Thread Number: 27962  /  Tag: Brand New Vacuum Cleaners
EU Ratings
[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# 312507   1/19/2015 at 09:45 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()        

Just spoke to Dyson and they tell me the EU test on carpet has to be done with the brushroll off that's why they had to downgrade the rating to a C. When they did the original test they had the brushroll on.
Whether this is true I don't know. But it would explain why the Miele S7 or U1 as it's now called gets a C rating on carpet.


Post# 312529 , Reply# 1   1/19/2015 at 11:02 (3,356 days old) by spiraclean (UK)        

spiraclean's profile picture
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 ()        

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)        

turbo500's profile picture

Dyson aren't exactly well known for making truthful claims.

"The worlds first bagless vacuum" - not true

"The worlds first cyclonic vacuum" - not true
"The cleaner that doesn't lose suction" - 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)        

spiraclean's profile picture
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 ()        

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)        

spiraclean's profile picture
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 ()        

I totally agree!

Post# 312548 , Reply# 8   1/19/2015 at 13:32 (3,356 days old) by sptyks (Skowhegan, Maine)        
What about CRI?

sptyks's profile picture

Well, we have such an independent testing lab here in the US. It's called the Carpet and Rug Institute (CRI) but not very many here on VL seem to agree with CRI's findings.

 

 What makes you think the findings of a similar testing institute in the UK will be believed anymore than CRI's findings?

 


Post# 312550 , Reply# 9   1/19/2015 at 13:49 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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 ()        

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 ( )        

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)        
What was the first cyclonic vacuum then?

turbo500's profile picture

Filter Queen in 1939.


Post# 312557 , Reply# 13   1/19/2015 at 14:40 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()        

Well I think we can say Dyson were the first to use multi cyclones.

Post# 312558 , Reply# 14   1/19/2015 at 14:43 (3,356 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        

I think Electrolux had a cyclonic machine years before the Dyson, probably only a single cyclone machine. And there were also those cyclonic interceptor modules for the industrial BVC machines, et al.

Dyson took the inventive step of marrying a low efficiency cyclone and a high efficiency cyclone together.

On-board tools was another feature that had been done decades before. Hoover had patented that one.


Post# 312559 , Reply# 15   1/19/2015 at 14:46 (3,356 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

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 ()        

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 ()        

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 ( )        

LOL Marcus your funny!
And the DC07 did get invented by JD I guess due to the multi cyclones as stated by Marcus


Post# 312566 , Reply# 19   1/19/2015 at 16:50 (3,356 days old) by Reflector ()        
Woodworking Cyclones

...You know they've been selling little miniaturized woodworking cyclones for decades right? Usually they're attached to a Shopvac (Or a higher end "Dust Collection System.")

Here's my Sebo C3.1 attached to one of those said woodworking cyclone units. I used a clean bag yesterday while doing some sanding and none of the powder-like-fines made it through to the bag surface. The bucket was pretty full however...

And yes that's a Dyson flexible crevice tool attached to it.


  View Full Size
Post# 312567 , Reply# 20   1/19/2015 at 17:09 (3,356 days old) by Vintagerepairer (England)        

If the testing was actually done with the brush roller turned off, I think we'd be seeing a test code closer to Z than C, because as we all know, the cleaning head of a machine with a roller brush is not designed to clean by suction only, unlike carpet tools on cylinder cleaners which have channels and pads to increase performance.


Post# 312573 , Reply# 21   1/19/2015 at 18:23 (3,356 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        
Here's a laugh for you...

sebo_fan's profile picture
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)        
Now the energy label...

sebo_fan's profile picture
I was shocked when I read the energy label and how the vacuum has been tested on various pick up.



Post# 312575 , Reply# 23   1/19/2015 at 18:37 (3,356 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)        

dys0nb0y's profile picture
i don't understand what's wrong with that.

Post# 312577 , Reply# 24   1/19/2015 at 19:29 (3,356 days old) by Reflector ()        

They used a crevice tool to test the pickup on carpet, not a floor nozzle. The same applies for the hard floor test...

Post# 312590 , Reply# 25   1/19/2015 at 22:30 (3,356 days old) by Sensotronic (Englandshire)        

I don't believe they used a crevice tool. I read about the testing procedure somewhere and the crevice refers to a gap, such as the gap you get in between floorboards etc. The test measures not only the dust removed from the surface, but also how much dust is removed from the gap.

Post# 312595 , Reply# 26   1/19/2015 at 22:43 (3,356 days old) by Reflector ()        

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 ()        

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)        

turbo500's profile picture
A energy, C carpet, B hardfloors?

