Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

http://gizmodo.com/345918/dyson-dc24-vac-sir-james-brings-his-ball-back

Two models, one small, one large :-

DC24
http://www.dyson.co.uk/store/product.asp?product=DC24-ALLFLOORS

DC25
http://www.dyson.co.uk/store/product.asp?product=DC25-ALLFLOORS

Dyson Ltd
17 January 2008
 
 
 Concentrated Technology
 
 The next generation of Dyson vacuum cleaners are mini yet mighty
 
 
The engineering challenge:
Dyson engineers have developed a new range of compact
cleaners, Dyson Baby and Dyson Ball, with the all-round performance of full-size
Dyson machines. Ideal for the UK's shrinking homes with limited space and
storage:
 
The UK has more, smaller households than ever before. A combination of an
increase in population, a decrease in the number of people per household (more
people choosing to live alone), an aging population and more people moving to
the UK all add to the squeeze.
 
 •The UK has the smallest houses per square metre than the rest of Europe.
 •Europe build houses of an average 100 sq m
 •The UK squeeze houses into just 76 sq m
 •Britain's smallest house is in Conwy, Wales. The one up - one down is
 just 3.05m by 1.8m
 •The smallest flat went on sale for £170,000, an 11ft by 7ft space in
 Chelsea, London
 •Since 1980, UK house prices have increased by 676%
 
 
Compact and lightweight:
 
DC24 Dyson Ball is a small, slim, lightweight upright that sits on a ball.
 
Conventional cleaners with fixed wheels can only move in straight lines; they're
not designed to steer. But the new Dyson DC24 sits on a ball and turns with
ease.
 
Dyson engineers have replaced wheels with a ball to give DC24 greater
manoeuvrability. The motor sits inside the ball, making it lighter in hand and
even easier to steer. With the turn of the wrist DC24 responds by swivelling its
head to nip around obstacles like furniture, children and pets around the home.
 
DC24 compresses by one-third of its height when it's not in use so it's easy to
store. Its motorised brush-bar captures even ground-in dirt and pet hair, so it
has the all-round cleaning performance of a full-size Dyson.
 
 
DC22 Dyson Baby is a compact cylinder, one-third smaller than other Dyson
cylinders.
 
Its telescopic wand packs down and its hose wraps neatly around its body for
tidy storage.
 
Baby uses the most advanced Dyson cyclone technology to capture more microscopic
dust than any other cyclone.
 
Like all Dyson machines, Dyson Baby doesn't rely on bags or filters to capture
all the dust. Instead patented Root CycloneTM technology spins dirt from the
airflow, so it doesn't lose suction.
 
Dyson engineers have taken this technology one stage further and developed core
separator technology to capture even more microscopic dirt. Dirt now goes
through three stages of separation:
 
 1. Firstly, dirt is drawn into a powerful outer cyclone. Centrifugal forces
 fling larger debris such as, pet hair and dust particles into the clear bin
 at 500Gs (the maximum G-Force the human body can take is 8Gs).
 2. A further cyclonic stage, the core separator, then removes dust particles as
 small as 0.5 microns from the airflow; particles so small you could fit 200
 of them on this full stop.
 3. Finally, a cluster of smaller, even faster cyclones generate centrifugal
 forces of up to 150,000G - extracting particles as small as mould and
 bacteria.
 
Hygienic and allergy friendly: Both machines have a trigger bin-emptying system.
This means with the press of a button, all the dust and dirt can be emptied
directly into the bin.
 
All Dyson machines are approved by the British Allergy Foundation. The air
emitted from a Dyson vacuum cleaner has up to 150 times less bacteria, mould and
allergens than the room's ambient air. Clean and allergy friendly.
 
Robust: They may be compact, but they are tough. Dyson engineers have put these
vacuum cleaners through their paces to make sure they are up to the most
rigorous cleaning challenge. Not only are they made from the toughest materials
(the bin is made from the same material as riot shields) - they have been
dropped down stairs and rolled over 1,000 miles (1,600km) - that's as far as
London to Helsinki as the crow flies.
 
