CUSTOMERS LOVE THE BAGLESS KIRBY CONVERSION
- Thread starter keeler
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
- Status
rolls_rapide
Well-known member
"when we should be at the hospital L@@King for patients
I was wondering about that myself.
I was wondering about that myself.
EUREKAPRINCE LOVES THE HOOVER TEMPO!
Never knew how impressive those all caps letters look in red!
The little shy Tempo now comes in basic white and is such a simple, basic, efficient upright carpet cleaner, costing only $90.00 at Best Buy in the US of A, CAD100 at Future Shop in the Dominion of Canada.
For the amount of money I save not buying a Kirby, I can have a supply of Hoover "Y" bags that will last me a decade. Let's see: one 5-minute bag change every month (no sneezing or coughing), x 12 months, equals 12 bags per year, equals 4 three-bag packs per year at about 10.00 a pack. Forty dollars per year divided by $800 per Kirby (and that's generous), that comes out to 20 years. Oh yah, I may have to change the belt too at some point.....
On the other hand, my thirty-year-old fan-first Eureka is still holding up, but it can't shampoo carpets like a Kirby. Love buying those F&G bags once a year........I'm such a Eureka princess.....
Never knew how impressive those all caps letters look in red!
The little shy Tempo now comes in basic white and is such a simple, basic, efficient upright carpet cleaner, costing only $90.00 at Best Buy in the US of A, CAD100 at Future Shop in the Dominion of Canada.
For the amount of money I save not buying a Kirby, I can have a supply of Hoover "Y" bags that will last me a decade. Let's see: one 5-minute bag change every month (no sneezing or coughing), x 12 months, equals 12 bags per year, equals 4 three-bag packs per year at about 10.00 a pack. Forty dollars per year divided by $800 per Kirby (and that's generous), that comes out to 20 years. Oh yah, I may have to change the belt too at some point.....
On the other hand, my thirty-year-old fan-first Eureka is still holding up, but it can't shampoo carpets like a Kirby. Love buying those F&G bags once a year........I'm such a Eureka princess.....
I love my bags
I love my kirbys the way they are.Thay keep kirby original
I love my kirbys the way they are.Thay keep kirby original
tommymilan
Well-known member
ME TOO....
First of all hello everyone and compliments to Mr Keeler for his success!
What I've been thinking about in these couple of days, but I have to admit I went through Mr. Keeler's Kirby Bagless conversions on ebay long time ago,is that, for what i recall, only clean-air types of vacuums have begun featuring bagless filtration and, even in the best attempts to get close to dyson's quality and performance ( really don't know which one was the best) there has always been a LOT of suction to make the system work. In my experience on direct air type of cleaners and we all know what we're thinking about, the only system to keep airflow (and cleanability) high was to replace paper bags frequently and, when there were old shake-out bags the advice was to "empty after each use", thing that nobody I've ever known has ever done.
The great improvement that has been saving direct air type vacuums, putting together a huge amount of airflow (wich means great cleanability , more constant suction, and excellent filtration are the kirby hepa bags and similar. the larger the filtrating surface, the higher the airflow. I do recognize that they are a little bit expensive, but if you cannot afford to buy kirby bags, why don't you buy a dyson?It's kinda buying a brand new rolls-royce and not affording to maintain it. would you try to put a gas system on it or to use oil from fried chips?wouldn't be better by a for Focus?
Sorry for the digression. I love kirbies as they are and dysons as well.no way to make me use another type of bagless cleaner.
For the people who can't afford to purchase genuine kirby bags and want to make a small investment (after spending a LOT of money on the machine) to save on bags Mr keeler's invention should fit. probably the same people who do not care about hepa filtration and performance and who just need their house to LOOK clean. Why Purchasing a kirby then?
However, Mr Keeler, if you ship to Italy I'll contact you tou buy one of your units in order to see how it works. In a collection of more than 350 vacs there could be a place for your invention.
Greetings, Tommy
First of all hello everyone and compliments to Mr Keeler for his success!
What I've been thinking about in these couple of days, but I have to admit I went through Mr. Keeler's Kirby Bagless conversions on ebay long time ago,is that, for what i recall, only clean-air types of vacuums have begun featuring bagless filtration and, even in the best attempts to get close to dyson's quality and performance ( really don't know which one was the best) there has always been a LOT of suction to make the system work. In my experience on direct air type of cleaners and we all know what we're thinking about, the only system to keep airflow (and cleanability) high was to replace paper bags frequently and, when there were old shake-out bags the advice was to "empty after each use", thing that nobody I've ever known has ever done.
The great improvement that has been saving direct air type vacuums, putting together a huge amount of airflow (wich means great cleanability , more constant suction, and excellent filtration are the kirby hepa bags and similar. the larger the filtrating surface, the higher the airflow. I do recognize that they are a little bit expensive, but if you cannot afford to buy kirby bags, why don't you buy a dyson?It's kinda buying a brand new rolls-royce and not affording to maintain it. would you try to put a gas system on it or to use oil from fried chips?wouldn't be better by a for Focus?
Sorry for the digression. I love kirbies as they are and dysons as well.no way to make me use another type of bagless cleaner.
For the people who can't afford to purchase genuine kirby bags and want to make a small investment (after spending a LOT of money on the machine) to save on bags Mr keeler's invention should fit. probably the same people who do not care about hepa filtration and performance and who just need their house to LOOK clean. Why Purchasing a kirby then?
However, Mr Keeler, if you ship to Italy I'll contact you tou buy one of your units in order to see how it works. In a collection of more than 350 vacs there could be a place for your invention.
Greetings, Tommy
Devil's Advocate
I might regret this, but I'm going to jump in here and look at this from the prospective of an calm, cool, and logical non Dyson influenced vacuum collector that just happens to be a student of Engineering Technology.
For starts, I have not used this device, but see it as interesting for certain apps. For instance, if you have a lot of larger particals in your household (gravel) than this could work fairly well.
I'd be interested to do a surface area comparison between the filter in this unit, and the actual Kirby bag. If those involved would be so kind to provide the important dimensions of each, I'd love to do some calculations on this. For the filter, I'd need its height, and the width of each folded piece, and the quantity of folded sections. For a Kirby bag, I'd try to break it into one rectangular prism, and two triangular prisms. If I have any takers, I'll post some diagrams to show what I'm after.
I'll also look into some other parts of the design at a later point to figure any other problems I see with it.
