Thread Number: 17988
What Did Any Of You Think Of The DC01 When It Was Released?
[Down to Last]

Vacuumland's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 196373   8/20/2012 at 20:33 (2,784 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

I have heard that the Dyson DC 01 was quite a shock to the retailers and the public when it came out because of the clear bagless cyclonic bin.
So I am asking some of the slightly older members on the fourm, who would remember it's release, what you thought of it at first sight, as there was nothing else like it at the time.





Post# 196378 , Reply# 1   8/20/2012 at 20:53 (2,784 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

I was 21 at the time and I thought it looked more like something directly out of "Star Trek", another expensive gimmick - as it was very expensive back then. We had a Turbopower 1 at the time which I used to clean our house, and it did ok for a cleaner of that age. My father bought one a few years after its launch and was impressed with it, but I didnt buy my first Dyson brand new till nearly 10 years later in 2003 when I bought the DC07 purple and lime model. Personally I thought the DC01 was ugly and still think that now, which is why I have a DC04, 07,14, and 15 upright but not a DC01. I might consider a DeStijl model now due to its collectability, but not for general use.

Post# 196381 , Reply# 2   8/20/2012 at 21:12 (2,784 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

You arent by any chance "numaticvacuum" on Youtube are you? love your videos, very explanative if you are!

Post# 196447 , Reply# 3   8/21/2012 at 03:25 (2,784 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I first saw it in an Auntum/ Winter Kays catalogue in 1992. I had been given the heads-up prior to this as my ex-wife was working in the electrical buying office of GUS at the time. She had briefly said the odd thing about it, but I did not see a picture until the catalogue first went to print.

My thoughts were that it was ugly, that it was a gimmick, and that if it made it to the A/W 1993 catalogue I would be very surprised. Had I seen it in an electrical shop first, I think I may have been more sure of its success, but as gimmicks come and go all the time in catalogues, it was easy to disregard the DC01 as such.

I was never offended by the fact one could see the dirt and in fact I did think the public would like this. If anything, the clear bin was one of the more 'normal' looking aspects of the design. It was the rest of it which I disliked. Also the original DC01 models were somewhat rough around the edges, I mean the DC01 as we know it was certainly such, but I thought the original was more so.


Post# 196451 , Reply# 4   8/21/2012 at 05:12 (2,783 days old) by thekirbylover (Warrington, cheshire )        
my mother loved hers

thekirbylover's profile picture
i wasnt even born when the came out , but my mother absolutely loved hers, she said she loved it because you dont have to buy bags and that her old vacuum lost performance, she loved the tools and hose and said it had good suction, my mum said when she first saw it she was like shocked and went into the shop and bought one, she had an absolute

Post# 196452 , Reply# 5   8/21/2012 at 05:17 (2,783 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

I remember the launch - but the ones I saw at department stores had a darker bin than the clear ones that were eventually sold at other retailers (and is also documented in Dyson's book). I thought it looked like a toy rather than an actual vacuum cleaner. My dad loved it though as he was into engineering and design. 


Post# 196455 , Reply# 6   8/21/2012 at 05:30 (2,783 days old) by ryry_87 ()        

The first time I saw one was when i was flicking through my dads newspaper when I was about 8. There was an advert for it, the one with the pics of all the different hoover bags. It was bonfire night 1995 I believe.

I thought it was amazing and looked like nothing else on the market at the time. Then a few months later my dads boss bought one, my dad was doing some electrical work in their house at the time so I got the chance to have a go on it, now bearing in mind it was only about 6 months old, it was completely clogged and had almost 0 suction. I was quite disappointed in its performance.

They had it serviced and a few months after that me and my dad went to give them a hand moving house, I was asked to give the main bedroom a good hoovering ready for the carpet cleaners to come in. There was about half an inch of dust where the bed had been and was looking forward to seeing how well the Dyson did. Again it struggled. The carpet cleaner took pity on me and gave me his Sebo to use instead.

In about 2004 I bought my own DC01 DeStijl, made sure it had new filters in it and was spotlessly clean etc. I used it on my nans thick 70s carpets and filled the bin. So it must have done a good job lol But the brush rolls in them were crap, far too soft and no beating at all. They would have been great little machines if a bit more design had gone into the brush roll.


Post# 196461 , Reply# 7   8/21/2012 at 05:46 (2,783 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
i wasnt even born when the came out

turbo500's profile picture

good LORD, I feel old!

 

The first Dyson I ever saw belonged to my Aunt and Uncle. My Uncle works in industrial electronics and they always had very high end electricals at home - washer, dishwasher, TV, VCR etc was all the latest stuff. Pre-Dyson, they had a Turbopower u2602. Anyway, my uncle got a DA001 from work - this must've been about 1993. I thought it was the wierdest thing I had ever seen, but being only 4 at the time, I was fascinated by it. I thought it was the best thing since sliced bread and loved watching all the dust spin around inside. Mum was less impressed, so when I hinted at us getting one, this was quickly brushed aside.

 

Now, fast forward to about 1996 - the DC01's were becoming increasingly more popular. The first one I got to use properly and form an opinion on belonged to my friend Karl's Mum. It was this model that I remember using the most and being horribly disapointed. All that dust spinning around in the bin and then I put my hand over the end of the hose and thought the suction was pathetic, especially compared with both the Kirby and Panasonic we had at home at the time.

 

The following year, my Grandma replaced her Electrolux 610 with a DC01. She also thought it was absolutely brilliant - I suppose purely because you could see all the dirt. The 610 certainly had more suction power and groomed the carpet better. My Grandma has 2 dogs and vacuums on a daily basis. The DC01, even after a few months, was falling apart. The hose release broke, the floorhead friction handle release broke, the baseplate cracked, the hose split. It only lasted 2 years (compared to the 11 years she had the 610) and was replaced with a DC04 in 1999, which I remember thinking was a VAST improvement.

 

In conclusion, my initial response to the DC01/DA001 was fascination. I suppose, because it looked so radically different to anything I'd seen or used and I spent HOURS with my aunts cleaner looking at all the different features. However, over time and the more I used them, the more I started to dislike them. I remember a lot of people quickly replacing them - even at that young age I was surprised at how short their lifespan was. I also remember my Grandma having to run the thing over the same spot several times, especially where the dogs had been sat (5 Dyson's down the line, she has finally learnt her lesson and bought another brand). It took a while, but I finally saw through the flaws of the DC01. I was, however, very surprised and impressed at the improvements made on the DC04 - I guess everyone has to start somewhere.


Post# 196463 , Reply# 8   8/21/2012 at 05:52 (2,783 days old) by ryry_87 ()        

I remember being more impressed with the Panasonic Icon from around the same time and thinking why would anyone buy a DC01 when they could have one of these?!

