herbicide
Well-known member
Well this is refreshing, the first part anyway.
Yet we are supposed to ignore others 'amatuer testing' but put full faith in your 'amatuer testing.'
Dyson Piston
- Thread starter Vacuum Facts
- Start date
Yet we are supposed to ignore others 'amatuer testing' but put full faith in your 'amatuer testing.'
Absolute Rainbow
Well-known member
@Vacuum Facts more misunderstanding again, sorry. This is not like AI, is not really fraught with mistakes. You took my words out of context - fitting for an arrogant guy with all the knowledge but little understanding (no offense though). Lab-like and laboratory-grade are not the same.
I can still agree that your testing procedure is free of the worst flaws of the kind YOU think I champions, when I have watched your videos. Surely, you're thinking that I never watched your videos. I am not an AI and my answers are far better than those generative AI. @Vacuum Facts, you just misunderstood me again, just as you thought I did you.
centralsweeper63
Well-known member
Vacuumfacts, how is absolute rainbow an AI. I just don't understand.
centralsweeper63
Well-known member
I am trying to find the thread that vacuumfacts says that all his reviews have the testing procedures. I tried to find what post it was on. Then I looked on vacuum facts account for what post it was on. Then I found out that I am unable to view his account because he restricted my access to it. Anyway, I want to appologise if this is on the wrong thread, there is so many Dyson based threads and I can never remember what one I need to post on. I will watch all your reviews vacuumfacts and tell you all the errors I see in your testing. Evenly spread, how is that specific enough. Brush over twice, what brush and how stiff is it, how hard are you pressing down on it, is the back and forth motion consistent. 0.5 meters per second, how do you measure that. How is Dyson zorb exactly a replacement to real dirt. Dyson zorb has to be slightly damp meaning it is not going to work properly. I notice the nozzle is not being guided perfectly straight, how does this effect results. I could go on and on, however I know that it is not worth it.
centralsweeper63
Well-known member
Also, I have never, ever seen someone vacuum the same spot 10 times. That is not realistic. Most people don't even vacuum in lines.
cheesewonton
Well-known member
The ATSM test procedure for removal of embedded dirt in carpet ( F608 ) specifies the kind of dirt to embed in the carpet, the quantity, the area that quantity has to be spread over and how many passes to make. It also specifies four different types of carpet to be tested as dirt removal will vary by carpet type. The procedure also requires the test use three or more examples of the same machine and averaging their results to normalize for the usual production variances among machines. This is why labs like Intertek charge over $1 million per vacuum type to perform these tests. Just obtaining copies of the test standards from ATSM costs a pile of money. What I know about the test procedure comes from several lawsuits between Shark and Dyson. Court records are public and free and the testimony and evidence is included. Lots of good insights into the test procedure from these publicly available documents where adherence to the test procedure was disputed between the litigants.
Absolute Rainbow
Well-known member
@Vacuum Facts thinks I completely misunderstands EVERYTHING he stated/said/explained/whatever.
@cheesewonton we would appreciate it if you can recap the entire test procedure (the methods, the environment, the results, etc.) for us right here publicly at VacuumLand.org? Heck, I would've liked to compare the ATSM with Vacuum Facts' own home testing!
cheesewonton
Well-known member
ATSM wants you to pay them for a copy of the complete procedure. What I was able to learn about the test came from public testimony in two lawsuits between Shark and Dyson. The transcripts of the trials are public information. There were significant disputes whether the testing used by each company to support their claims were accomplished in accordance with the ATSM procedure and that testimony was my window into how the test is conducted, but it is not the same as having the actual test procedure manual in hand. I don't have the money to buy that.
Absolute Rainbow
Well-known member
Oh ok.
centralsweeper63
Well-known member
I can imagine it is extraordinarily expense too.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
There are so many reviews now of the V16 but no one's really discussing the new technologies in them in any meaningful detail. I find that just amazing. Worse, the things people are criticising are so facile and genuine non-issues, yet they seem oblivious to the actual issues worth criticising. I'm just in awe how badly people are dropping the ball on this one. They're actually outshining Dyson's failings with the machine tenfold. My review next year is going to be as much a criticism of the internet reviews as it is of some of Dyson's stunningly poor choices.
