Bagged or Bagless ?

[jmurray01]

I suspect I may be opening a can of worms here, but oh well!

In my opinion - Bagged is Best!

Pros:

Better Filtration without the need of countless filters
Super easy maintenance
Looks better (I like a nice "slab front" cleaner, and can't stand the curving fronts the bagless ones have to have)

Cons:

You have to spend money on bags

And for Bagless...

Pros:

You don't have to spend money on bags regularly
When the filters are freshly changed and the bin is empty, the suction is very good

Cons:

The filters wear out a lot quicker than on a bagged cleaner, so you have to spend money on them
After a few uses the suction decreases rapidly
If you don't change the filters and empty the bin regularly the motor gets a lot more wear

I'd love to hear your opinions though!

 

[blackheart]

I'm a bag guy

I've used all sorts of bagged and bagless machines i find that bagged machines typically have better airflow and are just generally less messy to empty, i think Electrolux has the best bag system you just open the cover pull it out toss in a new one and close the machine, the oreck uprights are pretty easy too.

 

[suctionselector]

jmurray01

Well. Hmm, I like bagged and bagless.

Bagged because you don't have to replace any filters(some bagged) because when you throw away the bags they have the filters built in.

However bagless is good because you don't have to buy bags. But, many bagless vacuums such as Vax, Panasonic, Tesco, aren't as good as others like Dyson.

However when you said "After a few uses suction decreases rapidly", that is not true to be said of other machines. I used my 17 year old Dyson DC01 to clean the house, and that maintained the same amount of suction through each room/area.

Thats my opinion.

Jacob

 

[jmurray01]

By a "few uses" I didn't mean a few rooms, I meant being used on a few separate occasions, and for the three bagless machines I've owned so far, they have all lost a considerable amount of suction quickly, with my '04 Panasonic MC-E8011 Cylinder Twin Cyclonic being the worst for suction loss.

 

[jmurray01]

@blackheart - I agree that Electroluxes bag systems are very good.

I especially love the system in the 500 Series, with the horizontal input.

 

[rob_89]

Probably a can of worms indeed!

I think both systems have their merits, and equally there are good and terrible models of each. The cost saving of bagless is definitely an advantage- the price of bags seems to be rising but more and more manufacturers are using synthetic material which usually offer better filtration and clogs slower than typical paper bags.

I also like seeing the dirt collect in the bin as I'm cleaning. I generally use a Dyson for most jobs around the house, where the filters need little attention. However I've had other bagless cleaners (supermarket brands are worst for this!) which lost suction quickly, and I can't stand banging clouds of dust out of clogged pleated filters, so in that situation I would much rather just check and change a bag every few weeks.

As an aside, I agree it couldn't be easier to change a bag on the Lux 500 series. I've got a 610 model of similar vintage, great cleaner.

Rob

 

[jmurray01]

Well actually, people think a bagless cleaner will be cheaper because they won't need to buy bags any longer, but they will still have to spend money on new filters every 6 months!

I know the manuals say to wash them and they'll be fine for the lifetime of the cleaner, but unless the cleaner dies after 6 months (which some do, and that is how they get away with saying "lifetime of the cleaner") you will need to replace them, as after 6 months of use, the dirt gets so ground in that no amount of cleaning will restore the air flow the filter had when it was new.

Seeing as I only use my Panasonic MC-E8011 once a month, I've never replaced the filters and just clean them, but if I used it more, I would replace them regularly.

And yes, you're probably thinking "but even if I have to replace the filters, that is once every 6 months - I have to replace the bag every month!", however, bags cost £2-3 for a pack of 5, whereas filters cost £10-20 for a pack of one!

Indeed, you also have to replace the filters on bagged cleaners too, but because the filters aren't in direct contact with the dirt, you can simply clean them every 6 months and replace every couple of years, or sometimes never replace at all if you have a good quality filter and good quality bag.

Works out at just the same maintenance cost, if not more for bagless, so I know what I'd rather.

 

[jmurray01]

Oh, and also, when you do have to replace a bagged cleaner's filters, they are only £2-3 for a pack of filters, as they don't have to be made as thick. You can even buy them in bulk and cut to size for long term cost effectiveness if you wish.

 

[turbo500]

Personally, I wouldn't use a bagless cleaner if you paid me! I despise emptying the bloody things with dust clouds blowing in your face and I hate washing out the filters - it's just so messy!

However, I can imagine why people prefer a bagless machine. With regular filter maintenance, a Dyson (or other multi cyclone cleaner) will retain constant suction. It's just a pitty that there are so many low efficiency direct filter cyclones on the market that clog up after 1 use. Therefore, I've always thought that if you want to go bagless, Dyson is really the only option.

I've also never found any bagless vacuum to be of particularly high build quality. Dysons have always seemed cheaply made and flimsy in comparison to bagged vacuums in the same price range.

Sorry James Dyson, but I'll be sticking with a bag.

 

[jmurray01]

I know what you mean about build quality, as all the Bagless cleaners I've owned have been quite cheaply built, even if they weren't cheap to buy.

In comparison, my '94 HOOVER Turbopower 1000 Bagged cleaner is the sturdiest cleaner I've ever seen.

It actually fell down a flight of stairs about a year ago (when my mother was using it I hasten to add) and was 100% unscathed. Not even a mark on the body.

