Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Dyson is in the news frequently and so a dedicated thread.

.

...reporters got a little carried away by jumping to the conclusion that it means he IS developing a motor for cars.

Story here  and here.

Hi DIB,

Fascinating articles, I've seen a lot of that surface lately about James' plans for improving the electric car.  But what really intrigued me is the canister pictured, I have not seen that model before.  I looked a bit through the Dyson websites in different countries and it appears to be a variant of the DC19 but I'm not positive.

-MH

Hey Motorhead,

I actually have 2 of these air seperators, it is the DC08.  There are 12 cyclones and a cluster of 3 in the center (which are a little smaller than the outer cyclones).  The shroud is the weak link, the DC21 shroud is much better.  I've been wanting to upload this photo for some time and so I'm glad you asked.  Enjoy.        DIB             Enlarge pic

P.S.  It is still for sale online as a special offer - the DC08

So what's the news?  That's there's really no news!  That's news?  I said that about the original news story when several posters added it here.  It's not news.  It's hype.  Surprised?  Why?  If 450 dyson engineers can't improve the run time on its DC16 beyond 6 minutes on a battery charge, how on God's green earth can it build a battery charged electric car?  Dah!

Look at the facts fans.  What happened to dyson's original business logo and mantra:  Doesn't clog, doesn't lose suction.    That WAS the cornerstone of dyson's claim to fame.  Nothing but hype.  LIke the above newsstory.  It was false.  Untrue.  Dysons clog, dysons lose suction just like all bagged vacuums.  Even after 5127 dyson prototypes. 

What happened with the latest dysons DC24/25?  Same price, much more filter maintenance required by users to make the warranty effective.  More time and effort to keep the dysons working properly by users!  Why?  Answer, please.  DIB?  You said you know but won't say.  Afraid?  That's the news that all the dyson fans are ducking.  Why? 

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:
Look at all the pretty parts that break off just like the uprights.Can you say overpriced JUNK

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine,

Hype?  Can you demonstrate a Dyson press release stating Dyson was getting into the car motor (not battery) business?  I have seen not one.  The media gets excited around super successful inventors and leaders.  One misquote led to much news, it spread like wild fire online, and ALL FOR FREE!  This guy is loved and gets much free press, even when he only speaks.  Your fav guy cannot steal press like this.  J

 

Filtration:

I understand very well the Dyson filtration.  It would be most unkind for me to discuss this filtration openly.  I loath the garbage kapok so-call industry standard test done by bad mouthing of Dyson dealers and so why in the hell would I help these desperate rats bad mouth Dyson any further?

 

No Clogging:

Call Mr. O and ask how his bogas lawsuit is going with suing Dyson over the no clogging and/or no loss of suction.  Mr. O circumvented the FTC and the agreed (upon by manufacturers for fast and cheap) decisions of NAD and instead sued.  Those who sell tired product tend to sue.        DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote

Why dont you tell us ther truth,and say it will cost you your job.

MOLE

mole wrote:

BINGO! EUREKA! That's it MOLE. Mr. DIB's posted here before in regards to one of my posts that he fears saying something without sanction. Why? Due to the possibility of a lawsuit. He has a family to consider. Kudos for his family concern. If that's the reason for his silence about the compromised dyson filtration in the DC24/25, then he should say so. Rather than beat around the bush with all the smoke and mirrors.

Keep up the good work Mr. MOLE and keep your posts coming. I enjoy your analytical and thoughtful observations about the strengths and weaknesses of all vacuums. Even if the truth offends the dyson fans and admirers who hold the Sir Knight in such high esteem.

Carmine D.

Mr. Carmine,

50 years in the vacuum business and you plead with me to explain cyclonic’s?        DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Mr. DIB

Absolutely, I'm all ears and eyes.  If that's what it takes for you to come clean and tell us what you know about the compromised dyson filtration on the DC24/25 and when, then so be it.  I'm never too old and/or too smart to learn. 

 Still afraid Mr. DIB?  Do the right thing!  Tell the truth.  The truth will set you free.

Carmine D.

