Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Some observations -

• Oreck is conspicuously missing from the upright ratings.
• Panasonic has a new AeroBlast for $700 is a apparently a poor copy of a Dyson that burps loudly when it reverses the air flow to clean the filter.   Why would anyone pay so much for a Dyson copy, particularly when the filter clogs with fine dust?
  
• Hoover's fall from grace is noted, presumably due to their ill conceived bagless vacuums.  Hoover now has the worst reliability of the uprights.  Dyson is second only to Kirby in the reliability rankings.   
  
• For uprights, Kenmore takes the top 2 spots (bagged and bagless), followed by the Riccar SupraLite RSL3, the Electrolux Oxygen EL5035A, and the Kirby Sentria.  
  
• The Halo is #33 on the list for uprights. 
  
• The $60 Hoover Tempo Widepath has a better tool airflow score than the Dyson DC17 as well as better carpet cleaning scores. 
  

Thanks Severus.  I'll be on the lookout for the magazine.  I also did a quick check for pricing online and actually getting $700 for the AeroBlast (Model MC-UL975) is probably more a sweet notion on the maker's part as opposed to possible.  One shopper's club already has it for about $480. 

I searched but was not able to find a manual for it at the Panasonic website.  Thanks again.

Venson

Thanks also, Severus.  I've been looking for the March 2008 CR on the news stands, since I don't subscribe. It hasn't made it there yet.  Still February's for sale as late as today in most stores.

I've always liked the HOOVER Tempo and CR has too.  I mentioned this fact before but it's worth repeating.  RC Willey, the largest retailer of furniture, appliances, electronics, and floor coverings here in the West, stocks and sells several brands of vacuums: Bissell, HOOVER, and dyson.  With models in all the prices ranges.  Several times a year, it has huge rug and carpet sales and offers a free vacuum with all purchases over $1000.  The vacuum gifted with the purchases:  HOOVER Tempo.

Some may say that's because they are cheap so the cost for the giveaway is minimal.  Maybe there is some merit for this.  However, considering carpets are a huge cost and come with a substantial manufacturer's guarantee, which may span several years, RC Willey has to provide a vacuum that will ensure the rugs' guarantee is met.  It chooses the HOOVER Tempo.  One of my all time favorites.

WRT reliability: CR generally offers the following caveat for percentages:  Differences of less than 4 points aren't meaningful.  Based on the March 2007 CR, HOOVER ranked 8 out of 11 with a percentage of 12 for repairs.  While the 9th [RICCAR] and 10th [Simplicity]  rankings for reliability were 13, and 14 percent.  Based on the CR caveat, these would all be considered comparable for reliability. 

CR also provides footnotes further qualifying the reliability data such as "Kirby has been among the most reliable upright brands" and "Fantom has been among the more repair-prone upright brands."  In an effort to gauge the historical trend for reliability data for more meaningful results.  Why?  In part, to eliminate differences linked solely to age and usage of the product.  Intuitively, it makes sense that newer brands and models are less likely to need repairs.  Which skews the reliability data in favor of newer makes and models at the expense of older and more in use models.  My sense is adjusting the ratings for the latter [age and usage] is hard to do.  CR does not specifically say how it does. 

Carmine D. 

Severus wrote:

I'm not saying this is THE reason, just a possible one.  Oreck recently introed a XL Deluxe which is less expensive than the XL 21 Ultra and more price competitive with its peers [read dysons].  The XL 21 has been consistently reviewed by CR.  Oreck may want to submit its newest model for CR testing rather than the old.  It may take time for CR to run the new Oreck upright through the testing rigors and report on the results. 

Carmine D.

Hi Guy's. If the reports are accurate,which makes me want to believe that consumers reports are more than likely clueless.Are they in bed with sears and L.G.,How are their reliability rating formed?.Why do they always rate expensive uprights as not worth the money?.You guy's know that the upright market is going down the chute.As for 700.00 for the bagless panasonic [dyson looking clone],I would say that panasonic is doing this on purpose to make dysons price look like a bargain.Are panasonic and dyson in a business venture together?[MAYBE]..

MOLE

CR buys some of it's test vacs from my old employers' stores and one was the Aero-blast. They really didn't like it either.

I believe the Callisto was to be rated, I personally love this vac and was wondering how it did? Was the Sebo Felix rated.

