Dyson Piston

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

Back on topic for the first time in a LONG while with all the trolling...

This came out yesterday. It's all true. However, there's a lot more to this story than they're telling you in a 2 minute promo—including some warts from their ground up redesign. I've not yet seen a single review that doesn't add unnecessary and petty criticism (whining, really) about trivial non-issues that don't really show up in real-world usage, distinct from their unevidenced vague anecdotes. Yet those reviews completely miss the important and valid sources of criticism—and most importantly of all: in detail with clear objective evidence. Most reviews only want your clicks though for self gain...

There are so many details that aren't in the promo about the subtle design features of the head that allow hair to successfully release from the agitator into the airflow. Of course, no one has talked about any of it in detail in the scam reviews, but I'll go into them in my review.
 
Where 'petty criticism'
Vacuum Facts said:
Back on topic for the first time in a LONG while with all the trolling...

This came out yesterday. It's all true. However, there's a lot more to this story than they're telling you in a 2 minute promo—including some warts from their ground up redesign. I've not yet seen a single review that doesn't add unnecessary and petty criticism (whining, really) about trivial non-issues that don't really show up in real-world usage, distinct from their unevidenced vague anecdotes. Yet those reviews completely miss the important and valid sources of criticism—and most importantly of all: in detail with clear objective evidence. Most reviews only want your clicks though for self gain...

There are so many details that aren't in the promo about the subtle design features of the head that allow hair to successfully release from the agitator into the airflow. Of course, no one has talked about any of it in detail in the scam reviews, but I'll go into them in my review.
Click to expand...
Show us this statistically significant data on real-world usage.
 
Vacuum Facts said:
Yep, the DC41 was bad for clamping and why the later light ball introduced the bleed relief gates to increase airflow. These transferred over to the cordless, although this is a bit wasteful. There's a great story to tell about where the technology is going (see my eventual V16 review). The US animal 3, which is the equivalent to the final UK mains machine, does get the gates. It's amazing how energetically wasteful the mains machines are nowadays The V16 has shown that in real-world mess conditions (distinct from exaggerated building site-like testing from weak sources), you can now get mains performance with just ~138 W, including the 100 W head on carpet.
Click to expand...
Bleed gates. Pretty much what Panasonic had on their Plush Pro power nozzle with their MC-CG957 canister in 2014 and with the Kenmore Elite 700 Series canister vacuum that same year. The same design carries on today as the Kenmore Ultra Plush Nozzle and the Cen-Tec Systems CT-25QD. it is also sold with the Titan T9500 canister model. If you have ever used one you know this is one of the all time great power nozzles and does exactly what Panasonic claims on deep pile plush carpets.

 
Vacuum Facts said:
Back on topic for the first time in a LONG while with all the trolling...

This came out yesterday. It's all true. However, there's a lot more to this story than they're telling you in a 2 minute promo—including some warts from their ground up redesign. I've not yet seen a single review that doesn't add unnecessary and petty criticism (whining, really) about trivial non-issues that don't really show up in real-world usage, distinct from their unevidenced vague anecdotes. Yet those reviews completely miss the important and valid sources of criticism—and most importantly of all: in detail with clear objective evidence. Most reviews only want your clicks though for self gain...

There are so many details that aren't in the promo about the subtle design features of the head that allow hair to successfully release from the agitator into the airflow. Of course, no one has talked about any of it in detail in the scam reviews, but I'll go into them in my review.
Click to expand...
Cool.
 
centralsweeper63 said:
How do you mean?
Click to expand...
Cool take. However...
1) Based on my human-corrected Gemini 2.5 Pro usage (corrected in the first place because AI can be wrong), and taking advantage of @Vacuum Facts' lecture, I came up with a possible fix: cover the data pins with small piece of non-conductive tape, leaving only the power pins exposed. Which would prevent the machine from reading so much of the new dual-cones floorhead, preventing any performance loss and keeping its power.
2) Basically, the dual-cones floorhead works like the hair screw tool and PencilVac's gliding head mixed in.
3) Dyson is trying to balance between scientific facts that VF champions and brevity for as many people as possible to understand. Kinda like how I see things when it comes to vacuum cleaners.
 
