Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
o_0 I mean, you're just being petty now. But keep it coming, so we can all judge what we're dealing with here.
BrandSpark Canadian Trust Study of Vacuum Cleaners
- Thread starter Vacuum Facts
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
kirbyman65
Well-known member
Exactly!
It must be emphasized that all Dyson-type apparatuses lack the stabilizing influence of the retro-cycloidal suction harmonizer, thereby rendering their performance erratic at best. Proper machines, of course, employ a bifurcated torsional impeller shroud, carefully aligned to the supralateral bristle displacement angle (θᵦ), ensuring particle entrainment remains within the acceptable resonant flux window.
The governing equation is well known:
ΔΨ = √((μCFM² ÷ ρπ) + (Ω³ – λ²))
Where:
- ΔΨ represents the suction-phase destabilization index,
- μCFM is the pseudo-coefficient of cubic flux migration,
- ρ is the rug-nap density modulus,
- Ω is the oscillatory brushroll precession rate,
- and λ is the bristle torsional elasticity constant.
Naturally, failure to maintain ΔΨ below 1.7 leads directly to catastrophic bristle-pile implosion (BPI), an event from which no domestic vacuum has ever recovered.
Furthermore, repeated studies (see Appendix 19.4, Journal of Hyper-Vacuo Studies) have demonstrated that the hydrocoptic marzlevane assembly must always be cross-indexed against the logarithmic waneshaft resonance curve:
ΣF = κ(∂Φ/∂t) – ∇²Ξ
Where κ is the hyper-suction flux constant, Φ is the particle-entrainment potential, and Ξ is, of course, the general annoyance factor.
In short, to claim that Dyson “science” holds up under such rigorous vacuological scrutiny is laughable. Without tremie-pipe stabilization and girdlespring differential calibration, their so-called cyclonic efficiency is nothing more than decorative airflow twaddle.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
It is interesting that this is how you see what I provide. I should probably have a bit more sympathy if it's inaccessible. I forget at times I've sacrificed much of my life to developing to a stage where I can understand this stuff. It is all fact-checkably true though.
cheesewonton
Well-known member
Like I said before, spend some time using quality bagged upright and canister vacuums from the brands I mentioned, then we can have a rational discussion. Without some hands on with high quality vacuums you are talking out your exhaust port and have no credibility here. I am basically challenging you to use a Sebo G4 or similar for a month and then come back and try to tell us something else is better. Go ahead. Use the best for a while before spouting off again.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
I may just do that at some point. But I can tell you now, if I have to plug it in, if it's heavy and mains upright formfactor, if it requires more than a couple of hundred Watts for nominal cleaning, if it has continuous power level and not dynamic based on dust loading, if it has anciliaries and running costs, if it's noisy, if it doesn't have anti hair wrap fully solved, if above floor and stairs cleaning is a pain and not instant, if it uses belts, if it doesn't highlight dust on hard floors, if it doesn't work automatically across all floors without any user intervention, if it has fiddly dials to adjust head height, if it has two fixed wheels that impair manoeuvrability, if it doesn't show me how full the dust receptacle is, if it doesn't sweep hard floors of fine dust, if suction reduces as a function of dust loading, if I can't just buy it online direct from the manufacturer in my local region and get next day delivery, if I don't have a 35 day return without condition, if it snowploughs, and if it only can manage 99.97% filtration of particles greater than 0.3 µm, then this is not good enough for today's technology and it will be heavily criticised, since we've moved on and solved all this. YOU need to try better technology, understand, and appreciate it at a deeper level before passing judgements about those that write off old crap that may still clean well at a price.
People that thought they knew better said the exact same thing for the sebo felix. It was totally insufficient. It cleaned great, but talk about consequences that I've no time for in a better world.
People that thought they knew better said the exact same thing for the sebo felix. It was totally insufficient. It cleaned great, but talk about consequences that I've no time for in a better world.
Last edited:
kirbylux77
Well-known member
Vacuum Facts - you do realize you just wrote off 99% of the vacuums in today's marketplace right?! Talk about not even being remotely open minded!
Also, for someone who's sooo dismissive of anything not Dyson, and who spouts all these scientific facts, test results, testing methods, etc.....where is your college or university degree to PROVE you ACTUALLY KNOW what you're talking about? So far, you have done NOTHING to show or prove that your opinions are backed by a educational background that actually knows what research methods and testing mean!
Also, for someone who's sooo dismissive of anything not Dyson, and who spouts all these scientific facts, test results, testing methods, etc.....where is your college or university degree to PROVE you ACTUALLY KNOW what you're talking about? So far, you have done NOTHING to show or prove that your opinions are backed by a educational background that actually knows what research methods and testing mean!
royalfan103
Well-known member
If he’s doing that to 99% of the vacuums in today’s market, does he even know what today’s technology or standards are for that matter?
