|
Thread Number: 10531
Dyson: Can they really live up to what they say? |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 113821 11/7/2010 at 09:41 (4,912 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
I recently performed a Kirby G4 vs. Dyson DC 25 test. And kirby outweighed dyson in almost every test. And, of course, my opinion is that kirbys are the best. Could i hear some more peoples opinions? | ||
| Post# 113827 , Reply# 2 11/7/2010 at 10:57 (4,911 days old) by DysonAnimal () | ||
|
Erm, what "tests" were these? Just sounds like you're trying to stir up a Kirby vs. Dyson battle... wonder which brand the fair-and-balanced-as-Fox-News forum will side with!!! | ||
| Post# 113836 , Reply# 4 11/7/2010 at 12:08 (4,911 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
But i think cleaning performance is the most important...
...agreed! You have to bear in mind that the Dyson is a fraction of the price of the Kirby. In some cases (NOT ALL!), it is true that you get what you pay for. Personally, I only have 2 problems with Dyson - I find emptying and cleaning the filters messy, and the brushroll is utter garbage - it has the deep cleaning power of a worn baby's hairbrush (although I understand the US machines are better for deep cleaning)
| ||
| Post# 113838 , Reply# 5 11/7/2010 at 12:12 (4,911 days old) by DysonAnimal () | ||
|
The Dyson doesn't need to be self-propelled because it weighs so much less! Could you share a little more detail about how you've arrived at your conclusions? | ||
| Post# 113840 , Reply# 6 11/7/2010 at 12:15 (4,911 days old) by DysonAnimal () | ||
|
Chris - which Dyson brushbar are you talking about? The current upright range uses at least 3 different designs. Ask Jon to show you his Overdrive sometime ;) | ||
| Post# 113842 , Reply# 7 11/7/2010 at 12:22 (4,911 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
@Turbo500: Agreed! | ||
| Post# 113844 , Reply# 8 11/7/2010 at 12:29 (4,911 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 113845 , Reply# 9 11/7/2010 at 12:30 (4,911 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 113846 , Reply# 10 11/7/2010 at 12:32 (4,911 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 113850 , Reply# 13 11/7/2010 at 12:45 (4,911 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Actually Jack, the Oreck brushroll, in my experience, is pretty excellent. The Oreck has so little suction so the brushroll has to make up for that and it does pick up surface little pretty effectively. Don't be mistaken though, I still don't like Oreck lol.
As for the 2 pics above, you can clearly see that the Dyson uses very short and sparsely spaced bristles - the Kirby uses longer, thicker and very dense bristles. Like I said, any fool can clearly see which brushroll is going to have better deep cleaning action and better grooming of deeper pile carpet. With all Dysons statistics and impressive use of ever-changing technology, a half decent brushroll seems to have missed them completely. I've seen carpet sweepers that could groom a carpet more than that lol. | ||
| Post# 113851 , Reply# 14 11/7/2010 at 12:46 (4,911 days old) by DysonAnimal () | ||
|
Why wood? Were they all out of granite? When you say "break", how so? A metal axle runs all the way through, so it's not like it snapped in half! You still haven't answered my previous question about how you arrived at your "test" results... | ||
| Post# 113852 , Reply# 15 11/7/2010 at 12:49 (4,911 days old) by DysonAnimal () | ||
|
Well, I guess I'm just a fool, then! How lucky you are to be able to 'see' how well appliances will work. Have you sought work with any vac companies, you could save them a fortune on RDD! | ||
| Post# 113853 , Reply# 16 11/7/2010 at 12:56 (4,911 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
IDK, he just said "break". They probably cracked because theyre made of cheap plastic. Im not in any way doubting that dysons are good vacuums, they just have a lot of design flaws. | ||
| Post# 113854 , Reply# 17 11/7/2010 at 12:56 (4,911 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 113855 , Reply# 18 11/7/2010 at 12:58 (4,911 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
@Turbo500(again)Then i guess that oreck TV ad is false advertising. | ||
| Post# 113858 , Reply# 20 11/7/2010 at 13:16 (4,911 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
Lets beak it up, guys. | ||
| Post# 113860 , Reply# 22 11/7/2010 at 13:33 (4,911 days old) by DysonAnimal () | ||
|
And for the record... ...Chris, if I offended you with my sarcasm I apologise. | ||
| Post# 113863 , Reply# 23 11/7/2010 at 13:35 (4,911 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
OK, got it, Dyson Animal. Just it kinda sounded a little bit like a fight. | ||
| Post# 113865 , Reply# 24 11/7/2010 at 13:47 (4,911 days old) by DysonAnimal () | ||
|
Nope, no fight. I'm withdrawing from this discussion, you're all free to say what you like! | ||
| Post# 113867 , Reply# 26 11/7/2010 at 13:53 (4,911 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Don't worry, Jack - I think we both got the wrong end of each others point, and I certainly didn't intend to imply you're a fool.