Hi Mole,

Just speaking about Kenmore, the brand's top of the line canisters and uprights usually have deservingly meritted good ratings by way of performace and price.  They are not be all end all machinery but in consideration of higher priced niche vacuums and other cleaning inventions certainly hold their own.  If I am correct, performance and price are of high importance to CR.  My best example is Kirby, or at least the first that comes to mind.  CR does not deny its excellent rug cleaning ability or air filtration but has in past recommended that there are other vacuums that can deliver the same results for much, much less money.  It's not a great way to put it but like the Chevy, Kenmore vacs are the poor man's Cadillac -- of vacuums that is.

As for LG, I think they are trying hard but possibly failing in the American vacuum market.  I think the Progessive Bagless (the Iridium) is just great and as satisfactory as any of the Dyson canisters but don't get the feeling that my opinion is shared my many.  The new Premalite is nice on the eye and should clean well enough but I still hear talk about the wand/handle lock not being so hot.  A reduction in price closer to the $300 mark might make the public a little more hot to trot in regard to it.

Nonetheless, it is anticipated that Sears,known for providing just about everything, will always provide vacuums under its long-trusted Kenmore name. Sears in past had alliances with Whirlpool and Matsu$#%*a (both of which simultaneously produced vacuums under their own brand) which for such a commonplace venue produced some stellar product.  Product from each of those lines was totally different but obviously someone buying for Sears had enough on the ball either way to see to the the integrity of product that kept customers coming back for years and years.  This century I guess its simply LG's turn at bat even though I wonder if it can muster popularity for product it outsources.  It produces all sorts of appliances under its own name -- love my LG refrigerator and air conditioner too -- but I don't quitre get why it didn't do the same with vacuums for our market.

Best,

Venson

mole wrote:

Mole:

My sense is that it is not just uprights but all expensive [read substantially higher prices than average].  Why?  In part, Consumer Reports feels its mission in part is to "save people money" while assisting them to make smart buying decisions.  How?  By comparing a $500 dyson to a $60 HOOVER and saying don't waste your money on the dyson, when a $60 HOOVER is better.  I'm not making this example up.  CR uses this example in writing to promote subscriptions and readers.  That example is straight from its advertising.

Carmine D.

Hi Venson,I respect your opinion, you know something about this business,I and other industry pro's feel that L.G.will put an end to sears big share of the canister and upright market.

No one can argue that the panasonic made KENMORE products were a good bang for the buck machine.

For your information,The other electrolux,[THE ONES LIVING ON THE LUX USA] COATAILS.

The backlash is starting to really catch up to them.And you and i both know this machine was rated very high in c.r.

FORGET ABOUT ALL THE HYPE AND DYNAMIC ADVERTISING, IT'S ABOUT TIME TO START MAKING PRODUCTS THAT GIVE THE CUSTOMER THEIR MONEYS WORTH,AGAIN......

I AM PERSONALLY GETTING REAL TIRED OF THIS JUNK BEING MADE TODAY.........

i'll take an old lux,kirby,f.q.even a royal anyday...................

MOLE

CR also lacks in informing the public of the repair rate of some machines. This stat would take the control out of their hands and rely on the repair shops input so I understand WHY they don't do it but even still it's a disservice. Those Eureka/Electrolux are burning up Hose and Wand contacts like crazy and those replacement hoses on the Oxygen aren't cheap, especially when compared to the purchase price. Customers are quite shocked when the bill comes in. Plus who can or wants to try breaking into one of these things.

Quite true LUCKY1........

mole wrote:
Hi all,
Mole, I second your opinion.  This appears to be quite common today, whether it be vacuums, automobiles, furniture, appliances, even the level of customer service that is given today, just about everything is JUNK, even the so called "higher quality" products are a joke too!

I recently bought a Lindhaus Aria, it has been in the repair shop longer than it has been in my house, I'm very disappointed to say the least.

"take an old lux, kirby, f.q. even a royal anyday..." this is probably one of the most common sense statements I've heard in a long while.  I'll add to it, refurbish/rebuild them as well!

Vernon

mole wrote:

Hiya Mole,

Take a look! I finally got the quote thing figured out.  Anyway . . .

In recent times too many facets of business have relied upon buying up or relying on names to slap on flavor of the day product to make money off a dumbed-down public.  And that kind of business is all about nothing.  I in no way believe the American public is that dumb just beleagured with too many essential problems to argue.  Therefore, for the consumer, the least path of resistance becomes easy to follow when you've more important things on your mind than merely choosing a vacuum cleaner. 