Post# 196464 , Reply# 9   8/21/2012 at 06:06 (2,783 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
why would anyone buy a DC01 when they could have one of thes

turbo500's profile picture

Amen to that!

I remember thinking that the Hoover Vortex, even though it was a complete DC01 rip off, was a far better cleaner and, IIRC, was slightly cheaper.


Post# 196466 , Reply# 10   8/21/2012 at 06:10 (2,783 days old) by ryry_87 ()        

I actually quite liked the Vortex style machines, I had the red Widetrack one, think it was the Hurricane which had the later style cyclonic system and it was a fantastic vacuum. Cleaned brilliantly and never clogged. I used to take it to work and use it in the office I worked in at the time because it used to get filthy. It coped fine with that.

But yes, the Icon was the best of the bagless cleaners from around that time. I love my bagged one, its incredible.


Post# 196468 , Reply# 11   8/21/2012 at 06:29 (2,783 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

Yeh, alright, rub it in why don't you Ry....:P. I seriously regret not taking that bagless Icon from Richie's garage, but it just wouldn't have fit in the car :(

I agree about the Vortex, although I prefer the original red and white tripple Vortex with the cord rewind.


Post# 196469 , Reply# 12   8/21/2012 at 07:17 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
But wasn't there an issue with the Vortex deliberately letting lots more dust back into the air than the Dyson DC01 it copied ? Or maybe my memory is betraying me again.

Post# 196470 , Reply# 13   8/21/2012 at 07:24 (2,783 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

The difference with the Dyson over all the others was that it was the 'original' bagless cleaner and did not lose suction. It was also the 'trendy' one to go for. They had been selling since 1992 (even though production did not begin until 1993)and it was not until the early part of 1997 until there was any sort of competition, in this instance the Electrolux Powersystem. Because the cost of other makes of bagless cleaner was similar to Dyson, it could not be said that consumers went for the cheaper option. They went for the brand they trusted if it was that they felt the Dyson was not for them.

However, the Electrolux was a nightmare to use bagless (it was a smashing cleaner in bagged mode) and the Hoover Vortex was very, very hefty to move around. Dyson managed of course to out-sell all the competition.


Post# 196471 , Reply# 14   8/21/2012 at 07:26 (2,783 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Jamie the Vortex was taken off sale quite soon after it went on sale, and was a poor seller anyway. The old Hoover Turbomaster Freedom had problems with dust escaping, and the much later Hoover One had a terrible write up from Which? But I heard nothing about the Vortex. Will wait to see what others say.

Post# 196483 , Reply# 15   8/21/2012 at 08:23 (2,783 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        
Someone asked....

alexhoovers94's profile picture
Yes, I am indeed "numaticvacuum" on YouTube. :)

Sorry I should say what my thoughts were on the DC01, my mum bought the De Stijl model in 1997 after seeing my aunties DA001 that they got in 1993 because they always have to have all the latest gizmo's and gadgets, needless to say they have a DC40 now.
Anyway, my mum was really impressed with it and it wasn't till a few years later that she bought her own. From being so impressed with my aunties, she saw the De Stijl model in the Freemans catalogue and instantly loved the colour, she purchased it and it replaced her Hoover Turbopower Freedom Total System, which she hated.

I was about 3 when the DC01 arrived, I vaguely remember it in the box, but I can still picture her opening it on the living room floor, it was SO shiny, I thought it was amazing.
I never remember any other "normal looking" vacuum cleaner than my grandma's Panasonic MCE -46 which my grandpa bought her as a birthday present in 1994, it will always remain a mystery what vacuum she had before that, as nobody can remember.

I could still remember the DC01 like it was yesterday and I thought it was really good, better than mu grandma's Panasonic. I loved how you could see all.the dirt spinning around in this extraldamery complex vortex, in the plastic.. viewing chamber, I loved it. It was replaced in 2003 by the DC07 Animal which I HATED!!!!! And still do, urgh. The reason my mum got a new Dyson is because she loved the first Dyson she had, which had broken when I pulled it down the stairs in 2003 when I was about 8 haha!

It wasn't till I got my own DC01 De Stijl a few months, as it was a childhood memory vac. I saw right threw it and realised how not to great it really is, for a clean air machine the suction is lousy and combined with it's sparse brushroll it doesn't feel like it is doing anything when you use it (probably why they added a clear bin, HAHA) and it doesn't get into the carpet very well, it picks up the surface litter brilliantly, but deep down, No, you want hoover!

I do like the design of the DC01 and I will always like it despite it not being very good, haha.


Post# 196486 , Reply# 16   8/21/2012 at 08:34 (2,783 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

Sorry about some of the errors in the long post I just wrote, I am typing it out on my phone.


Post# 196493 , Reply# 17   8/21/2012 at 08:43 (2,783 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
it picks up the surface litter brilliantly, but deep down, N

turbo500's profile picture

this is a common missconception amongst the vacuum buying public. "Ooh, look at all that dirt it's picking up" because the user can see it spinning around. However, if you suck out the contents of a full Dyson cyclone into a normal vacuum bag, you'll see just how little is actually there. If you get a load of dust, dirt and hair and spin it around at high speeds in a cyclone, of course it's going to appear like there's loads of it. It's like egg white - you can whip it up with a hand mixer and make it look like there's loads of it, when in actual fact, it's just full of air.


Post# 196494 , Reply# 18   8/21/2012 at 08:52 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
That is a brilliant analogy Chris, I would never have thought of that one.

Very true though, the cyclonic air spinning the dirt around is making it all fluffy and increasing it in size.


Post# 196497 , Reply# 19   8/21/2012 at 08:59 (2,783 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        
Very true Chris and I shoild know...

alexhoovers94's profile picture

We use lot's of cream at collage and you can put the tiniest amount (about 2 pints) in the bottom of a stand mixer and after about 2 minutes of whisking it on speed 3, will bring it right to the top of the bowl.


Post# 196508 , Reply# 20   8/21/2012 at 10:46 (2,783 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

We had a Panasonic Icon bagged upright - absolutely brilliant but it was a strict loan from my aunt before my parents got the Sebo X1 Automatic. I never got the chance to try the bagless version but I loved the bagged version we had.


Post# 196510 , Reply# 21   8/21/2012 at 10:50 (2,783 days old) by ryry_87 ()        

my Icon :)

Post# 196511 , Reply# 22   8/21/2012 at 10:53 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Looks good Ryan.

If I remember right they have a separate motor for the brush roll don't they ?

Still, can't be as good as a... SENIOR RANGER!


Post# 196512 , Reply# 23   8/21/2012 at 10:59 (2,783 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
Still, can't be as good as a... SENIOR RANGER!

turbo500's profile picture

oh brother, here we go again!