PS:  A sidebar on your comments about the ORECK-dyson lawsuit:  If Mr. D took the route Mr. O took with the lawsuit, you would call him a maverick.  You would praise Mr. D for his unwillingness to take the easy road and instead take the road less travelled.  ORECK does it and what do you say?  You impugn Dave, his company, and his products.  All of which are irrelevant to the lawsuit against dyson which is about the truth.  Where you stand, depends on where you sit. 

I can't and won't speak for ORECK just myself.  I object to the NAD settlement/resolution.  It doesn't go far enough.  The dyson claim: Never loses suction is a half-truth [read misleading].  Dyson buyers are deceived unless and until the claim includes the printed warning: IF YOU PERFORM THE FILTER CLEANINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS.     That's one BIG IF.

When people take an oath in a court of law in the US to tell the truth, they put one hand on the Bible and with the other arm lifted in the air and raised to GOD they say:  I swear to tell the truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me GOD.  They don't say anything about half the truth.  It is a criminal offense to take this oath and lie.  It's called perjury and obstruction of justice. 

YOU GO DAVE ORECK!

DysonInventsBig wrote: CarmineD wrote:

Carmine D.

Carmine, I find many of the things James does interesting, I'm not an employee.  After much study and thought did I learn what I know of the Dyson filtration, I do not profess to be expert.  I stated my why’s of not disclosing my "learnings" earlier. 

.

I’d love to chat some more, but I am heading out for vacation.  Talk later.        DIB

 P.S.  I am already free, He paid my bill a long time ago.

DIB:

Enjoy your vacation.  We'll take up where we left off with dyson filtration when you return. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Please go and take Carmine and mole.  

HS:

I'd certainly support ORECK and favor its chances of winning.  Why?  The NAD ruling was clearly against dyson. 

Of concern in the legal proceedings is whether ORECK is allowed to use the DC24/25 as evidence.  Why?  The case filing predates these dyson models.  If dyson wins and continues to use the "NO LOSS OF SUCTION" mantra with the DC24/25, then ORECK would have to file a motion to reopen the case and introduce the DC24/25 as evidence in support of its position.  Then ORECK will IMHO win.  And dyson will have to drop the claim/qualify it with a warning about the filter cleanings. 

Either way, the writing is on the wall for dyson.  DIB will avoid any mention of the compromised dyson filtration for fear of giving ORECK ammunition to use against dyson.  Just as MOLE said.

Carmine D.

Oreck HAS no evidence.  Why?   The plain and simple truth of the matter is on the DC24/25, the diameter of the HEPA exhaust filter (which mostly serves the purpose of catching carbon-brush dust from the motor and not much else) has been reduced in order for the filter to be contained in the Ball assembly and eliminate the ducting to the separate filter compartment as on the DC15.  First of all, DYSON errs on the side of caution and believes that the DC24 or 25 will be used to clean a large house with infrequent emptying (i.e. allowing the bin to go beyond full capacity on each use).  Some of you may be thinking that the DC24 or 25 are lightweight uprights and theoretically for smaller homes, right?  WRONG!  Unlike Oreck, DYSON does not make that generalization and believes that any of its machines, regardless of how large or small they are, will be used for any purpose in any size home.  THAT is the reason for the more frequent filter cleaning intervals.  Not only because of the diameter, but because of the potential for heat to build up in the motor compartment in the Ball if the machine is used in a large home with infrequent emptying and the pre-motor filter (which is mounted in the usual spot above the bin) is left neglected over long periods of time.  If the bin is frequently allowed to get beyond full capacity, no doubt a minute amount of fine dust will make its way to the pre-motor filter a few times; more than would occur if the machine was used properly as it was intended and emptied frequently, of course.  Sure, the cyclone separators are good, but as with anything else, can only do so much.  DYSON is obviously aware of this potential.  As anyone can see that has absolutely NOTHING to do with clogging or losing suction, it is just a heavy use scenario.  Obviously if you are going to use a DC24 to clean a 3000 sq. ft.  house and only expect to empty it once (allowing the dirt to pass the MAX line each time it is used), yes, you WILL have to clean the filters more often, that goes without saying!  The filters have to be cleaned because the machine can clean. 

