|
Thread Number: 44056
/ Tag: Recent Vacuum Cleaners from past 20 years
What is the worst-performing vacuum cleaner that you've ever used? |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 458907 , Reply# 1 12/28/2022 at 14:46 (484 days old) by wstonehockertv (North Carolina) | ||
|
Shark and Dyson vacuums: Am I a joke to you? | ||
| Post# 458940 , Reply# 2 12/29/2022 at 12:40 (484 days old) by AmtrakSebo1997 (Vacmasterthegreats basement) | ||
This might be a controversial opinion but...
Rainbow D4. I've used one, and at first I was excited to use it, however, after maybe a few months of use, the excitement turned to frustration. I have the model that has two separate hoses, one for the power nozzle, and one for the tools. The ironic thing to me is that despite the hose not being on-board, you still have the tools on board. To me that's pretty pointless, because unless you were to detach the handle from the PN hose, which is not convenient at all, because the PN cord runs the length of the wand, handle, and hose, and is a pain to try to take off all of the cord clips that come with it, you can't use the tools when vacuuming with the PN. Speaking of the PN, despite the fact that it has a beater-bar brushroll, it's carpet cleaning was pretty lousy to me. I don't know if it's because the belt on mine was stretched, or if that's just normal, but either way that's how mine was like. Oh, and don't even get me started with the water basin, it's a hassle to fill and empty, all of that for a vacuum that probably doesn't filter any better than what I using beforehand. The one good thing I can say about it is that it can pick up water without converting it to do so, as long as you have the tool hose on, which is very nice for cleaning a kitchen with wet floors.
| ||
| Post# 458941 , Reply# 3 12/29/2022 at 12:41 (484 days old) by AmtrakSebo1997 (Vacmasterthegreats basement) | ||
|
This might be a controversial opinion but...
Rainbow D4. I've used one, and at first I was excited to use it, however, after maybe a few months of use, the excitement turned to frustration. I have the model that has two separate hoses, one for the power nozzle, and one for the tools. The ironic thing to me is that despite the hose not being on-board, you still have the tools on board. To me that's pretty pointless, because unless you were to detach the handle from the PN hose, which is not convenient at all, because the PN cord runs the length of the wand, handle, and hose, and is a pain to try to take off all of the cord clips that come with it, you can't use the tools when vacuuming with the PN. Speaking of the PN, despite the fact that it has a beater-bar brushroll, it's carpet cleaning was pretty lousy to me. I don't know if it's because the belt on mine was stretched, or if that's just normal, but either way that's how mine was like. Oh, and don't even get me started with the water basin, it's a hassle to fill and empty, all of that for a vacuum that probably doesn't filter any better than what I using beforehand. The one good thing I can say about it is that it can pick up water without converting it to do so, as long as you have the tool hose on, which is very nice for cleaning a kitchen with wet floors.
| ||
| Post# 458942 , Reply# 4 12/29/2022 at 12:41 (484 days old) by AmtrakSebo1997 (Vacmasterthegreats basement) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 458985 , Reply# 5 12/30/2022 at 14:36 (482 days old) by FanOfVacuums2 (Williamsburg, VA) | ||
That is interesting, because I have always found the Oreck XL Classics to clean carpet well for how little air they move and their lack of suction, the the Carpet and Rug Institute actually rates them quite highly in their scientific testing.
I have used lots of really bad vacuum cleaners. The worst one without a doubt was this Kenmore 115.31125310 bagless upright that did not lower enough to clean any low-pile carpet, making it completely useless on my berber carpet in my house. It should have been embarrassing for such a bad unit to be sold next to the decent vacuum cleaners, even decent bagless uprights they were selling in the 2010s. | ||
| Post# 458986 , Reply# 6 12/30/2022 at 15:46 (482 days old) by wstonehockertv (North Carolina) | ||
|
fanofvacuums2 IDK what Panasonic was thinking when that Kenmore couldn't work on Berber carpeting. Might be fine for high pile carpeting. | ||
| Post# 458989 , Reply# 7 12/30/2022 at 17:57 (482 days old) by panasonicvac (Northern Utah) | ||
wstonehockertv | ||
| Post# 458999 , Reply# 8 12/30/2022 at 20:41 (482 days old) by wstonehockertv (North Carolina) | ||
|
panasonicvac Then who made it? | ||
| Post# 459022 , Reply# 9 12/31/2022 at 14:33 (481 days old) by FanOfVacuums2 (Williamsburg, VA) | ||
|
wstonehockertv
The Kenmore model I mentioned was most definitely not manufactured by Panasonic, but rather by the Chunju Electric Company of Suzhou, China. Not all Kenmore vacuum cleaners were made by Panasonic and it has always been that way. Even way back in the days when Whirlpool was responsible for the canisters and various other models before Panasonic was in the picture, they had other manufacturers for certain vacuum cleaners such as Ryobi, Eureka, Douglas, and so forth. Other manufacturers during the Panasonic age include but is not limited to Hoover, LG, Samsung, even SEBO, and more. Nowadays, though the structure is a bit different, Cleva still does not fully manufacture all the Kenmore vacuum cleaners in their own factories, so you do have units from different manufacturers in their current lineup, though a lot are fully produced by them such as the canisters, the 31140/31150 and variants of it, the CrossOver uprights, and various others quite like with the Panasonic models. It is a complicated situation, but that is the gist of it. A good way to tell who manufactured an older Kenmore units is to look at the OEM code, which is the first three numbers in the model number. For example, you would see something like 116.31150 and the 116, being the OEM code for Panasonic and previously Whirlpool, means that it was manufactured by Panasonic, whereas if you saw one that said 125.31150, that means it was manufactured by Cleva because 125 is their assigned OEM code.