For the Dyson lovers out there: I'd love to see some figures of cleaning performance vs. energy consumption. I'd be willing to bet that almost anything under 12 amps would win such a competition. I personally recommend a test (perhaps a future VCCC cleaning competition category) where the amount of dirt sucked from a test carpet is divided by the cleaners wattage and the highest number wins. I'd enter my Hoover Baby 103 in such a contest any day.
I might regret this, but I'm going to jump in here and look at this from the prospective of an calm, cool, and logical non Dyson influenced vacuum collector that just happens to be a student of Engineering Technology.
For starts, I have not used this device, but see it as interesting for certain apps. For instance, if you have a lot of larger particals in your household (gravel) than this could work fairly well.
I'd be interested to do a surface area comparison between the filter in this unit, and the actual Kirby bag. If those involved would be so kind to provide the important dimensions of each, I'd love to do some calculations on this. For the filter, I'd need its height, and the width of each folded piece, and the quantity of folded sections. For a Kirby bag, I'd try to break it into one rectangular prism, and two triangular prisms. If I have any takers, I'll post some diagrams to show what I'm after.
I'll also look into some other parts of the design at a later point to figure any other problems I see with it.
For the Dyson lovers out there: I'd love to see some figures of cleaning performance vs. energy consumption. I'd be willing to bet that almost anything under 12 amps would win such a competition. I personally recommend a test (perhaps a future VCCC cleaning competition category) where the amount of dirt sucked from a test carpet is divided by the cleaners wattage and the highest number wins. I'd enter my Hoover Baby 103 in such a contest any day.
vacuumfreeeke
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2006
- Messages
- 1,997
Hey maybe I can stick a water wing on a Maglite and create the first floating Maglite... what a great "invention" that will be.
Did Ebay seriously eliminate the ability to leave negative feedback?
Did Ebay seriously eliminate the ability to leave negative feedback?
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
I know eBay eliminated the ability for sellers to leave negative feedback for buyers, but I hadn't heard it worked both ways...
riccarlover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2008
- Messages
- 488
"...The units are made in China..."
Well you lost me after that!!!
I will shop at Walmart but not use Chinese parts for my vacuums!!!
Clayton
Well you lost me after that!!!
I will shop at Walmart but not use Chinese parts for my vacuums!!!
Clayton
Kirby bags rule!!!
You can by cheap bags for the kirby plus they do a great job any ways.
You can by cheap bags for the kirby plus they do a great job any ways.
compactelectra
Well-known member
Just To Set The Record Straight
I received the following email this evening -
To whom it may concern, My name is Judy Keeler I am Jim Keeler's wife of 29 years. My husband signed onto your forum, I begged him not to for fear he would be treated disrespectful, and guess what I was right! My husband has been in the vacuum business for 40 years, he did invent the first self-propelled Kirby and he self-propelled the bison vacuum also. When he invented the vacuums, he used my household oven. To make the molds until he had it perfected and then we went to a plastic company. Anyway, we had our own vacuum co. sent our vacuums all over the Country even Hawaii. We have had numerous vac shops I don't think there is a vacuum that Jim can't fix! To see the way my husband was treated on your site was disgusting! He was treated way less than a criminal would be treated! My husband is an honorable man, he has been a wonderful husband, father and grandfather. I feel so badly I had to write this letter, I hope you can tell these people how out of line they were with him, he would help anybody and he might have been able to give these young men advice or help. The ones who were the very worst, were a007kirby man-----vacuum freeke----vintagehoover---shanonabc----kirbytronic----and turbo500. They even spoke cuss words to him they had no respect , said hey old man!please look the sight. Jim was not rude to any of them yes he did use capital letters by mistake. I thank you for your help and I hope you can take care of this, I feel my husband should have a little respect, what ever happened to "Have a little respect for your elder" What happened to your rules you have on your site? Sincerely, Judy Keeler
To which I replied:
Madam - I was quite hesitant to sign up your husband to the site when he asked (multiple times) to sign up to shamelessly hawk his product. He took a chance to "Dance With the Wolves" with some sophisticated folks with his adaptation for a much beloved product among us. I knew this would result in some controversial dialogue, but figured, what the heck, let's see what happens. I am toying with the idea of deleting the thread, but am also a believer in free speech. If he can't stand the heat, he should stay out of the kitchen. If he believes in his product, he should stand behind it.
Fred Nelson
Vacuum Cleaner Collectors Club Webmaster
Mr. Keeler has since deleted his profile. Goodbye.
Fred
I received the following email this evening -
To whom it may concern, My name is Judy Keeler I am Jim Keeler's wife of 29 years. My husband signed onto your forum, I begged him not to for fear he would be treated disrespectful, and guess what I was right! My husband has been in the vacuum business for 40 years, he did invent the first self-propelled Kirby and he self-propelled the bison vacuum also. When he invented the vacuums, he used my household oven. To make the molds until he had it perfected and then we went to a plastic company. Anyway, we had our own vacuum co. sent our vacuums all over the Country even Hawaii. We have had numerous vac shops I don't think there is a vacuum that Jim can't fix! To see the way my husband was treated on your site was disgusting! He was treated way less than a criminal would be treated! My husband is an honorable man, he has been a wonderful husband, father and grandfather. I feel so badly I had to write this letter, I hope you can tell these people how out of line they were with him, he would help anybody and he might have been able to give these young men advice or help. The ones who were the very worst, were a007kirby man-----vacuum freeke----vintagehoover---shanonabc----kirbytronic----and turbo500. They even spoke cuss words to him they had no respect , said hey old man!please look the sight. Jim was not rude to any of them yes he did use capital letters by mistake. I thank you for your help and I hope you can take care of this, I feel my husband should have a little respect, what ever happened to "Have a little respect for your elder" What happened to your rules you have on your site? Sincerely, Judy Keeler
To which I replied:
Madam - I was quite hesitant to sign up your husband to the site when he asked (multiple times) to sign up to shamelessly hawk his product. He took a chance to "Dance With the Wolves" with some sophisticated folks with his adaptation for a much beloved product among us. I knew this would result in some controversial dialogue, but figured, what the heck, let's see what happens. I am toying with the idea of deleting the thread, but am also a believer in free speech. If he can't stand the heat, he should stay out of the kitchen. If he believes in his product, he should stand behind it.
Fred Nelson
Vacuum Cleaner Collectors Club Webmaster
Mr. Keeler has since deleted his profile. Goodbye.
