Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

Forget the dyson, get the purple kenmore, go out to a *really* nice dinner
for the price difference.
http://www.sears.com/shc/s/ProductDi...0090505x00001a

no affiliation, just happy with the vac. It really sucks (just had to throw
that in there)

jc

"Sum Guy" wrote in message ...
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

On Oct 17, 10:49*am, Van Chocstraw
wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? *Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.

Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own. Virtually all of the reviews from people that actually bought it
are 4 and 5 stars (Dyson Animal). Google has a review consolidator -
click on the "all reviews" link.

R

RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 17, 10:49 am, Van Chocstraw
wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?
Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?
They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.

Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own. Virtually all of the reviews from people that actually bought it
are 4 and 5 stars (Dyson Animal). Google has a review consolidator -
click on the "all reviews" link.

R

Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g., Consumer
Reports)?

The cognitive dissonance problem with owner reviews of higher than usual
priced stuff (e.g., Macs, Kirby vacuums, etc.) is that having spent the
extra money, the buyer must now report how superior the product is lest
he be seen as a sucker or even a fool...

Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of
"if you advertize it, they will buy" ?

There is a little missleading information in their commercials in saying
that they do not loose suction. Their claim is based on the use of cyclone
centrifugal dust separation. Not the first to use them. They are used in
industrial applications and have been used in many vacuums. However,
cyclones work best with large dirt, fine dust and even lighter bacterial and
viruses rarely get separated because they don't weigh enough to be affected
by the centrifugal force. Dysons sometimes mention they use a Hepa final
filter to clean the air. Hepa is not a standard and can mean many things,
but, to add any filter at the end of the exhaust can result in the filter
becoming plugged and reducing the amount of air that leaves the vacuum,
thereby loosing suction, which is what they advertise that it does not do.

I prefer central vacuums, with the exhaust blowing to the outside so that
fine particulate and other unwanted items are discharged to the outdoors,
not back into my house.

On Oct 17, 11:21*am, Butch Haynes wrote:
RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 17, 10:49 am, Van Chocstraw
wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?
Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? *Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?
They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.

Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own. *Virtually all of the reviews from people that actually bought it
are 4 and 5 stars (Dyson Animal). *Google has a review consolidator -
click on the "all reviews" link.

R

Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g., Consumer
Reports)?

The cognitive dissonance problem with owner reviews of higher than usual
priced stuff (e.g., Macs, Kirby vacuums, etc.) is that having spent the
extra money, the buyer must now report how superior the product is lest
he be seen as a sucker or even a fool...

And no one would be ****ed off, feel that they had been screwed and
leave a bad/horrendous review in retaliation? I find almost just the
opposite in almost everything - people more readily leave bad reviews.

Of course there are 'unbiased' (everybody/thing has a bias) reviews.
Consumerresearch.com reviews the reviews and is a pretty good first
stop on such things.

R

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:21:24 -0400, Butch Haynes
wrote:

RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 17, 10:49 am, Van Chocstraw
wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?
Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?
They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.

Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own. Virtually all of the reviews from people that actually bought it
are 4 and 5 stars (Dyson Animal). Google has a review consolidator -
click on the "all reviews" link.

R

Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g., Consumer
Reports)?

The cognitive dissonance problem with owner reviews of higher than usual
priced stuff (e.g., Macs, Kirby vacuums, etc.) is that having spent the
extra money, the buyer must now report how superior the product is lest
he be seen as a sucker or even a fool...

Consumer reports is totally unbiased??????
I think not.

Pretty close - but there will ALWAYS be a bias.

And there are enough people in North America who will bitch about
ANYTHING, as well as launch "frivalous" lawsuits. No bitching and no
lawsuits would TEND to indicate better than average satisfaction.

Sure a lot od people bitched about Kirby and FilterQueen.

wrote:

Consumer reports is totally unbiased??????
I think not.

Pretty close - but there will ALWAYS be a bias.

They are probably have a bias against price or cost. They seem to
mechanize, automate, and use instrumentation recordings where possible.
A db meter for noise. A mechanical actuator to measure pushing force
when vaccuming. Measured amounts of dirt that are dumped on carpets and
then weighed to see how much the vacuum actually picked up. Even a
clean room with an airborne particulate counter to verify the
hepa-filter claims (their conclusion is that even regular vacuums that
don't claim to be hepa will work just as good as ones with "hepa"
filters).

I've got a kenmore canister that's about 8 years old that I want to
replace (the kenmore is being moved to a different location - not that
it's not working anymore).

