Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Consumer Reports March issue has an updated review of vacuum cleaners and water extraction cleaners.  There is also a review of some cleaning solutions for spot cleaning.  I don't have my copy with me, but some of the results are interesting.     

One bit of curiosity:  the Miele Twist ($550) and Miele Bolero ($800?) are ranked 3 and 5 respectively.  The numerical score is one point higher for the less expensive Miele.  Otherwise the scores on individual tests are equivalent.   CR does not seem to mention whether price is a component in their scoring system, and if so how much influence it has.

Dyson's reliability has dropped slightly, but it is still in 2nd place for uprights.  Kirby is alone in first place.  The Dyson DC28 (13th) is actually ranked higher than the Kirby Sentria (15th); (however, I double checked and the numerical scores are the same - so perhaps it's more accurate to say that they are tied). 

One thing that stands out is that there isn't much difference in the overall scores.  The highest rated vacuums tend to have the best scores for carpet cleaning.  However, the overall scores reflect the tradeoffs inherent in picking a vacuum.  The best cleaning vacuums (with the exception of the 2nd rated Hoover lightweight Platinum) tend to be the heaviest - which tends to cause them to have lower handling scores. 

Another thing that stands out is the high cost of some bags.  One vacuum uses bags that are $7.50 each apparently. 

Regarding carpet cleaners, the best hands down is calling a Pro like Stanley Steemer.   Several Hoover models did well.  CR was not very complimentary about the Dyson Zorb powder.  I don't know if they used it incorrectly, but it also was the most expensive application. 

A lot of high street sellers notoriously hike up prices of consumables like bags. I shop for mine online sometimes at EBAY depending on the brand and models. A lot cheaper in other words!

Severus wrote:

Hi Severus,

I've been whining about that issue for a very long time.  As a user, Miele bags for my two run about $19 to $20 -- same price for a pack of four for the S7 upright and a pack of five for my Capricorn canister.  I remain convinced that it only takes about a buck-fifty to actually make four filtrete disposable bags, stuff 'em in a box and glue it shut.  Okay, okay, I'll throw in ten cents more for the glue.

Never have I denied that the high-filtration bags, as supplied by Miele, work well but it's the price that I'll never understand despite the niceties like the shield below the bag mouth and the sealing mechanism.  However, it seems that there's not much the consumer can do either than opt for cheaper bags or go for knocks which I think is self-defeating as there's risk of damaging an already expensive investment.  And of course, as vacmanuk has stated that there is always eBay. At best,  Miele dealers will give you a better price on bags, at least here, if you buy in bulk. But not everybody's prepared to drop 70 or 80 bucks on 10 packs of bags.

When you speak to the company, it says. "Well . . . . we have to manufacture this wonderful product, then ship and then and then and then . . ."

Speak to a dealer, he says there's nothing he can do about pricing.

Vacuum bag prices will probably be more effected by consumer trends.  I want to believe that with everything so much more accessible to us due tot he internet that people will opt for cheaper places to buy quality items at more reasonable prices.  Maybe this will prove the same regarding the pricing of the machines these bags are intended  for.

Yet, I'm not sure if the problem's not everywhere.  I stopped at the dry cleaner's today to check pricing on what I saw as simple and uncomplicated.  I have a wonderful wool and cashmere winter coat that I bought at Marshall's for a great discount.  It couldn't have cost more than 90 bucks -- a real steal.  Anyway, a button came loose and it's also time for dry cleaning.  I explained to the person at the counter that the missing button was in my possession and that I just wanted it put on again and that I'd also like the other two buttons tightened to guard against possible loss.  I was informed that it would cost $18.00 to clean the coat and that button replacement/tightening would amount to $3.00 per each of the three buttons.  Thus, basic maintenance for my "bargain" adds up to almost a third of what I paid for it. 

 My feeling was that the whole affair was worth no more than 15 bucks tops but who's right, who's wrong?  AND if that problem's solved elsewhere at a better price there will still come some new incident of railroading to deal with the next over something else.

