Thread Number: 34489  /  Tag: Brand New Vacuum Cleaners
Tacony Tandem Air Suction Not Too Great
[Down to Last]

Vacuumland's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 372953   5/31/2017 at 04:35 by Shrink1982 (Indianapolis)        

shrink1982's profile picture
I have noticed on my Maytag 1200 the suctions through the hose is not all that great. Once I extend the wand and and add the dusting brush I can definitely tell the difference. The suction just isn't on par with my Sebo D4 premium. In fact, the suction is about as good as the suction I get if I hook the hose up to a Kirby, which seems odd considering it has direct suction only. I am not sure if the Maytag underperforms on suction only because the wattage of the machine is split between the two motors resulting in a much less powerful suction motor than what you get on a machine that only has a suction motor. I am not an engineer I just know what my experience has been. I have also noted that the part of the hose that clips into the hose handle, there is a slight leak of air. It is very subtle but I can feel it. It isn't sealed well but I don't blame that for the performance as it is very minimal. I think the suction motor is underpowered. It would be nice if the suction motor would pull more electricity and speed up when the direct air motor and brush roll are turned off. Has only else noticed this on Tacony models with TandemAir?




Post# 372957 , Reply# 1   5/31/2017 at 06:50 by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

You nailed it-the clean air motor in the Tacony tandem air machines is like 6A-about the same as the direct air-brush motor.So when you have both of these together-its 12A the 80% rating for a 15A 120V circuit.I don't use either the Kirby or Tandem air uprights in the hose mode only-have MANY canisters for that job-and they work better!Esp the central vacs.Just use the uprights for the WW carpet in my place.I would so like to see the tandem air uprights lose the hose or make it separate as on a Kirby-they make the machine clunky and awkward.Other wise I like the tandem airs.Very unique and effective on carpets.

Post# 372958 , Reply# 2   5/31/2017 at 06:52 by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

I am anxious to get the Tacony Tandem air canister-this may be the best of both worlds-tried a demo one and was quite impressed.The canister motor is more powerful than the clean air one in their uprights.Plus the hose is longer and easier to use on the canister.

Post# 372977 , Reply# 3   5/31/2017 at 10:04 by n0oxy (Saint Louis Missouri, United States)        
hose useage

When it comes to using a vacuum with a hose, canisters are the way to go. While many upright vacuums have hoses, they are not near as flexible, this is why I'm a huge canister fan and don't have any uprights, nor do I want any. It's personal preference of course, but canisters, whether a canister itself, central vacuum, or a backpack are simply more flexible. Use a power nozzle and you have carpet cleaning performance as good as an upright, for hard floors or above the floor, switch to the appropriate attachment, canisters are really the best of all worlds when it comes to a vacuum. Many uprights do not have as much cleaning power when using the hose, and the hoses are usually shorter, and there's no easy way to get the vacuum to follow you while cleaning. A canister vacuum does not have any of these issues.
Mike


Post# 372981 , Reply# 4   5/31/2017 at 10:29 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Or you could use an upright for deep cleaning carpet such as a Kirby or Royal and a canister for all other cleaning. Makes a good combo.


Post# 372984 , Reply# 5   5/31/2017 at 12:54 by n0oxy (Saint Louis Missouri, United States)        
upright and canister combo

This does work, but with a good power nozzle canister, you can get the same cleaning on carpets that an upright provides. The key is to have a good power nozzle and have the height adjusted correctly.
Mike


Post# 373063 , Reply# 6   6/1/2017 at 11:50 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        

sptyks's profile picture

I'd like to see any canister with any PN match my Kirby Sentria or my Royal 8300 on carpet.  A canister PN just does not have the weight needed to seal to the carpet and agitate it properly.

 

 


Post# 373070 , Reply# 7   6/1/2017 at 14:11 by kirbylux77 (Orillia, Ontario, Canada)        

kirbylux77's profile picture
Oh brother, here we go AGAIN!!

Stan, you just HAD to go ahead & bring up the topic of whether canister powerheads can seal to carpets again, eh?! Good grief, don't you know when a topic has been talked about & debated so many times it's pointless & non-productive? Seriously. It's time we put that topic to rest PERMANENTLY....it's quite obvious to me certain members will never agree with others, & it's just best to agree to disagree & not bring it up again.

As for the Maytag M1200, Riccar & Simplicity tandem air uprights having lower hose suction/airflow than average....I have to wonder if part of the reason why it was designed this way was so that the airflow from the direct air motor & the airflow from the clean air motor would be balanced. So that the clean air motor's suction/airflow wouldn't be so strong that it might overpower the direct air motor & possibly cause damage? Just a guess here.

And, just in case anyone is curious, the suction/airflow the clean air motor on the Tandem Air uprights produce would be considered average by the industry. Most "lower end", "disposable" or "retail" brands, like Hoover, Eureka & Dirt Devil, historically those clean air uprights have produced 60" waterlift. It's only when you buy a premium vac shop brand, such as the Panasonic/Kenmore uprights, Tacony uprights, Samsung, etc, that you start to see higher waterlift ratings, most of those brands are about 70" waterlift, sometimes as high as 80"-85".

Rob


Post# 373071 , Reply# 8   6/1/2017 at 14:39 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
I agree with you Rob. I think it's to do with getting a balance between the direct air and clean air motor. It's a good design but personally I'd still prefer a single motor.

The direct air Riccar canister PN that will be available soon does interest me a lot. I will be interested to see how well it performs.


Post# 373146 , Reply# 9   6/3/2017 at 10:30 by electromatik (Taylorsville, North Carolina, U.S.A.)        
@sptyks

Your claim is demonstrably false.

Post# 373147 , Reply# 10   6/3/2017 at 11:23 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        
electromatik:

sptyks's profile picture

Here is proof that my claim is demonstrably correct and that you are clearly wrong!

 




 

 


Post# 373177 , Reply# 11   6/3/2017 at 20:09 by kirbylux77 (Orillia, Ontario, Canada)        

kirbylux77's profile picture
Stan - Oh really? No, you're not right at all! If the video you're using as your proof was with a canister vacuum using a full size powerhead, not the compact Miele powerhead, you could say it's a fair comparison. But those compact powerheads can only clean low pile carpet effectively, where there isn't a lot of carpet nap to brush through. You can't compare that to a full size upright with a full size powerhead that can clean ALL carpet types effectively.

