Dysons Twice the Suction claim - is it true?

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

hi-loswitch98

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2013
Messages
1,123
I keep seeing the advert fir the DC41 on the TV & Dyson claim the DC41 has twice the suction of any other upright vacuum. Is this true in your opinion?
 
No, and I really would take what Dyson claims with a pinch of salt. I hope Miele sue Dyson over some of his claims like a Dyson never loses its suction - it does if the filters get blocked.


Dyson will say anything if he thinks it will increase the size of his bank account, and sadly, many people will believe him, and dash out to part with their hard earned cash.


Suction power is all down the power of the motor IMO, and a Miele S8 at 2200W would develop substantially more suction than any Dyson. I can see this claim could be potentially challenged by Miele, but whether they will is another thing.
 
The thing is, Dyson can claim all he likes. But a lot of buyers are reading up on reviews nowadays because Dyson will keep overpricing the vacuums - and some buyers if not most feel grudged to pay £300 or more "for the best."

Every vacuum cleaner loses suction, including Dyson -why does he keep reinventing ways to stop the inner cyclones from being clogged up?

And even if Dyson's claims can be proved where a bagless cyclonic no loss of suction can provide more suction than any other upright - can that same suction be relied upon for NOT destroying a carpet?

Hi-LO - Claims from vacuum cleaner brands are just pure and simple Claims, although there are some claims that are quite true - cue Oreck with their "lightweight" upright vacs.

Only a few claims ring true but they are very difficult to find a totally, universal agreement for every owner.
 
I know many here do not place value on the results of American Consumer Reports testing, but in the latest tests, the Miele S7260 had airflow through the tool hose equally as strong as the Dyson DC 41(very good). But it outshone the Dyson DC41 in carpet cleaning - "Excellent" versus just "Good." The Miele was also quieter and better at picking up pet hair...
 
Here's what he uses to back up that claim...

"Suction tested against upright market to ASTM F558 <span style="text-decoration: underline;">at the cleaner head</span>, dust- loaded as per IEC 60312-1. Graph reflects DC65 compared to top-performing product for each brand (Shark Navigator Lift Away, Hoover Windtunnel Air, Eureka Air Speed One Turbo, Bissell Cleanview Helix)."

Dyson is getting bolder with his "claims" ("claims" being used in its most frivolous form).

Suction at the floor head means little on a dry pick-up vacuum... If you want suction on your floor, you'd be better off sticking a toilet plunger to it...

[this post was last edited: 4/19/2014-20:38]
 
Hi Beckham, I know a DC04 with a worn brush and clutch is way better than a brand new DC41.

The DC41 I had in for repair has less suction than a DC04, it has a misleading upright lock click, the side ball breaks off, the design is horrid, the handle feels like its going to snap when you use the ball feature and its just a step down from a DC25.
DC25 is better in every way, metal wand, nice and sturdy, great suction and good brushbar, lifts carpets, its quiet, has a proper ball, and its much easier to use. IT is also much more robust
 
I understand it as being twice the suction of the brands he's mentions in the ad on the website. Or does he means all brands of vacuums. This must be when the pre motor filter is clean!

You could say its misleading as it's been reported that Dyson says filters (pre) can cause lost of suction after a time even on their own vacuums hence why they designed the Cinetic.
 
Some points to consider

Now, I am in no way standing up for anyone, but after all that James Dyson has been through with his own products, and given the amount of companies he has complained about to the Advertising Standards Authority, is there anyone reading this who still thinks that Dyson would be so downright stupid to launch an advertising campaign costing goodness knows how many hundreds of thousands of pounds which had such blatantly false claims?

If Dyson are saying that their cleaner has twice the suction of any other upright, then you can bet your life there is an official laboratory test which has all the relevant exceptions and clauses in it which permits Dyson to use the results in this way.

It does not matter whether or not this is relevant to the job which the cleaner is designed to do, what matters is that Dyson are using words and terms which the consumer wants to hear.

Consumers are a fickle breed. Look how many people in the UK smoke cigarettes. Each packet warns the purchaser of the dangers of smoking, and still they ask the sales assistant for 20 more chances to kill themselves. Until you understand that mentality, you cannot really get inside the heads of the general public.
 