 

Yes Jamie, the Icon was the first "direct drive agitator" upright that had a seperate motor driven brushroll which spun 1/3 slower than the motor, which means it groomed the carpet as well as a dirty fan cleaner, yet maintained the strong suction power of a clean air machine.  

 

I'd sooner have an Icon over a Ranger anyday!


Post# 196514 , Reply# 24   8/21/2012 at 11:03 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Then you shall face the wrath of the Hoover collectors some day my friend, some day...

Post# 196517 , Reply# 25   8/21/2012 at 12:24 (2,783 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

I think I would rather have a hoover senior, better brand!


Post# 196519 , Reply# 26   8/21/2012 at 12:30 (2,783 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

You can NEVER neat a dirty air machine forvacuuming carpets, whatever thr brand, personally a hoover agitator brushroll will be miles beyter than the icon brushroll.


Post# 196521 , Reply# 27   8/21/2012 at 12:38 (2,783 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
You can NEVER neat a dirty air machine forvacuuming carpets

turbo500's profile picture

well, it's a good job I knew what you meant as this makes little sense :P.

 

It's also very open to debate. 


Post# 196522 , Reply# 28   8/21/2012 at 12:45 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Oh no, please Lord not another dirty fan VS clean fan debate!

I think we all know I'm dirty at heart (ahem) but I can see the advantages to clean fan Vacuum Cleaners and on some types of carpet they do out-perform dirty fans.

The debate will go on forever and I doubt a consensus will ever be reached.


Post# 196525 , Reply# 29   8/21/2012 at 12:48 (2,783 days old) by ryry_87 ()        

I must admit having owned a SENIOR RANGER and numerous Hoover uprights from the 60s-00's, the Icon is one of the few machines that does actually clean as well (if not slightly better) than a Hoover. It is an incredible machine and the brush roll is simply fantastic (until the motor goes in it) The only other machine that i've used that cleans as well as a Hoover or Icon is the Electrolux C12. That also has fantastic beating and brushing action.



Post# 196532 , Reply# 30   8/21/2012 at 12:54 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Ryan you shock me, Hoover is THE BEST. No competition! Hmph...

Post# 196536 , Reply# 31   8/21/2012 at 12:58 (2,783 days old) by ryry_87 ()        

lol yes the Hoover agitator is an amazing piece of kit, my Hoover U7008 is an absolutely incredible machine and I wouldn't get rid of it for anything as is all the Seniors, Powerplus's and various commercials i've used over the years, but all i'm saying is the Icon and Electrolux C12 come very closer and in the Icon's case, slightly better lol Sorry, but it's just an opinion and observation drawn from my own experience lol :)

Post# 196537 , Reply# 32   8/21/2012 at 12:59 (2,783 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

The more carpet you have, the more you need hoover!

Hoover, Who better?

Hoover, the product of experiance.

Hoover can handle it.

Haha, I hear you Jamie.


Post# 196538 , Reply# 33   8/21/2012 at 13:02 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
That notwithstanding Ryan, my disgust is immense.

I'll have you done for treason, you hear...


Post# 196540 , Reply# 34   8/21/2012 at 13:04 (2,783 days old) by ryry_87 ()        

lol yes I know I'm a disgrace to queen and country, however as much as I love my Icon, its my U7008 that gets the most use ;)

Post# 196542 , Reply# 35   8/21/2012 at 13:06 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
You've redeemed yourself... For now!

Post# 196555 , Reply# 36   8/21/2012 at 14:05 (2,783 days old) by blakaeg (NW London, UK)        

1993. I have a Dual Cyclone which was one of the very early ones, made in Chippenham, Wiltshire, England. Doesn't work though. The hose doesn't stretch as far on this machine and is grey in colour, the hose is a bit like the one on the Sebo Felix. The latter ones are much better as they stretch right to the top & are transparent. First ever Dyson I used was a DC02 in 1997 when I was at school, I used to help do housecleaning after school to make some cash. A pic of DC01 with a 2002 DC04.

Post# 196557 , Reply# 37   8/21/2012 at 14:20 (2,783 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

It would be good to restore that Dc01, as the very early 1993 models will be very collectable in years to come - it has the old style DYSON logo on it, which didnt last very long either

Post# 196565 , Reply# 38   8/21/2012 at 15:24 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Wow that's some old Dyson Stefan!

Post# 196592 , Reply# 39   8/21/2012 at 17:51 (2,783 days old) by singingrainbow (Texas)        

Well, I am glad I didn't have to be the one to tell Jamie the truth! The U.S version of the icon is in my opinion and experience one of the few clean air machines that can beat a hoover convertable/senior at carpet cleaning. It is a very, very good machine.

Sorry to be so off topic.

Scott


Post# 196598 , Reply# 40   8/21/2012 at 18:13 (2,783 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

The tools with the original Dyson were not Dyson specific either. They were the same generic tools as supplied with Bosch and Hotpoint etc. unlike on later versions which had the exact same kit as was used on the DC02. Interestingly, even though the style and font of the Dyson name was changed, the 'Dyson' imprint on the tools was still the old style for a good deal of time afterwards. Even some of the Absolute cleaners had tools with the old logo imprinted into them, even though the cleaners had never carried that logo. As I remember it, 1996 was the year which saw the letters change from what we see in the left of blakaeg's picture to the style used ever since. I know the Antarctica Solo cleaners had the later style name and they arrived in 1996.



Post# 196650 , Reply# 41   8/22/2012 at 03:24 (2,783 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Oh, don't worry Scott, off-topic is my middle name! I do like it when a thread occasionally drifts away from the original subject as long as the thread starter is alright with it. Breaks the monotony a tad!

That is interesting Benny, I did not know that. Did Dyson make too many tools and not want to waste them or was it just an oversight ?


Post# 196654 , Reply# 42   8/22/2012 at 03:49 (2,783 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I would have suggested that it was down to Dyson having excess stock of grey tools with the old style logo long after the logo had changed, had it not been for the fact that, as I say, the early absolute cleaners had tools with the old logo which must have been made long after the Dyson logo changed. I expect it was due to a difficulty in changing the logo in the mould, but I don't know.

Post# 196656 , Reply# 43   8/22/2012 at 04:25 (2,783 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Hoover - Generations Past, Not Future!

 

Can we stop bleating about the Hoover Ranger??? There are so many other better Hoover uprights out there that came after it. Id sooner have a Junior U1104 to the Ranger - faster to clean, smaller, nimble, far more compact and easier to steer. 

 

The Ranger is good if you have all the time in the world. 

 


Post# 196657 , Reply# 44   8/22/2012 at 04:31 (2,783 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I liked the ranger for large areas of carpet. I know a good deal of Seniors were bought for commercial use due to their durability.