No bags, no extra costs: Unlike bagged vacuums which keep costing, Dyson
machines have no bags - and come with lifetime washable filters - so no extra
running costs.
 
 
 ends
 
 
For further information please contact the Dyson Press Office
laura.brock@dyson.com 020 7833 8244
 
 
 
Notes to editors:
 
Instore from 1 March 2008
 
Stockist details can be found at www.dyson.co.uk or call 0800 279 5127

Hi M00seUK

A bit of a surprise from Dyson!  I didn't expect the ball to be used in 2 vacs in one go, 3 launches in one go.  I see they don't class the DC18 in with the rest of the 'Ball' family!  DC24 looks like a replacement for the DC18 slim!  Again no mention of the DDM in both of the DC24 or DC25 and no use of the Core Cyclone Technology!  HEPA standard on the DC24!  The DC24 do not mention motor watts but has the smae airwatts as the DC25 both 220 AW.   Looks like the post motor filter is in the ball it's self this time!

DC18

Wow, I never saw this coming.  I had hoped they would redo the Ball design sometime, but I didn't think it would be this soon!  The Gizmodo site shows the price in dollars so I assume they will also be brought here.  Wish they had incorporated Level 3 technology and the DDM into these models, though, but hey, you can't have everything at once.

What I see both of them DO have is the much-needed center suction channel in the nozzle...take that, DC15 haters!

Again, I just love the fact that these new models are even better.  One of these days (and I predict in the near future), all of these improvements will come back to bite those dead-set against Dyson in the rear end, in a very BIG way.  They will have nothing to go against anymore; it will be funny about 10 years from now when we will still see the same old drivel about the DC07/14's poor performance, or how the DC15 can't hold a piece of paper to the nozzle ;-)

DC18 wrote:

Hi DC18,
It's a little frustrating not to be able to see the finer details! You could be right re: post motor filter. It appears that they've further refined the construction of 'The Ball' arrangement, which will hopefully mean that they can maintain a lower price point. Good to see the smaller / lighter version too.

Hi M00seUK

It is frustrating but there is some detail on the web. Click on explore features on the DC24 or DC25 and it gives you a inside exploded shot of the new ball setup on these models!

I have to say the price points on them are very good with the DC24 being cheaper than the DC18 and the DC25 the same price!

Seems there is no offical launch on these!?

DC18

We now have the two...

Acerone wrote:
I saw your message and checked the Dyson website now, glad to see they updated their pages.  Now the question is, when will we ever see the DDM?  If not, I wonder if a DC12 or 22 can be imported here from Japan?  Even though Japan has different voltage (IIRC even less than the US, 100 volts or something like that), I was told it's just a matter of switching the DDM's control board out with one that *will* work.  But then that also adds the question on where and how to get a hold of one, and since DDM technology isn't currently in the US...

Both the DC24 and 25 look very tempting, and they're priced less than the DC15 which surprised me.  Assuming that both are improvements over the DC15 (which I hope they are), I wonder if prospective customers will know that they are better?

Hello,

I took some screen captures of the DC24 being demonstrated on Gizmodo.com and one enlarged, "exploded view" of the ball/housing.  The image hosting site I used removed some quality of the photos and so there not as good as I hoped.  View here.      DIB

  < It seems easy for Dyson to get good press.  More.

Doh! 'Beat me, I was just about to post the same image! It's the first that gives you an idea of it's size.
It's interesting to see the way PR works in this web world. For their video, Gizmodo much have had a hands-on with the machine at least a few days before the launch embargo.

I don't know about others but I'm guessing that the test team at Consumer Reports can't wait to get the DC24 and 25 in its sights.  It should be very interesting. 

CR has taken dyson head on for producing high priced vacuum products with more sizzle than substance.  The mommie and baby ball's precursors [the Ball DC15 and Slim DC18] are not among CR's favorites.  Quite the contrary.  The DC15 gets a poor rating for pet hair pick up and is called a waste of consumers' $500 by CR.  The DC18 Slim is heckled by CR in favor of the much better time tested $60 HOOVER Tempo.  Jaydee's new generation of mommie and baby ball vacuums are destined to be scrutinized closely by CR for function and performance.    Count on it.  Quite possibly as a result of the CR reviews the mommie and baby ball uprights could well be the laughing stock of the industry in the USA.  And win a reputation for jaydee as a brilliant inventor who can't tie his own shoes.

