Airflow: Old bagged vacuums vs new bagless

[mike811]

Sorry to post this to this section also.
So I used the baird airflow meter and got quite impressive results from the old bagged vacuums.
Seems like the new bagless vacuums don't shine what it comes to airflow.

Old bagged vacuums:
10/7,5 Kirby Gsix (560w, 5 amps) year 1999-2002
5,5 Philips P74 Electronic (1000w, 9 amps) year 1985
7 Lux Royal D790 (1150w, 10 amps) year 1991-1995
8,5 Nilfisk GM80 (1000, 9 amps) year 1985-1990?
3 Kärcher upright (Sebo BS36 clone) (900w, 8 amps) year 2000 = disappointment


New bagless vacuums:
4,5 Electrolux UltraFlex (2100w, 19 amps)
2 Shark Rotator (1200w, 10 amps)

 

[wyaple]

Bagless Vacuums Use Much of Their Airflow to

Separate the dirt in the cyclones, so around 50% of what they could have gets used up by the time it reaches the hose end and/or connects to the power nozzle.

Examples:
Dyson DC14 has 117 CFM before cyclones and 74 CFM after,
Dyson DC25 has 119 CFM before cyclones and 74 CFM after,
Hoover Windtunnel 2 has 124 CFM before the cyclones and 66 CFM after,
Hoover Windtunnel MAX has 108 CFM before the cyclones and 60 CFM after.

Bag less machines are the most inefficient machines on the planet in terms of CFM per Watt consumed. Dirty air machines (like your G6) are the most efficient in terms of CFM per Watt consumed.

Bill

 

[mike811]

Oh yes. Cyclonic system indeed steals A LOT of airflow.
My latest measurement vacuum (bagged) Philips Performer Pro pulled 5 from the hose end. BUT that was when the power was set to half way. Same wattage bagless Electrolux pulled 4,5 with full power.
Philips was able to pull 9 with full power and that is best what I have seen in bybass vacuum.
Not only that, but most of bagless vacuums are much noisier.
So far my conclusion is that bagless vacuums have more than half less the airflow of bagged vacuum.

http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=olOwmRApVxs