Fred
From one webmaster to another
Good for you Fred. I just read your forwarded email with this note from his wife (***rolls eyes***) and your fabulous response and was just about to email you suggesting you to post this in that thread and you had already had. LOL! Love that. I totally would have done the same thing on aw.
In my 8 years of running automaticwasher.org I have found that when people email or post claiming to be a relative or friend defending the person who is causing trouble, it usually turns out to be the person causing the problem disguising themselves as someone else. Whatever, problem solved.
Good for you Fred. I just read your forwarded email with this note from his wife (***rolls eyes***) and your fabulous response and was just about to email you suggesting you to post this in that thread and you had already had. LOL! Love that. I totally would have done the same thing on aw.
In my 8 years of running automaticwasher.org I have found that when people email or post claiming to be a relative or friend defending the person who is causing trouble, it usually turns out to be the person causing the problem disguising themselves as someone else. Whatever, problem solved.
Its too bad really, that so many of us collectors are closed minded when presented with new ideas.
The very first thing that is stated in this thread is attacking the capitol letters. Not every one is up to speed on the internet, and the unwritten rules that govern it, and given the context of the message I would not consider it shouting, but just someone who has their caps lock on. At least his spelling was good, and he wasn't writing like some teenager on their cell phone. Now, the real problem here is that the only reason he was called out on this is because people don't like his product and used this as an opening for their attack.
Next, there are some good challenging questions, which are intelligent in nature. Excellent!
Then people start laying in regarding patents and who invented what. While the answers to these questions are fishy at best, the accusations that nothing was invented by this man is uncalled for. To my knowledge, there has never been a vacuum with this layout that used any sort of bagless system. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Even many of James Dyson's ideas are actually inspired by other concepts in other applications. If I'm not mistaken, his original idea came from industrial cyclonic separators.
Throwing out numbers fed by Dyson regarding the performance of competing products, like Mr. Keeler states, does not directly apply to his design. There are far too many numbers missing to do a comparison of separation efficiency. The numbers that Jack posted also fail to tell what competing cleaner Dyson tested, but he did mention the standard they were tested with.
Now its been mentioned that the filter on this system will clog with dirt. While it may be small, it does have a larger surface area than some would expect it to, and its material is not comparable to a paper bag. While its not as complicated as a Dyson system, it still has a purpose and a market.
Some people in the Dyson camp can't see this and instead resort to call it:
"a doorstop"
"a basic bagless design, that has no inventive steps and thus nothing of merit"
and poking fun at its method of construction. Not all good things require complexity, and in many ways the best designs are the simplest.
Its also interesting how some of us like to put down the intelligence of the general public with comments like these:
"All of those positive feedbacks are most likely from people who don't know a damn thing about how a vacuum works!"
Its all of these stupid people in the general public that get tricked into buying a overly complex Kirby, or excessively heavy (with exceptions) Dysons that require high technology just to get the job done and are power hungry. These companies certainly don't build cleaners with us collectors in mind.
Regarding Post 80108: I don't see how this would reduce the cleaners value, as it has an overall build quality higher than your typical department store cleaner. Also, did anyone think that a person could switch from one system to the other depending on the task at hand. I have surfaces where this system would work better, like bare floors (where a Kirby is a bad idea anyway) and high traffic areas where there is more gravel and less dust and other fine particals. And I have to mention "STOP FLOGGING YOUR SHIT OVER OUR FORUM". This demonstration of immaturity speaks for itself. To have this followed up by "Thank you Chris... Well said! On ya man!" brings me to my next point.
The pleasure that some of us take in ripping Mr. Keeler apart is disturbing but not really surprising. Dyson people have always been overly passionate and go well out of their way to rip other bagless and bagged designs. This has been seen before, years ago on other forums. The Dyson fanatic factor combined with the vacuum purists, and the mob mentality make for a very immature, angry, and useless conversation where issues and true factual debate are ignored by peoples blindness and loyalty to their favorite brands which can do no wrong.
And all of this has come from people that have not owned one. The one person that claims to own one has not provided proof of ownership, so I'll exclude that exception until proof has been shown.
That's all for now.
The very first thing that is stated in this thread is attacking the capitol letters. Not every one is up to speed on the internet, and the unwritten rules that govern it, and given the context of the message I would not consider it shouting, but just someone who has their caps lock on. At least his spelling was good, and he wasn't writing like some teenager on their cell phone. Now, the real problem here is that the only reason he was called out on this is because people don't like his product and used this as an opening for their attack.
Next, there are some good challenging questions, which are intelligent in nature. Excellent!
Then people start laying in regarding patents and who invented what. While the answers to these questions are fishy at best, the accusations that nothing was invented by this man is uncalled for. To my knowledge, there has never been a vacuum with this layout that used any sort of bagless system. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Even many of James Dyson's ideas are actually inspired by other concepts in other applications. If I'm not mistaken, his original idea came from industrial cyclonic separators.
Throwing out numbers fed by Dyson regarding the performance of competing products, like Mr. Keeler states, does not directly apply to his design. There are far too many numbers missing to do a comparison of separation efficiency. The numbers that Jack posted also fail to tell what competing cleaner Dyson tested, but he did mention the standard they were tested with.
Now its been mentioned that the filter on this system will clog with dirt. While it may be small, it does have a larger surface area than some would expect it to, and its material is not comparable to a paper bag. While its not as complicated as a Dyson system, it still has a purpose and a market.
Some people in the Dyson camp can't see this and instead resort to call it:
"a doorstop"
"a basic bagless design, that has no inventive steps and thus nothing of merit"
and poking fun at its method of construction. Not all good things require complexity, and in many ways the best designs are the simplest.
Its also interesting how some of us like to put down the intelligence of the general public with comments like these:
"All of those positive feedbacks are most likely from people who don't know a damn thing about how a vacuum works!"
Its all of these stupid people in the general public that get tricked into buying a overly complex Kirby, or excessively heavy (with exceptions) Dysons that require high technology just to get the job done and are power hungry. These companies certainly don't build cleaners with us collectors in mind.
Regarding Post 80108: I don't see how this would reduce the cleaners value, as it has an overall build quality higher than your typical department store cleaner. Also, did anyone think that a person could switch from one system to the other depending on the task at hand. I have surfaces where this system would work better, like bare floors (where a Kirby is a bad idea anyway) and high traffic areas where there is more gravel and less dust and other fine particals. And I have to mention "STOP FLOGGING YOUR SHIT OVER OUR FORUM". This demonstration of immaturity speaks for itself. To have this followed up by "Thank you Chris... Well said! On ya man!" brings me to my next point.
