|
Thread Number: 24701
Dysons Twice the Suction claim - is it true? |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 277232 4/19/2014 at 19:00 (3,657 days old) by hi-loswitch98 () | ||
|
I keep seeing the advert fir the DC41 on the TV & Dyson claim the DC41 has twice the suction of any other upright vacuum. Is this true in your opinion? | ||
| Post# 277240 , Reply# 2 4/19/2014 at 20:02 (3,657 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
The thing is, Dyson can claim all he likes. But a lot of buyers are reading up on reviews nowadays because Dyson will keep overpricing the vacuums - and some buyers if not most feel grudged to pay £300 or more "for the best."
Every vacuum cleaner loses suction, including Dyson -why does he keep reinventing ways to stop the inner cyclones from being clogged up? And even if Dyson's claims can be proved where a bagless cyclonic no loss of suction can provide more suction than any other upright - can that same suction be relied upon for NOT destroying a carpet? Hi-LO - Claims from vacuum cleaner brands are just pure and simple Claims, although there are some claims that are quite true - cue Oreck with their "lightweight" upright vacs. Only a few claims ring true but they are very difficult to find a totally, universal agreement for every owner. | ||
| Post# 277241 , Reply# 3 4/19/2014 at 20:18 (3,657 days old) by eurekaprince (Montreal, Canada) | ||
I know many here do not place value on the results of American Consumer Reports testing, but in the latest tests, the Miele S7260 had airflow through the tool hose equally as strong as the Dyson DC 41(very good). But it outshone the Dyson DC41 in carpet cleaning - "Excellent" versus just "Good." The Miele was also quieter and better at picking up pet hair...
| ||
| Post# 277242 , Reply# 4 4/19/2014 at 20:22 (3,657 days old) by piano_god (British Columbia, Canada) | ||
Here's what he uses to back up that claim... "Suction tested against upright market to ASTM F558 at the cleaner head, dust- loaded as per IEC 60312-1. Graph reflects DC65 compared to top-performing product for each brand (Shark Navigator Lift Away, Hoover Windtunnel Air, Eureka Air Speed One Turbo, Bissell Cleanview Helix)." This post was last edited 04/19/2014 at 20:38 | ||
| Post# 277262 , Reply# 6 4/20/2014 at 03:35 (3,657 days old) by madaboutsebo (Midlands, UK) | ||
I understand it as being twice the suction of the brands he's mentions in the ad on the website. Or does he means all brands of vacuums. This must be when the pre motor filter is clean!
You could say its misleading as it's been reported that Dyson says filters (pre) can cause lost of suction after a time even on their own vacuums hence why they designed the Cinetic. | ||
| Post# 277270 , Reply# 8 4/20/2014 at 07:48 (3,656 days old) by thekirbylover (Warrington, cheshire ) | ||
DC04 with a worn brush and clutch is way better than a dc41
tayyab I will have to disagree with you, the DC41 has to be one of the best dysons Ive used, its probably there best machine they have made in a long time, they dont have as much suction as a dc04 because they dont need to, the brush roll is very good and those design issues have since been rectified,the only thing I will agree on is the handle as it doesn't feel very sturdy oh well it will be something the user will have to get used to.
| ||
| Post# 277275 , Reply# 10 4/20/2014 at 09:18 (3,656 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
The claim is misleading. In that case you have good grounds to complain to the ASA. But you will need sufficient proof to back up your claim. | ||
| Post# 277279 , Reply# 11 4/20/2014 at 09:32 (3,656 days old) by parwaz786 ( ) | ||
|
Michael, Dyson claims it to be the most powerful vacuum, but why can a DC04 seal to the floor whereas the DC04 can't? | ||
| Post# 277289 , Reply# 12 4/20/2014 at 11:45 (3,656 days old) by sensotronic (Englandshire) | ||
|
Benny, I have been on the ASA's website and will be putting in a complaint. The TV commercial states that the Dyson has twice the suction of any other upright, but they haven't tested it against every current upright on the market. That is misleading in my book. | ||
| Post# 277292 , Reply# 13 4/20/2014 at 12:13 (3,656 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
Keep us posted on their findings. | ||
| Post# 277294 , Reply# 14 4/20/2014 at 12:23 (3,656 days old) by hi-loswitch98 () | ||
|
target="_blank">m.youtube.com/watchQUESTIONMARKRE... 
| ||
| Post# 277300 , Reply# 15 4/20/2014 at 13:20 (3,656 days old) by parwaz786 ( ) | ||
|
Lies! the DC07 is the most powerful Dyson ever made and they know it | ||
| Post# 277309 , Reply# 16 4/20/2014 at 13:53 (3,656 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire) | ||
Something I heard on QVC about 3 weeks ago during a Dyson slot....