Absolute Rainbow
Well-known member
He do know the technology and standards. He know the main-equivalent (or what I would call anti-corded) handsticks are the way to go. Only Dyson's ones (particularly the V10 onwards) and the absolute best of the dupes are the true proper examples of these handsticks - all others are just that, actual duds.
And then there are R&D and tech design behind the proper main-equivalents...
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
This exposes faulty thinking. Technology moves on and improves in performance per Watt, in ease of use, and in environmental impact. Not recognising this is wilful regression. We know it's possible and we know it's better, so anything that doesn't should be judged accordingly. By analogy, if you write off machines which are not electrical powered (REAL vintage machines), then you're guilty of the same apparent lack of open mindedness. What about all the brooms, which predate the vacuum cleaner format? Are you open minded to those as well? Or do you recognise them as inferior and that we've moved on. The lack of open mindedness and experience is simply displayed by yourselves. You have no experience with the latest technology, you don't understand it, and you can't appreciate it. So you demonise it instead. It comes across poorly. I have tried many older machines and my reviews evidence my conclusions.
I suggest you understand how to measure cleaning performance then go watch my videos evidencing the relative performance of different machines I've tested. You've also clearly got no experience in usability of a wider and more diverse range of machines beyond ancient dinosaur vintage machines. All this shouldn't even be contested; the data is crystal clear about where market trends are shifting. Almost as many people use the DC35 stick vac clones than mains cleaners now, globally. In the future, most people will use DC35 stick vacs. I assume you won't try to deny reality. Convenience wins out, and you write it off. The Dyson stick vacs clean as well as mains cleaners, at a fraction of the cost to the environment, and make it incredibly easy to do so compared to technologies of the past. You are clearly closed minded, unaware, and inexperienced with modern technology.
kirbyman65
Well-known member
Listen,
I don't care if you LOVE Dyson... but don't go around bashing other brands we like!
I don't care if you LOVE Dyson... but don't go around bashing other brands we like!
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
The wonderful irony is, I don't actually bash them. I just tell the rest of the full truth that the rabid vacuum enthusiasts deliberately hide, and it's all fact checkable. That you interpret the full truth, in all its warty glory, as someone 'bashing' them reveals to the rest of us that they are in fact flawed and inferior devices, as the evidence shows. You've shown to be your own worst enemy on that front.
I don't love Dyson, I love technological advancement. Only Dyson seem to be responsible whilst the rest copy, so it appears to those with limited thinking that I love them. It's amazing how many of the 'vacuum enthusiasts' are incapable of making that very simple distinction, but it makes complete sense if they don't notice, understand, and therefore appreciate technological advancement. It's easier to just demonise it and those that recognise it and can tell the full truth. As long as it's exposed in the way you've just helped, the rest of us can make judgements for ourselves about that community and the products they peddle.
Oh, and the idea that you think you can just dictate what people can and can't reasonably say freely only compounds the poor image already made. Lumber this response with passive aggressive emojis and prove my point.
Last edited:
rlsellman21
Member
Holy crap, that was Star Trek level technobabble. Kudos!
kirbyman65
Well-known member
Thanks
rlsellman21
Member
Looks like Absolute Rainbow is a huge Vacuum Facts fan lol
cheesewonton
Well-known member
He's trolling us. He has no hands on with high quality vacuums to know what he's talking about.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
You're going to offend all the rabid Sebo Felix fans that bit my head off when I revealed the full truth.
cheesewonton
Well-known member
I think everyone here knows I am not a big fan of the Dart / Felix thing. As much as the Felix just doesn't work for me ( top heavy, falls over, meh "filtration", cheesy hose, blows hot air on the user ) it is an order of magnitude better than a Diesoon. At least it's not the cheap shiny squeaky brittle miserable plastic and, complex to repair ( or not ) balls and clog-o-matic "filters" ( that washing never cleans adequately ) and cyclones found on Diesoons. You can get any part you need to repair any Sebo for comparatively little money in the US and they are designed from the outset to be repaired. It is a 20 year vacuum.
Here is my challenge. Go use a Sebo G4 or a WIndsor Versamatic 14 ( how the Sebo 360 is sold in the US ) for a few months and then lets see if you are still wetting yourself over Diesoons.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
Not sure what you've been using ...or how... but the similar machines I've used show none of these issues.
I've seen the machines you've talked about. The fundamental problems in the Felix are also there, so I've already effectively done this. The machine is a good performer, but terrible to use. Likewise, I challenge you to use a Gen5 and show how to reproduce any of your alleged problems with normal, responsible use. I have the best performing upright on the market and I wouldn't ever use it now after a stickvac which performs just as well but without the hassle.
vacuumdevil
Well-known member
This is guy is nothing but a Troll. Get him out of here!
