Dyson engineering ineptitude and complacency

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

marbles;

if I do that with my central vacuum which is sealed suction, the marble will not still be in my hand after only turning it on then off quickly. It will make it at least halfway through the hose.
 
marbles;

if I do that with my central vacuum which is sealed suction, the marble will not still be in my hand after only turning it on then off quickly. It will make it at least halfway through the hose.
 
I always tell my customers that Dyson is the best bagless on the market. Remember the best bagless. The thing I have against Dyson is you are paying $400 and more for nothing more than a heap of plastic. There are no features other than being bagless that makes the Dyson stand out. There is absolutley no adjustable suction and the ball part is made of plastic that easily scratches bare floors. I have had numerous customers return Dyson's because of that factor alone. The other issue is that there is so much suction that Dyson's are hard to use on flat, non grouted hard floors because they seal to the floor and allow no air to flow through. They also do terrible picking up any thing bigger than a grain of sand. Now America does not get the models with the adjustable lip mind you. You can get a much more reliable and effective machine for the same price in the Miele/Simplicity line up. I do not like cleaning with full suction all of the time and I would like a machine with some metal built into it. It does not have to be all metal. I also am not a fan of plastic wheels/hubs that can cause damage to my hard flooring. My other biggest complaint is their canisters have NO power nozzle. Those Dyson turbine heads stall on the thicker frieze type of carpeting that is more popular today.
 
I have never found a vacuum better for hard floors than my Dyson DC41 and DC14 & DC33. This includes straight suction cylinders. The Dyson just seems to have a miracle every time with it's large debris channel and and edge cleaning whiskers with suction channels on the sides and the soleplate overall is a good design which we take for granted.

he DC41 has an active base place which doesn't 100% seal the suction in bu has a slight gap between the surface for airflow and large debris only at the front. he back and sides are in 100% Direct contact with the surface
 
Oh and PS IDK about America but we can get a brand new DC40 with 5 year guarantee from retailers for £179.99 a lot of the time
 
Airflow thru carpet-this will not work if the carpet has an airtight backing-some do,and if the WHOLE carpet is glued to the floor.So the nozzle needed for cleaning CANNOT be "sealed" to the carpet as those with the porus backing or not glued to the floor.For the sealed and glued down carpet the nozzle has to be adjusted so some air will flow thru-above the nozzle to move the dirt-and no hard beater bars-they will pound and wear the carpet and the vacuum!
 
Parwaz,

Not here in the US. The exchange rate of a quid for our dollar added to inflated retail means prices for a Dyson begin at $399, and thats on sale.
It's the same with Miele, but they are not sold in department or discount stores.
Shark is the only affordable brand with excellent cleaning power and filtration for working class lower income households.
 
Sebo,

Dirt Devil does not sell a hepa sealed vacuum. Their price points are even lower than a high end Shark.
I saw the Shark Powered Rotator Lift Away infomercial this morning.
Mark Rosen filled the shark up with sand, and water lift tested it against an out of the box new, empty Dyson.
The Shark had a few more inches of water lift. The question is for how long?
He shut it off after five seconds.
 
Yes they are sealed. And here is where I have to say more...

The HEPA filter cartridge that the Americans demanded for their X series vacs LEAKS dust.

This is why most European countries with SEBO vacs don't use the HEPA filters made for the X series. The K series for example has a HEPA style motor exhaust but the air that gets pumped out of that vacuum goes through an S-Class designed fabric filter.

The new E Airbelt series doesn't have ANY paper pleated HEPA filters nor does the D series canisters.

The Evolution/Mechanical upright that you got to get your hands on does possess a HEPA filter but that is only for the bag on top of it; the S-Class roll to the side filters the air that emits out of the machine.

The S-Class filtration system is a higher degree of filtered air but it is more expensive to manufacture/install than cheap paper pleats, which can impede suction and air flow dependent on the vacuum cleaner and its design. S-Class uses electrostatic material to trap dust particles in the air but lets the airflow be maintained.
 
Sebo fan,

Yes, I agree with that. The hepa cell lock type bags are also better. Even a Sears Kenmore (Panasonic) progressive uses them, and at a $200 price.
My Oxygen, aka Electrolux Smartvac cylinder in the UK has the Goretex washable hepa filter.
 
