Tacony Tandem Air Suction Not Too Great
- Thread starter shrink1982
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
kirbysthebest
Well-known member
Why Chocolate Chip?
Do you have something against Oatmeal Raisin? Oreos. you could have Oreos.
Do you have something against Oatmeal Raisin? Oreos. you could have Oreos.
kirbysthebest
Well-known member
We have two votes for Oreo.
Something wrong with sugar cookies? Haha
wyaple
Well-known member
It's Settled Then...
Monday is Oatmeal Raisin
Tuesday is Chocolate Chip
Wednesday is Oreos, lots of Oreos
Thursday is Sugar
Friday must be Pizza then?
Bill
Monday is Oatmeal Raisin
Tuesday is Chocolate Chip
Wednesday is Oreos, lots of Oreos
Thursday is Sugar
Friday must be Pizza then?
Bill
kirbysthebest
Well-known member
What kind of pizza?
Whichever kind makes the most crumbs! I've installed a new bag in the sweeper, so eat up!
That would make Saturday Pot Roast day and Sunday is Milkshakes and malts, yes? I'll crank up the oven!
kirbylux77
Well-known member
Ha! I knew it! I am claiming victory on this once and for all!
Bill - We now have 2 videos, done by another Vacuumland member who has NOTHING to gain over this, that has proven you & Stan are WRONG. You can make claims & deny all you want. You, Bill, are grasping at straws here, & you know it. I think it's about time to give in, admit defeat, & admit you were wrong on this topic. And, might I also add, being foolish for making such a claim without being smart enough to test a modern canister to validate your own statements.
Make all the claims you want about Mikko's rug being low density pile & large flow through holes, that's a bunch of BS & you know it! And again, claiming the Kirby picked up all that fine particulate with a nozzle opening 59% larger & 14% less CFM density. If you're going to use claims like that to prove a direct air upright is so much better, consider this....not only did that Nilfisk canister leave only about 1% or 2% more flour behind, it did it with (according to you) less CFM, AND to boot losing some of that CFM through the hose, wand & powerhead connections. I find that impressive in itself.
As for your claims on Mikko's first test with rice....Well, I would take a machine that has only 50 CFM with the Bag Saver attachment. Your Hoover TurboPower 5000 surface debris test video shows that you can still have decent cleaning with low CFM. Even Mikko's final video with the flour under the rug shows a Shark upright with (according to Bill) 51 CFM, possibly slightly higher, cleans just as well. So, yes, I will jump on the bandwagon that a low 50 CFM machine can clean just as well as a 120 CFM machine. Bill, you seem to forget there are numerous other factors at play BESIDES high CFM that determine how well a vacuum deep cleans: Bag & bag chamber design, nozzle design & how stiff the brushes are, how restrictive the exhaust filter is, etc.
As for using the Bag Saver on the Nilfisk being inaccurate to determine how much was really left behind, & the Kirby with a Dirt Meter installed being a more accurate way to determine what was left behind due to it's higher CFM rating? Well, that might hold true if the Kirby Dirt Meter pads were made of HEPA Cloth material, not paper. The Dirt Meter, due to it's paper pad, even when the pad is clean & new, drastically reduces it's performance; I would say it drops the airflow on a Kirby Avalir from 137 CFM down to somewhere around 95-100 CFM. Also, it's a well known fact the Dirt Meter & paper pad robs a Kirby of it's performance while in use....go ahead & watch a couple YouTube videos of it in use, & it's clear how quickly the Kirby loses it's power. Therefore, using the Kirby with a Dirt Meter & paper pad installed would NOT be a accurate way of picking up the rest of the dirt left behind from each carpet, & to determine which vacuum cleaned better. In fact, despite the lower airflow the Nilfisk with the Bag Saver installed would have, it would actually be superior for this type of test, since there is NO filter to clog whatsoever.