Also, Mikko is using sawdust in his test, not normal dirt from normal vacuuming that he could have collected & spread out. Sawdust would clog a vacuum bag much more quickly than normal dirt. There's a reason vacuum collectors have criticized Consumer Reports in their testing of vacuums for using fine talc & sawdust to replicate dirt in their tests. Therefore, the 2 vacuums would lose their airflow much more quickly than normal, & is NOT a true reflection of the cleaning results one could expect using either machine.

Rob


Post# 373191 , Reply# 12   6/4/2017 at 03:48 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Good points Rob.

I would still like to see a canister/cylinder cleaner that can match the performance of the Kirby.

My MD central vac might well do. It's has very high suction and airflow. I can feel it pulling the dirt up deep down into the carpet pile. I use it with a Sebo ET1 which is a very effective PN.


Post# 373192 , Reply# 13   6/4/2017 at 06:01 by Mike811 (Finland)        
Kirby vs canister vacuums

mike811's profile picture
I don't think that there is a canister vacuum cleaner what can match the Kirby in a deep cleaning. However some come quite close. For example my Nilfisk GM80 with the full size Wessel Werk EBK 340 ph comes very close.
Now it's important to know, that the Nilfisk pulls 109 cfm from the hose end. I would say that it is pretty impressive for a clean air motor system.
I haven't done direct comparison video between those two, but maybe I should.
Here is my latest deep clean comparison video where Kirby won.
Note that the Lux Royal had a small ph in this test. It pulls 104 cfm from the hose end.





  Photos...       <              >      Photo 1 of 3         View Full Size
Post# 373193 , Reply# 14   6/4/2017 at 06:15 by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

Hmmm-Maybe I should try my Volt powernozzle with my Nilfisk GM 80 canister vacuum!Stangely---My Nilfisk came from the trade in pile in the Kirby salesmans van!The Nilfisk I have came with an air powered powernozzle-could see how the Kirby could beat that one.

Post# 373194 , Reply# 15   6/4/2017 at 06:34 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
I'm glad to see the Nilfisk comes close to the Kirby 😊

I would like to see the Volt in action.


Post# 373201 , Reply# 16   6/4/2017 at 08:38 by n0oxy (Saint Louis Missouri, United States)        
canister and upright comparison

If you have a good amount of suction and airflow, and a full sized power nozzle, I would think it would clean as well as an upright. That MD central vacuum and the Sebo power nozzle should be a great cleaning combination, I would think that would be comparable to an upright. As far as the volt, I would say give it a try with that nilfisk vacuum, see how it works. I have never seen a Nilfisk but have heard they are very good. Here is a youtube video about the volt nozzle, it provides a good overview of how it works.
Mike





Post# 373205 , Reply# 17   6/4/2017 at 10:31 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        

sptyks's profile picture

Rob,

 

The results of Mike's latest video prove once again that upright vacuums, especially Kirby, are far superior in cleaning performance. to any canister/power nozzle combination.

 

I have a 10 amp Royal Everlast 8300 that out cleans my Kirby Sentria. I would like to see any canister with PN even come close to matching the performance of my Royal.

 

~Stan

 

 


  Photos...       <              >      Photo 1 of 3         View Full Size
Post# 373211 , Reply# 18   6/4/2017 at 12:22 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
A central vac with over 1000 airwatts and 200 CFM will match a Kirby. I've seen it with my own eyes as I own both. 😊

Post# 373220 , Reply# 19   6/4/2017 at 18:29 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
1000 Airwatts!?

wyaple's profile picture
Mark,

What are the motor specs of that beast? The best I've seen from a single fan unit is about 700 peak airwatts.

Bill


Post# 373222 , Reply# 20   6/4/2017 at 19:26 by kirbylux77 (Orillia, Ontario, Canada)        

kirbylux77's profile picture
Stan, let me make this clear - The ONLY uprights ever put on the market, in my opinion, that can come ANYWHERE close to matching or exceeding a modern post-1990 canister vacuum's performance is the Tacony Tandem Air uprights, a post-1990 Royal Metal upright, or any Kirby made after 1980.

You cannot possibly claim that ALL uprights clean better than canisters. For starters, the motors in clean air uprights, whether bagged or bagless, produce less suction & airflow than canister motors. Forget how well the hose, wand & powerhead connections are sealed on a canister....the fact of the matter is, a modern, post-1990 canister vacuum's motor produces more suction & airflow than a competitor's upright from the same year. That easily overcomes any airflow losses & makes it clean better. And as for direct air uprights being superior? Well, the ONLY ones that actually work & are effective are the bell nozzle shaped uprights, like Royal & Kirby. All the others that have the fan & belt pulley placed at opposite ends, like 8 lb uprights & Hoover Elite, Dirt Devil Featherlite, Eureka Bravo, etc....They initially have good suction & airflow, but lose it very quickly with as little as 1/4 or 1/3 full bag of dirt. Same thing with the Hoover Convertible/Eureka F&G style uprights, & they also have the added disadvantage of burning thru their round belts much faster than uprights that use flat belts.

Rob


Post# 373226 , Reply# 21   6/4/2017 at 20:02 by n0oxy (Saint Louis Missouri, United States)        
highest ratings for a central vacuum with one motor

I have a total of 7 central vacuum units, and while they clean very well, some have higher power than others. My most powerful models are the Purvac barracuda, this one uses a Dommel motor, 151 water lift and I think 144 CFM, it's quite powerful. Then there's the vacumaid SR800, it has the Ametek lamb 8.4 inch two fan motor, 142 CFM and 147 water lift, it's quite a beast. And then there's the vacumaid garage vac pro, this unit is designed to give you the power of a central vacuum without pipes, it just has a hose inlet right on the unit. It uses an Ametek 5.7 two fan motor, interestingly, even though it's a smaller motor, the specs are not that much different than the 8.4 motor, 138 water lift and 138 CFM, it will also have no problem cleaning whatever you give it;. Hooking a central vacuum hose directly to a central vacuum unit with no pipes is really something, I guarantee you that this set up, with a good power nozzle will out clean any upright on the market.
Mike


Post# 373232 , Reply# 22   6/4/2017 at 23:28 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Everyone, Please Be Careful When Quoting Specs

wyaple's profile picture
As far as I can tell people keep quoting RAW motor specs that do not represent cleaning power at the end of the hose. As an example, pictured below is an 8.4" double stage Ametek motor that can do 142 CFM at the motor base with a 2" opening. When that opening get reduced by the typical 1.125" hose, the airflow drops like a stone to 106 CFM. Now add handles, wands, u-joints required to actually get the airflow to a carpet nozzle and you can see just how much airflow loss is apparent.