While we're on the subject of filter cleaning intervals for the DC24/25, you may notice the intervals at which the filters should be removed and washed...3-6 months.  Again, that is DYSON being cautious (realizing the potential for heavy use) and warning the owner as such.  In reality, the filters can be left alone for 6 months to a year (if not longer) with regular, proper use (read: frequent emptying during normal cleaning, and vacuum large amounts of extra-fine substances slowly) and the machine will fare just fine under normal circumstances, holding true to the fact that it never clogs, or loses suction.  The same wonderful fact (no half-truth about it, sorry Carmine and Oreck) which is, always has been, and always will be proudly displayed on both the box and the machine. 

The reason this is the first time we have heard of this is because the DC15, due to the separate compartment (and the ducting running from the Ball to said compartment), uses a large-diameter permanent exhaust filter like the others. 

What does this mean?  Two words: General Maintenance.  Filter washing is done at the same frequency as changing the belt on an Awfulwreck, but not necessarily required (usually under normal use the filter is not that dirty when going by Dyson's 3-to-6-month intervals, and the machine is still delivering the same performance it did when new), and MUCH easier

-MH

Motorhead wrote:

Hello Motor:

Spoken like a true dyson fan with irreverence for the facts.  So, you're pinch hitting for DIB while he's on vacation?  Did DIB sanction you!  

As usual, you are wrong.  The NAD decision ruled that dyson and retailers are not allowed to say the dyson filters don't clog.  Because they do clog and 36 dissatisfied dyson customers along with HOOVER and ORECK took exception to the dyson claim, they protested the claim saying its hype and untrue, and they prevailed.  Dyson lost.  Hence, the revised dyson mantra:  Never loses suction.  All the dyson references to the old claim have been scrubbed and new product lit and cartons reflect dyson/retailers' compliance.  Some, like you, thought dyson can just move on.  Not ORECK.  Hence the court case.

Did you get sanctioned by DIB to post this info about the dyson degradation of filtering?  DIB is the Forum poster who claimed authoritative knowledge of the compromised dyson filtration.  Not you!  DIB has remained conspicuously silent on the matter [probably fearing the ORECK-dyson lawsuit implications].  You're not.  You poured forth like an untapped well of knowledge just waiting to gush!    Pride and ego, the worse of sins.

Do you know when DIB is due back.  Curious to hear his perspective on your post.  If he's still speaking to you.

Carmine D.

Motor:

How well do you remember your fairy tales?  Remember the one where the dog stops to rest and misses catching the rabbit?  If only the dog didn't stop to rest, it would have caught the rabbit.  IF!  Your post reminds me of the fairy tale. Only your post is chuck full of IF-s.

Carmine D. 

CarmineD wrote:

Dyson has been EXPOSED for what they really are,the overpiced hyped doesnt clean your carpets any better than a 39.95 dirt devil, they just cost more to fix,

IT'S soon to be just another big box machine sitting on the shelf,that has to be dusted off every week[,but are pleasing to look at wild colors] The bins can also be used as a bird feeder,Carmine and I told you so ,its just too bad that the public did not catch on sooner,I must say that the DYSON marketing department is one of the best propaganda machines in the industry,Now we and the public know that the gig is up,Is the return center filled up to the max yet?

Whats next another overpriced hand vac with a sr motor that costs 599.00[HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,........

MOLE

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine, speaking of fairy tales, this is yet another example of you repeating your own lies over and over again, and eventually believing it.  Sort of like the statement about the U-bend on the DC07.  When I was at Wal-Mart last week to pick up another new machine (more on that later), I noticed the DC07 Original on the shelf right next to it.  I pulled the display model down, looked it over, and sure enough, the U-bend was exactly the same as all of the other DC07s I had seen in the past 6 years.  No changes whatsoever. 

Just like your claim about Dyson being forced to remove the "filters that don't clog" statement.  In the new DC25 brochure, "no clogging or loss of suction" is mentioned several times throughout.  You had mentioned the removal of this statement before the introduction of the DC24/25, and it's still there on a brand new model.  What happened?

