Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
Interesting, although I'm not well read enough on robots to comment authoritatively; robots never really interested me.
Dyson Piston
- Thread starter Vacuum Facts
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
I noticed Dyson have registered a trademark in Canada for "PISTON Stylized". Maybe they've put tinsel on it to cover up its shortcomings.
that's a huge shame @ robot, if the picea stuff is true, that thing looks terrible. their robot vacuums were never really their greatest products, but the one benefit they had over others is they genuinely vacuumed carpet well over the competition. this thing looks like it definitely won't do that, and just looks poor in general. if this seeps into their core vacuum lines that's basically the end of the company.
Highly doubt it'd be the end of company.
Their hair care products are probably going to be their main thing.
i basically meant the end of the company for me, sorry, should have clarified. i definitely won't be buying any products from them that are designed by a third party with the dyson name slapped on top. that's a disgrace. what's sad is, it's not just dyson either, both miele and sebo are going down this route as well. so there will be nowhere to turn to.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
There is plenty of R&D occurring. My channel even outlines some of it. And my V16 review will do what every other paltry source on the internet hasn't so far—namely discuss why the innovations are a step up in detail and how they work. Not sure what the plans for their robots are. Maybe they'll have different tiers or something; who knows. One that looks like all the other shit out there to appeal to the lowest common denominator who lack the IQ to distinguish quality from a dupe, and one that innovates.
Sharks? No?
I hear they're soo much better than anything Dyson ever made
Their power detect apparently outcleans Gen5
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
Last edited:
cheesewonton
Well-known member
Forget the Felix. It is all wrong IMHO. Awkward, top heavy, prone to tipping over using the hose, no onboard tool storage, no spotting wand, just one aggravation after another. If you want a vacuum set up like that with the motor in a body sitting on a single neck over a power nozzle buy a Lindhaus Valzer. Better in every possible way than the Felix.
The Sebo of choice for me is either a G4/G5 or the Mechanical 300/350. For the money a G4 is as good as it gets and everything the Felix isn't. It has half the handle weight of the Felix and doesn't tip over using the hose. The G series hoses never wear out or split. The brush roll is identical to the brush roll in the Sebo ET-1 power nozzle the Felix sits on and from experience they last a year or two of all day every day use by janitors so in household use they last many years.
Sebo filters get changed once a year. A package of 8 synthetic bags, enough for a year of use, is $34.99 on the Sebo website. The exhaust filter for the G is $14.99 and the HEPA pre-motor filter is $39.99. The basic pre-motor filter is $29.99. Annual running cost is $80 - $90 depending on which pre-motor filter you buy. Down the road several years you might need a new brush roll. Those are $34.99 on the Sebo website. But you won't be buying a new vacuum for the rest of your life.
Most Dyson HEPA filters are priced around $30 and a replacement brush roll is about the same price depending. The HEPA filter has to be replaced periodically according to Dyson literature but they also recommend washing it once a month after which it must sit overnight to dry, something you never have to do with a bagged machine. And we have all read the litany of woes regarding clogged Dyson cyclones and the difficulty cleaning them. I much prefer a simple bagged vacuum. Easy and clean to live with. I will gladly pay $35 for a year's supply of bags to avoid the grody task of washing filters and cyclones.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
I'd love to know how many people who've tried and liked a cordless stick vac would ever go back to a mains machine. I haven't and never would.
You're peddling total nonsense. It's common knowledge that Dyson filters and brushrolls etc. are lifetime and never need replacing unless they have been abused and neglected. There are no running costs on their machines. Anyone who claims differently is required to provide convincing evidence...and not a dot has ever been provided when they've been challenged. That tells you all you need to know.
Er, can you provide a simple link to this mystical literature that makes this claim and directly conflicts with their other literature saying it's a lifetime filter? There's nothing in the V16 manual about replacing it, which directly conficts with your statement.
You're peddling total nonsense. It's common knowledge that Dyson filters and brushrolls etc. are lifetime and never need replacing unless they have been abused and neglected. There are no running costs on their machines. Anyone who claims differently is required to provide convincing evidence...and not a dot has ever been provided when they've been challenged. That tells you all you need to know.
It's really stupid that the new robot vacuum has the cyclone on the auto emptying dock but not the actual vacuum like the VisNav. That means the actual vacuuming performance is going to be terrible, it'll just clog and lose suction like other non cyclone bagless systems. Unless there's some technology they're not talking about in the robot itself.
I also think they should just be honest about working with Picea instead of trying to hide it, looks desperate and dumb. And frankly it's sad to look at the very obviously not Dyson looking robot vac next to the other products made exclusively in house. The PencilVac for example is such a fun and innovative product, and the Robot is the complete opposite.
I also think they should just be honest about working with Picea instead of trying to hide it, looks desperate and dumb. And frankly it's sad to look at the very obviously not Dyson looking robot vac next to the other products made exclusively in house. The PencilVac for example is such a fun and innovative product, and the Robot is the complete opposite.
I have to completely disagree with you on brush rolls.
