Thread Number: 20642
Who is Dyson's Closest Competitor in Cyclonic Technology?
[Down to Last]

Vacuumland's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 231093   5/3/2013 at 18:25 (2,027 days old) by bagintheback (Flagstaff, Arizona)        

bagintheback's profile picture

In terms of dust separation efficiency, which brand do you think creates the best cyclonic system? I'm assuming Dyson has the lead here, and Hoover would come second. 

Post# 231096 , Reply# 1   5/3/2013 at 18:57 (2,027 days old) by super-sweeper (KSSRC Refurbishment Center)        
Dust seperation?

super-sweeper's profile picture

Dust stays in bag, Air moves threw bag

(They had it right in the first place).


Seriously though, A Dyson is far-too rigorous a machine, and doubt can even come close to the vibrating action of a Hoover Convertible Style cleaner. 


Just my thoughts,


Post# 231124 , Reply# 2   5/4/2013 at 01:44 (2,026 days old) by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

Cyclones as used in Dyson vacuums have been used for well over 100 years in industrial dust collector cyclones for woodworking and other machines.The cyclone itself filters out the more coarse particles-then a bag house type filter captures the fines.Same as the Dyson vacuum but on a smaller scale-the multiple cyclones-and the final filter.Interesting concept-but cyclones still work best in industrial systems-the bag is best for vacuum cleaners.

Post# 231136 , Reply# 3   5/4/2013 at 03:12 (2,026 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

In the UK, consumers don't seem to care about what the Dyson does, they just want one. All they see is a bagless cleaner. Many is the time I have wondered why Dyson bother making all these changes to a brand which is already outselling any other. I think they do it because James Dyson wants to do it and can afford to do it. Few businesses have this luxury in these desperate economical times.

Post# 231141 , Reply# 4   5/4/2013 at 03:25 (2,026 days old) by hi-loswitch98 ()        

I would have to say either Vax or Hoover, but seriously though vintagerepairer is right, why do Dyson bother to make these changes when its already good? But looking through the 2013 Argos Catalogue its clear, every page for vacuums is bagless, except 1 & 1/2 for henrys, mieles, plus uprights etc. That shocks me to think of all the resources they're wasting, plus the time & water the consumer is wasting for having to wash filters, bins etc. in some cases after EACH USE! I could not put up with that, could you?

On the plus bagged vacs are still available, Electrolux Powerlite PetLovers at 37 each at TESCO plus the Zanussi ZAN332 at 24.50 or therabouts.

Thing is though, where do people go for a vacuum? Argos of course. Flick through the catalogue & thinkk, bagless it is then! And they end up purchasing a bagless cleaner that after a few uses will become filthy inside, the filters will be disgusting, & it will lose suction dramatically.

This basic idea is what happens to cheap bagless vacs that claim to have 'cyclonic technology' whereas all that happens is the dirt is swirled around in a dirt cup with a filter getting clogged around the middle.

Post# 231167 , Reply# 5   5/4/2013 at 09:31 (2,026 days old) by dysonman1 (Missouri)        
The original question...

dysonman1's profile picture
About efficiency in cyclonic filtration...Yes, Dyson does have the best system right now because he's had longer to work with it than any other manufacturer. Like Air-Way and the disposable bag, Air-Way had it perfected before anyone else could even attempt it.

Electrolux/Eureka currently sell a multi-cyclonic upright and a multi-cyclonic straight suction canister. Apart from those two, Eureka also makes several dual cyclonic machines as well as single cyclone models. One problem is that Eureka is advertising machine as "multi-cyclonic" when in fact they are simply dual cyclonic. True multi-cyclonic models have more than one high efficiency cyclone.

Hoover makes dual cyclonic as well as multi-cyclonic models. The WindtunnelMAX is an example of a great multi-cyclonic. Most of Hoover's machines are simple dual cyclonic uprights - with a poorly designed shroud that allows quantities of lint to pass through and ultimately clog the pre-motor filter. Hoover's best multi-cyclonic upright (and canister) models still pass a large amount of fine dust onto the pre-motor filter.

Shark makes single cyclonic models, and loads their filters with dirt.

Panasonic makes several very nice multi-cyclonic models - but the high efficiency cyclones are not designed correctly, and pass a fairly large quantity of fine dust onto the pre-motor filter. Panasonic's cyclones are very easy to take apart for a good washing. Our Kenmore models are made by Panasonic, and use the same cyclone systems.

Bissell's Healthy Home and Heavy Duty models are true multi-cyclonic models and filter quite well. Bissell seems to be dividing their line up between fairly good multi-cyclonic uprights and terrible single cyclonic uprights (in their low priced line). They also make several dual cyclonic models, but these have a small high efficiency cyclone and don't work as well as a DC01 at filtering fine dust.

