  But thanks for the laughs.  They were priceless.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Again I pity those who fail to realize fact due to unsightly bias; I've shown you the evidence that they're quality, sealed machines based off of Miele's OWN tests. The plastic IS much higher grade; anybody with a sense of intelligence about plastics and quality could EASILY tell that, and the performance is that of a Miele, if not better (suction and airflow) - at least VERY close to. EVERY SINGLE PART is user-replaceable, and the plastic is recyclable, as well (from what I've gathered from the DysonFoundation website) - not all plastics are. They are quality machines. Not the best, but well built overall - of course they're no Kirby - but if taken care of decently and maintained, they are durable, relatively long lasting machines with INCREDIBLE design and great filtration. Period.

Again, why Dyson is DIFFERENT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-RK7Pc4aBg&feature=related Try doing that with nearly ANY - or even ANY - current China-made Target special or "any other bagless machine" coming out of China and I would bet a good deal on it breaking compared to the Dyson. If anything this proves my point Carmine - amongst the filtration test I showed you from Miele - that Dyson is a well made, durable machine that is *FAR* from "every other cheap bagless machine" - which is pure FALSITY. Obviously.

Hertz wrote:

No, quite the opposite.  It proves mine.  This is exactly what people expect when they plunk down $400-$600 US for a vacuum.  7-10 years plus of service with normal use and routine expected maintenance.  Nothing special if the vacuum delivers what's expected.

WRT dyson filtration, it's all for nought as soon as you remove the dirt bin and dump.  Ask any doctor who specializes in patients with eye, ear, nose and throat diseases.  They'll tell you to stay clear of bagless vacuums even dysons.  Bagless vacuums are triggers for the breathing disorders.

Carmine D.

Hertz wrote:

Now...who's being biased?  Dysons should deliver exactly what people expect when they plunk down $400-$600 on a vacuum.  7-10 years plus of service with notrmal use and routine maintenance.  That's a given.  Nothing special if it does except in your way of thinking. 

Carmine D.

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson;

In the likely/unlikely event that Sir James moves production of dysons from Malaysia currently to say........... Pakistan, this yacht would be the ideal mode of transportion to do so.  For workers who want to go and the whole kit and kabudle of dyson production.  Accomodates 358 plus a crew of 50. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Thanks for proving my point and disproving yours. You have said time and again "Dysons are just like any other cheap bagless machine" - which break down easily, have *TERRIBLE* filtration, and clean like poo-poo except for the multi-cyclonic COPYCATS. So yeah, Dysons are WORTH THE MONEY, when you say they're OVERpriced. Not. You are now starting to make sense, haha.

Hertz wrote:

You have not paid full price for your dysons and not purchased any new.  Just bought yours off the junk heap at junk prices.  To make a statement that they are worth the money means that they are worth their prices purchased when new.  You never bought any new dysons, did you?  I have bought both new/used dysons and received several free for extended times to use.  If you sincerely felt dysons are not overpriced and worth the do re me, you'd buy one/more new at the new prices and then make such a statement.  You didn't.  You don't believe based on your actions that dysons are worth the money, except junk prices.  As the saying goes..........put your money where your mouth is.

Carmine D.
 

CarmineD wrote:

Again you seam to say complete NONSENSE and sometimes near BS just to make you happy; I bought them at "junk" prices (just like there are Miele's and Electrolux's available for "junk prices everywhere buddy, open your eyes) to make a PROFIT; they are COMPLETELY worth the money new, however I could not only make one to like-new condition, but I could also make a profit; given that was the smarter choice, I did so. You say we live in economically tough times; if I found an HIGH quality machine for CHEAPER, why would I spend more? They are still worth every dime and sometimes then some new, but because I have the skills to rebuild them, I might as well buy them at lower prices, and do the work myself. Anybody with any sense of intellect and appreciation for working on quality engineering would have done the same. Stop being so clouded by your humorous vendetta against Dysons and the genius himself.

Hertz wrote:

My eyes and sense tell me you can't find/buy a dozen MIELE/SEBO vacuums on the junk heap for junk prices.  Just dysons. That makes dyson different.  Maybe you can find a few junk Eureka-Electrolux's.  Not a dozen in one buy let alone multiple buys.  Again, dyson is different.  Not better.  Different.

