Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_02030100000P?prdNo=1&blockNo=1&blockType=L1

It looks like Sears has a new Kenmore stick vac with power nozzle.  Price is $199.99 currently. 

Product Description from website:

The Kenmore Progressive Glide upright vacuum cleaner combines heavy-duty cleaning and lightweight maneuverability into a single stylish upright.

Ultra lightweight - 12.9 lbs - makes the Glide effortless to use, carry, and put away

Swivel+ steering system makes it easy to avoid obstacles and furniture

Electronic Dirt Sensor alerts you to the dirt that you can't see

Foot-activated Height Adjust sets the vacuum at the perfect height to clean your carpet

Fingertip Control allows you to clean multiple surfaces with the touch of a finger

Optimum Carpet and Bare Floor cleaning delivered by a 2 motor system

Vacuum contains recyclable plastic, uses 100% recyclable packaging, and uses 17% less energy than a 12 amp vacuum

(Let's see 17% less than a 12 amp vacuum - 0.83*12= 10 amps motor.)

CarmineD wrote:

Hi Carmine,

Efficiently running vacuums that need only 400 to 600 watts to clean well certainly classifiy as energy savers in light of all the higher draw models, 10 amps and up, on the market.  That's worth advertising.

There of course is the other way round.  It could be claimed that higher suction, etc., could get you done faster thus balancing out electrical cost but I doubt it.  By way of too many variables judge, lifestyle, materials to be cleaned, frequency of use and manner of cleaning, vacuuming remains one of the most labor intensive household chores save for the robotic newbies that can't be depended on for more than surface cleaning.

Venson

Venson wrote:

Hi Venson:

One of the key variables being lightweight which favors ORECK.  Typically, the ORECK uprights trump all other uprights of the 10 to 12 amp full size in the Consumer Reports rate an excellent.  Ratings of excellent in handling equates to less physical effort.  Less physical effort translates to less time to get the vacuuming done.  Less time equates to less energy used which compounds the energy effciency rating for ORECK's versus the others.

SEARS Glide weighs in at almost 14 pounds which technically qualifies as a lightweight vacuum.

Carmine D.

What about the Miele S140 series?/ stick vac Anyone got these? The UK had one model for many years but it was deemed too heavy and Miele took it out of the UK straight away.

vacmanuk wrote: Yes Vacmanuk, I have a Miele S147 with the SEB 217 powerhead.  I consider it to be one of the few stick vacs that are effective.   It has more suction and airflow than many canisters.  Filtration and filtration options are great.  It has multiple configurations to suit each individual.  Drawbacks that I can see are:  1) bags are small,  2)a little on the heavy side, depending on which configuration you have set up.

Vernon

MIELE bills these S140 model series as stick vacuums and universal uprights!  Some call these mini-uprights.  Prices ranging from $200-$400 plus.  But,  primarily straight suction cleaning feature in this product series except the most expensive model which offers a revolving brush [pictured below S147].  Also corded with 1000 watts.

Carmine D.

The base model S140 was sold in the UK for some time but as I said previously Miele took it off the market. It would make sense to offer buyers now, a lower wattage upright but again UK are slow to buy into the small stick idea even though this one is far bigger. I recall using one and felt it was too heavy. AEG used to make an even heavier one I used in the 80s that had a strange "reverse" shape suction pipe and handle that made it into a cylinder but it was even heavier to drag behind than push forwards.

SEARS is selling the Progressive Glide for $149 on sale.  Perhaps the one and only review has some clues to the reason.

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_02030100000P?prdNo=1#reviewsWrap

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Ola Carmine,

Thanks I read the review. As before in my books, being what it is, I can see the Glide in use in small homes and apartments where it might serve, lending a sense of thoroughness because of the "big" motor, as sole vacuum for not overly fussy or trendy-type housekeepers. It might also serve as a high-powered supplementary vac in larger homes that already have full-size vacuums for regular duty.

Nonetheless, as it is an old idea that's been done long before, this vacuum is not supposed to have attachments. It's predecessors didn't either. Whether Hoover, Regina, Shetland or Bissell lightweights, with the add on of power nozzles their power was assumed a near to regular upright machines for rug cleaning and that's all they were intended to do -- clean rugs and maybe bare flooring too.

Users of the Glide should only expect to use it to do floors. For anything else, you spray some Pledge on a piece of paper toweling or a cloth, swat a table top with it and call it cleaning. However, that's all the more reason why it -- the "Glide" -- should be priced far more sensibly. There is nothing to this cleaner other than a larger than usual motor has been placed in a stick vac.

I can't believe the public has allowed itself to run so far afield that it can not see what is in front of its face and as clear and obvious as day. But I am probably mistaken since Sears is most likely cutting the price almost 25-percent in the effort just to move the darn thing. The designers who came up with the idea for Sears should have seriously looked at the Shark Navigator, which was already here, and attempted to come up with something better or snazzier.

Best,

Venson

Olah Venson:

The message in the buyer's review is that for $200 a vacuum, in the current economy and times, stick or not, has to have more capabilities than this SEARS Glide.  Interesting perspective. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Well, here's to those who dare to dream -- customers and dmanufacturers. Shoppers want something for their money even though in the today's balance a couple hundred bucks is considered nothing -- except to those who have to sweat some to get it. Product makers appear to be looking for a lot for even the least of their efforts.

This is why I hope people will start toughening up and learn to play hard ball with producers of frivolous product especially in hard times. There needs to come enough public knowledge re how things are made, where they are made, what it costs to make them and so on to allow for a consensus among consumer regarding fair prices.

Venson