The durability and performance of the beater bar, extension tube, flex
hose and handle are my primary concern, as those are the components that
experience wear and tear. Any improvements to those components that
result in less air leakage as those parts wear, wearing of rotating
parts, breakage of thin plastic, etc, are what I would seek to know - if
such things are actually knowable in this age of disposable products.

I've found that the Dyson claim of "never losing suction" to be a red
herring. Even my 8-year-old kenmore can completely fill the disposable
waste bag, indicating that it still has enough suction to pull material
from the floor even when the bag is 100% full. And I prefer to throw a
bag away vs dealing with dumping a canister. Noise level is also very
important to me - my gut feeling is that the bagless units are louder.

Online consumer reviews are a mixed bag. They could be accurate and
representative, or they could be biased (a tendency to compain vs
praise) or they could be faked or planted by the manufacturer (or the
competitor).

wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:21:24 -0400, Butch Haynes
wrote:

RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 17, 10:49 am, Van Chocstraw
wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?
Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?
They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.
Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own. Virtually all of the reviews from people that actually bought it
are 4 and 5 stars (Dyson Animal). Google has a review consolidator -
click on the "all reviews" link.

R
Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g., Consumer
Reports)?

The cognitive dissonance problem with owner reviews of higher than usual
priced stuff (e.g., Macs, Kirby vacuums, etc.) is that having spent the
extra money, the buyer must now report how superior the product is lest
he be seen as a sucker or even a fool...

Consumer reports is totally unbiased??????
I think not.

Pretty close - but there will ALWAYS be a bias.

And there are enough people in North America who will bitch about
ANYTHING, as well as launch "frivalous" lawsuits. No bitching and no
lawsuits would TEND to indicate better than average satisfaction.

Sure a lot od people bitched about Kirby and FilterQueen.

My dad and a friend had a small side business selling Filter Queens. I
grew up without the words "vacuum cleaner" in my vocabulary. I grew up
calling it a Filter Queen as others grew up using the brand name Xerox
for "copy machine". I recall using the words "Filter Queen" in school
and nobody knew what I was talking about!

More recently my mother keeps buying vacuum cleaners, not liking them,
and she gives them away and buys a different new one and it's still no
good. She says she wishes she had her old Filter Queen, that was the
best she ever used. I'd buy one on ebay and give it to her but she
probably wouldn't like it anymore.

"EXT" wrote in message
anews.com...
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of
"if you advertize it, they will buy" ?

There is a little missleading information in their commercials in saying
that they do not loose suction. Their claim is based on the use of cyclone
centrifugal dust separation. Not the first to use them. They are used in
industrial applications and have been used in many vacuums. However,
cyclones work best with large dirt, fine dust and even lighter bacterial
and viruses rarely get separated because they don't weigh enough to be
affected by the centrifugal force. Dysons sometimes mention they use a
Hepa final filter to clean the air. Hepa is not a standard and can mean
many things, but, to add any filter at the end of the exhaust can result
in the filter becoming plugged and reducing the amount of air that leaves
the vacuum, thereby loosing suction, which is what they advertise that it
does not do.

I prefer central vacuums, with the exhaust blowing to the outside so that
fine particulate and other unwanted items are discharged to the outdoors,
not back into my house.

Consumer Reports October 2009: Dyson Animal DC28 rated 10th out of 40
Uprights (but not Check Rated). Cost $600. There were better performing
Check Rated models for as little as $120.
--
Peace,
BobJ

In article , Butch Haynes wrote:

Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g., Consumer
Reports)?

ROTFL

Scott in SoCal wrote:
Last time on misc.consumers, RicodJour
said:

On Oct 17, 10:49 am, Van Chocstraw
wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?
Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?
They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.
Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own.

I have never owned a Yugo, but I still know that they suck.

Still driving the "Le Car"? ;-)

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 10:34:47 -0400, Sum Guy wrote Re
What's the deal with the heavily-advertized Dyson vacuum cleaners?:

Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

No.

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time?

Yes, since Dyson pays for it. Anybody that pays for time is worthy of
that time.

Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

Bingo!
--
I filter all messages from google groups.

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:21:24 -0400, Butch Haynes
wrote Re What's the deal with the
heavily-advertized Dyson vacuum cleaners?:

The cognitive dissonance problem with owner reviews of higher than usual
priced stuff (e.g., Macs, Kirby vacuums, etc.) is that having spent the
extra money, the buyer must now report how superior the product is lest
he be seen as a sucker or even a fool...