'It took 60 'engineers' 3 years to perfect this technology' What technology I thought? getting a carpet clean? filtering the air? Something electrolux and hoover had perfected to more than acceptable standards. Didnt mention anything about the cost of the 60 'engineers' that consumers have ended up paying for plus the time and resources they wasted while pratting about with their ELC shapes and Fisher Price shape sorter. Yes its 60 jobs and thats great, but come on???? Where does this crap end? | ||
| Post# 277310 , Reply# 17 4/20/2014 at 13:54 (3,656 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 277312 , Reply# 18 4/20/2014 at 14:02 (3,656 days old) by parwaz786 ( ) | ||
|
A bit hypocritical, They stole the Cyclone dust extrction method and shoved it in a vacuum, then they sue Vax and Hoover etc for little things like a plastic box (bin). | ||
| Post# 277315 , Reply# 19 4/20/2014 at 14:14 (3,656 days old) by vintagerepairer (England) | ||
|
Yes Parwaz It was exactly as you described, nothing technical to it at all. | ||
| Post# 277323 , Reply# 20 4/20/2014 at 14:43 (3,656 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK) | ||
To be honest | ||
| Post# 277326 , Reply# 21 4/20/2014 at 16:14 (3,656 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa) | ||
 You can bet your bottom dollar that Dyson buys every single upright on the market and tests it, Even when I worked at Electrolux we did that. Its an important part of the development process. Any one who has worked in the engineering dep at a vacuum company will be able to tell you of the rooms filled with competitors vacuums. ( hoovers Vault ? )
One thing you guys do have very wrong, Dyson did not steal the idea of a cyclone and put it into a vacuum. He was inspired by the idea but it sure was not simple. Those big industrial cyclones work with positive pressure, They are all but useless at filtering out fine ( like household ) dust. A vacuum works on Negative pressure ( hence vacuum ).
In-fact dyson didn't use A cyclone he used two ( hence dual cyclone ) and later more. a single cyclone vacuum is all but useless, ever used a Electroluc /Eurek Pet lover ? the filter clogs instantly that is a cyclone vacuum.
Love or hate dyson he changed the face of vacuum cleaners forever and that is a good thing, I would hate to see were we would be now had he sold the Idea to Hoover or Electrolux who would have just buried the idea. Engineers were stuck with simply putting in a bogger motor and changing colors. Dyson got vacuum manufacturer to start thinking again, first they copied now they are coming up with their own ideas again. All in all this is a great thing for the consumer | ||
| Post# 277708 , Reply# 24 4/22/2014 at 20:19 (3,654 days old) by super-sweeper (KSSRC Refurbishment Center) | ||
you believed that crap Dyson told you!? A Dyson barely has enough suction to begin with! I'm going to have to find an airwatt meter what-you-ma-call-it thingy, and start 'Disproving Dyson!'
ANY and all vacuums are capable of losing suction, especially a Dyson! If you backed a Dyson over with a truck would it still be such a Willy-Nilly suction-keeping vacuum? Nope! David Oreck tested his vacuums the same way, and guess what? The Oreck worked fine! Even the faithful HOOVER could loose suction over forgetting to change the bag after vacuuming up wet cement (hopefully I will remember to change the bag on that U4056S the next time I use it!) | ||
Post# 277729 , Reply# 25 4/22/2014 at 22:41 (3,654 days old) by gottahaveahoove  (Pittston, Pennsylvania, 18640) |
||
yes, ALL of them have the  | ||
| Post# 277747 , Reply# 27 4/23/2014 at 06:23 (3,653 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
you hardly need to wash the filter, it rarely gets dirty!
That's because all the dust gets stuck in the top cyclones on the DC07 and cuts the airflow that way. The only way to resolve this, is to dismantle the cyclone assembly. Dyson fixed this issue on the DC14 by flipping the root cyclones over, so that the wider end of the cyclone was at the top. The 07 is notorious for blocking up with hair and dust.
