What's the deal with the heavily-advertized Dyson vacuum cleaners?

[Sum Guy]

Are the Dyson vacuum cleaners as good as they say they are?

Are they worthy of the tv-commercial air time? Or is this a case of "if you advertize it, they will buy" ?

[Van Chocstraw]

They are just trying to justify a high price. Some people will buy something just because it costs more.

[Joe]

Forget the dyson, get the purple kenmore, go out to a *really* nice dinner for the price difference.

no affiliation, just happy with the vac. It really sucks (just had to throw that in there)

jc

[RicodJour]

Curious that you have such a strong opinion on something you don't own. Virtually all of the reviews from people that actually bought it are 4 and 5 stars (Dyson Animal). Google has a review consolidator - click on the "all reviews" link.

R

[Butch Haynes]

Are there any reviews by an objective, unbiased source (e.g., Consumer Reports)?

The cognitive dissonance problem with owner reviews of higher than usual priced stuff (e.g., Macs, Kirby vacuums, etc.) is that having spent the extra money, the buyer must now report how superior the product is lest he be seen as a sucker or even a fool...

[EXT]

There is a little missleading information in their commercials in saying that they do not loose suction. Their claim is based on the use of cyclone centrifugal dust separation. Not the first to use them. They are used in industrial applications and have been used in many vacuums. However, cyclones work best with large dirt, fine dust and even lighter bacterial and viruses rarely get separated because they don't weigh enough to be affected by the centrifugal force. Dysons sometimes mention they use a Hepa final filter to clean the air. Hepa is not a standard and can mean many things, but, to add any filter at the end of the exhaust can result in the filter becoming plugged and reducing the amount of air that leaves the vacuum, thereby loosing suction, which is what they advertise that it does not do.

I prefer central vacuums, with the exhaust blowing to the outside so that fine particulate and other unwanted items are discharged to the outdoors, not back into my house.

[RicodJour]

And no one would be pissed off, feel that they had been screwed and leave a bad/horrendous review in retaliation? I find almost just the opposite in almost everything - people more readily leave bad reviews.

Of course there are 'unbiased' (everybody/thing has a bias) reviews. Consumerresearch.com reviews the reviews and is a pretty good first stop on such things.

R

[clare]

Consumer reports is totally unbiased?????? I think not.

Pretty close - but there will ALWAYS be a bias.

And there are enough people in North America who will bitch about ANYTHING, as well as launch "frivalous" lawsuits. No bitching and no lawsuits would TEND to indicate better than average satisfaction.

Sure a lot od people bitched about Kirby and FilterQueen.

[Sum Guy]

They are probably have a bias against price or cost. They seem to mechanize, automate, and use instrumentation recordings where possible. A db meter for noise. A mechanical actuator to measure pushing force when vaccuming. Measured amounts of dirt that are dumped on carpets and then weighed to see how much the vacuum actually picked up. Even a clean room with an airborne particulate counter to verify the hepa-filter claims (their conclusion is that even regular vacuums that don't claim to be hepa will work just as good as ones with "hepa" filters).

I've got a kenmore canister that's about 8 years old that I want to replace (the kenmore is being moved to a different location - not that it's not working anymore).

The durability and performance of the beater bar, extension tube, flex hose and handle are my primary concern, as those are the components that experience wear and tear. Any improvements to those components that result in less air leakage as those parts wear, wearing of rotating parts, breakage of thin plastic, etc, are what I would seek to know - if such things are actually knowable in this age of disposable products.

I've found that the Dyson claim of "never losing suction" to be a red herring. Even my 8-year-old kenmore can completely fill the disposable waste bag, indicating that it still has enough suction to pull material from the floor even when the bag is 100% full. And I prefer to throw a bag away vs dealing with dumping a canister. Noise level is also very important to me - my gut feeling is that the bagless units are louder.

Online consumer reviews are a mixed bag. They could be accurate and representative, or they could be biased (a tendency to compain vs praise) or they could be faked or planted by the manufacturer (or the competitor).

[Scott in SoCal]

I have never owned a Yugo, but I still know that they suck.

[Tony]

My dad and a friend had a small side business selling Filter Queens. I grew up without the words "vacuum cleaner" in my vocabulary. I grew up calling it a Filter Queen as others grew up using the brand name Xerox for "copy machine". I recall using the words "Filter Queen" in school and nobody knew what I was talking about!

More recently my mother keeps buying vacuum cleaners, not liking them, and she gives them away and buys a different new one and it's still no good. She says she wishes she had her old Filter Queen, that was the best she ever used. I'd buy one on ebay and give it to her but she probably wouldn't like it anymore.

[Marilyn & Bob]

Consumer Reports October 2009: Dyson Animal DC28 rated 10th out of 40 Uprights (but not Check Rated). Cost $600. There were better performing Check Rated models for as little as $120.

[Doug Miller]

ROTFL

[Tony]

Still driving the "Le Car"? ;-)

[Caesar Romano]

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 10:34:47 -0400, Sum Guy wrote Re What's the deal with the heavily-advertized Dyson vacuum cleaners?:

No.

Yes, since Dyson pays for it. Anybody that pays for time is worthy of that time.

Bingo!

[Caesar Romano]

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:21:24 -0400, Butch Haynes wrote Re Re: What's the deal with the heavily-advertized Dyson vacuum cleaners?:

Excellent point.

[Lee B]

One of my relatives has a Dyson and is happy with it (or was a few years ago the last time the subject came up). Said it was good for dog hair.

I have a lot of dog hair, but didn't want to part with that much money. I bought a Bissell vacuum a few years ago on sale at Target. It's theoretically designed for homes with pets, although I suspect that might be an advertising gimmick. However it does a great job and pulls out dirt and hair I never knew were there. They have a new one out now that is "multi-cyclonic". I'd like that but only because it sounds more high tech... no idea if it works any better. If I won the lottery, I might try a Dyson, but for now I'm happy with the Bissell.

[Joe]

Consumer Reports says they are so-so. They sure do look high tech. However, SWMBO bought a Hoover $89.95 on sale a while back and claims it is the best of many to pass through our portals in the the last 36 years. Since the cleanup involves 3 cats, 1 dog and carpets her opinion has merit.

Joe

[RicodJour]

Based on what? Based on other people's opinions? That's what the reviews on Amazon and Epinions and the like are - other people's opinions. If you don't value other people's opinions, does that mean you're smarter than everyone else? Based on you being an auto mechanic and taking them apart and putting them back together again? That has some weight, so let's apply it to what Chocstraw opined: do you think he's an appliance repairman and has had a large number of unhappy customers with Dyson vacuums? Why wouldn't he have said so? Why would Dyson give a FIVE year warranty if the things didn't last (main reason people replace vacuums is because they break).

R

[salty]

It's not uncommon for people to like what they bought. Once they spent money on it, they sort of have to like it, or else admit they were foolish.