Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

I recently visited a local vac shop, not the one run by a close friend. We discussed Dyson and other brands. He maintains that Dyson WAYYY overestimated the cost of returns/warranty repairs when he invaded the US vac market, which is why the Dysons were given a 5 yr warranty. He said Dyson, despite rumors to the contrary, is making money hand over fist, and show no sign of slowing down. Even though the hose is excluded as a warranty part, Dyson is issuing repair authorizations for them. He also said he is selling Dyson dirt canisters, cords, roller brushes, and hoses like there is no tomorrow.  He said Dyson is ready to cut prices when necessary to boost flagging sales.  The DC-07 will make a reappearance at  $299 or lower when the time is right.

I stopped by Best Buy to purchase a memory card  for my camera, and wandered down the vac aisle, of course. 33 full size vacuums on display. THREE bagged machines, all uprights. Other than Dyson, only ONE canister, a Dirt Devil straight suction. Dyson had on display three cans and four uprights, over 20% of the vac sku offerings!  There are new and interesting things in the vac shops, but nothing has changed at BBR where most of America buys their vacuums.  According to him, Panasonic has lost the contract to build Sears canisters.
All of this is, of course, excellent news for Kirby.

CarmineD wrote:

Honda has been advertising 0 APR.  I doubt sales incentives would increase sales by 49% if Toyota wasn't still the best auto available today.  Remember all those incentives on Hoover prior to them selling.?  It is difficult to sell inferior products even at distress prices.  

I am shifting gears away from a topic that you brought up.  As usual when caught with your drawers down you want to avoid the subjet. 

The discussion wasn't about Dyson being robbed of sales from other bagless vacs.  It was about bagged overtaking bagless.  You still can't produce data to support your whimsical comments.  Get facts then let's talk.

I am already out of the junk business.  I meant Oreck business.  I already knew I did not like them.  Just nol how much.

CarmineD wrote:

1. Good point about less dumping, but let's be practical here - it's more messy and owners won't like that compared to a disposable dust bag.
   
2. Filters for vacuums that use disposable dust bags can be the same as those that have permanent bags - Hoover and Electrolux have done this in the past but the cost of upkeep isn't the same because of poor sealing on the material shake out bag.
   
3. Dependent on the actual material used, fabric shake out bags aren't all the same - Vax's shake out bags for their canisters for example start to deteriorate after five times of the bag being washed. The material isn't designed to last a lifetime and thus needs replacing. Others on the market exist made of similar thin cotton - SMS bags last longer but they're not all uniform and can't always be trusted to seal in the dirt. The bag seals are usually well made but the plastic grid holders that are permanently sealed to the dust channel can go early on due to over heat when left to dry out.
   
4. Because permanent washable bags aren't all uniform, made out of the same material, filters can be damaged because of poor sealing on the bag itself. Usually most bags these days have a simple clip to keep the bag attached together - but this isn't enough to protect filters from being over clogged with escaping dust.
   

vacmanuk wrote:

There is a market for permanent cloth like reusable bags.  Just as there was for bagless.  And is for paper bags.  Science and technology advancements pave the way.  Always contingent on price.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS would you make up your mind.  What do you want to talk about?  Cars or vacuums?  Bagged vacuums like your Royal Emminence.  Bagless like your HOOVER upright.  Or junk like your DC07 that you got rid of. 

Like I said, and will repeat for your benefit for shortsightedness, now is a great time to buy a new car.  Incentives galore.  With toyotas selling at their lowest prices ever in the USA.  But that's what buyers expect.  After all, their loss in retail values are the subject of several class action suits. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

As suspected.  All you got is hot air.  Where is the data?  You are punch drunk again. 

Bullies like you run and hide when they are confronted.

HARDSELL wrote:

I thought Carmine was from the area of the RAGING BULL .

I heard Camine is a great shot with a screwdriver.

MOLE

mole wrote:

Bull is correct.  In fact he should be called BS.

I think he missed the whole car he threw at.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS you're nuttier than the deluxe pecan log at Stuckey's.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
For environmentalists the thought of using a permanent washable fabric bag means no harms to cutting trees down to save on paper. That may work for them but for the moment let me give you an example.

A cost of Vax genuine dust bags cost between £5-99 and double that for the same pack of 5 bags plus an extra filter kit. The permanent bag for the Vax canister is priced at the same as the extra kit dust bag kit, or for simpler understanding, double the price of the genuine dust bags. Most buyers these days tend to buy copy bags so they're even cheaper, sometimes half the price of genuine bags and only Sebo in the UK have released information about warnings of using copy bags (seen here: http://www.cleaningmag.com/articles/view/the-real-thing/0). I dont think most buyers listen when it comes to buying bags and will just go for whatever is available. Having owned the Vax canister myself and having had to pay out for three shake out bags in the machine's life time I have now returned to using paper dust bags. Simply because it is a dirty and messy affair when it comes to emptying and the poor cloth material doesn't last long after it has been washed and dried. Certainly my view would change personally if Vax updated the actual material to withstand machine wash, of which it carries correct and exact wash instructions.

At this moment in time Carmine, I don't think it's prudent to consider that the permanent dust bag is the next best thing. Certainly over the infinitely disposable idea which gets rid of dust once and for all out of the vacuum cleaner it makes a lot more sense to consider this than dirty shake out bags. Here's a quote I picked up after reading a short review following a Hitachi vacuum cleaner by someone:

http://www.comparestoreprices.co.uk/vacuum-cleaners/hitachi-cv790.asp

"...We bought our little Hitachi in 1996. It is the 1100W model. I have been delighted with the performance. It is well made and has excellent suction. The only thing that I don't like about the CV790 is the permanent dustbag. It is a bonus not to have to buy paper bags, but cleaning the clothbag is a dirty affair. The best method seems to be to brush the dust off in a bucket of water; otherwise one is covered in a cloud of muck. I repaired vacuum cleaners for a living for seven years and can certainly recommend the Hitachi CV790 as a well made, reliable machine. They are now discontinued, but parts are still available from Charles Hyde.

If you see one for a good price in a second hand shop it may be a good buy. However, do be aware that the cloth dust bag needs to be thoroughly cleaned on a regular basis in order to maintain good suction and prolong motor life..."

vacmanuk wrote:

Hi,

Just for history's sake, American Electrolux, Model XXX on, did not use pre-filters.  There was not a hing between the bag, whether permanent or disposable, and the fans and motor but a perforated grill or bag cage.  However, Electrolux models bore an exhaust filter until the coming of the Model G (save for the "hospital" model that I've seen few of) when it was dispensed with.  That model and others relied only upon the multi-layer disposable dust bag for many years until someone decided to go back to exhaust filters come the Renaissance series and its secondary models. 

The interesting thing here is that these cleaners despite the less than fancy filtering arrangement held up well and didn't begin to be reffered to as "dust blowers' until salesmen hawking other brands fell into the habit of it about ten years ago.

Lux permanent bags -- and I've emptied many -- were not all that difficult to empty and, depending on how you look at it, were less complicated to deal with than a present-day bagless machine's collection bin.  If you've got debris stuck inside a bagless bin that you have to dig out by hand the dust exposure may prove higher. 

The whole issue has a lot to do with consumer mind-set.  We are daily being fed info as to what toss-away thing  we can buy or what we can spared touching.  There are still those who see life as livable using a string mop along with those that believe they'll be killed by some dread disease if their hands are allowed to touch the water in a mop bucket.  The latter feeling is far more profitable to manufacturers and it will be a long time before they'll be thinking about dissuading us.

Venson