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

My,My,My, How Desperate Sir Jimmy and the Boy wonders in r&d have become,bringing back the ball [thats already a failure],and trying to fool the consumer into thinking it's something new.I Quess they had to find a place to unload all the wheels left over from the ballbarrow.They look like they need to do research in other markets,they should look into desinger underwear,and get out of the vacuum market,and stop embarrising themselves.

MOLE

Motorhead wrote:
I don't know about others but I'm guessing that the test team at Consumer Reports can't wait to get the DC24 and 25 in its sights.  It should be very interesting. 

CR has taken dyson head on for producing high priced vacuum products with more sizzle than substance.  The mommie and baby ball's precursors [the Ball DC15 and Slim DC18] are not among CR's favorites.  Quite the contrary.  The DC15 gets a poor rating for pet hair pick up and is called a waste of consumers' $500 by CR.  The DC18 Slim is heckled by CR in favor of the much better time tested $60 HOOVER Tempo.  Jaydee's new generation of mommie and baby ball vacuums are destined to be scrutinized closely by CR for function and performance.    Count on it.  Quite possibly as a result of the CR reviews the mommie and baby ball uprights could well be the laughing stock of the industry in the USA.  And win a reputation for jaydee as a brilliant inventor who can't tie his own shoes.

Carmine D.

Motorhead wrote:

When will the boneheads at DYSOON realize that the upright market is loosing ground and at a very fast pace,They will never make it in the canister market,they dont know how to.They better start chasing the real low end market if they still want to be a player.The dc21,22,23, will be the BUTT of many industry jokes.

TIme AND THE CONSUMER WILL REALLY TELL THEM HOW INNOVATIVE THEY ARE.

Can I have the dyson propaganda money now

MOLE

  <  Story here.

Above and below are snaps from a Dyson.co.uk flash movie.  It is much easier to view stills versus a looping movie. Below, "exploded view" can be seen in a  JUMBO size.        DIB

CarmineD wrote:
Hi Carmine,

It will be interesting what CR says.  I do agree with what you said about the ratings, etc., *not* because CR is a reliable source, but because there will undoubtedly be buyers out there that take CR's ratings to be the gospel.  That right there will be the main influence, just because they don't know any better.  Sure, the DC15 was certainly not the best, but it was also far from the worst.  Why CR didn't like the DC18 is beyond me; once again part of their inconsistent ratings.  Aside from the small bin capacity, I really don't see anything wrong with it.  In one issue the DC18 was covered in their "claim check" up front and they bashed it there as well.  Again, I believe CR doesn't like it simply because it's a Dyson.  And a Dyson will never occupy their top-rated position for that reason, no matter how good it is.  That's just how they are. 

With the Tempo, "time-tested" could very well be synonymous with "outdated".  The Hoover Windtunnel/Tempo is like the Chevrolet Venture/Uplander of vacuums, for lack of a better comparison other than the fact that they are from the same year.  Sure, with a few cosmetic improvements they both can look reasonably modern (and even that's stretching it), but underneath it's the same old outdated design from 1996 that really wasn't that great in the first place.  Besides, I'm glad to report that we're out of the phase where the majority of vacuums out there are still made of grainy-textured black plastic like the 90's and the early part of this decade.  The only difference, obviously, is that CR likes the Tempo and hates the Uplander ;-)

-MH

Hi DIB

Thanks for posting the pictures and links.   The 'freeze frames' from the Gizmodo web site are good.  The pictures with James Dyson gives a better idea of size of these machines, the DC25 can not be that much bigger!  Looking at the brush bar on the DC24 and DC25 it looks like one piece which comes out one end unlike the DC15 and DC18 which had 2 pieces.  Post motor filter in the ball itself!  The ball looks bigger in the pictures to the original DC15!  These 2 new Ball Machines have been designed to be more sleek on the outside which gives the nozzle better clearance...not as slim as the DC18 at the base!  The DC24 and DC25 (and DC22) like impressive!

