|
Thread Number: 26358
I'm on the radio again |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 295469 8/26/2014 at 09:06 (3,525 days old) by turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
Hey folks,
Some of you may remember last year I was interviewed on BBC Radio Leeds & BBC Radio Humberside regarding the new EU regulations on vacuums. Last week, BBC Leeds got in touch to ask me to go in again following the press explosion last week regarding the new laws. You can hear me at 1hr58mins in at the link below. It's not my finest moment, I admit. The presenter was a bit clueless and completely didn't believe me when I told her that her "super powerful Dyson" was only 1200w., but some people just won't be told. I also didn't like how she was making out like the EU officials would be coming and carting off 1600w+ vacuums away like something from the Gestapo. It was still an enjoyable experience regardless though. On the back of this, I got a call from a press agency, so I could end up popping up elsewhere. Happy to be setting the record straight about the new legislation. All the best, Chris CLICK HERE TO GO TO turbo500's LINK | ||
| Post# 295485 , Reply# 1 8/26/2014 at 10:13 (3,524 days old) by spiraclean (UK) | ||
Good for you Chris, I'm glad someone is trying to spread the word because the press, Consumers' Association (ha!) and most manufacturers certainly aren't doing a very good job of it. Quite the opposite in fact, almost every article on this subject so far has been a complete dog's dinner.
For too long the public has been brainwashed into thinking that higher watts automatically equates to better performance, but as you've seen for yourself, this perception is very firmly ingrained into people's minds now. So much so that, even if presented with evidence to the contrary, there will be an awful lot of people who can't (or more likely, won't) accept otherwise. "Just won't be told" indeed. They will blindly believe every agenda pushed by a crappo right-wing tabloid, mind you, but you can't fix stoopid. Personally, I find it quite exciting that some companies have managed to come up with low wattage vacuums that equal or even exceed the dust pickup of their previous cleaners. Hats off to those who took a positive stance, embraced the new regs and used them as a springboard to actually come up with something better, rather than crying to all and sundry that they're being strong-armed into complying. That has shaped my viewpoint of certain manufacturers for the better and others for the worse, and WILL influence who I give my custom to when I'm next in the market for a new cleaner. | ||
| Post# 295487 , Reply# 2 8/26/2014 at 10:22 (3,524 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Thanks Spiraclean :). I completely agree, it's getting ridiculous. And I'm tired of people using this as a front for their anti-EU views. Obviously, I have a political opinion, but I'm not letting that interfere with my views on this as a vacuum enthusiast. For the vacuum world, this is a good thing.
Below is a quote I gave to the press agency following the radio interview above. I only got this spot on because it was a written quote: "I fully support the EU legislation. High power does not always equal more suction. Two of the most popular brands in the UK are Dyson and Numatic (who make Henry/Hetty) and both have used 1200w motors for years. In 1990, the most powerful upright vacuum you could buy was 800w and in 1980 it was 575w, but yet our carpets are no cleaner than they were 20 or 30 years ago. The methods have changed, but the results haven't. With the right design, it's entirely possible that a low wattage motor can generate high suction power and with the new ratings system for energy and performance, it will be easier for the customer to chose a new vacuum" | ||
| Post# 295490 , Reply# 3 8/26/2014 at 10:57 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
Your getting all over the place nowadays!