The best upright I have measured so far is a Kirby Sentria II. Comparing apples to apples, the base of the motor tests at 177 CFM (with a HEPA bag) and then gets reduced to 137 CFM at the nozzle with the brush roll spinning.

Bill


Post# 373248 , Reply# 23   6/5/2017 at 10:41 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        
My Mistake...

sptyks's profile picture

Rob,

 

My apologies for any confusion. You are correct. I DID NOT intend to claim that ALL uprights deep clean better than a canister with PN. I meant to specify just Direct or Tandem Air uprights made after 2000, most specifically G series Kirby's and 9 and 10 amp Royals.

 

That being said, it did appear to me, I could be wrong, that the black upright vacuum in Mike's latest video is a Bypass air machine which did perform better than his canister with PN.

 

 


Post# 373257 , Reply# 24   6/5/2017 at 13:05 by n0oxy (Saint Louis Missouri, United States)        
drop in airflow

What Bill says is true, there will be a drop in airflow once a hose is connected. When you turn on the garage vac pro that I mentioned in my previous post with no hose attached, the air coming out of the exhaust port is definitely more than when a hose is attached. This is why many say that using a central vacuum with two motors does not really provide much benefit, the airflow will still be restricted by the hose and any pipes that are installed.
Mike


Post# 373258 , Reply# 25   6/5/2017 at 13:28 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
You are correct the single motor produces 700 airwatts but there are twin motors that produce over 1000 airwatts and 200 CFM.

Yes of course airflow will be lost through the hose but the suction and airflow is still very strong and my carpets look extremely clean after using the central vac.
The results are more than good enough for me 😊


Post# 373259 , Reply# 26   6/5/2017 at 13:32 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
I will be getting a twin motor central vac at some point.

Mike I think having 2 motors will be of benefit.Yew there will be a loss of airflow but if you're starting off with over 1000 airwatts and 200 CFM there's going to be more suction and airflow at the end of the hose than a single motor I would think.


Post# 373276 , Reply# 27   6/5/2017 at 20:13 by n0oxy (Saint Louis Missouri, United States)        
two motor unit

It would be awesome to try hooking a central vacuum hose directly to a two motor unit to see the performance, unfortunately I don't have a 220 volt outlet here, and the units that use two large motors require that. There are two motor units that use two smaller motors that use 120 volts, but these motors are rather small and you will probably get better performance with one larger motor in this case.
Mike


Post# 373303 , Reply# 28   6/6/2017 at 02:24 by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

I have a dual motor NuTone CV450 that has two 6A motors-electrically they are connected in parallel-airpath wise they are in series.My other central units are quieter and more powerful.The NuTone runs on 120V. 240V units are not practical for me-there is 240V in my house of course for the range and dryer,and GE Advantium oven.Just not convenient to run a 240V central machine for me.My MD Silentmaster does just fine!

Post# 373305 , Reply# 29   6/6/2017 at 02:58 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
We use 240v in the UK as standard.

The MD Silent Master is excellent. I was thinking of getting the model that used to be the S5 with 2 motors. That is extremely powerful with 950 airwatts close to 200 cfm. It's also quiet at 62db.

They now have a true seal bag which is a closed bag that attaches to all 3 inlets and is still tapered like the open bag for maximum airflow.


Post# 373307 , Reply# 30   6/6/2017 at 05:14 by Mike811 (Finland)        
Kirby vs canister vacuum cleaner (deep clean test)

mike811's profile picture
Here it is. Kirby Gsix vs Nilfisk GM80.
This is video for those who wonder can a canister vacuum cleaner beat the Kirby.





Post# 373309 , Reply# 31   6/6/2017 at 06:10 by kenkart (Mocksville, NC)        
The secret is NOT how heavy a machine is

But it is that the upright can LIFT a carpet from the floor and vibrate it on a cushion of air, Hoover, Royal and Kirby advertised this for many years, The other advantage is that the air does not have to travel long distances thus losing airflow, and its a proven fact that a open face fan moves more air,...doesent have as much suction, but moves volumes more air...This being said,newer carpets are much harder to clean because they backs on many of them are not as porous as they were years ago, so air cant be drawn thru them....and the fact remains, straight suction does a better job on thin carpets that are glued down.

Post# 373311 , Reply# 32   6/6/2017 at 06:31 by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

The airlift method is fine for carpets that are not fully fastened to the subfloor-many commercial carpets are fully glued to the subflooring-the air lift won't work there-and those low pile commercial carpets have waterproof-airtight backings,
Wish the US would go to 220-240V for small appliances-would actually be more energy efficient.Remember when we say 14Ga cable can carry 15A-thats 1800W@120V-now at 240VDOUBLES (3600W)!!!And look up on the power pole feeding your homes "pole pig"(USA)that little strip of 14-10Ga cable is carrying up to 15A@7500V!!!!Your WHOLE home running off that!That primary cable is like 2-4 ft long-taps to the main overhead MV dist lines.Same with for URD distribution-the cable has to be heavily insulated since it is underground-but the size is the same.Oh yes-the "pole pig" is the distribution transformer that steps the 7500V primary voltage to 120/240V that feeds the house.For URD the ground mount transformer.My neighborhood has URD(Underground Residentual Distribution.The transformer actually powers four homes.Mine and the 3 neighbors.


Post# 373316 , Reply# 33   6/6/2017 at 09:35 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Great video Mike. Your Nilfisk with the Wessel Werk PN does a fantastic job!What do you think of that Stan? :)

Post# 373335 , Reply# 34   6/6/2017 at 12:14 by kirbylux77 (Orillia, Ontario, Canada)        
Stan & Bill

kirbylux77's profile picture
Well, I guess this proves you two were totally wrong! Now there's NO WAY you can possibly say a modern canister can't clean as well as a direct-air upright.

Mikko, thanks for doing this test & posting it here & on YouTube. I think Stan & Bill are going to have to eat crow over this one :-)

Rob


Post# 373336 , Reply# 35   6/6/2017 at 12:48 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        

sptyks's profile picture

Rex:

 

At 120 volts a 12 amp (1440 watts) vacuum is plenty of power to clean any home. Remember that a 12 amp 1440 watt vacuum at 120 volts is only drawing 6 amps at 240 volts. The wattage stays the same while the amperage is cut in half at 240 volts.

