EU Ratings

[marcusprit]

Just spoke to Dyson and they tell me the EU test on carpet has to be done with the brushroll off that's why they had to downgrade the rating to a C. When they did the original test they had the brushroll on.
Whether this is true I don't know. But it would explain why the Miele S7 or U1 as it's now called gets a C rating on carpet.

 

[spiraclean]

Hmmm.

The other possibility is that the person you spoke with was stumped by your question, panicked and pulled a semi-plausible theory out of their ass in the hopes you'd believe it. I think you may have guessed that much already.

Really, I wouldn't mind if a customer service rep levelled with me and admitted to not knowing the answer. I'd think more of them if they promised to seek out the correct answer from the relevant person within the company, and then came back to me with the info I needed.

In this sort of situation you're probably better off emailing Dyson, so the question can more easily be passed up the line to those who are qualified to give an accurate answer. On the phone, you can be told all sorts by someone who is trying to quickly think on their feet... at least with an email they can read and re-read it, confer amongst themselves and formulate a sensible response.

 

[marcusprit]

Sorry I should have said it was an email reply

 

[turbo500]

Dyson aren't exactly well known for making truthful claims.

"The worlds first bagless vacuum" - not true


"The worlds first cyclonic vacuum" - not true
"The cleaner that doesn't lose suction" - not true


"Picks up more dust than any other vacuum" - not true


"The worlds first filterless vacuum" - not true


 


I think Spiraclean might be right. This may be a standard response given to the call centre agent/customer service rep and not the actual reason.


 


If this were true, then vacuums with no brushroll off function would, by default, all have higher ratings on carpet than Dyson. And they certainly don't.


 


The reason the ratings fluctuate so much, is because there is no independant, unbiased body set up to test these cleaners and thus no consistency in the testing or test environment.

 

[spiraclean]

In the words of Columbo... Just one more thing.

If what the Dyson rep told you was true (it isn't, by the way), a fully featured upright with brush shutoff facility would automatically be placed at a severe disadvantage against a more basic product that didn't include this feature at all. That would be rather like saying a fixed-power cleaner may be tested running at full pelt, but one with variable power must be run at its lowest setting. Doesn't make sense.

The real answer will lie either in the testing methodology having been changed, whether by accident or design, or simply the newer model being less effective than the one preceding it. Should the latter be the case, good luck in getting them to admit to THAT one.

 

[marcusprit]

That is a good point about uprights with no brushroll with no brushroll off function.
I will question Dyson about that!

 

[spiraclean]

And I see we're all posting at the same time. Chris pretty much nailed it on the head I think.

Moral of the story, take what the adverts and customer service reps say with a pinch of salt. The EU rating system could be a fantastic tool, but only if implemented properly. As it is, manufacturers test their own machines, and there are far too many inconsistencies even within the same brands. Only if the entire process was handed over to an independent testing would I trust it fully, until then it's probably best to only view it as a rough guide. A very rough one.

 

[marcusprit]

I totally agree!

 

[sptyks]

What about CRI?

Well, we have such an independent testing lab here in the US. It's called the Carpet and Rug Institute (CRI) but not very many here on VL seem to agree with CRI's findings.


 


 What makes you think the findings of a similar testing institute in the UK will be believed anymore than CRI's findings?


 

 

[marcusprit]

That's true. We have a consumer company called Which that do tests. I'm not convinced by some of their testing either.
But it will be better than the individual manufacturers doing the tests.

 

[marcusprit]

And the CRI could refine their test results a bit more instead of combining carpet pick up and immisions into one.

 

[parwaz786]

Oh? What was the first cyclonic vacuum then?

 

[turbo500]

What was the first cyclonic vacuum then?

Filter Queen in 1939.

 

[marcusprit]

Well I think we can say Dyson were the first to use multi cyclones.

 

[rolls_rapide]

I think Electrolux had a cyclonic machine years before the Dyson, probably only a single cyclone machine. And there were also those cyclonic interceptor modules for the industrial BVC machines, et al.

Dyson took the inventive step of marrying a low efficiency cyclone and a high efficiency cyclone together.

On-board tools was another feature that had been done decades before. Hoover had patented that one.

 

[turbo500]

well, not entirely. The early models were a pretty much exact copy of huge dust extraction machines used in saw mills for years. Mr. D just shrunk it down and stuck in a vacuum, so he didn't actually invent the cyclone itself anyway. He was the first to use it in a vacuum though.


 


His R&D department have refined it over the years.

 

[marcusprit]

And Rainbow came out with their water filtration system but can you name a bagged or bagless cleaner that doesn't have a pre motor filter? I think Dyson Cinetic is British engineering at it's best.

 

[marcusprit]

Of course he didn't invent the cyclone nature did

 

[parwaz786]

LOL Marcus your funny!
And the DC07 did get invented by JD I guess due to the multi cyclones as stated by Marcus