Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Look at these gems: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNBxAE1FWyU Seem to get good reviews, too: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bosch-BSG8PRO1GB-Cylinder-Vacuum-Cleaner/dp/B001E5CBRU/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=kitchen&qid=1271175245&sr=1-6 Does anybody here have any personal experience with Bosch? Are they Made in Germany? I do believe these new machines are, like Bosch's REAL products; not their somewhat decent but simply re-badged bagless upright that was supposedly a Vax and Dirt Devil re-name. Not even sure if that's true. But anyways check out that new bagless machine. A German-Made bagless?! This should be sweet. That new technology looks very interesting, too :D Ten year motor warranty, as well. Very impressive!

A better look at this new "PRO" line: Metal casters Metal bag holder Metal bag compartment clip - VERY impressive! http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bosch-BSG8PRO2-Bodenstaubsauger-BSG8Pro2/dp/B001S2PK8Q/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&s=kitchen&qid=1271175619&sr=1-9

Hi Hertz,

They are indeed nice looking machines BUT probably are what Bosch should have tried to bring into the game before bowing out of the American vacuum market.  Bosch's exit to the best of my understanding after a conversation with a sales rep, when the news first came our was that they were not not getting the hoped for return on the machines they offered.

The bagless model shown is already here in the sense that the Kenmore Iridium bagless (with fullsized power nozzle) has sensors, electronic speed adjustment, etc., and perfectly great cyclonics set-up  And, if still on the shelves should be selling for a round 400 bucks a pop.  Bosch is not prepared to meet those prices here. and none but a few who have money to toss around would be willing to consider it.

As for the other two bagged models, again very nice but  . . .

Metal reinforcement in the areas shown is at best meritable but doesn't mean all that much if the rest of the machine is plastic anyway.  It doesn't mean anything if doors and windows are strong but hte house is built on a weak foundation.  Beyond that all thes machines are using the same old Wessel Werk cleaning tools everybody else has got.  What you find on Miele you find on Bosch, Siemens and myriad other vacuums.  The only exception I noted as of late was the floor tool that European Hoover devised for getting into narrow spaces.  I give them a plus point for originality though I don't know if its efficiency or of worth.  The use scenarios offered pictorally were a little silly to me because I'd simply remove the tool and use the wand end --  as I always do --  in the same situation for a quick and good result.

I didn't get the point of the cutesy tool carrier for one of the Bosch models either.  They should be storable on the machine itself.  Thast's considered a real convenience. Tool kit carriers almost date back to the first vacuum cleaner made and are not indicative of moving forward but going backward.  The swivel-ball arrrangement re the hose attachment on one of the cleaners is a nice idea but again it being a straight suction can, I can't imagine that one little feature being worth the price it would be marked up to here in the U.S.

Bosch takes the same position as Miele when pressed to better explain high pricing.  To wit, it costs money to deliver quality.  Well . . .

Speaking of which, this does not apply to just European machines.  I recently viewed the new Lux Guardian.  Yes, twenty-year motor warranty and free check-ups every year are nice but at 1,800 bucks you'll find me a very hard sell.  I can live without it too.

Best,

Venson

Hi Hertz,

For you and anyone else interested, I've attached a link to the bagless GS-60's instruction PDF.  This cleaner uses a pleated filter withing the collection bin that is claimed to be self-cleaning.

http://www.bosch-home.co.uk/Files/Bosch/Gb/en/Document/Instruction_manual_GS-60.pdf

Meant to add that there are at least two not one new Bosch bagless machines.  One offers a manually operated mechanism to clean the pleated filter and the toher has a motor operated device that shust the cleaner off and "cleans" the filter automatically.

Venson

Hertz - the machines are made in Germany but what you've listed on Amazon is the OLDER Bosch models and I've sampled quite a few. Although they are well made they aren't as well built as Miele or Sebo. For a start ALL of the tools and pipes are friction fit only and they can fall out in use. The hose handle is also very cheaply made whilst the tools on board sit in a plastic tray that can get lost over time. Although I'm not a fan of Bosch vacuums they aren't badly made, but in the UK bags are not as nationally available as Sebo or Miele.