Absolute Rainbow said:
Cool take. However...
1) Based on my human-corrected Gemini 2.5 Pro usage (corrected in the first place because AI can be wrong), and taking advantage of @Vacuum Facts' lecture, I came up with a possible fix: cover the data pins with small piece of non-conductive tape, leaving only the power pins exposed. Which would prevent the machine from reading so much of the new dual-cones floorhead, preventing any performance loss and keeping its power.
2) Basically, the dual-cones floorhead works like the hair screw tool and PencilVac's gliding head mixed in.
3) Dyson is trying to balance between scientific facts that VF champions and brevity for as many people as possible to understand. Kinda like how I see things when it comes to vacuum cleaners.
Click to expand...
Why do you think (claim) VF is a champion scientific facts? Just because he posts charts* and data, doesn't make his opinions facts or his tests scientific. I hope you can see that he has a double standard, that he practices the exact same thing he condemns others for doing.

*while a lot of these are factually correct, there is also plenty of misunderstanding of the physical laws, or his own incorrect extrapolation of the actual science. An example: In his "lecture" many of his charts, graphs, etc reference arbitrary units.

Any chart/graph that shows "arbitrary units" is meaningless at best and purposely deceptive or manipulative at worst. Science relies wholly on measurement, and arbitrary units have no place in science. The very meaning (definition) of "arbitrary:"

Arbitrary: chosen, decided, etc. seemingly at random or on a whim rather than in a reasoned or methodical way
Click to expand...

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitrary
 
Last edited:
Absolute Rainbow said:
Cool take. However...
1) Based on my human-corrected Gemini 2.5 Pro usage (corrected in the first place because AI can be wrong), and taking advantage of @Vacuum Facts' lecture, I came up with a possible fix: cover the data pins with small piece of non-conductive tape, leaving only the power pins exposed. Which would prevent the machine from reading so much of the new dual-cones floorhead, preventing any performance loss and keeping its power.
2) Basically, the dual-cones floorhead works like the hair screw tool and PencilVac's gliding head mixed in.
3) Dyson is trying to balance between scientific facts that VF champions and brevity for as many people as possible to understand. Kinda like how I see things when it comes to vacuum cleaners.
Click to expand...
Panasonic has power nozzles with conical brush rolls that accomplish exactly what this Dyson claims to accomplish without the electronic complexity.

https://www.panasonic.com/my/consum...ner/handheld-vacuum-cleaner/mc-sb85kh047.html
 
cheesewonton said:
Bleed gates. Pretty much what Panasonic had on their Plush Pro power nozzle with their MC-CG957 canister in 2014 and with the Kenmore Elite 700 Series canister vacuum that same year. The same design carries on today as the Kenmore Ultra Plush Nozzle and the Cen-Tec Systems CT-25QD. it is also sold with the Titan T9500 canister model. If you have ever used one you know this is one of the all time great power nozzles and does exactly what Panasonic claims on deep pile plush carpets.

Click to expand...

This is another apples-to-oranges comparison with extremely vague contextualisation seemingly intended to be contrarian rather than make a meaningful and valuable point. Incidentally, and ironically, the relevance of suction pressure at the head was dismissed as nonsense by the least valuable, noisy trolls on here, despite the background science underpinning the technology having been established for over 250 years. Yet, simultaneously, it's perfectly acceptable here in this product which is fully consistent with the known science. Tells you all you need to know about those poor sources that are at odds with reality. This isn't the first product that has had bleed relief, since it comes in many forms (including cutouts on the floor plate that have been in many machines for decades). But this does not have front gates to achieve it, clearly. The front gates bring additional advantages—namely avoiding snowploughing on hard floors. There are also many designs of front gates, but not all are very effective, since most are dupes of an originally researched optimal design by you-know-who. Notice how that advert for the panasonic head provided absolutely no test data showing the reduction in net cleaning performance trends with their technology the user has no control over. Also, clamping can be reduced without necessarily reducing suction pressure under the head on high resistance flooring by other geometric design choices, as covered in my lecture. It's also more energetically wasteful relative to motor power reduction to achieve the same head pressure. The maths is covered here. I also love how in the advert, they point out that suction drops with bags. I wonder who cherrypicked to ignore that point...