 

Marcus:

 

To me, it looks like the amount of rice in the glasses at the end of the test is pretty much exactly the same meaning the Nilfisk matched the performance of the Gsix which has 121 CFM. However the Sentria II and Avalir have 137 CFM and my 10 amp Royal 8300 has over 144 CFM so it is highly doubtful that the Nilfisk could keep up with any of those 3 upright vacuums. 

 

 

 

 


Post# 373337 , Reply# 36   6/6/2017 at 13:26 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
It will be very close.

As will a central vac with 200 CFM. Admittedly that is 200cfm at the unit.

I bet you weren't expecting that result were you 👍


Post# 373339 , Reply# 37   6/6/2017 at 13:41 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        

sptyks's profile picture

Rob,

 

There's no Crow on my diet!

 As I said in Reply #35, the Nilfisk only matched the performance of the Gsix which is a 17 year old machine that has only 121 CFM. I still believe the Nilfisk would be no match for the much more modern Sentria II, Avalir, (137CFM) or the Royal 8300 (144CFM). So you can put that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

Besides, that model of Nilfisk is pretty rare. How many people do you know besides Mike that actually own one. Do you actually think the average Miele or Sebo canister with any PN can keep up with the Avalir or Royal 8300? 

 

~Stan

 

 

 

 


Post# 373340 , Reply# 38   6/6/2017 at 13:43 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Rob,

wyaple's profile picture
Let's take a look at what Mike actually accomplished in this video:

1) With two very, very, very slow completed passes on high, loose pile (and probably rubber backed, non-flow through) carpet, rice was vacuumed up.

2) The G6 is about 120 CFM at the nozzle and I'm guessing that the Nilfisk is about 88 CFM at the nozzle based on Mike's previous hose measurements (108 CFM).

3) The weaker Nilfisk was then used as a reference to vacuum up the remaining rice with 4 completed passes with a bag saver installed.

4) Results were shown and the Nilfisk picked up the same leftover rice on both sides of the carpet.

I could easily duplicate these results with any number of machines when using the weaker CFM one as "the reference." Mike doesn't have a Kirby dirt meter yet so he can't show the results using the Kirby as the final reference machine.

It is also possible that Mike's rice test doesn't require anything very powerful to clean his carpet well. Anything over 80 CFM might just be wasted.

The bag saver also reduces airflow considerably, so when he installed that on the Nilfisk, the CFM probably dropped to about 50 CFM at the nozzle. So Rob, are you ready to jump on the bandwagon that believes a 50 CFM reference canister can prove a 120 CFM upright as equal or even pointless? I'm certainly not.

Looks like I'll have to make a few more videos on my channel...

Bill


Post# 373341 , Reply# 39   6/6/2017 at 13:45 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture


  View Full Size
Post# 373342 , Reply# 40   6/6/2017 at 14:02 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        

sptyks's profile picture

Marcus,

 

you must have meant that photo in Reply #39 for Rob because I believe Bill has shown him that he is still WRONG unless he can make a video that proves otherwise.

 

~Stan

 

 


Post# 373343 , Reply# 41   6/6/2017 at 14:07 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Bill makes some good points.

But I still think there are some canisters and central vacs that clean extremely well and most people would be very happy with the results.


Post# 373353 , Reply# 42   6/6/2017 at 15:59 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Mark,

wyaple's profile picture
Different carpet types require different machines and I'm sure many people are very happy with the results of whatever type of machine they have. For cleaning various surface debris, my channel has shown that 50 CFM is usually acceptable...except for fine particulate.

So far, I've discovered that high CFM models are largely useless for rubber backed mats...unless you have someone standing on the other end.

For medium pile flow through carpet, high CFM coupled with at least medium agitation works best to deep clean. Since most people (Vacuumlanders excepted of course) don't care or know about deep cleaning, they wait until they hire a truck mount rig and then gasp at how much lighter and brighter their carpets become, all the while still not understanding that if they had a better vacuum, the difference would be minimal.

Bill


Post# 373360 , Reply# 43   6/6/2017 at 17:08 by Mike811 (Finland)        

mike811's profile picture
Now this is getting interesting.

Using Nilfisk with the bag saver to vacuum remains it picked
up from the both sides what it was able to pick up. So how it was able to pick up same amount from the Kirby side, if Kirby did better job?
I still think, that the Kirby G6 is better overall, but Nilfisk came VERY close.
I didn't do this test to cause any conflicts.

Some thoughts:
- this wasn't very accurate test but good enough to show the differences
- Wessel Werk ph has a smaller brushroll opening = better airflow density
- my carpet is flow through (see the picture)
- I have ordered the dirt meter (it should be here soon)
- I said in the test that I am not yet convinced
- My Nilfisk has a quite rare two stage GMD motor (rating
label says type GMI) it means industrial model
- not many canister vacuums can pull 108 cfm from the hose end


  Photos...       <              >      Photo 1 of 3         View Full Size
Post# 373366 , Reply# 44   6/6/2017 at 18:21 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Mike,

wyaple's profile picture
It's good to be skeptical! :)

But it the meantime, since you have flow through carpet, wouldn't it be great to see some flour under the carpet tests?

Some future testing suggestions:

1) Unless you're attempting to prove something rather special, keep the vacuum passes down to 1 or 2 maximum since that's all most people would do anyway.

2) Try to vacuum at a normal speed. Either too fast or too slow could skew test results.

3) As you can plainly see in my videos, even 50 CFM and a soft brush roll can pickup rice. Oatmeal is too easy as well.

Small particle tests can be aggravating to setup but aren't most people interested in how their machine does with fine dust or something similar? To that end, I'm looking onto obtaining some colored particles like sand, etc. and then creating a test that showcases that possibly along with flour.

I'm always rather dismayed at how some people see a video and jump to all sorts of conclusions. Enjoy your new dirt meter when it arrives. I also have one I use periodically.

Bill


Post# 373382 , Reply# 45   6/7/2017 at 00:20 by Mike811 (Finland)        
Bag saver loss of airflow

mike811's profile picture
Very good points there!
I have already made a video how much the bag saver drops the airflow. It's quite dramatic.
In the video it drops from 6 (92 cfm) to something like 45-50 cfm. No wonder why bagless vacuums has a much weaker airflow.
To get more accurate results I have to wait dirt meter to arrive.





