Tacony Tandem Air Suction Not Too Great

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

We use 240v in the UK as standard.

The MD Silent Master is excellent. I was thinking of getting the model that used to be the S5 with 2 motors. That is extremely powerful with 950 airwatts close to 200 cfm. It's also quiet at 62db.

They now have a true seal bag which is a closed bag that attaches to all 3 inlets and is still tapered like the open bag for maximum airflow.
 
The secret is NOT how heavy a machine is

But it is that the upright can LIFT a carpet from the floor and vibrate it on a cushion of air, Hoover, Royal and Kirby advertised this for many years, The other advantage is that the air does not have to travel long distances thus losing airflow, and its a proven fact that a open face fan moves more air,...doesent have as much suction, but moves volumes more air...This being said,newer carpets are much harder to clean because they backs on many of them are not as porous as they were years ago, so air cant be drawn thru them....and the fact remains, straight suction does a better job on thin carpets that are glued down.
 
The airlift method is fine for carpets that are not fully fastened to the subfloor-many commercial carpets are fully glued to the subflooring-the air lift won't work there-and those low pile commercial carpets have waterproof-airtight backings,
Wish the US would go to 220-240V for small appliances-would actually be more energy efficient.Remember when we say 14Ga cable can carry 15A-thats 1800W@120V-now at 240VDOUBLES (3600W)!!!And look up on the power pole feeding your homes "pole pig"(USA)that little strip of 14-10Ga cable is carrying up to 15A@7500V!!!!Your WHOLE home running off that!That primary cable is like 2-4 ft long-taps to the main overhead MV dist lines.Same with for URD distribution-the cable has to be heavily insulated since it is underground-but the size is the same.Oh yes-the "pole pig" is the distribution transformer that steps the 7500V primary voltage to 120/240V that feeds the house.For URD the ground mount transformer.My neighborhood has URD(Underground Residentual Distribution.The transformer actually powers four homes.Mine and the 3 neighbors.
 
Stan & Bill

Well, I guess this proves you two were totally wrong! Now there's NO WAY you can possibly say a modern canister can't clean as well as a direct-air upright.

Mikko, thanks for doing this test & posting it here & on YouTube. I think Stan & Bill are going to have to eat crow over this one :-)

Rob
 
Rex:


 


At 120 volts a 12 amp (1440 watts) vacuum is plenty of power to clean any home. Remember that a 12 amp 1440 watt vacuum at 120 volts is only drawing 6 amps at 240 volts. The wattage stays the same while the amperage is cut in half at 240 volts.


 


Marcus:


 


To me, it looks like the amount of rice in the glasses at the end of the test is pretty much exactly the same meaning the Nilfisk matched the performance of the Gsix which has 121 CFM. However the Sentria II and Avalir have 137 CFM and my 10 amp Royal 8300 has over 144 CFM so it is highly doubtful that the Nilfisk could keep up with any of those 3 upright vacuums. 


 


 


 


 
 
It will be very close.

As will a central vac with 200 CFM. Admittedly that is 200cfm at the unit.

I bet you weren't expecting that result were you 👍
 
Rob,


 


There's no Crow on my diet!


 As I said in Reply #35, the Nilfisk only matched the performance of the Gsix which is a 17 year old machine that has only 121 CFM. I still believe the Nilfisk would be no match for the much more modern Sentria II, Avalir, (137CFM) or the Royal 8300 (144CFM). So you can put that in your pipe and smoke it.


 


Besides, that model of Nilfisk is pretty rare. How many people do you know besides Mike that actually own one. Do you actually think the average Miele or Sebo canister with any PN can keep up with the Avalir or Royal 8300? 


 


~Stan


 


 


 


 
 
Rob,

Let's take a look at what Mike actually accomplished in this video:

1) With two very, very, very slow completed passes on high, loose pile (and probably rubber backed, non-flow through) carpet, rice was vacuumed up.

2) The G6 is about 120 CFM at the nozzle and I'm guessing that the Nilfisk is about 88 CFM at the nozzle based on Mike's previous hose measurements (108 CFM).

3) The weaker Nilfisk was then used as a reference to vacuum up the remaining rice with 4 completed passes with a bag saver installed.

4) Results were shown and the Nilfisk picked up the same leftover rice on both sides of the carpet.

I could easily duplicate these results with any number of machines when using the weaker CFM one as "the reference." Mike doesn't have a Kirby dirt meter yet so he can't show the results using the Kirby as the final reference machine.

It is also possible that Mike's rice test doesn't require anything very powerful to clean his carpet well. Anything over 80 CFM might just be wasted.

