Thread Number: 30920  /  Tag: Recent Vacuum Cleaners from past 20 years
CFM Tests of Vacs From 1980-2013
[Down to Last]

Vacuumland's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items --- [As an eBay Partner, eBay may compensate vacuumland.org if you make a purchase using any link to eBay on this page]
Post# 341809   1/23/2016 at 11:20 (2,986 days old) by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        

wyaple's profile picture
Well, here they are. Many CFM measurements performed with a Baird meter and a GM8901 anemometer, which is more accurate than the Baird meter of course. In total, I did take many more measurements, but I thought I would post only those that might seem the most relevant. Since I’ve already posted my water lift measurements, it’s only a matter of 1 calculation to get the almighty Airwatts figure.

Except as noted, all measurements were taken without any bags (or in the case of the Rainbow, no water). If I can find the time, I may repeat these tests with bags; however, with that being said, a fresh, empty, high quality HEPA cloth bag doesn’t appear to lower air flow readings to any significant degree (at least with some very quick testing I performed). The exception is the bag test performed on the Hoover Tempo Widepath. You can see the very small differences between, no bag, a genuine Y paper bag and a Crucial cloth HEPA bag (2 CFM total spread).

I can’t stress enough that these tests are intended to show best baseline performance. Once bags start to fill up, airflow will be lost as well as when power nozzles contact the carpet and slow down the fans. For a Rainbow, whatever CFM you start vacuuming with is also what you end with (unless you’re doing something really strange with it).

Enjoy!

Bill

Comments on the Results:

I think it is noteworthy that a 1980 Lux 1401-B can still pull a smidge over 93 CFM with the original motor (and a new hose) at the hose end.

At the hose end, all three Kirbys and the Widepath pull basically the same CFM (106).

The D4C SE has the lowest CFM from the hose end (65). GreatVacs has stated that factory specs for this model is 72 CFM, so maybe over time the hose and bowl don’t seal as well as when new.

The Windtunnel 2 is a new restore job I just finished a few days ago and boy, was I disappointed in the results. I had thought the motors were about the same in the Widepath and the Windtunnel 2, but they don’t perform anywhere near each other. With clean filters the best CFM I could get from the bagless Windtunnel 2 was about 74, while the Crucial cloth bagged Widepath was a whopping 114.

How Much CFM Do You Need?

My short answer is enough to get the job done without damaging the item being cleaned. For delicate items, it probably is useless to have so much airflow that you end up fighting to constantly remove said item from the hose and/or whatever attachment you’ve chosen to use. On many an occasion, I have had to use the suction relief valve on the old Olympia One when vacuuming with the dusting brush and floor tool because they would keep getting “stuck.” Something around the 40-60 CFM range appears to work best.

Speaking of carpet, probably more than you think. With a machine using a good suction seal at the rug plate, 110-130 CFM appears to really get the deep down crud. I have noticed that if your machine has a good beater bar, less airflow seems to be OK as well. Somehow, the dirt has to be coaxed from the fibers, then moved into the bag/bin and really good agitation can reduce the required CFM to around the 80-100 range.

For bare floors (linoleum, stone, etc.), I have found a combination of very gentile agitation (i.e. soft floor brush) and medium airflow, say about 60-80 CFM, works well and doesn’t make the floor tool too difficult to push. Using 100 CFM or more makes any of my floor tools feel like I’m shoveling snow.

Diameter of GM8901 Anemometer Detector = 2.1875 Inches
Radius = 1.09375 inches = .0911458 Feet
Detector Area = 3.1415926 x Radius Squared = 0.0260990 Feet Squared (rounded)

Electrolux Olympia One (1980)
Motor Exhaust = 570 ft/min = 14.9 CFM
Electrolux (Measured@Body, No Bag) = 4330 ft/min = 113 CFM = Baird 9.0
Electrolux (Measured@Hose, No Bag) = 3580 ft/min = 93.4 CFM = Baird 6.75 (reducer used)
Electrolux (No Bag, Measured@Blwr Base) = 5160 ft/min = 135 CFM = Baird 6.5*
Electrolux (No Bag, Measured@Blwr Hose) = 3310 ft/min = 86.4 CFM = Baird 1.5** (reducer used)

Kirby Heritage II Legend (1987)
Brushroll Blowing Through Zipped Outer Bag (directly in front of filltube only) = 216 ft/min = 5.6 CFM
Brushroll Blowing Through HEPA Cloth or Paper Bag (Bypassing Outer Bag) = 0 (fan didn't spin)
Motor Exhaust (Near F.R. Wheel) = 433 ft/min = 11.3 CFM
Kirby H2L (Measured@Body Low, No Bag) = 6260 ft/min = 163 CFM = Baird 10.0+
Kirby H2L (Measured@Body Hi, No Bag) = 7420 ft/min = 194 CFM = Baird 10.0+
Kirby H2L (Measured@Hose, No Bag) = 4100 ft/min = 107 CFM = Baird 9.0 (reducer used)
Kirby H2L (Hose, Measured@Filltube) = 4100 ft/min = 107 CFM = Baird 6.5
Kirby H2L (Brushroll, Measured@Filltube) = 5670 ft/min = 148 CFM = Baird 10.0+
Pignose engages low speed, but has a restricted intake
Hose engages high speed, but has a restricted intake (obviously)

