Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

I actually played with one at Lowes the other day. Overall, I liked the design, but the foam pre-filter is crap compared to Dyson's recent pre-filter design (which is also featured on the Hoover Platinum Cyclonic and Panasonic/Kenmore canisters...but I suppose its washable HEPA filter makes up for it. http://smallappliances.electroluxusa.com/ Highlights: - 14 foot cleaning reach - LED headlight - "Ball-like" swivel action - Metal Soleplate - 5 year warranty - $299

Mike_W wrote:

Try reading Vacmanuk's post about his Mother's broken hand and her experiences with vacuums.  [You brought up your wrist problem.]  She likes the ORECK and SEBO [save the ORECK sound and I understand the latest models sold by SEARS may even address the noise problem].  That's the point.  Vacmanuk got it, so did his Mom.  Simple to read and comprehend.  

Carmine D.

Mike_W wrote:
Thank you for answering the question.

None of SEBO's uprights are self propelled either - they don't involve a mechanism which is geared or mechanised to offer that faciity - yet they surge ahead and feel lighter to the user. Re-thinking the swivel on the Nimble - it looks very much like that of the Miele S7 swivel - i.e.e larger pivotal mechanism joined between bottom of the vacuum where the pre-motor filter would be located and the top of the hood of the upright. SEBO's Felix has a small pivotal neck and thus doesn't require that much turning - compared to Miele & Nimble seen by the photos.

Not all looped handles are the same though - the Oreck impels owners to hold the handle almost dead upright as if they are holding a joy stick when the Oreck upright vac is in use. More modern uprights with a looped handle employ the hand to push down at a flatter angle, also similar to that of the Hoover Freemotion cylinder which lacks a loop but is orthopaedically more comfortable:





Hoover however made the mistake of making the handle flatter despite being more comfortable by "looks," and then adding a heavy clip on tool directly underneath. In practice, it endangers pressure on the side of the hand, thus employing a clenched pose rather than using all bones within the hand equally and putting too much weight on one side of the hand - which is clearly demonstrated in the above photo.

Mike_W wrote:

There may not be the BEST or Perfect vacuum for all BUT surely vacuum makers who make their products better for all persons to use are attempting to defy that statement, which frankly is antiquated and disengenuous.  This AMAZON video is for the HOOVER lightweight bagged upright and dual compact canister.  Consumer Reports has rated this duo as its top rated pick on several occasions and within its top 10 picks on all occasions where it/they are rated and reviewed ALONG with full size uprights.  CR never adds the qualifier that it is a lightweight and only should be considered for quick pick ups and/or in conjunction with a full sized cleaner for home cleaning.  That thinking is stuck in the very old vacuum past.  The vacuum world has changed.  I've chosen the HOOVER vacuum team becuase you and others here have mentioned it in the past favorably.  

ORECK is THE VACUUM maker that has been the leader in the dual vacuums' marketing strategy.  Dave Oreck contradicted this wrong lightweight vacuum thinking when he introed his lightweight upright almost 50 years ago.  Vacuum makers from RICCAR, HOOVER, ELECTROLUX, KENMORE, SEBO, dyson and others followed ORECK's lead.  There is no difference between a full size canister with a power head nozzle and a direct suction lightweight upright [like the ORECK/HOOVER] for cleaning parity on rugs and floors.   

Carmine D.

 

CarmineD wrote:
There is a difference in Oreck and other brands.  The other brands actually remove imbeded dirt.

CarmineD wrote: You see, you are agreeing w/me and then contradicting yourself again.  It is not "antiquated and disengenuous" if it is true.  Manufacturers continue to try improving their product(s).  While they may add an improvement, something else may lack.  I will continue to use that phrase, because it is true.

You are not understanding my statement.  I said-
Mike_W wrote:
This was in response to your "smart" statement, which I could not understand.  I took liberty and responded w/a logical statement.  As anyone can see, I gave a full explanation.  I used the HOOVER Air as one example, as well as the Riccar Supralite.  You chose to pull every lightweight vacuum together and say I have said the same thing about everyone of them.  The Riccar would be fine for a very large home,  but someone will complain that they do not want to run and get a suction-only vacuum, for other vacuuming chores.  What does ORECK do, he puts out the Edge w/an onboard hose.  The only problem is, hose use is only good for small work ilke dust on a baseboard.  The Edge is not perfect or the Best.  Do you understand now? I even stayed in the lightweight category. Again!

Mike_W wrote:

Hopefully you understand now.  If not ask, I'll be happy to assist you just as I do your buddy here HS.

Carmine D.

 "There is no BEST or PERFECT vacuum cleaner".

 I will continue to use that phrase, because it is true.  

     Source:  Our illustrious Moderator here on this site Mike W.

Is this your original thought/idea or are you quoting someone else who you did not give credit to here?

Carmine D.

Carmine;

I know that you are still viewing, so sign in and read your email.