The bag saver also reduces airflow considerably, so when he installed that on the Nilfisk, the CFM probably dropped to about 50 CFM at the nozzle. So Rob, are you ready to jump on the bandwagon that believes a 50 CFM reference canister can prove a 120 CFM upright as equal or even pointless? I'm certainly not.

Looks like I'll have to make a few more videos on my channel...

Bill
 
Marcus,


 


you must have meant that photo in Reply #39 for Rob because I believe Bill has shown him that he is still WRONG unless he can make a video that proves otherwise.


 


~Stan


 


 
 
Mark,

Different carpet types require different machines and I'm sure many people are very happy with the results of whatever type of machine they have. For cleaning various surface debris, my channel has shown that 50 CFM is usually acceptable...except for fine particulate.

So far, I've discovered that high CFM models are largely useless for rubber backed mats...unless you have someone standing on the other end.

For medium pile flow through carpet, high CFM coupled with at least medium agitation works best to deep clean. Since most people (Vacuumlanders excepted of course) don't care or know about deep cleaning, they wait until they hire a truck mount rig and then gasp at how much lighter and brighter their carpets become, all the while still not understanding that if they had a better vacuum, the difference would be minimal.

Bill
 
Now this is getting interesting.

Using Nilfisk with the bag saver to vacuum remains it picked
up from the both sides what it was able to pick up. So how it was able to pick up same amount from the Kirby side, if Kirby did better job?
I still think, that the Kirby G6 is better overall, but Nilfisk came VERY close.
I didn't do this test to cause any conflicts.

Some thoughts:
- this wasn't very accurate test but good enough to show the differences
- Wessel Werk ph has a smaller brushroll opening = better airflow density
- my carpet is flow through (see the picture)
- I have ordered the dirt meter (it should be here soon)
- I said in the test that I am not yet convinced
- My Nilfisk has a quite rare two stage GMD motor (rating
label says type GMI) it means industrial model
- not many canister vacuums can pull 108 cfm from the hose end

mike811-2017060616130701483_1.jpg

mike811-2017060616130701483_2.jpg

mike811-2017060616130701483_3.jpg
 
Mike,

It's good to be skeptical! :)

But it the meantime, since you have flow through carpet, wouldn't it be great to see some flour under the carpet tests?

Some future testing suggestions:

1) Unless you're attempting to prove something rather special, keep the vacuum passes down to 1 or 2 maximum since that's all most people would do anyway.

2) Try to vacuum at a normal speed. Either too fast or too slow could skew test results.

3) As you can plainly see in my videos, even 50 CFM and a soft brush roll can pickup rice. Oatmeal is too easy as well.

Small particle tests can be aggravating to setup but aren't most people interested in how their machine does with fine dust or something similar? To that end, I'm looking onto obtaining some colored particles like sand, etc. and then creating a test that showcases that possibly along with flour.

I'm always rather dismayed at how some people see a video and jump to all sorts of conclusions. Enjoy your new dirt meter when it arrives. I also have one I use periodically.

Bill
 
Bag saver loss of airflow

Very good points there!
I have already made a video how much the bag saver drops the airflow. It's quite dramatic.
In the video it drops from 6 (92 cfm) to something like 45-50 cfm. No wonder why bagless vacuums has a much weaker airflow.
To get more accurate results I have to wait dirt meter to arrive.
 
Nilfisk and the Kirby-from what you could see-they are very close.It would have been better for the tester to weigh the contents of those cups to see who the winner really is.Good that a REAL powernozzle was used with the Nilfisk rathere than the air powered one that came with mine from the Kirby guys van.I would rate the Nilfisk as better to use than the Kirby as a "canister".The Nilfisk is quieter and has more "suction" better for the canister work.
 
I am neutral

Well all comments are welcome for me 😊
For these rugs I keep using the Kirby, because it's so light to push thanks to the techdrive. Canisters (Nilfisk or others) for anything else.
But if would had only one vacuum. It would be the Nilfisk or Lux Royal.
Now people really see (hopefully) Nilfisk potential ☺
 
The Kirby has a lot of good points. Build quality it's a deep cleaner and the tech drive makes it effortless to push.

I just find it to big and bulky to manoeuvre around my home.
 
Great job Mike,

May I ask for the nozzle measurements for the Nilfisk and Shark? I want to finish the interpretation of the results so all can understand your flour tests.

Kirby G6 Nozzle Area: 14.25" x 2.375" = 33.8 square inches
Nilfisk Nozzle Area: Need Measurements From Mike
Shark Nozzle Area: Need Measurements From Mike

As a preview (and guessing based on his video visuals, I'll take a wild guess that both the Nilfisk and the Shark have much smaller openings than the Kirby, say 22 square inches for the Nilfisk and 18 square inches for the Shark (both of these are guesses at the moment).