Post# 196659 , Reply# 45   8/22/2012 at 04:45 (2,783 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
There are so many other better Hoover uprights out there tha

turbo500's profile picture

Agreed. I have a ranger and never used it. Much prefer using the 1104 Junior or any of the Turbopower 1's.


Post# 196664 , Reply# 46   8/22/2012 at 06:06 (2,782 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Well actually as much as I love my Junior U1104 I find my hand starts to get uncomfortable after a while due to the hard square handle.

The round rubber handle of the Rangers were MUCH more comfortable, plus they glide over the carpets like on a pocket of air whereas the Juniors feel ever so slightly rough to push and pull.

To say the Junior was more manoeuvrable is true and it is not.

It is of course true because the Junior is less cumbersome than the Ranger, but not true due to the fact that because the rear wheels are so close together it tends to tip over if you turn too hard a corner. The Ranger however does not and is actually surprisingly manageable if you use it regularly and get used to the way it "feels".

To put it simply, the Junior and Ranger are both good at what they do, the former being small and lightweight and the latter being large and heavier.

Both have their own issues because of that; the Junior being unstable and the Ranger being cumbersome.

I'd far rather have the Ranger any day over the Junior however, because it just WORKS! I'm not saying the Junior doesn't, but I just don't get the same feeling of durability with the Junior as I do with the big ole Ranger. That may be because there is 9 years difference in their years of manufacture (1986 and 1977 respectively), so naturally the newer one, although still made to a high Hoover standard, isn't as strong as the older one which has an almost entirely metal undercarriage.

Then of course you could throw into the mix the fact the Ranger has the Hedlite (or is it Dirtsearcher for the UK ? I forget) which is controversial in itself. Some say it is futile, some say it is useful. I say it is useful.

But naturally this debate will go on and on longer than all our lifetimes no doubt, then the next generation of Vacuum Cleaner collectors will have to deal with it!



Post# 196667 , Reply# 47   8/22/2012 at 06:16 (2,782 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
the Junior being unstable

turbo500's profile picture

oh dear lord.


Post# 196668 , Reply# 48   8/22/2012 at 06:20 (2,782 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
It's true Chris! And I never usually have a bad word to say about Hoover but that has to be said.

With lack of size and weight you are going to get problems associated with that.


Post# 196685 , Reply# 49   8/22/2012 at 09:42 (2,782 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

I lile both the junior and the senior, and couldn't replace one for the other, they will both clean equally and the senior is only about 2 inches wider than the junior.
The junior also has better hose suction, talking about that, I have been using a hose on my U1012 junior and the suction is really quite strong, almost like the suction of a turbopower1 with a pan converter, I was so supprised.


Post# 196686 , Reply# 50   8/22/2012 at 09:49 (2,782 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Pitty they couldn't have designed the Senior to have better hose suction as the motor was very powerful, just needed to direct 100% of that power to the hose and you'd be laughing, but unfortunately a lot of it is lost.

Post# 196694 , Reply# 51   8/22/2012 at 11:07 (2,782 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

I fail to see how the junior is unstable mine has never fallen over, or tip at all, it is NOT top heavy. Jamie, I do hope you are not comparing it's lightweight structure to a dreaded O-reck


Post# 196696 , Reply# 52   8/22/2012 at 11:18 (2,782 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
No-no, I just mean when you turn it on a sharp corner it doesn't stay level like the Ranger does, or maybe I'm just too rough with mine!

Post# 196700 , Reply# 53   8/22/2012 at 12:29 (2,782 days old) by Oreck_XL (Brooklyn, New York 11211)        
Dyson G-Force

oreck_xl's profile picture
What I'm curious about is how come no one has mentioned the Dyson G-Force? That was the predecessor to the DC01, introduced circa 1984. I have heard the G-Force was EXTREMELY expensive when it came out, but were they only sold in Japan at that time? Between the release of the G-Force and the DC01 here in the states we got the Amway CMS-1000 (which ultimately became the ClearTrak). Any thoughts on the Dyson G-Force? Anybody out there have one?

- Hershel


Post# 196701 , Reply# 54   8/22/2012 at 12:37 (2,782 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
The G-Force was sold in Japan because no Vacuum Cleaner brand here in the UK wanted it due of the sales of bags.

It was around 2,000 yes, bloody expensive!


Post# 196703 , Reply# 55   8/22/2012 at 12:48 (2,782 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

There was a version of the G-Force sold in the UK exclusively through Kleeneze


Post# 196704 , Reply# 56   8/22/2012 at 12:53 (2,782 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
I remember that, it went for a lot on eBay!

Post# 196706 , Reply# 57   8/22/2012 at 13:24 (2,782 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England)        
DA001

suctionselector's profile picture
My great grandma had a DA001 fom 1992 to 2006, quite a good vacuum, was used in her house permenantly for 6 years until 1998, but then she moved, and the house she moved into had an integrated central vacuum, and the DA001 was used as a spare & for cleaning out cars for 8 more years.

It had a new hose and a new soleplate as well as a new brushbar, and the cyclone bin cracked at some point, so that had to be relaced, but all the tools remained and I remeber this being in excellent condition, and using it in my grans house, I pulled it espescially out of the laundry room in the basement to clean the house head to toe with it. I was used to Dyson's as we had a DC03 at that time, but never had I used a DA001/DC01 before, only seen one at a friends house.

In the end the motor burnt out, thankfully I wasnt using it at the time, but it did last long compared to some of the other ones mentioned on this thread. I loved using it as it felt like it had more power than our DC03, but the hose suction wasn't too great. My great grandma moved house a year later, and she bought a bagless Hoover Purepower, which lasted 2 years, with 2 replacement motors, she now has a DC24 All Floors, which was reccomended by me for its lightweightness.

So, personally, not a bad vacuum!

suctior


Post# 196708 , Reply# 58   8/22/2012 at 14:17 (2,782 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
You mean a Dust Manager Jacob ?

Post# 196727 , Reply# 59   8/22/2012 at 14:44 (2,782 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Regarding the G-force. Until 1992, I think it is fair of me to suggest that no one in the UK had really heard of James Dyson. I have a notion that he appeared on Tomorrows World once. I actually just wrote Top of The Pops which is stupid on two accounts, firstly because I would never have watched that program to know this and secondly because it is simply downright absurd to think Dyson may have been a guest. Then the more I think about it, the more I think maybe it was breakfast television and not Tomorrows World at all. Perhaps it was both? Well apart from these occasions, the UK was not really labouring in the knowledge of James Dyson and his cleaners.

Regarding the Junior, the rear wheels on all models are closely spaced together, so as to aid turning corners. This indeed has the potential for the cleaner to leave the floor, depending on the cleaning style of the user. It is more noticeable on the flat handled models as the round handled cleaners had more forgiveness as one's hand would slide around the handle ever so slightly when turning a corner. With the flat handle the grip in the hand is such that the whole cleaner moves when the hand is turned. This is one reason why the flat handle was not suitable for the larger Senior cleaners as a result so many handles snapped off on those models.