DC18

Motorhead wrote:

Not at all.  Synonymous with "classic."  Performance and price never go out of date.  It gets better with age.  Especially when the "latest and greatest" supposed innvovative competitors can't match up in price and/or performance. 

I don't agree that Consumer Reports is prejudiced against dyson by name and/or products.  I believe more accurately that CR is prejudiced against bagless machines and high priced-low to mediocre performing vacuums.  I empathize with CR and I fully understand its perspective and frame of reference. 

I believe that CR, especially over the last several decades, focuses on brand name vacuums sold by big box retail stores.  Sure Kirby, RICCAR, ORECK, Miele, SEBO, Filter Queen and Rainbow get reviewed continually.  Because of historical reasons and to round out the venue.  But, by and large CR caters to the likes and dislikes of consumers who shop at the big box retailers for vacuums.  This is dyson's sales venue of choice.  The ratings and rankings of vacuums are geared toward their interests and concerns.  Not vacuum collectors, vacuum enthusiasts, vacuum historians, and vacuum cleaner industry experts and professionals.  Hence, once again I say that this is the reason I never subscribe to CR except to buy an occasional monthly edition when the need arises. 

Carmine D.

This link below towards the end says the DC24 Ball does not come with a manual!! (also includes a link to an interview with Sir James Dyson)

http://www.dwell.com/daily/blog/13864047.html

DC18

DC18,

I'm glad you liked my info.  I indeed enjoyed reading and listening to the interview you posted, especially when James thru his vacuum to prove it was built tuff.  I was good to hear how respectful the interviewer was to James.  I read a press relase today that said Dyson has sold 24 million vacuums to date.        DIB

DIB

Just a few vacuums sold then!! I'm sure with these 3 new models a few more will be sold.  The DC24, DC25 and DC22 will do well in the UK.  Price point sare very good as well, the DC24 and DC25 not being anywhere near the original DC15 Ball.  Plus they are around the usual price points which is good!   Even though they are smaller and slim they are still built the same quality or course as the bigger models!  Which James Dyson proved to the interviewer! 

I'm interested to see all 3 models but in particular the DC24 and DC25 with especially the new nozzle on them!  From the first pictures the brush density on the brush bar looks the same as the DC15/DC18!  That aside the whole nozzle setup is completely new so will be interesting to see!

DC18

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Since dyson vacuums have been sold worldwide since 1984, that amounts to about 1 Million vacuums a year.  The annual number of new vacuums sold in the USA is about 20 Million, according to Consumer Reports.  And this number has been fairly consistent for the last 5 years counting.

To put the numbers in another perspective, Dirt Devil which has been selling its plastic body "bagged" (paper optional) handcleaners for about the same period of time, has sold over 25 million to date, according to Dirt Devil.  Just handcleaners.   In 2006, Dirt Devil was the leading seller of new vacuums in the USA for the period January 1-June 30, 2006, according to NPD.   NOT including its handcleaners.  Just vacuums, uprights and/or canisters.

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Yay, was good to listen to an interview for once - thanks for the link. James was saying that they're nearly there on their robot cleaner (although that's been the company line for quite some time!). Also in the news this week was the announcement of a break-through in Li-ion technologies :-

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/17/586070.aspx

Regardless of the manufacturer, if they truly can improve batteries by this level, it will make high performance, affordable robot cleaners a reality.

Yeah the Robot vacuum was mention.  From what James Dyson said he wants to do is engineer a robotic vacuum that gives the same cleaning performance as his full size vacuums.  This alone will need a lot of battery power.  Interesting link - thanks M00seUK, on new battery technology.  Hope the Dyson Robotic vacuum will emerge sometime soon!

DC18

DC18 wrote:

'Mentioned in this forum before... Dyson (and others) have patents on robot cleaners that can handle mains-powered cables in the course of their 'run'. Not as fun or as practical as using a battery, but would allow for a deep clean at a low cost.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DC18,

I'm glad you liked my info.  I indeed enjoyed reading and listening to the interview you posted, especially when James thru his vacuum to prove it was built tuff.  I was good to hear how respectful the interviewer was to James.  I read a press relase today that said Dyson has sold 24 million vacuums to date.        DIB

CarmineD wrote:

You’re unimpressed with James’ numbers no matter how it’s presented.  I am.        DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

It's simple to understand: It takes more to impress me.  