DC04 with a worn brush and clutch is way better than a dc41

tayyab I will have to disagree with you, the DC41 has to be one of the best dysons Ive used, its probably there best machine they have made in a long time, they dont have as much suction as a dc04 because they dont need to, the brush roll is very good and those design issues have since been rectified,the only thing I will agree on is the handle as it doesn't feel very sturdy oh well it will be something the user will have to get used to.
 
The claim is misleading.

A casual TV viewer on hearing the claim will assume that the Dyson has twice the suction of any other upright. This is not true. Looking at Dyson's UK website you will see that it was tested against a handful of other uprights, not every upright currently available. Unless Dyson purchases one of EVERY current model to test against the DC41, then the claim cannot be proved.
 
The claim is misleading.

In that case you have good grounds to complain to the ASA. But you will need sufficient proof to back up your claim.
 
Michael, Dyson claims it to be the most powerful vacuum, but why can a DC04 seal to the floor whereas the DC04 can't?
 
Benny, I have been on the ASA's website and will be putting in a complaint. The TV commercial states that the Dyson has twice the suction of any other upright, but they haven't tested it against every current upright on the market. That is misleading in my book.
 
Something I heard on QVC about 3 weeks ago during a Dyson slot....

'It took 60 'engineers' 3 years to perfect this technology'

What technology I thought? getting a carpet clean? filtering the air?

Something electrolux and hoover had perfected to more than acceptable standards.

Didnt mention anything about the cost of the 60 'engineers' that consumers have ended up paying for plus the time and resources they wasted while pratting about with their ELC shapes and Fisher Price shape sorter.

Yes its 60 jobs and thats great, but come on????

Where does this crap end?
 
A bit hypocritical, They stole the Cyclone dust extrction method and shoved it in a vacuum, then they sue Vax and Hoover etc for little things like a plastic box (bin).
 
You can bet your bottom dollar that Dyson buys every single upright on the market and tests it, Even when I worked at Electrolux we did that. Its an important part of the development process. Any one who has worked in the engineering dep at a vacuum company will be able to tell you of the rooms filled with competitors vacuums. ( hoovers Vault ? ) 


 


One thing you guys do have very wrong, Dyson did not steal the idea of a cyclone and put it into a vacuum. He was inspired by the idea but it sure was not simple. Those big industrial cyclones work with positive pressure, They are all but useless at filtering out fine ( like household ) dust. A vacuum works on Negative pressure ( hence vacuum ).


 


 


In-fact dyson didn't use A cyclone he used two ( hence dual cyclone ) and later more. a single cyclone vacuum is all but useless, ever used a Electroluc /Eurek Pet lover ? the filter clogs instantly that is a cyclone vacuum.


 


Love or hate dyson he changed the face of vacuum cleaners forever and that is a good thing, I would hate to see were we would be now had he sold the Idea to Hoover or Electrolux who would have just buried the idea. Engineers were stuck with simply putting in a bogger motor and changing colors. Dyson got vacuum manufacturer to start thinking again, first they copied now they are coming up with their own ideas again. All in all this is a great thing for the consumer 
 
Woodshop-industrial cyclones-Went to two high schools-thus two shop dust catcher systems involving cyclones.First one-at the old Central High School in Rapid City S.Dak-the cyclone system was indeed positive pressure-the debris from the machines and floor sweeps-went thru the suction fan(Direct air)us guys loved to sweep or throw small wood blocks into the floor sweeps and listen to them go CLANG thru the fan.You would then hear the pieces go thru the cyclone.At the base of the cyclone aws a bin for the coarse bits-then a bag filter for the fines.At the new high school-Stevens High-the system was clean air-the motor on top of the cyclone-the debris from the machines went thru the cyclone then to the bin under it-had an air seal.The blower motor discharge blew into a baghouse like filter with a lever you moved to shake the filters to dump the fines into another bin.One of my jobs was emptying both of the units.The new unit the cyclone would be under suction-or negative pressure.Hence the seals for the bin at the base.So the items would no longer clatter thru the blower fan-sort of spoiled our fun!Would love to see the fan in that older unit-thick it was turned by a 7Hp motor.The new one was 5Hp.The old shop had more machines and sweeps.Was trying to remember the brands-think the new one was like "Sea Breeze" or something-old one--Torit.
 