ANYWAY, back to the actual point of the conversation... I agree that the deep cleaning performance of a machine does depend on a number of factors, but IMO, the brushroll is one of the biggest of those. Even a carpet sweeper can remove surface dust and dirt and I think we would all agree that the machines known for their deep cleaning ability are the ones with thick, dense, relatively stiff bristles. The suction is obviously another factor, and I've said before, I have no issues with the suction power of Dyson cleaners, just the messy emptying, filter washing (both being unfortunately unavoidable) and brushroll (which is why I prefer Dyson's cylinder machines to the uprights).I would certainly like to see a brushroll more in the style of a Kirby, Oreck or Sebo brushroll as these have all proved for years that they do groom the carpet to a very high standard. The short, sparse bristles are not for me, I'm afraid. Having said that, one does have to bear in mind the current market. In the UK, thick carpets are out and hard-wearing, low pile carpet and laminate floors are in, obviously eliminating the need for such a deep cleaning brushroll. On the other end of that scale, many people did buy very good quality deep pile carpets and have not replaced these (my Mum and several friends parents, for example, still have carpets fitted in the 70's and 80's). Perhaps Dyson could develop and market a specific machine specifically designed for homes with thicker carpet with a more dense brushroll? Sort of like the animal, all floors, allergy etc variations on the same model, a Dyson "deep clean" would certainly have a market I think. | ||
| Post# 113869 , Reply# 27 11/7/2010 at 13:57 (4,911 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
I agree I highly agree, turbo500. But i just dont really like orecks. You said their suction is terrible, but i dont know since ive never used an oreck. So i guess their TV ad is false advertising! ;) | ||
| Post# 113873 , Reply# 28 11/7/2010 at 14:03 (4,911 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Kirbys can last up to 70 years..
..yes, but that is the difference between paying £2000 and £200 for a vacuum cleaner.
Kirby16, as much as I agree with you in regards to the performance and durability, testing a Dyson against a Kirby is like comparing a 3 course lobster dinner with a pot noodle. You pay for the Kirby to last 70 years. If I was to pay almost £2000 for a vacuum, I'd expect it last that long, and clean the house by itself whilst I sat with my feet up and a cocktail. You really need to compare the Dyson with an opposite cleaner in the same price range - a Sebo, Miele S7 or Vax Mach (Hoover US, I believe, although Jack will be able to confirm if that is within the same market price range). | ||
| Post# 113874 , Reply# 29 11/7/2010 at 14:06 (4,911 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Kirby16, Oreck don't have very good suction at all. The brushroll is about the only thing it has going for it. It DOES pick up surface litter as demonstrated on shopping channels and infomercials etc, but it is VERY dependant on the brushroll and leaves a lot allergens, dust mites and dust mite excrement behind due to the lack of suction
| ||
| Post# 113876 , Reply# 30 11/7/2010 at 14:15 (4,911 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
FALSE ADVERTISING! Yeah, on the TV commercials, they talk about how great an orecks suction is. (Have you seen the one where the lady is sidewys an holding onto a telephone pole?) | ||
| Post# 113879 , Reply# 31 11/7/2010 at 14:24 (4,911 days old) by Sablekid () | ||
|
I think the fact that Kirby (and Royal) has not changed the basic principles of the vacuum in YEARS of business should say something about them vs. others. | ||
| Post# 113889 , Reply# 34 11/7/2010 at 14:53 (4,911 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
Nevr knew that. Im gonna have to be more careful with my older kirbys. Could you post a pic of what that looks like? | ||
Post# 113901 , Reply# 36 11/7/2010 at 15:50 (4,911 days old) by sleepdoc  (St. Louis, MO) |
||
Variables
In any scientific field, "any fool" knows that experiments/"tests" control for variables. Those brush roll photos support no conclusion beside the brush rolls' being distinct. They function in entirely different systems. How that system functions overall is not determinable on the basis of one variable. "Any fool can see..." and its equivalents consistently are silencing assertions that attempt to persuade to conclusions that actually lack data.