If the press release [which you didn't share] said dyson sold 24 million new vacuums in the UK alone in 23 years, I would not be impressed.   Why?  The latter, if it were true and we know it is not, would even be an unimpressive number of new vacuum sales in the UK, considering the UK is dyson's country of origin.  Has dyson impressed buyers in the UK with any of his products' sales?  Vacuums? Washers?  Airblades?  I don't think so.  Quite the contrary.  Sales in his own country of his products are unimpressive.  IMHO.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
I have to disagree there.  The Hoover 60-series is classic...it's old enough to be classic.  Even the Convertible series could be considered classic.  The Windtunnel, however, is 12 years old and is outdated (I'd say just plain tired), CR ratings notwithstanding.  TTI will eventually see that it's not selling like it should and slowly drop the design, one by one.  It will be interesting to see what particular model will go first, it's only a matter of time.  No one wants grainy plastic vacuums when they can get something sleek and MODERN, the Uplander comparison bodes well.  Like I said, I never thought it was that great, when Eureka was starting to dabble in bagless and Fantom had been on the scene for a few years Hoover simply re-introduced a clean-air upright.  The first thing I thought when it came out was "about time Hoover did that!"  I'll give them this, they did get the clean-air design right that time.  Took them long enough, though, but at least the WT's handle doesn't wobble and the bags don't look upside down when they're installed.  There are just better machines out there both in construction and performance, even Hoover's OWN offerings!  They have the "sleek look" going on their new models and those seem to have done well.  I've used the Mach series bagless before.  Not an exact copy of the cyclonic design, so there are a few shortcomings, but I didn't think they were bad cleaners overall.  They also felt sturdy with their telescopic metal handle; I know for a fact the WindTunnel doesn't feel like a sturdy machine.  Again, something about that grainy plastic!

I never said CR was prejudiced against Dyson, I know they don't care for bagless in general...that was obvious to me years ago when they tested the Fantom and it still holds true.  They hated bagless then, they hate it now (although their tolerance has improved somewhat over the years).  However, I find it quite odd when the DC17 is #10, and both Kenmore and Hoover FILTERED bagless cleaners are in the top 5.  Something isn't right there.  There's just no possible way those could maintain performance long enough to get those scores!  Especially with all of the fine test dirt, etc.

-MH

The HOOVER WT, whether you like the looks or not, is the premier rug cleaning and grooming upright vacuum on the market FOR ALL TIME [IMHO].  It is the gold standard of carpet cleaning.  Its retail cost is $150 (bagged).  Supreme model. 

For uprights and rug cleaning, the HOOVER Tempo (bagged) for $60 outperforms ALL upright dysons on the market today including the DC17 which sells for $549.  The TEMPO weighs 16 pounds and the DC17 weighs 21.

When a $60 upright vacuum, albeit with a 10 year old form and function, consistently is better rated for rug cleaning than the latest and greatest innovative vacuums selling for 10 times as much, IT IS A classic vacuum.  Not because of age.  Because of the performance and price. 

Carmine D.

Hi,

My feeling re CR and bagless vacuums is that the issue of "tidy" emptying is still solved.  Mind you, this can be no different than what was going on with vacuums with permanent bags way back in the day that led to the welcoming of disposable dust bags.  CR was and reamined highly critical of disposable dust bags with wide mouths or that for whatever reason, by way of manner of removal, etc., promoted notable exposure to dust.  MH, I know your going to tell me that that problem is minimized by frequent emptying, and I thoroughly agree, but again I say the average consumer is out to merely buy another tool to facilitate care of the home.  In light of that, the issue is and has always been -- what's simple, what's easy.  There are those that may find stopping to empty their cleaner several times during cleaning day or having to fuss around with plastic bags to dump full containers into a bit bothersome.

Where I personally might not be overly bothered by the keeping of a Rainbow or even the simpler washing of filters now and then there are lots of people who can't be bothered with it.  The realities of maintenance are usually skirted when a sale is in the process and a lot of buyers of bagless machines are left to think that it will be business as usual the same way it was the bagged vacuums they'd been familiar with.