Post# 373384 , Reply# 46   6/7/2017 at 03:41 by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

Nilfisk and the Kirby-from what you could see-they are very close.It would have been better for the tester to weigh the contents of those cups to see who the winner really is.Good that a REAL powernozzle was used with the Nilfisk rathere than the air powered one that came with mine from the Kirby guys van.I would rate the Nilfisk as better to use than the Kirby as a "canister".The Nilfisk is quieter and has more "suction" better for the canister work.

Post# 373387 , Reply# 47   6/7/2017 at 03:54 by Mike811 (Finland)        
Flour UNDER the carpet vacuuming (Kirby, Nilfisk & Shark)

mike811's profile picture
Here it is. No words needed.





Post# 373392 , Reply# 48   6/7/2017 at 08:19 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
The Nilfisk has done an amazing job. This test proves that a canister with a good power nozzle really does deep clean carpets

Wait I can hear an excuse coming 🤔

Great job Mike.


Post# 373400 , Reply# 49   6/7/2017 at 09:43 by Mike811 (Finland)        
I am neutral

mike811's profile picture
Well all comments are welcome for me 😊
For these rugs I keep using the Kirby, because it's so light to push thanks to the techdrive. Canisters (Nilfisk or others) for anything else.
But if would had only one vacuum. It would be the Nilfisk or Lux Royal.
Now people really see (hopefully) Nilfisk potential ☺


Post# 373401 , Reply# 50   6/7/2017 at 10:11 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
The Kirby has a lot of good points. Build quality it's a deep cleaner and the tech drive makes it effortless to push.

I just find it to big and bulky to manoeuvre around my home.


Post# 373402 , Reply# 51   6/7/2017 at 10:16 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Great job Mike,

wyaple's profile picture
May I ask for the nozzle measurements for the Nilfisk and Shark? I want to finish the interpretation of the results so all can understand your flour tests.

Kirby G6 Nozzle Area: 14.25" x 2.375" = 33.8 square inches
Nilfisk Nozzle Area: Need Measurements From Mike
Shark Nozzle Area: Need Measurements From Mike

As a preview (and guessing based on his video visuals, I'll take a wild guess that both the Nilfisk and the Shark have much smaller openings than the Kirby, say 22 square inches for the Nilfisk and 18 square inches for the Shark (both of these are guesses at the moment).

The CFM density for the G6 is 120 CFM / 33.8 sq. in. = 3.55 CFM per sq. in.
The CFM density for the Nilfisk might be 88 CFM / 22 sq. in. = 4.00 CFM per sq. in.
The CFM density for the Shark might be 55 CFM / 18 sq. in. = 3.06 CFM per sq. in.

Since Mike's carpet has much larger holes, the Shark with it's low CFM was able to get some flour. So Mike's weave might just begin to respond to a 55 CFM machine. My medium pile carpet backing is much more closed off and only starts to respond to about 75 CFM, anything lower just doesn't pickup unless you have an extreme brush roll with ridiculous agitation (Simplicity).

In two slow passes, the Nilfisk is able to come fairly close to the Kirby partly because the CFM is fairly high but also because the CFM density is high. That's the upside. The downside is that with the nozzle being significantly smaller, it will take significantly longer to vacuum large areas. For example, if the Kirby takes 40 minutes, the Nilfisk make take 60 minutes to finish the same square footage.

Some people will say that the Nilfisk is insignificantly different than the Kirby. I'll ask them this question then: If a vacuum constantly leaves 2% behind when you use it, how much will accumulate over time? Since everyone is in a hurry these days and vacuums as fast as possible and no more than 1-2 passes in one area, what will eventually be the result?

Much thanks again Mike for this video. And your bare floors look much better than my concrete ones.

Bill


  Photos...       <              >      Photo 1 of 2         View Full Size
Post# 373403 , Reply# 52   6/7/2017 at 10:16 by Ultralux88 (Colorado)        
I got the 15ft hose and tool set for mine

Its the non-stretch long hose that they sell for the clean air uprights, but instead of the tapered cuff on the machine end, its got the same end as the onboard stretch hose. I've found I get far better performance using it this way for tools. It won't really turn a turbo brush well on the stretch hose, but it'll quite nicely run it on the 15ft hose, longer, BUT it has a larger inner diameter, and a scooter inside than the stretch hose.

Post# 373404 , Reply# 53   6/7/2017 at 10:23 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Well in larger homes some might prefer the Kirby but in my home I prefer my Central Vac or Miele C3 with a power nozzle.

But we all have different preferences. 😊


Post# 373420 , Reply# 54   6/7/2017 at 16:36 by Mike811 (Finland)        

mike811's profile picture
Bill

After watching your flour under the carpet tests I agree, that my carpet was easier for the vacuums.
For me differences in the nozzle sizes doesn't really matter (small areas)

Here are the nozzle measurements and my cfm ratings:

Wessel Werk ph 11.8 x 1.8 inches
Shark 9.8 x 1.6 inches

These are from the hose end.
Nilfisk 108 cfm
Shark 62 cfm

Thank you for calculating these things for me!


Post# 373426 , Reply# 55   6/7/2017 at 19:19 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Thanks for the nozzle specs Mike

wyaple's profile picture
Updated Nozzle Areas:
Kirby G6: 14.25" x 2.375" = 33.8 square inches
Wessel Werk: 11.8" x 1.8" = 21.2 square inches
Shark: 9.8" x 1.6" = 15.7 square inches

So the CFM density calculations become:
Kirby G6 is 120 CFM / 33.8 sq. in. = 3.55 CFM per sq. in.
Wessel Werk is 88 CFM / 21.2 sq. in. = 4.15 CFM per sq. in.
Shark is 51 CFM (Est.) / 15.7 sq. in. = 3.25 CFM per sq. in.

Mike, my 51 nozzle CFM estimate for the Shark comes from examining my growing database of bag-less uprights and using an average percentage drop from hose end to nozzle end.

CONCLUSIONS:

Since Mike's rug is not only shag (low density pile), but also has very large flow-through holes as seen in his videos, very, very low CFM machines can pull small particulate from the bottom fairly easily. And since the pile is not dense on top, rice can be pulled from low CFM bag saver crippled machines.

For those who think the Nilfisk/Wessel Werk combo nearly matched the Kirby consider this: The G6 picked up more fine particulate over a 33.8/21.2 => 59% larger area. And it did it with about 14% lower CFM density. This is a HUGE difference when you look at the mathematics.

As far as the Shark goes, the only way this low CFM machine can barely deep clean at all is because of the very tiny nozzle size. Dyson has pulled this trick with the DC25 and DC65.