The pleasure that some of us take in ripping Mr. Keeler apart is disturbing but not really surprising. Dyson people have always been overly passionate and go well out of their way to rip other bagless and bagged designs. This has been seen before, years ago on other forums. The Dyson fanatic factor combined with the vacuum purists, and the mob mentality make for a very immature, angry, and useless conversation where issues and true factual debate are ignored by peoples blindness and loyalty to their favorite brands which can do no wrong.
And all of this has come from people that have not owned one. The one person that claims to own one has not provided proof of ownership, so I'll exclude that exception until proof has been shown.
That's all for now.
Oooh....
Ok... The capitals... Obviously me! And I have done it before on other forums... EVEN on a forum not related to vacuum cleaners or any appliances!
Someone who has their own website and eBay store would know their way around the internet... As for the unwritten rules... True... But... Why is there no excessive use of capitals on these?
As for the attack starting with the capitals... Please read every message from that one on I stood back and watched while 17 other messages were placed... BEFORE I said a thing!
As for what i said to Chris... NOTHING to do with the "STOP FLOGGING YOUR SHIT OVER OUR FORUM" (not saying I don't support that call) but that was about the condescending "Looks like you have a fine vacuum collection,I'm sure you are a fine young man" (which is used at two different people). I would have taken issue with this too considering someone who doesn't know me from a bar of soap is saying it.
As for "a doorstop". Be brave enough to put the WHOLE quote in!
"Wow!
For the low price of $89.00 (not including future filter replacements) I have a doorstop!
How much is the Kirby I would need to make it work?"
Jim Keeler's first message states "...WOULD SEE AND USE MY BAGLESS CONVERSION BEFORE JUDGING IT..." Well... Because it is made for Kirby machines I would have nothing to try it out on (not that I would touch it... Used a Kirby before... I believe that this would reduce the efficiency of the whole system) This is a valid question!
I have used machines with a filter design similar and they were almost useless IMHO.
HOWEVER, I would not attack every machine just because it does not have a Dyson logo on it...
Yes, I would classify myself as a Dyson person but I will give praise where it is due! I do acknowledge that a Dyson is not for everyone! I am also fascinated by other products! I am a big fan of the UK Vax Mach 7... Especially in the Limited Edition Anniversary silver and orange.
So thank you for stereotyping Dyson people and trying to turn my comments against me! Much appreciated!
Ok... The capitals... Obviously me! And I have done it before on other forums... EVEN on a forum not related to vacuum cleaners or any appliances!
Someone who has their own website and eBay store would know their way around the internet... As for the unwritten rules... True... But... Why is there no excessive use of capitals on these?
As for the attack starting with the capitals... Please read every message from that one on I stood back and watched while 17 other messages were placed... BEFORE I said a thing!
As for what i said to Chris... NOTHING to do with the "STOP FLOGGING YOUR SHIT OVER OUR FORUM" (not saying I don't support that call) but that was about the condescending "Looks like you have a fine vacuum collection,I'm sure you are a fine young man" (which is used at two different people). I would have taken issue with this too considering someone who doesn't know me from a bar of soap is saying it.
As for "a doorstop". Be brave enough to put the WHOLE quote in!
"Wow!
For the low price of $89.00 (not including future filter replacements) I have a doorstop!
How much is the Kirby I would need to make it work?"
Jim Keeler's first message states "...WOULD SEE AND USE MY BAGLESS CONVERSION BEFORE JUDGING IT..." Well... Because it is made for Kirby machines I would have nothing to try it out on (not that I would touch it... Used a Kirby before... I believe that this would reduce the efficiency of the whole system) This is a valid question!
I have used machines with a filter design similar and they were almost useless IMHO.
HOWEVER, I would not attack every machine just because it does not have a Dyson logo on it...
Yes, I would classify myself as a Dyson person but I will give praise where it is due! I do acknowledge that a Dyson is not for everyone! I am also fascinated by other products! I am a big fan of the UK Vax Mach 7... Especially in the Limited Edition Anniversary silver and orange.
So thank you for stereotyping Dyson people and trying to turn my comments against me! Much appreciated!
I don't see what Mr. Keeler said as being intentionally patronising, and actually as an attempt to be kind. Instead, everyone reads things into it and uses it to further their argument against this man.
With the "door stop" stuff, if I included the entire post my point would still stand. It was just a matter of simplification to get to the important part.
"Jim Keeler's first message states "...WOULD SEE AND USE MY BAGLESS CONVERSION BEFORE JUDGING IT..." Well... Because it is made for Kirby machines I would have nothing to try it out on (not that I would touch it... Used a Kirby before... I believe that this would reduce the efficiency of the whole system) This is a valid question!
I have used machines with a filter design similar and they were almost useless IMHO. "
I'm not going to argue in favor of the design itself. I have doubts too. Its just that the way people here have dealt with the issue that bothers me more than anything else.
"So thank you for stereotyping Dyson people and trying to turn my comments against me! Much appreciated!"
Its not challenging for me. Dyson people, and Dyson debates have always fallen into a clearly defined pattern of spiraling out of control with constant escalation of tension and anger. No other brand causes the kind of rage and ridicule towards other collectors as Dyson does. Every time someone speaks badly of Dyson, someone is always there for the big fight, and never ever backs down. Its been that way for years, only the names change. I'm sure other vets of the online collecting scene can testify to this and even provide examples.
With the "door stop" stuff, if I included the entire post my point would still stand. It was just a matter of simplification to get to the important part.
"Jim Keeler's first message states "...WOULD SEE AND USE MY BAGLESS CONVERSION BEFORE JUDGING IT..." Well... Because it is made for Kirby machines I would have nothing to try it out on (not that I would touch it... Used a Kirby before... I believe that this would reduce the efficiency of the whole system) This is a valid question!
I have used machines with a filter design similar and they were almost useless IMHO. "
I'm not going to argue in favor of the design itself. I have doubts too. Its just that the way people here have dealt with the issue that bothers me more than anything else.
"So thank you for stereotyping Dyson people and trying to turn my comments against me! Much appreciated!"
