What Did Any Of You Think Of The DC01 When It Was Released?

[turbo500]

doesn't it defeat the purpose of having an upright to ha

especially as the DC04 De Stilj had brush controls, so the brush could be turned off.

 

[alexhoovers94]

Asking mum again, she said the instruction manual did mention the floor tool but only as an optional extra. I was wrong by the way, from checking with her, she bought it a little time after it was put on sale. I was under the impression the box was white with a picture of the DC01 De Stijl and a picture of the floor tool in the corner, but she confirmed the box was just brown cardboard with black writing.
They used to use brown cardboard boxes a litlle while ago. before changing to the black boxes they use now.
Maybe it did have something to do with the freemans stock, although when she bought her Sebo X4 extra in 2007 it did not come with the extra stairhose it said it was to come with.
Maybe my mum just had bad look with her extra tools, lol.

Needless to say - my mum bought the stairhose, duop, turbo brush and sebo air freshners separately, along with the Sebo itself it caame to a whopping
£298

 

[jmurray01]

Oh my goodness, Dyson really didn't think things through did they!?

 

[vintagerepairer]

Having the brush control for hard floors would defeat the object of a floor tool at all for hard surfaces, technically. However I have never been keen on the idea of pushing an upright cleaner over a hard floor, brushes spinning or not. I like a brush on the hose.

 

[vintagerepairer]

Alex, the brown box was the one which Dyson sent her. That was how all Dyson-sent stock arrived. The original DC01 D S box for retail stock was white, which a picture of the cleaner and details & pictures about the De Stijl movement.

 

[jmurray01]

So do I Benny, when I use an upright I like to feel some resistance but on hard flooring it just rolls over the floor and doesn't feel like it is doing anything. In fact, it ISN'T doing anything in most cases.

 

[vintagerepairer]

Well it could be pushing grit into the surface. Which is why I don't likethe idea.

 

[jmurray01]

That's true, if the sole plate is touching the floor even in the slightest it could be scratching the floor.

I much prefer a floor tool with protruding brushes.

 

[rolls_rapide]

Hoover Triple Vortex

The Hoover Triple Vortex went on sale at around Easter 1999. The Which? magazine tested it and thought that it was a worthy competitor to the Dyson. I think they tested the "S-Class filter" model, in red and black, V2001(?), as opposed to the basic V2000 with foam filters.

The Dyson DC01 was a poorly designed specimen. The plastics were too flimsy, the suction was thoroughly dreadful, and the machine was far too bulky to get under furniture. I had experience of a friend's daughter's DC01 (no suction - filter was clogged). I had two DC01 Absolutes; one was a replacement for the other. The plastic lower motor cover shattered on both near the wheel axle. A De Stijl model followed, but the HEPA filter split after a couple of months.

The only saving grace was it's ability to remove fluff and dog hair from carpet tiles. It's a pity that the suction from the soleplate was so dire, and that the "dirt tube inspection flaps" let grit fall out when the machine was switched off. Hideously dreadful emptying palaver too.

The Triple Vortex was a complete joy to use, in comparison.

 

[vintagerepairer]

Rolls_rapide; I would quite like to disagree with all of what you have said there. But I can't. How could I when it is so damn true?

I often wonder if James Dyson knows how very lucky he was to have been as successful as he has been. I have no doubt for a second that his life was hard, frustrating, and all the rest of it, but to have launched an unknown brand of expensive, flimsy cleaner into a market saturated by brand loyalty and quality standards far, far greater than that of the product he was offering, was just absurd. I am genuinely pleased for him that it was a success, but this has to be largely due to the fickle nature of the UK consumers who first liked his new fangled gadget, followed by those hollow UK consumers who had to have what "her nextdoor" had brought home, with a few UK consumers who thought the cleaner was actually rather genuinely a bit better than most, and not because his product was the most amazing thing since vacuum cleaners were invented.

Unfortunately, it seems to be the latter which James Dyson does believe to be the case. He was very, very lucky to be able to sell such a poor quality product and win the consumers over at the same time. I also think that if there hadn't been so much poor quality bagless competition in the 2000's, Dyson would not have done so well. The very fact that all the other brands jumped straight onto the bagless bandwagon with their cheap, nasty cleaners, did little else but make the Dysons looked like the cream of the crap.

 

[sebo_fan]

Well Benny, the same could be said for Gtech's venerable cordless sweeper - there was very little on the market before it - and it was hardly well built. Buyers bought it because it is far easier to push and pull than a conventional dust sweeper and then the Swivel Sweeper came to the market (I had one of those too) and then copied triangular ones thereafter.