Dyson DC25 has 57 nozzle CFM and a density of 3.37 (tiny nozzle)
Dyson DC65 has 52 nozzle CFM and a density of 2.33 (large nozzle)

Hopefully, this clears up many questions and observations regarding Mike's flour video.

Bill




Post# 373438 , Reply# 56   6/8/2017 at 00:12 by Mike811 (Finland)        

mike811's profile picture
Excellent!
Thank you for the information.

I will do more of these flour under the carpet tests.


Post# 373439 , Reply# 57   6/8/2017 at 06:11 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Yes but don't use rice or a carpet that has big pores and you must use wholemeal flour and you can't do more than 2 passes.😁

Post# 373447 , Reply# 58   6/8/2017 at 10:40 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Mark,

wyaple's profile picture
Your forgot the additional constraints: These tests must be performed only on Tuesdays, during a full moon, while wearing something plaid, eating a chocolate chip cookie, and repeatedly shouting "beam me up" directly at the offending particles.

Bill


Post# 373449 , Reply# 59   6/8/2017 at 11:00 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Haha good one 😁

Post# 373451 , Reply# 60   6/8/2017 at 11:24 by Kirbysthebest (Wichita, KS)        
Why Chocolate Chip?

Do you have something against Oatmeal Raisin?  Oreos. you could have Oreos. 

 


Post# 373457 , Reply# 61   6/8/2017 at 12:40 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Oreos yum yum. 😍

Post# 373465 , Reply# 62   6/8/2017 at 14:49 by Kirbysthebest (Wichita, KS)        

We have two votes for Oreo.


Post# 373474 , Reply# 63   6/8/2017 at 17:44 by vacuumlad1650 (North-East Illinois)        

vacuumlad1650's profile picture
Something wrong with sugar cookies? Haha

Post# 373477 , Reply# 64   6/8/2017 at 18:45 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
It's Settled Then...

wyaple's profile picture
Monday is Oatmeal Raisin
Tuesday is Chocolate Chip
Wednesday is Oreos, lots of Oreos
Thursday is Sugar
Friday must be Pizza then?

:)

Bill


Post# 373491 , Reply# 65   6/8/2017 at 22:29 by Kirbysthebest (Wichita, KS)        

What kind of pizza?

Post# 373492 , Reply# 66   6/8/2017 at 22:32 by vacuumlad1650 (North-East Illinois)        

vacuumlad1650's profile picture

Whichever kind makes the most crumbs! I've installed a new bag in the sweeper, so eat up!

 


Post# 373493 , Reply# 67   6/8/2017 at 22:33 by vacuumlad1650 (North-East Illinois)        

vacuumlad1650's profile picture

That would make Saturday Pot Roast day and Sunday is Milkshakes and malts, yes? I'll crank up the oven!


Post# 373497 , Reply# 68   6/9/2017 at 00:09 by kirbylux77 (Orillia, Ontario, Canada)        

kirbylux77's profile picture
Ha! I knew it! I am claiming victory on this once and for all!

Bill - We now have 2 videos, done by another Vacuumland member who has NOTHING to gain over this, that has proven you & Stan are WRONG. You can make claims & deny all you want. You, Bill, are grasping at straws here, & you know it. I think it's about time to give in, admit defeat, & admit you were wrong on this topic. And, might I also add, being foolish for making such a claim without being smart enough to test a modern canister to validate your own statements.

Make all the claims you want about Mikko's rug being low density pile & large flow through holes, that's a bunch of BS & you know it! And again, claiming the Kirby picked up all that fine particulate with a nozzle opening 59% larger & 14% less CFM density. If you're going to use claims like that to prove a direct air upright is so much better, consider this....not only did that Nilfisk canister leave only about 1% or 2% more flour behind, it did it with (according to you) less CFM, AND to boot losing some of that CFM through the hose, wand & powerhead connections. I find that impressive in itself.

As for your claims on Mikko's first test with rice....Well, I would take a machine that has only 50 CFM with the Bag Saver attachment. Your Hoover TurboPower 5000 surface debris test video shows that you can still have decent cleaning with low CFM. Even Mikko's final video with the flour under the rug shows a Shark upright with (according to Bill) 51 CFM, possibly slightly higher, cleans just as well. So, yes, I will jump on the bandwagon that a low 50 CFM machine can clean just as well as a 120 CFM machine. Bill, you seem to forget there are numerous other factors at play BESIDES high CFM that determine how well a vacuum deep cleans: Bag & bag chamber design, nozzle design & how stiff the brushes are, how restrictive the exhaust filter is, etc.

As for using the Bag Saver on the Nilfisk being inaccurate to determine how much was really left behind, & the Kirby with a Dirt Meter installed being a more accurate way to determine what was left behind due to it's higher CFM rating? Well, that might hold true if the Kirby Dirt Meter pads were made of HEPA Cloth material, not paper. The Dirt Meter, due to it's paper pad, even when the pad is clean & new, drastically reduces it's performance; I would say it drops the airflow on a Kirby Avalir from 137 CFM down to somewhere around 95-100 CFM. Also, it's a well known fact the Dirt Meter & paper pad robs a Kirby of it's performance while in use....go ahead & watch a couple YouTube videos of it in use, & it's clear how quickly the Kirby loses it's power. Therefore, using the Kirby with a Dirt Meter & paper pad installed would NOT be a accurate way of picking up the rest of the dirt left behind from each carpet, & to determine which vacuum cleaned better. In fact, despite the lower airflow the Nilfisk with the Bag Saver installed would have, it would actually be superior for this type of test, since there is NO filter to clog whatsoever.

Finally, I think one thing that everyone has ignored here, is that Mikko's Nilfisk canister is actually a pretty old, outdated model by today's standards, I believe it is most likely from the late 90's/early 2000's by the look of it. And, it is only average power at best....the current Nilfisk Museum Vacuum line the company currently produces only produces about 85" to 90" waterlift, which would explain Mikko saying it pulls 109 CFM, a current Miele C3 canister in comparison pulls 100" waterlift & 145 CFM. So, obviously a newer model canister, such as a Miele, Riccar/Simplicity, Sebo, Lindhaus, Aerus, Perfect or Kenmore would fare much better in the flour under the rug test. Bill, even your old Electrolux Olympia fared decently in your own flour under the rug test....if it had a PN5 or PN6 with the new style 10 degree brushroll, it would have fared even better, & most likely would have aced your test.