Dirt Devil, Hoover, and Eureka all offer a canister, multi-cyclonic, that appears to be made by the same company in China (King Clean). The parts are interchangeable. The cords are too short, and many have motor problems right away.

So, to answer the question, Dyson still has the best separation system in true multi-cyclonic vacuums today. That will all change here in a few months when Tacony launches their new Fuller Brush Multi-Cyclonic upright. Anyone attending the Vacuum Collector's Convention at the Vacuum Museum in June, will get a chance to see and use the new Multi-Cyclonic upright prototype. The engineering department has really been working hard to make the best cleaning and best filtering multi-cyclonic available.

Post# 231169 , Reply# 6   5/4/2013 at 09:51 (2,026 days old) by Alexhoovers94 (Manchester UK)        

alexhoovers94's profile picture
VAX and Hoover make pretty good cyclonic machines now.

Post# 231178 , Reply# 7   5/4/2013 at 11:00 (2,026 days old) by mark40511 (Lexington, KY)        

mark40511's profile picture
Was Fantom Fury from the late 90s single cyclonic? I'm guessing it was because it was awful and I think that vacuum made me never want to have another bagless vacuum again (aside from rainbow). I've heard that Bissel Healthy Home is as close to Dyson as you can get in terms of filtration. I just remember hating the fantom because as I vacuumed there would be just this layer of dust that would end up all over the outside of the vacuum. The dirt cup never made a tight seal. I prefer bags or a Rainbow.

Post# 231179 , Reply# 8   5/4/2013 at 11:26 (2,026 days old) by dysonman1 (Missouri)        

dysonman1's profile picture
Fantom used dual cyclonic technology which they licensed from Dyson. There was NO pre-motor filter on the Fury models, this was because Fantom wanted to sell Hepa filters. That 'greed' is why James did NOT renew his license agreement in 2001, why Fantom had to make the Wildcat (single cyclonic) model, which ultimately led to their demise.

Post# 231197 , Reply# 9   5/4/2013 at 14:04 (2,026 days old) by ultraperformer (Derbyshire, UK, Europe)        

ultraperformer's profile picture
I have a Vax Air Total Home cylinder and I've been very impressed with how clean the filter has stayed, plus it generates 310 air watts from the 1500 watt motor so it's efficient too!

Post# 231214 , Reply# 10   5/4/2013 at 16:44 (2,026 days old) by hi-loswitch98 ()        

I nearly bought one of these last year but instead chose a permabag Morphy Richards 73111 cylinder which was 29.99 on eBay. Great purchase if you ask me, great for getting into all those corners & crevices Panasonic can't reach!

Post# 231221 , Reply# 11   5/4/2013 at 17:08 (2,026 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        
That Vax

Is that Vax the one which Dyson twice took Vax to court over? If so, it is the machine which replicates the Dyson DC02. Seeing how the DC02 was not a bad cleaner, if not lacking a bit of suction and a decent floor tool on many models, it stands to reason that the Vax should be good too. Like I said earlier, Dyson makes a lot of changes for reasons I cannot decipher.

Post# 231240 , Reply# 12   5/4/2013 at 21:53 (2,025 days old) by eurekaprince (Montreal, Canada)        

eurekaprince's profile picture
According to the American Consumer Reports tests, the Kompressor bagless vacs by Korean LG seem to outperform many Dyson models. These vacs are truly providing some serious competition to Dyson in the marketplace. I think the LG Kompressor upright is the top-rated bagless vac in the latest set of comparative test results.

Post# 231241 , Reply# 13   5/4/2013 at 22:24 (2,025 days old) by dysonman1 (Missouri)        

dysonman1's profile picture
Is single cyclonic. The filter loads almost immediately with dirt. LG's only multi-cyclonic in the USA were made for Sears (both the upright and the canister models)and are no longer available.

Post# 231244 , Reply# 14   5/4/2013 at 23:06 (2,025 days old) by eurekaprince (Montreal, Canada)        

eurekaprince's profile picture
But the compacting mechanism constantly allows for more space in the bin, and the block of dirt is easier to dispose of. I don't think we consumers care how many cyclones there are. Just as long as the cleaner cleans well and is easy to use....

That being said, I much prefer any bagged vac over a bagless. :-)

Post# 231250 , Reply# 15   5/5/2013 at 00:30 (2,025 days old) by hi-loswitch98 ()        
No vintagerepairer

That was the Vax Mach Zen Super Silent one they took Vax to court over with, but to be honest even though they look similar I hiighly doubt Vax 'stole' their idea considering they released the Zen in 2009/2010 & Dyson released the DC02 in 1995!

