Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

The Dyson DC22 canister was very recently introduced in Japan. I have heard that this will make it to the US market in order to expand their canister range.

Key Features:

-Root Cyclone with Core Separation
-Dyson Digital Motor
-Stowaway Design
-Motorhead
-Pre filter rinse once every seven years

How many Dyson copies currently exist in the UK?  I knew there was the Vax Zero at one time but is it still in production? 

There are so many of them here it's not even funny, and they keep coming.  As with anything, some are good, and others could be better.  The Kenmore Iridium/Progressive canister made by LG is probably the best one I've seen to date.  I had heard it was a good Dyson copy, even better than the Dyson according to some, but didn't think anything of it until I used one and examined it up close.  What a cleaner that is, and POWERFUL.  There was also something different about the cyclone assembly when I took it off that was a clear advantage.  Can't remember if it was sequential separation or not.  LG recently released an upright Dyson clone for Sears called the Kenmore PremaLite that I haven't had a chance to see yet...did talk to someone who played with one and he mentioned a few problem areas.  I noticed on the PremaLite that the bin attached to the rear of the machine, versus the front as with the rest which I thought was strange. 

The best upright Dyson copy I've used so far has to be the Bissell HealthyHome made by Daewoo.  Definitely isn't your run-of-the-mill cheap plastic "Pissell"...really a dramatic departure from that.  This one is actually pretty well made and fairly heavy.  Great engineering too I thought, and lots of power.  At the meeting there was a bunch of dirt and debris under the repair table, including small screws, nuts, bolts, etc. left over from stuff we were taking apart, and of course I put the HealthyHome to the test...picked all of it right up, screws and all!  Just for fun I also connected the hose to the Hoover Z400 (filtered bagless that had seen its fair share of use that night and was fairly clogged by then) while both were running.  The dirt stopped moving in the Z.  There's also the Bissell Total Floors Velocity which is supposed to be a copy of Dyson's dual cyclone setup...not sure how well that works as I haven't had a chance to play with one yet.

Hoover's Dyson copies include the Fusion, also badged as the Maytag Legacy (the Fusion/Legacy name is gone and the machine is now sold as the Mach 3)...there's also the Mach 5 and WindTunnel Cyclonic.  All three use the same bin setup where the air is drawn up vertically through shroud, where lightweight debris can clog the holes.  Leaves a lot to be desired and could definitely benefit from a redesign, but I've used them and they seem to work well enough.  Euro-Pro had the Shark Infinity, with 24 test-tube-sized cylindrical cyclones...not cone-shaped like the others.  I gave that machine a workout cleaning dirty machines pulled from the basement and the power didn't drop off, but you could see that the cyclones got dirty fast from fine dust.  Dirt Devil had that Spinnergy machine out for a while, worked OK but I thought it was VERY cheaply made.  I see it's been pulled now from the website.  I also see that they have a new machine on the site, the "i" which to me closely resembles the Vax Zero.  Interesting.   Wal-Mart also has a GE-labeled dual cyclonic bagless lightweight, with a large fine dust chamber, for $59.  I had to buy one this summer to try out, and it's not a bad little cleaner.  I did notice the pre-motor filter gets a little dusty after use, but I guess that can be attributed to the fact that it's only a dual cyclone.

Eureka is the only manufacturer I know that hasn't jumped on the Dyson multi-cyclone clone bandwagon, yet.  They had a dual-cyclone machine out for a while (4880 I think?) in the early-2000s which is gone now...all they have now (of course) are the horrid filtered bagless machines.

That's all I can think of now.  Any other Dyson clones you guys know of?

Hi Motorhead,

I don't think it fair to call them "copies".  That would mean that all bagged vacuums developed overtime are copies or that all machines that use water as the main filtration mediums are copies of each other.  That is not case. 
An idea is one thing and the way it's applied is another. 

The Electrolux XXX employed a low-mounted suction port that promoted air movement over the bottom of the bag which kept at least a portion of the bag wall "clean",  and the user working, until the vacuum was really full. 
The machine was also designed so that there was plenty of room all around the bag to allow as much filtering area as possible.  A lot of tank type vacs made during that era missed the point in that area.   Electrolux did not invent the disposable
bag which was in use well before the Electrolux Model LX which we first associate it with but the company did not "copy."  It took the idea and embellished it.  Thus came a double-walled, self-sealing dust bag that, even though on the small side,
gave you a decent bang for your buck in the average home.

