Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

How can Mr Oreck,offer a 21 year warranty ,this must be one hell of a product

MOLE

DC18 wrote:

That's my point.  Scatter your time, money, effort and resources for years in too many different unrelated products and what do you get?  Mediocre and unsuccessful product results.  And not one signature product in any.   

Oreck on the other hand focused its time and attention on one product: Lightweight Vacuums.  And has been extremely successful.  And branched out into other venues.  Including a decent air purifier.  Simply amazing!

Carmine D.

DC18 wrote:

Oreck believes that it has a better vacuum than dyson and wants others to know why.  If you believe in your product and are willing to match it up against the competition head to head, why not?  What's wrong with doing so if you are honest and accurate in your methods and means?  Let consumers decide for themselves what is the best vacuum for them based on all the facts. 

Carmine D.

DC18 wrote:

Just like the daily usage of an Oreck, if you use the irobot daily to vacuum up the surface dirt, then  it doesn't become imbedded.  And adding a weekly/biweekly thorough vacuuming from a full size upright/tank/cann to the daily usage of an irobot/Oreck complements household cleaning, vacuuming and grooming.  With less effort, energy and time.

Carmine D.

DC18 wrote:

DC

I have no intentions of getting into a Dyson v __________ debate, but I would like to make a few points on my own as a simple end user.  Not a vacuum professional, not a collector, just a plain old joe that pushes a vac on a regular basis.

Your last sentence I will most agree with.  To compare a full size vac to a compact is like comparing a big SUV to a Pinto.  What I think Dave Oreck is trying to do is to let the public know is that the Oreck is a viable alternative to larger vacuums, especially for people who have limited physical abilities.  Though I question this in practice, I also know that there are many who would at give the rug a whack with a Oreck daily or weekly, whereas they would hesitate to drag out a Rainbow, Kirby, Dyson, or other heavy machine on a less frequent basis--thus it is a viable alternative.  I think it comes down to practicallity.  Something that will be used on a regular basis is more effective than something that is rarely used. 

With that said I would like to respond, again as just a user to some of your other points.

3.  Why a need for a light?  For those of us with limited or diminishing eyesight the headlight helps us see items that we would otherwise miss.  The light on the vac which is closer to the work area will illuminate a pin or needle, paper clip or penny faster than room light alone especially if there is little contrast between the item and the carpet being cleaned.  I like the headlight feature. Then again I have always had one, and this is what I am used to which is true of many American's.

9.  Energy Usage--As an end user I really don't care.  I just want to pull the darn thing out of it's hiding place, and I expect it to do the job I bought it for.  I never look at the watts it consumes unless it's a light bulb.  In the end I feel it is rather insignificant.  To further that point, I don't know how much electricity my range, or microwave uses. they just have to get the job done.

10.  Dirt storage.  The purpose of the vacuum is to get the dirt out of your house, however, I don't want to have to see it everytime I vacuum.  I would rather take a nice tidy bag and usher it out of my home for good.    I have a Kirby Omega that you can dump the emptor on a newspaper when I feel the need to see the dog hair.  (Again this is preference).

11.  Environmental issues?  Ok I don't buy this one in any form.  Bags are usually paper, which is biodegradeable, dirt in the bag is after all dirt.  I don't see a big impact personally.  Belts--Never have to be replaced? don't buy it.  All parts will wear.  To be correctly advertised I believe it should say "No user replaceable parts" but we all know they have to be replaced sometime.

I will add a couple of mine why I choose a USA built machine.

1.  It's built by someone that can actually afford to own it in the end, not some poor child that doesn't even have electricity in their home, and would have no use for the machine even if they had a disposable income because their home has a dirt floor.  ( I guess this is a fall back to Henry Ford and the Model T, but the worker who builds a machine should be able to own one.   (This excludeds Mercedes and Rolls, these are pretty low volume anyway, and not U.S. made.)

2.  Local service--When something does go wrong, and lets admit that anything made by man will eventually break.  I can take my vac to a local shop, in most cases have a nice chat while it is being repaired and then take it back home.  I don't have to pack it up in a box, send it to a "service center" and wait 12 weeks for them to tell me they aren't   going to fix my piece of plastic and I will have to drop bill or so to get it back.

Let me again stress that I am  responding to your post because you had some very valid points not because I disagree with you. I just want to expand on what the think is from a mere consumer's point of view.

Just,

As one consumer to another, I thank you.

Venson

On a hunch, I decided to Google both "Dyson vs. Oreck" and "Oreck vs. Dyson" and see what I came up with. 

The results?  Blog site #1
                         Blog site #2
                         Forum thread #1
                         Forum thread #2
                         And lastly, an Amazon review.

What can I say?  The proof is in the pudding (or in this case, the pictures).  I got similar results when Googling "Dyson Oreck comparison".