Post# 196731 , Reply# 60   8/22/2012 at 14:55 (2,782 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
I do wonder what he would have sung if he had been on that horrid show...

Perhaps Roy Orbison's "Penny Arcade" with the emphasis on "spend your last dime"!


Post# 196733 , Reply# 61   8/22/2012 at 15:04 (2,782 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well I doubt it would be Hooverville, by a group of gentlemen who's name escapes me.


Post# 196737 , Reply# 62   8/22/2012 at 15:17 (2,782 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
That would be The Christians Benny. Conflicting indeed.

Post# 196776 , Reply# 63   8/22/2012 at 20:17 (2,782 days old) by fan-of-fans (USA)        

fan-of-fans's profile picture
I was wondering about the DC01 cleaners myself. Of course we in the USA didn't get them (as Dyson didn't come until 2002).

How was the filtration with these cleaners? Was it HEPA comparable? The first bagless dual cyclonics that caught on here were the Fantoms around 1992-93, and interestingly, I read that the first ones had no filter and as could be guessed, the filtration was very poor. The HEPA filter was added later as almost what would seem a workaround to the filtation problem. The Dysons, however seem to have had filters from the beginning.

Are early Dysons still in wide use, or rare?


Post# 196798 , Reply# 64   8/22/2012 at 21:43 (2,782 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

The DA001 was the first Dyson to really catch on in the UK and that had micro static S - level filteration. (yh, ok)
That carried on from 93 until 95 or 96 when the Absolute (or as I like to call it Abslut) and in 97 the De Stijl models came out and they had HEPA filtration, which I think actually works.

Alot of people still use the older Dysons now, they do not clean as well as the new ones, but they are way more durable. The motors in the DC01's are quite reliable also.
They are not rare at all, apart from maybe the Antarctica Solo and De Stijl models


Post# 196808 , Reply# 65   8/23/2012 at 02:05 (2,782 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Jamie - what a load of old hoof that the Junior is unstable. Methinks you are trying to justify the Ranger or at least trying to defend it. I've never had a Junior tip over at all and I'm a lot older than you with quite a few more years under my belt. 

 

I find the Ranger is cumbersome, bulky and slow. As a design comparison, the Senior is slightly better as the original shape is easier to see than the expanses of unnecessary plastic design cladding that the Ranger hood covers up. I much prefer the Senior for large homes -also helped by a more powerful motor compared to the Junior. The Junior however is smaller and far more compact.

 

 


Post# 196813 , Reply# 66   8/23/2012 at 03:39 (2,782 days old) by suctionselector (Leeds, England)        
Jamie

suctionselector's profile picture
Yeah, it could have been a Dust Manager...

Post# 196815 , Reply# 67   8/23/2012 at 04:27 (2,782 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
what a load of old hoof

turbo500's profile picture

Ryan, I wouldn't have quite put that as politely as you, but I agree. The whole point of the Junior was to have a cleaner that was equally as sturdy and high performing as a larger cleaner, but more compact and lightweight - ideal for british homes.


Post# 196818 , Reply# 68   8/23/2012 at 05:00 (2,782 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

The 'Absolute' models were the first Dyson cleaners to have HEPA filtration, but they did not reach the UK retail outlets until the early part of 1997. The only alternative to the standard yellow & grey Dyson cleaners was the blue & grey upright and blue & white cylinder, both of which were identical in performance and filtration to their yellow & grey siblings and were sold to mark the crossing of the Antarctica by Ranulph Fiennes for a breast cancer charity. These cleaners went on sale in 1996 but stock did carry into 1997 and indeed Dyson continued to make the blue & grey upright cleaner for good while afterwards, but with no reference to the Antarctica theme, though if my failing memory is correct, that model still had links to breast cancer support.

Electrolux launched their Powersystem cleaners in late 1996 and bagless versions went on sale in 1997. One of these models had a HEPA filter and all sorts of claims about it's filtration. So then, like I said just now, the Absolute and De Stijl went on sale in early 1997 too, with the D S upright having a floor tool to justify the 20 difference in price between that and the Absolute cleaner. The D S cylinder was identical in all but colour to the Absolute cylinder, yet it was still 20 more expensive.

As for the Junior, like I explained, the positioning of the rear wheels could indeed lead to some level of instability to some users. However, it is really not worth getting hot under the collar about, rather we could use the same energy to embrace our varying experiences.


Post# 196819 , Reply# 69   8/23/2012 at 05:40 (2,781 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        
With the D S upright having a floor tool to justify the 20

alexhoovers94's profile picture

My mum had the De Stijl model DC01 and said it never came with the floor tool, and she had two, one she got first and it had head displacement, which customer service said was a common thing, she sent it back and they sent her another one which she said didn't come with a floor tool either.
She wanted the floor tool so had to buy it extra at the 20 price tag.


Post# 196822 , Reply# 70   8/23/2012 at 05:57 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well I don't know why that should be on the new cleaner from store, as the De Stijl upright cleaners in both 01 and 04 ranges always had a floor tool as standard. This is why so many turn up on eBay as a good deal of users never actually bothered with the floor tool. Either it was too much effort or they forgot they had it. As for the one Dyson exchanged, they may have expected your mum to keep the floor tool they thought she had. I really don't know.

Post# 196823 , Reply# 71   8/23/2012 at 05:59 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Incidently, the Dyson floor tool was not available in shops, only from Dyson. The price was 29.99. I remember that well, because some shops were making reference to the fact that the D S upright cost 20 more but had a tool worth 29.99.

Post# 196827 , Reply# 72   8/23/2012 at 06:39 (2,781 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

Really? she said there was an order fourm inside the instruction manual that had the floor tool on for 19.99 and she ordered it off that, she didn't know it was supposed to come with the floor tool and she said it was not advertised on the box that it should have come with it nor did the place in which she bought it (freemans.)
it will always be a mystery why the first De Stijl she recieved did not come with the floor tool, maybe they forgot to put it in the box, and the replacement they sent her, maybe like you said, they just thought she kept it from the first one she recieved, so didn't bother sending her another one.

Or, maybe the very first De Stijl models did not come with the floor tool and the only thing that made the De Stijl different that it was a different colour, at the time.
Other than that, I really don't know.



Post# 196829 , Reply# 73   8/23/2012 at 06:43 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

The original DC01 order form had a black generic Wessel Work tools for 19.99. But the D S always had a wheeled floor tool in the same colour as the cleaner. Same as used on the D S DC02 cylinder. It sounds as though your mother may possibly have had the first D S avaliable, unless Dyson did not send the floor tool with the Freemans stock. That would be strange though, as the instruction books for these cleaners would have mentioned a floor tool.

