Consumer Reports hits a new LOW...(Vacuum Ratings)

[georgect]

Has anyone seen changes made to Consumer Reports?
They have a whole new format to the magazine which is pretty sucky.

Small font everywhere yet they don't utilize the whole page. Every page has unused empty space at the top.

Anyway, they only list 13 bagged uprights (with only Kenmore, Miele, Hover, Eureka, Kriby, Sebo) making the list.

Only five Bagless uprights (Hover, Eureka, Dyson, Shark).

Six bag canisters (Kenmore, Panasonic yes two brands make the six tested)

Three bagless (Kenmore, Panasonic, Hoover).

It's like they didn't even try or feel like testing anyting else but Kenmore.

I think Consumer Reports has finally hit an all time low and how can they be taken seriouly with so few tested brands.

 

[tolivac]

Glad I don't subscribe anymore.

 

[sbakerde]

I never did

Have much faith in consumer reports. I have always felt their testing of vacuums was somewhat unrealistic. To me testing a vacuum in a warehouse with staged dirt is nothing like cleaning a really dirty house. I would be more appt to trust a review from a cleaning lady who uses the vacuum in different houses with different sets of challenges. But that's just my opinion.

 

[dysonman1]

My friends always called the magazine "Communist Reports". How ironic that they've almost always been WRONG since the first issue in December 1936. In December, 1936, the LOWEST RATED cleaner was the Hoover 150. The highest rated cleaner was the General Electric AVF-3. In the "unacceptable" category was the Air-Way Sanitary System.

In June, 1939, the Rexair was the one rated "unacceptable" because Communist Reports thought people would get shocked from it. The Electrolux XXX was the highest rated cleaner, with Communist Reports saying it removed more dirt than motor driven brush uprights (which it isn't possible to do).

Only once, in 1970, did CR get it right. The Lux 1205 was the Number One cleaner, with the Lux model L the number two cleaner. Both were fitted with pistol grip electric hoses, and telescopic wands, as well as PN-1 power nozzles.

 

[gottahaveahoove]

My aunt got it and

read all of the vacuums to me (knowing my affiliatiion). I'm underwhelmed. But, then, lots of reports and people, for that matter can do that. Glad I never relied on the report.

 

[marks_here]

Just because it's bad on CR doesn't mean it gonna be bad for you. I read all personal reviews by people who actually use them, not some made up demo on tv where you can hear the hoses being blocked by something so what they're selling of course does a better job.

 

[sbakerde]

A few years ago

CR rated the eureka boss (RR style bag) very highly. So of course droves of people went out and bought one. Iv heard an encyclopedia of complaints on that machine. Everything from too heavy, too bulky, belts don't last more than a month, useless on hard floors, hard to push, and it goes on and on. Needless to say these people bought this vacuum because a magazine told them to. And they all found out what a disappointment it was.

"Communist Reports". HAHAHa. I love it!

 

[fantomfan]

I didn't renew my subscription for this magazine.

I don't regret it one bit. How can the ratings change for a vacuum, if it's the SAME test, and the SAME vacuum? (The newest Hoover Windtunnel Self Propelled) I seriously question the validity of their reports.

 

[ralph123]

Still have the old Rainbow in online reviews.

The CR web site reviews quite a few vacuums. I'm still not sure what to think about the Rainbow review. They don't have the newest model reviewed yet. they give the price range as $889 to $2100 - which is considerably lower than the $2600 that I was quoted.

Under "lows" it says that "the power head is an optional accessory". My question remains - was it tested with a power nozzle or not?

Personally, I'm happy that the Rainbow gets a lousy rating - regardless of whether it's accurate. It made it a lot easier to get rid of the super annoying Rainbow salesperson.

 

[man114]

Rainbow

I think it is high time they retest the Rainbow, they haven't tested one in so long and the improvements are substantial.

 

[super-sweeper]

The Eureka RR The Boss was and is a good vacuum! It's bulky, sure, but an EXCELLENT vacuum cleaner! 

 


Communist Reports...LOL I love it!!! 

 

[marks_here]

me too, it all makes cents now

 

[super-sweeper]

Mark, did a Kirby fall off a shelf on you? Your replies just don't make any sense tonight! 

 

[raycarter]

I remember reading in the 1986 report on vacuum cleaners , where there was a small retrospective piece regarding the 1936 report, being that it was Consumer Reports' 50th anniversary, that two Hoover models performed well in the 1936 tests. Does anyone know which two those were, or have a copy of the ratings? I'm frankly shocked to hear that the Hoover 150 was so low-rated.

 

[2011hoover700]

Rating question

I have 2 models that sold alongside the Hoover model 150 at different times, How did consumer reports rate the Hoover 25 and 26? I personally love both.

 

[sptyks]

I just received the November 2014 issue of Consumer Reports.


On page 19 is their latest Upright vacuum reviews.


 


The Kirby Sentria II was rated #9 down the list for bagged vacuums.


The Dyson DC65 Animal was rated # 3 on the bagless list.


 


On the Sidebar it states: Kirby #A9 at $1800.00


 


"If Price were no object,


Kirbys are made to be rebuilt, not replaced. The Kirby Sentria II is weighty-among the heavist tested-and somewhat noisy, but the self-propelled bagged upright moves to the top of our list of picks for it's Superb Cleaning ability." Now as a Sentria owner, I will have to totally agree on the Superb Cleaning ability.


FYI - The Kenmore Elite 31150 was #1 on the bagged list.


 


It also states:


"The Dyson DC65 Animal bagless upright #B3 was impressive for carpets and pet hair, and top notch for keeping what it sucks up."


FYI - the Hoover Windtunnel T-Series Rewind made #1 on the bagless list.


 


I have a question: After reading Oli's review of DC41 MK2, and not knowing much about Dyson vacuums is: What is the difference between Dyson DC65 and DC41 MK2? Are they similar or totally different?

[this post was last edited: 9/25/2014-18:24]

 

[filterqueenman]

Do not know if it is true but...

I heard Sears allows C.R. to use their facilities for testing and that is why you see Kenmore Appliances so highly rated.  Do not know if it is true or not - just saying that is what I heard.  

 

[dysonman1]

Raycarter

December, 1936. Communist Reports rated the GE upright AV-1 the top rated upright (costing $29). The Premier Duplex was rated number two. While the Hoover 150 as well as the Hoover 25 got great marks for cleaning ability, Communist Reports stated that they were both "extremely overpriced". The model 150 was dead last in the Acceptable list. They also rated REBUILT Electrolux model 12's (the American Edition with the 350 watt motor) as an excellent cleaner for deep cleaning and a great value. Rated two down from the rebuilt Electrolux, was the brand new Model 12 Electrolux (which as we know, with no rotating brush, cannot clean a carpet very well). The Air-Way Sanitary System (Twin Motor model no less), was rated "unacceptable" due to the fact it used sleeve bearings which require greasing. They claimed that sleeve bearing would make the motor life very short. As we know, Air-Way cleaners always run perfectly.

History very rarely proves Communist Reports correct.

 

[raycarter]

Dysonman1

Thank you for clarifying that point. I figured it had to be the Hoover's prices that Consumer Reports had a problem with. The Kirby model G4 suffered similar judgment in the 1995 report, with the remark, "despite its solidity, the Kirby is simply too expensive to be recommended." Oh, please-have they never heard of installment plans?