Thread Number: 41859  /  Tag: Brand New Vacuum Cleaners
Shark design changes in "newer" models ala Electrolux? 		[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# 442191   5/24/2021 at 22:07 (1,065 days old) by Zinda (Peoria)        

Recently I've been working on some of the less durable Shark models that have excluded the typical Navigator or Rotator names. The first thing I've seen is a much less durable design, typically trying to get the brush roll closer to the sides of the case. As a result the brush motor, belt and transfer design has been weakened and thin plastic pieces have been used resulting in breakage from normal use, (mostly from simply pushing down while trying to stand if up will put enough force on the brush roll to stress the entire belt powered drive and break parts). I did see this happen on a model that was still badged as a navigator but was a very boxxy design. I'm thinking it was a 700 series, it was about 1 year ago.

I've worked on a few others that had a 2nd goofy puffy brush roll and some rockets et .. but this week I got 2 others I haven't seen before NV341 and NV586.
Here's the point I'm trying to convey, after working on a bunch of terribly designed Electrolux models that were poorly thought out and seemed to have never been tested it developed for a real work use. I was compelled to write Electrolux and ask them if they need help? Specifically in research, testing and development since it seemed to me the either had none or nobody was doing their job.

Their vacuums went from small, strong, built to last a lifetime and out cleaned everything out there to the abominations that became large than the women using them and weighed about the same. They had useless features that did not work, they chose form over function and we're drawing up these futuristic pieces if crap that all utilized some crazy way of diverting air flow from bottom to wand but after a few uses, the valves would simply stick in the bottom position. No tolerance allowance for build up, used levers that would barely make the movement required to push them open and lacked spring pressure to close it. I found myself doing some major alterations to arm lengths and changing out springs to get consistent results.

Not what I would expect from a $400+ vacuum that was 2 years old. Even then the design had such sharp radius bends along the path that even the strongest sucking motors couldn't compensate for the tube diameter changes that occured and left clogs everywhere. But that's still not the worst thing, they were made in such a way that they hid all but a few screws. Everything had hidden snaps like a remote control. There was a challenge ahead of you on every model, they couldn't help themselves, making the worst possible service nightmare ever seen. It was guaranteed that the case would have at least 1 crack in it somewhere after it was done! They made the case him and cheap to compensate for the 40 lbs of insides twisting and turning to fit the exterior shape they designed first.

Ok so this is where Shark come into play, Electrolux is done with vacuums and acts as if they never made one before, basically they won't acknowledge any vacuums. So I'm thinking that their engineers had to start seeking work after their severAnce ran out and of course with Shark becoming a huge contender in the market, ready for some new ideas since they have beaten the hell out of the navigator and rotator, with pretty outstanding resultant I've always liked Shark for their simplistic straight forward design that lent itself to easy repairs. There was no hidden screws although they liked to use a ton of different lengths that were very close in size but the wrong one would end up puckering the plastic if you weren't careful.

Now I'm seeing hidden screws everywhere, thin plastic covers with tons of thin plastic tabs that aren't meant to come apart without marking the edges up crazy glue is now needed to restore any tabs the didn't make it because each one has to be there or it's not going to stay together tightly. I was successful on tearing apart a handle to inspect why the catch tht holds the handle in place on the wand tube was so hard to get to come off the tube. What I saw was typical bad ideas that I saw used by Electrolux and on the worst "dirt devil carpet cleaner" I quoted that because I could not call it a carpet cleaner. It was more of a loud noise maker that you filled with water and pushed it around while it did nothing. No water, no brush, no suction, simply unusable garbage. But it used the worst trigger type water valve I've ever seen and that answered why no water came out. The long shaft was made to push a valve open by tapering the tip in a way that the shafts til would slide against the case and the valve was mounted on its side, the problem was the shaft was not strong enough to remain straight, the angle of the tapered part was not enough to even move the valve open. There wasn't enough travel to get to the thicker part of the shaft. I tried altering the angle to be more aggressive and added on bit to the top so I could cut the tip to achieve this. Then it was just too much spring pressure in the valve to be able to get the shaft to stop bending along it's 3 foot long path from handle to valve. I scrapped it.


Shark is using some awful similar design to unlock their handles and wands now. They simply don't work, they have even put some Teflon looking material as a backing brace for the tip to ride against impossible to move the handle to release it. Even with prybar the part out push on will just bend and deform. I lubed it up and it's simply never going to work I know if I'm having trouble with it someone's grandma is certainly not going o be happy when they can't remove the handle wand or release the canister for lift away use.

