vacuumdevil
Well-known member
I was wondering if anybody had the newest issue of consumer reports?
Particularly the issue with the vacuums that could be shared?
Particularly the issue with the vacuums that could be shared?
Consumer reports
- Thread starter vacuumdevil
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
rivstg1
Well-known member
is the November issue out?
I have a subscription but it ends soon, not sure if I"ll get the November issue. I checked august, September and October....dont' see any except a one page showing what they are testing ( 3 handhelds and 3 stick vacs
k
I have a subscription but it ends soon, not sure if I"ll get the November issue. I checked august, September and October....dont' see any except a one page showing what they are testing ( 3 handhelds and 3 stick vacs
k
dysonman1
Well-known member
There was only one time Communist Reports got it 'right', which was in 1970 when they rated the Electrolux 1205 as the best cleaner, and the Model L as the second best. Kenmore with PowerMate came in third.
The oldest 'report' I have is from 1933, and they were completely wrong. History proves it. In 1936, they rated the Hoover model 150 (arguably one of the all time best uprights ever made) as the lowest rated machine. They gave the Air-Way Zephyr a "not recommended' rating, saying the motors wouldn't last. Never saw an Air-Way upright with a bad motor.
The oldest 'report' I have is from 1933, and they were completely wrong. History proves it. In 1936, they rated the Hoover model 150 (arguably one of the all time best uprights ever made) as the lowest rated machine. They gave the Air-Way Zephyr a "not recommended' rating, saying the motors wouldn't last. Never saw an Air-Way upright with a bad motor.
eurekafansquid
Well-known member
is that "communist party" joke a reference to that all vacuums now are made in china?
vacuumdevil
Well-known member
@dysonman1
The reason I want a copy is because it's almost always wrong.
It would be the subject of a great video.
That's a great piece of history to know about the airway and consumer reports.
@rivstg1 It would be much appreciated even a couple screenshots.
@eurekafansquid No. "Communist reports" is a common nickname for consumer reports.
Not sure where that nickname got started.
The reason I want a copy is because it's almost always wrong.
It would be the subject of a great video.
That's a great piece of history to know about the airway and consumer reports.
@rivstg1 It would be much appreciated even a couple screenshots.
@eurekafansquid No. "Communist reports" is a common nickname for consumer reports.
Not sure where that nickname got started.
oreck_xl
Well-known member
I don't know where it originated but I can tell you the meaning. The metaphor is that "sheeple" need to be TOLD what brand to buy versus making an informed decision on their OWN. And yes more often than not they are wrong....
ralph123
Well-known member
To see the details you have to subscribe to the digital version. The magazine is very disappointing. It really is designed for sheeple. It’s a bit of a scam that you have to pay for the digital subscription to get the details that used to be in the magazine.
dysonman1
Well-known member
I have actively collected all the vacuum cleaner issues of Consumer Reports and Consumer Digest.
The most interesting point is that history always proves them wrong (with one exception).
In 1936, CR stated that the "Best" cleaner you could buy was the GE AV1. They went on to list the Premier as second best, etc. until you got to the end of the recommended vacuums. The lowest rated cleaner was the Hoover 150. While they did state it cleaned very well, they considered its "outrageous" price ($89) to be complete unacceptable (yet the $69 Electrolux model 12 was just fine).
Today, I can stand the GE AV1 next to the Hoover 150. How did they hold up all these years? The Hoover 150 is still one of the best uprights ever built, and the GE squeals to high heaven with their cheap ball bearings.
Through the years, Communist Reports have always stated that the Rexair (and ultimately the Rainbow) was unacceptable due to 'shock hazard'. I've never met anyone who got a shock from their Rexair.
For years, they rated the Hoover Self Propelled Windtunnel as the #1 cleaner, along with the Kenmore canister. Both machines were very problematic for the consumer and history has proven their were much better machines available at the time.
At the Vacuum Collectors Convention (held each year) here at the new Vacuum Museum, we sometimes take the old Consumer Reports articles, and pull all the vacuums they 'tested' then, and Re-Test them today - does history show CR was right. With just one exception (1970) the answer is a resounding NO!
The most interesting point is that history always proves them wrong (with one exception).
In 1936, CR stated that the "Best" cleaner you could buy was the GE AV1. They went on to list the Premier as second best, etc. until you got to the end of the recommended vacuums. The lowest rated cleaner was the Hoover 150. While they did state it cleaned very well, they considered its "outrageous" price ($89) to be complete unacceptable (yet the $69 Electrolux model 12 was just fine).