Having said that, the V16 is actually a really nice product and I'm enjoying it a lot more now. I much prefer it over the Gen5, and I've got it to clean extremely well in real-world conditions. The improvements are very impressive but no one has mentioned a thing online about them. I find that so astonishing. You really can see where Dyson are going and why, but you'd never know if you only relied on the lay internet.
Having said that, the V16 is actually a really nice product and I'm enjoying it a lot more now. I much prefer it over the Gen5, and I've got it to clean extremely well in real-world conditions. The improvements are very impressive but no one has mentioned a thing online about them. I find that so astonishing. You really can see where Dyson are going and why, but you'd never know if you only relied on the lay internet.
Last edited:
centralsweeper63
Well-known member
Well, 2026 is on it's way so maybe we can stop waiting. There was less suspense awaiting the release of anything than this. The whole dyson launch event had less buildup than this one review.
Absolute Rainbow
Well-known member
@Vacuum Facts great! How about you finally tell us about the mod that fixed the V16! TechRadar was so close to figuring the whole thing out but not only they ended up failed (they mis-blamed the floorhead), they didn't even bother double-checking or re-testing it again. Sad.
V16 is a tragic machine - a superior mains-equivalent crippled by some stupid design choices Dyson ended up making. Bruh
cheesewonton
Well-known member
Some of us are not impressed by, cough cough, "new technology". For me the tech just gets in the way. I just want something that is simple, basic, easy to use, cleans well enough and will last a couple of decades with no big failures or need for overhaul. The fancy tech is just bs I don't want to deal with. It's just something to clean my home, not a lifestyle statement.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
You've just described the V16 (or what it should be out of the box) more than any other machine I've ever used.
herbicide
Well-known member
“What it should be” is an interesting qualifier. One could apply that to anything, where that anything can be the best thing ever.
The limited reviews available seem to show its actual cleaning performance subpar to their own older models. To go a step further the old models’ actual cleaning performance is already subpar compared to many other makes (ones frequently discussed here). Proof you ask? Empirical evidence is plentiful on the internet.
The limited reviews available seem to show its actual cleaning performance subpar to their own older models. To go a step further the old models’ actual cleaning performance is already subpar compared to many other makes (ones frequently discussed here). Proof you ask? Empirical evidence is plentiful on the internet.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
There are many reviews. Despite all that, you didn't cite a single source which clearly and intelligently showed why. Oops. Any moron with half a brain can tell it doesn't clean as well out of the box (although many failed even this...). Only 2 sources I'm aware of have shown it convincingly; the rest of the cattle seem to attempt to show it by building site 'testing'. That, sadly, is a hallmark of serious intelligence deficiency and where to never look again. And not a single source has deduced why the performance is lower when it doesn't need to be, despite it being blindingly obvious if you understand how vacuum cleaners work at a fundamental level. That's the single biggest shame of all and deeply disheartening for me, since the knowledge is freely out there now. The V16 is a great opportunity for me to expose everything wrong with the internet and social media. And it's coming.
Last edited:
herbicide
Well-known member
Yea there plenty of reviews, I mean even you and your infinite knowledge has noted issues on this very thread. I don’t know the point in posting this as you’ll simply discount their findings and berate the reviewers, but here you go.
https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=dyson+v16+reviews
Of course you can also simply refer to the previously linked reviews in this very thread.
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
I'm aware of the reviews (obviously...). I've already berated them above. They're facile and don't discuss anything important. They pointed out the obvious but didn't explain anything. The viewer is left poverty stricken from having watched their cosmetic review. It's clear they don't understand anything and their motivation was exploiting the viewer for their clicks profit...
herbicide
Well-known member
If you were aware of them, as I and everyone else knew you were, why the question?
As predicted, discounted and berating of the reviews on your behalf.
The whole point of their reviews is to (drumroll please) review the machines! It’s not to explain them to your personal fancies and discuss potential solutions to shortcomings. They review them with the intent of informing potential buyers of their features and performance.
Side note, but since your state these reviewers are motivated by “clicks and profit,” (obviously)Do you honestly believe the reason for all of Dyson’s marketing efforts are not motivated by their desire for sales and profits?