When hit with endless hype by way of legendary name or cyclones or powers of levitation or germ zapping potential or whatever so-called convenience, it's easy to half-hear the story and half-think in regard to what you're about to buy.  How much do we think about price when the usual is to reach into pocket or purse and whip out a credit card.  That 500, 800 or 1,000 dollars is in no way considered peanuts but throw in the possibility of "easy payment" and there you go -- done deal. That has become a way of life here for many and, per constant reports of credit card debt, a big problem for many.  Even with the benefit of a credit card people have had to seriously come to grips with what they're buying and why.

If we in the U.S. continue to face the scary economic situation we're experiencing, something's got to give if the rent's going to stay paid up.  The "money for nothing" deal could soon be going out the window.  After all what is money that can be well-used elsewhere when spent on high-priced product that's less or no more effective than the same to be had at a lesser price? Waste.

I am not against "luxury" or, if you will, high-end items that bear high prices or those that can afford them.  It always feels a kind of nice to have something different, possibly a cut above the what's in the house next door.  Nonetheless, I am thoroughly against anything over-priced.  To me over-priced items are any high price tag products made without particular skill, quality or forethought. 

Here I'd ask anyone old enough to recall, if the pricing ratio on vacuums have remained the same.  Did the prices for Elecxtrolux G, Kirby, FQ, or Rainbow fall in as high proportion against the average weekly wage as they do know?  I remember as a kid that the brands like Hoover and Eureka, sold in department stores and small vendorships, usually charged a whopping $89.95 for a top-of-the-line model.  If the porportion of price is still the same now as then I have no particular argument yet I would question why the brands mentioned still turn up years later and are still capable of giving service.

I don't delight in seeing either people or industry learn things the hard way but as my grandad always said, "A hard head makes for a soft you-know-what."  I'm reconsidering my borrowed "just say no" attitude as there may not much chance for manufacturers or consumers to wrestle over acceptable product if in future it's no longer a matter of saying, "No," but saying, "Sorry, I can't afford it."

Best,

Venson

Lucky1 wrote:

Hi Luck1,

Hose replacement cost is not just a problem with the brand mentioned.  Unfortunately, it may cost near half the price of the cleaner to replace an electrified hose on even a Kenmore canister.  Multiply the problem by the number of other brands that offer a bare minimum of consumer repairable components and the picture is ridiculous.  I'll spare you my rant. 

I had a problem with a Kenmore hose and only got around buying a complete new hose because I knew what I needed when I contacted the Sears parts department.  This should have led to an outcome better than most.  BUT the fly in the ointment was that though the parts department would very happily sell the part, it would not tell you how to install it.  Fortunately I managed on my own. 

Electrolux (Aerus) for a time made a very easely replacable attachement-end on its hoses but has also gave up on that.  Most other brands have fallen into the same practice of forcing the buyer to buy a complete component instead of parts especially in regard to electrified hoses -- most of which are outsourced in the first place.  This is just anothe way of squeezing more money out of consumrs and it won't stop until somebody starts kicking.

Venson

Hi Vernon,Venson,LUCKY1,and anyone else that knows this business,[Yes Carmine even you].

I would like to submit the following question.

1 If you are in charge of producing a cleaner,and cost  and quality is the most important factor,and of course staying in business is important,What type of cleaner would you build, and what price point would you chase.

2 Would you hire people to design,engineer it, give it a retro look?.

3 or buy a company thats already going and use the   same as it's always been approach......

Please think about what and where this industry has become before posting........

MOLE

mole wrote:

Hello Mole:

First, congrats on the Super Bowl victory by the Giants.  NY won, without the point spread.  Here in Vegas it was 10 points.  Must have cost the book makers a fortune.  I knew many who picked the Giants outright without the spread. 

Excellent questions.  In my experience, the most innovative vacuum technology without question in my lifetime is the IRobot vacuums.  Very interesting company history and products.  This is the future in vacuums.  All styles, prices and features.  To date, iRobot has the lock on the market.  Even to the exclusion of other brands who try to compete.  Most retailers have culled competing robotic vacuums in favor of the Rhoomba.  Intro'ed in September 2002 without alot of hype and fanfare.  Now in its 5th generation of robotics with an array of related products [which result in economies of scale and less expensive prices].  Robots were the talk of the vacuum industry in the 50's although no one had any vision of what they would be like and how they would work. 

Sidebar:  I have to laugh at the critics here who kow tow the robotic vacuums in one breadth and in the other idolize bagless cyclones instead.  The latter can't hold a candle to the former in terms of innovation, technology, and impact on the vacuum market and the future of the industry.

