Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Has anyone seen this yet?  It just hit the shelves a couple of weeks ago at Wal-Mart (not even on the Hoover or WM website at this point), I picked one up around that time after speaking to Tom G. (who was the first one to tell me about it) but had neglected to post about it on here until now.  I finished posting a review in the Reviews section, needless to say I am very impressed with the machine now that I have been using it for a couple of weeks and highly encourage everyone to at least head to Wal-Mart and check it out. 

For those of you who haven't seen it, TTI/Hoover has finally jumped on the multi-cyclone bandwagon after experimenting with dual-cyclone for a couple of years with the Mach series, and only recently getting *that* right with a redesigned shroud for the Mach 3.  This Whisper is completely different, it's a copy of a Root Cyclone Dyson and a damn good one at that.  At $120 I am blown away by the type of machine it is, very substantial and not cheap-feeling by any means.  It's a completely new design, and appears to contain elements of the Mach series, the failed "One" cleaner in the UK, and, oddly enough, the LG/Kenmore Premalite.  At first glance it appears to be a dual-cyclone machine, until you either look at the side of the box or separate the two halves of the cyclone assembly.  Indeed, there are 6 high-efficiency cyclones hidden above the bin, and they look just like a Dyson's.  You will also notice the cyclonic "arrows" on the Hoover logo in front, for added emphasis

Carpet performance is good, it handles very nicely (positive weight) and the double-chevron brushroll helps pull the machine along; the bristles are soft but still effective.  What sets it apart from the Dyson though is above-floor cleaning convenience.  You push a button and the handle wand releases, you do not even have to let go of the handle; you're using the SAME ergonomic handle you just vacuumed the carpet with.  The wand is long as well, and does not need to be inverted for use.  There are only 2 attachments, and the wand isn't adjustable, but the brush/upholstery tool is, I presume to reach tight spaces.  I suppose if worse comes to worse other standard 1 1/4" attachments could work, it appears to be the same though I have not tried it.  I'll check that out further and post the findings.  The motor is soft-starting (like the Hoover Z), and the brushroll (driven by a separate motor) automatically starts and stops when the handle is lowered or raised, if the brushroll switch is on.  There are also 2 indicator lights showing when the brushroll is on, and when the suction is blocked.

This machine is basically a Dyson DC07 or DC14...at a third of the price.  Being a Dyson fan I hate to say it, but Dyson may be facing some competition with this machine as far as regular uprights are concerned, once it is more widely available and more people find out about it.  It's no match for the DC17 in terms of performance, obviously, but I can't see any reason why the 7 or 14 would be more desirable, as strange as that sounds.  If it was inexpensive and worked well but cheaply made, then it's obvious the Dyson would be the clear winner (as it usually is), but that's the thing...this machine does not seem to be cheaply made at all.  Definitely no WindTunnel here and I can't see why it wouldn't last a reasonable length of time.   On the other hand, while possibly not-so-good news for Dyson this could be some positive news for Hoover, perhaps the first of many machines to come?  It will be interesting to see what the future holds.

-MH

CarmineD wrote:
Are you refering to Orecks "simply amazing" claim or Hoovers "non-stop suction" claim?

Dusty

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Hello DIB:

Sorry guys.  Relax.  Settle down.  Take a chill pill.  My bad.  [Before posting here, I was reading the NAB, and must have had it still on my mind.  Happens when you reach my age: OLD.]

Meant to say ASA ruling against dyson.  Of particular note is that the ASA is a UK ruling authority, which BTW is dyson's country of origin.  Pretty bad when your own shoot you down dead in the water on a gray area matter: advertising claims typically passed off as sales puffing.   Maybe no more? 

My point is this: The powers that be here in the USA will be looking at advertising claims and holding the makers feet to the fire on these advertised statements.  No passes.  Benefit of the doubt will go to the consumers not the vacuum makers.

I'm waiting for the "lifetime" claim on filters and belts to get challenged.  And it will!  MOLE is right on the money on this farce.  May I add too, just as he was right on the money over 3 years ago when he said dyson's farcical claim: Never clogs, never loses suction is laughable.  He was right over 3 years ago and still! 

Carmine D.

dusty wrote:

Hey Dusty Man:

I'm referring to all suction claims specifically made by vacuum cleaner brands. 

Do they have to meet minimum advertising standards or maximum advertising standards? 

Do 'Non-stop suction"; "No loss of suction"; and "Constant suction" all get held to the same high standard and meaning in the printed word.  So vacuum brand makers can't cop out when called on the carpet by each other/consumers who rely on the claims?  Will the US ruling authorities err on the side of the consumers, and not the vacuum makers?  By no longer giving the vacuum makers a pass [when suction diminishes].  Will the ruling decisions lower the bar on these vacuum suction claims?  Or slowly start to raise it and hold vacuum makers accountable for their written claims?

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Manufacturers will always stretch the truths about their products, it makes for good television.  If complaints arise people like NAD and ASA are there to handle the situation and to that I say more power to them.  I have more respect for Dyson (and Hoover for that matter)  who abide by the decision rather than Halo who paid no attention to it and now have to do battle with the FTC.  As a vacuum guy I found the arguments Dyson put forth to ASA in defense of their commercial made perfect sense, but then I know the product and I know the competition.  For the average consumer I see where the problems arise.  Exagerating claims is nothing new in any industry (look at the false milage being touted by Hybrid cars) and I'm sure it will continue on.  Let the watchdog agencies in charge take care of the false claims and things will work themselves out in the end.