Finally, I think one thing that everyone has ignored here, is that Mikko's Nilfisk canister is actually a pretty old, outdated model by today's standards, I believe it is most likely from the late 90's/early 2000's by the look of it. And, it is only average power at best....the current Nilfisk Museum Vacuum line the company currently produces only produces about 85" to 90" waterlift, which would explain Mikko saying it pulls 109 CFM, a current Miele C3 canister in comparison pulls 100" waterlift & 145 CFM. So, obviously a newer model canister, such as a Miele, Riccar/Simplicity, Sebo, Lindhaus, Aerus, Perfect or Kenmore would fare much better in the flour under the rug test. Bill, even your old Electrolux Olympia fared decently in your own flour under the rug test....if it had a PN5 or PN6 with the new style 10 degree brushroll, it would have fared even better, & most likely would have aced your test.
Stan - As for your assertion that the Kirby G6 is outdated & having only 121 CFM, & the Sentria II & Avalir being more modern & having 137 CFM & your Royal 8300 having 144 CFM? Well, that would be easily overcome if Mikko had flipped up the headlight & inserts a small pocket-sized flat blade screwdriver to activate the top speed switch & make the G6 run in HIGH tool speed mode during testing. That HIGH speed should EASILY make the G6 match or exceed the Sentria II, Avalir or Royal 8300's performance levels. The only variable we don't know, & only Mikko can answer this, is whether his Kirby G6 has the older chevron brushroll or the newer oblique style brushroll with stiffer bristles. But, again, that too is easily overcome if Mikko puts the brushroll endcaps in the 3rd wear setting so they provide the maximum agitation that brushroll can allow. So, that blows your claim of the Kirby G6 being outdated & not a fair comparison to a modern Kirby right out of the water. Besides, let's be realistic - the average consumer is likely going to have a older Kirby G Series machine to use at home anyways.
So ya know what boys? At the end of the day, the ONLY thing you have proven is you both are a couple of stubborn old men, standing behind old, outdated technology, & making ridiculous claims. And, when proven wrong, come up with petty excuses to defend yourselves & make yourselves look good.
Bill, you want to redeem yourself & those idiotic claims you have made? Then put your money where your mouth is, buy yourself a modern canister & do the test on YOUR rug which you claim would produce more accurate test results with the under the flour test. I DARE YOU to go ahead, get a Miele or Riccar/Simplicity canister that is a current model, & prove me wrong! We all know here you don't have the guts to do it, because you KNOW I am right & you'll wind up with egg on your face.
Rob
Bill - We now have 2 videos, done by another Vacuumland member who has NOTHING to gain over this, that has proven you & Stan are WRONG. You can make claims & deny all you want. You, Bill, are grasping at straws here, & you know it. I think it's about time to give in, admit defeat, & admit you were wrong on this topic. And, might I also add, being foolish for making such a claim without being smart enough to test a modern canister to validate your own statements.
Make all the claims you want about Mikko's rug being low density pile & large flow through holes, that's a bunch of BS & you know it! And again, claiming the Kirby picked up all that fine particulate with a nozzle opening 59% larger & 14% less CFM density. If you're going to use claims like that to prove a direct air upright is so much better, consider this....not only did that Nilfisk canister leave only about 1% or 2% more flour behind, it did it with (according to you) less CFM, AND to boot losing some of that CFM through the hose, wand & powerhead connections. I find that impressive in itself.
As for your claims on Mikko's first test with rice....Well, I would take a machine that has only 50 CFM with the Bag Saver attachment. Your Hoover TurboPower 5000 surface debris test video shows that you can still have decent cleaning with low CFM. Even Mikko's final video with the flour under the rug shows a Shark upright with (according to Bill) 51 CFM, possibly slightly higher, cleans just as well. So, yes, I will jump on the bandwagon that a low 50 CFM machine can clean just as well as a 120 CFM machine. Bill, you seem to forget there are numerous other factors at play BESIDES high CFM that determine how well a vacuum deep cleans: Bag & bag chamber design, nozzle design & how stiff the brushes are, how restrictive the exhaust filter is, etc.
