max wrote:
In article ,
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:

In article ,
E Z Peaces writes:
john d hamilton wrote:
This photo shows the black very thin plastic type filter that sits facing
the fan on a household Hitachi CV-SF8 vacuum cleaner.

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=11rxdm0&s=4

Immediately behind this sits a plastic frame with a nylon fine mesh filter
and sitting in this frame is a black high density sponge filter. (doing a
search on this sponge filter, it's called a Mesh-Urethane filter).

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=6gv5tl&s=4

This Mesh-Urethane filter is on the *right* side of this photo, the black
one on the left is the reverse of the very thin plastic type filter
referred
to above.

This Mesh-Urethane filter really restricts the air flow. Its a bit better
when I wash it out under the tap with soap and water but soon seems to
clog
up again. I find it works quite well if I relace it entirely with a piece
of
soft tissue toilet paper, and keep changing the paper and all the debris
that builds up behind it.

Now the question here is what exactly is this very thin plastic type
filter
(if indeed it is actually a filter) doing? It's the one on the left in
the
second photo. It seems to have microscopic slits in its surface, but when
I
wash it, it wont pass water through it, which surely it would if its some
kind of filter? It's a thin flexible piece of plastic sheet, and seems
really strong. Almost like a sheet of carbon fibre.
The first stage is supposed to get rid of almost all the dust by
centrifugal force. If the air then clogs a filter frequently, I wonder
if something is wrong with the first stage.
If you want a cyclone cleaner that works, you're really going
to struggle with anything other that a Dyson. Dyson have a stack
of patents relating to designing cyclones small enough to be part
of a vacuum cleaner which actually work, that's it's pretty
impossible for other manufacturers to come close. His original
dual cyclone patent expired which is why you now see other
manufacturers doing those, but they're stuck with following all
his advances 25 years behind.

horse ****. utter horse****. Dyson's vacuums are devoid of any genuine
innovation whatsoever. His patents are as meritous as AOL's attempt to
patent the smiley face emoticon. He adapted the cyclone filter to a
carpet sucker. whoopie. wow!!! His innovation has a great more to do
with the advances made in material science making available to him the
possibility of doing something different. . A Dyson-style vacuum made
in 1950 would have been beyond the means of 75% of consumers.

His brushless air jet models are polycarbonate frauds.

People should AVOID Dyson vacuums unless they like ****ing their money
away. They work no better than any other cyclone vacuum available at
Walmart or Target. No difference. No Advances. Simple 19th century
soot collection.

They are, however, have the unique benefit of being possessed of superb
design, and are, as such works of functional art worthy of buying simply
for that reason. But a frugal person would avoid Dysons as if it were a
plague carrier. We won't mention the abominable ergonomics of some of
his designs, as they are self-evident and glaring. Dyson = Hype.

Save money-- buy a Hoover or a Bissel or a Snorch.

.max

Horse**** yerself,

If it wasn't for Dyson we would still be getting ripped off for hundreds
of dollars of bags and filters a year and putting up with poorly
designed crap that blows most of the dust back into the air along with
the mould and crap that grows inside the non replaceable filter paths
inside. Look how much effort the American vacuum manufacturers put into
killing the cyclone vacuum market in America only to have their market
share destroyed once people found out how good they are and how long
they last.

If you think a Dyson is so bad , Hoover your carpets with the best vac
you can find, then go over it again with a Dyson, you will be surprised
how much extra crap they will pick up. I expect you think that piece of
crap Oreck sells is a good deal.