So who has seen the YouTube video of captive air technology. I wanted to see what your thoughts where and if you think the 200 watt cleaner could out preform a 1400 watt vac. Possibly we could improve on the idea. Don't know just a thought.
New Vacuum Technology
- Thread starter hooverkid
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
turbo500
Well-known member
if you think the 200 watt cleaner could out preform a 1400 w
That wouldn't be too difficult. I've got a 700w Panasonic upright that pulls in more suction than my Mum's old 1800w Electrolux (US Eureka) upright. With the right design, a cleaner can still perform to a high standard with a lower wattage motor.
That wouldn't be too difficult. I've got a 700w Panasonic upright that pulls in more suction than my Mum's old 1800w Electrolux (US Eureka) upright. With the right design, a cleaner can still perform to a high standard with a lower wattage motor.
I think DESIGN of the machine is the real answer rather than motor "HP" or wattage.Good example--the good 'ol Hoover Convertible vs higher wattage machines built today-the "low" wattage Convertible will beat 'em everytime!!!The Convertible has a simple,short airpath so you don't need a High HP-wattage motor to try to shove or pull air thru complicated airpaths with hoses,twists and turns and such.We can say the same simple things about SIMPLE direct air machines from yesteryear-their simple airpaths win evertime-makes the complex machines of today seem so STUPID!!And of course Kirby,Eureka,Royal upright designs,too--SIMPLE!!IT WORKS!!
thats why
most people or vacuum cleaner fanatics on here, agree that any "direct-air" or "fan first" machine will out clean any bypass "clean air" machine. Short n simple airpaths are the way to clean carpet IMO. Theres no twisted hose or or channels. directly from nozzle, fan, to bag.. plain n simple. but that video is not a bad idea, not knocking it. with two suction hoses on the nozzle is not a bad idea for a clean air vac. but not sure about all that wattage is needed. Im sure the same effective design can be achieved with the standard 12amps, dont you think? Didnt the windtunnel V's have dual suction channels?
most people or vacuum cleaner fanatics on here, agree that any "direct-air" or "fan first" machine will out clean any bypass "clean air" machine. Short n simple airpaths are the way to clean carpet IMO. Theres no twisted hose or or channels. directly from nozzle, fan, to bag.. plain n simple. but that video is not a bad idea, not knocking it. with two suction hoses on the nozzle is not a bad idea for a clean air vac. but not sure about all that wattage is needed. Im sure the same effective design can be achieved with the standard 12amps, dont you think? Didnt the windtunnel V's have dual suction channels?
In response to Design over HP
I would agree that design is more important than HP. I think it was in the 80's or 90's that bigger HP motor where put on vacuums, but all they did was made the machine less efficient rather than clean more.
I would agree that design is more important than HP. I think it was in the 80's or 90's that bigger HP motor where put on vacuums, but all they did was made the machine less efficient rather than clean more.
jade_angel
Well-known member
I think power *can* make some difference, but you do hit diminishing returns.
Obviously the more convoluted the air path, the more power you need to get the same thing done, but there are limits. Does a 1200W Sebo D4 perform that much better than an 865W Filter Queen 95x? Not really, and most of that difference is the power nozzle (Sebo's is really good, FQ's is merely OK). For uprights, I can pretty confidently say that my Kirby Heritage II Legend outcleans my Royal 880 (4.5A motor on the Kirby vs 3A on the Royal). Both of them keep up with a 12A Simplicity 6970 fairly well, too. I'd even say the Kirby does better.
As another example, consider the Hoover Concept One. Only a 4A motor *and* it's a clean-air design - but it's widely regarded as being just as good a deep cleaner as Sanitaire, Kirby, Royal or Simplicity.
On the other hand, some of these wickedly overpowered 2600W canisters (like the Hoover I had when I lived in Italy)? They don't perform any better than a 1000W Tri-Star, really.
Obviously the more convoluted the air path, the more power you need to get the same thing done, but there are limits. Does a 1200W Sebo D4 perform that much better than an 865W Filter Queen 95x? Not really, and most of that difference is the power nozzle (Sebo's is really good, FQ's is merely OK). For uprights, I can pretty confidently say that my Kirby Heritage II Legend outcleans my Royal 880 (4.5A motor on the Kirby vs 3A on the Royal). Both of them keep up with a 12A Simplicity 6970 fairly well, too. I'd even say the Kirby does better.
As another example, consider the Hoover Concept One. Only a 4A motor *and* it's a clean-air design - but it's widely regarded as being just as good a deep cleaner as Sanitaire, Kirby, Royal or Simplicity.
On the other hand, some of these wickedly overpowered 2600W canisters (like the Hoover I had when I lived in Italy)? They don't perform any better than a 1000W Tri-Star, really.
jade_angel
Well-known member
Oh, oops! I was wrong about that then! Explains how it does so well on a small motor, then.
I also feel the Filtrete type disposable bags have improved the efficiency of ANY vacuum design over paper type bags.The Filtrete type have better filtration and efficiency-greater strength,so you can "pack" more into the bag over paper ones that will burst.Direct air machines are especially good at "packing or compacting" debris into the bag.
Similar threads