As for using the Bag Saver on the Nilfisk being inaccurate to determine how much was really left behind, & the Kirby with a Dirt Meter installed being a more accurate way to determine what was left behind due to it's higher CFM rating? Well, that might hold true if the Kirby Dirt Meter pads were made of HEPA Cloth material, not paper. The Dirt Meter, due to it's paper pad, even when the pad is clean & new, drastically reduces it's performance; I would say it drops the airflow on a Kirby Avalir from 137 CFM down to somewhere around 95-100 CFM. Also, it's a well known fact the Dirt Meter & paper pad robs a Kirby of it's performance while in use....go ahead & watch a couple YouTube videos of it in use, & it's clear how quickly the Kirby loses it's power. Therefore, using the Kirby with a Dirt Meter & paper pad installed would NOT be a accurate way of picking up the rest of the dirt left behind from each carpet, & to determine which vacuum cleaned better. In fact, despite the lower airflow the Nilfisk with the Bag Saver installed would have, it would actually be superior for this type of test, since there is NO filter to clog whatsoever.
Finally, I think one thing that everyone has ignored here, is that Mikko's Nilfisk canister is actually a pretty old, outdated model by today's standards, I believe it is most likely from the late 90's/early 2000's by the look of it. And, it is only average power at best....the current Nilfisk Museum Vacuum line the company currently produces only produces about 85" to 90" waterlift, which would explain Mikko saying it pulls 109 CFM, a current Miele C3 canister in comparison pulls 100" waterlift & 145 CFM. So, obviously a newer model canister, such as a Miele, Riccar/Simplicity, Sebo, Lindhaus, Aerus, Perfect or Kenmore would fare much better in the flour under the rug test. Bill, even your old Electrolux Olympia fared decently in your own flour under the rug test....if it had a PN5 or PN6 with the new style 10 degree brushroll, it would have fared even better, & most likely would have aced your test.
Stan - As for your assertion that the Kirby G6 is outdated & having only 121 CFM, & the Sentria II & Avalir being more modern & having 137 CFM & your Royal 8300 having 144 CFM? Well, that would be easily overcome if Mikko had flipped up the headlight & inserts a small pocket-sized flat blade screwdriver to activate the top speed switch & make the G6 run in HIGH tool speed mode during testing. That HIGH speed should EASILY make the G6 match or exceed the Sentria II, Avalir or Royal 8300's performance levels. The only variable we don't know, & only Mikko can answer this, is whether his Kirby G6 has the older chevron brushroll or the newer oblique style brushroll with stiffer bristles. But, again, that too is easily overcome if Mikko puts the brushroll endcaps in the 3rd wear setting so they provide the maximum agitation that brushroll can allow. So, that blows your claim of the Kirby G6 being outdated & not a fair comparison to a modern Kirby right out of the water. Besides, let's be realistic - the average consumer is likely going to have a older Kirby G Series machine to use at home anyways.
So ya know what boys? At the end of the day, the ONLY thing you have proven is you both are a couple of stubborn old men, standing behind old, outdated technology, & making ridiculous claims. And, when proven wrong, come up with petty excuses to defend yourselves & make yourselves look good.
Bill, you want to redeem yourself & those idiotic claims you have made? Then put your money where your mouth is, buy yourself a modern canister & do the test on YOUR rug which you claim would produce more accurate test results with the under the flour test. I DARE YOU to go ahead, get a Miele or Riccar/Simplicity canister that is a current model, & prove me wrong! We all know here you don't have the guts to do it, because you KNOW I am right & you'll wind up with egg on your face.
Rob
kirbylux77
Well-known member
Stan & Bill
Now, I see that Marcus has produced a lovely plate of crow for you to eat. What would you like with it? And how about dessert? I think a good helping of Humble Pie might be just the right dessert for the pair of you.
Rob
Now, I see that Marcus has produced a lovely plate of crow for you to eat. What would you like with it? And how about dessert? I think a good helping of Humble Pie might be just the right dessert for the pair of you.
Rob
kirbylux77
Well-known member
I have a few more constraints for Mikko's future testing:
1. There must be a full moon out, & it must also be raining & thunder & lightning.
2. There must be a episode of Jerry Springer & Maury airing at the exact same time across the world, with cheating couples & baby paternity tests being the topics.