Living in Leeds I heard it in the morning, I heard Liz talking about her Dyson, and I assumed there would be a mention of the EC law, then she said 'this is Chris Parker'! Well, I was suprised, however your no stranger tho the world of radio now! Well done you on spreading the word pubicly that this law is a good thing, not a bad thing. | ||
| Post# 295502 , Reply# 4 8/26/2014 at 14:26 (3,524 days old) by DesertTortoise () | ||
|
I dunno Turbo500. In the US we had 1400 watt machines in the 1980's. They were pretty common actually. While I don't know if that was true in Europe I don't see a good reason why it wasn't. The technology was certainly in mass prodcution. | ||
| Post# 295503 , Reply# 5 8/26/2014 at 14:27 (3,524 days old) by matt8808 (Teesside - North East - UK) | ||
|
He spreads himself aboot all over the place don't ya Chris?! You shhhhlllllaaaaaaa.... pmsl I think you did very well though! We need more people out there spreading the word! Personally I'm over the moon with these new rules | ||
| Post# 295505 , Reply# 6 8/26/2014 at 14:42 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
80s
DesertTortoise,
In the UK in the 1980's a popular budget machine was the Hoover Junior U1104, which had 300 watts, and still outperforms modern machines in pickup performance and reliability. Even the most up-to-date machines in the 1980's barely exceeded 600 watts, and that was sufficient to keep carpets clean. The reason for this is the DESIGN. The brushroll's in both machines mentioned above are much better to what we get today. Also a 300 watt motor spinning a brushroll is much better at cleaning carpets that a 2000+ motor, as the faster the brush spins, the less it agitates and picks up, hence why modern machines aren't as good as cleaning deep down in carpets. I have a 410 watt Hoover Turbopower 1 U2332 which outperform's my 800 watt Hoover Turbopower 2 U2462, which despite the Turbopower 2 having almost double the motor wattage, the brushroll spins twice as fast, so the U2332 in my opinion is better at the carpets. I don't know about American machines but that's the situation over here in the 1980's. | ||
| Post# 295509 , Reply# 8 8/26/2014 at 15:20 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
True | ||
| Post# 295514 , Reply# 11 8/26/2014 at 15:38 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Well
Hang on a minute then, lets take a look at the contents of your previous post shall we?
Post# 295502 , Reply# 4 8/26/2014 at 8:26pm by DesertTortoise (high desert/Great Basin-ish) posts: 839 report offensive post to webmaster Checkrate/Like I dunno Turbo500. In the US we had 1400 watt machines in the 1980's. They were pretty common actually. While I don't know if that was true in Europe I don't see a good reason why it wasn't. The technology was certainly in mass prodcution. So, there's the first post. Where in that are you mentioning anything you just said that I didn't do in my post, however, we can also see that you didn't post any either. Why ask me to provide the information if you did not provide any yourself, as seen below? Post# 295511 , Reply# 9 8/26/2014 at 9:30pm by DesertTortoise (high desert/Great Basin-ish) posts: 839 report offensive post to webmaster Checkrate/Like How are you quantifying the amount of cleaning different machines accomplish? What metric are you using to support your claims? Was 800 or 1000 watts achieving more sealed water lift and higher airflows on 1980's fan designs than we do on contemporary fan designs? How are you quantifying how much dirt a particular brush design or rotational speed removes from carpet? Without metrics I don't see that you have an argument. But like I said, 1400 watt vacs were quite normal in the US in the 1980's. I have numerous examples of them. That directly contradicts one of your claims and forces me to question some of your other claims. As you opposed this in the first place surely you should be the one to show the above points and mention them in your first post, if you were expecting comparisons from others? So, now what then? Oh, and also: 'But like I said, 1400 watt vacs were quite normal in the US in the 1980's. I have numerous examples of them. That directly contradicts one of your claims and forces me to question some of your other claims. ' I was talking about UK machines here, which are different to American machines. | ||
| Post# 295518 , Reply# 12 8/26/2014 at 16:27 (3,524 days old) by blakaeg (NW London, UK) | ||
|
Used a 1000 watt Sebo X1 at the weekend and it worked wonders on the carpet with its double Helix brush roll and the suction was excellent at the hose end. We don't need silly wattages to clean. My Dyson DC24 is only 650 watt, suction isn't great at the hose but it picks up no problem on carpets and hard floors. | ||
| Post# 295526 , Reply# 15 8/26/2014 at 17:27 (3,524 days old) by beko1987 (Stokenchurch, United Kingdom) | ||
|
Traffic sounded grim this morning on the M62... M40 was lovely! | ||
| Post# 295527 , Reply# 16 8/26/2014 at 17:31 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
you
Mr Desert Tort
I use these two things I have called eyes, which help me see things. I think I can see which is doing a better job on MY carpet. Also, there is truth to my point, why don't you try the two vacuums in question first then try to contradict someone who has used them both and does own both. Note I never said anything about performance figures regarding the 1400 watt machines you had in the 80s. That's because I have never used one , so unless you have used and compared both vacuums together, you cant judge them. | ||
| Post# 295551 , Reply# 17 8/26/2014 at 22:25 (3,524 days old) by DesertTortoise () | ||
|
I am paid to question wishful thinking. That's my job. Unless you can quantify your claims they are little more than heresay. Absent metrics all you can say is that something is your opinion. | ||
| Post# 295576 , Reply# 18 8/27/2014 at 03:33 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Yes
This is opinion, but it also has an element of fact to it.