Fantastic design's fall from grace...

I agree here. Dyson cleaners aren't as good as they used to be, and this a great shame in the vacuum cleaner world.

The biggest problem I have with the newer Dyson cleaners is the build quality - They just don't make them like they used to. I remember going hands on with a DC50 and I couldn't believe how much the handle flexed in my hand. Ok, flex isn't always a bad thing. Coming from an engineering perspective you can't have a handle that has no flex otherwise it would be brittle and eventually snap off. However, in the DC50 there's too much flex which makes me feel as if I'm going to un-intentionally bend the handle during normal use.

I found that the cut-off point for quality Dyson cleaners was in the late 2000s with the DC26 City. It felt really well made and could take a beating. Everything before the DC26 was great. I currently own three Dyson cleaners (a very early DC04 Absolute + from December 1998, a DC14 Animal from 2006, and a DC25 Animal from 2009) and I think they're great products. Most importantly however is the fact that they're well made. Though I must confess that the DC14 I have feels like a much better build than all of the Dyson cleaners I've ever owned.


It's such a shame that Dyson products have gone down in quality. I used to consider the Dyson brand as the best in vacuum cleaners, but since the downgrade in quality that's no longer the case (give me a Numatic any day). Whilst they may be simple machines they are actually built extremely well, and I value that.

A solid piece of design is considered, tested, and built really well...
 
Rootcyclone

Have you even tried any of the current generation, because the plastic is got so much better even better than the old once flexible but tough.
 
I have not been hands on with a new Dyson since 2014. They just don't interest me anymore. Machines from Sebo and Numatic seem better built in my view and more interesting. Such a shame the way Dyson has gone in recent years..
 
Dyson V16 Piston is the newest example thus far. The initial batch of it is crippled, leading to severely reduced cleaning performance as correctly pointed out by @Vacuum Facts and @frickhelm and incorrectly by various others (including TechRadar themselves). It's easy to fix but that risks warranty. Dyson really is stupid this time around, and they need to properly revise and actually fix the problem ASAP.

Hint #1: 450W consumption in Boost mode, not 900W!
Hint #2: https://vacuumland.org/threads/the-hack-that-can-save-pre-release-version-of-dyson-v16.46693/
 
What bugs me about pretty much all the bagless machines and an awful lot of lower cost bagged vacuums are the cheap, hard, shiny, brittle plastics they are made of, crummy fasteners and the fragility of things you might want to disassemble for service. I have watched Dyson repair videos out of curiosity and always end up wondering what kind of, cough cough, "engineer" makes something with so many layers of stuff to remove, and three different size torx heads on the screws just to extract a motor. A reasonably adept person can completely disassemble a Miele canister in five to six minutes. Seven or eight screws, unsnap some parts, unplug a couple of plugs and it's apart on the bench. Same for a Kenmore. Their canisters come apart with four screws. On some two of the screws are hidden under a cord rewind pedal you pry off. Simple and fast. Their power nozzles come apart just as fast making routine service or repairs quick and simple. Plus the materials are better and they are designed from the outset to be taken apart easily for repair. But you just don't see that on so many modern bagless machines and especially those Dyson balls. So many little fragile parts and so easy to break, not to mention having to use different size torx bits. The most complicated modern canister vacuum I can think of is a Lux Intelligence / Aerus Guardian Platinum and I can have those apart faster and easier than a Dyson. Dyson, Shark, Tineco, everything you touch is this hard brittle shiny plastic that is to me offensive in its cheapness. Nothing like the materials you find in a Sebo or Aerus upright or canister or even a Kenmore canister ( the new ones from Suzhou Cleva are a big improvement over the old Panasonic made Progressives in material fit and finish ). The only bagless upright that even half way appeals to me due to its sturdy construction ( built on a steel sub frame no less ) and no nonsense design is the old Amway Cleartrak / Workhorse upright. As long as you strictly adhere to the fill line in the bin the filters stay clean and they last forever. But if you over fill one you have an unholy mess to clean O_O New ones are still being made, a testament to their utility and value.
 