cheesewonton said:
Well I had an example of the Panasonic conical brush roll before the pandemic in 2019. I bought it hoping the neck was compatible with an older Panasonic canister but it was not. It was originally designed for a canister power nozzle and later adapted to their stick vacs.
Click to expand...
Who invented conical brush bars for hair detangling has been resolved already on this forum. The evidence available clearly shows Dyson patented conical brush bars years before any records provided by competitors and there was plenty of time for them to copy the idea from when Dyson's ideas first became publicly available. You were spectacularly, and infamously now, unable to provide any evidence whatsoever to your contrarian claims, including that co-development occurred. That was devastating to your credibility in all things going forward. Incidentally, the evidence of the effectiveness of the panasonic conical brush bars on real-world hair lengths and distributions is very weak, and they make no quantitative claims about effectiveness in their marketing, unlike Dyson.

cheesewonton said:
Well I had an example of the Panasonic conical brush roll before the pandemic in 2019. I bought it hoping the neck was compatible with an older Panasonic canister but it was not. It was originally designed for a canister power nozzle and later adapted to their stick vacs.
Click to expand...
Anyone else notice this? When Dyson make necessary changes to their connectors, preventing backwards compatibility with older (and less effective) tools, some very noisy people with the anti-Dyson complex complain until they're blue in the face, slamming Dyson for doing so. Yet, here, we have an example of other manufacturers doing the same thing, perfectly reasonably. But you notice what's absent? The blue faces. Interesting.
 
Vacuum Facts said:
This is another apples-to-oranges comparison with extremely vague contextualisation seemingly intended to be contrarian rather than make a meaningful and valuable point. Incidentally, and ironically, the relevance of suction pressure at the head was dismissed as nonsense by the least valuable, noisy trolls on here, despite the background science underpinning the technology having been established for over 250 years. Yet, simultaneously, it's perfectly acceptable here in this product which is fully consistent with the known science. Tells you all you need to know about those poor sources that are at odds with reality. This isn't the first product that has had bleed relief, since it comes in many forms (including cutouts on the floor plate that have been in many machines for decades). But this does not have front gates to achieve it, clearly. The front gates bring additional advantages—namely avoiding snowploughing on hard floors. There are also many designs of front gates, but not all are very effective, since most are dupes of an originally researched optimal design by you-know-who. Notice how that advert for the panasonic head provided absolutely no test data showing the reduction in net cleaning performance trends with their technology the user has no control over. Also, clamping can be reduced without necessarily reducing suction pressure under the head on high resistance flooring by other geometric design choices, as covered in my lecture. It's also more energetically wasteful relative to motor power reduction to achieve the same head pressure. The maths is covered here. I also love how in the advert, they point out that suction drops with bags. I wonder who cherrypicked to ignore that point...


Who invented conical brush bars for hair detangling has been resolved already on this forum. The evidence available clearly shows Dyson patented conical brush bars years before any records provided by competitors and there was plenty of time for them to copy the idea from when Dyson's ideas first became publicly available. You were spectacularly, and infamously now, unable to provide any evidence whatsoever to your contrarian claims, including that co-development occurred. That was devastating to your credibility in all things going forward. Incidentally, the evidence of the effectiveness of the panasonic conical brush bars on real-world hair lengths and distributions is very weak, and they make no quantitative claims about effectiveness in their marketing, unlike Dyson.