Words are cheap.  With words you can do anything.  Actions speak louder than words.  12 junk dysons at junk prices to rebuild and resell may be worth it if you have nothing better to do.  If you are looking to capitalize on the dyson fad and are disingenous, you'd buy junk dysons to sell at high prices.  You'd hype and hawk the merits of the brand too just like you are doing.  I'm not.  I won't.  I'm different from you.  Better?  I'll let others judge. 

Carmine D.

Hertz wrote:

Silly, funny and incorrect.  Having purchased and registered my new dyson DC07 in September 2006, I am on the dyson email list and receive messages about new products and launches.  Having experienced problems with the floating dyson head and clutch on my rugs, and working unsuccessfully with the dyson call center to find a work around, I emailed dyson with my concerns.  At the time I forwarded the email along with the picture of my new dyson to a poster here who sold new dysons.  Dyson responded back to me within 24 hours that it would consider my comments which it appreciated receiving and forward to its engineer department for future product consideration.  Exact words.  I emailed that response to the poster here who sold dysons.  I have no doubt that Sir James after going on record many times saying manual rug adjustments are not necessary changed course in part to emails like mine and others received over time from users unhappy with the clutches and floating heads ojn their carpets.  In June 2009, dyson launched its DC28 with rug manual settings rather than self adjusting floating head. 

Carmine D

CarmineD wrote:

You like to manipulate reality to fit your own whiny, silly little world that Dysons are "junk." When they're not MAINTAINED, you're going to have problems. It just so happens that such a high quality machine such as this was in the hands of people who didn't know what they were doing. There is no "junk" price; just a low price, yet you like to hug that word just to make you feel safe and secure. Maybe one day you'll open your eyes and not be so hilariously biased and stop denying the truth. Until then, enjoy not believing facts.

Hertz wrote:

It's only natural that junk dysons would spawn junk dealers.

Carmine D.

Hertz wrote:
How do you feel you have the right to qualify that Dysons are not junk though, Hertz? By buying up 12 models that have a few scratches, have had "obvious" abuse yet still turn over the moment they're switched on? You could say that about any vacuum cleaner that is sold in such a way! I've even seen old Sebo uprights sold on palettes of 5 that either need new drive belts fitted or tools which have become lost over time and thus you could easily if you wanted to, make a bit of money as a private seller selling off old vacuum cleaners at capped prices.

I've raised this issue before and I'll raise it again - Maintenance - how do YOU define maintenance? If people are ignorant about filter care its because of the Dyson mantra that their models are "lifetime," and have often been advertised as so. Owners don't bother checking the filters, or cleaning them believing that the suction design does that for them. This is why there are so many parts for Dyson on EBAY where the filters are concerned - not about making money - but supplying an OBVIOUS spare part that seems to break down more than often. Oh I know - Ive met some owners whose ignorance goes on without belief. Ive met many owners who wash out their filter cones but don't dry them expecting the vacuum suction to magically dry the filters, then problems happen and they don't realise. So whose fault is it that the Dyson has failed? The owners? Or the marketing that has led them to jump to such conclusions?

What most owners dont realise is that when they buy a Dyson for the first time and then go around the home with it to see if it picks up, the machine will pick up dirt that other vacs have left behind and owners naturally assume the vacuum will just fill up quite the thing until dust starts to compact the whole bin. SOME owners I know just leave the bin and don't bother emptying because they take the 100% suction principle too far! Is this a problem of ignorance for owners or just one of poor maintenance? Then what happens is that things start to clog, filters start to get over worked, parts start to FAIL.