The latest Bosch vacuum, the Free 'e model is much better thought out and is a new range in the UK and Europe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRF9qjHkASY

Here's the latest from Siemens. Expect a Bosch equivalent any time soon: taken from www.appliancist.com/green_appliances/siemens-vacuum-cleaner-offers-green-power.html



"...The new Siemens Z 5.0 is the premium compact vacuum cleaner capable of achieving a very impressive 47-liter per second suction rate. This compact powerhouse comes with the special Siemens motor that employs the latest super efficient XTRM compressor technology, providing the basis for such an incredible performance. With the Z 5.0 Extreme Power edition, you are getting a highly optimized air flow, making it an alternative to the larger Z 6.0 Extreme Power which creates 50-liter power per minute rate...The old equation a lot of watts = more power is no longer valid in modern vacuum cleaners. What ultimately matters is the force that is actually applied to the carpet. The air flow is much more relevant as it indicates how much air is drawn per second. And more air per second means more dust and dirt gets vacuumed. The compact Siemens Z 5.0 Extreme Power has a 4.5 liter dust bag while its hose and intake manifold diameter is 20% larger than those of the regular vacuum cleaners. The result is lesser air resistance, turbulence and fewer bottlenecks that typically slow down the air flow.

The vacuum also comes with the Siemens washable Ultra HEPA filter and the high-quality MegaAir SuperTex filter bag to hold back even the smallest particles. When you change the filter bag, a special hygiene seal ensures that no dust or dirt to return to the outside, making the Siemens Z 5.0 compact vacuum suitable for allergy sufferers..."

The new Siemens Z6.0 comes in two powerful and extremely efficient models, the Z6.0 Power and the Z6.0 Eco. Boasting the symbolic green power cord, these vacuums are setting the bar high in terms of environmental features and operating economy. Using lower wattage but delivering top performance, each energy saving vacuum offers a new dimension in floor care. Siemens Z6.0 cleaners combine the enhanced efficiency, offered by the Siemens compressor technology with a new aerodynamic system, designed to improve airflow within the cleaner. This results in up to 50% savings on electricity plus a significantly increased air throughput. And the new, green tagged air guidance system releases airflow blockages and prevents the air swirls that impair efficiency. To match their advanced aerodynamic system, both models feature innovative and powerful motor fans that resemble an aircraft turbine. Due to their aerodynamically-shaped impellers that reach a top speed of 800 kph, these Siemens vacuum cleaners convey exceptionally high air volumes while minimizing energy consumption..."






Despite the claims its a pity the main exhaust filter is at the top, giving owners a free hot facial not doubt just like Miele.

vacmanuk wrote:

Nice vacmanuk.  What ae the price ranges?

Carmine D.

Nice but I wonder if Bosch plans to venture again into the American market.  It pulled out a couple of years ago because it wasn't getting enough of a return for the effort.

Venson

Dont know the price ranges as yet Carmine - but I'm speculating that since they are based on the expensive Free'e series, they will be highly priced and put into Miele S5 territory.

vacmanuk wrote:

Tough market and price range to launch new products in now.  S2 venue would be more realistic epsecially in current economic times.  Then move up into the S5 territory.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Nope. The Siemens/Bosch have a compact line up already - this series would be premium, sitting alongside Miele S5.

vacmanuk wrote:

That is true for your side of the pond, vacmanuk.  Not here in the USA.  No vacuums at all from Bosch as yet.

http://www.bosch-home.com/us

Breaking into the US market, if Bosch does, at the TOL full size price range [$1000] would be difficult for Bosch but not impossible.  More appropriate to start with the compact $300 S2 range and work up IMHO.

Carmine D.

An advert for the Bosch with the line '50% energy saving with no loss of performance.' has today been banned in the UK by the ASA, due to lack of evidence to back up the claim.

http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/12/dyson-complaint-about-ad-for-rival-vacs-is-upheld-238966/

M00seUK wrote:

Hi M00seUK,

As the main factor re vacuum cleaner energy consumption is rate of use time versus power draw, I think there's going to be a lot of back and forth on the issue. Either a high power draw vac that actually shortens vacuuming time by way of single or double-pass deep clean ability OR a high-efficiency vac that runs at half or less todays standard power draw appears to be needed. We've already had the latter by way of several American brands, especially the Electrolux G and the Hoover Convertible. However, the low-watt vacuum motor has been long abandoned.

I don't think there's any way to seriously broach energy consumption issues without readapting to simply using less power draw.

Having said all that and even though vacuuming can be a lengthy and labor intensive task, I'll never be quite convinced that it puts all that big a hit on an electric bill. People, even the very fussy frequent cleaners, don't vacuum that long. You use far more electricity by way of cooking appliances, refrigerators and clothes dryers.