Cyclonics -- the method used to produce air movement that inhibits loss of maximum suction -- is a term that vacuum makers have been playing around with for years and will continue to play with.  Filter Queen uses "cyclonics", the squat little piggy vacuums like Air Storm, Patriot,
Miracle Mate, etc., all use cyclonics to prolong suction.  The Kenmore Iridium is indeed a quite capable machine and though it shares the idea that Dyson also employs I don't see it as a copy.  As an instance, I like the Iridium more than the Dyson canister in that it
provides a better power nozzle and the option to raise or lower motor speed.  That too is what it's about.  Swirling air in x-number of directions doesn't mean much if you don't have well designed attachments and a modicum of convenience. 
The short coming of the Kenmore and the Dyson canister too -- if there copies -- must be the problem of filtering breakdown when air movement is impeded in the dust collectors due to larger dedris. My Iridium does a great job but debris can
become lodged above the flange on the shroud.  When that happens air filtration, not suction, takes a nose dive   Debris build up, and not a lot, compromises the ideal of "cyclonics" and the pre-filter becomes the essential filtering medium. 
Everything looks swell when you're just picking up a bit fluff and watching it swirl around in the dust bin.  Thus far, I have seen no demos of these machines that get down to the nitty gritty of real household use.  The Iridium I have gets the job
done nicely but I do have to have to remember to keep the little blue pre'filter washed.

As for the LG-sourced Permalite, it is another example of sound logic and convenience. Just about anyone can walk up to it and use it right of the bat as opposed to the confusion I've seen Dyson uprights cause for many first timers.  And believe me the
dust bin is in just the right place.  I plan on bringing one home in the not too diistant future for a thorough look.

Best,

Venson

Hello Trilobite

I'm surprised too that the DDM has not made an appearance in the UK, but looking at the latest figures from Dyson 80% of his market c(exports) comes from abroad now! Japan

I believe is one of his most successful markets, I think the the UK market has slowed down in recent years!  Saying that it would be nice to see the DDM and the new core separation

in the UK at some point, which I'm sure we will!  I've wondered what the point of the DC19 & 20 was, I can see the point of the DC21 with the motorhead!  I think they change the cyclone

setup from 12 to 8 cyclones to give the DC22 root/core seperation a better impact.  May be to cut down on parts etc so all model canisters and uprights at present use root 8 cyclone

technology.  I believe there is no difference in suction power but saying that th DC19, 20, 21 have lower airwatts then their older models DC08/DC08TW.

The bleed holes on the tools were useful on the powerful DC07 (UK) but have to say like you don't really serve a use anymore on models like the DC14,15,18.  I like the bend in the

crevice tools, as it angles the wand away from the wall, but yes they are not long enough and are no use with the bend in them when going down a narrow opening to clean.

The only thing I think Dyson uprights let themselves down with is the brushbar!  They do a good job but I have seem better lately as you mentioned on a Sebo (Felix & X4).  For me

they just need to change that and make the cleaning head flatter/slimmer to fit easily under furniture etc... Saves getting the tools and attachments out all the time!

DC18

Hello Motorhead

There are 2 vacuums in the UK that have copied or done there own version of Dyson's Cyclone technology and they are Vax and LG.  Both have done there own version of the

Root Cyclone Technology.  I believe the LG is very good version!   No other vacuums have gone that way yet, they are all cheap bagless ones using filters to filter the dirt out. Once

market leaders Electrolux and Hoover (UK) in the UK don't seem to make quality products anymore, both have not come out with anything very exciting in years.  Dyson is the

main player from what I can see in the UK!