Kirby G4 (1996)
Brushroll Blowing Through Zipped Outer Bag (directly in front of filltube only) = est. < 1 CFM
Brushroll Blowing Through HEPA Cloth or Paper Bag (Bypassing Outer Bag) = 0 (fan didn't spin)
Motor Exhaust (Near F.L. Wheel) = 787 ft/min = 20.5 CFM
Kirby G4 (Measured@Body Low, No Bag) = 6260 ft/min = 163 CFM = Baird 10.0+
Kirby G4 (Measured@Body Hi, No Bag) = 7090 ft/min = 185 CFM = Baird 10.0+
Kirby G4 (Measured@Hose, No Bag) = 4090 ft/min = 107 CFM = Baird 9.5 (reducer used)
Kirby G4 (Hose, Measured@Filltube) = 4060 ft/min = 106 CFM = Baird 6.0
Kirby G4 (Brushroll, Measured@Filltube) = 5900 ft/min = 154 CFM = Baird 10.0+
Pignose engages low speed, but has a restricted intake
Hose engages high speed, but has a restricted intake (obviously)

Rainbow D4C SE (1997)
Motor Exhaust = 314 ft/min = 8.2 CFM
Water Bowl Exhaust = 885 ft/min = 23.1 CFM
Rainbow D4C SE (Measured@Body, No Water) = 3350 ft/min = 87.4 CFM = Baird 5.5
Rainbow D4C SE (Measured@Hose, No Water) = 2500 ft/min = 65.2 CFM = Baird 2.75 (reducer used)
Rainbow D4C SE (No Water, Measured@Blwr Base) = 4590 ft/min = 120 CFM = Baird 1.75*
Rainbow D4C SE (No Water, Measured@Blwr Hose) = 3520 ft/min = 91.9 CFM = Baird 2.0** (reducer used)

Kirby Gsix (2001)
Brushroll Blowing Through Zipped Outer Bag (only at the zipper) = 177 ft/min = 4.6 CFM
Brushroll Blowing Through HEPA Cloth or Paper Bag (Bypassing Outer Bag) = 0 (fan didn't spin)
Motor Exhaust (Near F.L. Wheel) = 1063 ft/min = 27.7 CFM
Kirby Gsix (Measured@Body Low, No Bag) = 6180 ft/min = 161 CFM = Baird 10.0+
Kirby Gsix (Measured@Body Hi, No Bag) = 7010 ft/min = 183 CFM = Baird 10.0+
Kirby Gsix (Measured@Hose, No Bag) = 4080 ft/min = 106 CFM = Baird 9.5 (reducer used)
Kirby Gsix (Brushroll, Measured@Filltube) = 5910 ft/min = 154 CFM = Baird 10.0+
Pignose engages high speed, but has a restricted intake
Hose engages high speed, but has a restricted intake (obviously)

Hoover Tempo Widepath (2012)
Motor + Bag Exhaust = 1338 ft/min = 34.9 CFM
Motor + Bag Exhaust = 1555 ft/min = 40.6 CFM (no post filter)
Hoover Tempo (Measured@Body, No Bag) = 4370 ft/min = 114 CFM = Baird 9.5 (reducer used)
Hoover Tempo (Measured@Body, Hoover Y HEPA) = 4290 ft/min = 112 CFM = Baird 9.5 (reducer used)
Hoover Tempo (Measured@Body, Crucial HEPA) = 4370 ft/min = 114 CFM = Baird 9.5 (reducer used)
Hoover Tempo (Measured@Hose, Crucial HEPA) = 4080 ft/min = 106 CFM = Baird 9.0 (reducer used)

Hoover Windtunnel 2 High Capacity Pet (2013)
Motor Exhaust (w/Filters) = 826 ft/min = 21.6 CFM
Motor Exhaust (No Filters) = 964 ft/min = 25.1 CFM
Hoover Windtunnel (Measured@Body, w/Filters) = 2820 ft/min = 73.6 CFM = Baird 3.5 (reducer used)
Hoover Windtunnel (Measured@Body, No Filters) = 2970 ft/min = 77.5 CFM = Baird 4.0 (reducer used)

* Difficult for the Baird to measure due to location of exhaust
** Two Adapters Used
*** Fan spun too low to measure


Post# 352673 , Reply# 1   5/23/2016 at 09:53 (2,866 days old) by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Adding 3 More Vacs To The Tested List

wyaple's profile picture
Hoover TurboPower 5000 (2003)
Hoover TurboPower 5K (Measured@Body, w/Filters & Bag) = 3600 ft/min = 94.0 CFM = Baird 6.5 (reducer used)
Hoover TurboPower 5K (Measured@Body, No Filters or Bag) = 4230 ft/min = 110 CFM = Baird 8.5 (reducer used)
Hoover TurboPower 5K (Measured@Hose, w/Filters & Bag) = 2540 ft/min = 66.3 CFM = Baird 2.5 (reducer used)
Hoover TurboPower 5K (Measured@Hose, No Filters or Bag) = 2740 ft/min = 71.5 CFM = Baird 3.0 (reducer used)

