Thread Number: 27962
/ Tag: Brand New Vacuum Cleaners
EU Ratings |
[Down to Last] |
Post# 312529 , Reply# 1   1/19/2015 at 11:02 (3,356 days old) by spiraclean (UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Hmmm.
The other possibility is that the person you spoke with was stumped by your question, panicked and pulled a semi-plausible theory out of their ass in the hopes you'd believe it. I think you may have guessed that much already. Really, I wouldn't mind if a customer service rep levelled with me and admitted to not knowing the answer. I'd think more of them if they promised to seek out the correct answer from the relevant person within the company, and then came back to me with the info I needed. In this sort of situation you're probably better off emailing Dyson, so the question can more easily be passed up the line to those who are qualified to give an accurate answer. On the phone, you can be told all sorts by someone who is trying to quickly think on their feet... at least with an email they can read and re-read it, confer amongst themselves and formulate a sensible response. |
Post# 312531 , Reply# 2   1/19/2015 at 11:06 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Sorry I should have said it was an email reply |
Post# 312532 , Reply# 3   1/19/2015 at 11:08 (3,356 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Dyson aren't exactly well known for making truthful claims. "The worlds first cyclonic vacuum" - not true "Picks up more dust than any other vacuum" - not true "The worlds first filterless vacuum" - not true
I think Spiraclean might be right. This may be a standard response given to the call centre agent/customer service rep and not the actual reason.
If this were true, then vacuums with no brushroll off function would, by default, all have higher ratings on carpet than Dyson. And they certainly don't.
The reason the ratings fluctuate so much, is because there is no independant, unbiased body set up to test these cleaners and thus no consistency in the testing or test environment. |
Post# 312535 , Reply# 4   1/19/2015 at 11:11 (3,356 days old) by spiraclean (UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
In the words of Columbo... Just one more thing.
If what the Dyson rep told you was true (it isn't, by the way), a fully featured upright with brush shutoff facility would automatically be placed at a severe disadvantage against a more basic product that didn't include this feature at all. That would be rather like saying a fixed-power cleaner may be tested running at full pelt, but one with variable power must be run at its lowest setting. Doesn't make sense. The real answer will lie either in the testing methodology having been changed, whether by accident or design, or simply the newer model being less effective than the one preceding it. Should the latter be the case, good luck in getting them to admit to THAT one. |
Post# 312537 , Reply# 5   1/19/2015 at 11:18 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
That is a good point about uprights with no brushroll with no brushroll off function. I will question Dyson about that! |
Post# 312538 , Reply# 6   1/19/2015 at 11:22 (3,356 days old) by spiraclean (UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
And I see we're all posting at the same time. Chris pretty much nailed it on the head I think.
Moral of the story, take what the adverts and customer service reps say with a pinch of salt. The EU rating system could be a fantastic tool, but only if implemented properly. As it is, manufacturers test their own machines, and there are far too many inconsistencies even within the same brands. Only if the entire process was handed over to an independent testing would I trust it fully, until then it's probably best to only view it as a rough guide. A very rough one. |
Post# 312540 , Reply# 7   1/19/2015 at 11:24 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I totally agree! |
Post# 312548 , Reply# 8   1/19/2015 at 13:32 (3,356 days old) by sptyks (Skowhegan, Maine)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 312550 , Reply# 9   1/19/2015 at 13:49 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
That's true. We have a consumer company called Which that do tests. I'm not convinced by some of their testing either. But it will be better than the individual manufacturers doing the tests. |
Post# 312551 , Reply# 10   1/19/2015 at 13:54 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
And the CRI could refine their test results a bit more instead of combining carpet pick up and immisions into one. |
Post# 312554 , Reply# 11   1/19/2015 at 14:11 (3,356 days old) by parwaz786 ( )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Oh? What was the first cyclonic vacuum then? |
Post# 312556 , Reply# 12   1/19/2015 at 14:34 (3,356 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 312557 , Reply# 13   1/19/2015 at 14:40 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Well I think we can say Dyson were the first to use multi cyclones. |
Post# 312559 , Reply# 15   1/19/2015 at 14:46 (3,356 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
well, not entirely. The early models were a pretty much exact copy of huge dust extraction machines used in saw mills for years. Mr. D just shrunk it down and stuck in a vacuum, so he didn't actually invent the cyclone itself anyway. He was the first to use it in a vacuum though.
