Pick your poison: Main equivalency!

[encorevacuums]

Howard Hughes commissioned Interstate Aircraft to make a vacuum for his TWA airliners during WWII. Interstate Aircraft was owned by a personal Friend of Howard Hughes, a man who co-designed Hughes pre-WWII racing airplanes. Howard Hughes specified the vacuum had to be small enough to fit under an airline seat and wanted it as light weight as possible, hence the use of the Magnalite magnesium-aluminum alloy in the vacuum body.

Compact Model 1s were already in production during WWII. I have an example of one that was made in El Segundo. They were made alongside the Kadet trainer, TDR unmanned bomber and other aircraft components Interstate Aircraft was building as part of the war effort. That plant in El Segundo was closed right at the end of WWII when aircraft production ceased. Interstate Aircraft sold their aircraft production tooling, changed their name to Interstate Engineering Company and moved from El Segundo to Anaheim. I have seen Compact C2s with data tags indicating they were made in El Segundo so that tells me that Interstate had already gone from the vertically split body used on the Model one to the horizontally split body used on the C-2 and all subsequent Compacts and Tristars since before the end of WWII.

If you still insist on claiming that your research is correct then kindly post that here. This is what my research has come-up with each time I google it. This is what I came up with from both "Google & Chatgpt" They both say the same thing. I've already posted that Howard Hughes commissions' Interstate to design a vacuum cleaner that design was the very first Compat design. Compact Model 1S vacuum cleaners were not in production during World War II, as the company that made them, Interstate Engineering Company (IEC), was focused on manufacturing for the war effort.

 

[centralsweeper63]

I wish I can find one some day. They are very elusive over here.

 

[cheesewonton]

If you still insist on claiming that your research is correct then kindly post that here. This is what my research has come-up with each time I google it. This is what I came up with from both "Google & Chatgpt" They both say the same thing. I've already posted that Howard Hughes commissions' Interstate to design a vacuum cleaner that design was the very first Compat design. Compact Model 1S vacuum cleaners were not in production during World War II, as the company that made them, Interstate Engineering Company (IEC), was focused on manufacturing for the war effort.

You have to scroll down a bit but this old LA Times article from July 1945, two months before the end of WWII shows Interstate Aircraft selling their aircraft manufacturing side to Harlow Aircraft to concentrate on making vending machines, small gasoline engines, refrigeration compressors and vacuum cleaners.

"Regarding the sale of the light plane division, Don P. Smith, president of that postwar plans for Interstate will require all available space formerly used fort the manufacture of the Cadet the manufacture of soft drink dispensing machines, refrigeration compressors, vacuum cleaners, a line of small gasoline engines. Paint Concern Orders Extra NEW YORK, July of Sherwin-Williams Co. today declared an extra dividend of 75 cents a share on the common stock in addition to the regular quarterly of 75 cents, both payable Aug. 15 to stock of record July 31."
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/380783049/

Interstate may not have sold a vacuum to the public until 1946 but they were making them for TWA before the end of the war and the examples for TWA mostly likely used different motors designed for the three phase 400 Hz power found on aircraft.

Incidentally Donald P. Smith was among the three other crew members who, along with Howard Hughes, flew the Spruce Goose on its one and only flight.

 

[Absolute Rainbow]

Well, I have no choice but to remake the poll.

 

[Absolute Rainbow]

https://vacuumland.org/threads/pick-your-poison-main-equivalency-which-one-would-you-take.46870/

Well, I have had to remake the thread, because I have no choice left.

 

[Absolute Rainbow]

Now that the new replacement has been locked for being deemed as spam-ish, @royalfan103... if only you haven't "remade" (read: copied) the thread in the first place...

