Cyclonic vacuums vs Filter in bin vacuums

[parwaz786]

OK, I have been thinking about this for quite some time...
I never really seen a FIB (Filter in bin) vacuum with a burnt out motor, the actual filter is like nowhere but in the bin, quite a good idea for increasing the life of a vacuum because it is being maintained when it is being emptied, a bit like a bagged vacuum. The filter gets cleaned as you empty it, but it's bloody messy.

Cyclonic vacuums are excellent for constant power. Dyson for example, people don't really wash the filters on theirs, hence why so many burnt out motors are becoming a problem. It's like using a FIB vacuum without emptying it
Cyclonic vacuums are more hygienic to empty due to lack of filter tapping/brushing etc. Boom goes the motor after a couple of years, the filters stay cleaner for much longer on a cyclonic machine though.

I have seen not many, but dozens of Dyson DC04's with burnt out motors when they use the same motor as a Henry. Henry's hardly burn out (great engineering of Britain here from both Dyson and Numatic, but I recall the Ametek DC01 motors saying "Ametek Italia"?) Anyways that's that
I would be happy to own a Vax v-006 170W Turboforce

 

[sebo_fan]

I'm confused. What do you mean by a filter in the bin? Do you mean like the type where Vax used to fit twist to remove paper pleated cones that sits centre of the plastic bin with a top lid that has to be taken off and the dirt flies past the filter when the bin is spilt into a refuse bin? It doesn't really get cleaned if the dirt is flying past it...The paper pleated cone is supposed to be removed and brushed clean, but it still won't be as clean as the paper pleated HEPA cartridge that usually sits in front of a motor exhaust on a bagged vac.

IME cyclonic vacs are not great for "constant power." Not even Dyson in my experience. Prolonged yes, but not constant. You know yourself that all cyclonic vacs are different. Not down to the copied Dual cyclone Dyson method of NLOS filters but rather sealed suction and airflow. A lot of cheap bagless vacs have lousy leaks, Parwaz. Even that Dyson Cinetic that was recently shown from a You Tube video shows dirt in the motor from the Cinetic design.

Cyclonic vacs are NOT "more hygienic" to empty though, either. Until brands start to make cyclonic filters that don't sit so close to the top of the bin, dust like pet hair that sticks to the top that requires it to be agitated to fall to the bottom will forever be required to be removed by hand.

You won't get that in a bagged vacuum.

 

[niclonnic]

One notable brand that has the "filter in bin" design is Dirt Devil. Most Dirt Devils have a paper pleated filter in the center of the dirt container. As these filters clog, the vacuum loses suction. When it's time to empty, they are absolutely disgusting to clean. Dust flies all over the place.

Cyclonic vacuums, such as Dyson and Fantom, are excellent in my experience. However, some companies that have copied Dyson's dual cyclonic technology have developed inefficient cyclones that will clog the filter and eventually cause the machine to lose suction.

I find that cyclonic machines with bottom-empty dirt cups leave a little to be desired. A lot of manufacturers have placed the emptying lever near the bottom of the cup. So you have some contact with the dirt as you empty it. They also contain static electricity, so you may be shocked when emptying it. Dyson, on the other hand, has placed the emptying lever near the bin handle, which makes it a lot more hygienic to empty.

 

[fantomlightning]

IMO...

The Dirt Devil F1 filter set up is actually one of the best I've seen. Due to the cone shape of the filter it does have a weak cyclonic action, spinning heavier dust and debris to the outside of the bin. For what it is it maintains suction incredibly well, better than some cheap dual/multi cyclonic machines I've seen. On top of that the F1 filter is made out of a seemingly softer pleated material than most, you can clean all the dust off with another machines crevice tool in one pass leaving the filter looking new again. The F1 based machines also tend to have super aggressive brushrolls to clean carpet well, I'd chose one over a Dyson any day. In all honesty I've never had an issue with any of my "filtered cyclonic" machines.

 

[parwaz786]

I agree with you Narayan, and yes I was referring to that lol
I have had no problem with Dyson's constant suction really, even when I vacuumed 4 bottles of Shake n vac the other day, but when it's used for lots plaster etc it can either blow up or lose suction.
The derooted DC07's filters hardly get dirty TBH, even ater 6 months they stay spotless, unless paster or something fine gets sucked up in huge amonts :/

 

[turbo500]

There is absolutely no doubt that multi-cyclonic, high efficiency cyclonic vacuums are far superior to single cyclonic, low efficiency, "filter-in-bin" vacuums.


 


I've seen heaps of burnt out single cyclone cleaners over the years. The filter doesn't get cleaned when you empty the bin as Tayyab said. Most of those pleated HEPA filters can't be washed, so unlike a Dyson or high end Vax where one would wash out the filter to maintain it, this can't be done with the cheaper bagless vacuums, so the only option is to bang or brush the dust out of the filter which, aside from being incredibly messy and unhygienic, doesn't remove all the dust.


 


The minute you turn on a bagless cleaner of that design and dust hits the bin, the suction is compromised.

 

[sebo_fan]

"...There is absolutely no doubt that multi-cyclonic, high efficiency cyclonic vacuums are far superior to single cyclonic, low efficiency, "filter-in-bin" vacuums..."