Central vacuum systems have progressed in my lifetime and become more price competitive with better performance.  Comparable to the best and priciest portables.

Filtrete paper bags.  I see even BEST BUY advertises the Eureka Boss Smart Vac upright and the filtrete paper bags along with.  Others too of lesser significance but still credit worthy: Uprights with on board tools [thanks to HOOVER Dial], self-propelled [again HOOVER] and yes, even lightweights thanks to Oreck.   And an array of desirable features like the auotmatic shut off [Lux], the full bag indicator, and so on.

BTW, the Eureka Boss Smart Vac upright is another missing from the March 2008 Consumer Reports, which went on stands yesterday.  So are the new Eureka Capture uprights [the latest and greatest Eureka bagless uprights].  The latter possibly due to the newness and need by CR for more time to test and rate.

Carmine D.

Hi Carmine,

Thank you for your reply,I agree with you that robotics have been talked about for years in the industry.

Is it at the point where these are worthy of the asking prices? I understand that most of the public really likes this idea,[have someone or something else do the work for them]

The robotics machines range from 59.95 to 1800.00. I quess the closest thing yet in the other sector are central vacuum systems,[this market is starting to make a lot more sense with the price of high end portables,these are a much better bang for the dollar.[The same problems arise with this as with the portables,the customer still has to take it out and use it.[The hose].

The high end portable market especially the upright market is on the decline,yes there are a few machines out there that have captured the commercial market,[NOT THE ONES THAT SOME ON THE FORUM THINK IT IS].

Lets face it Carmine,people are vey lazy today,More than likely because of machines that do the work for them.

Another thing that i am taking note of today is that the younger generation[under 40],is that anything more than 5 years old is out of style and they must have new and shiny stuff.. And the price they pay for it is borderline lunacy............

MOLE

mole wrote:
1. I would build a Canister just like the Miele Galaxy Series (Carina, Antares etc) but with an electric hose connected to a Sebo ET1 powerhead. A sealed system with advanced HEPA option. I would like it to be at the $499.00 price point but I think customers (at least in the NY Metro Area) would pay $650.00 or more. I get SO MANY people asking for powerful, Healthy, Lightweight Canisters.

I would like an upright like the Simplicity Freedom BUT WITH TOOLS (or ability to take tools) and a roller shutoff switch. Price point at $349.00 or less. Also a Sebo Felix but with a better design at $499.00

2. I would go VERY MODERN & STREAMLINED. Make it very simple looking and easy to use. I find customers shy away from anything with lots of stuff hanging off a vac. The Felix is a fantastic and unique vacuum but it's style is a hard sell.

3. Anyone who Knows the Eureka-Electrolux sham should despise the deceit pulled on the unsuspecting public but you cannot deny how successful it is working. GRRR!

PS Who is making the Kenmore stuff that is top rated in CR? Is it LG? Panasonic still?

Thanks

Hi LUCKY1,you and i think along the same lines,mix up a few of the best features from each company,and then price it at a fair markup. Yes you are correct the electrolux/a.b has done a lot of damage to the other aerus/electrolux.A lot of customers that had the origional lux product have bought the eureka/lux stuff and felt like they been suckered.

The comments we hear run along the following lines.Boy what junk electrolux is building now.

For your information,the aerus products are still being built with no planned obsolensince, all the parts are available,the hose handles ,powernozzle parts,right down to the elbow sleeves, and wire harnesses. Aerus sells their products with the consumer in mind.And stand behind their warranty.

The stores are mostly held by individual owners,some are excellent with people that have been in the industry for years,and some are run by BOZOS,    who dont deserve to be in the businees..............

MOLE

Lucky1 wrote:

Hello Lucky1:

I posed that same question to SEARS persons today.  Here's how they answered.  They showed me the SEAR's vacuums' labels with place of production/origin:  China!  And said: "Who knows?"  Which brought us to a discussion about the new HOOVER WT Cyclonic.  Made in China, after the TTI buyout of Maytag/Hoover.  With a HOOVER, North Canton Ohio label.  As we know that plant has been shuttered.

Carmine D. 

Got my issue yesterday.  I agree with everything Severus said, especially about that AeroBlast!  Why pay more for a Dyson copy when you can get the real thing for less?  I don't understand.  The air-blowing action is supposed to clean the pre-motor filter (it is a dual-cyclone with no bin filter), but the dual cyclone setup must not work well if the pre-motor filter clogs.  The Halo rating doesn't surprise me either, actually we could say that's one of the few instances where CR is right.  