Dyson can claim that his cleaners have more suction power all he likes. It's probably true. As Benny pointed out, he's not going to spend thousands suing (sp) other companies for false advertising and then do it himself. But James Dyson is NOT a vacuum designer. He's an engineer. A good one. The cyclone in a Dyson is second to none. But he's knows sweet FA about cleaning a carpet. That's why a 250w Hoover Junior will out-clean a 1200w DC01. There is far too much focus on suction power, but Mr. D has completely ignored other factors that clean carpets, such as grooming and agitation. And that's not even considering the fact that consumers are paying £300+ for a cheap heap of malaysian made, leaky creaky plastic and a screaming motor, but don't even get me started on that. | ||
| Post# 277846 , Reply# 28 4/23/2014 at 16:44 (3,653 days old) by madaboutsebo (Midlands, UK) | ||
|
I have to agree with you Chris on what one about Mr D focusing too much on suction power! I wouldn't of quite a few years ago as I once believe all what he was about in terms of his vacuum cleaners until I got my SEBO Felix and started to dig deeper into how a vacuum cleaner works in terms of performance etc...
I think his vacuums are becoming to complex and over engineered for what they need to be! He needs to go back to the drawing board and back to basics and design a simple but effective machine. What he has achieved and what he is about and how he and his team of Engineers have improved the cyclone technology over the years and come out with new technology too is great. But the vacuum cleaner is more that just filtering the dust and dirt it's about more than that IMO. | ||
| Post# 277853 , Reply# 29 4/23/2014 at 16:52 (3,653 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
ONE other aspect that Dyson seems to get away with other brands copying is weight - Dyson's idea of "lightweight" promises appears to be 7kg with some of their cylinder vacs.
When you consider that a twice as bagged capacity cylinder vac from any of the German brands can total 5kg, Dyson really must be thinking buyers aren't reading any of the specs or trying out other vacuums in store, despite their lengthy marketing campaigns. | ||
| Post# 277905 , Reply# 30 4/24/2014 at 05:32 (3,652 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
It's like I've said before, Jon, Dyson's success lies purely in clever marketing and not in actual product. Dyson created a problem for people that next existed.
Generally speaking, most bagged vacuums do not lose enough suction to reduce performance so dramatically that the machine doesn't pick up. The machine will still pick up the same amount with a full bag as it does with an empty one. And lets face it, who REALLY gave a flying fig about emptying a vacuum bag? We just got on with it. Bag, bin, done. Infact, disposable paper bags were added to vacuums to make them easier to empty. Prior to this, all vacuums had cloth shake out bags. And then we took the bags away again? Bit of a step back. But Dyson's "Say goodbye to the bag" campaign tapped into a gap in the market. It planted a teeny tiny seed of doubt in consumers minds, that grew and grew into something so big that the market was completely taken by storm. DC01's were flying off the shelves, but they really weren't all that good. The suction is poor, the build quality isn't great, the brushroll is pathetic. There were other, cheaper, higher performing and better made machines available at the time from Hoover, Electrolux, Panasonic and Hitachi, but still the lowest performing and most expensive cleaner was the one that was selling. All due to marketing. In credit to Mr. D, his very clever campaign worked. He's a very intellegent man and knows what he's doing. But sadly, his understanding of promotion hasn't meant his vacuums are actually any good. | ||
|
Post# 277911 , Reply# 32 4/24/2014 at 06:12 (3,652 days old) by tolivac (Greenville,NC) |
||
|
I have packed my Sebo,Meile,Riccar,Kirby Filtrete type bags to be like bricks before replacement.So bagless machines have no appeal to me.Have a few in my collection--but don't use them. | ||
| Post# 278063 , Reply# 33 4/24/2014 at 15:57 (3,652 days old) by madaboutsebo (Midlands, UK) | ||
|
So true Chris I've read comments like that before their very clever with their marketing! Something I've noticed more and more in recent years. I was one of them that got sucked into all that clever marketing (excuse the pun!).
