Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Subscribers to consumerreports.org have been able to add user reviews of vacuums for several years now.  It's not uncommon to read a user taking CR to the woodshed for a shoddy product purchased due to CR's high ranking.  Some of the highest ranked products have some of the worst reviews.  I suspect CR readers are toughest on the highest ranked products and more lenient on lesser ranked products since expectations are lower.  The disagreement many times is associated with CR's overall criteria not aligning itself with the needs of some consumers.   For example, it is common to see a consumer complaining that the highly rated canister vacuum weighing in at 26 pounds is too difficult for them to handle.  Many complaints seem to deal with reliability.  

Rather surprisingly , the Rainbow which rates very poorly in the Consumer Reports ratings, gets 4.5 out of 5 stars from the users.  I don't know if this is a direct result of the sales pitch that goes with the Rainbow, or a deficiency in the testing by CR.   Dyson owners are especially testy.  They always seem surprised that their vacuums don't perform better in CR's tests carpet cleaning tests.  

It's difficult to know whether the user reviews will influence ratings in the future due to their inherent biases.  Perhaps CR will do a better job of evaluating reliability data in the future.   CR has reported that when they get a lot of user complaints about reliability, that they dig deeper into the members annual survey to look for problems.  However, users with problems are more likely to publish reviews than users that are content.  

I believe feedback from members has resulted in the tests on cleaning pet hair and more emphasis on lightweight and ease of use. 

budmattingly wrote:
One of the reasons that the ratings change is that the criteria changes to reflect the times.   for example, the tests on pet hair are relatively new.   The weightings of individual test scores may change to reflect the needs of subscribers.  For example, although carpet cleaning ability might be the most important factor, ease of use might be weighted more due to subscriber demands.  I say this based on the relatively high ratings of light weight vacuums.   Then again, these tend to be fan first designs which are very efficient. 

As I've stated before, I'm not certain I trust the results for the Rainbow.  The Rainbow is truly unique with the water filtration, and I'm not convinced that it's the worst vacuum tested on carpet.  That said, I wouldn't buy one due to the ridiculously high price and high maintenance.   However, the CR subscribers who own Rainbows and submit user reviews seem to love them.  There's something to be said about a vacuum that user's like. 

Hello SEVERUS, Bud:

I always chaulked up the differences to the people doing the tests.  They are subjective in their review of the findings and the results, not objective.  Perhaps that is oversimplifying, but not knowing the test procedures and processes doesn't make the matter better.  The example I would use is a supervisor evaluating his employees.  If a supervisor is very strict the evaluations are not as glowing as those given by a supervisor who is lenient. 

Carmine D.

WRT Rexair/Rainbows, I have found their product loyalty among users rivals that of KIRBY and Aerus [formerly Electrolux].  I have a dear friend who brags that he bought a new Rainbow over 40 years ago when he married.  His wife left him after a few years but he still has the Rainbow and it works perfectly.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine,

I've always wondered how much influence the initial sales pitch has on Rainbow owners.   After all, they do have to buy into the argument that the Rainbow is much more than a vacuum - it is a cleaning system.   They use similar arguments to that of Dyson - no bags to clog.  I absolutely despised having to hold down a lever/button to keep the power nozzle on.  All door to door brands to their best to convince the consumer that their product is the only one that works.   I think that strong buy in by purchasers leads to some of the loyalty.

Not an original thought on my part but keep in mind that we’re being “sold” daily and that we often buy with no other rationale than, “Gee, I like that!”

We’re being sold new lines of nonsense daily. Pet hair? Forty years ago I would not have bought a vacuum that could not remove pet hair. And forty years ago I found vacuums, even straight-suction machines, that met the challenge well and without benefit of ad campaigns. Why would I buy a machine that “specializes”? I want all I can get for my money. That matter is significant to me in that most of the people I know and have known maintain their households with a single vacuum cleaner to handle all related tasks.

Consumer Reports apparently has found a way to garner an income by purporting to aid consumers inundated by TV adverts, fast-talking doorbell ringers, unsolicited mail and its internet equivalent. Too much information sometimes being as bad as too little, they come away without a clue as to what will really suit their needs. Personally, I don’t think a magazine intended to be of service to consumers could last long if the majority of its readers found its assessments incorrect or ill-founded. Moving on . . .

Can’t remember whether it was this forum or another many of us had been members of in past but we’ve only had one associate that I can recall who bought vacuums to “test” them. This gentleman claimed he fed chosen test items sure-kill stuff like ash and similar substances and would then would offer his opinion of this or that machine’s capability. However he caught all heck from other forum members for taking the machines back to the place of purchase for a refund once he was done checking out their potential.

Though it may sound a little silly I say to anyone so inclined -- by all means throw a few ounces of sand or whatever you feel appropriate on your own rug and see if the vacuum you own or the machine you’ve been talked into buying provides results that are satisfying to YOU.

The everyday consumer’s usual judgment regarding good versus bad, as vacuum cleaners go, stems merely from what meets the eye. Even when we flip the switch to assess hose suction by feel we have little idea as to what actually happens at floor level.

Any vacuum that quickly removes visible dust, pet/people hair and litter from a rug’s surface is deemed good and then even better if a certain amount of features and/or niceties are thrown into the deal. BUT – there are also little battery operated floor sweepers that can remove all of the above without suction pretty well. Would we rate them as adequate because they made a carpet look good?

For the venturesome souls, every now and then put on your specs, get down on your hands and knees and do a hands-on check for yourself. If you can separate the tufts or fibers that compose your rug and get a view of the top side of its backing, the story is all there. In high traffic and seating areas throughout your household if you see little or no grit or dirt at the base of your carpet’s tufting then you – not just your vacuum – are doing a great job. (One doesn’t work well without the other.)