The CFM density for the G6 is 120 CFM / 33.8 sq. in. = 3.55 CFM per sq. in.
The CFM density for the Nilfisk might be 88 CFM / 22 sq. in. = 4.00 CFM per sq. in.
The CFM density for the Shark might be 55 CFM / 18 sq. in. = 3.06 CFM per sq. in.

Since Mike's carpet has much larger holes, the Shark with it's low CFM was able to get some flour. So Mike's weave might just begin to respond to a 55 CFM machine. My medium pile carpet backing is much more closed off and only starts to respond to about 75 CFM, anything lower just doesn't pickup unless you have an extreme brush roll with ridiculous agitation (Simplicity).

In two slow passes, the Nilfisk is able to come fairly close to the Kirby partly because the CFM is fairly high but also because the CFM density is high. That's the upside. The downside is that with the nozzle being significantly smaller, it will take significantly longer to vacuum large areas. For example, if the Kirby takes 40 minutes, the Nilfisk make take 60 minutes to finish the same square footage.

Some people will say that the Nilfisk is insignificantly different than the Kirby. I'll ask them this question then: If a vacuum constantly leaves 2% behind when you use it, how much will accumulate over time? Since everyone is in a hurry these days and vacuums as fast as possible and no more than 1-2 passes in one area, what will eventually be the result?

Much thanks again Mike for this video. And your bare floors look much better than my concrete ones.

Bill

wyaple-2017060709253508733_1.jpg

wyaple-2017060709253508733_2.jpg
 
I got the 15ft hose and tool set for mine

Its the non-stretch long hose that they sell for the clean air uprights, but instead of the tapered cuff on the machine end, its got the same end as the onboard stretch hose. I've found I get far better performance using it this way for tools. It won't really turn a turbo brush well on the stretch hose, but it'll quite nicely run it on the 15ft hose, longer, BUT it has a larger inner diameter, and a scooter inside than the stretch hose.
 
Bill

After watching your flour under the carpet tests I agree, that my carpet was easier for the vacuums.
For me differences in the nozzle sizes doesn't really matter (small areas)

Here are the nozzle measurements and my cfm ratings:

Wessel Werk ph 11.8 x 1.8 inches
Shark 9.8 x 1.6 inches

These are from the hose end.
Nilfisk 108 cfm
Shark 62 cfm

Thank you for calculating these things for me!
 
Thanks for the nozzle specs Mike

Updated Nozzle Areas:
Kirby G6: 14.25" x 2.375" = 33.8 square inches
Wessel Werk: 11.8" x 1.8" = 21.2 square inches
Shark: 9.8" x 1.6" = 15.7 square inches

So the CFM density calculations become:
Kirby G6 is 120 CFM / 33.8 sq. in. = 3.55 CFM per sq. in.
Wessel Werk is 88 CFM / 21.2 sq. in. = 4.15 CFM per sq. in.
Shark is 51 CFM (Est.) / 15.7 sq. in. = 3.25 CFM per sq. in.

Mike, my 51 nozzle CFM estimate for the Shark comes from examining my growing database of bag-less uprights and using an average percentage drop from hose end to nozzle end.

CONCLUSIONS:

Since Mike's rug is not only shag (low density pile), but also has very large flow-through holes as seen in his videos, very, very low CFM machines can pull small particulate from the bottom fairly easily. And since the pile is not dense on top, rice can be pulled from low CFM bag saver crippled machines.

For those who think the Nilfisk/Wessel Werk combo nearly matched the Kirby consider this: The G6 picked up more fine particulate over a 33.8/21.2 => 59% larger area. And it did it with about 14% lower CFM density. This is a HUGE difference when you look at the mathematics.

As far as the Shark goes, the only way this low CFM machine can barely deep clean at all is because of the very tiny nozzle size. Dyson has pulled this trick with the DC25 and DC65.

Dyson DC25 has 57 nozzle CFM and a density of 3.37 (tiny nozzle)
Dyson DC65 has 52 nozzle CFM and a density of 2.33 (large nozzle)

Hopefully, this clears up many questions and observations regarding Mike's flour video.

Bill
 

Similar threads

Vacuum Facts
Why is airflow always measured?
2
Replies
59
Views
3K
Absolute Rainbow
A
C
I've been Metrovac'ed
Replies
3
Views
378
cheesewonton
C
A
Dirt Devil FeatherLite bagged uprights— direct air models VS bypass **HELP NEEDED**
Replies
2
Views
238
human
human
A
Vacuum plugs getting so hot they’re warping/melting! **HELP**
Replies
20
Views
759
royalfan103
royalfan103
niclonnic
Most unpleasant-sounding vacuum ever?
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
cheesewonton
C

Latest posts

Back
Top