Excellent point.
--
I filter all messages from google groups.

Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

One of my relatives has a Dyson and is happy with it (or was a few years
ago the last time the subject came up). Said it was good for dog hair.

I have a lot of dog hair, but didn't want to part with that much money.
I bought a Bissell vacuum a few years ago on sale at Target. It's
theoretically designed for homes with pets, although I suspect that
might be an advertising gimmick. However it does a great job and pulls
out dirt and hair I never knew were there. They have a new one out now
that is "multi-cyclonic". I'd like that but only because it sounds more
high tech... no idea if it works any better. If I won the lottery, I
might try a Dyson, but for now I'm happy with the Bissell.

On Oct 17, 9:34*am, Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? *Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

Consumer Reports says they are so-so. They sure do look high tech.
However, SWMBO bought a Hoover $89.95 on sale a while back and claims
it is the best of many to pass through our portals in the the last 36
years. Since the cleanup involves 3 cats, 1 dog and carpets her
opinion has merit.

Joe

On Oct 17, 2:26*pm, Scott in SoCal wrote:
RicodJour said:
Van Chocstraw wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:

Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? *Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.

Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own. *

I have never owned a Yugo, but I still know that they suck.

Based on what? Based on other people's opinions? That's what the
reviews on Amazon and Epinions and the like are - other people's
opinions. If you don't value other people's opinions, does that mean
you're smarter than everyone else? Based on you being an auto
mechanic and taking them apart and putting them back together again?
That has some weight, so let's apply it to what Chocstraw opined: do
you think he's an appliance repairman and has had a large number of
unhappy customers with Dyson vacuums? Why wouldn't he have said so?
Why would Dyson give a FIVE year warranty if the things didn't last
(main reason people replace vacuums is because they break).

R

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:16:19 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour
wrote:

On Oct 17, 10:49*am, Van Chocstraw
wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? *Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.

Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own. Virtually all of the reviews from people that actually bought it
are 4 and 5 stars (Dyson Animal). Google has a review consolidator -
click on the "all reviews" link.

R

It's not uncommon for people to like what they bought. Once they spent
money on it, they sort of have to like it, or else admit they were
foolish.

Lee B wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of
"if you advertize it, they will buy" ?

One of my relatives has a Dyson and is happy with it (or was a few
years ago the last time the subject came up). Said it was good for
dog hair.
I have a lot of dog hair, but didn't want to part with that much
money. I bought a Bissell vacuum a few years ago on sale at Target.
It's theoretically designed for homes with pets, although I suspect
that might be an advertising gimmick. However it does a great job and
pulls out dirt and hair I never knew were there. They have a new one
out now that is "multi-cyclonic". I'd like that but only because it
sounds more high tech... no idea if it works any better. If I won the
lottery, I might try a Dyson, but for now I'm happy with the Bissell.

Th "multi-cyclonic" only describes how it stores the dirt, not how well it gets
it from the carpet.

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:21:24 -0400, Butch Haynes
wrote:

RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 17, 10:49 am, Van Chocstraw
wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?
Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?
They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.

Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own. Virtually all of the reviews from people that actually bought it
are 4 and 5 stars (Dyson Animal). Google has a review consolidator -
click on the "all reviews" link.

R

Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g., Consumer
Reports)?

The cognitive dissonance problem with owner reviews of higher than usual
priced stuff (e.g., Macs, Kirby vacuums, etc.) is that having spent the
extra money, the buyer must now report how superior the product is lest
he be seen as a sucker or even a fool...

How about this? I OWNED a Kirby and thought it was absolutely
excellent, although a bit pricey, and things such as the jig saw
attachment were a bit silly. It was great as a vacuum cleaner and rug
shampoo-er, though. Thirty years later, I wish I still had it. I bet
it is still in like new condition, because my first wife, who got it
in the divorce, never did a lick of housework in her life.

RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:26 pm, Scott in SoCal wrote:
RicodJour said:
Van Chocstraw wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?
Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?
They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.
Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own.
I have never owned a Yugo, but I still know that they suck.

Based on what? Based on other people's opinions? That's what the
reviews on Amazon and Epinions and the like are - other people's
opinions. If you don't value other people's opinions, does that mean
you're smarter than everyone else? Based on you being an auto
mechanic and taking them apart and putting them back together again?
That has some weight, so let's apply it to what Chocstraw opined: do
you think he's an appliance repairman and has had a large number of
unhappy customers with Dyson vacuums? Why wouldn't he have said so?
Why would Dyson give a FIVE year warranty if the things didn't last
(main reason people replace vacuums is because they break).

