I remember the launch - but the ones I saw at department stores had a darker bin than the clear ones that were eventually sold at other retailers (and is also documented in Dyson's book). I thought it looked like a toy rather than an actual vacuum cleaner. My dad loved it though as he was into engineering and design. 

good LORD, I feel old!

The first Dyson I ever saw belonged to my Aunt and Uncle. My Uncle works in industrial electronics and they always had very high end electricals at home - washer, dishwasher, TV, VCR etc was all the latest stuff. Pre-Dyson, they had a Turbopower u2602. Anyway, my uncle got a DA001 from work - this must've been about 1993. I thought it was the wierdest thing I had ever seen, but being only 4 at the time, I was fascinated by it. I thought it was the best thing since sliced bread and loved watching all the dust spin around inside. Mum was less impressed, so when I hinted at us getting one, this was quickly brushed aside.

Now, fast forward to about 1996 - the DC01's were becoming increasingly more popular. The first one I got to use properly and form an opinion on belonged to my friend Karl's Mum. It was this model that I remember using the most and being horribly disapointed. All that dust spinning around in the bin and then I put my hand over the end of the hose and thought the suction was pathetic, especially compared with both the Kirby and Panasonic we had at home at the time.

The following year, my Grandma replaced her Electrolux 610 with a DC01. She also thought it was absolutely brilliant - I suppose purely because you could see all the dirt. The 610 certainly had more suction power and groomed the carpet better. My Grandma has 2 dogs and vacuums on a daily basis. The DC01, even after a few months, was falling apart. The hose release broke, the floorhead friction handle release broke, the baseplate cracked, the hose split. It only lasted 2 years (compared to the 11 years she had the 610) and was replaced with a DC04 in 1999, which I remember thinking was a VAST improvement.

In conclusion, my initial response to the DC01/DA001 was fascination. I suppose, because it looked so radically different to anything I'd seen or used and I spent HOURS with my aunts cleaner looking at all the different features. However, over time and the more I used them, the more I started to dislike them. I remember a lot of people quickly replacing them - even at that young age I was surprised at how short their lifespan was. I also remember my Grandma having to run the thing over the same spot several times, especially where the dogs had been sat (5 Dyson's down the line, she has finally learnt her lesson and bought another brand). It took a while, but I finally saw through the flaws of the DC01. I was, however, very surprised and impressed at the improvements made on the DC04 - I guess everyone has to start somewhere.

Amen to that!

I remember thinking that the Hoover Vortex, even though it was a complete DC01 rip off, was a far better cleaner and, IIRC, was slightly cheaper.

Yeh, alright, rub it in why don't you Ry....:P. I seriously regret not taking that bagless Icon from Richie's garage, but it just wouldn't have fit in the car :(

I agree about the Vortex, although I prefer the original red and white tripple Vortex with the cord rewind.

this is a common missconception amongst the vacuum buying public. "Ooh, look at all that dirt it's picking up" because the user can see it spinning around. However, if you suck out the contents of a full Dyson cyclone into a normal vacuum bag, you'll see just how little is actually there. If you get a load of dust, dirt and hair and spin it around at high speeds in a cyclone, of course it's going to appear like there's loads of it. It's like egg white - you can whip it up with a hand mixer and make it look like there's loads of it, when in actual fact, it's just full of air.

We had a Panasonic Icon bagged upright - absolutely brilliant but it was a strict loan from my aunt before my parents got the Sebo X1 Automatic. I never got the chance to try the bagless version but I loved the bagged version we had.

oh brother, here we go again!

Yes Jamie, the Icon was the first "direct drive agitator" upright that had a seperate motor driven brushroll which spun 1/3 slower than the motor, which means it groomed the carpet as well as a dirty fan cleaner, yet maintained the strong suction power of a clean air machine.  

I'd sooner have an Icon over a Ranger anyday!

well, it's a good job I knew what you meant as this makes little sense :P.

It's also very open to debate. 

Hoover - Generations Past, Not Future!

Can we stop bleating about the Hoover Ranger??? There are so many other better Hoover uprights out there that came after it. Id sooner have a Junior U1104 to the Ranger - faster to clean, smaller, nimble, far more compact and easier to steer. 

