Dyson Piston

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

I guess the logic is you effectively empty openly less frequently, so those that lack the basic IQ to empty in 5 seconds without mess on Dyson products have a 'solution', or that like unnecessary gadgets get one. Really, what has happened is that the dupes and clones of Dyson's inventions produced by the competition are so shit that you can't empty without a dust cloud. So, the regressive capitalist in these companies spotted a 'solution' to exploit even more. Why not consume more materials to make a machine to compensate for that pathetic design weakness, which adds to a false economy, and has running costs for more profit, and then make the customer pay even more for that too after tricking them into thinking it's a great idea! Problem is, since all the competition copied that bad solution, Dyson, who lack it because they don't need it, appear to the same lowest common denominator idiot customers as though they now lack an industry wide technology and so aren't as good. It's so ironic, and people are too stupid to even notice, so they get played. Once enough market share is lost from Dyson for them to get scared, they've no choice but to jump on the bandwagon. Instead of doing things right, they now do things that are popular, just to stay afloat. It's a broken system, and the numerically significant lowest common unthinking denominator are responsible for their own diminishment. You can see Dyson doing the same thing with their new wet robot. It has the rotating side brushes. Dyson for years pointed out and evidenced they flick crap everywhere and into the air—the last place you want it, but they've seemingly done as above, jumped on the bandwagon to not lose market share because people wrongly think it's a good thing because all the copycats have it as a means to compensate for a proper solution. Totally regressive.
 
Last edited:
It's interesting they put so much of the total time in that talk to the hair care range. Apparently, this area brings in as much money for them as the vacuum cleaners. The V16 was hardly mentioned, which is telling.
 
I was once told that the bigger a company gets, the more badly it's managed. I'm starting to wonder whether Dyson is going that way. They're spread out all over the place and it's not clear how well it's operating, at least at a technical level, internally. The V16 has really opened my eyes. I genuinely don't understand why Dyson would release a product that doesn't perform well. Like, how decisions internally are made based on data, and what data they've used to make their executive decisions. This is the first time I've had reason to lose confidence in them. And I should point out, it doesn't in any way verify all the rabid vacuum enthisiast anti-Dyson haters who never had a good or convincing reason, we're anti facts and anti science, and generally batshit screwballs. But that V16 data was quite a turning point for me. It's really given me difficulty preparing a review, as I really don't know how to manage the brilliant technical innovations (that no one is talking about because they seemingly lack any understanding) with the crappiness of the final product and how that was possible given that I KNOW they know and have solutions to various weaknesses. It's almost like they said, release it anyway. It stinks of a suit rather than a mind, internally.
 
The Gen5 absolutely did draw ~900+ W, so their motors definitely are capable of that. Why would they positively retrograde their core function for so little gain in noise and weight? It doesn't add up

Is there any chance Dyson simply didn't allow older products to discharge as deeply? If the cells they are using in the V16 have a newer chemistry that can continuously supply high currents for longer before excessive wear is an issue, then that may explain some (though probably not all) of the difference in runtimes.

It's unfortunate that it's so difficult to obtain direct power readings.
 
Well, all I can say is based on the reported run times and battery capacity, their power draw is lower in each mode during carpet cleaning. Suction is lower (also for other reasons) and their resulting cleaning performance is inferior. It's that latter point which is important and shocking to me.
 
Which bit was that out of interest?
regarding the stain recognition and this robot is the first or only one to do so (including the cleaning pattern) - 3iRobotix ones (this is a brand from the maybe used ODM Pieca) do so - some iRobot ones (that uses ODMs from Picea) do so - and other brands have similar stain recognition.
 
regarding the stain recognition and this robot is the first or only one to do so (including the cleaning pattern) - 3iRobotix ones (this is a brand from the maybe used ODM Pieca) do so - some iRobot ones (that uses ODMs from Picea) do so - and other brands have similar stain recognition.
Ah. As someone unfamiliar with robots, I understood it to be specifically that it detects an approaching stain and then explicitly checks after it has gone over it that it has been removed fully, otherwise it immediately u-turns and goes back over it as demonstrated, and repeats until gone. Is there any video evidence to support that others do specifically this?
 
So i am pretty much covinced now (labels + your collected power data) that the "900w" is just a marketing stunt and is the label of the used motor version.