Post# 196834 , Reply# 74   8/23/2012 at 07:22 (2,781 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
That is interesting...

Having a floor tool with an upright is a good idea though, because I just can't stand using an upright on hard flooring as the hard flooring height setting is always too high to actually suck any dirt up and if you lower it you risk damaging the floor with the brush roll.

Can't win!


Post# 196836 , Reply# 75   8/23/2012 at 07:28 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

You couldn't win with this one either, Jamie. The original DC01 D S floor tool was such that it would suck lino and other lose fitting hard floors up into the cleaner head. The head was very useful for carpets as it had wheels and a brushing action, but not good for hard floors. On the DC01 it was more use for cleaning under furniture in carpeted rooms. Here is a picture of it. It can still be purchased in various colours as it was not made by Dyson but by a supplier of vacuum cleaner accesories. This one is blue & yellow but the Dyson version was purple, red, and yellow.

Post# 196838 , Reply# 76   8/23/2012 at 07:30 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

This is the floor tool which Dyson put with the very last DC01 D S cleaners and most of the last DC02 cylinders of all models. It was a tool designed by Dyson.

Post# 196841 , Reply# 77   8/23/2012 at 07:35 (2,781 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
I have to say Benny, doesn't it defeat the purpose of having an upright to have a floor tool only useful for CARPETS ?

It could be used for under furniture yes but then for that you could simply spend a little extra time with the standard upholstery tool.


Post# 196843 , Reply# 78   8/23/2012 at 07:37 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well I always thought it defeted the object, yes, but according to Dyson the tool was suitable for all hard floor types. It was only if one tried to use it on a loose floor that the truth came to light. I would have been fairly miffed were I a DC02 owner with lots of lino in my home.

Post# 196844 , Reply# 79   8/23/2012 at 07:44 (2,781 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        
doesn't it defeat the purpose of having an upright to ha

turbo500's profile picture

especially as the DC04 De Stilj had brush controls, so the brush could be turned off.


Post# 196847 , Reply# 80   8/23/2012 at 07:47 (2,781 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

Asking mum again, she said the instruction manual did mention the floor tool but only as an optional extra. I was wrong by the way, from checking with her, she bought it a little time after it was put on sale. I was under the impression the box was white with a picture of the DC01 De Stijl and a picture of the floor tool in the corner, but she confirmed the box was just brown cardboard with black writing.
They used to use brown cardboard boxes a litlle while ago. before changing to the black boxes they use now.
Maybe it did have something to do with the freemans stock, although when she bought her Sebo X4 extra in 2007 it did not come with the extra stairhose it said it was to come with.
Maybe my mum just had bad look with her extra tools, lol.

Needless to say - my mum bought the stairhose, duop, turbo brush and sebo air freshners separately, along with the Sebo itself it caame to a whopping
298


Post# 196848 , Reply# 81   8/23/2012 at 07:48 (2,781 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Oh my goodness, Dyson really didn't think things through did they!?

Post# 196849 , Reply# 82   8/23/2012 at 07:49 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Having the brush control for hard floors would defeat the object of a floor tool at all for hard surfaces, technically. However I have never been keen on the idea of pushing an upright cleaner over a hard floor, brushes spinning or not. I like a brush on the hose.

Post# 196850 , Reply# 83   8/23/2012 at 07:51 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Alex, the brown box was the one which Dyson sent her. That was how all Dyson-sent stock arrived. The original DC01 D S box for retail stock was white, which a picture of the cleaner and details & pictures about the De Stijl movement.

Post# 196851 , Reply# 84   8/23/2012 at 07:52 (2,781 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
So do I Benny, when I use an upright I like to feel some resistance but on hard flooring it just rolls over the floor and doesn't feel like it is doing anything. In fact, it ISN'T doing anything in most cases.

Post# 196852 , Reply# 85   8/23/2012 at 07:57 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well it could be pushing grit into the surface. Which is why I don't likethe idea.


Post# 196853 , Reply# 86   8/23/2012 at 07:59 (2,781 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
That's true, if the sole plate is touching the floor even in the slightest it could be scratching the floor.

I much prefer a floor tool with protruding brushes.


Post# 196917 , Reply# 87   8/23/2012 at 17:03 (2,781 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
Hoover Triple Vortex

The Hoover Triple Vortex went on sale at around Easter 1999. The Which? magazine tested it and thought that it was a worthy competitor to the Dyson. I think they tested the "S-Class filter" model, in red and black, V2001(?), as opposed to the basic V2000 with foam filters.

The Dyson DC01 was a poorly designed specimen. The plastics were too flimsy, the suction was thoroughly dreadful, and the machine was far too bulky to get under furniture. I had experience of a friend's daughter's DC01 (no suction - filter was clogged). I had two DC01 Absolutes; one was a replacement for the other. The plastic lower motor cover shattered on both near the wheel axle. A De Stijl model followed, but the HEPA filter split after a couple of months.

The only saving grace was it's ability to remove fluff and dog hair from carpet tiles. It's a pity that the suction from the soleplate was so dire, and that the "dirt tube inspection flaps" let grit fall out when the machine was switched off. Hideously dreadful emptying palaver too.

The Triple Vortex was a complete joy to use, in comparison.


Post# 196940 , Reply# 88   8/23/2012 at 18:47 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Rolls_rapide; I would quite like to disagree with all of what you have said there. But I can't. How could I when it is so damn true?

I often wonder if James Dyson knows how very lucky he was to have been as successful as he has been. I have no doubt for a second that his life was hard, frustrating, and all the rest of it, but to have launched an unknown brand of expensive, flimsy cleaner into a market saturated by brand loyalty and quality standards far, far greater than that of the product he was offering, was just absurd. I am genuinely pleased for him that it was a success, but this has to be largely due to the fickle nature of the UK consumers who first liked his new fangled gadget, followed by those hollow UK consumers who had to have what "her nextdoor" had brought home, with a few UK consumers who thought the cleaner was actually rather genuinely a bit better than most, and not because his product was the most amazing thing since vacuum cleaners were invented.

Unfortunately, it seems to be the latter which James Dyson does believe to be the case. He was very, very lucky to be able to sell such a poor quality product and win the consumers over at the same time. I also think that if there hadn't been so much poor quality bagless competition in the 2000's, Dyson would not have done so well. The very fact that all the other brands jumped straight onto the bagless bandwagon with their cheap, nasty cleaners, did little else but make the Dysons looked like the cream of the crap.