I was pleased to see Dyson score as second-most-reliable for uprights.  The Hoover cyclonic bagless cleaners are a TTI design, I thought they were interesting and not badly constructed but I guess reader surveys indicate otherwise.  Although since Hoover hasn't been all that reliable in recent years, I wonder if the old design is contributing to that drop as well. 

Notice that again, the Electrolux Oxygen scores highest for canisters, while its sister models (Harmony and TwinClean) score considerably lower.  Why?  Apparently pet hair stopped the power nozzle just as it did on the last test.  Yet these cleaners use the same power nozzle!  In addition I see the DC17's ranking has improved as well, yet the machine itself is unchanged.  On the last report it scored 1 lower than the Bissell HealthyHome (which has also remained unchanged).  The DC21's rather low rating was disappointing, it's a lot better machine than they make it out to be.  Ridiculous.

The Kenmore, Tempo (with "Ametek Shanghai" motor no less), and Oxygen ratings are unsurprising, always a need for a "token machine".  In real life there's no way they would fare that well, and even so, how long would they last...

Motorhead wrote:

Hey dyson return man:

Had to "bash" the HOOVER TEMPO, a $60 vacuum.  Of course, because I praised it and CR for the excellent pick.  It moved up 2 in the rankings this year to number 6 and is ahead of the DC17 [your favorite] which costs $549 and comes in at 7.  Beat by a $60 HOOVER.  And the TEMPO has a headlight AND DYSONS DON'T.

Now to answer your question. An easy one.  At $60 per for a HOOVER TEMPO a consumer can buy 9 in total [at $540] which will outlast ONE dyson DC17 at $549.  AND the buyer has the benefit of NINE years [MINIMUM] of unconditional product guarantees NOT 5 year [MAXIMUM] limited guarantee on a DC17 PLUS A HEADLIGHT.

HOME DEPOT has added the HOOVER TEMPO to its sales venue recently while culling several dyson models from its inventory and shelves.  Wonder why dyson man?

Carmine D.

WRT the HOOVER TEMPO: Since you dyson return man like to peruse the internet for reviews and links I thought I would too.

One link here on this site rates the HOOVER TEMPO a 100 percent for popularity among buyers and users [higher than all other upright vacuums including dysons].  Why? Read on.

Hoover U5140900 Bagged Tempo Widepath Product Reviews
Review Excerpt
"I shopped extensively for a new vacuum. This one is the best model if you're looking to spend less than one hundred dollars. It works great." see at least 6 more reviews at pricegrabber.com
"Got this a couple of months ago as per the CR recommendation. It works good on carpet, not so good on hard floors." see at least 415 more reviews at amazon.com
"Powerful/Good Suction, Feels self propelled, Easy to Use, Efficient, Lightweight" see at least 216 more reviews at abtelectronics.com
"Seems to clean the carpets good, it is light weight and I don't really notice that it is not self-propelled, however it is loud and the cord is shorter than my other vac. cleaner. If you don't want to spend a lot of money this cleaner will get the job done." see at least 3 more reviews at astore.amazon.com 298 posters rate HOOVER Tempo 5 Stars.  248 posters rate it a 4.5.  187 rate it 4.  26 rate it 3.  9 rate it 2 20 rate it 1.  733 users out of 788 rate it 4 Stars or higher.  Pretty convincing and impressive. CR must have this one right! Always has. Not you dyson return man.  You're Wrong. Again. Carmine D.

Motorhead wrote:

Let me help you dyson return man. 

Rankings are affected by the number and brand of vacuums tested.  Remember I posted that the Eureka Boss Smart Vacuum was not included in March 2008.  It was in October 2007.  That's one less in the top 10 for tests that could account for the increase by one in the ranking for the dyson DC17.  Right?

What you should compare instead for consistency among the CR ratings are the individual test scores.  If you do, the dyson DC17 in the October 2007 ratings and March 2008 ratings are the same in every test category EXCEPT ONE: Noise.  The rating went from FAIR to GOOD changing the overall score from 64 to 65.  Not that big a difference.  One point. 

How do you know the machine is unchanged?  My sense is that the 450 dyson engineers figured out if they add a little more sound insulation to the motor housing [which could be coating of paint], it will muffle the noise. 

Carmine D. 

Motorhead wrote:

No dyson return man.  Accurate.  Let me help you once again.