Its not challenging for me. Dyson people, and Dyson debates have always fallen into a clearly defined pattern of spiraling out of control with constant escalation of tension and anger. No other brand causes the kind of rage and ridicule towards other collectors as Dyson does. Every time someone speaks badly of Dyson, someone is always there for the big fight, and never ever backs down. Its been that way for years, only the names change. I'm sure other vets of the online collecting scene can testify to this and even provide examples.
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
Thank you, Fred!
Judy, if you're still reading this forum, I resent your attempts to vilify the members of this forum, particularly those you mentioned by name.
I tried to enter into a polite and intelligent dialogue with Mr. Keeler. I finished my first question:
'Please understand, if people like your product, then good for them, and good for you. But I can't see your 'constant performance' claim having any merit.'
Polite, respectful, but still questioning one of his core claims - as is my right to do! I was responded to with a tirade of snide hostility, with Mr. Keeler shouting, '...if you want to come across as someone who knows it all...', 'YOUR NUMBERS MEAN NOTHING' etc.
I'm sorry Mr. Keeler finds International Electrotechnical Commission Standard figures to be beneath him, but they're the most reliable and accurate I (and the vacuum industry!) have access to, and they're the testing standards used by most of the vacuum industry to justify their own performance claims. As such, I saw them as appropriate for comparison with Mr. Keeler's invention, since he had not - and has not - provided any figures of his own; I assume simply because he just does not know them.
My second 'crime' seems to have been calling Mr. Keeler on his apparent misunderstanding of the way patents and patents-pending work. As I saw it, either he hadn't expressed himself very clearly in what he wrote, or he was actually attempting to mislead with untrue claims - a criminal offence! When I asked for clarification, I was told:
'I am not going to talk with you about this information because I do not trust you. The only reason you would want to know this information is to try and copy my bagless conversion. I have been doing this for 29 years and I know when someone is up to something. Don't ask again. You are realy starting to look bad.'
So, Judy, I reject your claim 'He was not rude to any of [us].' He came across as rude, defensive and paranoid, when all I was looking for was further explanation of his invention. How would Mr. Keeler respond to intelligent questions from a customer in one of his vac shops? Would he treat them in the same way, and make them out to be an untrustworthy thief, or would he try and answer them politely? Because that's really all I was after. Surely he realises that if his device IS patented, no one could steal it anyway!? That's the whole point of a patent!
I'm sorry that you consider me to be among the 'worst' on the forum, Judy - I think those who know me, know better. If anything, I'm guilty only of responding to your husband in kind. He and I could have had a polite and friendly conversation if he'd not made the assumption that I was in some way 'out to bring him down'.
And - third time I've said this now - if your husband's customers love his bagless units, good for him, and I'm glad they're happy with their purchases.
Judy, if you're still reading this forum, I resent your attempts to vilify the members of this forum, particularly those you mentioned by name.
I tried to enter into a polite and intelligent dialogue with Mr. Keeler. I finished my first question:
'Please understand, if people like your product, then good for them, and good for you. But I can't see your 'constant performance' claim having any merit.'
Polite, respectful, but still questioning one of his core claims - as is my right to do! I was responded to with a tirade of snide hostility, with Mr. Keeler shouting, '...if you want to come across as someone who knows it all...', 'YOUR NUMBERS MEAN NOTHING' etc.
I'm sorry Mr. Keeler finds International Electrotechnical Commission Standard figures to be beneath him, but they're the most reliable and accurate I (and the vacuum industry!) have access to, and they're the testing standards used by most of the vacuum industry to justify their own performance claims. As such, I saw them as appropriate for comparison with Mr. Keeler's invention, since he had not - and has not - provided any figures of his own; I assume simply because he just does not know them.
My second 'crime' seems to have been calling Mr. Keeler on his apparent misunderstanding of the way patents and patents-pending work. As I saw it, either he hadn't expressed himself very clearly in what he wrote, or he was actually attempting to mislead with untrue claims - a criminal offence! When I asked for clarification, I was told:
'I am not going to talk with you about this information because I do not trust you. The only reason you would want to know this information is to try and copy my bagless conversion. I have been doing this for 29 years and I know when someone is up to something. Don't ask again. You are realy starting to look bad.'
So, Judy, I reject your claim 'He was not rude to any of [us].' He came across as rude, defensive and paranoid, when all I was looking for was further explanation of his invention. How would Mr. Keeler respond to intelligent questions from a customer in one of his vac shops? Would he treat them in the same way, and make them out to be an untrustworthy thief, or would he try and answer them politely? Because that's really all I was after. Surely he realises that if his device IS patented, no one could steal it anyway!? That's the whole point of a patent!
I'm sorry that you consider me to be among the 'worst' on the forum, Judy - I think those who know me, know better. If anything, I'm guilty only of responding to your husband in kind. He and I could have had a polite and friendly conversation if he'd not made the assumption that I was in some way 'out to bring him down'.
And - third time I've said this now - if your husband's customers love his bagless units, good for him, and I'm glad they're happy with their purchases.
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
Erick:
First off, may I suggest you take the points made by each individual poster on this thread separately in your defence – by using the terms ‘people’, ‘some people’, ‘some of us’, ‘the Dyson camp’ etc, you’re making it sound as if anyone who dared to question Mr. Keeler’s claims was involved in some sort of malicious planned and co-ordinated ‘attack’ on him. In fact, everyone here speaks only for themselves, so their arguments should be examined individually.
Read back through each of my posts on this thread. Did I make any reference to Dyson (aside from mentioning bagless cleaners in general, of which I have many!) whatsoever? The answer might surprise you!
The IEC Standard figures I ‘threw out’ have nothing to do with Dyson at all, aside from the fact that they examine the performance of bagless cleaners. They were actually commissioned and published by Hoover for their UK ‘Airvolution’ multi-cyclonic range. So I’m not trying to deceive or mislead anyone by ‘...fail[ing] to tell what competing cleaner Dyson tested...’. Dyson don’t enter into the equation!
And I have to take VERY serious issue with your statements:
‘Dyson people have always been overly passionate and go well out of their way to rip other bagless and bagged designs. This has been seen before, years ago on other forums. The Dyson fanatic factor combined with the vacuum purists, and the mob mentality make for a very immature, angry, and useless conversation where issues and true factual debate are ignored by peoples blindness and loyalty to their favorite brands which can do no wrong.’
‘Dyson people, and Dyson debates have always fallen into a clearly defined pattern of spiraling out of control with constant escalation of tension and anger. No other brand causes the kind of rage and ridicule towards other collectors as Dyson does. Every time someone speaks badly of Dyson, someone is always there for the big fight, and never ever backs down. Its been that way for years, only the names change. I'm sure other vets of the online collecting scene can testify to this and even provide examples.’