| ||
| Post# 459045 , Reply# 10 12/31/2022 at 23:34 (481 days old) by panasonicvac (Northern Utah) | ||
|
As for me, mine would be the Dirt Devil Ultra hand vac. This was my aunt's, she since sold it when she moved and I wished I would've known because I would've been more than happy to take it off her hands. Despite it being a terrible machine, I still liked the looks of it. But I'm glad they don't make them anymore.
On a side note, I'd have to agree with FanOfVacuums2 here about Orecks. At first when I was younger, I loved Oreck. Then as I grew older, I had some controversy of Oreck. But now I can honestly say that I love Oreck again, I own several now in my collection. I think they're nice machines for what they are. Simple, lightweight, easy to use, built well, reliable, US made, cleans good, and I can repair them super fast. | ||
| Post# 459067 , Reply# 11 1/1/2023 at 15:03 (480 days old) by Jo (Dallas,TX) | ||
|
Dirt devil The cheap dirt devils clog very quickly making the suction performance horrible. Anything under $100 is a joke and people should expect to be disappointed at that price point honestly. Jon | ||
| Post# 459075 , Reply# 12 1/1/2023 at 17:34 (480 days old) by human (Pines of Carolina) | ||
If had been asked this question before I found this group, I would have said an Electrolux 1205, but I now know the leaky hose was to blame. That issue been remedied with a new hose.
(Dis)honorable mention goes to the Kenmore canister that my (now ex-)wife insisted I drop 375 hard earned dollars on in 2001. Suction was fine but there was simply no excuse for its sorry construction. We had to replace the elbow on the power nozzle three times in less than two years. The last time I saw that refugee from the landfill, the elbow was held together with duct tape and zip ties. That was the beginning of my long-running and deep-seated disdain for plastic vacuum cleaners. I haven't seen it or the ex in almost 20 years and haven't missed either of them for a single minute. | ||
| Post# 459077 , Reply# 13 1/1/2023 at 17:52 (480 days old) by wstonehockertv (North Carolina) | ||
|
human A $375 Kenmore canister from 2001 is now worth half $1k. | ||
| Post# 459084 , Reply# 14 1/1/2023 at 21:11 (480 days old) by human (Pines of Carolina) | ||
|
That POS wasn't even worth anywhere near the $375 I paid for it back then. It was a total ripoff. The real irony is that it replaced her Electrolux Discovery II, which I now understand just needed a new brush roll. That would have been a hell of a lot more economical fix. Unfortunately, I was not the Electrolux aficionado then that I am now.
| ||
| Post# 459133 , Reply# 15 1/3/2023 at 13:40 (479 days old) by WilliamNilliam (Michigan) | ||
My mom had an Oreck upright and canister combo when I was growing up, I don't remember the exact model but even then I found both to be pretty mediocre. Even the second hand Kirby Sentria II she replaced it with was better.
I got this Bissell bagless upright as a moving out/Christmas gift a couple years ago, and while the cleaning power isn't the worst the the size and overall design of the bin causes it to clog constantly. And this is a machine advertised for cleaning pet hair, apparently our one cat is too much for it between my spouse and I. | ||
| Post# 459144 , Reply# 16 1/3/2023 at 21:54 (478 days old) by Eureka1998 (New York ) | ||
A surprising disappointment but...... | ||
| Forum Index: | 
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