Post# 196948 , Reply# 89   8/23/2012 at 19:05 (2,781 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Well Benny, the same could be said for Gtech's venerable cordless sweeper - there was very little on the market before it - and it was hardly well built. Buyers bought it because it is far easier to push and pull than a conventional dust sweeper and then the Swivel Sweeper came to the market (I had one of those too) and then copied triangular ones thereafter.


Post# 196952 , Reply# 90   8/23/2012 at 19:16 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well I guess it could be, but what was the retail price of that sweeper? I don't know, but I guess it was around 50. I would also suggest that the expectation and indeed the use & abuse of that sweeper was considerably less than a Dyson vacuum cleaner.

Post# 197002 , Reply# 91   8/24/2012 at 02:54 (2,781 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Yes, but double the price of a mechanical dust sweeper, people weren't exactly taken with the GTech - it seemed to only take off after it was seen on Channel 4's Big Brother. Suddenly everyone realised it was an Eco-derived model due to the product placement just from that TV show alone. 

 

I think a few peeps are being unfair with Dyson - he's an inventor first and foremost - and thus even if Dyson had perfected a bagless suction system, including a hard floor tool wouldn't be the first brand to do so with an upright vacuum and I think in the early days of vacuum cleaner production and releases, brands like Dyson are allowed to get some things wrong.

 

Im still getting over how mad Hoover were to bring out Hoover branded clear dust bags for use in their Cyclean, and Vortex upright vacuums! It kind of defeated the purpose of bag-less. The concept didn't last long, even though some used food bags to trap the dust thereafter.


Post# 197006 , Reply# 92   8/24/2012 at 03:14 (2,781 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I don't think the comments are unfair, I think they are true. I think that Dyson was lucky to be able to design and make the cleaner he did and win the consumers over. Getting people to buy his product would have been a challenge on it's own, but to do so with the quality of the product he was offering was nothing short of a miracle. A good deal of people were experiencing problems with the poor quality parts long before sales really took off, so he was lucky that work did not get around before then.

I do of course take your point that the G-tech sweeper was double the price of a manual sweeper, but even so, it was affordable; the sort of price which people were prepared to take a chance on. It was also did something vastly different from a manual sweeper as it employed an electric motor, unlike a Dyson where the main selling point was an improvement on an existing set up.


Post# 197011 , Reply# 93   8/24/2012 at 04:17 (2,781 days old) by Scaniabebe ()        

1993, was 3 years old at the time, they're not bad vacuums. My best friend, called Amy was given the DC01 her Step Dad owned when she moved into her first house, and, it's still around today, just with a few more scratches on it than when it first came off the production line!:')

They're not bad vacuums, can remember them very well, not the prettyist of the Dysons, but I do actually kinda like the style, and it's not until recently that we realized that the Dysons didn't "Deep Clean" as well as the Hoover Turbopower with Autosence!

Actually looking on eBay at buying one, possibly!:D


Post# 197017 , Reply# 94   8/24/2012 at 06:05 (2,780 days old) by jakesvacs ()        

Why everyone dislike the Dyson Dc01 so much?
There are loads of Dc01's still being used today, my Da001 was still being used untill I got it and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it!
Its a plastic vacuum, just like the other vacuums.
The parts are robust enough for them to last a good few years, just a couple of days ago I met a lady who was still using her Dc01 with the old lettering and she said its the best vacuum she ever had. Of course when you compare it to a Dirty fan vacuum its not going to be as powerful.
I also love many features of the Dc01, its so iconic and special.
We also forget that we are debating about a vacuum that was from 93. Other vacuums of that era in discussions would be given some slack. I do not see many contours, Hoover turbopowers or other brands of that era still being widely used as Dyson Dc01s.


Post# 197030 , Reply# 95   8/24/2012 at 09:01 (2,780 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"Actually looking on eBay at buying one, possibly!:D" That's if your pocket money will stretch to it, or maybe you could sell one of the "cars" to buy it...

Sorry GENUINE VacuumLand members, just had to vent a wee bit there.


Post# 197036 , Reply# 96   8/24/2012 at 09:43 (2,780 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
Jake - A very good point.

I had a DC01 for many years and a DC04 - the DC04 didn't last as long as the DC01 and though the DC01 didn't have as much give when the machine was pivoted to the floor, I always felt the DC01 was better built. The DC04 by comparison had a better air inspection system but I had problems with the drive belts and eventually filter probs. I also liked the sound of the DC01 - not as noisy.


Post# 197050 , Reply# 97   8/24/2012 at 10:43 (2,780 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Ah well you see Jake, this is where it all comes full circle. The fewer sightings of the likes of the Electrolux Contour and Hoover Turbopower2 will be due in a large part to consumers replacing them somewhat prematurely, with the latest trend - a Dyson. I am never going to say the Contour was a great cleaner, although it was not bad. The Turbopower 2 and 3 were very good cleaners. But in both cases (and indeed the case of many a cleaner from that period of time) the build quality was considerably better than the Dyson DC01. It is not about knocking a Dyson, it is about how they were built.

The original question was about what we thought of them from their launch, and this is what I am reporting back. Dyson used a plastic which was too hard and brittle for a good deal of his cleaners to stand the test of time, and yet the plastics were too thin and soft in other areas. Although a good deal of DC01 cleaners are still around, this can only represent a small % of the millions they made. Many consumers had to obtain replacement parts in a very short space of time and I stand by my comments that James Dyson did very well to build an unknown cleaner with a poor build quality and yet still go on to develop a loyal customer base.


Post# 197052 , Reply# 98   8/24/2012 at 10:52 (2,780 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
That's true Benny and the manufacturers James Dyson went to with his ideas probably knew that too (of course the money they made through bags was a larger incentive!) and thus weren't interested.

Post# 197109 , Reply# 99   8/24/2012 at 14:56 (2,780 days old) by AlexHoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

I am surprised the Turbopower 2's were as popular as they were because they came out in 1992 and the DC01 was proven popular in the mid 90s.
The turbopower 2 would of only been best sellers for 3 or 4 years before the Dyson took off.
It annoys me how the brand Hoover everyone loved and trusted for there exceptional performance was pushed aside for a Dyson DC01 cleaner that would not of cleaned carpet much better than a Ewbank sweeper with a dustbuster stuffed into the head of it.

I wish Hoover would of teamed with Dyson and not be so ignorant to there profit they were making from bags, when they were already making permabag models that eliminated bags anyway.

The only thing that sold the DC01 in my opinion was that you could see what the vacuum was picking up, which would of looked like it was picking up lots and lots of dirt when in actual fact the dirt spinning around was filled with pockets of air just like cream does when you whisk it up.
If Dson made the same DC01, but you could not see the dirt, I think it would not of sold as well as it did.


Post# 197128 , Reply# 100   8/24/2012 at 16:07 (2,780 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Thing is through Alex, the Permabag system didn't really take off and after a short while people threw the messy clogged thing away and started buying the superior paper bags.