His R&D department have refined it over the years. |
Post# 312560 , Reply# 16   1/19/2015 at 14:48 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
And Rainbow came out with their water filtration system but can you name a bagged or bagless cleaner that doesn't have a pre motor filter? I think Dyson Cinetic is British engineering at it's best. :-) |
Post# 312561 , Reply# 17   1/19/2015 at 14:53 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Of course he didn't invent the cyclone nature did :-) |
Post# 312564 , Reply# 18   1/19/2015 at 16:07 (3,356 days old) by parwaz786 ( )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
LOL Marcus your funny! And the DC07 did get invented by JD I guess due to the multi cyclones as stated by Marcus |
Post# 312573 , Reply# 21   1/19/2015 at 18:23 (3,356 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I dont think the tests done by brands are all the same. I found a rather interesting energy sticker online the other day when looking at Vax commercial vacuums. The VCC 08A for example, which is their round tab vac also sold in the U.S under Hoover. Here's the photo....
View Full Size
|
Post# 312574 , Reply# 22   1/19/2015 at 18:24 (3,356 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312575 , Reply# 23   1/19/2015 at 18:37 (3,356 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312577 , Reply# 24   1/19/2015 at 19:29 (3,356 days old) by Reflector ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
They used a crevice tool to test the pickup on carpet, not a floor nozzle. The same applies for the hard floor test... |
Post# 312595 , Reply# 26   1/19/2015 at 22:43 (3,356 days old) by Reflector ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Are there a set of published, defined standards somewhere on the specifics? I'm curious as to how they're defining them. |
Post# 312604 , Reply# 27   1/20/2015 at 02:00 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
If anyone can find information about the EU test procedure that would be very helpful! |
Post# 312605 , Reply# 28   1/20/2015 at 02:03 (3,356 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312607 , Reply# 29   1/20/2015 at 02:48 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Huh? |
Post# 312609 , Reply# 30   1/20/2015 at 03:20 (3,355 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312610 , Reply# 31   1/20/2015 at 03:23 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Yes but tested with a crevice tool :-/ |
Post# 312612 , Reply# 32   1/20/2015 at 03:59 (3,355 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312613 , Reply# 33   1/20/2015 at 04:01 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
But it says dirt picked up on a Wilton carpet with crevice tool? |
Post# 312615 , Reply# 34   1/20/2015 at 04:55 (3,355 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312616 , Reply# 35   1/20/2015 at 05:06 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Yes I suppose it could be that. I would like to see exactly what the criteria is for the test procedure. That would be helpful. I don't know where I can get that info from though. |
Post# 312618 , Reply# 36   1/20/2015 at 05:18 (3,355 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Vacuum cleaner collectors and buyers aren't the same though. Whilst no actual reference to "tool" has been added to the Vax label, the mere mention of the word "crevice" will stand out to buyers who recognise the word. In my opinion Vax haven't been exactly professional in the way the info has been presented, after all you don't go about cleaning hard floor using a crevice, but rather the hard floor tool, or a combi suction tool.
Anyway regulations can be found here - by all means have fun reading them, it's not all that easy to follow in my opinion in some parts, though it is interesting to note what the "test crevice" is and how it is defined. The regulations also support the decision that brands should offer two types of floor tool such as one for carpets and another for hard floors. Some brands already do this. Not least SEBO for probably being one of the first uprights for featuring both tools where their Felix is concerned. CLICK HERE TO GO TO sebo_fan's LINK |
Post# 312620 , Reply# 37   1/20/2015 at 05:24 (3,355 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
View Full Size
|
Post# 312621 , Reply# 38   1/20/2015 at 05:27 (3,355 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
View Full Size
|
Post# 312622 , Reply# 39   1/20/2015 at 05:28 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Excellent! Thank you Nar :-) |
Post# 312625 , Reply# 40   1/20/2015 at 05:33 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Can't see anything about the brushroll being turned off. I don't like being told a cock n bull story! |
Post# 312652 , Reply# 41   1/20/2015 at 13:23 (3,355 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
See what I mean about the EU being a lot of hoof? I have been saying it all along. Whilst other members are quite to happily promote that the belief that the EU law will at last make brands thoroughly produce efficient vacuums, the reality of the EU law is that it is a total farce, helped along by the more farcical nature in which the brands are testing and rating their products.