Mike W.
Moderator

Typically AEG is taking on the Nimble in the UK. Seems that the higher end/more modern rivals are being used by Electrolux's other brand to "reinstate German engineering". Arrives in the UK by May 2011.

It seems to me that a crucial point of this debate has not yet been fully articulated. No one vacuum cleaner CAN do it all, nor could it ever be so engineered until A) BOTH batteries and cords are eliminated and the vacuum operates from a Tesla generator that draws electricity from the aether and B) the dirt is either teleported to a disposal site, or dismantled at the atomic level to provide it's own power. Those two points solve the weight/power issue with respect to the size of the motor and the size of the dirt container, leaving ample room for a full set of on board tools. Back to our current understanding of reality.

The present understanding of the laws of physics compels a recognition of two distinct types of above the floor cleaning 1) on the fly as in the stray piece of popcorn behind a chair, a cobweb, or crumbs on a chair/sofa and 2) thorough cleaning of all surfaces that are not carpeting or area rugs.  The on board hose of an upright lends itself to the first type and not to the second because a) it does not roll like a canister with a tug of the hose (the new Miele S7 is a PARTIAL exception to this caveat because its hose locks down, keeping the pull exerted  at a low center of gravity) b) the hose of necessity is of the stretch variety which collapses when suction is applied with an upholstery or crevice tool. The hose must be managed with BOTH hands so the hose can be used to make even strokes on upholstery or along the edge of a floor. Longer stretch hoses don't really help, just have more length to collapse. Longer regular hoses mean more hose to store on board,more weight, more to undo when needed, taking more time to replace on the cleaner when finished with the task. The new Miele canister stretch extension hose is brilliant, but has the limitation (for the moment, at least) of not being usable with an electric hose/nozzle assembly, but the discussion is still about uprights. Full size attachment kits offer more convenience in the attachment mode but require the conversion, which users complain about bitterly, especially with regard to the Kirby, the most complete and thorough conversion of all, taking in to account reach, number of tasks, and true portability. The separate portable canister offers lighter weight for both machines, since the canister does not need to clean carpets, and does not need wheels, but again, consumers complain about having to go get the second cleaner. The original Bissell LIft Off was a good idea, but it was bulky do to the fact that the bag compartment had to be large enough to accommodate a full size upright's carpet cleaning capability.  Taking all of this in to account leads us to Oreck's development of the Edge. They have distilled the on board tools concept down to what people really use it for: quick grabs of stray debris the upright cannot reach. A longer hose and more tools would defeat the purpose. Oreck's research (remember some Oreck stores did repairs on all makes and models) revealed that even with owning an upright with on board tools, a great many consumers still use a separate canister for their above the floor cleaning. Those who do not tend do much less thorough above the floor cleaning. Many, many uprights come in for repair missing their tools, but people still like them for their ability to grab stray debris on the fly. That is the one strength of an on board, instant on hose with an attached wand, that and nothing else. When I tried the Edge, it gripped the carpet better than any other Oreck, ever, on all carpet types. It maneuvered well, and the instant on board hose with attached flex crevice tool did well for what it was intended. I predict Hoover will imitate Oreck's advance as soon as the patent expires, or they can find a way around it. The Sharp bagless upright was brilliant in that the hose/floor suction was diverted back and forth with a foot pedal. One could actually operate the cleaner with the upright's handle in one hand and the wand in the other and simply flip back and forth from floor to hose, hose to floor  without even raising the handle to the full upright position, but no additional hose could be easily attached/removed. Most of the Panasonic, Riccar, Simplicity, etc uprights with on board tools are equipped with a port for a hose to accommodate a full set of tools. Not a bad compromise at all, easily designed, and it limits the trips to retrieve the hose and tools to those times when they are really needed. I think combining this approach with the Sharp diverter valve would be brilliant. Mention must be made of the Hoover concept with the on-board hand vac, nice try, but no wand to reach with, and not enough power for deep cleaning.

What about canisters? Well, the quick release wand from a power nozzle still leaves a metal wand to lift, and a metal edge to ding and scratch walls if one is not careful. The new Panasonic power head with built in bare floor brush looks brilliant, but the jury is still out on its durability. Some have complained it is difficult to re-insert the brush onto the nozzle base. Separate plastic wands are a good idea, but they don't ride along with the rest of the tools. Telescopic aluminum electric wands offer the best compromise so far, points to MIele, but still not as light as plastic wands.

The debate revolves around a few key points, which is why there is no one best vacuum for everyone. Six people faced with the same cleaning challenges might very well make six completely different choices of cleaning equipment.

1) How many different kinds of cleaning do you have to accomplish?
2) How do you prefer to do them (or not)?
3) What is most convenient for you?
4) Convenience, Power, Price: pick two and compromise on the third

I have not used it, or read reviews but the videos of Beam's new central vac hose look intriguing. It expands from 13ft to double it's length.