Post# 312607 , Reply# 29   1/20/2015 at 02:48 (3,356 days old) by marcusprit ()        

Huh?

Post# 312609 , Reply# 30   1/20/2015 at 03:20 (3,355 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

^I wasn't talking to you ;).

 

The Vax that Nar posted above. A energy, C carpet, B hardfloors. Of all the ratings we've seen so far, that doesn't seem like the most far fetched by a long shot.


Post# 312610 , Reply# 31   1/20/2015 at 03:23 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

turbo500's profile picture

It's not tested with a crevice tool, it's tested on a floor with a crevice. Part of the testing is to see how much dust is pulled out of gaps, for example between floorboards.


Post# 312613 , Reply# 33   1/20/2015 at 04:01 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

turbo500's profile picture

No it doesn't. It says "dirt pick up on wilton carpet with crevice". The word "tool" is not found anywhere.

 

Like Roger, I read this as "Dirt picked up on A wilton carpet with A crevice" ie. a crevice in the floor making the carpet uneven.


Post# 312616 , Reply# 35   1/20/2015 at 05:06 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
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)        
Or if you can't be bothered...

sebo_fan's profile picture


  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)        
2nd part

sebo_fan's profile picture


  View Full Size
Post# 312622 , Reply# 39   1/20/2015 at 05:28 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()        

Excellent! Thank you Nar :-)

Post# 312625 , Reply# 40   1/20/2015 at 05:33 (3,355 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
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)        

turbomaster1984's profile picture
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)        

turbo500's profile picture

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)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
I suppose the major difference of paper bag "cyclones" though is the simple fact that any dust spunout in the middle is thrown around, upwards and outwards, but thus clogging the actual bag compared to sliding off a plastic non-porous container.

Post# 312699 , Reply# 45   1/20/2015 at 17:08 (3,355 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        
Also a Tweet from Vax Commercial:

sebo_fan's profile picture
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)        

spiraclean's profile picture
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 ()        

That better be one insanely competent, incorruptable, infallible and perfect monolithic organization... Otherwise it still has the same flaws.

Post# 312725 , Reply# 48   1/21/2015 at 03:49 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

Good point reflector. Whoever does the testing it will never be 100% perfect and corruption is always a possibility. It's best to go by your own experience of a brand and a high percentage of good reviews.
And of course listen to members on here who know what they are talking about. With a few exceptions haha :-)


Post# 312726 , Reply# 49   1/21/2015 at 03:52 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

turbomaster1984's profile picture
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 ()        

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)        

turbomaster1984's profile picture
Quite clearly it does mean sod all given the amount of cleaners now using and potentially some that have always used mutli cyclones for the best part of 90 years.

Anyway....


Post# 312731 , Reply# 53   1/21/2015 at 04:33 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

turbomaster1984's profile picture
are they ahead of the rest?

who says so?


Post# 312734 , Reply# 55   1/21/2015 at 04:39 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

I wouldn't exactly say they're ahead of anybody, especially considering that they can easilly be out-cleaned by 40+ year old vacuums.


Post# 312735 , Reply# 56   1/21/2015 at 04:42 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

turbo500's profile picture
Wow, what a mature, convincing debate.

I don't know about you, Rob, but all my vacuum studying years now mean nothing and I am truly convinced that Dyson are the greatest vacuum cleaner EVER, just because Marcus says so!!! What a revelation.


Post# 312738 , Reply# 58   1/21/2015 at 05:02 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

turbomaster1984's profile picture
Ask us that in 3 or 4 years time.

Given your own admittance about Dysons ethics you of all people should be wary of his claims.

SO far this cleaner has not been in folks long enough to see if it does clog.

Basic sense to wait and see what happens in a real home with real people really.


Post# 312741 , Reply# 60   1/21/2015 at 05:07 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

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# 312744 , Reply# 61   1/21/2015 at 05:14 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

I didn't say it did but we were discussing cyclones. The other turbonator said they weren't the most efficient cyclones but they clearly are.
And having no filters to wash will be a good selling point.As no filters to buy or wash is a good thing.


Post# 312745 , Reply# 62   1/21/2015 at 05:21 (3,354 days old) by turbomaster1984 (Ripley, Derbyshire)        

turbomaster1984's profile picture
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# 312746 , Reply# 63   1/21/2015 at 05:28 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

If Sebo or Kirby for instance came out with a good innovation people on here would be all over it like a rash but when dyson comes out with something good you just can't bring yourself to give them any credit.
And I'm sorry Rob it was just a joke.:-)


Post# 312748 , Reply# 64   1/21/2015 at 05:59 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

That's not true, Marcus, I've dished out plenty of criticism at both Kirby and Sebo. I've never found a vacuum that isn't deserving of it's fair share of critique.