I'd add be sure to read the consumer reviews included with this article. They were very favorable giving me the feeling that maybe the finger pointing and tattling is just another matter of sour grapes on Dyson's part.

Best,

Venson

Venson wrote:

Agree with you Venson.  Sir James is rattled because Bosch launched several compact canns that give his baby dyson a whupping.  And Which? and consumers praise them and they are affordable.  We've seen this litigation tact by dyson before.  Running to the ASA whenever a competitor whups it fair and square with better products and prices.  Like the boy crying wolf.  After a few times, it loses credibility.  As you say, read the Which? reviews and the Bosch products are notable. 

I like the ASA rationale for banning the claim: "likely to mislead."  What in the heck does that mean?  ASA's rationale is likely to mislead readers too.

Carmine D.

I can see where ASA/advertising bodies are coming from. Bosch has made a claim using a dust bag that maintains suction without evidence yet Dyson for years proved that all dust bags do clog and reduce suction.

vacmanuk wrote:

"Proved," you said? There was nothing to prove. It was and has been common knowledge that bagged vacuums have to be emptied at some point to provide good performance. Some bagged machines are better at it than others. Come to think of it, for quite a while bag size and dust collection capacity was considered a real factor for making purchase decisions. It has been forgotten by consumer periodicals and subsequently by bagged vacuum consumers.

The Miele bags I use are over the four-quart line by way of capacity and do quite well in regard to maintaining air flow/suction power. The multi-layer high-filtration bags do allow for good suction longer and improved dust containment.

Bagged versus bagless, the real advantage for me is not having to either think about or need to make bag changes more than once every three or four weeks and that's just fine by me. Things here at the old corral don't get any cleaner for want of suction that lasts forever.

-Bagless machines, per manufacturers' instruction, require far more frequent emptying. Forgetting that point -- I've raised more dust and gotten my hands dirtier clearing out collection bins than I ever did when emptying even ancient Electroluxes or Hoovers with cloth bags. That should make Dyson feel threatened.

Whatever the case, it still appears to me that Dyson, despite its monetary success, is overly sensitive and a poor sport that will do or try anything to dampen competition. The ASA ruling leaves me cold and also makes me highly suspicious as to whether it is a bedfellow of Dyson. Despite what I think or don't think of its product I can say flat out that I think far less of the company due to its constant yapping and kvetching. Sometimes it's better just to shut up and do your work.

Bosch can probably get around the issue by simply inserting something like "maintains high suction better and longer than other/most BAGGED vacuums" within its advertising text and there would be little or nothing that the ASA or Dyson could say or do. AND -- there'll be far less from its bagged competitors.

Best,



Venson

Venson wrote:
My point is that the bag can't be used twice, Venson. That was Dyson's original mantra. A lot of the old Hoover vacuums in the UK still have reuseable paper dust bags - not to also exclude vacuums that use the reuseable washable fabric dust bags that need shaken out or machine washed to obtain the original strength of the vacuum cleaner. Many don't when either bag material types are put in the second time. That was Dyson's point in his original marketing (not with this recent complaint per se as it deals with "energy performance" results) but I feel the same can be applied to any dust bag - IN MY EXPERIENCE, there hasn't really been one on the market that maintains full suction from the moment it is taken out of the packaging and inserted into the vacuum cleaner because it progressively clogs and reduces the suction. There are SOME bags of course that maintain suction longer in terms of longevity but as we have proved so many other times before in this forum, suction isn't just the only principle that maintains air flow and as you know Miele, Sebo and Bosch have generally excellent sealed suction systems to counteract leaky air/dust emissions and at the same time, protect the bag on board as well as prolonging the suction due to the high filtration and bag structure.

I use the same Miele bags as you Venson - once they get full, there's little suction left over at the lowest power rating I prefer - if I want the dust to be picked up - the vacuum's suction has to be increased to pick up. Why should that be the case? Obviously the vacuum needs more power to let the suction pad the bag with dust! The Dyson cyclonic action minimises that - I've used Dyson vacuums where the bins are bursting out with dust in the cleaning jobs I've done (before I offered the company my Sebo DART vacuum to show them the dust disposal and far cleaner approach - company responded with buying two Darts and a Henry bagged canister vacuum.) whilst still using the Dyson when bags start to run out because of the suction principle that just keeps going - regardless of whether the bin is full or not.