3. There must be a Scotsman wearing a plaid kilt present to witness the tests.
Rob
1. There must be a full moon out, & it must also be raining & thunder & lightning.
2. There must be a episode of Jerry Springer & Maury airing at the exact same time across the world, with cheating couples & baby paternity tests being the topics.
3. There must be a Scotsman wearing a plaid kilt present to witness the tests.
Rob
wyaple
Well-known member
Rob,
I may or may not respond to your rant tomorrow as many of your claims simply don't make sense and personally I am amazed that you have gone on the attack like you have something to gain. Very childish behavior this "old man" thinks.
I'll leave you to chew on this then. You claim that a Miele C3 has 145 CFM. That is incorrect and I have posted this elsewhere. Usable airflow from a very expensive C3 is in the 85-89 CFM range at the nozzle.
I have spent much of my free time doing something that no one in the entire world has done as far as I can tell. Build an airflow box and do actual measurements. Decode the infamous Baird meter and introduce the idea of airflow density. If you don't like seeing the truth and having a scientific discussion, you don't have to engage in the conversation.
I have no problem at all leaving Vacuumland and keeping my journey to create a database of extensive measurements to myself. Let's see what others have to say about your rant my friend.
Bill
I may or may not respond to your rant tomorrow as many of your claims simply don't make sense and personally I am amazed that you have gone on the attack like you have something to gain. Very childish behavior this "old man" thinks.
I'll leave you to chew on this then. You claim that a Miele C3 has 145 CFM. That is incorrect and I have posted this elsewhere. Usable airflow from a very expensive C3 is in the 85-89 CFM range at the nozzle.
I have spent much of my free time doing something that no one in the entire world has done as far as I can tell. Build an airflow box and do actual measurements. Decode the infamous Baird meter and introduce the idea of airflow density. If you don't like seeing the truth and having a scientific discussion, you don't have to engage in the conversation.
I have no problem at all leaving Vacuumland and keeping my journey to create a database of extensive measurements to myself. Let's see what others have to say about your rant my friend.
Bill
How about
Everyone use what they like!!!I use a straight suction machine most of the time, Everyone thinks straight suction WONT deep clean....WRONG, its amazing just how much grit and sand I can pull behind any upright or power nozzle.Right now I have a 541 Hoover, a 825 Hoover and a 68 Convertible in the house, I can vacuum the hall and bedrooms 50 times with all of them, then come behind with my C-7 Compact or my Lewyt 120 and get up a bunch of fine sand, point being no ONE vacuum of any type gets ALL the dirt out of ANY carpet...and, older carpets are much easier cleaned than new because of the backing, my wool rug in the living room is thick and dense but it has the old fashioned backing , you can run any machine over it and feel air going thru if you put your hand under it.
Everyone use what they like!!!I use a straight suction machine most of the time, Everyone thinks straight suction WONT deep clean....WRONG, its amazing just how much grit and sand I can pull behind any upright or power nozzle.Right now I have a 541 Hoover, a 825 Hoover and a 68 Convertible in the house, I can vacuum the hall and bedrooms 50 times with all of them, then come behind with my C-7 Compact or my Lewyt 120 and get up a bunch of fine sand, point being no ONE vacuum of any type gets ALL the dirt out of ANY carpet...and, older carpets are much easier cleaned than new because of the backing, my wool rug in the living room is thick and dense but it has the old fashioned backing , you can run any machine over it and feel air going thru if you put your hand under it.
Just few notes.
My Nilfisk GM80 is made in 1985. Motor is twin fan 1100w (9 amps)
I have measured the airflow and suction from the hose end.
Those results are: 108 cfm and 2400 mmH2O of suction (waterlift over 100)
Sebo and Miele cfm specs are measured straight from the motor. So those are unrealistic numbers.
My rice pick up test was a deep clean test, because my rug is high pile and I worked rice in to the pile. After that rice was mostly invisible.