DC18

Venson wrote:
Hi Venson,

I understand where you're coming from, however, taking an idea and embellishing it *is* in fact copying something.  When I said that Dyson copies exist, I certainly didn't mean it in a negative connotation...it's just what they are.  There will always be the front-runners (whether it be Air-Way, Rexair, or Dyson) that take the initiative to come up with a new, theoretically improved design.  If it proves to be successful and a fierce competitor, the others will most likely copy that same basic design, but adjust it to their own specifications, making changes where necessary...in other words take the idea and embellish it.  The way I see it, copying is definitely not a bad thing at all...it leads to many positive changes and advances and has brought us to where we are now (not just vacuums, many other things as well).   I honestly believe that had Air-Way not invented the disposable bag, Electrolux would have continued to use the cloth shakeout bag in the 1950's.   That's not to say that someone else wouldn't have invented the paper bag...it just would have come about at a later date.  Since they have been around so long (and are now so different from one another), it doesn't really make any sense for us to call all bagged machines "Air-Way copies," but all of the disposable bags are based on the same original design.  And the other water filtration vacuums on the market today besides Rainbow, however loose of a copy they are (separator, non-separator; cheap, expensive, etc.), are still copies of the same basic design invented by Rexair.  Again, I don't mean that in a negative way at all. 

As for cyclonic technology, I know it's been around, but not in the sense that Dyson came up with.  Even though Electrolux, Interstate, etc., touted cyclonic technology, they still needed a filtering medium (cloth bag).  That would eventually clog no matter how well-engineered the machine was.  I would compare those to the current filtered bagless upright and canister machines on the market today...yes, the dirt spins around in the container, but the filter still clogs.  If you were to remove the filter, the cyclonic action itself could not contain the dirt, instead it would naturally go toward the motor.  With the Dyson, you could remove all of the filters and it would not blow dust as the cyclonic action itself contains the dirt.  How many machines could you remove the filter from without loading the motor with dirt and consequently blowing visible dust out the exhaust?  Except for the Dyson (and other machines that have copied the design exactly like the Iridium), you really can't do that.  Just because the cyclonic action is there, doesn't necessarily mean it works.  That really all depends on how fine-tuned the design really is.  I agree with what you said about the Dyson attachments, those could definitely use some improvement.  Aside from the silly air-bleed hole, the DC21's crevice tool is OK, and I like the floor tool, however, the dusting brush and upholstery tool are horrible.  But mediocre attachments has been my main complaint on new machines for a few years; recently it's always been more of a scrub brush than a dusting brush, a short crevice tool, and a ridiculously tiny upholstery tool.  Regarding the Kenmore (my feeling is that the DC21 power nozzle is one of the best there is, even though the Kenmore's is good), the main characteristic of cyclonic machines is that air movement is not impeded.  Even if debris becomes trapped in the shroud area, air movement and filtration shouldn't be affected, especially not with this one since there are the high-efficiency cyclones as well.  In a cyclonic machine, the pre-motor filter never becomes the only filtering medium under normal use conditions.  I've never experienced anything like that with my DC21 during regular use.  However, if someone  "experiments" with one by sucking up a bunch of sheetrock dust, ash, etc., nonstop (like putting the hose into a bucket of ash or Capture fast, without going slowly and letting the machine take in extra air), there's bound to be some (if not a good amount of) dust on the pre-motor filter. Someone who had just bought their first Dyson (a DC18 Slim I believe) wanted to see what it could really do and did just that...sucked up a bunch of sheetrock dust up at once.  The pre-motor filter had a considerable amount of the stuff on there, of course.  Yes, the separation may be good, but it's not perfect.  It's only a Root Cyclone, not a level 3!  However, at no point in time did the suction ever drop off, and this is what this person was trying to accomplish to prove if the Dyson's claims were really true (after all this was the first one he bought...shortly afterward he bought his second new Dyson, a DC21). 

My feeling is that had James Dyson not invented cyclonic separation, Hoover most likely would not have come up with it on their own today...they would continue to use bags as they had been doing.  The problem was that Dyson was taking sales away from the high-end Hoovers...no one was buying the $400 WindTunnel (and later, the WindTunnel 2) anymore.  Hoover needed something to stay competitive (and, in hindsight, stay alive)...so they looked in the direction of their competition and the Fusion design was born.  To me, that machine was a dramatic departure from the others...for a while I did not care for the new Hoovers as even the expensive models still had a cheap "plasticky" feel to them.  The Fusion didn't.  The plastic parts were a different grade, and the telescoping part of the handle was metal.  Definitely an improvement, and ironically that was not the most expensive machine they had (or currently have, as the Mach 3), either.  Of course due to poor management (heading down an already rocky path and lacking innovation as early as the 1990s), Hoover would soon be acquired by TTI, although considering some of the decent TTI-made Hoovers that are out there, I don't think it was necessarily a bad thing.  The HealthyHome did the same thing for the Bissell name (in part due to its $299 price tag), in my opinion, a name commonly associated with cheap cleaners that don't clean and break often. 