I don't regret going back to bags or do it's emptying bins and washing filters. I've not noticed any dramatic lost in suction using a bag vacuum. The leaps in bag technology means bags filter better allow air to flow through them better and allow them to fill to the top so they are like a brick! Like you say bag bin done easy no mess quick and simple off you go again with a new bag to fill. Love the synthetic bags I'm using on my SEBO Felix. | ||
| Post# 278068 , Reply# 34 4/24/2014 at 16:24 (3,652 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 278075 , Reply# 36 4/24/2014 at 16:48 (3,652 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
bagless dust cups won't fit in my bin lid | ||
| Post# 278077 , Reply# 37 4/24/2014 at 16:51 (3,652 days old) by hi-loswitch98 () | ||
|
Well, when you have to go down a flight of stairs & outside where the bin is unsheltered & it's blowing a gail? Eeer, no. That's why now I empty them into a carrier bag then put into the regular bin but I still get into contact with dust. | ||
| Post# 278078 , Reply# 38 4/24/2014 at 16:58 (3,652 days old) by madaboutsebo (Midlands, UK) | ||
|
It certainly is hi-loswitch98 less messy. I agree with you there pointless emptying a bagless bin into a carrier bag when a bag vacuum it's already done for you. Come to think I probably did that with my Dyson's on occasion if I didn't empty straight into the dust bin. Which made a mess of the dust bin too nice bit of airborne dust when putting other rubbish in yuk! Probably why I used a carrier bag! Pointless. That's true no emptying each time or more regularly than a bagged machine.
| ||
| Post# 278079 , Reply# 39 4/24/2014 at 17:00 (3,652 days old) by hi-loswitch98 () | ||
|
It's just so much easier, even if there is the (small) cost of bags. | ||
| Post# 278084 , Reply# 40 4/24/2014 at 17:07 (3,652 days old) by madaboutsebo (Midlands, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 278188 , Reply# 41 4/25/2014 at 16:17 (3,651 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
What annoys me no end is no matter what bagless brand that I have owned, whether it is Dyson, Hoover or Vax, dog hair forever gets stuck right at the top of the cyclone shroud which means the whole thing needs to be taken apart. Its all right if you have a bottom release trapdoor, but of little use when dust at the top gets stuck.
Morphy Richards (and a few others) have an ingenious turn dial scraper on their Endurance bagless cylinder vacs installed on the older paper pleated cone type filters that scrape against a mesh filter, thus loosening any clogged dust or hair off. However, the filters can still clog up just by sucking up a bit of paper and it gets stuck in between the dust chambers and the dust channel. When owners are told that they no longer have to buy bags, only some who learn the hard way when it comes to dealing with clogged dust or clogged bins often return to vacs with bags. No wonder! | ||
| Post# 278192 , Reply# 43 4/25/2014 at 16:34 (3,651 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Well, from memory the beauty of the old DC01 we had was that you could keep letting it go above the max fill line, or it might have been the DC04. That's the thing about Dyson, or other brands - if there's still suction at the end of the hose or the floor head, you're more than likely to keep using the machine rather than emptying it the moment it gets to the max fill line.
Owners and collectors are yet again, two very different sorts! | ||
| Post# 278197 , Reply# 45 4/25/2014 at 16:55 (3,651 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
OH I know that one well. Sadly I didn't like the one I bought. Far too flimsy and a chore to get it to lie flat. Having to assemble most of it before usage wasn't impressive either.
CLICK HERE TO GO TO sebo_fan's LINK | ||
| Post# 278449 , Reply# 47 4/27/2014 at 20:38 (3,649 days old) by Jaker15 (Meridian, ID) | ||
Hey...
We have the Zanussi here in the US, but it's called the Eureka AirSpeed. They are the worst. That spiral-looking thing around the bin? Yeah, it's just for decoration. It doesn't actually serve a purpose. You'd think that it added to the cyclonic action, but it doesn't. My 1954 Kirby 514 out-cleaned my dad's girlfriend's Eureka Endeavor NLS by a long shot. Just goes to show you that new machines aren't always better.
| ||
| Post# 278499 , Reply# 49 4/28/2014 at 10:43 (3,648 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
In the case of the Kirby being better than the Airspeed or any bagless upright for that matter, well its a case of dirty fan vs clean fan.
At the end of the day, dirty fan always cleans better, but I prefer clean air - Im happy that the carpet's dust and hairs get taken up. Anything else is a bonus. Without damaging the carpet at the same time. | ||
| Forum Index: | 
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