Here's what's the options look like:
- Dyson V16 Piston Animal (and Submarine), the crippled mains-equivalent. This thing is the most advanced ever, succeeding the vaunted Gen5 (should've been named V15 Advanced, but alas) - 315AW (for above-floor and crevices) lighter, have bin compression (CleanCompaktor), PencilVac-styled shroud (patented, dang it!), dynamic Root Cyclone technology (opens up more cyclones in Boost mode), whole-machine HEPA filtration, pro particle counter with proper sensors, and so much more. Normally, it's Dyson's very best machine to date, but at launch, it is crippled out of the box: as @Vacuum Facts and @frickhelm have noticed and the former have found out for real, the machine has been crippled out of the box and has to be fixed either by an easy but warranty-risking modification (as VF have mentioned) or an actual revision. The V16 ships with the new dual-cone floorhead (All Floor Cones Sense) for both hard floors and carpets at once (featuring a new version of the existing green laser), which was mis-blamed for the cripple but only the angled front wall could've posed any major problems (the thin unswept strip at the center isn't as bad as those olden belts in old brush bars, especially given that the big mess tests not being representative of the cleaning performance).
- Samsung Bespoke AI Jet Ultra (and by extension, Bespoke AI Jet Lite), the wasteful flagship. At up to 400AW (Jet mode, not Max (125AW) or Boost (Dyson)), Jet Ultra is the most powerful cordless machine on the market as of 2025, meaning it has excellent above-floor/crevice potential (even the Lite's 280AW Jet matches the vaunted Gen5's Boost mode). The 2025 Jet is also AI-powered, but with more software kick instead of Dyson's more sensors. Two versions of Samsung's new motor performs differently and weighs differently, so we have Ultra and Lite in the same body, with all the same base features except for the batteries (Ultra is up to 100 minutes per battery on Eco, compared to Dyson's 70+ and normal ~60). But the cyclonic system in the Samsung (which finally claimed HEPA, but I'm very unsure of because there's no direct mention of whole-machine sealing) is wasteful, with 3 inlets per cyclone instead of just the perfect 1 like in Dyson's - and the dual-brushrolls floorhead is no less wasteful, not only being bulky and only partially motor-driven (the regular brush bar but not the soft roller), but there's little proper sealing aside from felt strips, and the end result is poorer cleaning performance (as proven by RTINGS). Samsung still also duped from Dyson's revolutionary form factor but ended up being way too front-heavy even for in-line forms (at least Dyson chose gun-ish design)! Ships with the self-emptying station, one of (if not THE) the only true innovation the copycats made over Dyson since the mains-equivalent era started (V10).
- Dreame Z30, the alleged Dyson killer. This 315AW Chinese machine is yet another Dyson copycats with their own motor, and they have nice above-floor and crevice cleaning potential. While not directly as wasteful as the Samsung, the Dreame have somewhat sloppy take on Dyson's pre-Piston designs: hair vanes only on center instead of throughout width, flimsy front gate, clunky take on laser tech, basic bristles, and wrong power consumption on each floorhead, just to name a few. Most egregiously though, is an inferior particle counter, which turns the Auto mode into literally Eco mode that occasionally rush into Boost mode and back with only primarily excessive dust concentration (not to mention inaccurate readings). Worse tools than even Samsung's, which fall shorts of Dyson's (both pre- and onto-V16 Piston with connectors aboard).
- SEBO Balance A1, truly not meant to be mains-equivalent. Sebo's late Dyson copycat looks eerily like a V10, but have inferior specs (only 48 minutes instead of 60? Bruh) and way inferior cyclones and tools. While visually the most similar out of the modern copycats (most cordless dupes are shaped MUCH more like DC35 and V8, not V10 onwards), A1 is actually weak and Sebo rightfully chose not to treat it as anything more than a companion for their corded and bagged machines with asymmetrical-shell brushbar and so on, so forth.
- Lupe Pure, a lost cause with rather curious making. This is a cordless upright with dual brushrolls, with barely cyclonic bin and of course, classical hassle trying to convert into lift-up/portable and back. The fact Lupe is out of business means the Lupe Pure is officially lost to time, never to get any more chance to revolutionize anything ever again.
- Henry Quick, a smiley-face trying to invade the trend. This is an in-line vacuum with a freaking bag. Yep, it's bagged. While it's very easy to empty and can be hygienic, it can smell (what else can explain the Henry pods?) and it will have to be thrown away itself along the content it holds, rather than dumping only the contents as is the case in all bagless designs... therefore, running cost for Henry! Oh, and the specs isn't that competitive (aside from the 60-minute battery), and it's not as environment-positive as it wants you to believe (the trash sucked in the vacuum is the only thing that should be dumped to landfills, not the not-free parts of an entire machine)!
- Any version of Dyson V8, the flagship turned budget vacuum. This one has a pretty long history, dating back to 2016, and had to be refreshed and rebuilt a few times already. Also, while it's compact and feel like ergonomic DC35 at hand with everything so close to the hand, it cannot contain much content at once and it isn't going to be as powerful - only the new V8 Cyclone has the power and efficiency to be able to become mains-equivalent - might as well be a handheld otherwise. That trigger is smart and efficient but can tire your finger in continuous use.
- eufy E20, the space-saving measure itself... not exactly entirely, but the E20 is made to be both a robot vacuum and a stick vac at once. This means small and thus easily less powerful stuffs in the actual machine, just to accommodate this hybrid design. That robot is unsure, while the stick vac might as well be a freaking handheld.
- Kirby, the myth, the legend, the mains-power! From Tech Drive to clunky metals to extremely slow evolution, this thing is actually not worth being in 21st century (Vacuum Facts has good points). In fact, with belt-drive, dangerous weight, bagged shebang and sleazy door-to-door sales, the Kirby is only good for big mess and un-backed shaggy rug - that excessive vibration doesn't count outside of under the brushbar, and so on, so far, blah blah blah... It's very ancient and yet still considered legendary even to this day, to the point of comparing to any cordless sticks? Geez... (If you still like Kirby, sure, just vote for it)
- And the others. Shark, LG, Miele, Bissell, Panasonic, Kenwood, central vacuums, tool brands, and all other copycats of, say, Dyson's DC35 and V10, with either innovations to outdated stuffs or lack of proper R&D. It's a wild-west, and the biggest reason why these count as a single option is because... well, VacuumLand.org maxes out at 10 options per poll.