The Ranger is good if you have all the time in the world. 

Agreed. I have a ranger and never used it. Much prefer using the 1104 Junior or any of the Turbopower 1's.

oh dear lord.

There was a version of the G-Force sold in the UK exclusively through Kleeneze

Jamie - what a load of old hoof that the Junior is unstable. Methinks you are trying to justify the Ranger or at least trying to defend it. I've never had a Junior tip over at all and I'm a lot older than you with quite a few more years under my belt. 

I find the Ranger is cumbersome, bulky and slow. As a design comparison, the Senior is slightly better as the original shape is easier to see than the expanses of unnecessary plastic design cladding that the Ranger hood covers up. I much prefer the Senior for large homes -also helped by a more powerful motor compared to the Junior. The Junior however is smaller and far more compact.

Ryan, I wouldn't have quite put that as politely as you, but I agree. The whole point of the Junior was to have a cleaner that was equally as sturdy and high performing as a larger cleaner, but more compact and lightweight - ideal for british homes.

especially as the DC04 De Stilj had brush controls, so the brush could be turned off.

Well Benny, the same could be said for Gtech's venerable cordless sweeper - there was very little on the market before it - and it was hardly well built. Buyers bought it because it is far easier to push and pull than a conventional dust sweeper and then the Swivel Sweeper came to the market (I had one of those too) and then copied triangular ones thereafter.

Yes, but double the price of a mechanical dust sweeper, people weren't exactly taken with the GTech - it seemed to only take off after it was seen on Channel 4's Big Brother. Suddenly everyone realised it was an Eco-derived model due to the product placement just from that TV show alone. 

I think a few peeps are being unfair with Dyson - he's an inventor first and foremost - and thus even if Dyson had perfected a bagless suction system, including a hard floor tool wouldn't be the first brand to do so with an upright vacuum and I think in the early days of vacuum cleaner production and releases, brands like Dyson are allowed to get some things wrong.

Im still getting over how mad Hoover were to bring out Hoover branded clear dust bags for use in their Cyclean, and Vortex upright vacuums! It kind of defeated the purpose of bag-less. The concept didn't last long, even though some used food bags to trap the dust thereafter.

Um.. the only thing about "quality aspirations," way back when Dyson was launched was that consumers weren't really interested in quality - we were still going on marketing promises like high power, high motors and dust capacity. The only aspect of quality that people who had seen Dyson machines were repairers or those working within the industry of selling vacuums. When Dyson came along, although undoubtedly pushed along in a few years with the suction power mantra, Dyson brought back glitter to the plastic surfaces and oh how they all copied Dyson after that! 

1991 eh for Hoover? I always imagined it was the other way around. I never looked closely at my Turbopower Total but it certainly didn't have glitter to the plastics - that came later on the TP2 and 3 series. The Autosense model had glitter.

Whilst I liked the DC01, at the time I felt the far more conventional and far lighter Hoovers I had were much better just to use from a usage point of view - the big floor head on the DC01 was a case in point. Great for cleaning carpets but couldn't get flat to the floor as there was too much height on that main floor head.

Also the tool storers at the back were a bit cheap - having the option to slide a dusting brush on top of a crevice tool and then on the other side, with the flat upholstery tool locked on- might have been handy when used for car cleaning if you are bending down anyway and have the tools to hand - but I much preferred the flush fitting design of Hoover's TP2 & 3 series where the tools had their own recesses and was far more flush.

Yep and the TPs also cleaned flat to the floor without much getting in the way.

It seems to be the case, sadly for a lot of bagless uprights on the market who persist in offering bagless, round bins 19 years on.. Morphy Richards' Clarity is about the only bagless upright I can think of that has a squarish bin, but even the pivot below the floor head restricts true flat to the floor cleaning.

Well I think we can agree then that in both cases, Hoover's design was far more efficient and versatile, but at the same time, it wasn't exactly new having flush fitting recesses on the rears of uprights, especially if you owned any of the Sebo uprights, or Panasonic.