Europe to cut power of vacuum cleaners to save energy

[borusa]

Europe love to legislate on everything - you would not believe the regulations. Deal with a lot with work but can't argue with the principle.

 

[vintagerepairer]

"Consumers like power". Only because that is what they have been conditioned into thinking. I agree that the power consumption of vacuum cleaners is at stupid-watts now. People have been told that more watts equates to better cleaner. They now need to be re-educated so they can understand what it watt. Terrible pun and I beg your forgiveness. But really, any fool would realise that a car which is capable of travelling only at 120mph would not be a useful tool to have on a day to day basis and the same thinking needs to be ploughed into vacuum cleaning.

I did smile to myself (first time today, probably this week) when I read those comments which James Dyson made, when he said "developing new technology required to improve efficiency can take years". What utter, utter nonsense. One only has to take apart a few Electrolux cylinders from the 1970's period and analyse what made them so darn good, and then recreate it for todays market.

 

[sebo_fan]

Um, well it isn't law yet and I sincerely hope it won't become law, because quite frankly the whole idea is preposterous. I quote from a previous thread here - if a modern day rapid boil kettle uses 3000 watts in one go or an electric hob that uses far greater watts, aren't these kinds of appliances used every day or both in tandem compared to a vacuum cleaner? What is stopping consumers from using a stove kettle on the hob to save money instead of using a separate jug kettle? What is stopping buyers from replacing their standard hob with a lower cost to run efficient induction hob?


 


I think you'll find that the reason exists because of convenience, faster boiling and a far safer approach compared to the metal, non-heat insulated, liable to boil over non-stopping stove kettle. As for the hobs, owners will keep what they have instead of shelling out for something more technologically advanced, uses less power but you still have to buy the pots and pans that can actually be used on the darn thing first!


 


Therefore one would assume that if consumers are using up more electricity than they should be, they should be coerced with brands appliances sporting the older, longer to boil 2.2 kilowatts/2200 watts for kettles and hobs. Still, some would argue that 2200 watts are still too high.


 


Frankly I think the proposal is only just a proposal - the newspaper report dates back to 2010 - so in two years, what manufacturer has brought out a vacuum with the suggested wattage?? Who has taken notice? Not many brands as far as I can see. And, yes there was an Electrolux Powerlite Eco upright (light green, I had one and it cost more than the 1700 watt version when it appeared) with 800 watts maximum. The trouble I found with that vacuum is that it ran out of suck with the synthetic dust bags that it was required to be fitted with and another reason it didn't sell was simply for the fact that it was priced more than the normal version and consumers weren't interested.


 


Electrolux have just brought out a new upright for 2012, the Air Excel Lite and it sports a 1300 watt motor. Still, for a bagless upright with the Vax Mach Air sporting 1200 watts, it is a step in the right direction - even if Sebo have been offering 1300 watts as its highest in their upright ranges - for more than 10 years with the X1.1 having 1150 watts. The older X1 A has 850 watts to 1000 watts.


 


About the only other brand I know who still sell upright vacuums with low watts is Oreck - or are there any others in the UK other than going down the Vintage route? My Black and Decker mains corded hand held with optional floor tool and extension pipes (thus allowing a mini upright vac by design and look) sports 900 watts and it's bagless. Maybe that's the way brands will eventually go.


 


In the meantime my daily driver is still my newly bought Gtech SW02 cordless sweeper - its soft bristles and eager power only requiring charged over night per 2 weeks ensures I have enough power to get around the home. It uses 25 watts to anyone interested! Thus when the vacuum gets taken out, there really isn't much to clean up as a result and only requires to be taken out two to three times a month.


 


Jamie - your posts are being monitored, Id be careful with what you say.


 


 

[this post was last edited: 8/29/2012-20:09]

 

[jmurray01]

"Jamie - your posts are being monitored, Id be careful with what you say." Is that a threat Ryan ?

Indeed Benny, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out what made vintage vacuums so good for so little watts.

It was simple, for a cylinder you had a hose that went into a bag that had a big motor with big fans behind it. Big in every way except power, they only had around 500 watts give or take.