-MH

mole wrote:
In you and Carmine's eyes, Dyson is always "soon to be" *something*.  Soon to disappear from the shelves, soon to be "scrubbed", etc.  But it never is.

I'd work on improving my "predictions" if I were you.  The track record on both of your posts isn't that great, to say the least.

Motorhead wrote:

Motor:

Here's the truth.  Within the first year of launch, dyson retooled the DC07 u-bend air way joint.  Making it permanent on the DC07-s and not removable.  It was removable originally on the first and early DC-07's supposedly to allow users to clear clogs/blockages.  It had a yellow thumb tab on it to depress to remove/attach.  People thought it was the handle release and would step on the thumb tab.  The piece came off and most stores' staff didn't know how to attach it.  It remained along side the dyson display model/still in the box never used.  Result:  No suction in the tool mode.  Fix:  Dyson knew a buck item was poised to derail its launch, and made the piece permanent.  Quick like. 

Good thing ORECK stayed the course and took dyson to court.  I have not seen the latest DC24/25 product lit.  But, if dyson is still using the false claim, then dyson is violating the NAD ruling and subject to punitive and monetary disciplinary actions.  Dyson isn't that stupid.  Even the dyson retailers have long dropped the use of the false dyson claim.  

Carmine D. 

Motorhead wrote:

Motor:

The writing for dyson is on the wall.  Look at the UK.  From 43 percent vacuum market share in 2004 to 28 percent in 2007.  Based on the facts, our prediction was accurate.  Dyson sales in Mr. D's country of original are off an average of 5 percent a year for 3 consecutive years steady. 

BTW, weren't you the one here who said dyson new vacuum sales in the USA were 4 MILLION units in 2007?  Was that a prediction?  It was wrong!  Certainly not a fact.  According to the dyson expert here, Matt mmc AirBlade, 2 Million dyson units [not counting returns and refunds] were sold in 2007.  You were wrong by a factor of 100 percent.  

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Neither you nor mole predicted the Dyson sales to drop in the UK.  Once again you lie.  You said for three years that each new Dyson would put Dyson out of business and I said you were wrong.  I was correct.

You saind numerous times that BB was discontinueing Dyson and again I disagreed.  I was right again.  Your predictions are not so accurate.

CarmineD wrote:

First post here and I am curious.  I keep reading a couple posters saying that Dyson can no longer use this claim and yet :

 "no loss of suction"

and  statements like

"Dyson proves no loss of suction using the IEC 60312 Cl 2.9 test standard on uprights and canister
vacuums and using a test method based on the IEC 60312 Cl 2.9 standard for the handheld.

Dyson proves no loss of suction, best average pick up, and 'overall outcleans other vacuums' using results from
IEC 60312 Cl 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.8, 2.9, ASTM F608 and F558, and DTM 755— an independently conducted Dyson test."

Are plastered all over thier webpage.  Are some here not understanding a ruling correctly, just blowing smoke to make an argument, or is Dyson in violation of a court order?

Hello JackD and welcome aboard:

Here's a synopsis based on my understanding.  I speak for myself and not a representative of any of the companies and customers directly involved in the matter. 

It's not a court ruling, but an NAD ruling.  NAD is a USA industry arbitrator who facilitates cases brought by customers and companies against businesses who make false, misleading, and deceptive advertising claims [read: untrue].

NAD and dyson.  The original dyson claim, also once used by retailers advertising dysons, WAS:  No clogging, therefore no loss of suction.  Dissatisfied dyson customers [read: with clogged dysons that lost suction] along with ORECK and HOOVER brought the dyson claim before the NAD.  Based on the evidence, NAD ruled that dyson could no longer say its vacuums didn't clog [read filters].  Dyson revised its claim to: Never losses suction.  Retailers stopped using the claim in print.

ORECK [possibly encouraged by other vacuum makers sitting on the sidelines monitoring the developments] decided to proceed against dyson with a legal action.  ORECK's right.  That's where it stands.  In court awaiting a hearing, trial and ruling. 

