I’m referring to the new Dyson vac featured on the front page. It’s definitely not a new idea, and I think the use of “ball” is a mere gadget. I can use a thin wheel and achieve the same effect. Well, a motocycle wheel can do the job as well. Also, this is exactly what you find on a canister vac attachment.
First impression of that vac is… damn, that’s a lot of parts! Are they all necessary? I bet there are way better solutions to the problems they were trying to solve.
Then the ball gives a “unique” feature to the vac, however, they sacrificed another. When I was doing my vac project last year, one of the features that are oftenly found but easily taken granted for is the ability of the vac to stand freely.
Now, I’ve looked at those images at their website, it seems that you will need to do an extra step to make the vac stand, that is to remove the kick stand at the back.
Of course I am a student and don’t have much say, but this is just tooooo unnecessary to me, too many extra parts and efforts. I’d rather stick to the usual design. IMO, this is a bad example of ID. It doesn’t matter how well the vac works, I won’t buy it.
The last time I tried their vac, the handle was horrible.
I don’t really understand what the problem they are trying to solve is.
From a physics point of view their claim doesnt seem to make a whole lot of sense to me. If you want the cleaner to turn you have to apply force to it, an dchange your momentum no mater how the thing rolls. it is kind of cool that the motor is in the ball, but other than that it seems like they are grasping for things to “revolutionize”, just to keep keep their reputation as trendsetters. How does the handle work? it seems to be at the wrong angle to be comfortable. Then again
Of course I am a student and don’t have much say
and I don’t know a whole lot about vacuum cleaners, and I prefer the ones where the part you move about is connected to thw canister by a hose so the canister doesn’t really have to move that much.
I’d like to see whatever studies they did to back up the efficiency of their design.
just my two cents,
BTW @molested_cow, your name rocks.
i actually thought it was a pretty innovative design. havent seen any vacuums with anything that even resembles this. I do see the advantage of the ball for maneuvering (on current vacuums you have to “steer” from behind, whereas this seems to go wherever you tilt it) I think the difference is steering with the entire arm in existing models vs steering by moving your wrist with the ball.
and about the kick stand comment, dont you have to step on that button to get your vaccum from upright to vacuum position anyways? i think it would be pretty much the same thing to bring down the kickstand on the ball.
and dyson design is another issue. they have a star wars fetish or something, but thats a different can of worms. I think the idea deserves credit, even though i wouldnt buy it, especially with those looks and at that price.
Hey, I will consider if they use Segway’s gyro technology to balance itself so there isn’t even a need for kick stand! Won’t that be awesome?
Oh wait, I got an idea. Let’s just fill up the ball with water or sand and it should work fine… right?
If arm and back strain are the issue, why not a vacuum cleaner you can ride?
slap a power brush on the front and our problems are solved.
a vacuum cleaner is a lot like paint a lawn mower; i’ve never found one that fits my hand.
as in; i don’t use 'em
I am aware that his section has been ‘dead’ for a while I could not resist it as I worked on it. The reason for the ball is because it also houses the motor. One of the first prototypes was a MDF wheel with a ‘cut and shut’ vacuum cleaner wand to basically play around with validity of the concept.
With regards to the kick plate when I last saw it which was about two years ago there was no extra movement. In fact we went through dozens of variations of making the ball vac stand.
hey inspires, will this variant of upright still have a 29% return rate?
I was surprised by that rate of problems. 20% repairs in the 21st century is just incredible to me! Taking a glance at the Consumer Reports buying guide, which rates % of users that had repairs, no other vacuum is close. In uprights, Kirby had the least in 2003, about 6-7% needed repairs. Fantom was the worst with 16-17%. Dyson was not rated, as it was not available in NA at the time.
Looking at other appliances, fridges, stoves, lawn mowers, washing machines…there are only three companies that surpass 20% repair rate in one given category or another.
Another thing that I realized shopping for appliances when I moved was that the good designs are often on the worst products (Bosch exempted). The best looking stoves I found were not as dependable according to the data I had, and they were not nerely as efficient as some of the less unique models. They also lacked features that make ownership more enjoyable. Despite their failings, the good looking appliances demanded hefty amounts more money!
I thought good design went hand in hand with cutting manufacturing costs!
Your funny guy…where did you find that info out I would be interested in reading it.