I have large collections of Kirby and Dyson vacuums, and I like both makes. I think they have comparative strengths and weaknesses. I have observations, but those observations don't constitute conclusions, let alone mechanisms. | ||
| Post# 113908 , Reply# 38 11/7/2010 at 16:39 (4,911 days old) by kirby16 () | ||
|
Due to HooverCeelebrity's offensive post, i will not be posting in the vacuumland forums ever again. Goodbye, everyone. | ||
|
Post# 113943 , Reply# 42 11/7/2010 at 19:12 (4,911 days old) by sleepdoc (St. Louis, MO) |
||
|
^^ that might be true
But, no one has data to show that it's impossible that a Dyson could endure regular use for 50+ years. One can suspect that to be the eventuality but simply cannot demonstrate it without data.
Are you prepared to say that all plastic vacuums, "no matter how well designed will not be around in [40]+ years except..." rather than 50+? I ask because I believe that people are using their Dial-a-Matics since whenever they were introduced, which is somewhere around 40 years. My great uncle had a plastic Electrolux upright from around 1980 that was his daily driver from its new purchase until his death in 2009, and it survived in very good condition. (I grant that that that's basically 30, not 50, years, but who's to say it won't make it another 20?) Of many predictions, lots of people have "said it many times before", but so what? Be as skeptical as you want to be, but I don't see how you can justify claiming to know the factual outcome of something that hasn't yet transpired. | ||
|
Post# 113946 , Reply# 43 11/7/2010 at 19:29 (4,911 days old) by sleepdoc (St. Louis, MO) |
||
|
I don't understand the point of making posts to the effect that one has determined that some certain thing is decidedly better than something else on a board like this and then becoming incredulous when some other person expects a substantive explanation of the claim beyond his or her being a fool for not already knowing it and an even more egregious fool for failing to conclude the same on the basis of some arbitrary factor that, in isolation, does not constitute evidence.
I don't remember that it's ever failed to provoke a fight. | ||
| Post# 113955 , Reply# 47 11/7/2010 at 21:13 (4,911 days old) by Sablekid () | ||
|
and to add to that I dont think ANYone in my area likes the price tag of a Kirby....OR Dyson. Again, this is a regional thing...not the gospel or opposition of anyones thoughts. More of an observance! | ||
| Post# 113987 , Reply# 50 11/8/2010 at 00:37 (4,911 days old) by aeoliandave (Stratford Ontario Canada) | ||
Thank you for that Fred.
My radar immediately went off when I checked the profile (as I do with every unknown poster) behind this thread's initial post today, to find "Kirby16" had been a 'member' since all of...yesterday? Member Since 11/06/2010. That's right, guys and what a busy little dweeb he has been contributing insipid comments on a number of threads about Kirbys and Dysons. Certainly, providing an email address: LALALALAL, indicates malice of forethought; a sincerely cautious person would have left it blank. Sorry you got caught up in it, Jack, and you other fellers. :-( Atrocious spelling and sentence structure is a damning give-a-way that one is somewhat of a texting tweener twit and in light of the peevishly abrupt withdrawal pending the 'growing of a pair' and some manners, one reaches the conclusion that the cowardly malefactor from Billings is simply the harbinger of yet another feeble assault wave from outside our ranks. Rest assured he is part of a pack, some may already be lurking among us and there will be more until the novelty wears off. We've been here before. What these mischief makers never realize is that it's not a matter of a wolf stealthily invading the henhouse but a chicken surrounded by curious roosters. On a lighter note pertaining to the subject, today was Vacuum the upstairs Bedroom Day. Being one of Hector and Felix's favorite snoozing spots, the heated waterbed duvet accumulates an impressive weekly surface load of long & short black fur. Experience has taught me that a bagless vac with a motor-driven brushroll run back and forth all over the duvet cover does the best job of getting up 99% of it, which is easily collected and dumped from the bagless dirt jug. Depending on which suitable vacuum is next in line, today I used the Dyson DC07. With all tools on-board and readily at hand, the detachable wand & long hose is perfect for getting down into the mattress side channels and snapping up escaped down feathers from the pillowcases, crevice tool cleans all the junctions where vertical furniture bases meet horizontal floors, dusting brush keeps table & door tops