I don't think CR is particularly biased re bagless just, in this at least, aware of the consumer's desire for not only what's affordable but also easy.

My greatest fear for Hoover is that to TTI it may just be a name to sell.  When the name is finally run down, they will either find some alleged new innovation with a new name or buy up another old name and ride on it ontil they run it into the ground as well.  The Hoover we knew was an organization that appeared to bear a semblance of pride in the product it put forth and sales came.  It took risks on ideas. The market today is not interested in risk but in making money which means you sell anything you've got any way you can sell it.  Not a bright picture for consumers.

Best,

Venson

Venson wrote:
Hi Venson,

I agree.  While frequent emptying doesn't eliminate the problem completely (especially on fine dust pickup), it does help quite a bit I've found.  The way I see it is one small step at a time.  It will be solved eventually, making the dustcloud a thing of the past.  Look how far we've come already, first the cloth shakeout bag, then the disposable bags, now the bin. 

Regarding Hoover, I don't think TTI is going to do that to the brand, at least that wasn't the initial impression I got.  They seem to have picked up where Hoover left off, continuing existing machines and using a proprietary design on the new models...no "rebadged Dirt Devils" as we had all feared.  I predict in the very near future, TTI/Hoover will put much of their effort into the dual-cyclonic Mach series design in order to compete with Dyson and others that use a true cyclonic design, i.e. Bissell and LG/Kenmore.  But that's just a wild guess. 

Hi DIB,

Great pictures and information you provided about these as always, especially the inner workings of the Ball up close.  And it's still mind-boggling seeing the compact size of the DC22!  The sales figures are impressive as well, any way you look at it.  We know that James Dyson has been designing vacuums since 1983 (24 years right there to the end of '07).  That's all well and good and worth mentioning in the press release, but we can't really get a good yearly production average out of that because I'm willing to bet he did not sell very many machines in the early years.  So saying 1 million machines per year would be just a *bit* inaccurate.  The yearly sales figures are likely very staggered in reality.  Besides, I know Dyson has been more successful than that, especially in recent years ;-)

Just out of curiosity, how long have machines produced under the Dyson brandname existed in the UK?  I want to say 1990 but I'm probably wrong.

-MH

Motorhead wrote:

The dyson G-force sold door to door starting in 1983.  From 1982-84 dyson tried to sell the design to European firms.  No luck.  He sold the rights to an American firm in 1984.  The buyer pulled out.  Dyson took it to Japan and it was successful.  Dyson sued his former American licensee for patent infringement over a machine brought out after the breakup.  It was settled and with the royalties dyson built the 1992 Malmesbury plant.  Dyson's dual cyclone in both upright and canister was launched in the UK in 1993.  You can say that the lawsuit proceeds financed dyson's vacuum launch.

The dyson sales have not been consistently one million a year.  But for lack of the sales data and statistics, which jaydee holds close to his vest, an average can only be estimated by doing the simple math.  Units divided by years.  You can extrapolate the sales number further to the countries where the products are sold.  This further reduces market share by units in any one geographic location.  If I had to venture a guess, I'd say Japan would be dyson's best vacuum sales market [not the UK as one may think]. Quite the contrary only one third of the Brits buy dysons every year.  So the majority of Brits buy and use another brand vacuum not dyson.

Carmine D.

  <  New York Times.

There was a bagless cleaner sold via the "Innovations" Catalogue in 1988/89 (small technology catalogue, normally enclosed with the weekend papers).

I think this machine had the dry-powder cleaning function. It was rather expensive, about double that of the Hoovers and Electroluxes at the time.

The trouble is, I cannot remember if it was sold as  "Dyson" or if it was one of those "Iona" imported cleaners. (I believe some were imported, am I correct?)

Baby dyson ball won't get under furniture, beds, sofa, and cushion chairs.  Not with that huge monstrosity of a ball wheel.  Ditch the ball wheel, make the dirt bin larger, put some rear wheels on the power head, drop the price by half, and it will sell a million units in the first year in the USA.