Dyson DC14 Animal (2004)
Dyson DC14 Animal (Measured@Body, w/Filters) = 4490 ft/min = 117 CFM = Baird 10.0 (reducer used)
Dyson DC14 Animal (Measured@Body, No Filters) = 4900 ft/min = 128 CFM = Baird 10.0+ (reducer used)
Dyson DC14 Animal (Measured@Hose, w/Filters) = 2870 ft/min = 74.9 CFM = Baird 4.0 (reducer used)
Dyson DC14 Animal (Measured@Hose, No Filters) = 3010 ft/min = 78.6 CFM = Baird 4.75 (reducer used)

Riccar 8850 (2005)
Motor Exhaust (w/Filters) = 1043 ft/min = 27.2 CFM
Motor Exhaust (No Filters) = 1082 ft/min = 28.2 CFM
Riccar 8850 (Measured@Body, w/Filter) = 3917 ft/min = 102 CFM = Baird 8.0 (reducer used)
Riccar 8850 (Measured@Body, No Filters or Bag) = 4035 ft/min = 105 CFM = Baird 8.5 (reducer used)
Riccar 8850 (Measured@Hose, w/Filters) = 3504 ft/min = 91.5 CFM = Baird 6.0 (reducer used)
Riccar 8850 (Measured@Hose, No Filters or Bag) = 3563 ft/min = 93.0 CFM = Baird 6.5 (reducer used)

==========================================================

COMMENTS: The Riccar has great airflow, while the TurboPower is a little on the low side, but the hose is fairly beat up. The Dyson, while having insane water lift (well over 110") has decidedly average airflow from the hose end and at the sole plate.

Bill


Post# 352698 , Reply# 2   5/23/2016 at 17:08 (2,865 days old) by ralph123 (Little Rock, AR)        

thanks for posting. Would be nice to see how numbers change after ingesting say 10oz of dirt.

Post# 352706 , Reply# 3   5/23/2016 at 20:23 (2,865 days old) by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Ralph123 I Have An Answer For That...

wyaple's profile picture
In a previous post, "HEPA Bag Testing" or titled something similar, I posted results with clean and used bags. I'll re-post here. The quick answers is (when using HQ cloth HEPA bags), not much performance is lost.

Bill

===================================================================

In this latest round of tests, I wanted to answer two questions:

1) How much performance do you lose by re-using a cloth HEPA bag and
2) How much performance do you lose by completely filling a cloth HEPA bag.

My test machines of choice (all in mint and/or fully restored condition) were a 1980 Lux 1401-B, a 1987 Kirby Heritage II Legend and a 2012 Hoover Temp Widepath. My cloth HEPA bags of choice were the Perfect for the Lux, the OEM Kirby white cloth for the Heritage and the Crucial white bags for the Hoover.

Airflow measuring devices were the ubiquitous Baird airflow meter and a GM8901 anemometer.

Results:

The Hoover Tempo Widepath experienced a 3 CFM loss when re-using a bag and a 15 CFM loss when the bag was full. These measurements were taken at the body, not the hose end.

The Kirby Heritage II Legend experienced a 10 CFM loss when re-using a bag and a 17 CFM loss when the bag was ¾ full. As it took me several months to accumulate enough dirt for this test, I was unable to completely fill the Kirby’s bag. These measurements were taken at the body, not the hose end.

The Electrolux Olympia One experienced a 7 CFM loss at the hose end when the bag was full. I did not attempt to re-use the Perfect bag this time around.

Comments:

I found out that turning a cloth HEPA bag inside out and blowing all the dust and debris out was a very messy undertaking and I wouldn’t normally recommend it. But with airflow losses in the 3-6% (3-10 CFM) range, I have enough proof that the pores in high quality cloth bags aren’t permanently clogged—at least with my house dirt, which includes some dog hair.

I definitely was surprised that ¾ to completely full bags still only lost 7-14% (8-17 CFM). The mighty Lux 1401-B still had 79 CFM at the hose end (that’s just about what new Rainbow’s start with). Even though the eject mechanism still works in the 36-year-old beast, a full HEPA cloth bag wouldn’t trigger it, but a full 4-ply paper bag will.


Post# 352721 , Reply# 4   5/24/2016 at 02:44 (2,865 days old) by electromatik (Taylorsville, North Carolina, U.S.A.)        
What a thorough investigation!

Thanks for the time and effort in order to bring us these extremely noteworthy results.

Post# 352723 , Reply# 5   5/24/2016 at 07:22 (2,865 days old) by wyaple (Pickerington, OH)        
Thanks! And What A Wild Trip It's Been...

wyaple's profile picture
testing these machines. A little over two years ago, I set out on a journey to discover all I could about vacuum cleaners. I naturally figured that I would eventually have to start testing them in addition to learning how to rebuild them. What a ride!

Bill



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