Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Looking back over the past year, one thing conspicuously absent from this forum is a rabid Rainbow enthusiast.  Perhaps it is difficult to justify the outrageous price of these door to door wonders.   To some extent, a Rainbow owner has to believe in the Rainbow sales pitch and doesn't want to be confronted with any negative information about the Rainbow.    I also noticed that overstock.com is no longer selling the refurbished Rainbow SE's with the Wesselwerks small power nozzles.    Given the economy, it's got to be tough selling $2000+ vacuums - even if they can purify one's home. 

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine,

Since you’re the king of twisting (the truth) and shifting focus (away from the truth)...I’ll take 'switch[ing] gears' as a compliment.


Dyson Invents Big

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Dib-ster:

If that makes you happy, so be it.  The facts are the facts regardless of whether you are happy or not and regardless of whether you believe them or not.  The fact is when it comes to anything and all  things dyson, the plain and simple truth is that dyson's pitch is superior to its products.

Carmine D. 

CarmineD wrote:

Same as your pitch about Oreck and Hoover.

HARDSELL wrote:

HS:

Here's my assessment [pitch] based on hands on personal and professional experience: 

• HOOVER WT/TEMPO is the gold standard for rug cleaning and gets first place, starting as low as $70. 
• ORECK XL Classic is a very distant second starting at $199 and gets second place. 
• Dyson's DC07 at $400 plus was all show and no go.  Dyson didn't even get the dismal third place showing.  It never finished. 

That's how they measure up price and performance wise for me.  Of the above 3, dyson does win my acclaim for pitch over product.  Does that count for anything.  I think so.  Why?  HOOVER WT/TEMPO and ORECK XL Classic are still made and sold pervasively.  BUT dyson's DC07 has been discontinued.  Gawdawful clutch and wimpy brush bar couldn't make muster.  Not even a signature dyson model despite all the stories about 5,174 prototypes.  Dyson's pitch [Never clogs, never loses suction] far superior to DC07 product [now dead and gone forever.............along with the infamous dyson pitch].

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

Hardsell,

Just curious, do you feel like your Rainbow performs as well as the sales pitch?   As I've mentioned previously, I'm always somewhat surprised by how well most Rainbow users like their product.  They don't complain about the high price - they tend to praise the product and how well it works.   

Regardless of price, what vacuum do you think provides the best bang for the buck?  What has the minimum level of quality and features that would you feel that your purchase wasn't a disappointment?

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine,

What’s your definition of ‘fact’ and ‘fiction?’


Dyson Invents Big

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Dib-ster:

My definition is the same as Mr. Webster.  How about you? 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
The Dyson does shine at presenting the amount of dirt in the best possible way - uncompressed and fluffed up for maximum effect.   It's similar to the Rainbow in that regard.   With the Oreck and Tempo, you don't get to see the dirt up close and personal.    Before Dyson, how many vacuum owners took pictures/videos of the filth in their rugs and put it on web sites?  Nobody empties out a full Kirby bag and makes a video of it for u-tube.   Dyson owners seem to love to play with the filth that was in their rugs. 

Severus wrote:

SEVERUS:

Too bad Nick Garcia couldn't sell dyson on the halo UV-C technology.  I understand Sir James had first right of refusal before ORECK bought it.   The combination of dustmites and dirt in see-thru magnified plastic bins could have elevated dyson vacuum sales to a whole new level.   Wonder if he's sorry now that he turned Garcia/halo down on the offer? 

Carmine D.

Severus wrote:

I have never been disappointed with the Rainbow's performance.  Like all cannisters it is a PITA to use and store.  I also dislike having to clean it after use.  I have no regrets of buying as I have used it in circumstances that other vacuums can't be used.  I used to use it to vacuum water from my boat's interior after washing it out.  I have had a water heater burst and used it to clean water from the carpet (over concrete of course).  When I wash the tile floors in the bath rooms I can vacuum the residue and have them dry in minutes.  I may start to paint cars with it.  

I think that Kirby has quality = to any vacuum.  I simply never liked to use mine. In the mid 70's I owned an electrolux that I feel has qaulity = to any today. I am sure that the European vacs have great quality, however I refuse to buy a vac then have to pay an extra fortune for the tools.  The best bang for the buck actually depends on the user IMHO.  There is no one for all.  I liked my DC07 as much as any vacuum and dislike the Oreck as much as any.  Carmine feels opposite.  We both have praise for our vacuum of choice although neither likes the other's choice.

To date I have never had a vacuum to fail.  Most were gifted and a few sold as I had the desire to try others.  Excluding the ones I returned all have lasted 5 or more years.  I will pay more for a vacuum that cleans thoroughly even if it does not last as long as a poor performer.

My choice must include strong hose suction (or strong portable included), maneuver easily, deep clean my carpet, can't exhaust from the front and blow debris away when vacuuming hard surfaces, tools included with vac.  I prefer a long cord, minimum of wheel and brush marks left on carpet, brush turn off control, on/off switch located so it is not in the way when using vac.  I never cared for a light prior to the Hoover Platinum as all others were so dim as to be useless.

I probably left something out but this is a start.