Carmine D.

Trilobite wrote:
I remember those.  Here it was sold as the NovaDry, and then later the Capture Drytech machine.  One of the things I found interesting about these was that the instructions said that it was not to be used as a regular vacuum cleaner.  This was because the suction inlet/ducting was a small diameter...it could handle the dry powder (and the debris within) but not larger dirt.  I found this out later.

-MH

CarmineD wrote:
Hi DIB,

Again, great information.  This picture clearly shows the small size of the machine; I couldn't really tell from watching the Gizmodo video or looking at the website.  Very neat, the more I see it the more I want one.  If it had the DDM I'd spring for one in a split-second. 

Hi Carmine,

The reason for the large ball wheel is probably because that the motor is contained within (and the motor's large size).  The reason the Slim has a smaller ball, I believe, is that the motor is mounted differently.  One way they *could* possibly make the ball smaller on the DC24 is to put a DDM in it.  I understand the DDM is smaller and since it turns at such a high speed, it does not need to have a large fan.  Since it's a small machine it would be the perfect candidate for the DDM.  Then again, that's just my wishful thinking for a DDM-equipped US machine taking over ;-)

-MH

So does the Dyson DC25 use Core Seperation?  If not, why?  And furthermore, what's with the design of the motorhead; it looks like it has a dual brushroll set-up going on.  Also, isn't the DC24 a bit of a redundancy, especially next to the DC18?  Overall, not bad for a heavily redesigned DC15, however, I would also like to see the DC17 brushroll, Level 3/Core Seperation, and possibly the DDM on a Dyson Ball model one of these days.  But for now, I will be sticking with my DC18.

Update:  I just read on a retailers site that the DC25 only weight 12 pounds; very impressive.  It is listed as a pre-order item only for $499, and they say it will ship in mid-March....Basically, the DC18 has nothing that stands out.

Motorhead wrote:

Probably so.  For a lightweight supposedly quick and easy daily user, the huge monster mounted ball wheel defeats the baby dyson ball purpose.  It limits the vacuum's usage rather than increasing it which is the purpose of the ball: More manueverability.  Not under the bed, furniture and low cushionn chairs.  User still has to move the furniture out of the way to clean underneath.  I'd use the $35 HOOVER Cordless Slider and/or Oreck Classic. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
I really don't think people vacuum blindly under furniture/beds blindly; there is always rubbish like coins, socks, small toys, or other large debris than can cause serious damage to your machine.  I would seriously think that people who operate $300-$600 vacuum cleaners would be more mindful of that than someone who could care less about maintaining a working vacuum cleaner and regularly cycle through $50 bargain vacs.  I always move my furniture/beds before vacuuming the carpet under them, or get down and inspect the floor underneath with the cleaning wand in hand to clean under those hard to reach areas.  As long as the Dyson Ball vacs have that low profile motorhead that can roll under extruded kitchen/bathroom cabinets, I could care less if I can't blindly ram it under a couch or a bed, because IMO, that's asking for trouble.

iMacDaddy wrote:

Different strokes for different folks.

I have a English yellow lab who sheds year round.  And a dear Wife who has sinus and allergy issues year round.  Our bedrooms are carpetted.  The lab's hair gets under the bed and bedroom furniture daily.  I wouldn't want to move the bed and bedroom furniture weekly to vacuum up the hair and dust.  Like most, there are books, TV and radios, clocks, clothes, portraits and jewelry weighing down the pieces.  Hair and dust [did I mention I live in the desert] always gather in the nooks and crannies up close to the base board and wall near the bed and furniture and around the legs.  I wouldn't want to move the bed and furniture out weekly to use a $500-$600 upright vacuum to clean underneath.  I don't have the time.  Let alone my dear Wife who spends most her time with our 2 grand daughters [and another on the way].

Instead, I use the $35 HOOVER Slider [weighs 2-3 pounds with a revolving brush roll and no cord] /$150 Oreck [weighs 8 pounds] AT LEAST once a week to get the dog hair and dust that inevitably accumulates under the beds and furniture.  And throughout the year, usually seasonally, I'll move the matress and bed and bedroom furniture to do more thorough cleaning.  In part to make sure there are no big and little items under there so I can continue to do my weekly vacuuming in these out of sight places. 