|
Post# 312674 , Reply# 42   1/20/2015 at 15:31 (3,355 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Im not convinced Dyson were even the first Dual cyclonic either.
Tub cleaners such as the Hoover Aquamaster are also cyclonic due to the tub being round and thus the airflow moves in a cyclone fashion. Now it would be interesting to see if the bag itself had the air whirling around inside in a cyclone - that would mean 2 cyclones one either side of the bag wall. Which makes me wonder if there is also a cyclone effect happening above the fabric filter situated above as this is also round in shape. Thus I don't believe a claim of Dyson being the first 'Multi cyclonic' Regarding the comment about the brushroll being off seems clear as day to me that someones being paid to lie (knowingly or unknowingly) which is hardly surprising given the companys poor ethic standards. Case in point heard in both Lincoln store AND Derby.... by 2 different reps so its quite clear its part of the blurb they spout by putting the fear of god into a customer by linking.... 'Emissions' with 'Carbon Dust' and 'Pollution' along with a higher risk of getting 'Cancer' from a vacuum cleaner motor and the air that blows out. This guy wont stop for anything. |
Post# 312682 , Reply# 43   1/20/2015 at 15:58 (3,355 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Rob, we can even pre-date that! Look at the Lux 302 and earlier machines in that style. If you take the hose out, you can see the dust spinning around inside the bag and even with a full bag, the dust is thick around the edges with an almost clear suction path through the middle. And that's, what, 1972 and earlier? |
Post# 312697 , Reply# 44   1/20/2015 at 17:05 (3,355 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312699 , Reply# 45   1/20/2015 at 17:08 (3,355 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I sent Vax Commercial a Tweet as well as further asked them what they are using to clean wilton carpet if they are not using a crevice tool. We'll see what they may come up with tomorrow.
View Full Size
|
Post# 312723 , Reply# 46   1/21/2015 at 02:40 (3,355 days old) by spiraclean (UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
The other problem we have with the EU rating system as it is, is that people will treat it as gospel when it happens to reinforce the beliefs they hold about a certain product, but the moment things don't quite go their way it will be declared inaccurate or rigged!
With different products being tested by different labs, nobody can be sure the tests are 100% accurate across the board. Of course, each lab will be working off the same testing methodology laid down by the EU, but there's no way of knowing if they're all implementing it in exactly the same manner. Now, if all appliances (not just vacuums) were tested by ONE internationally recognised independent test institute, you would eliminate that concern from the get-go. The issue here is, every other testing organisation would scream there was a monopoly, and manufacturers would complain that it wasn't as cost effective as nominating a lab of their own choosing. |
Post# 312724 , Reply# 47   1/21/2015 at 03:24 (3,354 days old) by Reflector ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
That better be one insanely competent, incorruptable, infallible and perfect monolithic organization... Otherwise it still has the same flaws. |
Post# 312726 , Reply# 49   1/21/2015 at 03:52 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
And Chris Dyson have a patent on their multi cyclones. I think that tells you something :-) |
Post# 312728 , Reply# 50   1/21/2015 at 04:18 (3,354 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
A patetnt means sod all - it just means they got the application in first and certainly does not mean he invented something nor was the first to use it.