They absolutely need replacing, carbon fibre bristles wear down and with detangling vanes, nylon bristles wear down too.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
Well, on some older machines, like the V6 (no longer sold), the carbon fibre bristles, which are extremely delicate, could wear away for some people (not all). Usually if you ran over nails sticking out and such. That was an exception than a rule, since they redesigned them later to not fail that like. It's also true that the V15/Gen5 nylon and carbon fibre bristles wear down in the regions where they hit the comb vanes (and why such technology is a bit shit), but the brushbar still works effectively that I can't really quantify a significant difference. So, I'm not convinced you have to replace those. In general, you never need to replace a roller (unless abused).
centralsweeper63
Active member
Here I have found a video from 2012 showing a samsung robot vacuum going over the spot again for regular vacuuming. go to 3:30 for that feature.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
Interesting, but this is not apples to apples. The technology isn't just 'does it go over the same spot again', it's (for wet cleaners specifically) does it detect a heavy stain, does it check after it has attempted to clean it to confirm it's removed, if not does it return and make as many attempts as necessary until it's gone? It's not clear this 2012 samsung machine is doing that from that promo, nor could it since it's a dry vac and not a stain remover.
centralsweeper63
Active member
I am not saying they re exactly the same, though I am saying they are similar. I think either dyson or the company making the robot maybe saw this idea and ran with it.
Either way the vacuum so far looks not great. I'd love to see data and be proven wrong when it comes out, but the fact that it has those stupid spinning whisker things isn't giving me much hope.
I will say being charitable in the early days of Dyson they used to use Wessel-Werk to design their attachments, essentially just rebranded. So I guess technically it's not the first time Dyson has done something like this. But those were just attachments. This is an entire Vacuum.
I will say being charitable in the early days of Dyson they used to use Wessel-Werk to design their attachments, essentially just rebranded. So I guess technically it's not the first time Dyson has done something like this. But those were just attachments. This is an entire Vacuum.
Last edited:
cheesewonton
Well-known member
cheesewonton
Well-known member
From experience I have some Bissell and European Electrolux products that make the claim that their HEPA exhaust filters are washable but they never really come clean using just fresh water and after less than six washings they're done. These are pleated cloth HEPA filters btw.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
Yeah, maybe. it's fairly intuitive. As always, what's the point of cleaning if you don't do the job properly.
I mean, your own link just verified my point and refuted yours. They say nothing about replacing them and only mention additional filters to maintain usage whilst the other is drying if you've not figured out you can use a cool fan to speed up drying time. I'm confident that your claim was a falsehood after being given a chance to defend it and failing. This, I've noticed, is a running theme from much of your output, which reduces credibility for future factual claims. It simply verified this place is too much of an exclusive echo chamber, where too often, merely challenging factual claims (that are clearly falsehoods) results in hypersensitivity and aggressively defensive behaviour.
However, you're right about rinsing with water alone not always unclogging a filter (for Dyson filters; I can't comment about others, other than their technology is inferior). I recently has this issue on the V16 after a ridiculous flour test. But this isn't something any user would likely face in normal real world use, and my careful and gentle machine wash technique restored to factory default. The mild detergent helps detach sticky substances caked onto the filter fibres.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
It's surprising how few reviews there are out there of the V16. It really shows the US dominance to YT content. Given that almost all reviews out there are cosmetic or junk, it's also exposes where most of that rubbish comes from. Sadly, I won't be releasing my review for the V16 until all the major 'reviewers' have released their reviews, so Dyson's delay releasing this product to the US is a blow on that front. What I might do in the meantime though, is release some myth busting videos. Are there any demos or myths people want busting, like "it doesn't clean hard floors" etc. I want to check if the loss of carbon fibre bristles prevents fine dust removal. I've already confirmed it's the quietest machine they've ever produced, dispelling the myth it's loud.
That's what I thought, but they again it's not getting released until 2026 so still some time
I doubt there is room to fix manufacturing issues, the brush looks like the old models that were prone to tangling on older robots (namely roborock, eufy, etc).
Which is also identical to the brush used by irobot on their Picea-based robots, just with a different color palette.
All of which are prone to hair tangles as indicated by the user manual.
Vacuum facts
Some quirks from various Reddit posts and YT reviews on the V16 state the following:
- Cyclonic system is flawed, lacks a main which may lead to reduced suction or increased filter cleaning.
- Filter system leaks.
- Lasers are not as powerful.
- Cleaning is not as good as previous models.
Can you kindly verify if these are myths or not??
Thank you.
Shattered
My goodness, that is very bright!
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
Reddit is literally the internet's toilet wall scribbles. Take everything you read on there as nonsense unless evidenced by reputable people. I can comment on some of them
Bullshit. Whoever speculated this failed to realise that the same (better) cyclones still exist downstream, so anything that gets through the primary separator still has to face the cyclones. There are some caveats to that as I'll cover in the review, but for REAL-WORLD usage (distinct from treating it like a garbage disposal unit like some clowns), the new separator and cyclone system performs at least as well and without key disadvantages. These people just don't understand it...and is why I'm waiting until all the 'big reviewers' have finished spouting their ignorant opinions before I release my review that evidences the facts.
BS (and no doubt unevidenced). A leaky filter system would mean the final seal leaks dust. There's no evidence of that.
For the first time, I'm actually enjoying the laser. It's much more effective to me than the fluffy head lasers at highlighting dust and I can see why people like it. I still stand by all my previous comments; it doesn't add any meaningful practical value. But it definitely adds psychological value analogous to a clear bin.
This is true as I've already evidenced (and Frickhelm) and no one else to my knowledge, at least reputably. I assume the person who said this failed to evidence it or cite evidence. It's also something you can fix with a hack. It's an embarrassment to Dyson that a hack is needed, but they made a stupid mistake and should be called out hard for it.
Last edited:
Similar threads