Do you have access to IEC 62885-4:2023 for the AW rating? The gen5 was tested against the older 2020 version if i am not mistaken, curios if something major has changed here.
So I've figured out what's going on and where all the sources of performance 'downgrade' are, and shown that for the most part, there's a really simple hack you can do to restore performance to be near the Gen5. The ugly unswept centre line that all the Dyson haters are fixating on actually contributes negligibly, since you overlap strokes.

There's no software issue. It's running right. The 450 W label represents its nominal power. This is reduced compared to the Gen5 and they've clearly done this by modifying the default power mode to be much lower, with changes to sensitivity so that it's in its 'boosted' mode, when it detects a lot of dirt, much less to save on battery. This optimisation means you've got to be aware of this in testing to avoid accidentally not using its unboosted mode, which the Gen5 remained in for longer with typical test conditions. It is possible to get the ~900 W motor power output, but it will rarely ever be used, really highlighting the half truth of marketing ever bigger airwatts to cosmetically outshine the competition. I'll cover all this in my review. Suffice to say, that performance wise, with a little hack (that is ridiculous that it's needed and really what should be criticised since it was avoidable), and understanding how testing differs from real-world use, the V16 no longer really feels like a significant performance downgrade. I still think they've over focussed on run time increases rather than performance, but this appears to be a direct consequence of the majority of people not even noticing...or caring...about small performance increases. THey genuinely don't notice, but they do notice run times. Dyson seem to have done a best of both worlds approach for this one, increasing run times at the slight expense of performance (once the hack is applied). That one stupid design choice meant that performance reduction was hugely exaggerated but anyone who cares can fix this, as I'll show in the review. It does now feel like an upgrade overall, with caveats. Same with the new separator; once you know its limitations and understand how to distinguish between real world performance and 'test' performance, you realise it's not a downgrade, even though you can think that with 'test dust'. In the review, I'm going to explain how it works and why it can be poor in some circumstances—which you don't face in real world conditions but do when 'testing' from scratch. Fortunately I'm trained in spotting subtleties like this. I'm still going to criticise this machine, but I now actually like it and don't think it's a total dud for real-world use as some of the haters are desperate to claim, without evidence, yet relying on my hatred of some things.

I'm also aware of what's coming—I hope sooner than later. Can you believe this machine (the V16) was apparently completed in June 2022 according to patents, which would make it before Gen5 release. And they just sat on it for 3 years it seems. I suspect the next one is already complete.
 
So enlighten us love. What's the hack to improve performance?
Really looking forward to your video then.
Vacuum wars arent going to make one for a while, it's not even released in USA not even a date yet.
French guy might release something and he'll be saying Sharks are the same at a fraction of the price as he always does 😂
So just make one don't wait for others

I gotta say, I like it way more than Gen5 Nd even more than V15.
 
Last edited:
So enlighten us love. What's the hack to improve performance?
That's going to wait until the review so the trash reviews etc. don't copy me (you can probably figure it out from the physics outlined in the lecture video I made). I've got all but one piece of test data now to evidence how things work, which I'll try to get tonight. Still got lots of work to do before the review is done though. Sadly weeks, but I'm trying to get the majority done in the next 2-3 weeks before it becomes almost impossible due to total lack of time.
 
Last edited:
So are you saying your previous data was wrong and the vacuum isn't being gimped by the software unintentionally? If that's the case that's a huge shame, and I guess I won't be purchasing it ever. That means without the "hack" the vacuum is objectively a worse performer than the Gen5/V15 at actually cleaning. And even with the "hack" you said it only gets "near" Gen5 performance, so it's still worse. Big shame. What's going with Dyson right now?

At this point, the way the V16 is looking, I think the new V8 Cyclone will be a better machine..... :\ V16 probably won't be performing much better anyway so might as well just buy the cheaper machine.

None of this makes any sense. v16 will be a huge failure if they don't fix this.
 
