Dyson Upright Vacuum Cleaner

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

we have all seen the ad's no loss of suction etc well I decided to put it to the test.

I have a dyson upright and to be honest its pretty good, I always thought there claims of no loss of suction to be far fetched.

Here were have the tank thingy, quarter full, mainly cat hair and dust

here we have my 50 inch water vacuum gauge,

hose to the vacuum cleaner itself

turned the cleaner on and it pulled 5 1/4 inch vacuum (1inch water = 0.036PSI)

emptied the canister

refitted the canister, nothing else was changed bear in mind and now

yes thats right 6inches of water!

Thats an increase in vacuum of 0.027 PSI!!!

So basically Dyson lie.

Still its a good vacuum cleaner and well worth the money.

I do these experiments to help YOU the consumer get honest perceptions of products, tough job but someones gotta do it!

Forum Moderator Joined: 16 Feb 2004 Posts: 1356

OMG Chris I never realised what state you were actually in, hats off for the scientific experiment but MATE its a HOOVER!

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

well pushing the probe right into the heart of the beast has raised the value to 10 inches of water!

I know, theres something seriously wrong with me.

Forum Moderator Joined: 16 Feb 2004 Posts: 1356

HHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVVVVVVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRr

Forum Moderator Joined: 18 Feb 2004 Posts: 7432

i think these findings really should be documented properly and sent to Dyson, see what they say. Threaten sending it to Watchdog or something.

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

you see I was contemplating that, after all its false advertising.

perhaps more testing should be undertaken at differing fullnesses with different matrials in the canister.

Forum Moderator Joined: 18 Feb 2004 Posts: 7432

they do say NO suction loss, "not a sausage", after all.

That's a pretty bold claim.

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

I suppose but how do I get them to accurately measure a sausage? Is that a full sausage or a percentage of a sausage?

Who knows!

I think they woudl argue my setup is not scientifically acurate enough but I would beg to differ. As the only change that was made was the can emptied, the hoover never moved neither did the nozzle.

A bold claim that they thought no one would contest, well this lone Scotsman has and proved them wrong. Righty Dyson are getting mail!

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

they have a cool game, play it

http://www.dyson.co.uk/default.asp

dunno who I need to get in touch with

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 8:18 am

How big is the actual sausage in question?

I mean are we talking cocktail sausage, Walls or a cumberland ring (The only sausage in my book)

The length / girth of sausage will definately have impact on the results I asume.

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

indeed mals indeed.

What consistsof a sausage? A string of links could be regarded as a singular sausage since they are indeed joined to each other.

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 8:23 am

Ah, but if you go into a butchers and ask for a sausage (Singular) I very much doubt they would produce a string of sausages and give you the lot. I presume they would sever a singular meaty morsel.

Forum Moderator Joined: 18 Feb 2004 Posts: 7432

I used to write loads of stupid letters to companies in my bored hours at work. Like this one:

RE: Misleading Shreddies advert

Dear NestlÃ©,

I write regarding the television advertising campaign for â€˜Shreddiesâ€™ breakfast cereal. In the advert, it is proudly boasted that Shreddies will â€œkeep hunger locked up â€˜til lunchâ€. This is a bold claim, however from personal experience I can attest that in fact, despite having a [very large] bowl of Shreddies for my breakfast in the morning, hunger is very much free and on the rampage again by only 10 or 11 oâ€™clock that very same morning. This situation is unacceptable, and I therefore demand some form of redress. One yearâ€™s supply of â€˜NestlÃ© Crunchâ€™ chocolate would suffice, but if you like you can also send me some banana flavour (or strawberry, if that is more convenient for you) milkshake powder.

Yours hungrily

Neal Wright Esq.

Never got a reply to that one Sad

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

lol yeah I remember you saying!

Forum Moderator Joined: 18 Feb 2004 Posts: 7432

hang on im scanning the best one i did in... this will make you laugh!

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

heres what I sent to them, entitled loss of suction

Your television adverts make bold claims in the statement thatno loss of suction occurs no matter how much debris is in the hoover cylinder. Indeed it is said there is NO loss of suction, none, not a sausage

After experimentation I have concluded this is a false statement.