I have to call it as I see it; that’s nonsense, pure and simple! In fact, if I didn't have any manners or self-control, I'd use a far stronger word than that. What a ridiculous and totally uncalled-for attempt to negatively characterise one group of people. I do take personal offence at this list of insults you’ve reeled off. Everyone here is passionate about their favourite brands, Hoover, Dyson, Kirby, Electrolux, Oreck. What do Shanon or I have to do with the behaviour of Tom Gasko, which is doubtless who you’re referring to? Do any of your "vets of the online collecting scene" feel us comparable to Mr. Gasko?
Please take your axe and grind it somewhere else!
First off, may I suggest you take the points made by each individual poster on this thread separately in your defence – by using the terms ‘people’, ‘some people’, ‘some of us’, ‘the Dyson camp’ etc, you’re making it sound as if anyone who dared to question Mr. Keeler’s claims was involved in some sort of malicious planned and co-ordinated ‘attack’ on him. In fact, everyone here speaks only for themselves, so their arguments should be examined individually.
Read back through each of my posts on this thread. Did I make any reference to Dyson (aside from mentioning bagless cleaners in general, of which I have many!) whatsoever? The answer might surprise you!
The IEC Standard figures I ‘threw out’ have nothing to do with Dyson at all, aside from the fact that they examine the performance of bagless cleaners. They were actually commissioned and published by Hoover for their UK ‘Airvolution’ multi-cyclonic range. So I’m not trying to deceive or mislead anyone by ‘...fail[ing] to tell what competing cleaner Dyson tested...’. Dyson don’t enter into the equation!
And I have to take VERY serious issue with your statements:
‘Dyson people have always been overly passionate and go well out of their way to rip other bagless and bagged designs. This has been seen before, years ago on other forums. The Dyson fanatic factor combined with the vacuum purists, and the mob mentality make for a very immature, angry, and useless conversation where issues and true factual debate are ignored by peoples blindness and loyalty to their favorite brands which can do no wrong.’
‘Dyson people, and Dyson debates have always fallen into a clearly defined pattern of spiraling out of control with constant escalation of tension and anger. No other brand causes the kind of rage and ridicule towards other collectors as Dyson does. Every time someone speaks badly of Dyson, someone is always there for the big fight, and never ever backs down. Its been that way for years, only the names change. I'm sure other vets of the online collecting scene can testify to this and even provide examples.’
I have to call it as I see it; that’s nonsense, pure and simple! In fact, if I didn't have any manners or self-control, I'd use a far stronger word than that. What a ridiculous and totally uncalled-for attempt to negatively characterise one group of people. I do take personal offence at this list of insults you’ve reeled off. Everyone here is passionate about their favourite brands, Hoover, Dyson, Kirby, Electrolux, Oreck. What do Shanon or I have to do with the behaviour of Tom Gasko, which is doubtless who you’re referring to? Do any of your "vets of the online collecting scene" feel us comparable to Mr. Gasko?
Please take your axe and grind it somewhere else!
vintagehoover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
I should also add, Mr. Gasko certainly is an unrivalled authority on Dyson (and surely other brands as well!), so if his arguments - or those of Shanon or myself - tended to go on, it's because we know what we're talking about! We can usually respond to people's criticism with our own knowledge, or else know where to find the answers. I know it must make a change from the brainless 'Dyson r crap'-type comments, which I find on my YouTube videos every day, from people who, in your own words '...are closed minded when presented with new ideas..'
I challenge you to find one thread here or in the achives where I've strayed from intelligent and informed discussion, to decend into petty insults or the mass-vilification of people interested in a particular brand, as you have just done.
I challenge you to find one thread here or in the achives where I've strayed from intelligent and informed discussion, to decend into petty insults or the mass-vilification of people interested in a particular brand, as you have just done.
turbo500
Well-known member
lux1521..
I responded to Keeler in the same tone he posted in. Read his first post and the posts that followed. He was clearly trying to sell his product to us and was not open to anyone's opinion on it. Had he given us some REAL information about the product and accepted that it does have it's flaws (as do a lot of things), I'm sure this thread would have been a much more positive discussion. Instead of coming on here and going "HEY LOOK AT MY PRODUCT, ISN'T IT WONDERFUL, EVERYONE SHOULD BUY ONE. THE PROOF IS IN MY EBAY FEEDBACK", he should've said "this is my product. this is what it does. it does this well but the drawback is this". And after he failed to answer any questions with a half decent answer and started to get patronizing once he found out I was younger than him, I lost my patience. Maybe it was rude and immature. But hey, I'm a ass hole sometimes.
I responded to Keeler in the same tone he posted in. Read his first post and the posts that followed. He was clearly trying to sell his product to us and was not open to anyone's opinion on it. Had he given us some REAL information about the product and accepted that it does have it's flaws (as do a lot of things), I'm sure this thread would have been a much more positive discussion. Instead of coming on here and going "HEY LOOK AT MY PRODUCT, ISN'T IT WONDERFUL, EVERYONE SHOULD BUY ONE. THE PROOF IS IN MY EBAY FEEDBACK", he should've said "this is my product. this is what it does. it does this well but the drawback is this". And after he failed to answer any questions with a half decent answer and started to get patronizing once he found out I was younger than him, I lost my patience. Maybe it was rude and immature. But hey, I'm a ass hole sometimes.
hoovercelebrity
New member
I still just wanted to see these Selp-Propelled Kirby mechanism thingys.
~Fred
~Fred
rolls_rapide
Well-known member
Lux1521
"Conclusion: a basic bagless design, that has no inventive steps and thus nothing of merit."
I stand by what I said: it is a basic bagless design and non-cyclonic to boot (as Keeler freely admitted in his response to my posting), employing a filter that clogs. Such bagless, non-cyclonic technology has been tried in the past and found to be ineffective.
The whole point of getting the air to spin in vortices is that it separates the dust from the airflow. Different diameter cyclones have the ability to remove particles of certain sizes.
You do realise, don't you, that dirt entering that particular bagless design will migrate very rapidly to the air outlet, which in this case is covered by the pleated filter. There is no swirling action to keep the dirt away from the filter. Had there been a modicum of swirling it might have slightly improved the length of time between filter cleaning.