Hope that assists you in getting brought up to date.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

What makes you think the USA is different than the UK?  I quote you this because it was an overused statement on many vacuum forums to convince consumers that the USA would fall for dyson the same way as the UK.  Contrarily, the reverse is true.  We can expect here what's already happend in the UK. 

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

Over the last few weeks, several posters here provided you with incontrovertible proof that all the major retailers are culling dyson vacuums from their shelves with discounted prices advertised much lower than dyson MAP.  MOLE and I predicted this would come to pass with the big box store venues and dysons.  It has.   One dyson supporter, Dusty, recently posted that he agrees with us as it concerns dyson and big box stores.   

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

Let's recap 6 years of dyson facts and circumstances in the USA and our predictions.  

The DC07 and DC14, supposedly the dyson signature models [you owned the DC07 but sold it], are being discontinued and sold on clearance by all the major retailers.  The DC07 as low as $289 this week.  Brand new.  From an MSRP of $439.  MOLE and I predicted this would happen.  

The DC11 canister for $499 was pulled off the USA markets after 9 months.  I was one of 2 of the biggest critics of its puny power nozzle as early as April 2004.  Right again.

The DC15 original Ball was launched for $699 in March 2005.  By September, dyson dropped the price to $599 starting with BEST BUY stores, as I predicted .  Currently, it is $499 and less. 

The DC16 cordless hand held has a 5 minute run time.  Disgraceful for a $150 vacuum product.  I was a huge critic of the product when HSN demoed it and one went dead on air in less than 2 minutes.  It is currently being discounted by dyson for $49 with any new dyson purchase.  Right once more.

One major USA rug maker voided its warranty if any of the dyson vacuums are used on its carpets. 

Consumer Reports consistently rates all the dysons, save the DC17, as fair to middlin at best in a field of many less expensive makes and models.  Even the DC17, with an original MSRP of $549, is discounted now for $499 [before other buyer incentives]. 

The DC16 Slim for $469 [supposedly dyson's best selling sku] is currently being sold for $369 and is being scrubbed by most big box retailers after just 2 years on the market. 

The DC24/25 are too new to have a past.  But the filtering is seriously degraded from the earlier dyson models.  Still researching and learning the reasons.  Tho MOLE posted the reasons in a post awhile back.  And we are slowly learning he's right.

The air watts and dirt bin capacities have been consistently down sized with subsequent dyson model.  Now the filter maintenance is also increased.  Making the user more burdened with performing frequent filter cleanings which degrade the life of the filters.  Prices are the same and/higher.

A sad commentary for dyson, its products and dyson fans who praise them.  The only glimmer of hope that dyson can point to here in the USA is the reliability rating it received from Consumers Report in March 2008.  It was second only to Kirby.   But this is the first time it was rated for reliability.  CR adds the caveat that the rating must be sustained to be meaningful.  Time will tell.

Carmine D.

Isn't high product turnover good for a company?  I mean what company doesn't want new product turnover to boost the bottom line with resales?  As I read here there definitely seems to be a healthy "Dyson" debate with a couple of posters on both sides.  It is obvious by the Pro Dyson side who they like, but I am curious what company the other sides posters prefer?  Is there currently a more succesful company that you guys stand behind?  If so how do they hold prices in these economic times, re sell without product line turnover, and how are they currently more succesful than Dyson?  It just seems so easy to nit pick a company if all you are going to do is take the negative side so I am wondering what you see as the current and climbing success story.

Hello JackD:

Can I conclude, since you have changed directions in your posts, that your concerns are satisfied at least for now with the dyson printed claims, their revisions, and the events and dialogue surrounding them?

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Not really, I am still researching.  A little confused by the posts here.  Seems to be both some strong support for Dyson here as well as what seems to be some vitriol towards the company and/or product.  I guess I am just first trying to figure out what the animosity is about from both sides as well as trying to figure out some facts as I don't think I could figure them out from this site alone as it appears to be a bit of emotional "gotcha" rather than Pro and Con discussion.  I suspect there is not really a "consumer" debate going on here but a few "insiders" looking to influence the market in thier direction.  I do appreciate the answer and the point in the right direction but in reading the posts I think I might be better off looking for the answer myself.