and books and shelved vacuums gleaming, then the same machine does a terrific job in upright mode on the carpets and bare floor sections. I could and have done the same thing with one of the Kirbys but it is much more labor-intensive and the weight can lead to nasty arm-ache. Frankly, and without taking away any of the joy of wielding gorgeous vintage vacuum cleaners, because of the higher suction levels and aggressive brushroll designs of the better modern bagless vacuums I find I am using them more often for serious and efficient major house cleaning. I'm not wasting vintage bags and the evidence of cat hair and sandy grit in the bagless jugs just tells me there's more than enough debris down there in the carpets than any one vacuum could extract. Each of us have differing needs in our various geographic zones, our home circumstances and house conditions. When we find a vacuum that is demonstrably superior for the task at hand it naturally becomes a favorite 'daily driver' until it's time to mix it up again. That's what collectors do. Hopefully we don't carp and crap all over someone else's findings and choices. Dave 
| ||
| Post# 113991 , Reply# 51 11/8/2010 at 02:28 (4,911 days old) by Sablekid () | ||
|
..".there's more than enough debris down there in the carpets than any one vacuum could extract. Each of us have differing needs in our various geographic zones, our home circumstances and house conditions" Excellently said! | ||
|
Post# 114034 , Reply# 53 11/8/2010 at 14:58 (4,910 days old) by sleepdoc (St. Louis, MO) |
||
|
^ | ||
| Post# 114038 , Reply# 54 11/8/2010 at 15:38 (4,910 days old) by kirbyeureka95 () | ||
|
i think another problem is that... the dc14 straight up sucks. (in the everyday meaning of the word). the airmuscle and other, newer dyson uprights might face alot better chance. | ||
|
Post# 114104 , Reply# 55 11/8/2010 at 22:19 (4,910 days old) by Air-WayCharlie (USA) |
||
Hello Fred S.........................
I have to laugh for you nailing that, "vacuum enthusiast", on some level. Although I do not provide information about myself for reasons well known to long time posters, I still enjoy reading and posting.
Fred S., back to what I wanted to post about: remember several or more years ago when a certain designated high ranking member was given a Dyson, serial number #000001, in the US at a certain event in NYC, and it was shipped to me? (That certain member has a fear of flying.) I had it for a few months and was so disenchanted with it's performance, (and my non-vacuum spouse named it, "Barbie's Dream Vacuum"), that I called you and asked if you would like it to play with and then it would become part of the club's collection. I seem to remember you had fun putting it through a pace of tests and then something kind of simple broke and you had to send it back to Dyson, (in Chicago at the time, I think), to have it fixed as a warranty issue. That left a lasting impression. It did not really do anything on the knap of my berber carpet. Yet, all my Kirby's do, from the 1967 Dual Sanitronic to the Sentria, the Miele Champagne, the Air-way MKII 88, Air-Way Centurion, Ultralux with P/N 6 and Filter Queen 31, (circa 1979). Interesting results to say the least. And, I'm leaving out several other vacuums as well. How well we have seen posters come and go on this site and it's forerunners. Thanks for looking out for all of us. Charlie | ||
| Post# 114127 , Reply# 57 11/9/2010 at 08:37 (4,910 days old) by eurekaprince (Montreal, Canada) | ||
I think we all have our personal favourite brand. It may not have anything to do with logic or performance whatsoever. It's just love.
For the life of me, I can not figure out how I developed my absolute fascination with Eureka. I know it has something to do with growing up with one as a toddler....the colour, the smell of the tools and the hose, the clean carpets it left behind. What's even more bizarre, is that to this day, whenever I see the famous "curvey e" logo, this wave of calmness rushes over me. It's totally bizarre and unexplainable. I can't get the same effect from a Hoover logo, or even from Eureka's new "Toys r Us" graphic (yuch!! "eureka!"....oy vey). It has to be that curvey "e" from the 1960's and 1970's. If someone had to offer me a brand new Dyson for free or a free NIB Kirby or a free New In Box Eureka Empress from 1968, guess which one I would take? It's kind of like loyalty to a sports team. And when a Eureka got top ratings from Consumer Reports? Wow. For me it was like winning the Stanley Cup! And Eureka did it many times in the 1970's and 1980's. Gimme an E! "E"! Gimme a U! "U"..... :-) | ||
| Forum Index: | 
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