Last edited:
The data is the same (although I remeasured the modified hack data with a more carefully implemented hack since and it performs great. But yes, without the hack, it is objectively worse because of one utterly stupid decision they made. But the hack is easy. You get 'near' gen5 perforamnce because the effects of the different motor sensitivity behaviour make it a little less sensitive in these kinds of tests, which is very hard to eliminate without changing the test and preventing fair comparison. But I think in real-world usage, which is subtly different to the testing, V16 performance is actually very similar to gen5, so that minor difference isn't really there in day to day use. If you do the hack, it's pretty much Gen5 with bells. My initial hatred reaction was because of that one stupid design feature needing a mod and the rest is actually good and shows why you've got to be careful interpreting 'tests'. I finished my separator test before and it proved exactly what I was expecting and confirms how it works, and where its limitations lie. Will spend a bit of time tomorrow working on that review. I'm going to have to restructure it...

The pencil vac is a hardfloor sweeper with suction + above floor vac. Interesting, but its core technologies are in the V16.
 
Having to do a hack to fix the vacuum is a no go for me. That's indefensible imo and I would be reaming them for it if I made the review. It basically ruins any of the good features the vacuum may have. RIP V16 for me, too bad. Maybe the next one will be better.
 
They deserve a protest. Maybe they'll change things during its lifetime, who knows. They do make small revisions.
 
With all due respect, I admire your passion for Dyson - but their labs feature Numatics for the cleanup and dealing with fine dust. Their employee perks like free gourmet pizza were great, but it was clear the brand was always style over substance. They never believed in bagless, and now are focussed on Fans, Earphones or whatever James is into right now. If you are truly into bagless, see what others are doing to innovate.
My passion isn't for Dyson per se, it's for innovation. I've seen no genuine, meaningful innovation from others. Otherwise I'd be all over it.
 
Having to do a hack to fix the vacuum is a no go for me. That's indefensible imo and I would be reaming them for it if I made the review. It basically ruins any of the good features the vacuum may have. RIP V16 for me, too bad. Maybe the next one will be better.
Just buy a simple analog vacuum with a cord. They are out there and some will last the rest of your life given reasonable care. Companies like Sebo, Lindhaus, Aerus, Schoettler make durable buy it for life vacuums with no software to fret about.
 
I'm sure they work to some degree, but I just don't think you're going to convince anyone to go back to old technology, because it's less convenient and has other drawbacks. Market share is likely to hit parity between corded and cordless soon, with cordless dominating thereafter, especially when solid state batteries come out soon. Even if you go for a corded machine, independently verified data clearly shows Dyson's latest upright mains is the top performer with no running costs, so why someone wouldn't go for that one for the 'rest of your life given reasonable care' is anyone's guess.
 
I'm sure they work to some degree, but I just don't think you're going to convince anyone to go back to old technology, because it's less convenient and has other drawbacks. Market share is likely to hit parity between corded and cordless soon, with cordless dominating thereafter, especially when solid state batteries come out soon. Even if you go for a corded machine, independently verified data clearly shows Dyson's latest upright mains is the top performer with no running costs, so why someone wouldn't go for that one for the 'rest of your life given reasonable care' is anyone's guess.
Filters are a running cost. Replacement brush rolls, If you can even buy one, are a running cost. The labor to clean them regularly is a cost too, a time cost. And the durability of something like a Sebo, Lindhaus or Aerus product means you are not forking out for a new vacuum for decades. That is money saved, a lot of money too because Diesoons are not inexpensive to buy. Pay $800 up front for a Sebo G5 and never have to buy another vacuum for a few decades. A package of Sebo dust bags that will last you a year or more costs less than replacing the filters on a Diesoon. Brush rolls are cheaper too, and more durable. Same story for Lindhaus and Aerus. Long term they are cheaper to own and less frustration overall. But oh dear they are not trendy. Who cares about trendy? Trendy doesn't clean my home.
 
If you're replacing filters on a Dyson machine, then you're abused it. Simple as. They are lifetime filters and no one has ever shown evidence of a method to reproduce a filter failure from normal use, let alone actually define what they mean by the filter not working. They rest of those claims are unsupported by evidence, so we've no reason to believe them. Except the comment about trendy. Trendy does not clean homes; good engineering does, and there's evidence bearing on such claims for us to make up our minds.
 
Incidentally, this thread is now, by far, the most read (popular) in the history of this entire forum. All in just a few weeks and recently, despite the entire history of this place. This really does beautfifully reflect what can happen when more diverse topics are discussed, and evidences there's a real audience for interesting technology and topics. Thanks to all those who have contributed to this thread's success. it's worth contrasting this to the brutal and unfriendly hostility I faced here from some regulars when I first arrived; it seems it was at odds with reality.
 