You originally stated that in the US 1400 watt vacuums were common in the 1980's, and I only made comparisons to what we had in the UK in the 1980's. I WAS just stating my opinion and which one I believe is better. Give me a week and I will be able to prove my point, it's just I am away for a while, and evidence is at home whilst I am away from it. How are metrics measured anyway? | ||
| Post# 295581 , Reply# 19 8/27/2014 at 04:00 (3,524 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
I am paid to question wishful thinking. That's my job
Not on here it's not. Stick to your day job instead of being argumentative for the sake of it. I'd like to see you provide some FACTS and measurements of some the cleaners you like to slag off on the Forums, especially considering you don't own any of them.
The fact of the matter is, the UK and US markets were VERY different. We did have 1400w cleaners here in the late 80's, but those were all cylinder cleaners. My post specifically said upright. I don't think vacuums clean any better or worse than they did 20 or 30 years ago, but the methods are quite different. Where a vacuum used to rely on things like quality brushroll's, beaters and twin fans, they now rely on cheaper parts and ridiculously high wattage motor's. There are of course exceptions to that rule with some companies using more efficient motors - Dyson, Sebo and Numatic for example, pull in plenty of suck with 1050w, 1150w, 1200w and 1300w motors depending on the model. Jacob, you're talking a lot about dirty fan cleaners, but aside from Kirby's with their ridiculous retail price, there are no dirty fan cleaners on the market today, largely because they're inconvenient. But look back at clean air machines - the Electrolux 600 series were 575w, Panasonic 40 series were 650w and the Hoover Turbopower 2 was 800w. All had strong hose suction and excellent floor pick up. There is a reason why an 800w Hoover TP2 will pull in more suction than a modern 1800w bagless Electrolux. | ||
| Post# 295585 , Reply# 20 8/27/2014 at 04:26 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Chris
The reason why I was talking about dirty fan cleaners was due to the fact that many cleaners in the 1980's in the US were 1400 watts apparently, and the machines I mentioned - U1104, U2332, both were popular dirty fan cleaners - were much less than 1400 watts and were sufficient still.
I'm not saying that clean fan cleaner's aren't good, in fact, I believe totally the opposite. As you mentioned with the Turbopower 2, the Panasonic 40 series etc, they were all great clean fan cleaners with great hose suction. And I agree with you on clean fan cleaners being more convenient, as they have hoses that you don't need to attach. I have a Hoover Turbopower U2332 which is a great dirty fan cleaner for carpets, but when you attatch the hose assembly the suction isn't great. As Hoover said themselves with the Turbopower 2 '19% more improved suction power'. | ||
| Post# 295587 , Reply# 21 8/27/2014 at 05:02 (3,524 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 295588 , Reply# 22 8/27/2014 at 05:04 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Chris | ||
| Post# 295589 , Reply# 23 8/27/2014 at 05:26 (3,524 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 295590 , Reply# 24 8/27/2014 at 05:35 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Chris | ||
| Post# 295592 , Reply# 25 8/27/2014 at 06:42 (3,524 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
clean fan machines coming at the back end of the 1980's.
Well, no. The Electrolux 500 series are all clean air and came out in 1971. The Hoover Convertible (Dial A Matic in the US) was also clean air and came out in the mid-60's. 1980 saw the arrival of the Panasonic Jetflo and Hitachi CV50D, which both paved the way for the Panasonic 40 series and Hitachi Powerhouse cleaners, both very popular from about 1986 onwards.
By the mid-80's, clean air machines were becoming increasingly popular as the hose suction was considerably better, especially on cleaners with on board tools. But even still, clean air uprights were only about 600w maximum until the early 90's. Cylinders have always been more powerful than uprights, obviously to compensate for the lack of brushroll, but again these were usually no more than 1000w, with 1100w and 1200w cleaners hitting the market in the mid to late 80's. It's entirely possible that there were 1400w vacuums on the market in the US during the 1980's - I've no idea. Unlike some members here, I don't go posting information about markets I know nothing about. I suspect that any 1400w vacuums that are that old will be cylinders, which have never been overly popular in the UK. | ||
| Post# 295593 , Reply# 26 8/27/2014 at 06:55 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Re
Regarding uprights, most modern cheap ones are bad, but how do you make a BAD cylinder? They are such an easy thing to make right but companies just churn out junk all the time! Look how basic the Henry is, the design is so simple and has been around for decades, but why do some other manufacturers make such rubbish cylinders?