That's the only Dyson if not the only bagless upright I'd buy today is the ClearTrak. Built super solid, powerful, very simple, easy to repair, can still get parts for them today, and I like that they're assembled here in the US. The only thing I'm disappointed about is not having a very efficient cyclone. Even before it reaches to the fullest line, my filters get dusty. That could be the reason why WMJ decided to remove the fill lines in the dust bin because they're no longer there when you purchase a new Workhorse.
 
The only caveat with those machines is that they have extremely poor filtration. So if you have bad allergies they're probably not worth it. But otherwise they are pretty good I think.

I used to have the latest and (probably last) upright model Dyson sells, the Ball 3, and it was actually an impressive cleaner suction wise, but the freaking cyclone/filter/bin design had the same exact issues as the DC40 from 2011, which is insane that they never updated it. The pre motor filter setup on the Ball machines are trash, and there's constantly a build up of dust on the inner walls where the filter sits. All that dust is outside the cyclones, so if you turn the vacuum on that shit is going straight to the motor. So I ended up selling it, even though I honestly thought the performance was pretty good.

That's why the Cinetic Uprights were a huge failure, there was always dust that made it past the Cyclones and went straight to the motor after you turned the vacuum back on. It had a similar setup to the other ball models, and they didn't design it right for the Cinetic system. They actually worked kinda as advertised on the canister models as they had a different setup, I think you could actually get 5 years out of the filter if you weren't abusing it.
 
vac14012 said:
That's why the Cinetic Uprights were a huge failure, there was always dust that made it past the Cyclones and went straight to the motor after you turned the vacuum back on. It had a similar setup to the other ball models, and they didn't design it right for the Cinetic system. They actually worked kinda as advertised on the canister models as they had a different setup, I think you could actually get 5 years out of the filter if you weren't abusing it.
Click to expand...
Vacuum Facts debunked THAT. Even the uprights could be working as designed.
 
Absolute Rainbow said:
Vacuum Facts debunked THAT. Even the uprights could be working as designed.
Click to expand...
How many of those did he work on to make that claim? We have people here who actually serviced the things and when they say the dust got into the motors I have think they are more credible than some dude with no hands on with the hardware, or tupperware as the case may be.
 
cheesewonton said:
How many of those did he work on to make that claim? We have people here who actually serviced the things and when they say the dust got into the motors I have think they are more credible than some dude with no hands on with the hardware, or tupperware as the case may be.
Click to expand...
The lack of a pre motor filter was interesting on paper but terrible in practice. The "cinetic tips" were only capable of filtering out up to a certain micron level. (Don't know the number off hand)

So anything out of that range was going to hit the motor. You'd also have to in theory watch the max fill line like a hawk, cause then you'd clog up the tips and then more dust hitting the motors and it was SOS for the vacuum at that point.

If they included a pre motor filter and kept the cinetic technology that might have been interesting. But they basically abandoned uprights for cordless not to long after the Cinetic line died.
 
cheesewonton said:
How many of those did he work on to make that claim? We have people here who actually serviced the things and when they say the dust got into the motors I have think they are more credible than some dude with no hands on with the hardware, or tupperware as the case may be.
Click to expand...
Vacuum Facts has physics to back up his claims. He also made a homemade version of THE laboratory test that measures actual deep cleaning performance, using normal backed carpets and not shaggy rugs, and no extreme big mess whatsoever.
vac14012 said:
The lack of a pre motor filter was interesting on paper but terrible in practice. The "cinetic tips" were only capable of filtering out up to a certain micron level. (Don't know the number off hand)

So anything out of that range was going to hit the motor. You'd also have to in theory watch the max fill line like a hawk, cause then you'd clog up the tips and then more dust hitting the motors and it was SOS for the vacuum at that point.

If they included a pre motor filter and kept the cinetic technology that might have been interesting. But they basically abandoned uprights for cordless not to long after the Cinetic line died.
Click to expand...
You are not supposed to overfill the bin at all.

Cinetic died out primarily because of the technological limitations, especially on battery. Solid-state batteries feeding the superior digital motors (like the latest versions of Dyson's own) should help that.
 
vac14012 said:
The only caveat with those machines is that they have extremely poor filtration. So if you have bad allergies they're probably not worth it. But otherwise they are pretty good I think.