On Dysons "no loss of suction" claim, that is still used in all their advertising.  As I understand it, ASA had no problem with that part of the slogan and accepted the testing that was done to prove the point.

Dusty

dusty wrote:

Hey Dust Man:

Well said.  I note the major big box retailers don't use the claim: Never loses suction" in their ads for dysons.  I suspect the reason you cited [ASA gave it a pass] is the reason ORECK is pursuing legal action.  Possibly, the reason retailers are silent on the claim in print. Pending legal action. 

In a court of law, judges, juries and lawyers impute more weight to the exact meanings and reliance on the advertised words and claims. 

The problem with the old dyson claim: "Never Clogs" is that many dyson buyers relied on this false claim as the sole justification to pay $500 plus for purchase.  When users learned their dysons did clog they returned them to the retailers and squawked!  Hence the ASA action.  That's the crux of the dyson matter.  That too can weigh in on the reason retailers don't use the dyson claim: Never loses suction.  How does the saying go:  Never say never?  Ops there goes another dyson refurb.

Dyson is going down for the count on this claim too.  Dyson will join the infamous ranks of makers like halo who overstate their product claims.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Dyson has always contended that if the owner will follow the printed directions, the filters will not clog and the machine will not lose suction.  If you follow the printed directions on an Oreck, Hoover, or Eureka with a bag, by the time the dust reaches the full bag mark, the machine will have lost a significant amount of power and the bag will have clogged.  What I'm saying, very simply, is that if the customer follows the directions the Dyson will have 100% suction, 100% of the time.  Now, with other multi-cyclone vacuums on the market (like the Hoover, Dirt Devil Spinnergy, Bissell HealthyHome, Infinity, etc.), if the customer follows the directions, those machines will not lose suction or clog either.  For your information, the Infinity claims right on the vacuum cleaner "Never Loses Suction" and "Lifetime Clean Air".  The Hoover Whisper claims, right on the box, "Non-Stop Suction".  The Dirt Devil Spinnergy claims, right on the box, "Multiple Cyclones Separate Particles at a Higher Velocity Creating Guaranteed Sustained Suction For Every Room You Clean".  The Dirt Devil Spinnergy box also goes on to say "Multi-Stage Cyclonic Technology Prevents Clogging of Filter". 

The fact is, they have ALL jumped on the Dyson bandwagon.  Dyson is not the only one to make that claim anymore, therefore, it will be harder to dispute in the future.  As all vacuum manufacturers begin to use Dyson's technology, it will in fact be the only thing that exists.  Bags will be as obsolete as you are, and their days are just as numbered

-MH

Hey Motor Man:

That's the reason these suction claims are going to get scrutinized closely in the future.  Just as the ASA did with the dyson claim.

Again, disagree.  Do you see a pattern here?  Bagged vacuums are still here after 6 years of dysons.  And will be here long after dyson is gone.  Bagless is a fad and fading fast, especially for high prices paid in the past on dysons.  HOOVER Whispertone: $120.  HEALTHY HOME $250.  Dyson $500.  Dah!  Sayonora on the old steel guitar.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
If bagless is a fad it's interesting then that if you check the Hoover, Dirt Devil, and Eureka websites you will find that there are 65 (give or take a few) bagless uprights available versus only 19 (once again, give or take) bagged models.  The cheapest units?  Bagged.  The most heavily promoted?  Bagless.  Our rep from one of these companies explains to us that the box stores don't want to deal with the hassle of bags, they just want to move product.  Bagless is their choice and that's good because the end result is that people are either sick of cheap bagless vacs and step up to a Dyson or they're sick of bagless all together and step up to a Riccar or Sebo or other high end product.

Dusty

dusty wrote:

Dusty,

The once backyard inventor influences an entire industry and retail too, incredible!  It was interesting hearing you tell how Dyson’s premium priced vacuums helped customers get accustomed and/or except the idea of paying more for technology and/or quality, which helps sell other premium brands too.  I love the Dyson story and it’s far reaching impact.        DIB

Hey Dust Man:

You make a point worth debate.  Let me rephrase.  Big box stores don't want the hassle of carrying bags for bagged vacuums so prefer bagless vacuums.  [Tho these same stores' carry an aisle full of bagless filters].  Why? 

Obviously, the vacuum manufacturers you sited, HOOVER, DIRT DEVIL, EUREKA, and dyson use the big box stores as their major sales venue for their vacuums.  So what do they do?  They produce bagless vacuums for the big box stores.  Look at that sales venue:  Big box stores are synonymous with disposables.  Cheap.  Undiscerning vacuum buyers are getting bagless vacuums forced on them by the big box stores and the vacuum makers that cater to them.  But for how long?  You can fool all the people, some of the time.  You can fool some of the people all of the time.  But you can't fool all the people all of the time.

BTW, the best selling vacuum at BEST BUY stores is the EUREKA Boss Smart vacuum bagged upright for $149.  Never on sale.  Rarely advertised.  Has been numero uno for sales for years, before and after dyson launch.

Carmine D.