Today, I can stand the GE AV1 next to the Hoover 150. How did they hold up all these years? The Hoover 150 is still one of the best uprights ever built, and the GE squeals to high heaven with their cheap ball bearings.
Through the years, Communist Reports have always stated that the Rexair (and ultimately the Rainbow) was unacceptable due to 'shock hazard'. I've never met anyone who got a shock from their Rexair.
For years, they rated the Hoover Self Propelled Windtunnel as the #1 cleaner, along with the Kenmore canister. Both machines were very problematic for the consumer and history has proven their were much better machines available at the time.
At the Vacuum Collectors Convention (held each year) here at the new Vacuum Museum, we sometimes take the old Consumer Reports articles, and pull all the vacuums they 'tested' then, and Re-Test them today - does history show CR was right. With just one exception (1970) the answer is a resounding NO!
huskyvacs
Well-known member
RE: shock hazard
Keep in mind that you are reading 40-50+ year old reviews. Technology has advanced a great deal in that many decades. Back when those machines were new, people did not have grounded outlets or even 3-prong outlets. I have a belt sander from 1972 that the directions state how to hook up the tool to a grounded adapter plug (you had to buy that separately) before plugging into the outlet, and then the ground wire on the adapter you screw into the wallplate screw on the outlet.
Now when you use a machine made entirely or mostly of metal like those early wet vacuums were that has water touching the frame and chassis - combined with an ungrounded outlet - depending on how and where you touch it you can very well be electrocuted.
I had a Toastmaster box fan that I got out of the dump once. I washed it and let it dry in the sun. When I plugged it in and touched the metal chassis to pick it up, I got zapped through both hands, even with shoes on. It still had one tiny puddle of water sitting in a corner of the frame, and that small amount of water was enough to make the frame electrically live. Water is a very good conductor of electricity.
I even have a 1950's Hamilton Beach milkshake mixer that I have to be very careful that my finger isn't wet when I touch the on/off switch or else it shocks me too, and that is even with a grounded outlet and the mixer having been correctly wired up with brand new cord. It's because the mixer's shaft is inside a liquid and is conducting electricity transferred through the motor due to the way motors were wired back then.
Today, we have grounded outlets with plastic outlet boxes and GFCI circuit breakers and appliances are built with all these dummy-proof safety measures in place so much to the point that it has drastically reduced the risk of being electrocuted by anything - so not surprising that there is no longer a shock hazard. I'm sure you could take a bath with a Rainbow vacuum today and you'd be fine. lol (Matter of fact the Kirby salesman himself told my kid self in 2002 that I could hook the shampooer gun up to the Kirby in the bathroom and blow suds into the bath water for a bubble bath!)
Keep in mind that you are reading 40-50+ year old reviews. Technology has advanced a great deal in that many decades. Back when those machines were new, people did not have grounded outlets or even 3-prong outlets. I have a belt sander from 1972 that the directions state how to hook up the tool to a grounded adapter plug (you had to buy that separately) before plugging into the outlet, and then the ground wire on the adapter you screw into the wallplate screw on the outlet.
Now when you use a machine made entirely or mostly of metal like those early wet vacuums were that has water touching the frame and chassis - combined with an ungrounded outlet - depending on how and where you touch it you can very well be electrocuted.
I had a Toastmaster box fan that I got out of the dump once. I washed it and let it dry in the sun. When I plugged it in and touched the metal chassis to pick it up, I got zapped through both hands, even with shoes on. It still had one tiny puddle of water sitting in a corner of the frame, and that small amount of water was enough to make the frame electrically live. Water is a very good conductor of electricity.
I even have a 1950's Hamilton Beach milkshake mixer that I have to be very careful that my finger isn't wet when I touch the on/off switch or else it shocks me too, and that is even with a grounded outlet and the mixer having been correctly wired up with brand new cord. It's because the mixer's shaft is inside a liquid and is conducting electricity transferred through the motor due to the way motors were wired back then.
Today, we have grounded outlets with plastic outlet boxes and GFCI circuit breakers and appliances are built with all these dummy-proof safety measures in place so much to the point that it has drastically reduced the risk of being electrocuted by anything - so not surprising that there is no longer a shock hazard. I'm sure you could take a bath with a Rainbow vacuum today and you'd be fine. lol (Matter of fact the Kirby salesman himself told my kid self in 2002 that I could hook the shampooer gun up to the Kirby in the bathroom and blow suds into the bath water for a bubble bath!)