R

Or they thought they were broken. When I lived in the apartments, I
used to find at least one orphan a month sitting by the dumpster. Almost
always, all they needed was the string cut out of the beater bar, the
hairballs removed from the elbow in the plumbing, and maybe a new belt
to replace the smoked-slick or broken one. If they were shiny enough,
I'd get them running and drop them off at Goodwill, or give to friends
to sell in their garage sale.

That is one definite downside of moving into a house. Instead of 17
dumpsters that I would walk by every evening on my walk, now I get to
listen to idiot dogs barking at me, even after we have been introduced
multiple times.

--
aem sends...

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:58:29 -0400, "EXT"
wrote:

Dysons sometimes mention they use a Hepa final
filter to clean the air. Hepa is not a standard and can mean many things,

When you wrote Hepa, if you meant HEPA, there is a HEPA standard:
they are able to trap at least 99.97 percent of particles of .3
microns.

"LDC" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:58:29 -0400, "EXT"
wrote:

Dysons sometimes mention they use a Hepa final
filter to clean the air. Hepa is not a standard and can mean many things,

When you wrote Hepa, if you meant HEPA, there is a HEPA standard:
they are able to trap at least 99.97 percent of particles of .3
microns.

Is the mis-capitalization really that much of a stretch?

Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

Avoid it at all costs. In a recent vacuum cleaner test it was rated 11th.

What you want to do is to buy a commercial vacuum cleaner. If you have a
Costco Business Center near you, they carry them. They are not
exceptionally expensive, they last a long time, and they suck.

Dyson is for the same people that buy the Bose Wave Radio!

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:21:24 -0400, Butch Haynes wrote:

Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g., Consumer
Reports)?

Yes, CU has rated vacuums:

Rated #1 with a score of 73 is a Hoover WindTunnel Anniversary Edition
U6485-900, price range of $186.99 - $253.54.

Best Dyson, DC28 Animal, is rated #12 with a score of 67, price $599.99.

Kuskokwim wrote:

Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g.,
Consumer Reports)?

Yes, CU has rated vacuums:

I bought the Nov CR issue last night, but apparently it's not the issue
that contains an indepth review of vacuum cleaners - just a table
showing a handful of best performers. This is the Canadian version, and
the special Canadian insert that shows the equivalent cdn models isin't
even showing the correct model numbers.

I was going to buy a one-month access to CR's online website, but when I
got to the point where I was filling out my CC information, it said that
it was a _recurring_ one-month charge unless or until I cancelled it,
which I immediately swore at them. They just lost some direct revenue
because I wanted a one-time charge to my card, not to have to deal with
cancelling it so I wouldn't be charged for a second (etc) month.

It would be nice if there was a code inside the CR magazine such that if
you bought CR at the news stand that you could use the code to access
the CR website for a limited time (one month?).

I purchased a Sears Kenmore "Elegance" model 23107 (black color) which
is same as 23106 and 23105 (purple and yellow). The Elegance black
model ($399 CDN, on sale) is the same as the US Ebony 28614 model ($288
USD). We get screwed up here in Canada over the exchange rate, seeing
how the CDN dollar is almost at par with the USD.

All of the sears vacuum cleaners (including the really expensive "Blue"
(US) or Intuition (Canada) have the same canister unit and beater-bar
roller brush. The Blue/Intuition has a beater bar unit with a
detachable hard-floor cleaning head, but all units have a small powered
accessory head for cleaning stairs and furniture.

There's a lot of talk about suction and hepa, but it's all noise. How
the beater-bar interacts with carpeting is where your real cleaning
action is. All vacuums have enough suction to bring dirt/hair into the
capture bag or container once it's been dislodged by the beater bar.

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 10:34:47 -0400, Sum Guy wrote:

Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Which? They make quite a few different models, and you don't say where you
are...

We had a DC05 at one point - the filters would block up quickly, part of
the hose assembly broke after a while (and they only wanted to sell me a
whole new hose assembly at great expense rather than just the fitting
that had broken), and the whole rotating brush part which was supposed
to run via the airflow was just a joke and next to useless (I'd end up
stripping the whole brush assembly apart at least a couple of times a
month, which gets old fast).

Never tried one of those Dysons with the ball, if that's what you're
talking about.

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:26:20 -0700, Scott in SoCal wrote:
Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own.

I have never owned a Yugo, but I still know that they suck.