It's really up consumers to decide where the buck stops. 

Venson

Another curiosity is with the Oreck Halo.  At $600, the performance seems to be a little lacking.  It was rated in the last quartile if I remember correctly.

If I were a consumer contemplating a purchase of a vacuum, the bag prices would be of great concern to me.  I prefer bags, and I buy in bulk at greatly reduced prices.  If I saw $5 to $7.50 per bag for the high filtration bags, I would have to seriously consider a bagless vacuum.    CR did warn that 1/3 of bagless buyers had buyer's remorse due to messy task of emptying the dirt canister and/or maintaining filters, based on a survey of vacuum owners. 

CR does make a nice point about "green vacuums" that supposedly save money by using less electricity.   The savings are so minuscule that the Department of Energy has no intention of offering Energy Star designations for vacuums.

One comment about the rankings - they shouldn't be taken too seriously.  There are a lot of ties in overall scores, and they depend a lot on what other vacuums are included.  For example, in the 2009 buyer's guide, the Kirby Sentria was ranked #5 with an overall score of 67 points. The same Kirby is ranked 15th this year with the same score of 67 points.  

Consumer Reports uses a scoring system such that: 
0-20 = Poor,
>20 to 40 = Fair,
>40-60= Good,
>60 - 80 = Very Good,
>80-100=Excellent. 

Even the highest rated vacuum, the Hoover Windtunnel Anniversary Edition ($230), only scored a 73 overall.  The top 32 vacuums score at least 61 points (i.e. Very Good).   Not a single vacuum gets an "Excellent" score - due to the various tradeoffs in design.  Most likely any vacuum in the top 32 would make a decent choice. 

For the Dyson lovers, here are the scores:
DC28 (score=67, rank=13*)         (ranks 12-15 all scored 67)
DC17 (score=65, rank=21*)         (ranks 18-22 all scored 65)
DC14(score=62, rank=26*)          (ranks 25-27 all scored 62)
DC18Slim(score=60, rank=34*)  (ranks 33-35 scored 60)

Oreck seems to have fallen in the rankings:
XL platinum power team (score=60, rank=33)
Halo (score=56, rank=40)
for reference Gary(score=52, rank=43)

CR likely ranks the results and then rounds the scores for publication purposes. 

Based on the CR scoring system, the best performing vacuum for the money is the Hoover Tempo Widepath at $80 with a rank of 6 and a score of 70.  

Severus wrote:

Howdy Severus,

Wow!  Thanks for all the work.  It's good to know that there's simple "plain jane" machinery around that can get work done as well as or better than substantially costlier machines.  

Best,

Venson

Venson wrote:
I don't know whether the Tempo would be appropriate for allergy sufferers, but the bags were relatively cheap as well.  I would have a hard time purchasing any vacuum that required $7.50 per bag change. 

Severus wrote:

Severus,

What was the CR rating as far the Tempo's emissions level?  Severe allergy sufferers definitely have issues but those with only mild allergies or none should be fine.  It's my feeling that allergy sufferers may be affected by design flaws as much as by actual emissions.  Even if a vacuum filters well, if it disturbs dust while in use the problem's about the same.

I suppose marketers' thinking in general is that if people can spend a thousand bucks or so on a vacuum, high-priced bags and accessories should also be no problem.  This doesn't cover the "splurge" fact however.  Not throwing away money frivolously but spending more than usual in the hope of acquiring long lasting quality.  This is often the pitch high-end sellers use when they talk you out of going for the hundred dollar deal at Sears and get you to spend several hundred dollars above what you'd planned.

Venson

Venson,

Regarding emissions, CR's testing doesn't seem to be that interesting:

Of the 52 uprights tested, 42 scored Excellent (81%), 6 scored Very Good (11.5%), and 4 scored Good (7.7%).    The Hoover Tempo did score an excellent in emissions for what it's worth.

 

I believe Which test the emissions of the vacuum cleaners....

Severus wrote:

Perfect!  It cleans wel and contains fine dust well.  Can't ask for more than that for the price.

Venson