You refer to bagless vacuums as if they all have the same capacity - but not all brands do - and it's a point that UK consumers still go over when buying a vacuum cleaner - bag capacity/bin capacity is still a major factor when it comes to buying vacuums. The Henry tub canister wouldn't be where it is today in terms of popularity - if it didn't have a large bag capacity (generally 7 litres, or in my case 4 to 5 months of general household traffic dust excluding any DIY work that clogs the bags quicker.) whilst the washable fabric shake out bags are used by many in the commercial industry who have to deal with shaking the dust out - let them do it  - I prefer disposable bags because it is cleaner, even though in the back of my mind I know that I'd be spending more money on bags than I would do with any Dyson or the TTI Hoover/Vax/Dirt Devil suction that has been copied from Dyson DualCyclone parts.

As you and I will know, Miele do not recommend using the same bag twice. I ran out of Miele bags for my S140 stick vac (which is being used by my mum) yesterday. I sucked all the dust out of the bag with my Sebo Felix  - there is still suction available from the IntensiveClean bag, but it wasn't as strong as it first was when it was brand new. The HyClean bags aren't any better - infact they seem to provide as much action as sucking through a straw when the vacuum's bag is fully packed with dust AND the vacuum's suction control is lowered to the lowest setting. This occurs on both my old S571, S381 and more recently the Ecoline S4212. It is no different to my SEBO vacuums either when the bags fill up and need to be replaced because the suction is slowly running out due to a clogged bag.

Whilst I agree that Dyson is being sensitive to what brands are advertising, they are simply trying to keep ahead of the game, but the way they have approached and raised the issue is rather vague in my mind and uncalled for. I guess that's just what happens in business but I'm with many who agree that their approaches are underhand for the most part and who ever gave Dyson the right to constantly appear superior? Again I feel this is just what happens in Business.

Bosch haven't done their homework in their own advertising either. When they released that vacuum cleaner on the market, they claim that the motor on board maintains the same power as a full 2100/2400 watt motor. It seems the ad didn't have that particular wording to provide evidence to the original statement of "...50% less energy to maintain performance..." Would that, for example be with the variable suction control being used or relation to the dust bag, or both, or something relating to the motor that Bosch have actually fitted?

And its not as if Bosch are unique in using the eco-marketing consumer grabbing headline that by fitting a lower energy motor to maximise performance, their model is any better than the rest, or as efficient. Electrolux, Hoover and all the major brands including Miele have all done it. In my experience, vacuums that have lower than 3000 watts will never really affect electric bills. I've tried by looking at my own and there is no real difference to using a higher powered vacuum against a lower one where my actual electricity usages are concerned. Just because a vacuum may throw a trip switch or if the electricity load is too high, doesn't point to higher electricity usage charges - and a lot of owners seem to get confused with that a lot of the time. It points more to the actual electricity the whole home is using including the room in question where the vacuum has been plugged into - if it already uses a high source of electricity per room, the vacuum may well overload the system.

Regardless of the companies involved, ASA should never hold up as a standard for enforcement and banning product claims: "...likely to mislead."  Too qualified to be a standard of measure for advertising.  It either does or does not.  With the qualifying verbage, any and all product claims should be banned.  Why?  Somebody, somewhere, somehow, some way is likely to be mislead for a variety of reasons many of which have little to do with the truth.  The advertising standard should always be: "Likely to mislead an informed knowledgeable third party with no vested interest in the product maker or claim." 

Carmine D.

The ASA generally get two types of complaint; either a consumer who purchased a product and found the claims lacking or a competitor who believes that the advertising is false or stretches the truth to an unreasonable degree. I wouldn't say it's fair to suggest that Dyson, by making a complaint are being ungracious -  check out the number of complaints (the vast majority not upheld) made against them by their competitors over the years.

In this particular case, it depends on someone who has a commercial interest. Someone with the technical knowledge and funding to be able to make a good, convincing case against the claims being made. 

Do Dyson have a rationale, beyond merely spoiling a competitors campaign? I think they do. For many year Dyson have designed their bagless technology to make effective use of the motor. Whereas many bagged competitors have tried to make a big play by promoting the power draw of the motor, as a measure of the machine's effectiveness.  Now, this competitor is trying to justify, by some questionable logic, that lower watts can clean just as well. Would I personally sit by and watch potential market share go to a competitor who has some misleading, largely irrelevant ECO claims being made, without them being challenged? No, I would do something about it.