IMHO, the reason the dyson DC21 is ranked 54 of 61 is the ratings in the categories for carpet cleaning, noise, and pet hair removal from carpets.  The first and last categories carry a lot of weight for CR.  Don't take my word, read the CR narrative.  The ratings for the dyson DC21 [a $500 bagless canister] are GOOD for all 3.  The dyson DC21 rating for handling, a category that 450 dyson engineers should max out, is FAIR.  Which lowers the overall DC21 rating and rank further vice its competitors.

The carpet cleaning and pet hair removal ratings for the DC21 are not ridiculous, save the fact that dyson after 6 years still can't improve its performance.  Why?  The ratings in these 2 categories are comparable and pretty consistent with the CR category ratings for October 2007 and March 2008 FOR ALL THE DYSONS TESTED:  DC07, DC14, DC15, and DC18.  Either good/fair.  So the DC21 ratings in these specific categories are on par with all the dysons tested by CR for these categories for the past 2 years.  My sense is that if you look back further than 2 years, the same is also true.  Why?  The DC07, 14, and 15 are all three or more years old.  And in this time, dyson uprights have never made the top 10 until now with the the DC17.  Which launched in the USA in September 2006.  And CR first reviewed in October 2007.  It was number 11 behind number 10: The BISSELL Healthy Home.  Which is number 9 in March 2008. 

The only real difference among the dyson vacuum ratings is in the dyson DC17.  It gets very good in these 2 categories and no doubt this is the reason it fares the best in ranks.  And moves up to number 7, in front of the BISSELL Healthy Home.  Why?  Read on.

Compare the BISSELL Healthy Home ratings by category and the Dyson DC17 ratings by category for October 2007 and March 2008.  The BISSELL Healthy Home ratings are identical from one time to the other.  Not so the dyson.  The rating for noise went from fair [October 2007] to good [March 2008].  And the reason the DC17, in part, moved ahead of the BISSELL Healthy Home.

As with the DC21, the DC17 gets a fair in handling.  Which keeps it in the low top 10 in the latest CR rankings.  With 450 dyson engineers, several test laboratories, and all the money spent on R&D, the best dyson can muster for handling for their latest full size vacuums is FAIR.  For shame. 

Dyson did very well in reliability for its first year out in the USA...............but they have to improve the performance of their vacuums.  After 6 years, dyson is still struggling with its performance.  It takes both performance and reliability when you price your products the highest.  The latter doesn't count without the former and vice versa.

Carmine D.

So why is it that the dyson uprights are mediocre,when they basically use the same ydk/panasonic/domel/china ametek,suction motors.The problems must lie somewhere else with the product.You would think that after all the research and development they would have it down pretty good by now.

The dc22 baby can is just another dyson mistake,and should get out of the u.s. canister market.In the longrun these mistakes are going to reflect on the company as a whole,and the consumers are going to shun the products with DYSONS name on it.

Maybe they should get back into the laundry stuff again?

MOLE

CarmineD wrote:

Mr Washed Up,

It seems that the trend at CR is to pick the least expensive.  If one chooses the $60 Hoover should they also invest in a good electronic air filtering system to catch the dust spewed from the Hoover?

I notice that you are now supporting the disposable vacuum.  Is that because all your favorites only last a short time?   Maybe that useless headlight is wearing them out.

 

Just wrote:

Prior to December this was a very civil board.  Then Carmine joined.  From that point it took less than 30 days to lock a topic.  He has also been a major contributor to getting an entire site closed.  Problem is he is living the past and can't comprehend how he was passed by.

In case you do not know, Carmine parted the sea, predicted a flood and provided a ship to save all animals, taught Fred Astair to dance,  taught Joe Louis to box.  No matter what the occurance Carmine always reminds the world that he predicted it way in advance.  He predicted that Dyson would be out of business two years ago.  He predicted that the Hoover Fusion then the Hoover Z would be the next bagless standards.   They are long gone.  There were a few others that he claimed would unseat Dyson in BB and other stores.  It ain't happened.

I see he has a puppet on this site also.  Perhaps he and mole should get in the laundry business.  Both seem to be washed up.

 I really like Dyson!!

Hi  H.S.,remember me?.I invented the wheel........

MOLE

mole wrote:

Yes, and then Carmine made it round so it would roll.  Of course I suspect the two of you also invented electricity because you anticipated a future machine that would suck up dirt..  It would initially be cranked to turn the fan and suck air.  Of course it would not work properly without a light and that required electricity.