Dyson have been claiming a lot for years and it's not true.

I cleaned the filters on my Dyson DC24 and the suction has improved a lot. The filter on top of the bin gets HEAVILY coated in fine dust from where the inner cyclones have not filtered the dust and in turn this does affect the suction on my DC24, which hasn't the best suction to start with. Shame they never got the design right on the DC24. I have to out up with the brushbar and end cap wearing every 6 months or so and the cleaner head starts to sound like a pneumatic drill and vibrates so much, the brushbar no longer cleans effectively until I put a new one in and then it's quiet again and cleans properly with the feel of suction on the carpet. When it plays up it doesn't seem to really agitate the carpet much.

Dyson did change the face of vacuum cleaners and has a lot of others copying their designs. I still prefer the older models somehow and the only ball machine I like is the DC24 an DC25's. I see no advantage to the newer ones having no release pedal and the plastic wand isn't something I'm keen on.

I do find Dyson uprights good on hard floors but I never really believe Dysons claims anymore like I once did.
 
you believed that crap Dyson told you!?

A Dyson barely has enough suction to begin with! I'm going to have to find an airwatt meter what-you-ma-call-it thingy, and start 'Disproving Dyson!'
smiley-tongue-out.gif



 


ANY and all vacuums are capable of losing suction, especially a Dyson! If you backed a Dyson over with a truck would it still be such a Willy-Nilly suction-keeping vacuum? Nope! David Oreck tested his vacuums the same way, and guess what? The Oreck worked fine! Even the faithful HOOVER could loose suction over forgetting to change the bag after vacuuming up wet cement (hopefully I will remember to change the bag on that U4056S the next time I use it!)
 
In my opinion, the DC01 models to the DC25 are the best. No other.

A Dyson DC07 with the later cyclone will be suitable for Blakaeg because you hardly need to wash the filter, it rarely gets dirty! This is only for the late DC07 models.

Also, the Dyson DC07 and DC14 are the most powerful Dyson vacuums ever made! They have the most suction, and they stick to the floor well. Especially the non clutched models.

The most reliable Dyson DC04 in my opinion is the Silver lime model. They has the good and reliable Italian Ametek motor fitted to it, which is why you dont see many burnt out DC04 lime models. The clutch DC04's do have a good motor, but not as reliable as the DC04 silver lime one.
 
you hardly need to wash the filter, it rarely gets dirty!

That's because all the dust gets stuck in the top cyclones on the DC07 and cuts the airflow that way. The only way to resolve this, is to dismantle the cyclone assembly. Dyson fixed this issue on the DC14 by flipping the root cyclones over, so that the wider end of the cyclone was at the top. The 07 is notorious for blocking up with hair and dust.

Dyson can claim that his cleaners have more suction power all he likes. It's probably true. As Benny pointed out, he's not going to spend thousands suing (sp) other companies for false advertising and then do it himself. But James Dyson is NOT a vacuum designer. He's an engineer. A good one. The cyclone in a Dyson is second to none. But he's knows sweet FA about cleaning a carpet. That's why a 250w Hoover Junior will out-clean a 1200w DC01.

There is far too much focus on suction power, but Mr. D has completely ignored other factors that clean carpets, such as grooming and agitation.

And that's not even considering the fact that consumers are paying £300+ for a cheap heap of malaysian made, leaky creaky plastic and a screaming motor, but don't even get me started on that.
 
I have to agree with you Chris on what one about Mr D focusing too much on suction power! I wouldn't of quite a few years ago as I once believe all what he was about in terms of his vacuum cleaners until I got my SEBO Felix and started to dig deeper into how a vacuum cleaner works in terms of performance etc...

I think his vacuums are becoming to complex and over engineered for what they need to be! He needs to go back to the drawing board and back to basics and design a simple but effective machine. What he has achieved and what he is about and how he and his team of Engineers have improved the cyclone technology over the years and come out with new technology too is great. But the vacuum cleaner is more that just filtering the dust and dirt it's about more than that IMO.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top