If on the other hand you do discover what you feel to be too much nasty stuff, the solution lies within a fair assessment of the problem.

1. Depending upon your individual home traffic situation, how often do you vacuum?
2. Has your vacuum been well maintained? (Not by your standards but per its user guide.)
3. Do you vacuum fast or slow? (Vacuuming too quickly is as bad as not vacuuming. Despite high suction and revolving brushes, a vacuum needs to be allowed time to work effectively.

Venson

Severus wrote:
Hi Severus,

In defense of Rainbow, the switch is a added safety mechanism. Rainbow has also further improved as it is now designed to remain inoperable if the motor unit is not seated on the water pan thus leaving the separator exposed.

A slight annoyance yes but anything may prove a boon as regards safety especially within households with children.

I can attest to this as when the old Electrolux XXX with detachable cords were around I stuck the end of a plugged in power cord in my mouth. Didn't take the curl out of a hair on my four-year old head head but it cured my curiosity as far as further experiments with electricity were concerned. I decided not to do it again. Luckily, I got a chance to make the decision. Another lucky event was the time a friend mine and I hosed down his pedal car and decided to dry it off with his mom's vacuum -- outdoors on the lawn.

Worst case scenario is the story of a toddler whom stuck the hose of an unattended running vacuum in his mouth and suffered permanent lung vacuum due to it.

All it takes is a second or so of diverted attention to open up all sorts of possibilities for injury to young ones. Electrical outlet covers, dead-man switches, and other devices can be annoying but lend to at least a little piece of mind.

Venson

I have been a Consumer Reports subscriber since the mid-eighties (and I read my parents' copies before that).  I have also owned a Rainbow since about 1992 (I bought it through DirectBuy (then United Consumers Club), so I didn't have to deal with a salesperson and I got a bit of a deal.

Shortly after I bought it Consumer Reports said how terrible it was.  But if you read Consumer Reports' methodology, it's clear what went wrong:  they didn't use real house dust, but rather simulated dust with sawdust.  Since the Rainbow uses water, and sawdust is made from wood, which floats, it shouldn't surprise you that the dust emissions were high.  We have been fairly happy with our Rainbow and, as far as I can tell, it works as well as it did new.

That said, it's not our only vacuum...it is heavy and a pain to fill the water and dump the gunk down the toilet, so we also have an older Panasonic upright (that she is also complaining about now...which is how I found this forum).

Currently considering the Oreck at Costco,  but I'm still not convinced it's worth the premium price--it's nice and light, but we're not housekeepers taking it from home to home.  The top-rated on at Consumer Reports got terrible reviews from actual users on their site.  More research is needed. :-)

David H. ,

Consumer report tests vacuums with what they call wood flour mixture that they think will tell how good vacuums do. Rainbow is commonly called mudslinger for one good reason. Dirt will get thru the seporator and build up in the fans. Not wettable dirt will continue back into the air. This is why Rainbow has a so called HEPA filter to catch the non wettable dirt. The Panasonic upright is using the right clean air concept but still lacks some in bag change and some other minor things.

    Cleaner line of choice for me is  the Aerus-Electrolux line. You may not need the features the best machine has but have 3 canister that have the same power but different features. The top two are true automatics. When the bag is full or the cleaner motor is taxed to much to cut the cleaning effeciency it will  shut off. Overheated motor it shuts off, built in cord reel, light weight and easy to manuever. The upight is powerful, easy change bag ,True sealed HEPA system, will give years of good service. Just a recommendation to look at . There are 3 upights to choose from.

                                                                                                                                                          Procare.

DavidH wrote:

Hello DavidH:

WRT Rexiars/rainbows, I nevr saw the attraction and appeal to buyers.  Never.  But buyers and users do, so more power to them.

If you have a local ORECK store nearby, you may be able to buy a new XL Silver upright on sale, minus the giveaways, for $200.  These sales are run typically thruout the year.  With Christmas coming up, it's likely again.  Or a used ORECK for $100.  In many cases, these look and work as good as new.  Also, estate sales are excellent sources for top of the line ORECKs from $25-$50.  The TOL ORECKS are typically purchased by retired seniors looking to buy their last vacuum and want no worries about repair costs for 10-20 years.  They [the buyers] usually go before the ORECKs, sadly.  The left behind ORECK's get sold off cheap, especially now.

Carmine D.

Procare- If I read Davids post right he is having trouble with Orecks "PREMIUM PRICE" at Costco. What's that $199.00? and your recommending an $800.00 vacuum! LOL

David- Try to separate your buying instinct that has been formed by the forces of Mass Retailing that "PRICE is the only thing that matters". Go to a reputable dealer, here you will find "VALUE" and you will probably be surprised it might not be as expensive as you thought, especially AFTER you purchase the vacuum. Vacuums are one of the FEW household appliances you can try BEFORE you buy it, so why would you buy a Vacuum in a box???? If your interested in a Lightweight, please go to a Simplicity or Riccar dealer and check out their Freedom/Supralight Lines. IMHO they are much better than Oreck in every way. From bigger fans and stiffer brushrollers to belts that last more than 6 months.

PLEASE support small business. Box Stores do LITTLE for your community and little for your local economy.


Costco and Oreck are undercutting the local Oreck franchise dealer and THEN have the nerve to make the Dealer honor the service contract! That short term profit driven business model is an insane way to do business. So beware MANY Oreck franchisee's are REFUSING to honor the Warranties...a perfect example of "Price vs VALUE"