I guess my follow-up was really just trying to figure out what the Non-Dyson side's "angle" was as the other side seems obvious.  So I really didn't "change direction" in my posts I am still fact finding, perhaps guards may come up quickly here.

Perhaps others will respond and provide some more answers and insight for you. 

Most of the posters here, unlike you, are veteran posters of many years on several different vacuum Forums.  Going back to even before dyson launched in the USA in 2002. 

Not having the benefit of the past history and personalities, it's understandable to look at this site now and have the view you have.  Particularly about the persons who critique dyson.  It's like reading the last page of a novel, learning about the death of the protagonist, and asking why.  Well to get the answer, you need to read the beginning, middle and end of the novel.  Then, it all comes together.  Unfortunately they don't make/sell Cliff Notes for Vacuum Forums with the main characters, themes and plot neatly summarized!

I was in the vacuum business from 1949 to 1992.  I owned and operated a vacuum store in Bloomfield NJ.  I sold the business to another vacuum dealer who still has the store.  He and I still talk and keep up to date on the bsuiness.  The store is an historic landmark on the Newark, Bloomfield, Belleville border lines.  After 1992, I was a self-employed consultant to the industry working for both private and government entities on all matters related to vacuums.  In August 2006,  I retired and moved to Las Vegas.  I receive at least one offer of part/full-time employment every week related to the vacuum business.   So far, I've turned them all down.  Some reluctantly.  Not for love of money, but love of the business. 

I trust your research and fact finding will be successful.  If I can assist, I certainly will try.  If you prefer private emails, that's fine too.  Just send me a message offline and I will answer in kind.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote: HI Carmine,

Is this a different lawsuit from the first two?  As I understand the first Oreck / Dyson suit was settled out of court for an undisclosed sum of money.  Part of the settlement however was that Dyson could continue saying "no loss of suction" about any of it's current product sold in the USA.  When the DC18 came out, Oreck sued again over the same thing but the case was dismissed because the earlier case had been settled and was not subject to any appeal.

Dusty

CarmineD wrote:
I would encourage you to take a look at a DC07 somewhere.  Any that I have in stock have a removable air joint and even the Dyson websites (US and Canada) clearly show a thumb tab to remove the elbow (choose the 360 view)

Dusty

dusty wrote:

Hello Dusty:

You're in Canada, and it was late to the dyson sales game.  Just the last 3 years if I understood correctly.  I suspect you're getting old dyson DC07 stock before the u bend airway was made permanent.  And the dyson pics are old.  All the DC07-s now in the USA [that I have seen in stores since the launch of 2002] have a permanent u bend airway joint.  The removable one has been obsolete here in the USA.  I speak with experience in several states on both coasts.

It's an important piece.  Without it, the vacuum has no suction in the tool mode. [FYI: The DC07 pink I bought in August 2006 from TARGET had a very permanent u bend airway joint with no thumb tab to be seen and still does]. 

Carmine D.

dusty wrote:

Dusty:

It was not a suit with the NAD.  It was hearing with an industry sanctioned authority [NAD] whose ruling is binding on all the parties who agree to the hearing. 

I took the liberty to highlight the relevant words in your post.  Perhaps that is the reason ORECK subsequently filed a lawsuit against dyson with the DC18 and by-passed the NAD?  As I presume ORECK will do with all new dysons in the USA if the claim is used.  I believe ORECK is being encouraged by several vacuum makers [who are watching the proceedings closely] to pursue legal action against dyson.  IMHO. 