Maybe Hoover or anyone else didn't realise what they had designed and bar a little diagram in the Aquamaster's brochure there wasn't any big song and dance about cyclones in vac's until Dyson came along. Now who on here should be not be listening to? Share names. |
Post# 312729 , Reply# 51   1/21/2015 at 04:23 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I disagree a patent means sod all. They don't hand them out willy nilly milli vanilli haha |
Post# 312730 , Reply# 52   1/21/2015 at 04:29 (3,354 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 312731 , Reply# 53   1/21/2015 at 04:33 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Haha if you say so. And anyway Dyson cyclones are most certainly ahead of the rest. Seems we now have 2 Turbonators :-) |
Post# 312732 , Reply# 54   1/21/2015 at 04:35 (3,354 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312734 , Reply# 55   1/21/2015 at 04:39 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 312735 , Reply# 56   1/21/2015 at 04:42 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I say so. Well if they can be out cleaned by 40 yr old vacumms then so can Sebo and miele as I own them too and the Dyson cleans just as well if not better. So stick that up your pipe turbos :-)))) |
Post# 312737 , Reply# 57   1/21/2015 at 04:50 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 312738 , Reply# 58   1/21/2015 at 05:02 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Haha and can you name another cyclonic vacuum cleaner that has cyclones so efficient that there's no need for a pre motor filter? |
Post# 312740 , Reply# 59   1/21/2015 at 05:06 (3,354 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 312741 , Reply# 60   1/21/2015 at 05:07 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Marcus, have you actually used a Cinnetic?
Having not used one, I can't name ONE, nevermind another.
But that's a little irrelevant. Dyson can add as many cyclone refinements and bells and whistles to the cleaner as they like. The primary function of a vacuum cleaner is to clean carpets, hard floors and furniture and whilst a Dyson will do 2 of those things to an acceptable level, in 22 years, I have yet to find a Dyson that will clean a carpet anywhere near as well as an old Hoover Senior, Electrolux 500, any of the Kirby's or even Goblin Commander's and Moulinex Major's.
The fact that it has an efficient cyclone doesn't mean it cleans better. |
Post# 312745 , Reply# 62   1/21/2015 at 05:21 (3,354 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Your pretty poor at reading. I didn't say anything of the sort.
Re read what I said about waiting to see if they clog in a few years time. No proof that they don't and certainly no proof that a pre motor filter isn't needed. p.s Im finding your 'turbonator' comments a bit arrogant. I have a name if you can be bothered to check it out. |
Post# 312748 , Reply# 64   1/21/2015 at 05:59 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312750 , Reply# 65   1/21/2015 at 06:04 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Me neither. But I'm always happy to give credit to any company that come out with something good :-)PS Dyson have now replied. Its in my other Dyson post. |
Post# 312759 , Reply# 66   1/21/2015 at 07:40 (3,354 days old) by spiraclean (UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Meh, something being the first of its kind doesn't necessarily imply that it's the best, or even any good. The outhouse earth closet came on the scene way before the modern indoor flush toilet, but I know which I'd prefer.
Look at the DC01 as an example. For the sake of argument I think we can all probably agree it was the first mass marketed vacuum in the UK with two different types of cyclone running in series, but for all that it was still a middling performer at best, even by early 90s standards. An awful lot of uprights we were selling at the time could run rings around the Dyson in terms of hose suction, brush roll agitation and carpet pickup. What the Dyson WAS good at was fluffing up the dirt and putting it on show to make people go Ooooh! At the time it was a novelty, an object of desire, but not automatically any better than the competition by a long shot, despite what the glossy brochure said (so, nothing new there then). They pointed out it had 100% suction, 100% of the time. What they didn't say was that it still had far less suction than a Purepower with a full bag, luckily Hoover had the sense not to let that "accidental" omission slide! I'm only surprised Electrolux didn't seize the opportunity to join the pile-on and give them a spanking of their own. On the subject of the Cinetic, Dyson will of course have tested this in their labs to beyond buggery and back again, and are probably fairly confident it will perform as advertised. At least I hope that is the case, considering it makes a lot of promises and costs almost half a grand, but as they say in America, some folks could tear up an anvil. Once Joe Public gets his hands on it all bets are off, and they will find ways to screw this thing up that Dyson never even thought of. Yet. Any owner that suffers performance issues with this cleaner that cannot be rectified by simply emptying the bin is going to be absolutely furious, because as far as they are concerned that's all they should have to do with it. The advertising said so, and if it delivers anything less than that promise they will quickly come to the conclusion they'd have been better off buying a Vax, which does everything just as well but for 1/4 to 1/4 of the price. |
Post# 312761 , Reply# 67   1/21/2015 at 07:51 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
That also didn't point out that the 100% suction was reliant on the cleaner constantly having clean filters. The same applies to ALL Dyson's, apart from the Cinnetic. So none of them have 100% suction, 100% of the time because as soon as the filter gets dusty, the suction will decrease.
