This may be a stretch for the home repair group, but it was some recent
repairs and upgrades that got me thinking about it, so ...
I've owned a Kirby vacuum cleaner for many years, and just replaced
carpeting that was 20 years old. I've always heard the claims that by doing
a better job cleaning, i.e., removing more dirt from the carpet, that this
made carpets last longer. (The idea being that dirt acts as an abrasive and
wears out carpets.) While my old carpet stood up very well for that rather
long period of time, the installers and a supervisor who stopped by during
the installation agreed that there was about the same amount of fine dirt
and sand under the old carpet as they see everywhere else for a carpet of
that age. In other words, probably no cleaner with the Kirby than with the
other machines out there.
My wife hates pushing the heavy thing around, and would like to get one of
the newer, lighter vacuums. My argument for keeping the Kirby has always
been the idea that the Kirby will make the carpet last longer, but that now
seems in doubt. Any opinions out there?