Of particular note for future:  Observe whether big box retailers use the dyson claim "Never loses suction" when advertising dysons for sale by their stores.  Most if not all avoid it.  Why?  I don't know if there is some legal reason, concern or suspicions on their part.  Or, and more importantly, they know it is false because they have real world experiences with new dysons under warranty that clog and lose suction returned by unhappy buyers.  If the latter, it will support ORECK's suit IMHO.  Is there a correlation with these dyson returns and the high number of dyson refurbs for sale?  A question that ORECK will raise and answer its court proceedings against dyson.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
3ish years is correct, give or take a month or two.  If I'm getting old stock, then everybody is getting old stock.  I have never seen a DC07 or DC14 with a permanent UBend (a trip to Future Shop this evening affirms this) .   Perhaps it's just something at has happened on American models?  The Dyson US website also shows how to remove a blockage from the UBend in all DC07's, the pink included. Kind of odd they haven't updated since they launched, don't you think?

I agree it's an important piece.  We make a point of showing our customers how to maintain the product they are buying and most would agree it's a good idea to have access points if a blockage were to occur. Case in point, we removed a pencil crayon from said area after a customers kid was a little over zealous cleaning their room.  The customer btw, had previously bought from Linens and Things...before you go accusing me of not really explaining my product very well :-)

Dusty

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine, let me ask you a somewhat philosophical question:  Is the U-bend permanent simply because you do not know how to take it off?  Or, rather, because you do not know how to remove the U-bend, does that mean everyone should believe it is permanent? 

Motor, Dusty:

Well let me say this:  The dyson u bend airway joint does NOT come off and stay off as easily as it did with the original launch of the DC07-s.  At that time, it had a prominent thumb tab that users stepped on to release the handle.  Only to learn that the u bend air way joint fell off and no one could replace it.  The dyson Users Guide didn't address it's removal and replacement at the time  Tool suction was zip.  Frequently, the piece was found sitting along side the display models and/or still in the box in the warehouse.

My DC07 pink, now retired from service for inability to perform as well as less expensive uprights, has no thumb tab to remove the joint, has not fallen off ,and has not been taken off since August 2006.  That makes it permanent to me.  Certainly makes it retooled from the original form and design.  How's that for dyson accuracy and correctness?

Carmine D.

Dusty, you may not recall, but it is common knowledge that many dyson users, not just me, and even dyson fans criticized the first wave of dyson vacuums for having miscellaneous pieces that fall off. 

Consumer Reports was most vocal.  Motor should remember very well the very first Consumer Reports review of the dyson DC07.  Why?  It was a lousy review.  Why?  CR was extremely critical of the dirt bin on the DC07.  Why?  The release button to disengage it from the vacuum was prone to be pressed when picked up by the bin handle by the user.  Result:  The user was left holding the dirty bin and the vacuum (18 pounds) was on the user's foot.  There is a picture engraved in my mind of the dirty deed in action in the CR edition.  Not Mr. D's finest hour.

Dyson corrected that problem too.  

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine,

I think your pink was sabotaged and marked ' for sale to Carmine' .

Are you now saying that the joint is not permanent but not as easily removed?

I purchased my DC07 about 3 years ago and it had the removable joint.  I never incurred a problem with it. 

 

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

Yes, that's what I said based on a little assistance from Motor and Dusty.  It's permanent unless deliberately and intentionally removed with effort and forethought.  No longer does it fall off accidently and unintentially and remain off.

Please read my post about the Consumer Reports review and the DC07 dirt bin.  It's a dyson and CR classic.  I'm sure you never had the same problem as CR either with your dirt bin.  Doesn't mean it didn't exist.  Just means dyson, to its credit, took CR's criticism seriously and corrected the problems.  You may not recall/don't remember.  You were not posting on the vacuum Forums at the time, to my knowledge, as HARDSELL.

You're getting better HS.  Use to be you blamed my carpets: Mohawk wool loop medium pile.  Builder grade you called it.  Which it is not.  I special ordered.   Now you say the dyson vacuum was sabotaged.  If it is the latter, it was a permanent sabotage by dyson during the design, manufacture, and production.  It failed not just me but 2 other users too in their home carpet vacuuming.  You know what happens and the result.  Gawdawful ratcheting noise, brush roll stops turning, no cleaning being done.  Since all 3 of us have household pets, the constant ratcheting noise drove the poor animals wild.  Probably gave them permanent hearing loss and fear of vacuums. 

Carmine D.