Vacuum Cleaners Discussions |
|
vacmanuk
Location: Scotland UK
Joined: May 31, 2009
Points: 1162
![]()
|
 |
Re: Why Dyson is different.
Reply #49 Jul 20, 2010 10:11 am |
|
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." 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!
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
![]()
|
|
|
Re: Why Dyson is different.
Reply #50 Jul 20, 2010 9:21 pm |
|
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."
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.
This message was modified Jul 20, 2010 by CarmineD
|
Hertz
Joined: Jan 31, 2010
Points: 199
![]()
|
|
|
Re: Why Dyson is different.
Reply #51 Jul 21, 2010 1:32 am |
|
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. 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.
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
![]()
|
|
|
Re: Why Dyson is different.
Reply #53 Jul 21, 2010 7:04 am |
|
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.
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.
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
![]()
|
|
|
Re: Why Dyson is different.
Reply #54 Jul 21, 2010 7:17 am |
|
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.
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.
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
![]()
|
|
|
Re: Why Dyson is different.
Reply #57 Jul 22, 2010 6:40 am |
|
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.
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.
This message was modified Jul 22, 2010 by CarmineD
|
Hertz
Joined: Jan 31, 2010
Points: 199
![]()
|
|
|
Re: Why Dyson is different.
Reply #58 Jul 22, 2010 7:54 am |
|
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.
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.
|
|
|