My conclusion was drawn and I can only think that Electrolux has now started their poison on what used to be a too of the line product sold at reasonable prices prices have gone up on new junk and it has become unusable. This vacuum is dated 7-20! It's not even a year old and someone tossed it in the garbage! They didn't even care to try and get another or check for a recall, that's how disappointed they were with this product, that's exactly what happened with all the Electrolux models I had.

On a similar note I had a phantom or fantom? Commercial vacuum years ago that looked to be well built, solid and quiet. It had very poor suction and every review was terrible and all said it had poor suction. I took it apart to see if it was a design flaw, Evey last single part was lying in front of me and the very last thing
I removed was the part of the case that connected to the exhaust cavity and then through a tunnel into the HEPA filter. There is a gasket that goes between the 2 case parts, the case had 3 square holes with thin strips of plastic that acted as braces to keep the holes the same size and shape. The opening was curved and the opening on the exhaust part was the same way but opposite curve so it was less likely to loose shape from the hot air. But the problem was in the glue they used while they assembled the very 1st 2 case pieces that started the build of that vacuum. The parts didn't simply get pushed together face to face but had to be rolled into position. While they were turned into place out could no longer see the opening. The gasket had stayed in place but not on the piece that was tuning but rather stayed covering 60% of the openning. Rotating it back apart revealed that the gasket needed to be glued onto the receiving part that did not have the braces in place if it was ever going to work. So that meant the glue needed to be permanent during that one skidding into position moment. Then after that it made no diffence since it couldn't move since the pressure from the 2 case parts was so tight it couldn't move. After a few tries I compensated for the slippage and found out where the gasket needed to be positioned before sliding them together. A peak inside the HEPA filter opening showed it had 96% or so clear. After a full day of reassembly that vacuum (all 35 lbs of mostly metal parts) was one of the best vacuums I have ever used. A simple error on a gasket caused that maker to go under. They only made a few models and I had the home version as well but it was complete garbage. It had a 3/4” tube at one point for dirt to clog up. Loud, plastic was so brittle it broke into tiny bits as I smacked it on the floor trying to unclog it every 5 seconds. I still have the 1 metal piece of the 3/4" tube handle.

I really hope Shark sees these problems and takes the proper corrections needed quickly, also I hope the engineer responsible leaves the vacuum business. Ruining Electrolux is unforgivable but then Shark? No f'n way should they get anymore chances. Now I could be wrong and if you have any inside info on sharks employees please say so and confirm my suspicions or tell me it's not so (but they're probably related or old college buddies.
Thanks for reading my ramblings I just can't believe what I'm seeing, there as no vacuums that I can honestly recommend t this point in time. You know we are always being told his new technology has so much more to offer and has made our lives beter, strange how I have not seen this to be true in any way shape or form other than automobile engines have become much better and car stereo prices have finally gotten reasonable, TV's got bigger and clearer, thats only 3 things that have really improved everything else has turned to junk and dies in 3 years.

  View Full Size
Post# 442194 , Reply# 1   5/25/2021 at 05:32 (1,064 days old) by huskyvacs (Gnaw Bone, Indiana)        

huskyvacs's profile picture
I always say it, and people don't like to hear it - but the only vacuum around today that has.....

1. tried and true design
2. made out of metal and as little plastic as possible
3. rugged
4. reliable
5. simple to use and does what it is supposed to
6. no fancy gadgets and gimmicks
7. can withstand dumb owners and careless abuse
8. will last you your entire life

...is Kirby (and maybe Royal as well - but not their plastic line)

Even Sebo, TriStar, Dyson, et. al., they all have powernozzles, power wands, lots of intricate electrical pin connections running through the hoses and position sensors, circuit boards, logic boards, and all that - it adds more stuff to fail (and they do).

Post# 442196 , Reply# 2   5/25/2021 at 06:43 (1,064 days old) by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

Don't forget Sanitaire-another tried and proven design.TriStars don't have circuit boards.Same with Filter Queen.Rainbow now has boards-they didn't have before.Just hope Kirby doesn't use boards in future models!NOT NEEDED!!!



Post# 442205 , Reply# 3   5/25/2021 at 14:10 (1,064 days old) by human (Pines of Carolina)        
EXACTLY!

 human's profile picture
This thread eloquently elaborates every reason that I hate modern vacuum cleaners. They are literally built to FAIL!