Anyone else notice this? When Dyson make necessary changes to their connectors, preventing backwards compatibility with older (and less effective) tools, some very noisy people with the anti-Dyson complex complain until they're blue in the face, slamming Dyson for doing so. Yet, here, we have an example of other manufacturers doing the same thing, perfectly reasonably. But you notice what's absent? The blue faces. Interesting.
Click to expand...
@Vacuum Facts
1) Right. A well-designed front wall with front gates brings quite some benefits.
2) Panasonic's unswept paths are way worse than Dyson's strip, as there are center gap and possible thickness in edge walls, in contrast to the design of the dual-cones floorhead which is a hybrid of that of hair screw tools and PencilVac's gliding head's rollers, both of which are in turn based on Archimedes-screw design. Oh, and Dyson got there first, too. This is an example of proper R&D.
3) VF, I think I might have figured out why the V16 is crippled out-of-the-box. It's likely because of the data pins in the connectors, communicating between the floorhead and the machine. The machine (at least the ones the likes of you have tested) has questionable tuning due to Dyson's oversight (which is stupid and bordering on reckless, so unlike their previous efforts), and so the V16 uses half the maximum motor power when deep cleaning which is enough to severely reduce cleaning performance to the levels of actual copycats that struggle to work well on cleaning. The solution appears to be covering the data pins with a small piece of non-conductive tape, and I got this solution by constantly correcting Google Gemini 2.5 Pro with the help of your lecture.

@cheesewonton are you even listening to us? And speaking of compatibility... Dyson's new designs dictate a whole new standard of their connectors
 


Not sure i'm a fan of how the V16 empties the bin, at least in this example at 2:41.

It leaves a lot of the larger debris behind on the bin compressor. On the V15 any large debris like that wouldn't be left behind in the bin usually, mostly just finer dust. Which is maybe annoying but kinda unavoidable on a bagless system. (Although if you close the bin and turn the vacuum back on boost you can kinda remedy it, otherwise I just use a swiffer duster on mine) I think they missed a trick by not putting some sort of rubber seal around the bin compressor, seems dust can collect up there, and would have maybe helped the issue seen in the video.
 
Last edited:
Vacuum Facts said:
This is another apples-to-oranges comparison with extremely vague contextualisation seemingly intended to be contrarian rather than make a meaningful and valuable point. Incidentally, and ironically, the relevance of suction pressure at the head was dismissed as nonsense by the least valuable, noisy trolls on here, despite the background science underpinning the technology having been established for over 250 years. Yet, simultaneously, it's perfectly acceptable here in this product which is fully consistent with the known science. Tells you all you need to know about those poor sources that are at odds with reality. This isn't the first product that has had bleed relief, since it comes in many forms (including cutouts on the floor plate that have been in many machines for decades). But this does not have front gates to achieve it, clearly. The front gates bring additional advantages—namely avoiding snowploughing on hard floors. There are also many designs of front gates, but not all are very effective, since most are dupes of an originally researched optimal design by you-know-who. Notice how that advert for the panasonic head provided absolutely no test data showing the reduction in net cleaning performance trends with their technology the user has no control over. Also, clamping can be reduced without necessarily reducing suction pressure under the head on high resistance flooring by other geometric design choices, as covered in my lecture. It's also more energetically wasteful relative to motor power reduction to achieve the same head pressure. The maths is covered here. I also love how in the advert, they point out that suction drops with bags. I wonder who cherrypicked to ignore that point...


Who invented conical brush bars for hair detangling has been resolved already on this forum. The evidence available clearly shows Dyson patented conical brush bars years before any records provided by competitors and there was plenty of time for them to copy the idea from when Dyson's ideas first became publicly available. You were spectacularly, and infamously now, unable to provide any evidence whatsoever to your contrarian claims, including that co-development occurred. That was devastating to your credibility in all things going forward. Incidentally, the evidence of the effectiveness of the panasonic conical brush bars on real-world hair lengths and distributions is very weak, and they make no quantitative claims about effectiveness in their marketing, unlike Dyson.