Post# 312750 , Reply# 65   1/21/2015 at 06:04 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

spiraclean's profile picture
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)        
What they didn't say was that it still had far less suct

turbo500's profile picture

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 ()        

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# 312764 , Reply# 69   1/21/2015 at 07:57 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

Chris i've been using the Dc41 for 4 months now and the filter is still extremely clean no loss of suction that i've noticed. But of course in time the suction will decrease and it will need washing, Thats not a problem to me but i may get a Cinetic in the future.

Post# 312766 , Reply# 70   1/21/2015 at 08:10 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

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 ()        

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)        

turbo500's profile picture

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)        

spiraclean's profile picture
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# 312773 , Reply# 74   1/21/2015 at 08:51 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

Yes but the cyclones have improved greatly so very tiny amounts of dust will escape from them now so the filter stays clean for long periods I find. and with cinetic nothing above 0.5 microns will get through. As I say after 4 months use if there has been any drop in suction it is miniscule and not affecting performance. Filters also get clogged on bagged cleaners.

Post# 312774 , Reply# 75   1/21/2015 at 08:58 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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# 312775 , Reply# 76   1/21/2015 at 09:05 (3,354 days old) by parwaz786 ( )        

The late De rooted Dyson DC07's filters stay SPOTLESS even after a year. I know this because we got our origin on the 3rd January 2014 and it has hardly needed a filter wash TBH, apart from when I used shake n vac with it and the previous owner sucked up plaster, but TBH there's not really any hair etc. These cyclones are pretty good!

The early DC07's however, have inefficient cyclones. I don't really blame Dyson that this needed modifications because it was the world's first multi cyclonic idea. Dyson just launched it and one of the USP's were it's powerful suction from the root cyclone technology.

Regarding the DC01, I disagree with it being a crap vacuum. Not for a collector performance wise, but overall for a normal household, that is just what people want. The nice Dyson design and features (stretch hose, quick release wand, washable filters later on, performance which is good enough to remove all surface dirt and even deep clean a little, bagless, no loss of suction IF you maintain it when they do tell you).

People know about DC01 filters because it is very noticeable when you empty the vacuum. There is red writing that tells you to remember about the two filters which need to be "replaced" every 3 months with a diagram. I remember as a kid my Auntie pulled the filter cartridge out to check it when she finished using it. My family do not care to read the instruction manuals and look after the vacuums, but this was very noticeable, so they knew that is should be done. the white filter would get dusty, so it would either be cleaned or replaced. If the vacuum were to break, that's it. Throw it away and buy a new one.


Post# 312776 , Reply# 77   1/21/2015 at 09:06 (3,354 days old) by parwaz786 ( )        

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)        

dys0nb0y's profile picture
the dyson kinetic cylinder has bin doing quite well.what i have hear it's no problems and it's been out for quite a while and still no problems.

Post# 312779 , Reply# 79   1/21/2015 at 09:23 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

"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 ()        

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)        

dys0nb0y's profile picture
i haven't heard dyson say 100% of the suction 100% of the time.in a very very long time.

Post# 312786 , Reply# 83   1/21/2015 at 09:36 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

To be fair they do say no loss of suction. Maybe they should say no loss of suction providing the filters are washed when dirty. Which in my case won't be for at least 6 months. But with Cinetic they can safely say No loss of suction.

Post# 312788 , Reply# 84   1/21/2015 at 09:40 (3,354 days old) by dys0nb0y (Luton)        

dys0nb0y's profile picture
at least dyson don't say never loses suction like shark.

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 ()        

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)        

turbo500's profile picture
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 ()        

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)        

turbo500's profile picture
Have you used it, Marcus? Infact, has anyone on here?

Given the evidence in this thread about Dyson's false claims, I'm very surprised that people are so willing to believe the claims that Dyson are making about the Cinnetic without trying it out for themselves first.


Post# 312800 , Reply# 90   1/21/2015 at 10:23 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

I've tried the cylinder version that's been out a while now. Only on a demo but I've heard good things about it and don't forget there are a huge amount of happy Dyson customers out there who are loyal to the brand. I admit it's early days for the big ball but I'm confident it will be a winner providing the price comes down.