My dear Wife uses the Slider and Oreck for the same reasons.  And she loathes vacuuming with a passion.  If she had to move the furniture and bed to vacuum under with the $400 dyson DC07 pink, she wouldn't.  She can't.  She uses the Slider to vacuum the lab hair on the beds' comforters [our lab has the run of the house and likes to sleep alot on the beds.  She's old like me].  CAn't do that with the baby dyson ball.  Slider works very well.   My dear Wife loves me in part for these vacuums.  Makes her life much easier.  And mine too.  Happy Wife, happy life.

I guess that's why they call it a "Slider."  And not a slammer, ball, and/or rammer.  And they call the Oreck: Simply Amazing!

Carmine D.

Carmine,

Is it my imagination or has low clearance height in regard to upright vacuums become a none-issue for selling them? 

Venson

Hi Guy's

I have a question,what is the benefit to the customer,if the machine uses the digital motor,do you really think the customer cares?The reason i say this is because MIELE touts it's vortec motor,it's a single fan carbons mounted on the top instead of the bottom with the conical fan,does the consumer really care?.The d.d.m has to be controlled by a computor like rexairs . I would not even venture to quess what the computor cost is and they have been known to fail,The regular e series motor replacement is over 425.00.

God knows how much a motor and computor board change would cost.But i would think a 20.00 carbon brush replacement is a lot more friendly to the customer.

This industry is overteching itself...........It's to the point of insanity.............

MOLE

Venson wrote:

Hello Venson:

Yes, to a degree.  In part, due to on-board tools on uprights which are a relatively recent development for the upright vacuum industry.  HOOVER Dial started in the early 60's.  But by and large other makers were later.  The 80's.  And its spawned a new venue of daily users: The lites, nanos, etc.  The Regina Electrikbroom was very popular for decades in large part because users found them quick and easy to use in the hard to get out-of-sight places. Oreck and RICCAR-Simplicity catered to these customers cleaning needs for years and now too the lightweights both bagged and bagless. 

Carmine D.

mole wrote:

Mole:

I agree with you.  Hi-tech motors are transparent to end users.  They can care less.  What's important to them is less weight, good performace, easy to use and store, and now most especially PRICE. 

Carmine D. 

Hi Mole,

If digital motor technology could produce beneficial effects by way of increased power, less unit weight, increased dust capacity or lower and simplify repair matters (meaning consumer executable motor changes) I'd say yes the public would be very interested.  Are we talking the same Dyson motor that is also said to be of lesser size?  Anyway . . .

The idea of a "motor module" was pushed some time in the last century by Shetland Lewyt but did appear to gain much interest and Shetland Lewyt, I think, was just about dead in the water by the 1980's.  In any event the idea of an affordable motor/fan unit that could be ordered online or by phone call and then simply be dropped into your vacuum and locked in much the same as you'd pop in a circuit board or RAM chips into your computer would be great.  Too great I think.  I don't think established service suppliers would appreciate it much.

Miele's motor design is interesting and I think a good pitch point but as always, price can soon kill interest in innovation.

Venson

Venson wrote:

The Dyson Digital Motor can apparently produce a third more suction power than a conventional motor. The new motor is very small in comparison to a conventional one. The Digital motor is supposedly more robust than a standard motor; carbon brushes and armatures being, supposedly, the reason for most failures.

It could be said that Nilfisk have a drop-in motor on their GS80 series machines: motor drops in, locks into place, plug in the flex, and away we go!

As for Miele's motor, I think it is just another variation on what has gone before. Most motors that I have seen have had the fan(s), then the armature, then the carbon brushes.  The carbon brushes would get the heat in this arrangement.

Miele has the fan(s), brushes, then the armature. The carbon brushes run cooler in this arrangement.

However, the Hoover 'Powerglide' S4256 cylinder that I once owned, I'm sure had a reverse positioning of the fans to the motor: carbon brushes, armature, then the fans. The filtered air was sucked over the brushes, over the armature and expelled from the fans. This was quite a noisy cleaner.

Yes Trilobit