Same with uprights only they used the dirty fan method which could still be used today in a hygienic way with HEPA bags such as certain Kirby models use.

They say you have to move with the times, but why ? When things are fine there is no need to try and improve them.

Ever heard of the phrase "if it ain't broke don't fix it ?" ?

That applies here, vacuum manufacturers are trying to fix non-existent problems by increasing the wattages over and over and over.

What they need to do is turn them down and make the technology better so as to not require a massive power plant for a motor.

 

[sebo_fan]

Its not a threat Jamie, it's a fact.


 


If you had a cylinder vacuum now like the vintage ones with sleigh rails, very little else other than a main floor head and a hose, would you be happy? I don't think you would - infact I think you'd pine for your Tango since that's all you appear to do.


 


Benny made a fair point earlier - consumers have been conditioned to buying high power - but they've also been conditioned to buy other features that outweigh the justification of keeping to the old formula they had such as:


 


A larger dust bag, more features on board such as an auto cord rewind system, tools on board, power settings, different cleaning tools, far more compact designs, easier to store, lighter to carry, telescopic height adjustable tubing, different filter options, longer cords and then different floor heads.


 


Higher power only forms part of that marketing strategy to pull the buyers in. I don't think you could easily live with vintage cylinder vacuums so easily without at least some, if not all of the modern features given above. 


 


I am puzzled as to why you think brands are over complicating things by increasing wattages. All they are doing is increasing power - in the same way that virtually every other product or lifestyle product like car brands do - but unlike other appliances I've pointed out - there really isn't a problem with power usage and high power vacuums - not when kettles, ovens and hobs are used every day.


 


Until brands lower the output on kettles, hobs and stoves, I don't see the problem in producing high motors on vacuums. That fact seems to have passed you by - and a few others on here.

 

[jmurray01]

Actually, I would be happy Ryan, as less is more with me.

I can appreciate luxury and lots of features, but there is a certain attraction to something so simple yet so effective.

By the way, I don't pine for my Tango. You've mentioned your Sebo much more often than I have my Tango, so I'd say you are pining for it, but hey, I'm not getting pulled into such childish antics.

Simple fact is Ryan, people managed to clean their homes just fine back in the 50s and 60s with the cylinders of that day and age. I'm not saying we should go back to being that basic, but I'm saying manufacturers should take a leaf out of the book of history and see that people were once motivated to buy something because of reliability, durability, simplicity and most of all, magnificent customer service in the way of in home servicing, in home pre-purchase testing etc...

These days you go down to Argos and pick up a 2200W Vacuum Cleaner which will scream at you until your ears bleed and break down in 6 months.

I never said that brands were complicating things by increasing motor wattage, what I said is that they are putting them up and up thinking that they are making things better.

Maybe in your eyes they are, but in mine they certainly aren't.

If only they could think "right, lets make something that has a quiet and efficient motor with such a design as to allow it to be just as effective as anything else on the market". But, I doubt they ever will, because there is no money in trying to convince people that wattage isn't everything, so they will "go with the flow".

A flow which is ever deteriorating and giving consumers the absolute wrong idea about effectiveness and power of a Vacuum Cleaner.

The fact is, the two do not influence one another.

 

[sebo_fan]

Mmm yes, all very well if we lived in a solid economy but we no longer do - you can't buy reliable or durable appliances these days unless you pay through the nose for it - and even then the durability isn't as good as it once was - case in point, Miele vacs are very fragile - I managed to damage one last week when I picked up dry, rotten milk in dry, solid form on a hard floor that has stank out my Active Air Clean filter as well as completely destroyed the hose and has left a horrible smell through the motor.


 


"Such childish antics." Oh please, listen to yourself - or rather check the posts where you continuously harp on on about your Tango, Hoover Ranger, Philips and everything else you seem to own. Oh and by the way, the Sebo X1 1000 watt motor has a 67 dbl noise level compared to your Hoover TP2 Auto sense 800 watt motor at 71dbl. How can that be, a higher powered motor is quieter than a lower powered motor - and the Sebo doesn't have extra sound insulation either!


