I'm sorry to go WAYYYYYY off topic....
If used correctly then there is no reason the Kirby should not score 'A' in every category. Certainly in carpet performance without a shadow of a doubt.
I don't want to sound bias at all, but...
To use the DC41mk2 as an example - It has scored 'A' for everything. There is no way that you can tell me that a new Dyson is a better performer than a new Kirby. Yes the Dyson is far more user friendly when it comes to using the tools - nobody can argue that - so please don't think I'm trying to slander one particular brand.
As another user has said, they once owned a Kirby and found the filtration poor.
And you often see youtube videos of people compairing an old machine from brand X against a new machine from brand Z.
For example there are endless videos of users comparing Kirby Legend era machines against much newer Dyson machines ect ect. In some of these videos the NEW machine may come out better - but how worn was the brush in the Kirby? Was the belt old / stretched / genuine? Was the bag empty and a genuine part?
It's what really gets me when people say 'Oh I had one once and it was rubbish'.
Yes, it might of been rubbish by the time you had finished with it, but how old was it? How maintained was it? Fair enough if you owned it from new and it was rubbish from day one. NOTHING in life is going to perform as well as it did when it was new without propper care and TLC.
There is no doubt that a brand new £400 Dyson will perform very well. But treat it like a normal user - don't clean the brush and never clean the filter ect ect and then in two years time when performance is poor replace it with a £50 bagless machine - The £50 machine will perform so much better than the poorly maintained £400 Dyson and you'll go "wow, that Dyson really was cr@p!", when in reality the Dyson would be far superior if it had been maintained.
I think a lot of the comparisons we see need to be done using both machines NEW. It's no good comparing a sparkly new Dyson against a machine thats 15 years old with a million miles on the clock.
From PERSONAL EXPERIENCE my most recent machines, owned FROM NEW within the last year or so have included a Sebo X4 PET, DC39 Animal, DC41 Animal, DC25 All Floors, Miele S8 Cat & Dog, Sebo Felix PET, Numatic Henry (580w eco version and the older autosave version), Kirby Sentria 2, DC33 Multi Floor, AEG Ultra performer & AEG UltraOne AUO8870 with the electro brush. There's probably a few I've missed out. oh I also had a Miele S7 Cat & Dog from new too.
Now they're all premium machines with premium price tags - apart from maybe the Henry and Ultra performer. And can you guess what? In terms of dirt removal and filtration I would say they have all performed about the same. Thats using them in normal domestic circumstances and maintaining them correctly.
From the cylinder machines the two AEG's were without a doubt the best cylinders I have ever used in terms of dust removal. The Ultra performer was a bagless suction only machine but had incredible airflow and pulled out so much fine powdery dust. The Ultra One with the electro brush - WOW - this was amazing. Sadly it was let down by a cheap and nasty feeling hose. I wouldn't say there is a worst performer in the cylinder machines I have listed as I feel the others all picked up just as well as each other.
From the uprights the best machines I have found from what's listed in terms of dust removal have been the Sebo's (I preferred the Felix), Miele S7, DC41 and the Kirby Sentria 2. The worst performer I feel was the DC33 followed by the DC25.
While I feel the actual dirt removal capabilities of the machines was all well and good, the machines differed wildly when it come to build quality, ease of use, carpet grooming ect ect
I currently own the new version Henry and the Sentria2.
The Henry offers me something quick, robust, user friendly, basic, no frilly bits straight forward cleaning with cheap running costs in relation to bags.
The Kirby offers me what I have found to be the best in terms of dirt removal and carpet grooming - however you have to work for the results in terms of faffing about with the tools ect
I can't say there is a HUGE difference in the overall cleaning ability between the Kirby and Sebo machines I have owned. I'd like to think the Kirby performs just that little bit better given the much higher airflow around the brush, but I suppose we each have our own opinion.
And as far as the EU ratings go.... They're a load of Bollo......
The Henry scored 'A' for energy use - as it should do being only 580 watts.
'C' for carpet performance - okay, a bit dissapointing but it is straight suction after all.
'C' for hard floors - Really? Are you kidding me? And yet the upright Dyson scored an 'A'? Wellaye kidda pull the other one!
'C' for filtration - At this point I start smashing my face off a brick wall. The henry has HOSPITAL GRADE filtration. Used correctly with the Numatic Hepa Flow bags there should be 0 dust escape. I'd happily go to town vacuuming up asbestos with my Henry and I'd even inhale a nice gulp of the exhaust air afterwards. Fair enough I wouldn't want to change the bag. How the hell is it only a 'C'?!? Are they basing this on carbon dust emissions from the motor? Surely they must be? Because theres nothing escaping from the bag chamber on correctly used machines thats for sure!
So yes, it will be very interesting to see just what the Kirby is awarded under the new rating system.
lmao