Notice on the two threads on two different forums, you tend to see a few people who had bad experiences with Dysons, but the number of people who praise the Dyson far outweighs that.

I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to prove.  I missed your point.  Is it that some users like their dysons and others like their Orecks.  So what?  Specifically, in one review you citted an old as is hand-me-down Oreck in the family for almost a generation was matched up to a new dyson, and the grandson who inherited the old Oreck liked the new dyson better.  Wow!  I'm impressed with that finding and conclusion.  So what?

I'll trust my experiences with the Oreck XL Classic and the DC07 pink IN MY HOME in addition to the Consumer Reports' findings over the goofy links you provided.  AND.................

Furthermore, and more importantly, both the builder and subcontractors who supplied and installed the Mohawk carpets in my current Las Vegas home and in all the other homes like it in my community [about 3,000 in total] expressly warn and discourage [AND STILL DO] ALL the homeowners from buying and using ANY DYSON VACUUMS on their carpets in these homes.  Every month at homeowner seminars on the care of the floors and carpets, they put out the warnings and recommendations.  The last of the new houses are being sold now and the community will be finished.

ALWAYS recommended by them to all the attendees are HOOVER uprights and Orecks.  Why?  For personal and professional reasons AND the Carpet and Rug Institute of America certifications for both HOOVER and Oreck vacuums.  AND NOT FOR ANY DYSONS. 

Now, please tell us again what you were stating about the proof in the pudding an/or anywhere else?  I missed it in those silly links you cited.

Carmine D.

It proves that from an "average buyer" standpoint (not any tests from consumer organizations benefiting from said tests, vac shop "reviews", etc.), the Dyson does appear to be better than the Oreck (do a Google search like I did and see what you come up with, the results will be the same), AS WELL as the fact that it spreads through word of mouth!  Look in those posts, blogs, etc. and there will always be some relative, acquaintance, etc. praising it.  I don't think I've ever heard anyone talking about their Oreck, Hoover, Dirt Devil, you name it that way.  You don't have to take it seriously to see it's THERE. 

Whether or not any vacuum is certified or endorsed by organizations such as the "Carpet and Rug Institute of America" is both irrelevant and pointless.  That certification for Hoovers and Orecks, as well as the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America certification for Dysons (trying not to be one-sided here) does not mean anything in the end, just an advertising gimmick.  Speaking of which, CR brought the AAFA "Certification" to light a couple of years ago in their test of air purifiers, citing the endorsement of the useless Ionic Breeze as an example.

-MH

Motorhead wrote:

Why would I want to do any search and any research, when I've used both a DC07 pink and an Oreck XL Classic in my home and found the Oreck was the better vacuum.  What more proof do I need?  I gifted the dyson away and I'm still using the Oreck XL.  Dah! 

And my results were VERIFIED and CERTIFIED by the builder of my home and his subcontractors who supplied and installed the new Mohawk carpets in 3,000 homes in my development.  These links you provided are better proof than the home builder, the rug subcontractor and me.  I don't agree and I still don't get your point! 

If I posted my results on one of your silly links, then you would believe me?  Because it's there.  Yeah, right.  Good point.  Conclusive finding.

Carmine D.

Motorhead wrote:

CR has NEVER questioned and/or doubted the CRI certification.  NEVER.  I agreed with CR on the Ionic Breeze.  I said so on several Forums BEFORE the Ionic Breeze buyers brought a class action suit against it and won.

You can impugn and deny the reliability of the CRI certification all you want.   That's your right.  But it doesn't make you right. 

YOU CAN'T DETERMINE AND DICTATE TO ME AND OTHERS WHAT CERTIFICATIONS ARE VALID AND/OR RELEVANT AS SUPPORT FOR THEIR VACUUM CLEANER PURCHASE DECISIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.  Just because you don't agree.  That's arrogant and haughty on your part. 

Let people decide for themselves what and who they believe and why.  If it's you-fine.  If it's CRI, that's their right just as it is your right not to believe.  

Why are you "bashing" the CRI certification?  Do you concrete evidence of CRI certifications that are wrong, bad, and/or unsubstantiated?  Please share with us here.  Or, are you just bashing CRI because I and others choose to accept their findings about HOOVER and ORECK but you don't?  Either way, I don't really care what you think about the CRI certifications.  I use them and I recommend them and I will continue to.  So do many other industry insiders and outsiders. 

Citing an irrelevant and totally unrelated certification for a scam fad product not related in any way to the vacuum industry and vacuums HAS ABSOLUTELY NOT ONE IOTA OF AN EFFECT AND IMPACT on the CRI Certification and its reliability.  None whatsover.  In other words, it is completely and utterly ridiculous. 

Carmine D.