Oh and by the way, Ive owned the DC25 for 6 months. I couldn't stand it. Poorly made with handles that didn't feel as if they were locked down, a push button that kept sticking and sometimes wouldn't function and that Ball that continually got in the way for cleaning under low furniture. Good performance maybe but build quality and design let it down in my eyes. I have a right to thus make judgement. You have a right to make your own judgements but clearly you're not prepared to discuss other avenues. Just wait until your Dysons fail again, no matter how experienced you are in repairing them.

vacmanuk wrote:

I know everything about a Dyson in and out - if they fail (which, unfortunately, half of them don't turn on but their filters were so clogged due to poor maintenance most likely their motors burnt out) then given Dysons QUALITY design and intelligent layout, one can very doable user-replace the motor and/or brushes. The motor unit housing the non-ball ones (and even the ball ones) is higher quality, higher grade plastic and VERY high quality seals that alone is better than half the china junk, JUST THAT PIECE probably has overall more dense plastic that china-specials, at least quality wise if you can even quantify such a measurement, but my point is the same none the less.

Hertz wrote:

Of course you say that, you have a dozen dyson junks you bought.  What was it that P.T. Barnum said?

Carmine D.

PS:  If 6 of the 12 dysons don't run and you suspect motors are the problem/and they actually are shot, then you didn't buy the cream of the crap or pure crap as you like to call it.  You just bought plain and simple every day run of the mill crap.  Period.  They must have seen/smelled you coming a mile away.  They jumped through hoops backwards to unload the pallets of the junkiest of the junk dysons they could muster.  I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they send you a Christmas gift this year for your generosity.  Another junk dyson. 

  Hertz wrote:
You dont know your xxxx from your elbow, mate! But then all along you've been comparing your Miele "Air Clean" filter to Dysons which is a bit unfair and also comparing a bagged vacuum with bagless, which is also unfair. I only realised going through your unfair posts before. Super Air Clean by any chance, the most basic of Miele filters? Try the HEPA cartridge and compare like with like. Good luck with your Dysons.

Your point is FLAWED regarding Dyson and their quality but then you're only basing it on 12 abused models. Once yet again, unless you spend premium, brand new I suggest that you keep going along in your deluded little world of what you class as premium. You were only going on about Electrolux's Ultra only a few weeks ago, a bagged cleaner no less. Save up your day job salary and buy new.

vacmanuk wrote:

**(portion deleted by Moderator, because of inapporpriate content)** You're the one who can't get w/ the truth and realize and appreciate Dysons incredible build quality; again, their just dirty - not BROKEN, and if anything me seeing them in this abused condition and being able to CLEAN THEM UP LIKE-NEW really is a testament to their quality that you're too incapable of comprehending (apparently). W/e man, at least your intelligent enough to realize that Miele's and SEBO's are quality machines, so I won't call you a complete crap head ;) Hahaha

A testament to their quality was tested the day they were thrown out, numbnuts.

vacmanuk wrote:

Were you deprived of oxygen from putting a vacuum bag over your head? Seriously though; You basically lost the whole argument if you feel like you need to start calling names. How pathetic and child like. I wouldn't be surprised if your best friend is 10 years old to be honest. You find SEBOs and Miele's thrown out, as well. By your dumb ass logic they must be "junk", too. Buddy I've taken Dysons apart DOWN TO THE BONE, and they are *VERY* well built, with durable plastic all throughout. A testament to their quality is still running and taking the licking they did and still basically looking very good. The plastic they use is even the same color all through out - NOT painted, but ALL the plastic IS the color you see, which in that regard is better quality than even a SEBO or Miele.

Hertz wrote:
Oh Grow up Hertz! One minute you're arguing about Electrolux vacuums like the Ultra for being so technologically advanced in one corner (Yet, you don't own one), then praising Kirby machines, then Dyson. Dont you sound a little bit silly? I dont give a shi* how many Dysons you have repaired, how many Dysons you find that are better built - THE EVIDENCE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF by going onto EBAY UK or any other online market like EBAY where you will find that the majority of second hand vacuums are Dyson. You'll find there are MORE Dysons sold refurbished, more Dyson vacs sold second hand and more Dysons that have been split apart for spares. What does this tell you? Well it tells me quite a few things other than the popularity that Dyson bestows...

Quality doesn't just count the colour or the strength of the plastic, infact it is IMPOSSIBLE to define what a quality vacuum cleaner is dependent on the buyers needs and the buyers use of it. If you find a whole load of Dysons that have only lasted something like 3 to 5 years, and paid top dollar for it, I'd say there's something wrong in the supposed "quality" of the vacuum in question, particularly if Dyson claim that their models are lifetime or have a number of years in which to counteract their model's longevity.  A quality vacuum in my eyes is 10 years old and with its original motor intact.