I've never really felt like a cylinder outperforms a decent upright on carpet deep cleaning, par the exception of power heads, but they are very uncommon over here and I think its only Numatic & Miele who do them in the UK. Even though cyclinder's don't have brushroll's, there's no excuse for 2000 watt + motors to be in them. I have a Miele S2111 and I rarely use above 900 watts as I find that more than sufficient. I find cylinders that don't compact down or have parking slots really difficult to store, I have to keep my Vax 121 in the garage out of the way, whereas an upright can just sit in the corner of a room and not take up as much space. I don't own one - and probably never will - but here's the Dyson DC11, which, I think stores quite cleverly. That's about the only good thing about it really. 
| ||
| Post# 295597 , Reply# 27 8/27/2014 at 07:42 (3,524 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Miele and Numatic don't sell powerhead cleaners in the UK anymore. The only company currently selling a PN cylinder is Sebo.
Bad cylinders are easy to make. Just look at the Goblin Rio, for example. Nice, basic cleaner with good suction, but they're useless on carpet because of the crappy floortool. And now, of course, we have direct filter single cyclones that clog up within a very short period of time and lose suction. That design combined with a crap floortool and cheap, leaky hose makes for a very crap cylinder. Why do other manufactuers make rubbish? Simple. IT's CHEAP and QUICK. I agree with what you're saying about cylinders being difficult to store, but in the same post as signing the praises of a Henry, you're stating that the Vax is difficult to store, whereas I've found this applies to any kind of tub vac really. | ||
| Post# 295604 , Reply# 28 8/27/2014 at 08:47 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Rio | ||
| Post# 295605 , Reply# 29 8/27/2014 at 08:49 (3,524 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
are you referring to the blue and grey one or the red and be | ||
| Post# 295606 , Reply# 30 8/27/2014 at 08:50 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Rio | ||
| Post# 295608 , Reply# 31 8/27/2014 at 09:05 (3,524 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Jacob, that's not the point. I was replying to your comment regarding what can make a poor performing cylinder and gave that as an example of a decent machine let down by poor tools.
As a customer, you should be able to take a new vacuum out of the box and for it to perform to an acceptable standard without having to customise it. Lets not forget that the general vacuum buying public don't have 20-odd floorheads lying around the house to swap around. | ||
| Post# 295609 , Reply# 32 8/27/2014 at 09:12 (3,524 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
True | ||
| Post# 295628 , Reply# 33 8/27/2014 at 10:07 (3,523 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Exactly! It's the downfall of many cylinders unfortunately. I had a similar situation recently when Rob (turbomaster1984) picked up an Electrolux T8. It was a fab little cylinder with strong suction, but the floorhead was crap. We put a Miele floortool on it and it significantly improved the performance.
| ||
| Post# 295641 , Reply# 34 8/27/2014 at 10:20 (3,523 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Goblin | ||
| Post# 295651 , Reply# 36 8/27/2014 at 10:30 (3,523 days old) by hi-loswitch98 () | ||
|
suctionselector Other heads include the type you now get with Argos Value Cleaners, it's been used on hundreds of cleaners over the years. I got one with my Daewoo & it's crap, I replaced it with a Qualtex floor head & performance improved significantly. | ||
| Post# 295653 , Reply# 37 8/27/2014 at 10:37 (3,523 days old) by hi-loswitch98 () | ||
|
Also, there is a 5 page thread on Digital Spy, a very interesting read. CLICK HERE TO GO TO hi-loswitch98's LINK | ||
| Post# 295654 , Reply# 38 8/27/2014 at 10:40 (3,523 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Beckham
Cheers for posting on that thread, trying to help teach the masses. Before I left school for the summer I had to explain to one of my teachers about the new EU legeslations, she thought that bigger wattages are better, as does pretty much everyone else.
Beckham's Response: They are allready selling Eco cleaners at Argos, most of which are 700w, some are a little over, & a few are about 580w, like the new .Numatic Henry. Also, by 2017 the maximum power will be 900w, just to add. If you want a 1600w+ cleaner, they will still be sale from the 1st September, they won't be made anymore from the 1st, they can still be sold. | ||
| Post# 295655 , Reply# 39 8/27/2014 at 10:44 (3,523 days old) by hi-loswitch98 () | ||
|
Haha yes, that was my reply to that thread, I've posted quite a few more replies to people thinking that on the first they have to chuck out their cleaners! | ||
| Post# 295660 , Reply# 41 8/27/2014 at 10:58 (3,523 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Yes | ||
| Post# 295674 , Reply# 43 8/27/2014 at 12:52 (3,523 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England) | ||
|
Well
I would like to see £1million in front of me but that's very unlikely to happen.