 


You're quite happy to recognise that people from the '50s had basic vacuums and you don't want a return to that, but you want the same kind of customer service, durablity and reliability that the machines of the day - AND THEIR SUCCESSORS thereafter - makes me wonder if you are actually from this time period! Have you got a Tardis? Are you in the right century? Sadly, as consumers we have moved away from all of those concerns - why else do we have disposable pens, disposable shavers, plastic oil based carry bags compared to the woven tweed bags (and Hessian etc), food bags compared to tinfoil or wrapping your sandwiches in grease proof like paper? Because times have moved on - we've been living in a disposable society since the 1970's, possible helped and literally fuelled along by the oil crisis.


 


Effectiveness with any cleaner is in the name - it has to be effective to clean well - thus power is an absolute essential when it comes to how effective the vacuum cleaning can actually be - however it is in how the power is used that defines effective cleaning - and that aspect is lost on future buyers. You're not dealing with a car here, where a lower engine produces a higher fuel efficiency compared to a 2.0 or 3.0 engine. It's just a vacuum cleaner - its just a cleaning device.


 

 

[turbo500]

not to divert away from the topic, but is that a proper cyclonic vacuum from Electrolux??

 

[jmurray01]

Well Ryan, pot call kettle black.

You are wrong there, my two Turbopowers are both 1000W versions (1994 TP1000 & 1999 TP2).

On an off topic note, I feel slightly sick after reading about that milk.

Two things churn my stomach - rotten cheese and rotten milk.

 

[rugsucker]

power consumption

I have noticed that the average customer wants to see a 'big' number written on the vac but has no idea what it means as with the lady who called for bags and told me I would know which vac it was as it said eighty five amps!--I recall a Royal sales folder that quoted someone at a huge Las Vegas hotel saying that to switch to efficient lower amp vacs saved thousands on monthly electric bills.

 

[richardlee1985]

How long will it be before we start seeing 3000w vacuum cleaners. They'll be so powerful you won't be able to manoeuvre them! Ha.

 

[jmurray01]

Well 3KW is the limit for a 13 AMP BS 1363 plug & flex so I'm just waiting for it, shouldn't be too much longer unfortunately.

 

[sebo_fan]

No pot calling here, Jamie - if its 1000 watt version, its rated at 71 to 73dbl - still too loud!

 

[sebo_fan]

Well you'll know yourself Richard - that Miele and Sebo have different rating plates - their machines may be advertised as having 2200 watts but the rating plate usually states lower. 

 

[vintagerepairer]

I can fully appreciate that other factors over the years have drawn customers to newer cleaners, but as the topic was (and I do stress the use of the word 'was') about wattages, it was this aspect I spoke about. I wouldn't say consumers had been conditioned into the likes of telescopic tubes, attachments, and power controls in quite the same way, as these are very much a physical thing, something which people can look at and touch and experience for themselves. They can then decide if this added feature is what they need.

With wattage, it is much simpler. You can't see it, you can't really measure the benefits of it on a factual scale, so the consumer simply trusts in what they think they know and what they've been given to understand, which is that big is better. Notice that Dyson cleaners have never really stated their wattage on anything but the rating plate. I am cutting myself some slack here as I am quite sure someone with a keener eye and better memory will be able to say there was such an attempt at such and such a time, but I speak in the very general sense when I say Dyson have never really advertised the wattages. People still bought the cleaners though, despite have relatively low wattage motors. It is though they are immune from it; as though somebody somewhere has suggested that when choosing a new vacuum cleaner one should purchase a Dyson, then failing one should automatically hunt down the cleaner with the most watts.

I would suggest that the Hoover Freedom 1000 and Electrolux 345 cylinders, and Hoover Turbopower 2 & 3 would be good choices for an manufacturer to study in great detail to decipher what really makes for a good, all round vacuum cleaner. Please note these three models I refer to are not exhaustive, they are just what comes to mind. It's not an attempt to open a debate about every Tom, Dick, & Dyson ever made.