If you walk into boxmart and look at the vacuums of course Dyson is your best choice, if you can afford it, Hoover Tempo if you can't, but you can't compare to Sebo, Miele or Riccar Vibrance line

Actionvac wrote:
Well, perhaps UK buyers are more savvy when it comes to brand choice. In terms of brands available at our Comet stores for example, DYSON used to have the largest number of models to view. Now there are 9 uprights compared to 9 Vax uprights, 5 cylinders compared to 13 Miele models. That tells me a lot; more brands more choice. No longer Dyson being the biggest amount on display.

vacmanuk wrote:

Well in the USA consumers have the choice of Dyson or a bunch of China made garbage in box stores mostly (some Miele in Bed bath Beyond stores) for the better models they have to find an independant vac dealer like me

Things may well change due to lifestyle and consumers needs.

Actionvac wrote:

Hi Actionvac,

I think there lots of shopping options around.  However, people can be lazy or feel too beleagured by other matters to take time to look.

Indie shops can be good resouces for good vacuums -- because pricing can be negotiated -- and also for good, sturdy rebuilts that come with warranty that may come at really nice prices.  We now also have eBay but accomplishing good purchases by way of it takes common sense and care.

Nonetheless, many people who'd only deal with specialists for highly expensive purchases seem to feel, as I'm sure you're well aware, "What's a vacuum cleaner?"

I was at my local vac shop yesterday chewing the fat for a minute with its owner who was proudly regaling me with the story of how he'd made his first hole-in-one a couple of weeks ago.  I know squat about golf so that part of the conversation lasted just a minute or two and got to vacuums.  Most memorable, he said that years ago he'd been taught by a company rep that vacuum buyers fall into definite categories.  Those that feel no more than 99 bucks is a proper price for a vacuum and who will never spend more than that and then those that feel a good vacuum can't be had for less than 500 dollars who will probably never spend less than that.  The opportunity for real sales potential predominantly lies with those who stand in the middle. They can be convinced to try this or try that and probably settle on whatever gives them perceived satisfaction.  The quote, unquote good fit.

Venson

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson:

20-60-20 rule.  20 percent of consumers could care less about vacuums and the particular brands/models.  20 percent know exactly what they want and are willing to pay for quality made and performing vacuums.  60 percent go with the flow..whatever comes along and anything as long as it runs and picks up the dirt.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Thanks Carmine,

My neighborhood guy didn't tell me there's a name for it.

Venson

Venson that is so true, I have done Dirt devil warranty for 20 yrs and do you think I have sold anything to those folks more than a pak of bags? no of course not thats because they are the 100.00 people, now Dyson warranty sells me 20-30- new high end vacs a year (and pays better) because they are the folks that spent the 500.00 to get something good and willing to spent another 500 plus in my shop.

CarmineD wrote:
Sadly I wish that were true in the UK. When I worked in retail in the UK, most customers knew that they wanted a Dyson by the infamous commercials and wouldn't back down from the brand until they tried it in the shop. Then they began to see that it was not all sweet and wonderful. Most customers now are reading up on Which and other consumer sites and asking weird but wonderful questions that I've not heard for a long time stuff like:

"Well it looks fantastic but how easy is it to change the drive belt?"
"If the hose goes up a stair case, does the model fall over?"
"If Dyson says his models are lifetime, what about the filters and drive belts?"

Clearly some UK consumers are thinking ahead of themselves and most would if they have had bagged vacuums and ran out of bags. Dyson has tried every rule in the book when it comes to bagged vacs. If sales were really that bad, I guess there would be no market for bagged vacs.

vacmanuk wrote:

The economic situation worldwide makes all who want to keep a little money on hand more thoughtful as to how they spend and what they buy.  The questions you mention are posed by informed consumers.  They know there is no such thing as magic and if there is, it's doubtful that they'll find it inside the box a vacuum came in.

The more intelligent questions and demands.consumers put forth, the better possibility of getting worthwhile product.