Post# 312808 , Reply# 91   1/21/2015 at 13:24 (3,354 days old) by parwaz786 ( )        

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)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
The proof is in the pudding as Chris says. Unless you own it AND take apart the cyclones to inspect it, you'll be none the wiser.

Post# 312814 , Reply# 93   1/21/2015 at 15:15 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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# 312816 , Reply# 94   1/21/2015 at 15:20 (3,354 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
Imagine this scenario...

Mr & Mrs Smythe own a country house, with wood-burning stoves / fireplaces. They also own the Dyson Cinetic (upright or cylinder, it doesn't matter which).

In the course of daily use, the fireplaces accumulate ash. Maintenance of which requires disposal of the ash, creating dust, soot, etc.

What would happen if the Cinetic machines were used daily in this case? I don't think they would perform as Dyson claims. I think they would clog relatively quickly, with the exhaust filter becoming clogged. I don't think that Dyson has thought this through - and just remember - at those prices, the only people who will be able to afford the machines are the ones with fancy country homes and wood-burning stoves.


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)        

dys0nb0y's profile picture
here we go i found a solution and it's quick an easy and doesn't break you vacuum

Post# 312820 , Reply# 97   1/21/2015 at 15:36 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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# 312822 , Reply# 98   1/21/2015 at 15:49 (3,354 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
My point is...

...that Dyson presumes that everyone uses their cleaner to suck up ordinary household "dust" only. Which is, of course, a somewhat short-sighted outlook.

We all know that people use their machines to clear up after diy, building work, accidental spillages, etc.

Dyson should be engineering their machines to cope with these extreme cases, rather than placing cop-out disclaimer labels upon the cleaners. Simples.


Post# 312823 , Reply# 99   1/21/2015 at 15:52 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        

dys0nb0y's profile picture
you shouldn't up plaster dust in with any vacuum cleaner.no one's gonna pick up liquids with a vacuum cleaner that's just silly. and if you look in the manual most machine say not to pick up plaster dust and certain materials.

Post# 312826 , Reply# 101   1/21/2015 at 15:55 (3,354 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
as people save up for them

turbo500's profile picture

Not true. You might save up, but you don't represent the general vacuum buying public. Average Mr. Smythe isn't going to feel the need to save up for a specific vacuum, he'll just replace it when his old one breaks.


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)        

dys0nb0y's profile picture
i know many people that save up for a dyson simples.

Post# 312829 , Reply# 104   1/21/2015 at 15:59 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        
dyson testing the machines lots of different things not just

turbo500's profile picture

says who? The legal requirements that Nar posted only mention using artificial dust. Where is you evidence that Dyson use more than dust for testing?


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# 312832 , Reply# 107   1/21/2015 at 16:02 (3,354 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
"no one's gonna pick up liquids"

You wrongly assumed it was liquids. I said "accidental spillages", which can pertain to a dropped bag of icing sugar, flour, talcum powder et al.

Oh, and vacuum cleaners can indeed suck up water: witness the Vax 121, Hoover Aquamaster, Electrolux Masterlux, Goblin Aquavac.


Post# 312833 , Reply# 108   1/21/2015 at 16:02 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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)        
i don't need proof is common sense

turbo500's profile picture

You do if you're going to make comments like that on here and state them as a fact. You've no evidence to show what Dyson uses for their testing at all.

 

Marcus, I was following on from Callum's earlier example using Mr. Smythe. Mrs. Smythe is probably off having an affair somewhere.


Post# 312835 , Reply# 110   1/21/2015 at 16:06 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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 (-)        
"don't burn wood or coal"

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 ()        

I thought energy prices were coming down?

Post# 312841 , Reply# 115   1/21/2015 at 16:17 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

And how many trees are we gonna need to chop down for am increase in wood burning stoves? I'll stick to electric.

Post# 312842 , Reply# 116   1/21/2015 at 16:19 (3,354 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
"any vacuum can pick up icing sugar flour and talcum pow

Yes, and pass it right through the cyclone system to coat the final filter - the filter which is not user maintainable, nor replaceable.

Remember, Dyson previously stated that different cyclone designs captured different sized particles. So presuming this still to be the case, Cinetic machines will still allow some particles through to the final filter. This filter will clog over time.


Post# 312843 , Reply# 117   1/21/2015 at 16:21 (3,354 days old) by marcusprit ()        

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 ()        

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.



Post# 312847 , Reply# 120   1/21/2015 at 16:55 (3,354 days old) by parwaz786 ( )        

There shouldn't be and spuds ty motors. The cyclones self clean cos they are made of something not too flexible and not too tough either. Goodbye dusty cyclones


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