Vacuum Facts
Well-known member
I'm not quite sure why you made a prediction about something apparent before you responded. My comment was to berate the reviews and for the reasons outlined. You missed this, somehow? It was literally spelled out for you. Incredible.
And they've done a very poor job, which was the point you seemed to have missed, despite it being spelled out clearly, even before your 'prediction' of the apparent.
The worst are motivated by clicks and profit on social media. It doesn't have to be this way. This was the point you apparently missed. Not quite sure of your warped logic between the exploitative and weak reviewers out there, misleading and doing a very poor job, and a cherry-picked global manufacturer with different intentions. If it was a weak segway into the corruption of marketing, then there's plenty of discussion of that in the last 3 Dyson reviews I've done—just in case you fancied another one of your predictions of something already completely apparent.
herbicide
Well-known member
This is all actually pretty simple. The reviews show that the v16 has some deficiencies compared to prior models in the reviews. You choose to belittle and discount these reviews for ‘reasons’ that do not actually discredit their observations and opinions.
Again you’re here attempting to convince us to believe your observations, methods, etc, but ignore all the other empirical evidence counter to your claims, whilst not providing a scrap of evidence counter to these claims.
https://www.theguardian.com/thefilter/2025/oct/29/dyson-v16-piston-animal-vacuum-cleaner-review
In the cat litter test, I was left with more uncollected cat litter after a single forward pass and backward pull than I was with the Gen5detect, both on carpet and hard floor. The V16 was good at picking up pet hair, but no better than its predecessors, which are also excellent at this job.
Flour was the most disappointing test. On both carpet and hard floor, the V16 Piston Animal failed to transfer about 30% of my test spillages into the collection bin. Some of this was left on the floor, particularly in a central smear where there’s a gap between the two rollers. I also found flour in various nooks and crannies around the floor head, including a surprising amount inside the rollers themselves.
At the end of the day, based on most reviews, including this newer one from the Guardian. The V16 takes longer to clean areas than the previous model. Is it possible there's some sort of user error going on? Maybe. But when basically every review is saying the same thing, (Vacuum has good features but the cleaner head is poor), then I'm inclined to believe them.
Could you make more passes and still achieve the same results? Maybe. Most people make many passes regardless, BUT, the reviews still shows this cleaner head is essentially a straight up downgrade.
A family member had their hair cut in our kitchen yesterday, and there was a very LARGE amount of hair on the floor. Even more than what was seen in the test on the Guardian. I used the V15 Motorbar (which has the anti tangle combs), and it picked everything up and did not tangle a single strain. So I fail to see the benefit in the current design, seemed like a solution in search of a problem that didn't really exist. Seems like they just decided to implement the Hair Screw Tool idea into a larger format without thinking about any potential issues.
In the cat litter test, I was left with more uncollected cat litter after a single forward pass and backward pull than I was with the Gen5detect, both on carpet and hard floor. The V16 was good at picking up pet hair, but no better than its predecessors, which are also excellent at this job.
Flour was the most disappointing test. On both carpet and hard floor, the V16 Piston Animal failed to transfer about 30% of my test spillages into the collection bin. Some of this was left on the floor, particularly in a central smear where there’s a gap between the two rollers. I also found flour in various nooks and crannies around the floor head, including a surprising amount inside the rollers themselves.
At the end of the day, based on most reviews, including this newer one from the Guardian. The V16 takes longer to clean areas than the previous model. Is it possible there's some sort of user error going on? Maybe. But when basically every review is saying the same thing, (Vacuum has good features but the cleaner head is poor), then I'm inclined to believe them.
Could you make more passes and still achieve the same results? Maybe. Most people make many passes regardless, BUT, the reviews still shows this cleaner head is essentially a straight up downgrade.
A family member had their hair cut in our kitchen yesterday, and there was a very LARGE amount of hair on the floor. Even more than what was seen in the test on the Guardian. I used the V15 Motorbar (which has the anti tangle combs), and it picked everything up and did not tangle a single strain. So I fail to see the benefit in the current design, seemed like a solution in search of a problem that didn't really exist. Seems like they just decided to implement the Hair Screw Tool idea into a larger format without thinking about any potential issues.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