Complete agree about the DC01. It was a pretty crap upright, even the Goblin Laser's on sale at the time had better carpet pick up. But they tapped into a gap in the market and promoted the hell out of it. Clever marketing brought Dyson success and not actual product. |
Post# 312762 , Reply# 68   1/21/2015 at 07:53 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Well as you say it will have been thoroughly tried and tested. Only time will tell. As for Vax they are ok i've owned a few of their uprights. Good value for money but i'd much prefer Dyson. |
Post# 312766 , Reply# 70   1/21/2015 at 08:10 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
The suction drop may still be negliable and unnoticeable without being computer tested, but it is still there even if you don't notice it.
Personally, aside from a few poorly designed machines, I've never noticed any particular suction loss on a vacuum with a full bag and never got the "100% suction" need/claim. I've certainly never found a bagged cleaner to lose enough to hinder the performance of the machine. |
Post# 312768 , Reply# 71   1/21/2015 at 08:22 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
No providing you change the filter at recommended intervals. I change my Miele Hepa every year and the Sebo Felix every 10 bags. |
Post# 312770 , Reply# 72   1/21/2015 at 08:42 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
But those cleaners use bags and also don't claim to have no suction loss. It is inevitable that once dust hits the Dyson filter, the suction will decrease, even by an unnoticeable, negligable amount. The only way to stop this from happening is by putting a brand new, unused filter in the vacuum after every use. Even constant washing won't remove all the dust particles in the filter.
That's reminded me, I need to replace the S Class filter in my Sebo - thanks :). I tend to replace it once a year. 20 bags last for yeeeeeeeaaaaarrsssss and after a year, the filters tend to look quite grubby. |
Post# 312771 , Reply# 73   1/21/2015 at 08:43 (3,354 days old) by spiraclean (UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
The 100% suction claim caused a lot of confusion even then, when people were being told at the same time they needed to keep on top of filter changes or else risk losing suction. As I used to tell my customers, the cyclone only replaces the bag, but it does still have filters which work in exactly the same way as those on any other vacuum cleaner. In other words, they will still become soiled, and as a consequence, clog.
This was never mentioned in the brochure or on the TV ads. The first you ever saw it was in the instruction manual, after you'd already paid your money and gotten it home. |
Post# 312774 , Reply# 75   1/21/2015 at 08:58 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Anyway I've said all this before so I'm just repeating myself which isn't good so I'll say no more on this subject. I'm happy with my Dyson you're happy with your cleaners happy vacuuming :-) |
Post# 312776 , Reply# 77   1/21/2015 at 09:06 (3,354 days old) by parwaz786 ( )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
A Dyson will never lose suction as long as it is emptied at the max line and has it's filters washed on time. |
Post# 312778 , Reply# 78   1/21/2015 at 09:17 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312779 , Reply# 79   1/21/2015 at 09:23 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
"as long as it is emptied at the max line and has it's filters washed on time."
That's EXACTLY the point Tayyab. Dyson claim that their cleaner has 100% suction, 100% of the time, which is not true. It is reliant on the filters being 100% clean, 100% of the time, which is impossible.
Whether you notice it or not, there is an inevitable suction loss. |
Post# 312780 , Reply# 80   1/21/2015 at 09:25 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. |
Post# 312782 , Reply# 81   1/21/2015 at 09:27 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Miniscule and irrelevant loss of suction just being pedantic. Pedantic Chris :-) |
Post# 312783 , Reply# 82   1/21/2015 at 09:27 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312788 , Reply# 84   1/21/2015 at 09:40 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312790 , Reply# 85   1/21/2015 at 09:48 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. |
Post# 312791 , Reply# 86   1/21/2015 at 09:57 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Oh you've opened a can of worms now Joshua haha. |
Post# 312794 , Reply# 87   1/21/2015 at 10:07 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
But a suction loss is still a suction loss. It's still a false claim.