On the subject of dyson and ASA and untrue product claims, 39 consumers of dyson vacuums brought a grievance to the ASA against dyson for its claim:  Never clogs, never loses suction.  2 vacuum companies joined the grievance AFTER the consumers filed:  ORECK and HOOVER.  ASA agreed with the consumers that the dyson claim was not true and can't be used.  ASA told dyson to cease and desist from using the claim, which dyson agreed to and did.  This is the best case scenario.  Consumers of the dysons [no vested interest] WITH vacuum makers [professional industry expertise] joining forces to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a product claim[s] is/are false, untrue, and disengenuous.  The combinination was too convincing for ASA to rule against ion favor of dyson. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Well, in the context of that complaint I read '39 consumers of dyson vacuums' as '39 people who allow the bin to continually fill way past the MAX marking'. I've seen people's Dyson vacuums get plugged up before now - but never in personal use, when ensuring that the bin is dumped regularly. I find no first-hand evidence that if used correctly, that the no loss of suction claim is at all invalid.

Dyson have previously demonstrated in that in dual cyclone bagless cleaner, although in general use, a tiny, tiny amount of dust particles might get through to the filter, the minuet loss of suction would be more than made up by fluctuations in the voltage / air pressure. 

Dyson's legal for the current claims are: "Dyson proves no loss of suction and pick up performance using results from IEC60312 Cl 2.2, 2.3, 2.8, 2.9, ASTM F2607, F608 and F558, and DTM755 - an independently conducted Dyson test. Dyson proves Dyson’s most advanced cleanerhead technology and engineered to pick up more dirt based on the results of IEC 60312 Cl 2.2, 2.3, 2.8, ASTM F2607, F608 and F558, and DTM 755- an independently conducted Dyson test."

However, I'd say that concessions might have to made considering reasonable use of a product - it's human nature to forget / be unaware of why you should dump regually. Hence why some recent Dyson recommend checking the filters every 2 months, down from the previous 6 months. I have a DC24 with the 2 months recommendation - but based on my own, considerate, use could go at least 18 months before needing to wash the pre-motor filter. Ideally, dual cyclone vacuums would have a shut off before any overloading could plug the cyclones - but practically, for a domestic cleaner, I'd suspect this would be very challenging and add to the handling weight.

M00seUK wrote:

Well..........NEVER means never.  It does not mean NEVER ...."if you follow the instructions in the User Guide."   If it did, dyson should have said so.  BTW, dyson's original filter service and cleaning instructions to dyson users stated that the filters should be cleaned every 6-9 months.  And dydon did not include the "legal caveat" you cited above which came after the ASA ruling against dyson.  As did the revised filter service cleaning schedule of 3-5 months in all future dyson User Guides. 

To wit:  dyson's claim of "lifetime belt" and "filters."  And zero costs over 5 years.  "Likely to mislead." 

Carmine D.

M00seUK wrote:

Electrolux added the automatic shut off and pop out feature in its paper bagged tank line in the mid 1950's. 

Carmine D.

M00seUK wrote:

Hi M00seUK,

The idea's quite nice but it would mean employing strategically placed dust sensors in a bagless machine.  That would probably cause a rise in cost unfavorable to most consumers and probably more maintenance issues for keeping the sensors clean.  Anyway . . .

Funny thing happend yesterday.  A salesman was explaining the difference in two canister vac models of the same brand to a mother and her teenage daughter.  When he told them that one had a full bag alert and that the other didin't the daughter asked, "Well how do you know when the bag is full?"

"You look," I said.

I am always amazed how things that are simple can so easily escape people lately.  I don't know whether that is attributable to over-hype of so-called feature advantages. 

Venson

vacmanuk wrote:

I only know of a few people who recycle vacuum bags and I never heard of Dyson's using that as a sales campaign pitch point.  As well, for good or ill, disposable bags in the U.S. were definitely intended to be used once and then tossed.  They are a great convenience of course but disposable bags also appear to be and have been the vac industry's way of maintaining connection with end-users -- and their money. (Forgive me, I've been reading Noam Chomsky.'s Manufacturing Consent.) Due to replacement likelihood, disposable bags -- replaceable belts and two types of required filters -- generate far more continuing revenue than replacements for permanent bags.

