Does anyone know what are the best rated vacuums?

That's a fair and somewhat interesting question -- how do I decide since I find I disagree w/ CR's ratings so frequently? In considering it, I've come to two conclusions --

First, I really buy very little that I don't already have strong opinions upon and likes/dislikes so that I rarely have a quandry in selecting a product -- I already know what I want so just go get it.

On the second where there is some uncertainty, in thinking about what I've done over the last several years, I find I have made a final selection between competing products somewhat like the other poster noted by comparing online user comments at Amazon or similar forums. Products w/ quite a number of DOA's or other comments are avoided and otherwise I simply select based on what I want/see in the literature I can get.

I will agree that the one place where CR still does have some credibility w/ me is in the long-term repair histories -- but again, in many instances they're either so generic as to be meaningless or my personal experience doesn't seem to match the overall data. So, I might avoid a particular model from a particular manufacturer, but if I have used that manufacurer's products for quite some time w/ satisfaction, I'm not likely to switch until I have a personal experience that.

On one specific issue, paint testing -- the problem there is that while CR's tests may be perfect and there of some value, in the real world it's similar to real estate's mantra of "location, location, ..." -- it's all in the "preparation, preparation, preparation." The best paint poorly applied on an improperly prepared surface will peform more poorly than almost the worst paint well- applied on a good surface. Hence, the anecdotal stories...

In general, I've come to the conclusion that CR is, for the most part, more interested in selling CR than anything else...anybody else getting the stupid "testing results as news" on their local news casts? Talk about a waste of air time and lazy reporting...I've wondered but never bothered to ask--are these sponsored? :(

Reply to
dpb
Loading thread data ...

I agree, and do this too. But, if given both a CR rating and online user comments, though I consider both, I normally give the CR rating more weight.

I agree with you, but I think their paint ratings are the best information available.

CR has no sponsored advertising or publications. Their support comes entirely from their subscribers.

-- jim

Reply to
jim evans

I, otoh, can't think of the last time I've looked at CR -- it's just not a resource I think of as useful in general.

Oh, and one other reason -- for the most part, the things I buy most frequently they simply don't rate. I don't buy much at all in the consumer electronics or other high-volume goods and have strong enough opinions on things like cars, etc., that I'm not influenced by others' opinions, anyway.

Farm equipment and the kinds of tools for woodworking and so on I do buy are beyond the level of what they look at.

I think the _best_ information available is looking at the actual in depth product data from the manufacturers. Things like pigment concentration levels, etc., that normal consumers never bother to look for or understand if they do...the problem w/ their ratings when the subject came up on a usenet thread some time ago and I looked at them in some detail was that the same paint from the same manufacturer in subsequent reports could get a widely different rating. Hence, the same problem as others have noted on other products -- either the ratings are inconsistent and/or flawed or the products themselves aren't consistent enough to make the generalization of much value unless you can find the specific paint tested and ensure it is actually the same formulation as that tested -- which may not be possible to determine. Then, one has the problem of transferring the conditions of the test to the conditions under which one is going to be using it -- they test may or may not be valid or have any direct bearing. It's the same old thing of "statistically significant" -- if the conditions aren't the same, extrapolating the results is risky.

The best one can say is that under those conditions, with their preparation and application, the results they reported are such and such. Whether that is useful is, imo, hard to say definitively.

Wrong frame of reference. I'm wondering if _CR_ is sponsoring the playing of these infomercials on the "news" casts or if it is simply a sign of laziness and/or cost-cutting on the local stations' part to use cheap pre-canned programming rather than having to actually do something on their own.

Reply to
dpb

My problem with CR is that they usually test the "yuppy" priced products.

They may rate Mercedes as the best station wagon, but that hardly affects the greater population.

Too many of their tests are between products out of my price range.

Reply to
Anonymous

I think there's no doubt that's their prime audience... ...

Or, if not price, products of no interest...

Or, what happend to "rugged individualism"? :)

Reply to
dpb

Me too. Really good, and inexpensive too.

Is a bit heavy, though.

David

Reply to
David Combs

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.