The question for me and others [which remains unanswered] is how many new dysons were sold to unsuspecting buyers who relied on these false and exaggerated claims.  I suspect many were returned to retailers when their owners learned the truth which accounts for the huge resale market for used/refurbed dyson vacuums. 

It's a moot point now except for the future and the more wiser:  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.  

Carmine D.

I recall a now famous ASA ruling recently against dyson UK.  ASA found and ruled based on the preponderence of test evidence of several vacuum industry professionals that the Electrolux Infinity upright with a full paper bag outcleaned a dyson DC14 by over 40 percent.  And, subsequently, the Infinity was allowed to keep its written advertised claim that it was a better rug performer than a dyson [much to James chagrin, who initiated the ASA action, and your unkind characterizations of the ASA rule makers here]. 

However, I can't recall that the Electrolux Infinity upright was ever a test model in the Consumer Reports in the recent past.  Perhaps I misunderstand/misinterpret your statement.  Would you mind elaborating on your above statement?

Carmine D.

Guys, are we talking about the Electrolux Intensity here? I can find no ASA reference to an 'Infinity'. If so, here's the appropriate report, and the picture's not quite as you painted it, Carmine. They ruled in Dyson's favour...

ASA Adjudications

"We [ASA] noted the independent test data submitted by Electrolux. Although we had not seen up-to-date comparative sales figures to support the market leadership claim made in the ad, we acknowledged that the independent laboratory test data provided by Electrolux showed that, when tested in accordance with International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 60312 clause 2.8, the Intensity did have 50% more suction power than Dyson's DC14 as well as the other vacuum cleaners that Electrolux had tested."

As I stated in reply to DIB, I have not seen a Consumer Reports rank and rating on the Electrolux Intensity, tho I would certainly hope and want to. 

Carmine D.

Carmine D.

Ad

Carmine D.

Clearly the ASA ruling squashes the suction myth for cleaning carpets.  Ironic?  Yes, but also a good ASA ruling.

Carmine D.

'Agitator', with a capital 'A', was certainly a Hoover term orginally, but now it's used interchangably with the terms 'brush roll' and 'brush bar' by many manufacturers; see for example the catalog listing for the Panasonic Icon models below, which references their 'beltless direct drive agitator'. Hoover abandoned the term, at least in the UK, in the early 1980s with the introduction of the Turbopower/Turbomaster uprights, which used the all-new 'Activator', which was a modern progression on the original Agitator design. Hoover UK sadly no longer use any form of beater on their upright brush bars.

I don't have the Consumer Reports findings on the Electrolux Intensity, but here's Which? Magazine's verdict:

Test criteria	Rating
Cleaning
Carpet
Laminate floors
Floorboards
Walls and corners
Performance
Allergen retention
Pet hair
Noise
Ease of use
General use
Emptying
Cleaning stairs
Manoeuvrability

I personally have an Electrolux Intensity, and I can confirm it does do a passable job on carpets. However, the RRP of £286 is laughable for a cleaner with such miniscule bags and no on-board tools. The cord is much, much too short, and it's incredibly heavy to push the bulky motor-unit/nozzle from the rear of the machine, especially when the front is glued to the carpet by the much vaunted suction! Also, it's main party-trick is it's ability to fold up small for storage. However, since you have to purchase an additional canister cleaner for 'above floor' cleaning, you lose the space you save by buying this expensive compact in the first place! It also weighs at least as much as a full-size upright. Save your money and go for a decent all-rounder.