Venson

A little insight on how I dislike Dyson. On any other vacuum repair that I have done of late , it has been for the consumer to get a fair shake on keeping their cleaner running. A Dyson DC-25  is currently here that needs a brushroll and new end bearings. Normally that is something that the customer would pay between $30-$60 depending on the cleaner. The Dyson brushroll can be bought separate but not the cheap made plastic bushing end caps. The customer is having to pay $75 plus the cost of labor for a bearing and brushroll combo that shouldn't cost the consumer more than $25 . They want you to buy a complete head.  The way the head is constructed and the material it is made with makes me wonder why people would fork over so much money. If people saw the cheapness of the brushroll and bearings  I don't think they would buy one. Hertz and  his well designed vacuum is poorest designed in my book.   CONSUMERS are # 1 and should get quality.                                                                       Procare

procare wrote:

Just out of curiosity, how easy is it to get parts from TTI versus Dyson?   Which companies are best for getting parts and service?

Severus wrote:

Hi SEVERUS:

I went to the HOOVER site and clicked on the parts icon amd then typed in brushrolls and got this:

http://www.hoover.com/parts/?category=vacuumbrushrolls

Brush rolls go from $12 for some current models like the Elite Rewind to $45 for the old metal agitators for concept, spirit and celebrity models etc and everything in between.  The average price is about $25 for the WT. 

I went to dyson site for DC25 clicked on parts and typed in DC25 brushroll but couldn't get anything but jibberish.  Nothing even closely related to a brush roll.  Went to DC07 and DC14 and the same.  No brush rolls just jibberish.  Interestingly, according to the site it claims DC25 has a 5 year parts and labor warranty.  Wonder if the brush roll is covered?

It appears the default for not finding the dyson part is a telephone number.  I'll go back and type in brushbar and see what that does.  No success with brush bar either.  Just a telephone number.

Carmine D.

Carmine ,

   The question I asked my Dyson  repair friend about how long to get a head or any part if he had to order was 10 days minimum. That is too long. The people that brought in the cleaner had a problem early on under warranty and went  to Sears where they bought it and it took 10 days before they got it back. The next time they had a warranty center they went to and it still took 10 days. I got the cleaner Wed. and they will have it back tomorrow.  My Dyson repair center just called me and asked if the customer wanted the head I got off of him or decided not to repair. It happens that he needs one and it will take 10 days to get another one.

                                                                                                                                                                                            Procare

                                                                                                                                                                                                     

procare wrote:

Hello Procare:

Sounds like that particular DC25 may have been a lemon out of the box.   

BTW, just to see the time and cost for shipping from the HOOVER site, I went thru the order on-line process for a HOOVER brush roll.  It says it can take up to 6 days to leave the warehouse and 4-7 days for standard shipping time at $4.95.  So, it appears the min-max mail time is 5-13 days for receipt of the brushroll.  Of course, this is a simple user performed job so there's no cost for labor if someone has and is handy with a standard household screwdriver. 

Carmine D.

One of the regional retailers is selling DC25 All Floors ball refurbs from dyson for $279.  MSRP is $499.  Wonder to myself and others if somehow/way DC25 refurbs/dyson refurbs in general are the reason for the absence of such parts like standard brush rolls on the dyson web site for upright models.  Or, in the DC25 example presented here by Procare, selling the brush roll in conjunction with the complete head nozzle rather than as a separate part.  One way to make money off the sale of routine wear and tear parts not covered by warranty is to force customers/users to buy/pay more for what they actually need.  Seems like a recipe for giving customers a "rear deal."

Carmine D.

PS:  Out of curiosity I went to the dyson web site looking for "remanufactured" models:  Only 3 models are currently available from dyson [although there are 2081 matches]:  DC07 for $269.  DC14 for $299.  DC21 for $339.  All come standard with 6 month warranty.  Appears that dyson, based on this DC25 example, may be giving exclusive sales on some of its refurbs like DC25 All Floors to particular retailers.  Interesting marketing strategy in an industry that has been plagued in recent years with a downward trend in new sales.  Down 3 percent in 2009 and predictions of worse for new vacuum sales in 2010. 

Aviori wrote:

Halo's UV-C technology was unique and leading edge too.  Happy to see ORECK acquire after halo went belly up.

