The reason for the failure of the Hoover Z is simple.  It's a monstrosity of a vacuum cleaner. There's a reason no one bought a Hoover Z.  The reason is that the Z was displayed, alongside other vacuums that were much lighter, lower, and less expensive.  It was designed to compete (price wise) with Dyson, but has (and is) nothing new to offer.  Just a clogging old filter and a heavy, ineffecient vacuum.  The suction through the hose was NOT what one expects out of a $400 vacuum. Carmin always talks about Dyson's "$50 Panasonic Motor", yet the Dyson has tons more suction (and constant airflow) that the Hoover Z never had.
 
They could always use the Hoover Z as anchors for cruise ships.  Or drop them on Osama's caves.  I bet they'd do more damage than the bombs we now drop.
 
 
The Hoover Windtunnel 2 is almost as bad as the Z.  I bought one at Wally World last Thursday, on my day off, for $294. and took it back after one hour.  The filter clogs with dust (it's NOT "self cleaning" by any stretch of the imagination), the machine is a monstrosity to pick up and use, and it's not ever very powerful with the hose. The turbo brush stops turning within minutes of being used.
 
The Fusion debacle (horrible machine, loses suction), the Z and Wintunnel 2 monstrosities, as well as Hoover's general lack of innovation today, are all NAILS IN HOOVER'S COFFIN.  I will be very surprised indeed if Hoover even makes it to their 100th anniversary.  With junk like they now make, they'll have no customers within a year or so, except for the real low end, China-built Hoovers from Wally World (for which there's not much profit to the company).  It's a shame really that such a great company would sink to this low of a level, on par with the Regina Housekeeper.  What a shame.

Quote from Carmine_Difazio   on 06/27/06 at 8:39pm:

 
You also incorrectly posted that the Z would cause the demise of Dyson.

Quote from tiger21   on 06/28/06 at 8:50pm:

 
Dyson is very much alive also.  Most big box stores booted the out so no choice but to let the independents nurse them.  Maybe not dead but on the death bed.

I remember some time ago posters commenting on how well some of the lower cost Hoovers cleaned rugs, et all, and were good values for the bucks.  
 
The inexpensive Hoover Elite, though saddled with yet another pleated filter design, is in some ways more pleasant to use than the heavier, more deliberate moving Z.
 
And how are those Z filters holding up?  At what level does the air flow eventually stabilize at once the dirt level in the filter remains constant  (I have seen many a Z with badly discolored filters, suggesting some dirt remains embedded in them despite the self cleaning technology).

Success and/or failure in the vacuum industry are not measured solely on unit sales and/or market share.  
 
Product performance, reliability, customer satisfaction and product longevity factor into the equation for success.
 
If sales alone defined a vacuum's success (as you suggest), the Regina Electrik Broom (the most units of any vacuum product ever made and sold in the US) would be the most successful vacuum product ever made and marketed.  
 
Unfortunately despite spectacular sales, their performance was terrible, their reliability was terrible, their customer satisfaction after usage was less than mediocre and the product eventually died an ignominious death.  Very much like the Fantom vacuums.
 
Where are they now?  Long gone and since forgotten.  
 
Carmine D.