As far as I'm concerned, suction level debates often makes mountains out of mole hills.  I do not claim that bagged machine suction does not lessen somewhat, say from week one's insertion of a fresh bag to week four when the bag is nearly full, but I strongly state that available suction in better models is satisfactory for the same tasks all along that period of time.  As for power consumption levels, I live in an old building that has my aprtments two circuit breakers down in the basement and the only access is through my landlord's office.  Trip a breaker on a Sunday or a holiday when he's not around and you have to wait 'til Monday to get it switched on again.  Thus no ironing or vacuuming with an air conditioner on, etc.  That in mind, I use the Miele(s) using several speeds and have no problems.  I do this sometimes as compromise to avoid consumption related problems and sometimes because the work at hand calls for it.  Speed switched all the way down, I can clean really light scatter rugs using the power nozzle to effect a better clean with les effort, switched all the way up I can zip over bare flooring and stairs very quickly.

As well, I have only had two vacs that had automatic power adjustment but liked both very much.  The Hoover Dimension canister that I owned started up at about mid-speed when set on "automatic" and only increased if it sensed a build up of dust in the bag or if there was a particular concentration in the area that I was cleaning.  Made perfect sense to me and was my idea of useful as far as energy efficieny was concerned.  Come to think of it, it was one of the most sensible vacs Hoover ever made.  Can't figure out why they stopped putting it or something like out.

Bagless vacuums still do not generally offer collection capacity for continuous cleaning as genrous as many bagged vacuums and require more work to keep them running properly.  I open the bag chamber of my bagged vacuum and everything I need to see (bag and pre-filter) are right there.  If the look of  the pre-filter doesn't please my eye I can change it without a lot of fuss and the bag's a breeze to replace.  My idea of heaven.  My other vision of Heaven is merely to be in that wonderful position of having just enough.  Therefore, if I have just enough suction to everyday get work done efficiently and quickly, I'm happy and hopefully duly grateful.

Last but not least, a very large part of vacuum cleaner advertising claims rely on malarkey.  I have seen this occur with generations of American vacs of all brands.  I don't think we need special agencies to protect us from madness in the vac makers' conference rooms as much as we need consumers to apply a little common sense.

Venson

Venson wrote:
The clogged bag was the mantra in which Dyson felt that as a consumer, he, himself and whoever used the 'second hand Hoover Junior with the reuseable paper dust bag," was a bit of a con when it clogged the moment it was put back in after shaking out. This is documented in his book as well as the endless advertising/commercials when Dyson first entered the market. It is a point that he has never let Hoover get away with, even now.

See the story if you wish: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4jpQGV_1Hw&feature=related (also note the still image of his old Hoover Junior fashioned with a cyclone chamber on top of the motor hood!)

Automatic suction sensoring is something Hoover UK also dabbled with the 1980's and 1990's with its "Autosense" feature. Whilst it did the same thing of supposedly "sensing" the amount of dust the vacuum was asked to clean, the mechanics were not very reliable and Hoover had marketed the feature as being energy saving even though for the most part the vacuums that had this feature fitted kept going onto the highest level of power rather than the lowest. What made matters worse was that Hoover had fitted a selectable suction control for the owners to choose, only for the Hoover itself to decide what the suction setting was, regardless of what the owner tried to manually input. Autosense isn't a feature that has been included on Hoover's latest products nowadays. It was also a feature that cost a lot to repair and really didn't do much in terms of its actual use on board their uprights. Panasonic also did this with a lot of their uprights but the sensors often ignored the lower bands of selective power and constantly made the vacuums difficult to steer with the full force of fixed suction at the top.

Rather than try and offer up capacities of a bagless Dyson against the larger dust bag from a Miele, I suggest that you get a Dyson, Venson and a full bag from your Miele. Suck out all the dust from the bag, cut the bag in half and also suck out the dust that has clogged the multi filters of the HyClean and watch as the Dyson bin fills up with still more capacity to take - the cyclonic action always pushes the dirt around and down towards the base of the bin. I was surprised to find that my little Vax Mach Air with its 1.5 litre capacity could take twice the amount of dust from a Miele bag before it needed to be emptied - viewable from the bin and also going over the max full decal with space above for more dust! Granted the pre motor filter is different on MANY bagless vacuums, but most in Dyson's case are just under the bin. For the fact that those filters are washable, it does in theory provide some substance that they are just as efficient as the Miele white filters that go behind the bag - which according to Miele aren't washable (I've washed mine!). I think you'd be surprised to find that Dyson vacuums and other bagless brands can take far more dust "in one go" against their known capacities - same as paper dust bags in other brands. My SEBO X bags for example has 5.5 litres by stats but there's been times when it's been left in the machine, dust is nearly coming out the top and the red light on the machine has yet to come on to show that the bag needs emptied!