What I'm trying to say is that maybe we're on to something here, that because of the copying and trying to make a better machine, the overall quality of new retail-store vacuums is improving.  I honestly believe that they have improved in quality just in the past year.  I bought 3 machines brand new this year, for the first time in over 10 years...and those who know me know that I don't just buy any new machine.  Two of those machines I bought were Wal-Mart machines under $60 (the other was the Dyson DC21 canister), something that I previously would never touch.  And those two Wal-Mart machines have visible metal parts as well, not just the fasteners!  I for one would love nothing better than to finally get out of the "cheap crappy vacuum" stage...it seems that the mid-1990s through the mid-2000s were the worst period for that.  At any rate, things are looking up, and we can only improve from here.

-MH

P.S.  I recently found out that Wal-Mart is no longer selling the GE-labeled dual-cyclonic bagless anymore...any time someone brings one to the register and the cashier rings it up, it says "Do Not Sell."  I wonder why this is?

DC18 wrote: Hi DC18,

Again, I'm surprised that more manufacturers over there have not introduced their own version of the Dyson!  But I guess that would make sense since it seems that Dyson occupies a very large section of the market there/   What really caught my interest, though, is that both you and Trilobite mentioned that Dyson's digital motor is not on any machines over there yet.  I wonder why that is the case, considering the market for Dysons there is so large?  Maybe they don't feel it necessary to introduce new technology when they have already dominated the market?  Interesting...

-MH

Hello Motorhead

Yes it is surprising more haven't followed, but having said that Hoover (UK) and Electrolux have in the passed tried to do there own version of the Dual Cyclone back in the late 90's. 

Prolem is Dyson would alway take them to court for infrigement on his patents (which has expired on the Dual technology a while ago) so probably put them off. 

Now Dyson has moved on to Root technology dual is ok but old technology.  LG and Vax are the only ones really that are doing their version (copies) of the Root Technology. 

 All the other brands seem to be happy to knock out cheap bag and bagless machines for under a £100 or just over leaving mainly Dyson to dominate the higher upper

value of the UK Vacuum market.  I'm surprised the DDM has not made it into the UK market yet, not sure why this is? 

Yes Dyson does dominate the UK market I can't see that being a reason why the DDM has yet to be launched here.  Nothing too major since the DC15 Ball has been launched in the Upright and Canister (cylinder) markets in the UK. 

The DC22 Motorhead in the UK is a new up to date version to the DC05 Motorhead, and the DC18 is a up to date version of the DC03 with the DC15 ball technology made

slimmer and simpler.  Not that there is anything wrong with these new models, they were needed in the model line up.  I'm hoping the DDM will make an appearance in the

UK market in 2008!  Not sure what shape or form when it does appear here in the UK wil it take!  I do feel we are in need of a totally new upright to replace the DC14/07 in the UK although I believe the DC14 is

quite a popular upright model in the UK Dyson range!  The base of this machine (apart from a few changes/improvements with each model) has not changed since the DC04

model and I think it's time for a radical change which could include the DDM!

DC18

Hello,

 < This and other DC22 pics from a Japanese blog (while on blog, click pics to enlarge).  Here.        DIB

Hello DIB

Interesting pictures of the DC22.  Shows close up of the new Root and Core technology! Like the new motorhead that is on the DC22 looks slimmer in height! 

DC18

Hi DIB,

Great new pictures of the DC22, thanks for linking.  Of course you know it makes me even more anxious to see this machine in person and buy one when it's introduced here.  The new low-profile Motorhead does look good; appears to be slightly narrower but still the same basic design as the DC21's Motorhead, which is really one of the best power nozzles I've used in a long time.  To me a gear-driven brushroll is the only way to go now.  As for the low profile, I don't have a problem getting under the bed and other furniture with my 21, but this probably makes it even more of a breeze.

I'm still itching to hear how the DDM sounds on startup and full speed.