Solid, solid as a rock!

 

[jfalberti]

I think it's all up to personal preferance

I have both bagged and bagless cleaners. In my opinion Dyson is the only bagless cleaner I like. I have a DC14 and a DC15 and like them a lot. I bought an extra pre motor filter for each, and when it comes time to clean the filter, I just swap it out and clean the old filter at my convenience. Always have a fresh filter ready to go. I also have bagless Eureka and a bagless WindTunnel that I don't care that much for. I also like my bagged Hoover Tempo, Kenmore Progressive, and Kirby Ultimate G Diamond Edition.

 

[director12]

I have a Bissell bagless (Powerforce Turbo) and a bagged Hoover (Windtunnel Self-Propelled, and the Anniversary Edition). The Hoover is bagged, and I use generic Type Y bags, as the original bags are only on Hoover's website, and are smelly and expensive. The Bissell, it's bagless, and I use the Hoover to vacuum it out for clean emptying (again guys, dump bagless outside if you have allergies).

 

[eurekaprince]

I'm definitely a "bag" guy. Ever since our family owned a Sanyo bagless "dust cassette" canister vac in the 1970's, I have never been convinced that there is any benefit to a bagless vacuum cleaner. The time required to maintain such cleaners is far greater than the time required to find and buy bags for a bagged vac. And now with the internet, it is very easy to order the right kind of bags and have them delivered to your door.

Being a closeted teen "vac lover" several decades ago, I was the one who took it upon myself to keep our 2 vacuums running properly. Compared to emptying the Sanyo, changing the F&G bag on our Eureka upright was a breeze.

A lot of the vacuums bought by consumers are actually used more by hired help than the consumers themselves. Many of these "cleaning ladies" are faced with the dusty task of emptying the bagless vac bins and keeping the filters washed and dried.....tasks they often don't understand or have time to do.

I also don't enjoy seeing dirt spinning around in front of my face the entire time I am using a vacuum. And I can't stand having to deal with hair clinging to the filter of any dustbuster or cordless stick vac I have used in the past.

And no matter what they say, bagless vacuums eventually need to have their expensive filters changed. So you do have some expense in upkeep just like a bagged machine.

I also have to agree that the circular dust bins of cyclonic vacs make them far too bulky. Add to that all the on-board attachments,"plumbing" and turbo tools hanging onto them for dear life, and these bagless uprights look absolutely ridiculous. Seeing anyone use these contraptions often makes me laugh - it looks like they are pushing around an entire hardware store on wheels! I would prefer to clean wall to wall carpeting using a sleek Miele upright, or even a bagged Eureka Ultra any day, over using these cumbersome overloaded bagless machines.

Just my 2 amps worth!

 

[eurekaprince]

Question for vac repair shop owners:

Do you find that your workload is greater these days due to the prevalence of bagless vacs on the market? In other words, do you have a sense that buyers of bagless vacs are coming to you with more problems, than those who have bought a bagged vacuum?

I often wondered if the loss of revenue from sales of bags may be filled by more vac-users bringing their bagless vacs in for repairs due to sloppy maintenance on their part. Any thoughts? Just curious.....

 

[suckolux]

I prefer bagged, not that dirty look first time you use it, no clean up to speak of. Some bagless have worked ok, Dyson does not seem to require much up keep, or mine anyway, the most recent Hoover Air stays pretty clean too for me.

 

[jmurray01]

@eurekaprince I couldn't have said it better myself!

 

[eurekaprince]

@jmurray01: :-D

 

[super-sweeper]

i'm bagged,but with some aceptoins

first off,i agree with eurekaprince on how those bulky dirt chamber things are just
silly.how do you expect the consumer to get under things like beds,couches,exe...
with that bloody thing dropping attachments everywhere,when you're granny's old hoover convertible glides under everything in a snap!

and another thing,most bagless vacs have,the bloody stretch hose! now,HOW on earth
does hoover,eureka,bissell and more expect us consumers to clean some cobwebs in the
corner,or along baseboards when as soon as i stick the crevice tool on,i thing rockets back at me!

for this reason,i am most defiantly a baged vacuum person,vacuums like a hoover elite
get under things like that.and,again,i don't know why anyone would pay $20-$30 for a
new filter every 6 months when you could buy a pack of bags for $2-$15 every 6-12
months!

however,i do have some accept-ions for bagless vacs,


KENMORE/SANYO DUST CASSETTE CANISTERS:I like the little pigs,i don't find them that hard to empty.

FANTOMS:the one everyone forgot,fantom vacuums, especially the thunder/furry.they have stupendous power,and groom the carpet excellently.i don't see why people here like the dysons,my DC-07 barely grooms,and i think fantom is the much better cleaner.

just my 5 amps worth

 

[jmurray01]

The only thing I disagree with is about the stretch hoses.

My 1994 HOOVER Turbopower 1000 has a stretch hose, and it never snaps back at me when I put the crevice tool on.

OK, occasionally if the end of the hose/attachment gets stuck to something, either the hose or the Vacuum Cleaner will tug backwards, but so long as you're careful, I'd prefer a stretch hose, as the plastic ones are so unwieldy and limit the amount of spaces you can clean without hauling the whole cleaner around with you.