Interesting - back in the day I used to hear nothing but praise about
their off-roaders; sounded like they were just as capable as the more
expensive equivalents from other manufacturers.

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:13:57 -0400, Tony wrote:
Still driving the "Le Car"? ;-)

Hmm, I remember a friend having one of the Alpine turbo versions (not sure
if they were ever sold in the US?) and it was a really fun car,
particularly on twisty hillside roads :-)

Power output even without the turbo was twice that of the standard
vehicle, though, so it was a reasonable power/weight ratio in something
with a reasonably sort wheelbase...

cheers

Jules

on 10/17/2009 11:58 AM (ET) EXT wrote the following:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of
"if you advertize it, they will buy" ?

There is a little missleading information in their commercials in
saying that they do not loose suction. Their claim is based on the use
of cyclone centrifugal dust separation. Not the first to use them.
They are used in industrial applications and have been used in many
vacuums. However, cyclones work best with large dirt, fine dust and
even lighter bacterial and viruses rarely get separated because they
don't weigh enough to be affected by the centrifugal force. Dysons
sometimes mention they use a Hepa final filter to clean the air. Hepa
is not a standard and can mean many things, but, to add any filter at
the end of the exhaust can result in the filter becoming plugged and
reducing the amount of air that leaves the vacuum, thereby loosing
suction, which is what they advertise that it does not do.

I prefer central vacuums, with the exhaust blowing to the outside so
that fine particulate and other unwanted items are discharged to the
outdoors, not back into my house.

I have a central vacuum, but sometimes you just need to pick up some
local debris and don't want to drag 30' of hose out and snake it to
wherever you need it.. My other vac is a Bissell combo upright/canister
vac that I bought in WalMart when I wasn't shopping for a vac. I spotted
that candy apple red machine on the shelf and had to have it. I think it
was about $150 USD
http://www.acohardware.biz/713.html

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

on 10/17/2009 7:54 PM (ET) Joe wrote the following:
"LDC" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:58:29 -0400, "EXT"
wrote:


Dysons sometimes mention they use a Hepa final
filter to clean the air. Hepa is not a standard and can mean many things,

When you wrote Hepa, if you meant HEPA, there is a HEPA standard:
they are able to trap at least 99.97 percent of particles of .3
microns.


Is the mis-capitalization really that much of a stretch?

As long as it isn't Hep-A that you are talking about. :-)

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

"willshak" wrote in message
...
on 10/17/2009 7:54 PM (ET) Joe wrote the following:
"LDC" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:58:29 -0400, "EXT"
wrote:


Dysons sometimes mention they use a Hepa final
filter to clean the air. Hepa is not a standard and can mean many
things,

When you wrote Hepa, if you meant HEPA, there is a HEPA standard:
they are able to trap at least 99.97 percent of particles of .3
microns.


Is the mis-capitalization really that much of a stretch?

As long as it isn't Hep-A that you are talking about. :-)


Clever. Nice one! ;-)


Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 10:40:06 -0500, Jules
wrote:

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:13:57 -0400, Tony wrote:
Still driving the "Le Car"? ;-)

Hmm, I remember a friend having one of the Alpine turbo versions (not sure
if they were ever sold in the US?) and it was a really fun car,
particularly on twisty hillside roads :-)

Power output even without the turbo was twice that of the standard
vehicle, though, so it was a reasonable power/weight ratio in something
with a reasonably sort wheelbase...


And an even shorter service life!

Sum Guy wrote
Kuskokwim wrote

Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g.,
Consumer Reports)?

Yes, CU has rated vacuums:

I bought the Nov CR issue last night, but apparently it's not the
issue that contains an indepth review of vacuum cleaners - just a
table showing a handful of best performers. This is the Canadian
version, and the special Canadian insert that shows the equivalent
cdn models isin't even showing the correct model numbers.

I was going to buy a one-month access to CR's online website, but
when I got to the point where I was filling out my CC information, it
said that it was a _recurring_ one-month charge unless or until I
cancelled it, which I immediately swore at them. They just lost some
direct revenue because I wanted a one-time charge to my card, not to
have to deal with cancelling it so I wouldn't be charged for a second
(etc) month.

It would be nice if there was a code inside the CR magazine such
that if you bought CR at the news stand that you could use the
code to access the CR website for a limited time (one month?).

And just how long do you expect it would take before that ended up on the net ?