The Permabag was just a selling point that people would see as a God send initially, but after cleaning it out a few times would just spend a Pound or two on a pack of disposable bags from the local vacuum shop to save the trouble!


Post# 197130 , Reply# 101   8/24/2012 at 16:12 (2,780 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

My ex-wife used to use paper bags in her Turbopower 3, but I don't think that many permabag owners did such a thing. I can only speak of the models I had in for repair and didn't see a paper bag in the permabag models. I think they are more scarce as production of those models was shorter than the bagged versions of the TP2 which went on for a good deal of years.

Post# 197134 , Reply# 102   8/24/2012 at 16:24 (2,780 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Well I was just speaking from what I thought would be common sense (though, I've learned a lot of people don't have that virtue) and the fact I've seen a good deal of Turbopowers for sale with "Permabag" written on the bag door but paper bags, or indeed no bags on occasion, fitted.

Post# 197147 , Reply# 103   8/24/2012 at 17:13 (2,780 days old) by ryry_87 ()        
'That's if your pocket money will stretch to it, or

hope that wasn't a poke at me Jamie? lol

Post# 197148 , Reply# 104   8/24/2012 at 17:23 (2,780 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Oh no-no Ryan, of course not, I wouldn't say that to somebody like you.

It was a "poke" at Scaniabebe who is a troll to my belief. Why would I make that assumption ? Well, you'd have had to speak to him privately and hear some of the crap that comes out of his mouth.

On one hand he was enjoying the sun with "the wife" and literally 15 minutes later he said to me she had Skin Cancer. Yes, those two really correlate don't they ?

Then he talks about buying cars on eBay for him and his "ten friends" to drive around in, but of course the only images he could produce were links to the completed listings and current listings of cars he was "going to buy". When I asked to see actual pictures of the cars in his possession, he said he didn't have any and clammed up.

Oh and of course there was the "plug stuck in the socket" incident where he apparently managed (God knows how) to get the plug of his Numatic James jammed in the socket and got an electrician out to remove it. Then what did he say ? He would have to buy a whole new flex for the James. Why do that when you could just cut the old plug off and put a new one on ? Absolutely ludicrous.

He truly is either a crackpot or a troll, maybe a bit of both.

So I'll say again, it was not a dig at you, I apologise if it sounded like such.


Post# 197150 , Reply# 105   8/24/2012 at 17:26 (2,780 days old) by ryry_87 ()        

lol no worries

Post# 197252 , Reply# 106   8/25/2012 at 06:57 (2,779 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Um.. the only thing about "quality aspirations," way back when Dyson was launched was that consumers weren't really interested in quality - we were still going on marketing promises like high power, high motors and dust capacity. The only aspect of quality that people who had seen Dyson machines were repairers or those working within the industry of selling vacuums. When Dyson came along, although undoubtedly pushed along in a few years with the suction power mantra, Dyson brought back glitter to the plastic surfaces and oh how they all copied Dyson after that! 


Post# 197299 , Reply# 107   8/25/2012 at 10:02 (2,779 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I would certainly agree that consumers did not go looking for quality in a vacuum cleaner, but I do think they still expected a certain standard. It was a good deal of years after the launch before anyone brought me a Dyson to be repaired, because they came with a two year guarentee as standard. All I know about the quality was based on what I had seen when looking in shops and hearing what my customers who owned one said about them when they came in to buy bits and peices from me.

As for the glitter, I always considered Hoover to be the one who started that off around 1991 with thier glittery new Turbopower Total System cleaners.


Post# 197306 , Reply# 108   8/25/2012 at 10:55 (2,779 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

1991 eh for Hoover? I always imagined it was the other way around. I never looked closely at my Turbopower Total but it certainly didn't have glitter to the plastics - that came later on the TP2 and 3 series. The Autosense model had glitter.


Post# 197308 , Reply# 109   8/25/2012 at 11:01 (2,779 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Yes, and so did the top Turbopower total system cleaners. The Freedom bagless models were the most notable, but there were shades of dark blue, dark green, and dark red in the bagged cleaners.

Post# 197310 , Reply# 110   8/25/2012 at 11:04 (2,779 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

There is a green one pictured in a message here, so I found. They say it was a German cleaner in this case but I know the UK had similar.

CLICK HERE TO GO TO vintagerepairer's LINK


Post# 197458 , Reply# 111   8/26/2012 at 07:30 (2,778 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Whilst I liked the DC01, at the time I felt the far more conventional and far lighter Hoovers I had were much better just to use from a usage point of view - the big floor head on the DC01 was a case in point. Great for cleaning carpets but couldn't get flat to the floor as there was too much height on that main floor head.

 

Also the tool storers at the back were a bit cheap - having the option to slide a dusting brush on top of a crevice tool and then on the other side, with the flat upholstery tool locked on- might have been handy when used for car cleaning if you are bending down anyway and have the tools to hand - but I much preferred the flush fitting design of Hoover's TP2 & 3 series where the tools had their own recesses and was far more flush.

 

 


Post# 197459 , Reply# 112   8/26/2012 at 07:35 (2,778 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
I agree the tool storage of the Turbopower 2/3 were exceptionally well designed for ease of use yet without the risk of them falling out during use and getting lost.

Post# 197460 , Reply# 113   8/26/2012 at 08:25 (2,778 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Yep and the TPs also cleaned flat to the floor without much getting in the way.

 

It seems to be the case, sadly for a lot of bagless uprights on the market who persist in offering bagless, round bins 19 years on.. Morphy Richards' Clarity is about the only bagless upright I can think of that has a squarish bin, but even the pivot below the floor head restricts true flat to the floor cleaning.


Post# 197461 , Reply# 114   8/26/2012 at 08:26 (2,778 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture

I agree the tools on the turbopower 2/3 are much more accessible, than a DC01, however, I found them to be hard to click in and pull out, but I guss it helps them not to fall out.
The totalsystem turbopowers onboard tools were much easier to take off and put back on, yet didn't fall out.
I don't really like the purepowers but they have easy access tools.


Post# 197462 , Reply# 115   8/26/2012 at 08:28 (2,778 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Well I think we can agree then that in both cases, Hoover's design was far more efficient and versatile, but at the same time, it wasn't exactly new having flush fitting recesses on the rears of uprights, especially if you owned any of the Sebo uprights, or Panasonic.


Post# 197465 , Reply# 116   8/26/2012 at 09:10 (2,778 days old) by alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture
Well at least with the turbopower 2 all the tools you would ever need were located at the back, rather than having some at the back, some on the side or some on the front, like sebo and panasonic.
I like how Hoovers turbopower 2/3 had seperate tools for each job at the back of the machine along with the hose in one neat and convenient place.





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