Don't get me wrong, it's not something that bothers me. All my vacs lose some suction as the bag fills up although it's not enough to hinder the performance. But it is still yet another false claim, or at the very least, a claim with a heap of small print conditions. |
Post# 312795 , Reply# 88   1/21/2015 at 10:10 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Not a heap of conditions just one. Wash the filter when dirty. Not applicable to the BIG BALL it's a monster! :-) |
Post# 312797 , Reply# 89   1/21/2015 at 10:17 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
|
Post# 312808 , Reply# 91   1/21/2015 at 13:24 (3,354 days old) by parwaz786 ( )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Well there is no filter to wash, so even if fine dust does go to the motor, Dyson would be concerned and add a filter. Did they though? No, so it is very very unlikely that fine dust would go to the motor |
Post# 312812 , Reply# 92   1/21/2015 at 15:08 (3,354 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312814 , Reply# 93   1/21/2015 at 15:15 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
People are making comments about the DC41 Mk11 without ever using it. And why would you have to take the cyclones apart?You can tell by the performance. |
Post# 312817 , Reply# 95   1/21/2015 at 15:31 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. |
Post# 312818 , Reply# 96   1/21/2015 at 15:35 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 312820 , Reply# 97   1/21/2015 at 15:36 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Haha only people who live in country homes? Wait till it comes on QVC over here and watch them fly :-) And there will be offers on the price. I got my dyson for just over £300 with 6 tools. |
Post# 312823 , Reply# 99   1/21/2015 at 15:52 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
If it doesn't suit your needs don't by it. Simples :-) And don't burn wood or coal as it is very polluting to the atmosphere. Remember the days of smog? |
Post# 312825 , Reply# 100   1/21/2015 at 15:53 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312826 , Reply# 101   1/21/2015 at 15:55 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312827 , Reply# 102   1/21/2015 at 15:57 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. |
Post# 312828 , Reply# 103   1/21/2015 at 15:59 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312829 , Reply# 104   1/21/2015 at 15:59 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Or buy one on credit or qvc. Dysons are big sellers so it can't only be people in posh country houses buying them :-) |
Post# 312830 , Reply# 105   1/21/2015 at 15:59 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 312831 , Reply# 106   1/21/2015 at 16:02 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. |
Post# 312833 , Reply# 108   1/21/2015 at 16:02 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
And you don't represent the general vacuum buying public when you say "he" what about "She" Tut tut Chris |
Post# 312834 , Reply# 109   1/21/2015 at 16:06 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
|
Post# 312835 , Reply# 110   1/21/2015 at 16:06 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Yes yes there are wet/dry VAC's that can pick up liquids but that's a specific kind of vacuum. |
Post# 312836 , Reply# 111   1/21/2015 at 16:08 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. |
Post# 312838 , Reply# 112   1/21/2015 at 16:11 (3,354 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Actually, with the high energy prices, it appears there is a shift towards wood-burning stoves. Whether or not they are good for you is another matter. CLICK HERE TO GO TO Rolls_rapide's LINK |
Post# 312839 , Reply# 113   1/21/2015 at 16:13 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. |
Post# 312840 , Reply# 114   1/21/2015 at 16:14 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I thought energy prices were coming down? |
Post# 312841 , Reply# 115   1/21/2015 at 16:17 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
And how many trees are we gonna need to chop down for am increase in wood burning stoves? I'll stick to electric. |
Post# 312843 , Reply# 117   1/21/2015 at 16:21 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Anyway its past my bedtime so Nos da to you all :-) |
Post# 312844 , Reply# 118   1/21/2015 at 16:25 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Calum it's probably best to wait and see how people get on with over a period of time before you make assumptions. Dyson are not as stupid as you may think :-) |
Post# 312845 , Reply# 119   1/21/2015 at 16:28 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)   |   | |
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. |