Post# 231253 , Reply# 16   5/5/2013 at 01:42 (2,025 days old) by kirbylux77 (Orillia, Ontario, Canada)        

kirbylux77's profile picture
You are right, the LG Kompressor uprights do get excellent ratings in Consumer Reports over most Dyson models. BUT, the reason for that is most likely due to their aggressive brushroll, the primary reason why, in my opinion, Dyson's are poor carpet cleaners....their brushrolls are wimpy & don't do a good job of grooming carpet, lifting the nap & removing dirt from the carpet pile. Whereas most of Dyson's multi-cyclonic competitors do have good brushrolls. If you think LG's Kompressor uprights are superior, then why is one of the Hoover T-Series the Number 1 bagless upright in the current issue? It's only because the brushroll on the Hoover is signifigantly better than the Dyson! Case in point....back a couple of years ago, the Dyson DC28 Airmuscle earned the highest cleaning scores in Consumer Reports. It was so good, it even matched the Kirby Sentria's score! Why? Because it has an aggressive brushroll which is much better than most of Dyson's other vacuums. This explains why the LG Kompressor gets the better scores, & not because the Kompressor technology is superior.

Also, when you say "But the compacting mechanism constantly allows for more space in the bin, and the block of dirt is easier to dispose of. I don't think we consumers care how many cyclones there are. Just as long as the cleaner cleans well and is easy to use", I would strongly disagree with you on that! Yes, the Kompressor feature is's definitely a benefit that the dirt is compacted down into a "dirt puck" so that dust doesn't fly around as much when emptying, like a filtered cyclonic upright would. BUT, when you say consumers wouldn't care how many cyclones a bagless vacuum has, that's where you are dead wrong! If you look back a few years at customer reviews on & for filtered cyclonic upright & canister vacuums, most consumers were complaining that the dirtbin was too messy to deal with, due to the filter cleaning, & that they lost power quickly. Now, can you REALLY say that a filtered cyclonic upright would be easy to use if you have a messy dirtbin & filter to maintain, or that it would clean well if the vacuum constantly lost suction power due to a clogged filter? I think not. These days, consumers want superior performance, & that's what the multi-cyclonic bagless vacuums on the market today deliver. And bin capacity isn't a huge concern, not when the bottom-emptying dirtcups are so easy to empty & hold a decent amount of dirt. The concern of dust flying everywhere & the mess it created, like what happened in the past with filtered cyclonic vacuums, is long in the past.

Tom G: I must say I agree wholeheartedly with your opinion that Bissell's multi-cyclonic system is 2nd best after Dyson. As most people here know, I have had a blue Bissell Healthy Home 5770, the first Healthy Home that's now called the Heavy Duty, since 2010. That vacuum has always impressed me with it's design & cleaning performance, & it's multi-cyclonic system captures a LOT of dust. Having said that, the only way you can really clean it out is to take a compressor to it, or use another vacuum with a blower port- say a Filter Queen or TriStar- & blow it out with the hose & a crevice tool on the end to concentrate the airflow. If you wanted to wash it out, you have to remove several screws that holds everything together, & not nearly as easy as other vacuums like Hoover's & Panasonics where everything can be disassembled & washed easily. I have also noticed that not all the dust comes out from the inner cyclone chamber when emptying the dirtbin- If you separate the cyclone assembly from the dirt bin by pressing on the 2 latches, & take the cyclone assembly outside & gently tap the inner chamber on a hard surface, there's a lot of dust that will fall out. Hopefully, Bissell will improve both the Healthy Home in the future so these will no longer be issues.

As for Hoover, I must say I am not impressed with their multi-cyclonic system at all. I just ordered & took delivery of a Hoover Windtunnel Air Pro UH72450 on April 29th. It's Hoover's answer to the latest Dyson Ball models, as it's steerable, just like the Shark Rotator Lift Away. While it's a darn good upright, & it has AMAZING suction power, I was totally surprised at how quickly the pre-filter got clogged with dirt....and it's only been used 4 times since I took delivery of it! And yes, it does have a good pre-filter that looks very much like a copy of the Dyson Ball DC29 pre-filter, but it's gonna need cleaning frequently. Hoover recommends in the user's guide to clean the pre-filter every 2 months, but with how dirty it got, I think it's gonna need to be cleaned every 2 to 3 weeks. I had ordered a spare pre-filter & HEPA filter to set aside for the future, & Hoover didn't charge extra for them (most likely since I was ordering directly from Hoover, & it's a new offering), but something tells me I am gonna need that pre-filter far sooner than I initially thought. I will be creating a separate post about the Hoover in the next couple of days, giving my complete assesment of the vacuum. It's a good vacuum & does an excellent job cleaning, but it certainly has some flaws.


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.

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