Post# 442206 , Reply# 4   5/25/2021 at 14:21 (1,064 days old) by luxkid1980 (Richmond, Virginia)        
@huskyvacs

 A large portion of consumers aren't going to be willing to spend that kind of money on a new Kirby vacuum, regardless if the vacuum will last them 30 years. People are about cheap, inexpensive units that they can dispose of every 5 or less years, buy a new one, and still be ahead price wise compared to a vacuum like a Kirby. Manufacturers know this of course and make cheap vacuums to fill that niche. They generally don't care as long as they make a profit. Vacuum collectors may not mind buying a used, high quality vacuum, but many people would scoff at this. It's where we know big savings can be found!

It is kind of interesting though to see what consumers are willing to spend big money on, but smaller appliances like vacuums usually are not one of those things, especially when a consumer can go to a local store or online and buy a cheap unit. Of course, there are some pretty expensive brands around today, like Dyson, Dualit, etc. that make small appliances with hefty price tags. Even those have cost saving features.

Another consideration when buying a vacuum that manufacturers know folks are concerned about is weight. Those metal parts which make the Kirby and other premium units durable is what some older people (and others) don't like, so there's a trade off with longevity. Circuit boards are lighter and cheaper to manufacturer and the general public again typically doesn't care if their vacuum won't last more than 5 years.

Post# 442207 , Reply# 5   5/25/2021 at 14:36 (1,064 days old) by Blackheart (North Dakota)        
filter queen and circuit boards

 blackheart's profile picture
Rex, Filter Queens have had circuit boards in them since the 112A introduced in '98

Post# 442213 , Reply# 6   5/25/2021 at 15:43 (1,064 days old) by vaclab (Pickerington, Ohio)        
Most Budget Machines

 vaclab's profile picture
Are meant to be sold as quickly as possible and thrown out in a similar style. Get the latest features and/or color schemes and next year, they will make you feel "left behind", just like phones.

Bill

Post# 442240 , Reply# 7   5/26/2021 at 02:24 (1,063 days old) by tolivac (Greenville,NC)        

In the Filter Queen -what did the board do?

Post# 442241 , Reply# 8   5/26/2021 at 04:13 (1,063 days old) by Blackheart (North Dakota)        
FQ boards

 blackheart's profile picture
They were used for the two motor speeds. Unsure if they have other functions like shutting down for overheating.

  View Full Size
Post# 444058 , Reply# 9   7/22/2021 at 09:39 (1,006 days old) by Zinda (Peoria)        
I have to add a bit to this

 As of right now I still have not finished the repair on 2 Shark vacuums! The one I mentioned here was so difficult (I think it actually must have some glue holding it together) to get apart, the case suffered some chipping and just like every recent Electrolux model I took apart suffered a crack in the case while trying to find the next snap holder. Keep in mind this was a simple cord replacement job! I figured 1 hour and it would be done. I spent at least 6 hours trying to get the case apart up by the switches before I ended up prying trying to see up inside to see what was holding it together so tightly.

I have about 25 or more brand new shark cases some with upper and lower motors, all are missing brush rolls and canisters, some have switches, all handles and case parts are new. Of course hoses are gone too. They must have been used for parts, date codes are less than a year old. All are from the good shark designs where parts were interchangable and you can actually create crossover models the use canisters that were not the originals by making changes to the back piece. They made a tall and short piece that has a very slightly different canister and hose inlet port. One constricts the air flow at the inlet and one is not. Of course the canister is shorter on the restricted model, presumably to create a slowing of the air before it enters the short canister so it will do it's job and not clog the filter instantly like all canister type bagless vacuums will.

I don't know why anyone would waste their time working on such a flawed design but I have cleaned a few Dyson's and just recently got a bissell Opti something absolute garbage, typical 10 seconds if use before unclogging the inlet or the filters. I believe the record for worst performance was a dirt devil canister that could not run and suck anything for more than 5 seconds without stopping! But many Dyson's were no better and cost 20x as much plus weighed 6 times more so it's not always proportionate when cost is considered on some models.

But here's what I really can't seem to figure out, I still use my Kenmore upright that I bought new in 1985, I think I put 2 new belts on it and repaired the inlet piece due to it constantly falling over while using the hose. The suction is so incredible that you have to be very careful where you aim the nozzle. In an instant things disappear before you have a chance to see what it was. But once a bag or a shirt start up the hose the vacuum accordions the hose closed and the vacuum slides toward you with some real force. It's not a light vacuum either.