"I am not disposed to let opinion be passed along as fact" Well does that imply that we forum members should just ignore your opinions? Oh and regards to cylinder heads, we were talking about ones that are not as good as others. Most floor tools are brilliant for the job. | ||
| Post# 295679 , Reply# 44 8/27/2014 at 13:21 (3,523 days old) by thoth () | ||
|
Can someone link or quote the details of the legislation? Is it just to limit the power used by appliances? I don't see why this would even be an issue if we went 100% renewable like we are moving towards and must lol | ||
| Post# 295684 , Reply# 46 8/27/2014 at 13:51 (3,523 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
All you have are opinions Likewise, DT, the same applies to you. Where are you stats that cylinder's with powerheads out-clean uprights?
The move from dirty fan to clean air had nothing to with cylinders being superior. It was a gradual move in both the UK and US and was purely a convenience factor - clean air uprights gave better hose suction, and the consumers wanted the convenience of on-board tools. It gave the best of both worlds in an upright form, just like PN cylinders give the best of both worlds in cylinder form. I still firmly believe that dirty fan cleaners gave far better carpet pick up, but hard floor and hose suction was abysmal. The growing demand for more convenience coupled with the move to more homes having a wider mix of floortypes rendered them redundant. | ||
| Post# 295687 , Reply# 47 8/27/2014 at 14:01 (3,523 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Thoth, I'm hunting for a link that details all of the legislation for you, but here is the gist of it: CLICK HERE TO GO TO Turbo500's LINK | ||
| Post# 295689 , Reply# 48 8/27/2014 at 14:04 (3,523 days old) by DesertTortoise () | ||
|
You said it for me Turbo500. Clean air uprights have better hose suction. Exactly. Thank you. Before clearn air motors were adapted to uprights you had to have a canister vac to get decent hose suction. Am I right? | ||
| Post# 295693 , Reply# 49 8/27/2014 at 14:13 (3,523 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
DT: In your response to why you think many do not consider a canister vac as a good tool for vacuuming carpet, it is because cylinder vacs have always been sold as an idea for being "lighter to lift for above the floor cleaning." It isn't that light if you have a heavy power nozzle jammed onto the end of it!
Thus, in turn a cylinder vacuum cleaner with a power nozzle goes against the design element of something lighter than an upright vacuum cleaner, which is traditionally heavier. Look at the amount of full size uprights on the market that have no brush bar. Can you think of any? I can't. So why, should one consider a canister with a PN head over an upright to clean carpets? | ||
| Post# 295698 , Reply# 50 8/27/2014 at 14:29 (3,523 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
That's quite true, DT. Although nobody bothered having 2 cleaners - that would get expensive. The hose suction was always acceptable for dusting and picking up surface litter fairly easily, but no where near as strong as the suction on a clean air machine.
The adaptation of the upright design with the brushroll combined with the clean air set up of the cylinder was the happy medium. As Sebo_Fan has pointed out, cylinders were marketed here as being lightweight and designed more for the difficult to reach areas or smaller homes and apartments. Uprights have mostly always dominated the market here, which is the opposite to most of mainland Europe where the market is 80% straight suction cylinders. | ||
| Post# 295700 , Reply# 52 8/27/2014 at 14:33 (3,523 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Thoth, this really won't affect the US market - it's European Union only. | ||
| Post# 295701 , Reply# 53 8/27/2014 at 14:33 (3,523 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Things won't be clearer though...
Sadly I don't think things will be clearer though, Chris.
Thoth - Brands are already over pricing models in the UK with the "new" Eco led vacuums for the EU law. Some are falling in price such as those from Hoover Europe. The labels themselves dont do the vacuum models any justice. You might get one that has been rated "A" for overall efficiency but dependent on what it comes with, it might get a C rating for carpet performance, even if it is an upright vacuum cleaner that we all know will be better at carpet pick up than a suction only vacuum cleaner. It will be confusing to buyers who think they are buying the best - or what they can afford - only to perhaps realise by trusting in the label attached to the machine - that perhaps their favoured choice isn't so leading for carpet cleaning after all (or other aspects of performance such as hard floor pick up and filtration). | ||
| Post# 295769 , Reply# 55 8/27/2014 at 23:32 (3,523 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Open your eyes, DT.