Anyone else notice this? When Dyson make necessary changes to their connectors, preventing backwards compatibility with older (and less effective) tools, some very noisy people with the anti-Dyson complex complain until they're blue in the face, slamming Dyson for doing so. Yet, here, we have an example of other manufacturers doing the same thing, perfectly reasonably. But you notice what's absent? The blue faces. Interesting.
Click to expand...
Panasonic was selling theirs in Japan as a power nozzle for one of their Japan market canister vacuums before Dyson introduced the fluffy cone thing. Panasonic maybe had to get patents globally to sell outside Japan or to sell it with a stick vac since the idea originated with a canister power nozzle but I had one in 2019 right before the Pandemic and that predates both companies western patents.
 
Absolute Rainbow said:
@Vacuum Facts
1) Right. A well-designed front wall with front gates brings quite some benefits.
2) Panasonic's unswept paths are way worse than Dyson's strip, as there are center gap and possible thickness in edge walls, in contrast to the design of the dual-cones floorhead which is a hybrid of that of hair screw tools and PencilVac's gliding head's rollers, both of which are in turn based on Archimedes-screw design. Oh, and Dyson got there first, too. This is an example of proper R&D.
3) VF, I think I might have figured out why the V16 is crippled out-of-the-box. It's likely because of the data pins in the connectors, communicating between the floorhead and the machine. The machine (at least the ones the likes of you have tested) has questionable tuning due to Dyson's oversight (which is stupid and bordering on reckless, so unlike their previous efforts), and so the V16 uses half the maximum motor power when deep cleaning which is enough to severely reduce cleaning performance to the levels of actual copycats that struggle to work well on cleaning. The solution appears to be covering the data pins with a small piece of non-conductive tape, and I got this solution by constantly correcting Google Gemini 2.5 Pro with the help of your lecture.

@cheesewonton are you even listening to us? And speaking of compatibility... Dyson's new designs dictate a whole new standard of their connectors
Click to expand...
From years of experience using small Japanese market Japanese vacuums including daily use of a Japanese Panasonic, if you put the nose of the power nozzle against a wall it cleans the corner leaving nothing. They clean corners too. The don't leave an unswept area like a lot of big American and European power nozzles do.

The Panasonic power nozzles also have their "Parent and Child" feature. Once you use it you never want to use anything else. Step on the pedal on the lower half of the power nozzle to detach it from the swivel neck. The neck has felt pads on the bottom and you can sneak this between furnishings and walls or between the fridge and a wall where no other nozzle fits. Also works for cleaning hard to reach window ledges.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0308.JPG
    IMG_0308.JPG
    2.7 MB
  • IMG_0309.JPG
    IMG_0309.JPG
    2.2 MB
  • IMG_0424.JPG
    IMG_0424.JPG
    2 MB
  • IMG_0425.JPG
    IMG_0425.JPG
    1.7 MB
  • IMG_0431.JPG
    IMG_0431.JPG
    1.9 MB

Similar threads

V
Bought A Dyson PencilVac From Japan (Review Inside)
Replies
11
Views
3K
Vacuum Facts
Vacuum Facts
A
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
Pick your poison: Main equivalency! Which one would you take?
Replies
9
Views
397
Alan
Alan
Vacuum Facts
Thoughts on the Sebo Balance A1 Cordless Vacuum Cleaner?
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
centralsweeper63
centralsweeper63
A
  • Poll Poll
Who really invented the cyclonic vacuum cleaner?
Replies
21
Views
550
centralsweeper63
centralsweeper63
Vacuum Facts
  • Locked
BrandSpark Canadian Trust Study of Vacuum Cleaners
2 3
Replies
62
Views
4K
Absolute Rainbow
A

Latest posts

Back
Top