Carmine D.

Dyson in the UK may well be ahead with the "Root Cyclone system," but TTI aren't that far off in supplying similar Dual Cyclone (albeit being far older than Dyson's latest patent) procedures - i.e constant suction with little cleaning to the main filters on board cheaper priced vacuums that seems to be hitting Dyson hard.. However  Aviori - the HEPA system in my experience is a no-brainer for bagless systems regardless of what Dyson would have you believe. HEPA only maintains air that the vacuum has sucked in and filters out clean air, yet for all that HEPA is handy to have, once the dust is emptied out of a canister, you stand to breathe in air as well as re-scent the rooms (most people in the U.S I imagine empty their vacuums outside but in the UK, most use their kitchen bins inside the home) with stale sucked up dust that includes pet hair stench.

How many people do any of us know that are all that much in love with physics?

I don't get the feeling that the important folks, shoppers looking for a new vacuum, actually give a hoot or a holler about cyclonics whatever they are purported to do, however they are designed or whomever made them. This applies to the Dyson brand as well. End-users only care if the vacuum delivers by way of performance and does not give them annoying problems by way of function or economics.

You know, I happened to meet a couple a few days back who bought a bagged Kenmore canister as opposed to Dyson, their first consideration, due to its positioning in the Consumer Reports ratings. Root cyclones weren't on their minds --- cleaning was.

Cyclone talk works well mostly on techno-minded menfolk like the majority of us here at the forum but not so well on those of either gender who just want to get their flooring, etc., clean and walk away.

I'd say that the term cyclonic has been bandied about for so long and by so many that it only brings a blank-eyed, quick let-me-look-like-I-understand type nod from prospective buyer to vendor these days. No customer asks, "What's the level of your systems dirt separation between intake and "dirty air" arrival at the first filter."

And that's what counts. How much stuff -- gritty material, fuzz, lint, hair and pet fur AND fine dust do so-called cyclonic systems glean and retain from the incoming air stream before it goes on to the primary filter? (Also, not discussed is the general small collection capacity of bagless collection bins and how free travel of larger debris for avoiding hang-ups around "shrouds, etc., which can disrupt intended air movement thus causing higher levels of dust to escape the process.) It would be good to learn that Brand A's system brings about x-amount more dust capture -- not at the HEPA but before the pre-filter -- than Brand B's. Those are points of discussion I'd allege bagless vac makers in general are not prepared to broach.

Venson

Venson wrote:

Last I knew and heard Venson, there is no awarding of a Nobel prize for vacuums...........but I'm sure if there were, dyson would be in contention.  BTW I am a huge fan of physics and chemistry but I agree, like you, that when these are applied to everyday products consumers are more impressed by price and performance NOT panache.

Carmine D.

Venson wrote:
At the end of the day there's a democracy here of what people individually appreciate, Venson. I've been having a similar discussion with another forum I'm on with a certain car brand. U.S buyers it seems have an interest to where cars are made that is the major decision breaker to whether they buy the car regardless of whether they love it or like it. In the UK we don't buy cars like that. Similarly, in the U.S whilst many may argue that vacuum cleaners should function the way they should, it is America that has hyped up the models - why else do you have so many different floorcare ranges on offer - because American tastes will think differently to many different lifestyle devices to make life easier. Whereas the U.S have had self driven mechanisms built in and auto cord rewinds on uprights, (admittedly its fun for the repairers who will know the amount of repairs that need to be done) the U.K has only just been given several brands with these wonderful features added. Similarly filter systems that claim to make the air better can't always be relied upon - and it was the Germans who had HEPA fitted to their vacuums in their bagged models before the bagless brands took it on as their mantra to provide clean air - even though a bagless design is messier.