Who in their right mind thinks every canister with every power nozzle has the same weight? Clearly you do!
Are you also trying to tell me that my SEBO K3 which by body weight alone weighs 5.5kg PLUS the 2.4kg ET-1 floor head at the bottom of the tube is lighter than pushing a SEBO Felix at nearly 7kg total weight? The SEBO K3 Premium would appear to nearly weigh 1kg more in weight. Oh yes, the cylinder vac pays dividends when the main head is taken off. Oh yes you have a much lighter hose, but then you can buy a hose that has twice as much length and use that on an upright. Not much of a difference there in my opinion. Of course what you seem to forget is that in the UK we don't have cylinder vacs with PN heads unless you buy in from SEBO and only recently Miele are offering a power nozzle floor head. In your opinion you think an upright with a turbo brush is no comparison to a cylinder. I think differently - again it comes down to weight and usage of particular brands and the tools on offer. You preach on about being an engineer, yet you're not able to clearly widen your view that brands and models do things differently per type of vacuum cleaner. However, end of the day UK buyers don't tend to buy a lot of cylinder vacuums because we've only had cylinders with suction only floor heads or air driven turbo brushes. We've been led to believe that uprights are best - helped by Hoover from the U.S "back in the day" and other established brands. | ||
| Post# 295787 , Reply# 56 8/28/2014 at 03:22 (3,523 days old) by blakaeg (NW London, UK) | ||
|
I would much prefer to push around an upright vacuum cleaner than lug around a motorised head unit on a cylinder vacuum cleaner. Tried a Sebo D4 Premium in my home and found it cumbersome. | ||
| Post# 295797 , Reply# 58 8/28/2014 at 08:43 (3,523 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
veritable speed dark green Hoover power | ||
| Post# 295824 , Reply# 62 8/28/2014 at 12:33 (3,522 days old) by blakaeg (NW London, UK) | ||
|
Well that's you're opinion. Don't really care to be honest. | ||
| Post# 295831 , Reply# 63 8/28/2014 at 13:17 (3,522 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
"…You don't lug a canister around behind you, you park it one spot and work the room pushing only the hose and powered floor brush, for most work the canister stays put in one spot.."
Really? is that why canister vacs have wheels? And none of them lock, so the machine will inevitably move, regardless of whether you think it isn't moving. I suppose you have gone and added locks to the wheels of your Kenmore then? In reality, the only one that sits outside this realm of reality are the old Vax tubs where the castors can be taken off. They sold them in the U.S under Dirt Devil Wizard names. I'm sure there are plenty of tub vacuums like the old Vax where the castors can be taken off and left permanently in one place. If it falls over from the slightest tug of the hose, then you'll learn in time that canister vacs do move little by little. The only other time they don't is when they are stored in the upright position. You can't do that with tubs though, only with sledge style cylinder vacs. I do agree that having a longer hose means less effort on having to pull a cylinder vac behind you, but having a heavier electric power nozzle on the front isn't all that convenient. Note, I'm one of few owners on here who has already admitted to owning a cylinder vac with a PN - I seldom use it though - I'm just not into the bulkiness or the cumbersome action. Much prefer suction only floor tools, or air driven turbo brushes - worlds away from heavy PN floor heads. | ||
| Post# 295832 , Reply# 64 8/28/2014 at 13:19 (3,522 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
much more to the world of vacuums than the UK market Take your own advice. There is far more to the vacuum world than just the US. Not everybody in the world wants to use a powerhead cylinder, which have never been particularly popular in the UK or across mainland Europe.
Like I said, people on here write about what they know, which is exactly what we're doing. And I would ask you to do the same instead of mouthing off on a discussion regarding a market you know nothing about and a piece of legislation which doesn't affect you. | ||
| Post# 295833 , Reply# 65 8/28/2014 at 13:32 (3,522 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Id also like to add that most of the vacuums we get in the UK also get sold in Europe and Asia. Not all Asian countries, but most. The UK are not out on a limb where vacuums are concerned.
