I think this is the thread. Correct me if I am wrong -
http://www.vacuumland.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-VIEWTHREAD.cgi?7229
The whole concept of converting a bagged vacuum such as a Kirby into a bagless one seems rather ridiculous and pointless. Those who are buying a Kirby know that they are bagged vacuums, or is one going to pay thousands of pounds for a vacuum in the hope that one day it will be bagless? You see what I mean?
It doesn't take a genius here. Kirbys are bagged vacuums, with airflow and the architecture of the entire vacuum cantered around it using a bag. I fail to see how this man could ever had imagined using a plastic container with a cheapo cone pleated filter was actually a viable alternative. I don't completely dislike bagged vacuums, I just prefer bagless, but trying to make it into something it is not is just wrong, not to mention damaging to the vacuum.
I remember to old cone pleated filters inside the dirt containers on bagless vacuums sort of 8 years ago before they went to cyclonic technology which is obviously more efficient.
As someone mentioned on the thread, if he was serious into doing something like what he was trying to do, why not a system similar to dysons cyclone technology? I think many people will agree Dysons bagless systems are the best in the industry, rightly so considering the patents on it, although other manufactures come close.
I don't know. That is certainly something I would do be into. Buy a bagged cleaner if you like bags, buy a bagless if you don't. Simples.
Have these conversions caught on at all in the Kirby community, dare I ask ?