HARDSELL wrote:

I have to say that I stopped reading the old board because of the bashing that took place by several members… The saddest part was that a lot (but not all) of the commotion was started by Carmine…

When the old forum closed it was like a breath of fresh air to come onto the new forum, even if for me it was only to read and not post…

I often thought the same thing that you did Hardsell… It was so nice without Carmine stirring the pot. I was actually glad that he had not found his way onto this forum, but knew it would only be a matter of time before someone ruined it for everyone else and led him back…

So once again, most people will stop coming to this forum to actually ask questions – Now that there is a new host of the board, maybe someone will step up and address the actual problem and see about having the problem removed once and for all…

Dan

Danorob wrote:
Dan;

This forum is the same, just using a different program.

Remember to keep your comments/opinions regarding administration/moderator off the posts(same as other forum).  As for "most people will stop coming"-NOT!  It has been the same people for quite some time now, just like the former forum.  There are quite a few who return almost every hour.  We have seen very few visitors posting, even before Carmine.  BTW, this seems to be one of the most active of the few discussion boards here.

Now, bring this thread back to topic and take it off eachother.

HARDSELL wrote:
HardSell:

Most consumers pick the lowest priced machine that meets or exceeds their needs, so why wouldn't CR use a similar criteria.   This particular Hoover is a great bargain at $60.   Given CR's positive emissions rating on this machine, it is a little disingenuous to refer to it as a dust spewer.  Whether it's a wise strategy on Hoover/TTI's part to have such a good performer topping it's more expensive siblings, I don't know.  But that has nothing to do with CR's ratings.  Unless you have lifetime/repair data on this particular Hoover Tempo to share, which I'm sure you don't, you don't really have a leg to stand on when discussing the lifetime of these products - or calling it disposable.   Many people manage quite nicely with their $60 Hoover Tempos.   Assuming that they are not abused, I suspect that most of these Hoovers will still be in service ten years down the road.

The $60 Hoover Tempo Widepath has great reviews on Amazon.com

Severus wrote:

Picking the lowest price machine that meets minimum standards for the consumer does not make that the best overall machine.   If that was true the Ford Taurus and F-150 Ford trucks would be the best autos ever built.

I simply asked if extra filtration was needed since Hoover has been known to spew dust.  I haven't read the latest report.  Was a measurement given for the amount of dust released back into the air?   Have you used a Tempo on tile or wood floors?  My money says it will blow more dust across the room than it vacuums up.  Dyson is excellent for these types of floors. 

Carmine is the one who eluded to replacing the Tempo every year.  For the past 3 years or more he has repeatedly stated that the Dyson will not last.  Maybe you should ask for his lifetiome data.   I used a DC07 for 3 years with absolutely no parts replaced or any other problems.  Try 3 years without replacing belts and bags on other brands. 

Most any vacuum that is not abused should last 10 years.  Big question is how will it perform during that time span?   Good example is the $700  broom with a 21 year warranty.

Hardsell,

Thanks for what you said about the timeline and the trouble they cause.

 You should know this baiting cheap shot and calling you “disingenuous” by someone called “Severus” is indeed “Mole”.  Mole is also “DysonIsOverated”.  He floats around this forum using the Severus or Mole typically.  Most telling, Mole uses children’s fantasy characters from “Harry Potter” for all 3 of his Member profile personas.  Creapy?

 

Dan,

Yes, it is already happening, Good people here are attacked frequently by 2 individuals or “Internet Trolls”.  Lately these good people are posting less and less.        DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB,  thanks for the heads up.  I was wondering if mole chose that name because he resembles one of those little creatures that always hides underground and roots in his own excrement.  Considered by most to be a pain in the a$$ and useless.

Hi DIB, H.S.,

Dib your wrong in your assumptions about me,I think you should retract that post.H.S. you and I have gone at it for over 3 years now .

You are trying to combat one of the living legends in the industry.

GOOD LUCK.........

THE  MOLE

Hi all,

Here's the Seattle Times interpretation of the latest Consumer Reports vacuum estimations.

Best,

Venson

mole wrote:

Howdy Mole,

I’m so sorry.  It took me a while to come up with a well thought out answer to the questions you posed. . It’s for you to judge how worthwhile all the thinking was.  First let me say . . .

In no way an original thought on my part but, as an instance, in the music industry -- a business unto itself -- there are about three levels of artists.  There are those who do the work more for the love of the craft than love of money and who are unafraid to bear the weight of faith in uncompromised originality on their shoulders.  They make their sacrifices, they put blood, they put sweat, they put tears into the effort of "making" and may gather something of a following but don't usually get the accolades or landmark returns for all the effort invested.  Could this be representative of now defunct Air-Way and some similar old guard American manufacturers either still in business or gone?