'Dirty-fan' also known as 'direct-air' bagless technology has been done before (both cyclonic and non-cyclonic) by various manufacturers, including James Dyson himself. He tried and tested a cardboard and duct-tape affair, strapped to his Hoover 'Junior' (below).
"Conclusion: a basic bagless design, that has no inventive steps and thus nothing of merit."
I stand by what I said: it is a basic bagless design and non-cyclonic to boot (as Keeler freely admitted in his response to my posting), employing a filter that clogs. Such bagless, non-cyclonic technology has been tried in the past and found to be ineffective.
The whole point of getting the air to spin in vortices is that it separates the dust from the airflow. Different diameter cyclones have the ability to remove particles of certain sizes.
You do realise, don't you, that dirt entering that particular bagless design will migrate very rapidly to the air outlet, which in this case is covered by the pleated filter. There is no swirling action to keep the dirt away from the filter. Had there been a modicum of swirling it might have slightly improved the length of time between filter cleaning.
'Dirty-fan' also known as 'direct-air' bagless technology has been done before (both cyclonic and non-cyclonic) by various manufacturers, including James Dyson himself. He tried and tested a cardboard and duct-tape affair, strapped to his Hoover 'Junior' (below).
kirbyotronic
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2008
- Messages
- 1,151
"All of those positive feedbacks are most likely from people who don't know a damn thing about how a vacuum works!"
Its all of these stupid people in the general public that get tricked into buying a overly complex Kirby, or excessively heavy (with exceptions) Dysons that require high technology just to get the job done and are power hungry. These companies certainly don't build cleaners with us collectors in mind."
Overly complex Kirby....nozzle, fan, bag, motor......all them complex partz names just makes my head spin! How can a Kirby be overly complex? They've used a very similar design for decades, with the biggest changes being disposable bag systems and adding the TechDrive. And they're not stupid for buying a Kirby or a Dyson (depending on which model). Power hungry?!?! Last time I checked, the G series uses 7 amps. Most Dysons use 12 amps, but the DC24 uses 6.5 amps.
~Alex
Its all of these stupid people in the general public that get tricked into buying a overly complex Kirby, or excessively heavy (with exceptions) Dysons that require high technology just to get the job done and are power hungry. These companies certainly don't build cleaners with us collectors in mind."
Overly complex Kirby....nozzle, fan, bag, motor......all them complex partz names just makes my head spin! How can a Kirby be overly complex? They've used a very similar design for decades, with the biggest changes being disposable bag systems and adding the TechDrive. And they're not stupid for buying a Kirby or a Dyson (depending on which model). Power hungry?!?! Last time I checked, the G series uses 7 amps. Most Dysons use 12 amps, but the DC24 uses 6.5 amps.
~Alex
Re: Just To Set The Record Straight
Regarding Jim (& Judy) Keeler's pity party...
"Oh poor me (us), I (we) am (are) being asked to 'prove' or 'validate my (our) claims. They don't take us at our word that we invented this or that item. Oh poor me (us). Boohoo, boohoo."
I am not going to speak for others' comments; however, I will for mine. If you go back & "re-read" my initial comments, it relates to his (Jim) claims of what he invented, period. Jim said in a prior post: "...Anyway hear are the facts..."
Most people [with common sense] (imho) would not buy/invest in something w/o seeing it (actual item); or seeing some valid proof (blueprints/Patents w/diagrams, etc.) of what it is or what it is capable of doing. I have "seen" NO FACTS, I have "heard" 'claims', NO PROOF.
*****Some individuals may be willing to buy into "The Emporer's New Clothes" program; however, I am not one of those people. (SEE LINK BELOW)
I was brought up to (attempt to) use common sense. If something 'smells fishy in Denmark' (or Sweden, Germany, US, etc. [incl. CANONSBURG, PA]), then BUYER BEWARE.
If you are not willing to provide any documantation (Patents), proving your claims of inventing what YOU said YOU did, then why in anybody's wildest dreams would you have us believe your 'other' claims about a 'different product' that is 'so wonderful' & that has "...ALL ARE POSITIVE, 100%..." feedback?
You (Judy) show me where any of that [my posts] is disrespectful!?!?!
And, I take issue with you lumping everyone together & then stating this or that... (blah, blah, blah), about ALL of them.
Address an individual directly. "THAT, WOULD BE RESPECTFUL."
Oops, on my cap lock.
Have a wonderful day.
http://www.rickwalton.com/folktale/yellow04.htm
Regarding Jim (& Judy) Keeler's pity party...
"Oh poor me (us), I (we) am (are) being asked to 'prove' or 'validate my (our) claims. They don't take us at our word that we invented this or that item. Oh poor me (us). Boohoo, boohoo."
I am not going to speak for others' comments; however, I will for mine. If you go back & "re-read" my initial comments, it relates to his (Jim) claims of what he invented, period. Jim said in a prior post: "...Anyway hear are the facts..."
Most people [with common sense] (imho) would not buy/invest in something w/o seeing it (actual item); or seeing some valid proof (blueprints/Patents w/diagrams, etc.) of what it is or what it is capable of doing. I have "seen" NO FACTS, I have "heard" 'claims', NO PROOF.
*****Some individuals may be willing to buy into "The Emporer's New Clothes" program; however, I am not one of those people. (SEE LINK BELOW)
I was brought up to (attempt to) use common sense. If something 'smells fishy in Denmark' (or Sweden, Germany, US, etc. [incl. CANONSBURG, PA]), then BUYER BEWARE.
If you are not willing to provide any documantation (Patents), proving your claims of inventing what YOU said YOU did, then why in anybody's wildest dreams would you have us believe your 'other' claims about a 'different product' that is 'so wonderful' & that has "...ALL ARE POSITIVE, 100%..." feedback?
You (Judy) show me where any of that [my posts] is disrespectful!?!?!
And, I take issue with you lumping everyone together & then stating this or that... (blah, blah, blah), about ALL of them.
Address an individual directly. "THAT, WOULD BE RESPECTFUL."
Oops, on my cap lock.
Have a wonderful day.
http://www.rickwalton.com/folktale/yellow04.htm
dualsanitronic
New member
Peace,love,sunshine
I just don't understand the hatred here. I don't like bagless at all and I love the balooning bag effect also. I would not like something like that, but some people would like this product for some apps. Can't we all get along and disagree agreeably? Jim seemed nice to me,I wish it wouldn't have ended this way. The world is full of wars and rage but "let there be peace on Earth and let it begin with me".Let's roast marshmallows in the campfire of life, not each other. I think Goldenboy's saying that some were heartless was true.