I purchased a Sears Kenmore "Elegance" model 23107 (black color) which
is same as 23106 and 23105 (purple and yellow). The Elegance black
model ($399 CDN, on sale) is the same as the US Ebony 28614 model
($288 USD). We get screwed up here in Canada over the exchange rate,
seeing how the CDN dollar is almost at par with the USD.

All of the sears vacuum cleaners (including the really expensive
"Blue" (US) or Intuition (Canada) have the same canister unit and
beater-bar roller brush. The Blue/Intuition has a beater bar unit
with a detachable hard-floor cleaning head, but all units have a
small powered accessory head for cleaning stairs and furniture.

There's a lot of talk about suction and hepa, but it's all noise. How the
beater-bar interacts with carpeting is where your real cleaning action is.

Not if you dont have carpet.

All vacuums have enough suction to bring dirt/hair into the capture
bag or container once it's been dislodged by the beater bar.

On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 06:52:34 -0700, SMS
wrote:

Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

Avoid it at all costs. In a recent vacuum cleaner test it was rated 11th.

What you want to do is to buy a commercial vacuum cleaner. If you have a
Costco Business Center near you, they carry them. They are not
exceptionally expensive, they last a long time, and they suck.

Dyson is for the same people that buy the Bose Wave Radio!

We have a five-year-old Dyson. Before that SWMBO would go through a
Hoover, Eureka, or whatever, every six to nine months. They would
either lose suction (sucks to lose impeller blades) or would blow out
the side of the case. Yes, they aren't designed to suck up pennies,
but the fact is they do. The Dyson may not work any better but it
*is* built better than the $100 vacuums out there.

"Sum Guy" wrote in message ...
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

If you have a really good product, people know about it, and you don't have
to spend a lot on advertising. If you don't, you advertise the hell out of
it. They have to sell a lot of vacuums to just break even on the
advertising. Like Geico. Tons of TV ads. Nascar cars. Drag racers @
$40,000 a run. If they want to drop the cost of their insurance, simply cut
the ad costs. Allstate is beating them up pretty good now by just
advertising prices, and not going with all the hoopla. I'm just sick of
seeing the cavemen.

Steve

"RicodJour" wrote in message
...
On Oct 17, 10:49 am, Van Chocstraw
wrote:
Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy
something just because it costs more.

Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't
own. Virtually all of the reviews from people that actually bought it
are 4 and 5 stars (Dyson Animal). Google has a review consolidator -
click on the "all reviews" link.

R

reply: I don't own any Oakley glasses. I think anyone who would pay $200
to $300 for a pair of sunglasses needs to be confined and observed for a
week. The same goes for vacuum cleaners. I've had $5 garage sale vacuums
that did as good as a new one, and if they died, hell, just go get another
one.

Rhinestone shades (@$200 a pair) or cheap sunglasses, as some prophet once
said.

Steve

And no one would be ****ed off, feel that they had been screwed and
leave a bad/horrendous review in retaliation? I find almost just the
opposite in almost everything - people more readily leave bad reviews.


reply: I quit reading online reviews. They all looked like they were
written by the same English major, and I could find very few negatives.

I'd rather ask the neighbors or friends, or come here.

Steve

"LDC" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:58:29 -0400, "EXT"
wrote:

Dysons sometimes mention they use a Hepa final
filter to clean the air. Hepa is not a standard and can mean many things,

When you wrote Hepa, if you meant HEPA, there is a HEPA standard:
they are able to trap at least 99.97 percent of particles of .3
microns.

OMIGAWD! I totally understood that he meant HEPA when he typed Hepa. What
is wrong with me, and what should I be doing about it?

Steve

"Lee B" wrote in message
...

Sum Guy wrote:
Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if
you advertize it, they will buy" ?

One of my relatives has a Dyson and is happy with it (or was a few years
ago the last time the subject came up). Said it was good for dog hair.

I have a lot of dog hair, but didn't want to part with that much money. I
bought a Bissell vacuum a few years ago on sale at Target. It's
theoretically designed for homes with pets, although I suspect that might
be an advertising gimmick. However it does a great job and pulls out dirt
and hair I never knew were there. They have a new one out now that is
"multi-cyclonic". I'd like that but only because it sounds more high
tech... no idea if it works any better. If I won the lottery, I might try
a Dyson, but for now I'm happy with the Bissell.

If I hit the lotto, I don't think I'd have a new vacuum on the list of
priorities. I think all that overbuying is why a lot of lottery winners end
up poor again. Have to have the latest greatest most expensive of
everything, when a cheap one will do just as well.

Steve