Very true, but at the same time before all this bagless cyclonic design came along, vacuum owners didn't really have to worry about cleaning out dust when a bag contains it all. That's my point in a nutshell.

As consumers we're constantly being told how bagless passes BAF awards as well as being healthy for allergy sufferers using the HEPA filter as the barrier to dust. it simply isn't true at all. Yes, bags do clog but that "cloud of dust" that some brands and models provide due to a lack of dust seal closures is MINIMAL compared to the dust created when emptying a bottom release dust bin, even worse with the filter in the bin idea.

 

[parwaz786]

I think the only cyclonic vacuums that work are only dysons though, my ex "mate" has a vax Air 3 and the filters get a chunk of dust on them after several uses

 

[turbo500]

Agree completely Nar. I've always, ALWAYS found bagged to be more convenient and more hygenic, even as a 7 year old when I was first playing with DC01's and DC03's, I always thought they were messy.


 


My Mum has a Vax Air reach. Granted, it only get's used upstairs and to clean the car, but she uses it a few times a week and the filters usually last about a month-6 weeks before they need cleaning. Not that she ever cleans it, I always end up doing it for her. Much to my annoyance.

 

[sebo_fan]

IMO it doesn't matter if one or two brands are able to demonstrate that. What Dyson need to develop is a cyclonic shroud that doesn't sit too close to the top of the inner bin. Thus, minimising any clogged dust like pet hair that gets stuck and then needs to be removed by hand when it doesn't come out the first time.

 

[sebo_fan]

Yes Chris, bagged vacs do provide more convenience and hygiene but the general consumer has been fed too much on the "no need to buy bags" Dyson mantra, only to find several months down the line that they are up to their elbows in dust and cleaning filters.

However, with the requirement to clean every day due to pets, I can see the worthwhile point of owning a bagless vacuum. Or in a home that has children playing all the time where dirt is forever going to land on carpets.

I recently sold my Vax Mach Air Reach to a friend in need who has just inherited two rescue dogs. It wasn't a hard task to come to in terms of finding an excuse to keep it; I still have a bagless Hotpoint cylinder vac. It barely gets used unless family members visit with pets on tow and the dirt.dust and pet hair can be emptied after use.

The beauty of bagless is that you CAN empty as you go; same with Gtech sweepers, dust busters et al.

The only similarity with bagged vacuums is that both require brush rolls to be cleaned off when hair gets wrapped around the brush roll; but so many owners tend to forget this and more so if the bagless vac requires the filters to be cleaned again.

 

[parwaz786]

I think Dyson should cover half the shroud with plastic, the side where dirt enters the bin and make a shroud with a larger surface area on the other side from the top of the shroud to the bottom, if not about an inch or two less

 

[Mike81]

I have bagless AEG/Electrolux UltraPerformer/UltraActive and it has just single cyclone.
But I like the design. Cyclone is separate from the canister. That means that dust won't keep spinning in the cyclone. Dust just spins extremely fast through the cyclone and settles down to the bin without clogging the mesh filter in the cyclone. Of course it allows some fine dust go to the filter. For single cyclone it's good if you ask me. I wash the filter about once in a month.
Bin and the cyclone assembly is clear and see through. It's very easy to wash completely.
However I prefer bagged UltraOne. It has the same motor, but has more airflow and suction. It's also quieter.

Cyclone in action:

 

[sebo_fan]

The Hotpoint Trolley vacs use a similar design even though they are not NLOS and also a few Black and Decker hand helds that use that kind of cyclone.

 

[niclonnic]

I also have had no problems with Dyson's suction power. My DC07 Animal's filter remained spotless after countless uses. I washed them every 6 months, and the water ran clear each and every time. The only time when the filter got dirty was when my mom vacuumed off an extremely dirty air purifier. There was black dust flying into the canister, and some of it got to the filter. I then washed it, and it never came back to its original color.

10 months ago, my mom bought some Arm & Hammer Carpet Odor Eliminator powder to get rid of the DC07's dog smell. It worked; however the filter dirtied after use. I think some of that powder got to the motor!

We went through the entire box, and now the dog smell is gone! And even better, the Dyson still works beautifully!

As I've stated before, Dyson is the only company to have perfected cyclonic technology.

Below is a pic of my DC07, AKA my old profile pic. My mom now owns it.

 

[parwaz786]

I agree

 

[niclonnic]

Sebo_fan

I've had to untangle brushrolls on occasion -- clutched Dysons often suffer from this.

A couple of weeks ago, I caught a restaurant employee (her name is Kat) untangling the brushroll on a Bissell stick/hand vac.

Sadly, it's a joy of many vacuum cleaners.

 

[man114]

I wouldn't really say Dyson has perfected cyclonic dirt separation, there still is working room. They don't even have the best filtration using the design, The 11 amp Fantom Thunder does the best job by far of dry multi cyclonic separation, probably followed by a well maintained DC07. I think if Dyson had enough airflow rough some of the designs they could do a fantastic job of filtering. I'm fairly convinced you need large airflow through the Cyclones to get good separation.

 

[fantomlightning]

I'd...

Have to agree. The Fantom machines do seem to have a great balance with the dual cyclonic system they employ. The bin design in the Thunder, and similar shape in the Lightning and Cyclone XT do a great job at keeping larger things like pet hair compressed and moving instead of getting hung up and stopped like in many newer machines.