Filters are a running cost. Replacement brush rolls, If you can even buy one, are a running cost. The labor to clean them regularly is a cost too, a time cost. And the durability of something like a Sebo, Lindhaus or Aerus product means you are not forking out for a new vacuum for decades. That is money saved, a lot of money too because Diesoons are not inexpensive to buy. Pay $800 up front for a Sebo G5 and never have to buy another vacuum for a few decades. A package of Sebo dust bags that will last you a year or more costs less than replacing the filters on a Diesoon. Brush rolls are cheaper too, and more durable. Same story for Lindhaus and Aerus. Long term they are cheaper to own and less frustration overall. But oh dear they are not trendy. Who cares about trendy? Trendy doesn't clean my home.
Excuse me but aren't you supposed to replace filters and brush roll on Sebo too? Plus hose that rips on Felix and deffo won't last few decades.

Not to mention that Felix or X series are soo noo user friendly. No wand on Felix, mediocre on hard floors unless you swap heads. X series has a wand but constantly spinning roller is a huge NO from me, plus hose retracts back into wand making it even harder to use than on upright Dysons.
 
Excuse me but aren't you supposed to replace filters and brush roll on Sebo too? Plus hose that rips on Felix and deffo won't last few decades.

Not to mention that Felix or X series are soo noo user friendly. No wand on Felix, mediocre on hard floors unless you swap heads. X series has a wand but constantly spinning roller is a huge NO from me, plus hose retracts back into wand making it even harder to use than on upright Dysons.
I've learned it's not always best to patch obvious nonsense with a dose of well-thought out and evidenced reality. It tends to just cause a doubling down of the nonsense and make you realise help is sometimes beyond reach.
 
Recent updates seem to confirm that Dyson is indeed using third party manufacturers to design and mass produce some of their products.
1757162256876.png

There is also a news chinese site that interviewed the CEO who mentioned a "long term cooperative relationship with companies such as iRobot, LG, Phillips, Xiaomi, Electrolux and Dyson".

1757162401489.png

The engineering and innovation era of dyson is over and there is no way of denying it, Dyson has not been part on the engineering of this product and are using third party chinese manufacturers to do the actual design & production.

After they realized that Picea was leaking on the robot being showcased @ IFA, they taped the QR codes and labels.

There is a good chance the new Air purifier being affected by this, who knows how far will this go? Their vacuums could be next (if not already impacted!). The new management and CEO at Dyson clearly see no point on investing on heavy R&D if they are willing to release products like these.
 
Seems to be just for robots, although I'd like to see evidence about other products and to what extent before listening to rumours. Interesting though, and I suspect it's a purely financially beneficial arrangement. They take some 3rd party base model and integrate their innovations in it. Seeing their robot have those spinning side whiskers just stunned me, because I distinctly remember Dyson showing why they were shit. And what happened to their innovative tank tracks? It's surprising, and supports the idea that Dyson is getting so big it's getting badly managed by profiteering suits rather than minds with vision. After some elements of the V16, my confidence in some of their decision making has been shattered. I'm still dumbfounded they made one particular decision.

My prediction is that the anti Dyson idiots (e.g. the rabid vacuum enthusiasts) will just fixate on the upcoming criticism from people like me, and embellish it whilst ignoring the genuine praiseworthy innovation and positive aspects. They'll just cherry pick and spin a half truth. They've actually always done this, but it'll be easier for them now.
 
Seems to be just for robots, although I'd like to see evidence about other products and to what extent before listening to rumours.
Correct, robots have been confirmed to be Picea and air purifier is to be determined.
They take some 3rd party base model and integrate their innovations in it
I'm afraid there is no innovation on these, the only novelty is the dock station empty bin which I have my doubts will be using Dysons IP but a copycat (see example of chinese robot with almost the same design)
1757165559395.png

Seeing their robot have those spinning side whiskers just stunned me, because I distinctly remember Dyson showing why they were shit. And what happened to their innovative tank tracks? It's surprising
Absolutely, almost everything about this release shares design decisions Dyson argued were poor.

This is very sad, why would they cover the labels only after somebody pointed out Picea... too late.
1757165705913.png


More examples:
1757165844469.png1757165853595.png

1757165876064.png1757165879953.png

The few things they featured at IFA are core features of the Picea base robot.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top