I used to have the latest and (probably last) upright model Dyson sells, the Ball 3, and it was actually an impressive cleaner suction wise, but the freaking cyclone/filter/bin design had the same exact issues as the DC40 from 2011, which is insane that they never updated it. The pre motor filter setup on the Ball machines are trash, and there's constantly a build up of dust on the inner walls where the filter sits. All that dust is outside the cyclones, so if you turn the vacuum on that shit is going straight to the motor. So I ended up selling it, even though I honestly thought the performance was pretty good.

That's why the Cinetic Uprights were a huge failure, there was always dust that made it past the Cyclones and went straight to the motor after you turned the vacuum back on. It had a similar setup to the other ball models, and they didn't design it right for the Cinetic system. They actually worked kinda as advertised on the canister models as they had a different setup, I think you could actually get 5 years out of the filter if you weren't abusing it.
Click to expand...
I definitely agree on the filtration, in fact I just recently wrote that on another thread. To be fair, it's a 30+ year old design when other vacuums back then didn't had as many layers of filtration. As long as there's a filter before the motor, I'd much prefer having that over the Cinetic or the older Fantoms that doesn't have a pre motor filter. I don't trust any kind of cyclone set up, that's why I gotta have something that's the first line of defense or otherwise it's a hard pass for me with the exception of true cyclonic central vacs like Vacuflo as long as they're vented outside. And yes you are right, Dyson discontinued the Cinetic because it was getting too expensive to keep up on warranty work. At least I heard that's what Dyson USA in Chicago told dealers the reason why. They knew it was a failure or otherwise we would've still seen the Cinetic today with the same head as the Ball Animal 3.
 
Vacuum Facts has physics to back up his claims
I just retired from a career at a big R&D lab. Physics are fine and all but there is no substitute for hands on experience. That is where you find out if you got the physics right. I have seen a lot of engineering projects go into the test phase with all kinds of bitchen eye watering physics built in but out on the test range in real life conditions, well, they never made it to production. That's where you find out some of your assumptions were faulty. We do incredibly high fidelity testing in elaborate simulation labs but we still have to do some open air testing to validate the results of our simulations.
 
Absolute Rainbow said:
You are not supposed to overfill the bin at all.
Click to expand...
Correct but on a regular Dyson with a pre-motor filter, accidentally going over the fill line a few times isn't a huge ordeal as you have the pre-motor filter to save you. On the cinetic system there's nothing there, so it can be quite disastrous over time. There's also nothing you can do if you vacuumed up particules smaller than the cinetic system could filter out, max fill line or not.
 
vac14012 said:
The only caveat with those machines is that they have extremely poor filtration. So if you have bad allergies they're probably not worth it. But otherwise they are pretty good I think.

I used to have the latest and (probably last) upright model Dyson sells, the Ball 3, and it was actually an impressive cleaner suction wise, but the freaking cyclone/filter/bin design had the same exact issues as the DC40 from 2011, which is insane that they never updated it. The pre motor filter setup on the Ball machines are trash, and there's constantly a build up of dust on the inner walls where the filter sits. All that dust is outside the cyclones, so if you turn the vacuum on that shit is going straight to the motor. So I ended up selling it, even though I honestly thought the performance was pretty good.

That's why the Cinetic Uprights were a huge failure, there was always dust that made it past the Cyclones and went straight to the motor after you turned the vacuum back on. It had a similar setup to the other ball models, and they didn't design it right for the Cinetic system. They actually worked kinda as advertised on the canister models as they had a different setup, I think you could actually get 5 years out of the filter if you weren't abusing it.
Click to expand...


*screaming in horror*
 

Similar threads

V
Anyone else think the pre "ball" Dysons had better Bin/Cyclone designs?
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Vacuum Facts
Vacuum Facts
V
Bought A Dyson PencilVac From Japan (Review Inside)
Replies
11
Views
2K
Vacuum Facts
Vacuum Facts
niclonnic
Dyson DC17 Cyclone Issue
Replies
2
Views
233
huskyvacs
huskyvacs
oliveoiltinfoil
I really like the new Dyson's
2
Replies
38
Views
484
thevacuumbarn
T
niclonnic
Dyson DC17 Absolute Animal
Replies
11
Views
617
niclonnic
niclonnic

Latest posts

Back
Top