My experience has shown that especially the sawdust is very hard to clean from my rug. Even Kirby has difficulties with it.
My Nilfisk GM80 is made in 1985. Motor is twin fan 1100w (9 amps)
I have measured the airflow and suction from the hose end.
Those results are: 108 cfm and 2400 mmH2O of suction (waterlift over 100)
Sebo and Miele cfm specs are measured straight from the motor. So those are unrealistic numbers.
My rice pick up test was a deep clean test, because my rug is high pile and I worked rice in to the pile. After that rice was mostly invisible.
My experience has shown that especially the sawdust is very hard to clean from my rug. Even Kirby has difficulties with it.
Guys this is just a discussion about vacuum cleaners. I enjoy these discussions very much. There doesn't need to be any bad feeling.
Let's keep it civil and light hearted.
I would like to see Bill do the test with a Miele or Riccar. Maybe someone could loan him one for a weekend?
Let's keep it civil and light hearted.
I would like to see Bill do the test with a Miele or Riccar. Maybe someone could loan him one for a weekend?
kirbysthebest
Well-known member
I agree with Marcus and Hans
Use what you like the most.
The BEST vacuum, is the one that you like and that you use. In the end they all suck dirt off the floor and capture it in some manner.
Pizza--Crispy crust, lots of sprinkle cheese.
Use what you like the most.
The BEST vacuum, is the one that you like and that you use. In the end they all suck dirt off the floor and capture it in some manner.
Pizza--Crispy crust, lots of sprinkle cheese.
sptyks
Well-known member
Well Rob,
I have never seen so much HOT AIR expelled by one sore loser such as yourself. I think there is enough Hot Air in that desperate long winded reply to fill a Hot Air Balloon that would lift four people for a long ride. I would have to agree with Bill that your long winded, non factual reply was very childish indeed. By the way, I own a Kirby Dirtmeter and the pads ARE NOT made of paper, they are made of the same filterette material used to make HEPA bags. They DO clog quickly and are designed to be used to make only 2 or 3 short passes before examining the results and then replacing the pad.
We all use the vacuum cleaners we like the best, but Bill's extensive tests not only help to satisfy our curiosity by informing us collectors how other brands of cleaners perform, but he also provides valuable information to anyone who is researching which machine to purchase for use in their own home or business.
So Bill, I hope you will continue to do these tests on more and more machines as you are able to acquire them and continue to post the results here on Vacuumland. I for one have subscribed to your Vaclab channel on You Tube and enjoy watching your videos very much.
I have never seen so much HOT AIR expelled by one sore loser such as yourself. I think there is enough Hot Air in that desperate long winded reply to fill a Hot Air Balloon that would lift four people for a long ride. I would have to agree with Bill that your long winded, non factual reply was very childish indeed. By the way, I own a Kirby Dirtmeter and the pads ARE NOT made of paper, they are made of the same filterette material used to make HEPA bags. They DO clog quickly and are designed to be used to make only 2 or 3 short passes before examining the results and then replacing the pad.
We all use the vacuum cleaners we like the best, but Bill's extensive tests not only help to satisfy our curiosity by informing us collectors how other brands of cleaners perform, but he also provides valuable information to anyone who is researching which machine to purchase for use in their own home or business.
So Bill, I hope you will continue to do these tests on more and more machines as you are able to acquire them and continue to post the results here on Vacuumland. I for one have subscribed to your Vaclab channel on You Tube and enjoy watching your videos very much.
sptyks
Well-known member
Mike,
I am glad you got your Dirtmeter. I have owned one for a couple of years now. You will have fun retesting all of your vacuum cleaners and using your Kirby Gsix with Dirtmeter to find out which ones have the best cleaning performance.
I will look forward to watching any new videos you make using your new Kirby Dirtmeter.
I am glad you got your Dirtmeter. I have owned one for a couple of years now. You will have fun retesting all of your vacuum cleaners and using your Kirby Gsix with Dirtmeter to find out which ones have the best cleaning performance.
I will look forward to watching any new videos you make using your new Kirby Dirtmeter.
Similar threads