 

[vintagerepairer]

Well I guess it could be, but what was the retail price of that sweeper? I don't know, but I guess it was around £50. I would also suggest that the expectation and indeed the use & abuse of that sweeper was considerably less than a Dyson vacuum cleaner.

 

[sebo_fan]

Yes, but double the price of a mechanical dust sweeper, people weren't exactly taken with the GTech - it seemed to only take off after it was seen on Channel 4's Big Brother. Suddenly everyone realised it was an Eco-derived model due to the product placement just from that TV show alone. 


 


I think a few peeps are being unfair with Dyson - he's an inventor first and foremost - and thus even if Dyson had perfected a bagless suction system, including a hard floor tool wouldn't be the first brand to do so with an upright vacuum and I think in the early days of vacuum cleaner production and releases, brands like Dyson are allowed to get some things wrong.


 


Im still getting over how mad Hoover were to bring out Hoover branded clear dust bags for use in their Cyclean, and Vortex upright vacuums! It kind of defeated the purpose of bag-less. The concept didn't last long, even though some used food bags to trap the dust thereafter.

 

[vintagerepairer]

I don't think the comments are unfair, I think they are true. I think that Dyson was lucky to be able to design and make the cleaner he did and win the consumers over. Getting people to buy his product would have been a challenge on it's own, but to do so with the quality of the product he was offering was nothing short of a miracle. A good deal of people were experiencing problems with the poor quality parts long before sales really took off, so he was lucky that work did not get around before then.

I do of course take your point that the G-tech sweeper was double the price of a manual sweeper, but even so, it was affordable; the sort of price which people were prepared to take a chance on. It was also did something vastly different from a manual sweeper as it employed an electric motor, unlike a Dyson where the main selling point was an improvement on an existing set up.

 

[Scaniabebe]

1993, was 3 years old at the time, they're not bad vacuums. My best friend, called Amy was given the DC01 her Step Dad owned when she moved into her first house, and, it's still around today, just with a few more scratches on it than when it first came off the production line!:')

They're not bad vacuums, can remember them very well, not the prettyist of the Dysons, but I do actually kinda like the style, and it's not until recently that we realized that the Dysons didn't "Deep Clean" as well as the Hoover Turbopower with Autosence!

Actually looking on eBay at buying one, possibly!

 

[Jakesvacs]

Why everyone dislike the Dyson Dc01 so much?
There are loads of Dc01's still being used today, my Da001 was still being used untill I got it and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it!
Its a plastic vacuum, just like the other vacuums.
The parts are robust enough for them to last a good few years, just a couple of days ago I met a lady who was still using her Dc01 with the old lettering and she said its the best vacuum she ever had. Of course when you compare it to a Dirty fan vacuum its not going to be as powerful.
I also love many features of the Dc01, its so iconic and special.
We also forget that we are debating about a vacuum that was from 93. Other vacuums of that era in discussions would be given some slack. I do not see many contours, Hoover turbopowers or other brands of that era still being widely used as Dyson Dc01s.

 

[jmurray01]

"Actually looking on eBay at buying one, possibly!" That's if your pocket money will stretch to it, or maybe you could sell one of the "cars" to buy it...

Sorry GENUINE VacuumLand members, just had to vent a wee bit there.

 

[sebo_fan]

Jake - A very good point.

I had a DC01 for many years and a DC04 - the DC04 didn't last as long as the DC01 and though the DC01 didn't have as much give when the machine was pivoted to the floor, I always felt the DC01 was better built. The DC04 by comparison had a better air inspection system but I had problems with the drive belts and eventually filter probs. I also liked the sound of the DC01 - not as noisy.

 

[vintagerepairer]

Ah well you see Jake, this is where it all comes full circle. The fewer sightings of the likes of the Electrolux Contour and Hoover Turbopower2 will be due in a large part to consumers replacing them somewhat prematurely, with the latest trend - a Dyson. I am never going to say the Contour was a great cleaner, although it was not bad. The Turbopower 2 and 3 were very good cleaners. But in both cases (and indeed the case of many a cleaner from that period of time) the build quality was considerably better than the Dyson DC01. It is not about knocking a Dyson, it is about how they were built.

The original question was about what we thought of them from their launch, and this is what I am reporting back. Dyson used a plastic which was too hard and brittle for a good deal of his cleaners to stand the test of time, and yet the plastics were too thin and soft in other areas. Although a good deal of DC01 cleaners are still around, this can only represent a small % of the millions they made. Many consumers had to obtain replacement parts in a very short space of time and I stand by my comments that James Dyson did very well to build an unknown cleaner with a poor build quality and yet still go on to develop a loyal customer base.

 

[jmurray01]

That's true Benny and the manufacturers James Dyson went to with his ideas probably knew that too (of course the money they made through bags was a larger incentive!) and thus weren't interested.