Stan - As for your assertion that the Kirby G6 is outdated & having only 121 CFM, & the Sentria II & Avalir being more modern & having 137 CFM & your Royal 8300 having 144 CFM? Well, that would be easily overcome if Mikko had flipped up the headlight & inserts a small pocket-sized flat blade screwdriver to activate the top speed switch & make the G6 run in HIGH tool speed mode during testing. That HIGH speed should EASILY make the G6 match or exceed the Sentria II, Avalir or Royal 8300's performance levels. The only variable we don't know, & only Mikko can answer this, is whether his Kirby G6 has the older chevron brushroll or the newer oblique style brushroll with stiffer bristles. But, again, that too is easily overcome if Mikko puts the brushroll endcaps in the 3rd wear setting so they provide the maximum agitation that brushroll can allow. So, that blows your claim of the Kirby G6 being outdated & not a fair comparison to a modern Kirby right out of the water. Besides, let's be realistic - the average consumer is likely going to have a older Kirby G Series machine to use at home anyways.

So ya know what boys? At the end of the day, the ONLY thing you have proven is you both are a couple of stubborn old men, standing behind old, outdated technology, & making ridiculous claims. And, when proven wrong, come up with petty excuses to defend yourselves & make yourselves look good.

Bill, you want to redeem yourself & those idiotic claims you have made? Then put your money where your mouth is, buy yourself a modern canister & do the test on YOUR rug which you claim would produce more accurate test results with the under the flour test. I DARE YOU to go ahead, get a Miele or Riccar/Simplicity canister that is a current model, & prove me wrong! We all know here you don't have the guts to do it, because you KNOW I am right & you'll wind up with egg on your face.

Rob
















Post# 373501 , Reply# 69   6/9/2017 at 00:23 by kirbylux77 (Orillia, Ontario, Canada)        
Stan & Bill

kirbylux77's profile picture
Now, I see that Marcus has produced a lovely plate of crow for you to eat. What would you like with it? And how about dessert? I think a good helping of Humble Pie might be just the right dessert for the pair of you. :-)

Rob


Post# 373502 , Reply# 70   6/9/2017 at 00:37 by kirbylux77 (Orillia, Ontario, Canada)        

kirbylux77's profile picture
I have a few more constraints for Mikko's future testing:

1. There must be a full moon out, & it must also be raining & thunder & lightning.

2. There must be a episode of Jerry Springer & Maury airing at the exact same time across the world, with cheating couples & baby paternity tests being the topics.

3. There must be a Scotsman wearing a plaid kilt present to witness the tests.

Rob


Post# 373503 , Reply# 71   6/9/2017 at 01:20 by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Rob,

wyaple's profile picture
I may or may not respond to your rant tomorrow as many of your claims simply don't make sense and personally I am amazed that you have gone on the attack like you have something to gain. Very childish behavior this "old man" thinks.

I'll leave you to chew on this then. You claim that a Miele C3 has 145 CFM. That is incorrect and I have posted this elsewhere. Usable airflow from a very expensive C3 is in the 85-89 CFM range at the nozzle.

I have spent much of my free time doing something that no one in the entire world has done as far as I can tell. Build an airflow box and do actual measurements. Decode the infamous Baird meter and introduce the idea of airflow density. If you don't like seeing the truth and having a scientific discussion, you don't have to engage in the conversation.

I have no problem at all leaving Vacuumland and keeping my journey to create a database of extensive measurements to myself. Let's see what others have to say about your rant my friend.

Bill


Post# 373512 , Reply# 72   6/9/2017 at 05:26 by kenkart (Mocksville, NC)        
How about

Everyone use what they like!!!I use a straight suction machine most of the time, Everyone thinks straight suction WONT deep clean....WRONG, its amazing just how much grit and sand I can pull behind any upright or power nozzle.Right now I have a 541 Hoover, a 825 Hoover and a 68 Convertible in the house, I can vacuum the hall and bedrooms 50 times with all of them, then come behind with my C-7 Compact or my Lewyt 120 and get up a bunch of fine sand, point being no ONE vacuum of any type gets ALL the dirt out of ANY carpet...and, older carpets are much easier cleaned than new because of the backing, my wool rug in the living room is thick and dense but it has the old fashioned backing , you can run any machine over it and feel air going thru if you put your hand under it.

Post# 373513 , Reply# 73   6/9/2017 at 05:43 by Mike811 (Finland)        

mike811's profile picture
Just few notes.

My Nilfisk GM80 is made in 1985. Motor is twin fan 1100w (9 amps)
I have measured the airflow and suction from the hose end.
Those results are: 108 cfm and 2400 mmH2O of suction (waterlift over 100)

Sebo and Miele cfm specs are measured straight from the motor. So those are unrealistic numbers.

My rice pick up test was a deep clean test, because my rug is high pile and I worked rice in to the pile. After that rice was mostly invisible.
My experience has shown that especially the sawdust is very hard to clean from my rug. Even Kirby has difficulties with it.


  View Full Size
Post# 373520 , Reply# 74   6/9/2017 at 09:43 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Guys this is just a discussion about vacuum cleaners. I enjoy these discussions very much. There doesn't need to be any bad feeling.

Let's keep it civil and light hearted. 😊

I would like to see Bill do the test with a Miele or Riccar. Maybe someone could loan him one for a weekend?


Post# 373522 , Reply# 75   6/9/2017 at 10:17 by Kirbysthebest (Wichita, KS)        
I agree with Marcus and Hans

Use what you like the most. 

 

The BEST vacuum, is the one that  you like and that you use.  In the end they all suck dirt off the floor and capture it in some manner. 

 

 

Pizza--Crispy crust, lots of sprinkle cheese.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Post# 373524 , Reply# 76   6/9/2017 at 10:32 by Mike811 (Finland)        
Kirby dirt meter

mike811's profile picture
So my Kirby dirt meter came today and I am excited about it. Finally I can see more accurate results.

And like Kirbysthebest said. Use what you like the most.
I totally agree.





Post# 373525 , Reply# 77   6/9/2017 at 11:56 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        

sptyks's profile picture

Well Rob,

 

I have never seen so much HOT AIR expelled by one sore loser such as yourself. I think there is enough Hot Air in that desperate long winded reply to fill a Hot Air Balloon that would lift four people for a long ride. I would have to agree with Bill that your long winded, non factual reply was very childish indeed. By the way, I own a Kirby Dirtmeter and the pads ARE NOT made of paper, they are made of the same filterette material used to make HEPA bags. They DO clog quickly and are designed to be used to make only 2 or 3 short passes before examining the results and then replacing the pad. 