vacmanuk wrote:

If I may add my 2 cents, Venson when you do the comparison use your MIELE S7 upright with 6.76 qt dirt bag capacity [if Vacmanuk is referring to a dyson upright dirt bin capacity] rather than your S5 MIELE cann with 4.76 qt dirt capacity.    Might suggest Vacmanuk you do the same and let us know the results.   

Carmine  D.

CarmineD wrote:
I think I'll try it with my SEBO X since I don't have the S7, Carmine.

CarmineD wrote:

Hi guys,

Opinions are always welcome but I don't see myself making such tests in the near future.  The only only Dyson so far that made an impression on me was the DC28. The suction's nice and it cleans well plus is user adjustable for carpet height.   And guess what?  It's not a ball model that, according to Dyson at least, the world can't live without.  Fancy that.

However, no matter the model, I hate the attachment set-up.   Just a few days back, I had opportunity to handle the DC33 that seems to be drawing interest from some shoppers by way of pricing but was first, taken aback by its flimsy feel and second, "bitten" again while try to get the hose and wand assembly in back in place after removing them to check out the suction.  That also proved a waste.  Serves me right for not knowing better.

The "those nasty old clogged up bags" campaign has been with us for years and so has the malarkey.  Rexair -- now Rainbow -- for one, was supposed to have solved the problem by tossing the idea of contained cyclones to the wind (is that a pun) AND  bags also by giving us a monsoon in a can.  "Wet dust cannot fly."  You didn't have to buy bags but you did get to tote around the weight equivalent of a large, filled mop bucket as you cleaned.  And to what avail?  They had to and still have to be emptied and refilled during cleaning sessions to keep dust collection at its best.  They did not capture all the dust they claimed and in later years, without the least of a sheepish look in regard to how the company had long swore by its claims that the water batch captured everything, began to slap on HEPA filters.  Bottom line, cleaning was satisfactory and filtering tolerable but the the trade off for water instead of a bag simply led to a lot of work.  A lot of bright ideas in the vacuum industry have proved interesting science as well but lead to more work than I'm prepared to deal with at present.

I am not as concerned over how much Dyson or bagless vacs in general can pick as I am over maintenance issues.  My bagged machines, so far, free me up from extra work and put forth little need for serious attention on my part over the long run save for reasonable care and use.  Oddly enough I was asked the advantage of bagless as opposed to bagged and the best answer I could give is that it all depends upon what the user is prepared to deal with.  A regular maintenance regimen to keep a bagless machine performing its best and thus make the payoff for not having to buy bags count or shouldering the responsibility of paying a required amount for disposable vacuum bags and filters in the name of convenience and less work.

It would seem, at least to me, that a so-called advantage would mean that which lessens problems as opposed to increasing them.  If Dyson owners can continually run their machines when dirts past the fill line in the bin and still have them over the long without a lot of trips to repair shops, good for them.  It's me who sees no advantage.

Venson

Venson wrote:
Good points Venson.

I guess the proof is in the pudding. As owners, we can only testify through our own experiences what the good and bad points are, largely boosted and promoted by what we feel we can put up with rather than true design points that actually alleviate one aspect or another or in real time testing that has a neutral line. I prefer bags but the reason I bought a bagless vacuum was purely because I was wasting the expensive bags on picking up paper shreddings from my large office shredder as well as handy for new carpets that waste a lot of dust bags with top soil carpet fluff. I'm also annoyed that Miele's super air clean filters only last 4 bags duration before needing to be replaced, regardless of whether they come in a box of every 4 bags bought.

vacmanuk wrote:

You're very lucky.  Most households have and can only afford one vacuum and rely on it for all related tasks.  Miele loses points by way of its pricing in general and there'll never be a way that it will convince me that the cost of manufacture and shipping of bags from wherever they're made amounts any where near the $19.00 and change (before sales tax) that's being asked here.  I seldom spend that much on a shirt.