I have collected we over 100 bags for it and piles of filters, never do any maintenance and the suction remains far beyond any bagless ever made. So knowing this and having the chance to pick up a few brand new (display models) of Hoover's best bagged models from most recent designs, t series and a MAX, I have a pile of bags for them and posted them for sale, detailing the huge benefits of bagged vacuums and maintenance free use. The included bags offer over 2 years worth of use and these vacuums are made to last a lifetime of abuse as mine has. Conservatively priced at $50 and $60 each, after 2 weeks I have had zero interest in these fantastic machines. Are people really that ignorant or are they just so brainwashed by companies making crap and calling it better that they become so gulable that they believe it without ever testing anything out before drawing such bad conclusions?

I have to say that I really cannot believe that people are so foolish that they won't even ask to do a side by side test while they're here buying something that is never even consider keeping for my own use and paying the same amount of more and dealing with all the problems that bagless will encounter.

In the past I have worked at industrial fabrication shoos that built cyclones and dust collection systems, but my crown jewels were 2 cotton pickers (1 Case or IH and 1 John Deere) that I converted to cotton seeders fir farmers to work for Monsanto with their GMO research farming division. It encorporerated most aspects of cyclone technology but had to also be able to move and collapse for transport. Of course I was given no drawings or design to do this and had to figure it out as I went along. Plus I had no way of getting most of the steel I needed to perform the tasks, all ductwork was cut via hand plasma, and they changed ideas about row the rows were to be separated, making the outer and inner rows kept separate but joined them into 1 bag due to cross pollenisation. Creating modifications after completion. I will post pictures of final products here so you understand that vacuums are quite simple machines as far as I'm concerned but even these tiny versions of dust collection systems are being made with poorer designs now than they were when they miniaturized them years ago.

  Photos...       <              >      Photo 1 of 17         View Full Size
Post# 444077 , Reply# 10   7/22/2021 at 20:11 (1,006 days old) by fan-of-fans (USA)        
Circuit boards

 fan-of-fans's profile picture
My Hoover Celebrity QS has a circuit board with a silicon chip on it in the power nozzle.

My Kenmore Progressives do too.

Post# 444112 , Reply# 11   7/23/2021 at 18:52 (1,005 days old) by oliveoiltinfoil (England, UK)        

oliveoiltinfoil's profile picture
You are a vacuum repairer (from what I can gather from your story)

This is the Doctor complaining why so many people come to his surgery with health problems, aches and pains.

Dyson sell literally millions of vacuums per year, as do shark. Like it or not but our beloved Sebo, Kenmores, Kirby’s et al are squarely niche products for a very specific yet loyal customer base that has really expanded, nor do those aforementioned brands want to expand it either. And that’s okay.

Simple logic dictates you could see 20x the number of shark or Dyson or bissell products vs those lovely bagged American and German brands, this shouldn’t have to be pointed out.

I can see why it’s easy to think along those lines however, but perspective in life is a wonderful thing.

Lastly, and probably most importantly; users are generally stupid, inpatient, lazy or all 3. That would also explain why more bagless vacuums go in for faults than bagged models.


Post# 444758 , Reply# 12   8/15/2021 at 22:57 (982 days old) by TheVacuumBarn (Idaho)        
Something I’ve noticed:

I’m sure other people have seen this too, but while you typically see a lot of bagless junk in the home, when it comes to commercial environment, such as hospitals, hotels, schools, etc., you usually see high-quality commercial bag vacuum cleaners such as Advance, Sebo, Clark, older Sanitaire models, etc. seems like most of the commercial cleaning industry, with a few exceptions, scoffs at the idea of a cheap bagless vacuum cleaner. What serious janitor is going to want to wash filters every time they vacuum, Continually unclog tubing and hoses, and deal with constant part failures? I think that’s how companies like Sebo make most of their money, and that’s probably why, unlike Miele, Who tries harder to please the masses, Sebo etc have yet to come out with bagless machines, if they ever will. Personally, I understand why they don’t, and would rather that they never do. Granted, there have been a few times when i’ve seen cheap bagless machines like Sharks and Bissells in a commercial environment, and every time I do, I just kind of chuckle to myself and think, that’s not going to end well.


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