From an engineering point of view, I don't think HEPA was ever invented for bagless systems. As you say bagless brands are not prepared to broach on their own efficiencies, but rather just relate the basic premise of a HEPA filter and what it is designed to do.

vacmanuk wrote:

Hi vacmanuk,

This U.S. buyer bought a used German-made car over two years ago not for name but reputation. (Unfortunately, from what I have seen, I have not been given much to uphold the blind faith I once had in regard to American product.) Matter of fact I think I kind of lucked out because I am told that even maker of my car brand's newer models don't quite match up. I got it with 103,00 miles on it and, much to the surprise of someone who thinks he never goes anywhere, I have put on about 17,000 more to date. The mechanic I took along to inspect the car and others said I might realistically anticipate more than 200,000 miles out of this car. (I thought of the new ones I could buy here and have to dump after 100,000 miles and saw no difference except for a saving.) It's just a little wagon but it holds the road and handles like a dream and I can't help but feel blessed every time I get behind the wheel. If I could have found the equivalent American-made, I'd have bought it as long as I liked looking at it.

But lest I digress . . .

Please do not think I am suggesting that we rely on just one thing in a vacuum. What I am asking is that when makers start flipping around rhetoric they should have simple English means for backing it up and solid numbers. I am seeing daily that "cyclonics" is a loosely used term and to my mind it's time for people to insist vac makers point out the worth. Thus, as I see it, knowing if someone's so-called bagless cyclonic system has better than average scores for dust capture in the collection bin prior pre-filtration medium I may be induced to think that will mean less actual filter maintenance/replacement whether primary or HEPA. Please also note, I am not here for what I like. My wish is to see the general public get a better deal too. I don't care who makes the product or the devices it uses to work - as long as they're safe - I'd just like to see all of us getting our money's worth.

Venson

Venson wrote:.

I like to see buyers getting their money's worth too - the problem is nowadays, with so many Chinese made vacuums coming onto the market, where they should be cheaply priced and probably damaging Dyson and other major brands, some brands aren't lowering the price - or the basic design - other than a paint job or an increased motor rating.

vacmanuk wrote:

Hello Vacmanuk:

Do you have some specific brands and models other than dyson to share with us?  Stateside, median prices of big box store vacuums have declined in recent years EXCEPT for dysons which have actually gone up int he same time.  With the exception of the most recent and current year which finds dyson following suit.  It took 8 years for dysons to actually lower product MSRP and retail selling prices on its newest models and matching 20 percent retailers' discounts.  Contrarily, other vacuum brands and models, like TTI, Dirt Devil, EUREKA, BISSELL, [even ORECK selling its upright solo for $200 and stocking its combo team in big box retailers for $225-$250] have all been lowering their price offerings in the last 8 years except perhaps for one or 2 models of each brand.  Use to be $200-$225 was the median price for a full size decent up/cann in the bb retailers.  No more.  $100-$200 for most of their full size vacuum wares.  Hence, the reason tht the buyer/user of the SEARS progressive Glide wrote: For the money [$200] the SEARS Glide should offer more, like attachments.  Why?  He's been [and others] conditioned by the falling vacuum prices among big box retailers.  Dyson tried unsuccessfully for its time in the states to buck the trend of downward vacuum prices and now has joined in.  Why?  Because the competition at big box retailers is hurting dyson sales IMHO.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Without getting too entrenched in the micro economics, it's safe to say that the lower vacuum prices in the USA have not allowed total annual new vacuum units to stay the same at 20 MILLION or in fact go up, as one would expect, with all things being equal, and we know they never are.  Recession in America [worldwide] with 14 percent unemployment, falling housing prices and new starts, and the tanking US housing market, worked adversely on the economics of new vacuum sales staying the same and rising.  Including dyson where the US market represents 2/3 of its total annual new unit global sales.  Add to this, the US Federal Reserve, my good old friend Ben boy Bernanke revising economic growth in the USA downward from 3-3.5 pecent to 2-2.5 percent, not just for this year, but next.  Add too, the collapsing Euro overseas.  First Greece going bakrupt, now Ireland.  Next Spain?  and Portugal.  I expect a 2 tier Euro across the pond: Northern and Southern euro.  Add too, the USA monetizing our debt [after Keithner and Bernanke swore under oath to Congress never to do so] adding $600 BILLION on top of the 2 Trillion already under this current administration, and inflation is already starting to rear its ugly head.  Big time.  Setting off, no doubt, an increase in vacuum prices in the near future.  What will all these factors do on new vacuum unit sales in the USA?  Globally.  For the next 2 years and out.  Doesn't take a genius to know. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Hi Carmine

