Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/home/2010/09/dyson-vacuum-thief-should-have-checked-consumer-reports-.html

Thanks vacmanuk.  I like the UK Which? reliability rating schedule for several reasons.  Intuitively it appears realistic.  This gives truth to the findings.  I suggest Consumer Reports revamp its reliability system and implement the same system as Which?  I know independent vacuum store owners and operators who take huge exceptions with the CR vacuum reliabilty data.  My thoughts are CR is aware of the shortcomings too and adds all the notes and caveats to the repair/reliability percentages for that reason.  Unfortunately these caveats negate CR's reliability data usefulness.

Carmine D.

Hi guys,

Maybe . . . but aren't these ratings based on consumer feedback?  I'd take some caution here. Kirby vacuums, as an instance, are more in number for report in the U.S. than in the U.K. I'd like a comparison of user input data first  -- how many versus how many.  I would not expect results for this kind of rating to exactly match up on both side of the sea.

This is much like the U.S. voting system.  An election win here can be called a landslide if merely one-fourth of eligible voters out of how many hundred million inhabitants of the country turn up at the polls and then a large majority of those few cast a vote for x-candidate.

Venson

Hi Venson:

Yes, Consumer Reports' reliability data for vacuums are driven by consumers' reported data.  Not vacuum repair and industry professional/technical staffs.  At issue for me with CR, based on the consumer driven data, is the number of survey responses received for each brand over the useful life of the models.  I believe there is a built in bias for a lower CR score when more survey responses are received for a particular brand/s which tend to be used longer by users.  Like expensive brands such as MIELE and SEBO.  Similarly, the CR reliability bias favors a better reliability rating for brands with fewer responses and/or that are disposable after a few years.  

To level the scores, the survey data needs to be judged on what constitutes reliability repair problems.  For example, ORECK routinely provides free annual service/check ups and repairs with the purchase of many of its products.   If ORECK customers take advantage of the free services, the ORECK brand is dinged as less reliable because it requires more frequent returns to the shop. 

More expensive brands like MIELE and SEBO are returned more frequently over the course of their useful life [usually 20 plus years] to the vacuum shops for repairs.  But they last longer and provide more years of service to their owners in the process.  Less expensive brands, say $50-$100 BISSELL's, Dirt Devils, and Eurekas may be used for a year or so, then scrubbed for a new vacuum soon after the warranty ends rather than repaired/returned to repair centers for service.  These disposables have fewer trips to the repair shops with lesser years of useful live.  But they appear in the CR data to perform as well or better for reliability than more expensive brands that tend to be repaired more frequently BUT used as many as 20 plus years. 

Ideally the best mix of reliability data is both consumer and industry driven.  With the details presented for readers/buyers of the particular brands and models for their years of ownership and service, and types and costs of repairs over their total useful lives.  The drawback to collecting and reporting this way is that some brands and models don't last that long on the market.  Hence, they do well in CR surveys because not many are sold and reported on over a long period of time.  Another bias in CR reporting.  Just like cheap disposables.  The more and sooner a brand brings new models to market, and scrubs the old, the better the brand's reliability ratings.  Why?  CR really needs 4 or more years to collect trend data on a brand and model for reliability purposes.  If the models are discontinued every year or two, and replaced with completely new models, there are less consumer surveys received and less repairs reported.  For CR that combination translates into better reliability data reported.  IMHO.

Carmine D.

I agree with you here also.  And attempted to make this point in a different way some time back when the thread dealt with these matters.  I believe Pano sold out to SEARS Kenmore [read compromised] to keep the on-going guaranteed out source business and money coming in.  I think Pano still makes a decent budget line while its high end makes and models have slid in build quality and longevity.  Pano/SEARS Kenmore needs to come into the 21 century with its warranty periods too rather than charging exorbitant amounts to customers for extended service plans for free service and parts beyond the meager one year warranty.  Most especially on their high end highh priced models.

Carmine D.

I'd opine that it was SEBO that said good bye and good riddance.

Carmine D.

Hiya Lucky!,

Point noted.  Nonetheless, I am not adept enough of mind to discern whether Kenmore vac owners I've encountered are generally happy campers or lambs led to the slaughter. Few people are demanding to try these machines before sale so who knows if they even think about workmanship unless something breaks unduly early in the game.  As chance would have it, lately, I've been in and out of a few Sears stores quite frequently -- I've really got to get a life --  but have yet to see or hear much complaint from owners coming in for bags and parts.

The very newest canisters, not resemblent of the usual Pano/Kenmore models, I'd have to agree do look a bit on the flimsy side..

The only complaint I've heard thus far was rather odd.  A woman who owns a Kenmore Progressive beltless upright claimed she at times had problems pushing it.  I asked if she had the carpet height properly adjusted, if it proved hard to push just after she'd installed a new bag (thinking a fresh bag might allow for enough suction pull to cause extra resistance), Per the lady in mention, it boils down to same rug, no different manner of vacuuming, no change in settings.  There are just times she finds the vacuum hard to push and others that she doesn't.

My first impulse was to suggest she run see a doctor for a physical.  Instead I said she should take the machine to an indie shop to learn if the problem could be sorted out.  She asked why an indie instead of Sears.  I explained that I'd made the suggestion as the cleaner is three years old and probably out of warranty and that an indie might proved an explanation or solution in a less costly fashion.

I've never had an on and off problem like that with a vacuum.  They either perform or don't. An off-the-wall idea but I can't imagine that the situation might be due to intermittent humidity levels making pushing a vacuum easily sometimes a go and sometimes not.

Venson

Hi Venson:

I'd offer the new bag too as a reason for difficulty to push AND the pile and pattern of the rug.  Ease and difficulty of pushing and pulling vacuums oftentimes is dependent on the direction of the vacuum over the rug pile and fibers: against versus with.  Most times users can alter the direction and see/feel the difference.  Other times due to the placement of furniture and small size of the carpet being cleaned versus size of vacuum, user can't and has top tough it out.  Certainly adjusting the rug height higher may ease the push pull weight but degrade the cleaning and grooming.

Carmine D.