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
These are my conclusions based on observations. You can watch my review yourself. If you have any evidence, distinct from an irrelevant opinion on the factual matters associated with how I drew my conclusion, you're welcome to positively contribute. Otherwise, kindly keep the petty name calling and lynching calls for the playground. It's only the bullies that shouldn't be welcome here. A dose of facts on this vacuum fiction land has been long overdue.
Absolute Rainbow
Well-known member
No, @Vacuum Facts is right. He observed, tested and based his conclusions with facts and data. If you guys still try to dismiss him, then you're ignorant as heck (sorry for the censor). Dyson and most dupes are better than old and corded machines, and Dyson's latest and greatest (both Gen5 and V16, at the moment) are the best in market at the end of the day. This is objective, not subjective. I watched his video and appreciated his objective observations, something that's all too rare enough to make you guys... well, let's just say secretly angering him. I knew vacuumland.org is an echo chamber of ignorance. Bruh!
rlsellman21
Member
Keep kissing that a$$ dude
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
I'm not aware of a cordless dupe that's as good as a mains cleaner (in default mode).
Absolute Rainbow
Well-known member
That's for the modern ones. But the ancient machines are way worse. You already experienced it with the Kirby.
It means Dyson is the only cordless family that consistently match the performance of a modern corded mains in the former's default mode, and has been the case since the V10 back in 2018.
vacuumdevil
Well-known member
You are partially responsible for the death of Matthew Lock. Get out of here!
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
That's in an innappropriate low blow and I have written evidence directly from him archived confirming this to be false. I know exactly what upset him in this area of his life because he told me. And you won't like the truth. The primary cause of his death was associated with a mental health disorder and you insult his memory by hypocritically weaponising his death to attack others in such a repugnant way. You really showed a wholly new low side to the community you represent.
Absolute Rainbow
Well-known member
I have recently reported @vacuumdevil for that disrespectful comment. THEY are the one needed to be banned.
Also, good job, @Vacuum Facts
cheesewonton
Well-known member
kirbylux77
Well-known member
Hold on a minute....who is this Matthew Lock that Vacuumdevil refers to? Was he a member on Vacuumland? If so, what was his username?
Vacuumdevil - No offence, but I think that was a bit of a low blow. Unless you have some PROOF that Vacuum Facts really was involved somehow in Matthew's death.
Vacuumdevil - No offence, but I think that was a bit of a low blow. Unless you have some PROOF that Vacuum Facts really was involved somehow in Matthew's death.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
I'm genuinely surprised vacuumdevil wanted to go here. Matthew named Performance Reviews, aka vacuumdevil on here, as a source of his abuse (amongst others) before he died, as you can see in the email screenshots below. The irony of that guy's cruel comment above was seemingly an intentional low blow, and revealed true colours. It forced me to defend against a false accusation. If he suffers no reasonable punishment from this by the forum administrators, since it has absolutely nothing to do with this forum or this thread, then it sends the message they're happy for people to behave all but liabellously with impunity, inventing deeply hypocritical, cruel lies that aren't supported by a dot of evidence, just to smear other people they don't appear to like, at the expense of the dead they allegedly helped to bully.
These are a few snippets from messages Matt sent me, seemingly to psychologically deal with the abuse he got on here and elsewhere by the rabid vacuum enthusiasts. It's terrible how that horrible community seemed to poorly treat him for no reason other than he liked my videos. They can't bully me, so they apparently bullied a young boy instead, who was very bubbly and innocent. Maybe that's what vacuumdevil meant above by it being 'my fault'—possibly implying it was justified he was bullied for the 'crime' of enjoying my videos that simply evidence a full truth about various products.
Sadly, things seemed to get even creepier for Matt, as this snippet of a conversation he had with me shows. There was a video (now removed) of another teenage boy with a channel on YT @DeepRinseEnthusiast2002, that seemed to allege there'd been sexual harrassment and deeply inappropriate advances by certain other members of the rabid vacuum enthusiast community who will remain nameless for now. Matt claimed he'd also been a victim, as you can see below. I recall there was a big noise about it all at the time and I heard rumours that the police were involved, but I didn't hear whether anything came of it in the end. The video later became unavailable and the alleged culprit is still making YT videos. I wonder if some people still have that video saved. It was quite disturbing. The point is, this is what that community is, like it or not.
Some of those who Matt claimed were bullies are the same ones that contribute to targeted hostile threads just to attack people they don't like for no good reason. People can draw their own conclusions about those that slither around in this place while the rest of us are being civil and decent, contributing to theads that are more popular than any other on this entire forum by a stunningly huge margin, which says something.
I don't particularly enjoy talking about this or interacting with the culprits, and I don't want to discuss this anymore, since it's in the past now. It's unfortunate this thread has been reduced to this by the same old troublemakers that never seem to suffer any appropriate consequences. It's not hard to stay on topic and be civil. I enjoy discussing advancing technology and my only interest in my channel or this forum is correcting falsehoods I come across and revealing what's true—because the evidence shows it.