I have proved scientifically thats at 1/4 full with dust mainly and a bit of cat hair theres a 0.027PSI loss of suction at 1 inch insertion into the handle.

Therefore thats a false claim of efficiency. Unless you can quantify the value of a sausage and that its value is less than 0.027PSI at 1 inch insertion of the handle then it does lose a sausage in suction as well.

Here is a link to my experimentation.

Yous curiously,

Chris H

I am a tool in that I forgot to put the link in! lol

Forum Moderator Joined: 18 Feb 2004 Posts: 7432

When i worked at the cinema, we had this long pole device with a 3 pronged claw thing at the end that you would use to change light bulbs way up in the ceiling of the the auditoria. It broke. I was peeved. I was bored...

No Climb Products Ltd.
Alston Works
Alston Road
Barnet
Hertfordshire
EN5 4EL

RE: LIGHTBULB CHANGER device.

Dear No Climb,

I write to you having recently affected a repair on the head part (LCT01) of a No Climb light bulb changer. Upon inspection of the broken part, it was clear that had it been manufactured properly, it would not have broken. If you are familiar with the device you will know that it consists of three rubber clad fingers hinged on a 'hub', which are actuated by a cone being pressed against cam shaped extensions on their inner ends. In the example I repaired, the slot in the hub for one of the fingers had been ground too deep, such that the finger opened too far under gravity and as the cone pressed against it, the effect was not of closing that finger, but simply of applying a large force to the cam shaped extension, the only possible result being breakage.

Now, it became immediately apparent to me that design itself is utterly preposterous and the cretin responsible really should be beaten savagely, for crimes against the design and engineering professions. Presenting the brief to an average class of A-level CDT students would likely yield 10-15 far more satisfactory designs than the one you have used, with the teacher grading yours as "highly unlikely to work to any reasonable degree".

Atrocious though the design is, it CAN be made to work (albeit badly), as long as it is manufactured to the necessary standard. In the example I have seen this is clearly not the case, your staff being unable to use a grinder to make a slot the correct depth.

So, from the observations above, we can see that the problem with your device is twofold, consisting as it does of major shortcomings in both design and manufacturing aspects. Being a nice helpful person, I have put together some suggestions to help you overcome these.

Firstly, if the person responsible for the design claims any kind of qualification in the fields of design or engineering, I advise you to investigate their credentials thoroughly, for they must surely be lying. Consider replacing them, one of the aforementioned A-level CDT school leavers should prove a far superior successor.

As for the manufacturing, you should stop importing those blind Philippino children to stand at the belt sander/grinder all day reshaping parts cast (badly) out of monkey-metal. Of course it is not necessary to CNC machine every part from billet T6 aluminium, but consider giving your people a ruler so they can at least make the parts roughly the right shape and size.

On enquiry, it was revealed that a replacement head LCT01 was to cost around Â£50. I mean, come on!!! I appreciate that there is little or no competition for you in the field of extendable pole light bulb changers, but that is not a valid excuse for such flagrant complacency of this level. This is why the general British engineering industry is in the state it is in. If youâ€™re going to charge an extortionate price, at least provide the appropriate quality.

Oh, and your website www.noclimb.com doesnâ€™t work properly on some browsers either (surprise surprise) unless you specify /index.html

Overall grade for your company: 4/10 - must try harder.

I await any comments you may have.

Yours Faithfully

Neal Wright

Forum Moderator Joined: 18 Feb 2004 Posts: 7432

was not expecting to receive a reply from that, for obvious reasons, but lo and behold, a while later, this came through:

is that a veiled job offer at the bottom there? Smile

never wrote back, wish i had now.

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 8:46 am

Classic, go to the top of the class!!!!

Laughing

hhmmmmmm maybe we should patent a new model, Get some competiton going!

Forum Moderator Joined: 18 Feb 2004 Posts: 7432

Chris H wrote:

Unless you can quantify the value of a sausage and that its value is less than 0.027PSI at 1 inch insertion of the handle then it does lose a sausage in suction as well.

LOL

quality!

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

lol yeah Neal you could have got a job from that!