 

[vintagerepairer]

I have to suggest that the day of a 3kw vacuum cleaner will never arrive, for two reasons. One, the cost of fitting flex which was both thick enough to take the loading for long periods and long enough to use would be rather high, and the flex itself rather bulky to use and store in a domestic situation.

Two, I would suggest the heat from the motor would be too great for the plastic casings to comfortably withstand it. Mouldings and casings would have to be minimises and with that comes an increase in noise. In 1994 the Hoover Alpina was being marketed as a machine which was both powerful and quiet. But in designing this cleaner, ventilation had clearly been overlooked and a good deal of early models used to regularly overheat.

 

[whirlpolf]

thank God finally someone is thinking

Without even having read the article:

In the good old days, vacs had like 400 to 600 watts and they were cleaning reasonably well even compared to today's machines.
Then the 80s wattage race came up in the commercials, the miraculous 1 kW being THE holy grail.
Then came Dyson with his patents, blocking all other manufacturers from producing a well-thought-of multiple cyclone. Consequence: They would place their 1400 watts China screamer motors into plastivacs with a cardboard-zigzag wannabe cyclone (Dirt Devil crap vacs et al.)
Consequence: All cheapo vacs went from silly zigzag paper cyclone on 1 kW to silly zigzag cyclone with 2 kW.
Major companies having noticed that went from 2000 w to 2200 or even 2400 here (Bosch etc.).

I am really sick of this cheap-cheap-thrift-bingo race.
Do it the Lux way or the any other good vacuum company way:
A REAL filtration system (no cough-yourself-to-death plastic pans, hello Mr. Dyson) or just devise some good water basin thing (but withOUT rusting of the motor shaft, hello Rainbow!)
A real motor (best magnetic field dispersion through the iron, no China pressed cheapo screamer stuff)
A real good hose, tight gaskets, best swivel joints.
A really good nozzle (fastest air stream close to the surface, no air leaks when on carpets)
Calculation of the best "workability point" in the diagram:
No airstream = highest vacuum load per kig
Full airstream = lesser kg per litres of air stream but highest litres per minute.
Somewhere in between there must be THE working point for any of that specific vacuum cleaner.
No trust in thrift shreaking get-me-deaf plastivacs.


Coming from here any fantastic vacuum cleaner can be made with some mediocre 600 to 900 watts.
Look at Kirby, Lux, Vorwerk and all the others that really CARE about their profession and take pride in diligence to details. It is not about vacuum "brokers" but about "manufacturers" (manum = Latin for hand, factum = made, so hand made)
Even if hand-made may not be practical today, I still request any "manufacturer" to have a "hands-on" mentality regarding customer's needs. Period.

 

[vintagerepairer]

I like that. I would also like to see consumers educated into understanding that it is only really carpet cleaning which requires a reasonable amount of suction power. For all other tasks, like hard floors and surfaces, it is just not needed. In fact, I can recall telling a good deal of my customers who had mostly hard surfaces that the concept of a cleaner like a Dyson which does not lose power was completely wasted on them as power was not what they needed to clean their homes. They would of course benefit from the bagless side of it, but that wasn't the principle reason James Dyson made the cleaner as far as I can see.

 

[fantomlightning]

Really Ryan?

You're complaining about Miele now because you decided to suck up rotten milk in one? Yes I did read that it was dry but thats not something you should be picking up with a vacuum in the first place... Thats not fragility, its user stupidity. But let me guess... You've done the same with a Sebo with no ill effects correct?

 

[rolls_rapide]

Hoover has the "Greenray" machines.

Although intriguingly, the Purepower Greenray seems to have dematerialised from the Hoover website! (I recently mentioned this in another thread).

I want manufacturers to think carefully and design appropriately. I want a lesser powered upright, but it must agitate the carpet properly and remove grit and hair efficiently.

1000 Watts seems about right for clean air uprights and cylinders. Think of the 1980's Hoover Sensotronics, the 1990's Hoover Turbopower 3 and Electrolux Airstream 1000.

Remember too that twin-stage fans gave way to single-stage fans and ridiculous power consumption. Increasing the diameter of air ducts can improve airflow efficiency too.

I just wish that manufacturers would get off their collective arses and instigate changes on their own initiative!