Is it not hard to beat a tempo overall...or a panasonic 583....versus the higher priced alternatives. Same results or better  at a far lower price...even in the long run with proper care they are both hard to beat at that price point. Why spend more when u can spend less for far better results....and a product that will last just as long as the higher priced units. Why spend more ...when you dont have to for the same results.

turtle 

retardturtle1 wrote:

Hello turtle:

Agree.  WRT HOOVER/TTI Tempo:  It's prices have actually risen over recent years from a low of $50-$55 to now $80 and $85 and rarely on sale/advertised.  Worth every $ plus some.  Pano makes a decent budget line of uprights. Very popular sellers among vacuum store independents and worth their prices.  I have no doubt that as the vacuum makers raise their prices on their big box store vacuums, the vacuum store independents will see a resurgence among vacuum customers for their new and rebuilt brands/models.  Hopefully, these vacuum sales, at last the new ones, not the rebulits, will balance the fall off in new vacuum sales among the big box retailers.  Sadly, no industry data/sources factor into the annual vacuum sales both new and used vacuum sales.  Nor can/should.  Except to know that to the extent big box store vacuum sales fall off, possibly even precipitously, used vacuums, rebuilts, parts and service will surge among vacuum indies.  A good thing for the industry.  Nice to see a silver lining, despite the bad economic reasons and causes for it. 

Carmine D.  

Well Carmine there's all the HOOVER UK uprights ; bagless and budget market made in China yet about £100 / roughly $159.88 that should be much cheaper yet aren't. Panasonic's totally outdated bagged upright vacuum sells at the same price, uses the daft 2 drive belt system and basic features against the same models you guys in the U.S have under the Miele Powerhouse upright vacuums with better features; those as well as the Hoover uprights are made in China. The Vax Life bagless stick vac / Hoover U.S Lynx "bagless" stick vac is £200 plus / $319.74 TTi yet should be far cheaper to buy - no other cordless stick vac in the UK is priced so highly.

vacmanuk wrote:

Hi vacmanuk:

Overall, would you say that the median prices of vacuums sold at UK big box retailers have gone up or down [or stayed the same] over the last 3-5 years [excluding dyson brand]?  How do these recent vacuum price trends compare to median vacuum prices in the UK in 2000 and soon after with the adoption of the euro?

Carmine D.

Hi Vacmanuk: 

The HOOVER LiNx cordless stick vac sells for $179 here in the US at most retailers and as low as $135 on Amazon.       Substantially less than the $319 US in the UK.

Carmine D.       

Share

CarmineD wrote:





















I know! The U.S version is substantially cheaper. Ive thought about it, but would probably need a transformer to get around the charging issue. It is a nonsense really that Vax think they can charge that kind of money.

To answer your last question, the "median" prices of the Hoover and Panasonic products have increased to meet price comparing with Dyson products. Most people who go to Big Box high street places in the UK like Comet, Currys, John Lewis or Euronics can sample the models themselves and will usually find by moving the different parts, the difference in quality and feel with some products. At smaller franchises like House of Frasers stores (and their associated sub-names in England) you can try a few models in the shop as well as at John Lewis. That means buyers can feel and test the products for themselves.

At least people there are getting the opportunity to try them out. Considering what the Hoover rechargeable stick is, it would be great to test them before buying. However, I wonder if all that many stores here want them tested because of the price. Certainly not an encouragement to buy.

The same as with some other machines, I think buyers making assumptions by way of price may be a little surprised once they're home with the thing out of the box and in use.

I may have mentioned a department supervisor at a major chain store saying that she had been instructed to remove all demo rugs. I learned since I'd last spoke to her that she'd been chewed for trying to quietly bring the demo rugs back into her department to make the customers happy. However, since our big boxers" are allowed to get away with it, the idea has crept over the line to major stores now. Everybody wants to get into the act by acclimatizing customers to buying on blind faith and returning the item if they don't like it. Or is there some sort of statistic regarding this "pay and walk away" scheme that proves once we get it home, like or not, we'll learn to live with it?

Venson

vacmanuk wrote: