Thread Number: 18620
Dyson Dual Cyclone machines 		[Down to Last]

Vacuumland's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items --- [As an eBay Partner, eBay may compensate vacuumland.org if you make a purchase using any link to eBay on this page]
Post# 204641   10/24/2012 at 11:47 (4,201 days old) by dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        

Hi All!
just wanted to start a thread about Dual cyclone dysons, and what people think of them. i have 7 dual cyclones, (3xDC01, 2xDC02, 2xDC04) and i think they aren't too bad, just the DC01's are a little low on 'suck'. however there were some good machines, such as the limited editions- as you may guess by my username i really like the De Stijl colour scheme.
thedysonman

Post# 204642 , Reply# 1   10/24/2012 at 11:48 (4,201 days old) by dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        
DC02

 here is one of my DC02's:


Post# 204644 , Reply# 2   10/24/2012 at 11:51 (4,201 days old) by dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        

DC04 absolute

Post# 204645 , Reply# 3   10/24/2012 at 11:56 (4,201 days old) by suckolux (Yuba City, CA)        

suckolux's profile picture
Cool pics, thanks for the look

Post# 204646 , Reply# 4   10/24/2012 at 12:00 (4,201 days old) by dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        

other DC02 taken with DC08T (not dual cyclone!)

Post# 204647 , Reply# 5   10/24/2012 at 12:01 (4,201 days old) by dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        

DC01 de stijl

Post# 204648 , Reply# 6   10/24/2012 at 12:05 (4,201 days old) by dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        

DC04 (sorry for bad quality)

Post# 204649 , Reply# 7   10/24/2012 at 12:07 (4,201 days old) by dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        

and finally another DC01

Post# 204650 , Reply# 8   10/24/2012 at 12:19 (4,201 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

You'll not get many replies on this subject as the majority of members here are American, and the earliest Dyson they got over there was the DC07, so they wouldnt know about the Dual Cyclone original machines.
I like the earlier Dysons, and have a few uprights, but the only one I have thats a Dual Cyclone is the DC04 Purple and Magenta which I picked up for a bargain price of £5 in a bad state on EBay. It was filthy and not working, but I repaired the cable, and cleaned it up and its not a bad cleaner, but not as powerful as the later multicyclonic models. I think the earlier models up to the DC15 were the best and most reliable as long as they are maintained properly. I liked the colours of the older models, and nowadays they are very boring. The bright colours of the DeStijl models are great, and in good condition the DC01, DC02 and DC04 DeStijl models will be collectable the older they get. I think the DC02 DeStijl is possibly the rarest one now, as the DC02 wasnt that popular when it was launched, with the DC05 being a much better seller.

Here's some of my Dysons, including the DC04, which was always my favourite colour combination:



Post# 204654 , Reply# 9   10/24/2012 at 13:39 (4,201 days old) by jakesvacs ()        
Hi

 Really like your dyson collection. We have similar machines!

Post# 204656 , Reply# 10   10/24/2012 at 14:32 (4,201 days old) by Dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        
Dyson

 Hi there jake- i do also have a dc16 animal, dc25 ball, dc07 animal, and a dc14 vroom- and about 35 non-dyson vacs.
thedysonman

Post# 204658 , Reply# 11   10/24/2012 at 14:45 (4,201 days old) by Dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        
Madabouthoovers...

 Hi there, madabouthoovers, your dc04 is my dream machine to have. it looks so shiny! i also like your dc15. and i love the dc07's, one of the best ones!
thedysonman

Post# 204659 , Reply# 12   10/24/2012 at 15:12 (4,201 days old) by Vintagerepairer (England)        

I like the idea of a cyclone cleaner which does not lose suction power. I also like the way the dirt slides out of a Dyson tank. So that is good.

What I do not like is that in making a bagless cleaner and making all sorts of comments about bags costing money and this being unfair on consumers, he spared no thought for the thousands of independent retailers who relied on the sale of vacuum cleaner consumables to keep their business going.

No one has ever yet said how important suction power is in the overall experience that is cleaning. To my knowledge no figures have been collated and put into the public domain as to how many air watts are needed to perform individual cleaning tasks. And whilst the original Dyson DC01, DC02, and DC03 cleaners did not lose suction power, they never had a good deal of it to start with. Many of the bagged competitor machines had more power, albeit in decline as the bag filled.

I am also at a loss for words as to how someone as clever as James Dyson has consistently overlooked and dismissed much of what worked well on existing vacuum cleaners in his attempts to make his own cleaners. So he replaced the bag with a no loss of suction cyclone system. Fair enough. But the inconvenience of the fat plastic tubes, short hoses, and latterly short mains leads and impractical tools are to my mind becoming a problem in itself, to the point where one could be forgiven for thinking that a regular bagged cleaner with a conventional set of practical tools and useful length of easy to use hose would be a better choice for some consumers over a bagless no loss of suction cleaner which is incredibly difficult to use and manage.

As the years have passed, all I see is that Dyson cleaners have solved one specific problem -the bag- but consistently added more and more different problems into the balance.

Post# 204671 , Reply# 13   10/24/2012 at 17:29 (4,200 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
Agreed...

 I find that the Dysons are not the easiest machines to use - despite what the television adverts say.

And I have to say, I still prefer the Hoover Purepower style of tools: decent length hose, extension tube, long straight crevice tool, separate dusting brush and upholstery head.

Post# 204720 , Reply# 14   10/25/2012 at 05:32 (4,200 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

The success of Dyson purely lies in clever marketing and not the product. I've always found most Dyson cleaners to be incredibly average machines, with a very premium price tag. I do like the idea of a bagless machine, but in practice I've always found them messy, unhygenic, flimsey, over priced and poorly constructed. The earlier machines were certainly nothing to write home about, with the DC01, DC02 and DC03 having some of the lowest suction on the market at the time. The DC04 was a VAST improvement and probably my favourite of all the Dyson cleaners. Of the 5 Dyson's my Grandparents have owned, it was certainly the more higher performing and it lasted the longest.

 

I've also never been a fan of the tools. One of the things I love the most about the Sebo is the quick release hose and wand that doesn't require me to stop using the machine and put it upright whilst in use if I need to get into a corner or behind furniture etc.

 

I do think Dyson have improved dramatically since the days of the DC01. I used the DC40 the other week for the first time, and apart from being disapointed in the build quality, I found it to be a pretty good machine. However, I still firmly hold my belief that there are higher performing, more reliable and cheaper bagged cleaners on the market. Anybody that spends £398 in a Dyson DC40 need their head testing.
Post# 204724 , Reply# 15   10/25/2012 at 08:28 (4,200 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Benny summed my opinions up to a T.

Post# 204735 , Reply# 16   10/25/2012 at 10:17 (4,200 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

Dyson made a big mistake when he decided to lay off his production staff in Malmesbury, Wiltshire, and move production off to the far East in Malaysia in 2001. Many people have never forgiven Dyson for doing this, and it was seen as purely greedy and profit grabbing.
I would never buy a new Dyson and pay full price for it, when so many older models are available on Ebay for less than £60 refurbished. They are good as bagless cleaners, but too many of them become fragile and suffer from broken plastic housings, torn hoses and bits snapping off. Also, far too many later model DC24 and DC25's suffered from premature brushroll motor failure, and the prices now approaching £400 for the newest models will buy you a top of the range Sebo or Miele high quality bagged upright with all the bells and whistles, made in Germany not Malaysia.
Also, whilst I have a few old Dysons I rarely use them, and use a Sebo X4 or Miele S6 for daily cleaning - both bagged cleaners. My Dysons are purely part of my collection, and I am not interested in any newer than the DC15, as that is where they got simply too expensive and unreliable, and I never approved of his move in production to Malaysia.

Post# 204738 , Reply# 17   10/25/2012 at 11:19 (4,200 days old) by dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        
dc25..........

 hi there everyone, i am really sorry but i'm not too certain, as i have a DC25 as you can see and i use it all the time, as i think it is amazing. but i do agree dyson took the cheaper way out and moved to malaysia, and the motors don't last nealy as long as the earlier ones did. Although the DC01/02 were iconic desings, they do have their many flaws! the DC04 was probably the best dual cyclone, despite some of the non-clutched brush rollers being very noisy!
thanks for all your comments!
thedysonman

Post# 204742 , Reply# 18   10/25/2012 at 11:43 (4,200 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

I have seen many DC24's especially on ebay that have had brushroll motor failure, and these small motors are usually only available as a complete head assembly. Its a good thing that most Dysons now come with a 5 year guarantee so at least you can own it for 5 years with no financial outlay for its repairs, as Dyson are actually good at repairing them under warranty. But A vacuum for the price asked for a Dyson should be expected to last longer than 5 years in a domestic situation.
Of all the Dyson DC07's I bought to refurbish and sell on again, the most common problems were motor's arcing or burnt out completely, plastics snapped off, main hoses that have rips or tears in them, broken handle retaining lugs on the back of the switch housings, plastic soleplates that crack, break or disintegrate, and on the clutchless models, broken brushroll belts and brushroll clatter. But many of these problems were caused by owner neglect to maintain the machine properly. Bagless machines are much more prone to motor failure through overheating, as people dont clean the filters as often as they should or operate the machine with uncleared blockages.
One of the biggest problems on the DC04, was the mains cable breaking internally at the joint to the spine of the cleaner, at the switch housing grommet. Also, the wand handle wasnt reversible as on the DC07, so that the handle iself got in the way of using the wand. The DC01, was a nuiscance for having to buy new pre motor filters as they werent washable, and it didnt have clutch control for the brushroll. It also had relatively poor suction. The other big problem with the DC01 was that the top of the handle often suffered from broken plastics where the tools fitted into the end of it.

Post# 204748 , Reply# 19   10/25/2012 at 12:53 (4,200 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
The thing is, we can be subjective now that Dysons are taken for granted as being fairly expensive to buy now, even when the first DC01 came out, it too was expensive as it was new and novel.

My parents bought a brand new DC01 a year later after launching in the UK (compared to my uncle who bought a Sebo as he was manager of a care home and had already used the commercial upright) they liked using the DC01 even though it was bulkier and heavier than their Oreck XL. At that point in my life I adored Hoover products, but I did like the DC01's novel central hose handle idea compared to the curved up hose on my Turbopower uprights. I also found it faster to clean carpets with the DC01's larger wheels and auto adjusting head, even if it didn't clean deep enough, it seemed to be able to extract more dust even after the use of my numerous Hoovers - but back then I was taken in by the clear dust bin concept and didn't realise that the same test with a Dyson used first before a conventional bagged vacuum could still produce excess dust, it just made it easier to see the dust being collected in the Dyson. I didn't like the emptying procedure - the DC04 was far easier to empty thanks to its bottom release door.

What I miss about the DC01 is its motor noise. I didn't ever find it that noisy certainly compared to Hoover products "back in the day," and yes whilst it couldn't get under low furniture, the Dyson just seemed to be quicker than using some of the classic traditional bagged vacuums. We eventually replaced the DC01 with a DC03 that didn't last long because of leaking dust and Dyson ended up giving us a brand new DC04 at a reduced cost as a goodwill gesture. The DC04 seems to be the model I ended up liking the best even though I find it noisier than the DC01.

Whilst Dyson moved production to Asia for cheaper production, it certainly didn't lower the cost prices!





Post# 204749 , Reply# 20   10/25/2012 at 13:19 (4,200 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

sebo_fan, the DC04 didnt have a bottom drop bin, it was only introduced on the DC07. The DC04 had the same type of bin as the DC01, in that the top half had to be removed, and then cear bin tipped upside down to empty it. The clear bin also retained the lower part of the central cone which could be pulled out for cleaning.

Post# 204751 , Reply# 21   10/25/2012 at 13:21 (4,200 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
Oh well, it was so long ago! Ty for the reminder - but then again, didn't the DC04 have proper smaller cleaning tools that you didn't need the daft adapter that came with the DC01? I think Dyson had improved things by then.

Post# 204752 , Reply# 22   10/25/2012 at 13:37 (4,200 days old) by sanitaire (anchorage, alaska)        

lots of my friends give them too me and don't know aobut the washable filter......lucky there motor hasn't burned up yet...

Post# 204755 , Reply# 23   10/25/2012 at 13:53 (4,200 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

Sebo_fan, yes indeed on the DC04, it had the same tool set that was on the later DC07 models, that attached directly to the hose or the end of the wand handle. The DC01 tools were a bit of a failure really, as they attached to the base of the cleaner and always got lost or kept falling off - my parents had the DC01 for many years and said that was the main problem, so they ended up keeping the tools in the their cleaning box. The tools were also smaller than those on the DC04, and indeed, did need the adaptor. The Henry also has this adaptor as its tools wont attach directly to the end of the hose without the adapter.

Sanitaire - yes, its an all too common problem with the filters in ANY bagless cleaner, not just the Dysons. People think all they need to do is tip out the bin and thats all the maintenance they need to do. So many bagless cleaners end up on Ebay as spares or repairs simply for loss of suction due to clogged filters. It amazes me - dont people ever read the instructions they get when they buy a bagless cleaner? or is it that they are just too idle to clean the filters when they should? Why spend all that money on a bagless cleaner to avoid the costs of buyin bags, then before its even a year old and the filters are clogged, sell it off for next to nothing? Surely these people would be better buying a bagged machine, at least when emptying the bag, they would restore lost suction again and not need to sell the cleaner and buy another new bagless one again - thus spending much more money in the long run.

Post# 204762 , Reply# 24   10/25/2012 at 15:38 (4,199 days old) by Vintagerepairer (England)        
tools

 The original tools on the upright Dyson cleaners were made by a 3rd party and were the same as those used on a good deal of vacuum cleaners. The earlier Hoover Turbopower and Turbomaster cleaners had the same, as an example. When Dyson went on to produce their own tools, they initially made a small crevice tool, small dusting brush, and sharp cornered small tool. As you will all know, the DC02 was of course designed to accommodate these tools in the on-board caddy, so they could not be changed, but the Absolute and De Stijl uprights always had the large crevice tool and dusting brush as used on the DC04 range. Towards the end of the 1990's, the basic yellow & grey DC01 came with an identical kit to the 04, even down to the oval shaped swivel small tool.

It was not the tools on the DC01 which commanded the need for an adaptor, it was the shape of the hose cuff. If the user was to attach the tools to the wand, the adaptor was not used, but again you all know this. The need for an adaptor on a Henry is slightly different as it is designed to fit the metal wand which is double ended with a male section on each end. Numatic like to give the user the choice of which way the wand is used, and a jolly good idea it is too as the variouis configurations are useful for low level and high level cleaning.

The fault with the DC04 mains lead is a perfect example of Dyson not paying attention to history. Back in the early 1970's Electrolux had the exact same problem with the mains lead on their new 500 series cleaners. The mains lead left the cleaner on a straight grommet which allowed too much flexibility as to the direction of which the lead could be pulled, and in addition offered little cushioning to sharp tugs. The result was torn leads which would often short-circuit. The answer came in the form of a right-angled flex sleeve which offered a whole lot less flexibility when it came to moving the lead about, but also had much absorption of any strain. Fast forward 20 years and Dyson bought out their new upright cleaner which had the same problem as the Electrolux 500. Dyson even carried this fault on into the DC04 as has been mentioned, and of course decided that a right-angled flex sleeve was required. That, gentlemen, is the "research and design" which Dyson claims adds cost to his cleaners. I hate to be flippant, but I could have shown him this problem and the necessary solution, for a lot less money than it must have cost them.

Post# 204788 , Reply# 25   10/25/2012 at 18:43 (4,199 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

On the later DC04's I believe the cable outlet grommet was changed to a right angled rubber boot, but that it was angled upwards instead of backwards like on the DC07 and onwards. As the DC04 I have is the earlier limited edition model with the earlier hood graphics and "dual cyclone" logo, it had a straight grommet fitted, and obviously when I bought it, it was a non worker. I tested the continuity of the cable from the switch to the plug and found that the neutral wire was broken internally. I swapped the cable for another spare cable off a DC07, and the cleaner worked again.
I had exactly the same problem with a Kirby G7 I bought, with broken internal wires at the joint to the handle, causing the cleaner to switch on and off when using it. I remedied it by cutting out the bad section and fitting a push connector rather than paying over 20 quid for a new cable.

That adaptor on the Henry is only used when fitting the tools directly to the hose cuff, as it has a slash cut angled end. The tools fit straight onto the metal wand or top metal bend, without the adaptor.

I remember also discussing the fact that the clutchless models of upright on the DC04 and DC07 were very prone to shredding their solepates, more so than the clutched models which had small wheels in the soleplate, and tended to fare better.
I think much of the problem came from using the clutchless models on hard floors, which they were not designed to be used on, and this caused big chunks of the soleplate to be removed from the back side of the brushbar recess. The front side of the soleplate recess rarely got pitted or damaged.

Post# 204791 , Reply# 26   10/25/2012 at 18:58 (4,199 days old) by Vintagerepairer (England)        
sole plates

 Therein lies another aspect of the Dyson cleaners which bears no resemblance to any other cleaner made in past. The sole plates were far, far too thin. Look at any other make of cleaner and the sole plate is chunky and often rounded inwards. Dyson sole plates just seem like a sheet of thin plastic with a hole cut out. Even on carpets they can easily be shredded when threads get caught and ripped through the plate. If it wasn't for the fact that James Dyson has been banging on about appliances and devices in life being made so that the manufacturer could then sell consumables at a cost and how he thinks this is morally wrong, I would stake my life that the sole plate was designed the way it was so that it would fail quickly and they would make money selling a new part.

As for the flex on the DC04, indeed it was a right angled sleeve which pointed upwards. As this was a complete afterthought on an established cleaner, there was no way the cord could exit backwards, due to the existing design of the cleaner. Interesting Madabouthoovers that you mention it being different from the DC07; yes, it was of course, but the DC03 had been on sale for a good deal longer than the DC04, and that too had a backward facing right-angled flex sleeve. It is a wonder that the DC04 did not have the same. The biggest problem with straight flex sleeves on upright cleaners is the constant yanking of the flex. On the original Electrolux 500 it was the constant pulling by the user which caused the issue. On the Dyson DC04, as well as the pulling, the fact that the flex left the cleaner 2/3 of the way down the machine meant it was very, very easy to step on the lead when pushing the cleaner around, which put lots more stress on the flex. The very shape of a soft right-angled sleeve is such that it will absorb that kind of stress to a far greater extent than a straight sleeve ever could. I have seen mains lead failure on DC04 cleaners with a right-angled sleeve, but it is a much rarer sight than on straight-sleeved versions.

Post# 204799 , Reply# 27   10/25/2012 at 19:52 (4,199 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

I thought about the fact it was threads and hair build up on the round brushroll of the clutchless models that were hitting against the edge of the soleplate every time the brushroll revolved that could be making the characteristic comb teeth looking damage to the soleplate. On the clutchless models, the brushroll is a solid cylinder shape traditional type and it is this type that seems to shred the soleplate more than the clutched type which has a helical brushroll instead.
I couldnt understand though why it only affected the rear part of the recess in the soleplate and hardly ever the front side of the recess, as surely any threads of carpet etc wrapped round the brushbar would hit the front of the recess as well as the back with each revolution of the brushroll.
If you also noticed that the clutched model had different soleplate recesses, and side whiskers on the front corners of the cleaner head, and these soleplates seemed much more robust than the non clutched model's soleplate which didnt have the same type of side whiskers, or cutouts in the soleplate by these side whiskers.

Also, due to the fact that the non clutched models had no soleplate wheels, they were more prone to friction wear on carpets and also made the cleaner slightly harder to push about. These soleplates also had no air bleed passages to the side whiskers, so creating a much stronger suction force to the carpet, giving them a slightly better performace on carpet, but at the expense of also making them harder to push along.
Later DC07's also had additional air bleed passages at the rear of the brushroll recess, to prevent them sticking to the floor. Even later, on the DC14's there was yet another air bleed passage on the front of the brushroll housing that was supposed to act as a large debris channel collector hole, and this made the DC14 very easy to move across carpets.

Post# 204841 , Reply# 28   10/26/2012 at 12:52 (4,199 days old) by dysondestijl (east midlands, UK)        
soleplate........

 hi all!
i agree about the soleplate thing. i once had a DC04 that had shredded its back part of the soleplate!! but some of them are pretty noisy. non-genuine replacement brushroll's sometimes tend to be noisy too.
and back to the noise of the dc01- the YDK motors always made a nice noise. my ancient DC01 (firs picture) has that motor but i never use it as the commutator is pretty black. and it has no switch. sounds similar to the DC02.
thanks for all your comments anyway!
thedysonman


Forum Index:       Other Forums:                      


Comes to the Rescue!

Woops, Time to Check the Bag!!!
Either you need to change your vacuum bag or you forgot to LOG-IN?

Discuss-O-MAT Log-In



New Members Click Here To Sign Up.



                     

automaticwasher.org home
Discuss-o-Mat Forums
Vintage Brochures, Service and Owners Manuals
Fun Vintage Washer Ephemera
See It Wash!
Video Downloads
 Audio Downloads
Picture of the Day
Patent of the Day
Photos of our Collections
The Old Aberdeen Farm
Vintage Service Manuals 		Vintage washer/dryer/dishwasher to sell?
Technical/service questions?
Looking for Parts?
Website related questions?
Digital Millennium Copyright Act Policy
Our Privacy Policy