 

We all use the vacuum cleaners we like the best, but Bill's extensive tests not only help to satisfy our curiosity by informing us collectors how other brands of cleaners perform, but he also provides valuable information to anyone who is researching which machine to purchase for use in their own home or business.

 

So Bill, I hope you will continue to do these tests on more and more machines as you are able to acquire them and continue to post the results here on Vacuumland. I for one have subscribed to your Vaclab channel on You Tube and enjoy watching your videos very much.

 

 


Post# 373527 , Reply# 78   6/9/2017 at 12:05 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        

sptyks's profile picture

Mike,

 

I am glad you got your Dirtmeter. I have owned one for a couple of years now. You will have fun retesting all of your vacuum cleaners and using your Kirby Gsix with Dirtmeter to find out which ones have the best cleaning performance.

 

I will look forward to watching any new videos you make using your new Kirby Dirtmeter.

 

 


Post# 373530 , Reply# 79   6/9/2017 at 12:49 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
Stan its a bit rude calling Rob a loser. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I think the Nilfisk came very close to the Kirby in this test. I'd love to see a Miele C3 or Riccar immaculate or a central vac with the Volt PN and see how well they would do in the test. My guess is VERY WELL! 👍


Post# 373533 , Reply# 80   6/9/2017 at 13:41 by sptyks (Woburn, MA)        

sptyks's profile picture

Marcus,

 

So you think it's OK for Rob to get away with all the RUDE comments he made about Bill and I in Reply #68? You must have read Bill's reply to Rob's post. He stated that much of Rob's post didn't make much sense. I would have to agree.

 

 

 


Post# 373534 , Reply# 81   6/9/2017 at 13:47 by vacuumlad1650 (North-East Illinois)        

vacuumlad1650's profile picture
Please...can we just eat our treats in peace? And let us please turn the discussion back to Vacuum Sweepers, and not another argument?

Post# 373535 , Reply# 82   6/9/2017 at 13:49 by sebo4me (Cardiff)        

sebo4me's profile picture
It's just a bit of fun. Someone needs to lend Bill a Miele or a Riccar so we can see in his tests how well they do then we can have closure on this subject and love n peace 😁



Post# 373547 , Reply# 83   6/9/2017 at 18:32 by kenkart (Mocksville, NC)        
I have a

Nilfisk GS-90, as well as a 70 and 80, I need to bring the 90in, it has a PN setup.Its a very fine machine.

Post# 373579 , Reply# 84   6/10/2017 at 03:10 by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

I did try my Nilfisk GM80 with the Volt nozzle-WORKS WELL!!!!Since I don't have any new bags for my Nilfisk-threw out the old,smelly paper bag that came with it----and found that a Kirby Filtrte bag fit the bag horn perfectly.Had to fold it to fit.Works really well now and no smell.Rediscovered this machine and like it.Qiet and effective.Will be another one of my favorite cansiters to keep Kirby company.The Volt nozzle sure works better than the air powered nozzle that came with my Nilfisk.Are the new Nilfisk bags made from Filtrete?

Post# 373717 , Reply# 85   6/12/2017 at 14:59 by Mike811 (Finland)        

mike811's profile picture
Well I did the test again, but this time Kirby Gsix vs Lux Royal. Now results are more clear, because of the dirt meter.
Note that Lux pulls 8 from the airflow meter and Nilfisk 9. So not a big difference.





Post# 373763 , Reply# 86   6/13/2017 at 06:44 by Shrink1982 (Indianapolis)        
Response to Rob

shrink1982's profile picture
Rob, that statement doesn't make sense as the Tandem air model I have is an expensive premium vacuum. It is made by Tacony. You state higher suction only comes on premium brands then go on to point out Tacony machines.

Post# 373768 , Reply# 87   6/13/2017 at 07:58 by Shrink1982 (Indianapolis)        
Volt Nozzle for Central Vac

shrink1982's profile picture
I can see how the battery powered Volt nozzle would be more convenient but why not have a PN that plugs into an outlet? That takes care of the issue with the hose not having electricity. I realize not everyone wants to plug their power nozzle in but I would rather do so than use a battery operated PN. Batteries die fast and don't always provide as much power as a mains powered PN.

Post# 373769 , Reply# 88   6/13/2017 at 08:09 by Shrink1982 (Indianapolis)        
Getting Along and Forum

shrink1982's profile picture
As a side note, it would be nice if we could reply directly to someone's post and have it quote the post. It can be difficult to read through the entire thread to figure out what was responded to.

At the end of the day, these are just vacuums. The amount of emotional energy that gets put into these posts can really put one off. There is almost a fear of getting attacked if you say something someone may not agree with. Doesn't seem worth the hassle to argue over any of this.

What I have found is the way to really keep my carpets clean is to vacuum more frequently, vacuum slowly and go over strokes, and vacuum in different directions on certain days. Just by doing this, I am not pulling much out of my carpets anymore. I would use a basic bagless vacuum to see how well my vacuums were performing and was surprised how much came up after I used my Sebo or Kirby. With the Maytag, I vacuum more thoroughly, more often, and much more slowly and there is no longer any fluff/hair that comes out of the carpet. I get a bit of dust which is expected as no vacuum gets it all. Whatever vacuum you use, if you follow my advice, I think your carpets will be pretty clean (with exception to certain vacuums that are very poor). Vacuuming regularly and thoroughly helps keep dirt and dust from becoming embedded in the carpet in the first place.


Post# 373770 , Reply# 89   6/13/2017 at 08:13 by Shrink1982 (Indianapolis)        
Tacony and Central Vacs

shrink1982's profile picture
Correct me if I am wrong but, generally speaking, the suction on a central vac tends to be pretty good, so wouldn't a PN with a direct air fan or motor be moot as the higher suction would negate the extra airflow created? Doesn't a vacuum that uses both a direct air motor and bypass motor need to be carefully synced in order to ensure optimal airflow and suction is maintained? Wouldn't simply adding a PN with a direct air motor or fan mess with the balance?




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.



                     


Vacuumland home
Discuss-o-Vac Forums
Vintage Brochures, Service and Owners Manuals
Today's Vacuum of the Day
Photos of our Collections
Vintage Vacuum Cleaner to sell?
Technical/service questions?
Looking for Parts?
Website related questions?
Digital Millennium Copyright Act Policy
Our Privacy Policy