If you really are that interested in educating yourself, DT then check this link to a thread I created on here from the archives regarding brands in Europe and Asia www.vacuumland.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-... CLICK HERE TO GO TO sebo_fan's LINK | ||
| Post# 295837 , Reply# 66 8/28/2014 at 14:22 (3,522 days old) by blakaeg (NW London, UK) | ||
|
Well said turbo500! Agreed. | ||
| Post# 295852 , Reply# 68 8/28/2014 at 15:59 (3,522 days old) by turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
Those results are from an online survey. The site makes no reference to which countries this survey was available in, how widely advertised it was, the proportion of participants from each country (28,000 people is not a lot considering how many people are actually on the planet - this could have quite easily been purely a far eastern survey) and it is not based on actual sales.
Also, having been a vacuumland member for 7 years, I think I can safely say that uprights are most definitely more popular on here. Now, can we at least try and get back onto the topic at hand here before DT decided to vomit all over it, which is the EU legislation on vacuum wattage and rating labels. Quite what the popularity of cylinder PN cleaners has to do with anything is beyond me. | ||
| Post# 295885 , Reply# 71 8/28/2014 at 19:58 (3,522 days old) by super-sweeper (KSSRC Refurbishment Center) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 295928 , Reply# 73 8/29/2014 at 05:29 (3,522 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Thank you for noting that my perceptions are narrow, DT.
At least I have experience of what I have used. And you are completely wrong to suggest that I am very narrow minded. I've been on this forum a lot longer than you, you can easily Google archive threads and search my name on this forum and see the contributions I have done. They may not appeal to members all the time. In a more recent thread on here I've promoted the Hoover Tempo upright - I may not be able to buy one in the UK or own one - but I have used one in the U.S (due to family I have there). However, my perceptions are based on the 100s of vacuums I have trialled, or bought, collected, restored and eventually had to sell off because of a lack of space in a British home. Some of them are too great to sell off - that's the joy of a collector. I am thankful that you have noted that other members on this forum have just as much experience as I do. However most members in the U.S are privy to having far more vacuum cleaner brands that we in the UK don't get to have. Of the American brands we do have, Kirby is the most expensive, Oreck is the poorest having to put up with older models that the U.S don't even sell much of and at a push we've had the TTI bodied Wertheim cylinder/canister with a PN head. Anything before that has come from Miele Hoover Europe and other brands that uksausage has mentiond above. CLEARLY, if the UK market were in love with canister vacs with PN's, then wouldn't we have a lot more? Another aspect that I'd like to mention that seems to have "gone missing" from this slight off topic is that despite the manufacturers decreasing wattage on main motors, what about decreasing watts on actual PN heads? On account that Vorwerk used to have some 50 to 80 watts PN heads, it will be interesting to see if this new EU law makes an impact on powered nozzles as well. | ||
| Post# 295973 , Reply# 75 8/29/2014 at 11:04 (3,521 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
All hat and no cattle pal.
you really don't know anything about anything, do you DT?
Sebo_Fan has been an important member of the vacuum world for a LONG time. When I first joined up to one of the old sites back in 2005, Sebo_Fan had already been posting long before I joined. You've been here for less than 3 months. Quite frankly, for you to sign up to a site and start making judgements about members far more knowledgable, experienced and respected than yourself kinda makes you a giant asshole. Just because somebody doesn't post every single thing they do on here, doesn't mean they don't do it. I've had to do some restoration work on every vintage cleaner I own, from a quick wipe down and polish to a full strip down and refurb, yet I rarely post about doing such things on here. Doesn't mean I don't do it. | ||
| Post# 295999 , Reply# 76 8/29/2014 at 15:57 (3,521 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2) | ||
|
Maybe you should sort out your ignorance
Well, unlike you DT I am not an engineer. I get more satisfaction out of using vacuums rather than potter about with a screwdriver and wonder how I can make an original design worse by "thinking I am better" than the brand who makes it.
Secondly like most collectors on here, I get pleasure from using a vacuum cleaner possibly down to its external look, its internal performance and the nice, fuzzy feeling inside when something vintage or modern is still kicking along. I am also a product reviewer - and if your complete ignorance can't search out my name on the Internet to see the hundreds of reviews I've written based on the products I've bought then that's your problem. Lastly DT, we collectors are all different, just like different vacuums and different countries take on issues and general lifestyle tastes. Something, I feel you clearly don't understand the definition of. | ||
| Forum Index: | 
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