Then there those who are adept at imitating the former with less investment.  Onstage, though maybe not as artful, they know all the technical moves to the dance and can match poses with the real talent well enough to produce some semblance of “know how”.  They usually do well because they focus on the look of things re the status quo.  Could that be Aerus and several other companies?

Lowest on the ladder are the mere assemblers of things.  They are picked by bigger entities and haberdashers to put forth cute stuff of dubious quality that money can be quickly made from and ask no bigger questions than, "When's lunch?"  They say what they are told to say, stand where they’re directed to stand and move right to left as directed by guides who care little about the art of manufacture but a lot about pleasing the crowd with the superficial -- again all for money.

Anyway . . .

If I were in charge of putting together a vacuum cleaner from the ground up, though I’d be more inclined to want to develop a traditional bagged canister with power nozzle, I might be also intrigued by seeking a way to the best of both worlds. 

I might want to opt for a two-motor machine say no more than 12-15 inches in overall body width and of no more than a 10-inch height with an attached power nozzle.  The design idea being that the vacuum could be used upright style for rug cleaning and flipped back horizontally for better mobility for above the floor cleaning and other duty.

There would of course have to be safety mechanisms in place to keep the brushroll from becoming operable while the machine is in horizontal position.

I think I’d opt for a hand-operated cordwinder similar to the one used back in the day on the Lewyt 210.  The amount of actions you usually go through to guide a power cord into a spring-wound winder aren’t significantly less involved than reeling in a cord by hand.  There’d be also be less components in the winder to bother about.

I’d first want to find as compact, quiet and well-balanced a two-stage fan and armature set-up as I could get and see to it being well-mounted.  I’d also want to research and design an integral baffle set up, prior or post final filters, for exhaust air that might lessen noise additionally and allow less reliance on sound muffling material that may promote heat build-up.  And all that of course without impeding air flow.  Automobile mufflers basically use this idea don’t they?

Yes, I’d want my machine to be bagged.  I would also want as large as possible high-efficiency filtration area, pre-motor and after, besides a large disposable bag. Design of the bag chamber would of course allow for efficient airflow all around the disposable bag.

Plastic would be used as a mainstay for the overall body of the unit but a metal skeleton of some sort could be used to further strengthen the cleaner’s body and possibly be incorporated as a motor mount.  Ideas as to how to keep the machine as easily owner repairable as is reasonable would also have to be kept in mind while thinking on overall design.

I cannot answer questions as to cost but the idea, I feel, can be realized by way of modification of forms already here.  This is something, Miele, Tacony or Electrolux could easily do it if they wanted to.  Of course the issue is that it would be different.  Different is always an exception on way or the other when making money is in mind.

Best,

Venson

 

 

Hi Venson, thanks for  your imput,well said.

So it looks like we would have to build 2 or 3 different vacuums to satisfy the different consumer needs.

A good arguement if this could be made for airway,staying with one type of machine,although they had an upright a thousand years ago[ok 50 years ago].

At the other end of the spectrum was hoover as we knew it ,mistake after mistake after mistake,finally when there was nothing left , there was nothing left but the name to sell off.Maybe TTI can help hoover make the comeback and start leading the vacuum industry again.Yes the tempo is a good cleaner for 60 bucks.I'm sure TTI has many other areas of  which they would want to do R@D on.

The combo unit your talking about sounds like the seboFELIX, but is way too expensive,As you pointed out many times the average vacuum buyer doesnt care what it does or the projected lifespan is I'M NOT PAYING THAT MUCH FOR A VACUUM CLEANER.

Now we know why the rebuilt vacuum guys do so well,And yes they are the SMART ones in this business.

Also central vacuums are making more sense everyday,MAYBE BECAUSE OF THE PRICING].

The little blue pig that eats dirt was made out of magnesium, I liked the idea if it ever blew up i could melt it down and make a spare wheel for the race car.........

MOLE

mole wrote:

Mole, that's what recycling is all about.

Venson

DysonInventsBig wrote:
DysonInventsBig,

I feel compelled to  your slanderous comments.   You are out of your mind. I have never and will never post under the nickname "Mole".    Perhaps you are naively assuming that only one person disagrees with your Dyson drivel?   Please keep on task and refrain from making unfounded personal attacks on this forum.  

Curiously, you are attacking people for keeping personal information (i.e. names) private, when you are doing the same.   Or is your name really "I like Inventors"? 

-Severus