But that's the way of the world I guess.  Can you believe that smokers here in New York now actually pay $7.00 to $10.00 per pack for cigarettes?  You'd think they'd quit but they don't.  They may groan a bit about it but in the end they meet the price and keep puffing.  I can't say that the increasing cost of an addiction makes a good comparison but I assume Miele expects somewhat the same result once its hooked a sale.  "You went out and bought the thing so what are you gonna do?"

The only way that will change is when and if other manufacturers start offering better deals.

Venson

vacmanuk wrote:

Not for my benefit.  I'm with Venson on the dirt bag/bin capacities.  I was suggesting that any comparison of dirt containment capacity be like kind.  Cann bag to cann dirt bin.  Up bag to up dirt bin.  For parity.  Using straight suction to vacuum up a bag's contents is not the same as using the vacuum itself to pick up the same contents itself.  By letting the first vacuum do all the work, and letting the second merely straight suction up, is a lot easier on the second vacuum than the first vacuum.  Plus you can NEVER straight suction the imbedded dirt in the pores of the filter bag into the bin by straight suction alone.  Try it.  Then shake the vacuumed bag and see what comes out.  More fine dirt and dust that is bonded to the bag's filter and air pores.  If it were as easy as straight suctioning the used bag, then a case could be made for reusing the bag.  But it's not.  Why?  Dump the bag.  Suction clean.  Still have pores in the bag filled with fine dust and dirt.  Which degrades and comprises the filtering and air pass through of the bag to keep the motor cool anmd suction at peak performance.  If you have some old HOOVER upright reusable paper bags [from the models 60, 61, and 62] note the heavier density of the paper vice the disposable paper bags. 

Carmine D.

Venson wrote:

"I've heard this over & over and even heard that from Oreck to get dealers to buy into their system, yet, I see little evidence that this this where dealers make the real money. So far in this business I need Vac Sales, Repairs, Parts and consumables to survive."

Hi Lucky1,

Read me again.  What I meant to say was that branded vacuum consumables -- recommended bags, belts, filters only attainable through vac makers -- keep extra revenue coming in for vac makers and in a fashion keeps end-users bound to the company long term, if they make relatively durable machinery.  My error may have been using "the industry"  instead of "manufacturers" to best describe the entities I was referring to. 

No reference to independent vendors was intended.  That's a whole other ball game. For the 20 bucks I may spend on a pack of Miele high-end bags I have no idea at all how much resellers make.  I am told it's not much but I do intend to find out for myself by hook or crook one of these days. Nonetheless, that keeps myself and the guys who sold me my unit linked up with Miele for the length of time I'll own my machines.     

Venson

Venson wrote:
Ah but you guys have somethings tougher and easier than we UK citizens! You have different levels of payable healthcare - we dont - we have a free service that is nothing next to hopeless and then private care that is similar to your Blue cross system.

We don't have our credit cards linked to our drivers licenses.

As for cigarettes, a 20 pack here costs on average the same as $10.

Your car prices and household appliance costs are usually cheaper too!

UK consumers have only just got into buying two vacuums. Ironically, it seems to be a trait by DYSON OWNERS who have been let down. Or more to the point, they can't be ars** to wash the filter to de-clog the pipes when it all goes wrong. In Miele's advertising UK brochures (before they went from paper to online pdf. formats) the wording for the "The Alternative," stick vac model (S140 - S160) carried the marketing line "suitable as a second cleaner for the home," which often provoked the thoughts of UK buyers.

I've just ordered the Professional series Bosch vac a couple of days ago. I'll let you know how I get on; it's the dark grey / BSGL5PROGB model that has been given a Best Buy from Which UK Consumer Magazine.

vacmanuk wrote:

Danke schone Vacmanuk, would like to know more.  Curious too if the new Bosch canister has an auto cord winder.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
The Bosch canister does have an auto cord winder - similar to SEBO"s K range - pull the cord once you're finished and it rewinds back in.

However, all I'm going to say is that it looks better than it goes. Review soon!

vacmanuk wrote:

Thanks for the info on the auto rewind.  Seems like most new canns are going that route.  Even ups.  From the pic, the Bosch looks like a large version of a computer mouse.  Or a modern looking Compact/Interstate vacuum. 

Carmine D.

Review now showing!

vacmanuk wrote:

Hello VacmanUK:

Thanks for the Bosch Pro review.  What is the warranty?

Carmine D.

Unbelievably, the warranty is only for 2 years. Then you have to buy an extra 5 years which Bosch aren't giving away "free".