I just don't understand the hatred here. I don't like bagless at all and I love the balooning bag effect also. I would not like something like that, but some people would like this product for some apps. Can't we all get along and disagree agreeably? Jim seemed nice to me,I wish it wouldn't have ended this way. The world is full of wars and rage but "let there be peace on Earth and let it begin with me".Let's roast marshmallows in the campfire of life, not each other. I think Goldenboy's saying that some were heartless was true.
"The IEC Standard figures I ‘threw out’ have nothing to do with Dyson at all, aside from the fact that they examine the performance of bagless cleaners. They were actually commissioned and published by Hoover for their UK ‘Airvolution’ multi-cyclonic range. So I’m not trying to deceive or mislead anyone by ‘...fail[ing] to tell what competing cleaner Dyson tested...’. Dyson don’t enter into the equation!"
The IEC Standard is only a test method. You left out a number of important figures including the vacuums used in the test, the surface areas of the filters, and the actual performance change caused but the filters inefficiency. Without more info, this data has little meaning. Who performed the test is quite irrelevant, when half the data is missing anyway.
"I should also add, Mr. Gasko certainly is an unrivalled authority on Dyson (and surely other brands as well!), so if his arguments - or those of Shanon or myself - tended to go on, it's because we know what we're talking about! We can usually respond to people's criticism with our own knowledge, or else know where to find the answers. I know it must make a change from the brainless 'Dyson r crap'-type comments, which I find on my YouTube videos every day, from people who, in your own words '...are closed minded when presented with new ideas..' "
The problem is the source of your knowledge. Its simply a restating of what Dyson (or anyone else) puts out. You need to try harder to challenge what Dyson releases. Even its performance measurements (air watts) are derived from other measurements and don't tell the complete story. I'd like to see some water lift and air flow measurements. Dyson also makes claims such as being completely free from maintenance, with no filters to replace and no belts to replace, which is clearly not true.
The IEC Standard is only a test method. You left out a number of important figures including the vacuums used in the test, the surface areas of the filters, and the actual performance change caused but the filters inefficiency. Without more info, this data has little meaning. Who performed the test is quite irrelevant, when half the data is missing anyway.
"I should also add, Mr. Gasko certainly is an unrivalled authority on Dyson (and surely other brands as well!), so if his arguments - or those of Shanon or myself - tended to go on, it's because we know what we're talking about! We can usually respond to people's criticism with our own knowledge, or else know where to find the answers. I know it must make a change from the brainless 'Dyson r crap'-type comments, which I find on my YouTube videos every day, from people who, in your own words '...are closed minded when presented with new ideas..' "
The problem is the source of your knowledge. Its simply a restating of what Dyson (or anyone else) puts out. You need to try harder to challenge what Dyson releases. Even its performance measurements (air watts) are derived from other measurements and don't tell the complete story. I'd like to see some water lift and air flow measurements. Dyson also makes claims such as being completely free from maintenance, with no filters to replace and no belts to replace, which is clearly not true.
"I responded to Keeler in the same tone he posted in. Read his first post and the posts that followed. He was clearly trying to sell his product to us and was not open to anyone's opinion on it. Had he given us some REAL information about the product and accepted that it does have it's flaws (as do a lot of things), I'm sure this thread would have been a much more positive discussion. Instead of coming on here and going "HEY LOOK AT MY PRODUCT, ISN'T IT WONDERFUL, EVERYONE SHOULD BUY ONE. THE PROOF IS IN MY EBAY FEEDBACK", he should've said "this is my product. this is what it does. it does this well but the drawback is this". And after he failed to answer any questions with a half decent answer and started to get patronizing once he found out I was younger than him, I lost my patience. Maybe it was rude and immature. But hey, I'm a ass hole sometimes."
Whats wrong with trying to sell a product. I'm sure we would all love it if we had an actual manufacture of vacuums as a forum member, but we don't, because they don't care that much about our opinions. You have to give him credit for trying something, which is more than many of us have done. All we do is sit around and post ideas about others designs. None of us are true insiders or designers.
There is nothing wrong with constructive feedback, but what happened was a complete dismissal of the entire concept. You should at the very least give the concept of a bagless Kirby a shot. It would not surprise me if Kirby built an bagless unit of their own in the near future.
Whats wrong with trying to sell a product. I'm sure we would all love it if we had an actual manufacture of vacuums as a forum member, but we don't, because they don't care that much about our opinions. You have to give him credit for trying something, which is more than many of us have done. All we do is sit around and post ideas about others designs. None of us are true insiders or designers.
There is nothing wrong with constructive feedback, but what happened was a complete dismissal of the entire concept. You should at the very least give the concept of a bagless Kirby a shot. It would not surprise me if Kirby built an bagless unit of their own in the near future.
vacuumfreeeke
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2006
- Messages
- 1,997
Well, at least we had a little action here... Can't remember when we've had a thread with this many responses.
Fred, you handled that perfectly. And, thank you for not deleting me for being so mean to "Judy's" husband! LOL
I still don't think anyone was mean or out of line, people just stated their opinion!
Fred, you handled that perfectly. And, thank you for not deleting me for being so mean to "Judy's" husband! LOL
I still don't think anyone was mean or out of line, people just stated their opinion!
Rolls_rapide:
I clearly understand the idea of a cyclonic bagless system. What Mr. Keeler designed was more like a Shop Vac than anything else. Its great if you have substantial dense partials to pick up, and drastically decreases in performance with finer materials.
What is original about Mr. Keelers designs, is the application. No high end, metal, fan first, side discharge, self propelled, full size cleaner has ever been marketed with such a system, and no conversion has ever been offered for mainstream consumption.
If he had used Dyson style cyclonic technology, chances are you would have still pushed the issue and accused him of stealing the idea. There is no way he could win.
I clearly understand the idea of a cyclonic bagless system. What Mr. Keeler designed was more like a Shop Vac than anything else. Its great if you have substantial dense partials to pick up, and drastically decreases in performance with finer materials.
What is original about Mr. Keelers designs, is the application. No high end, metal, fan first, side discharge, self propelled, full size cleaner has ever been marketed with such a system, and no conversion has ever been offered for mainstream consumption.
If he had used Dyson style cyclonic technology, chances are you would have still pushed the issue and accused him of stealing the idea. There is no way he could win.
- Status
