I agree with many others who commented. Dyson ball Cylinder corded are the best vacuums Dyson ever made (not the tall uprights but the standard looking ones like the big ball animal/ multifloor etc). If used with a Turbine brush and not the standard flat head it mostly comes with, it will beat anything on the matket. They have the best suction with deep clean and removes all hair. Avoid cordless as their batteries degrade, limited runtime, not much suction and very expensive that's why they have these gimmicks now like the green light to see crumbs on the floor and lcd screen to switch between normal and maximum power but u can't use normal as it doesn't pick anything up so u have to use max power but that isnt advised as battery and motor can't handle it. They sell the upright corded still but u can barely do one room as its really heavy to manoeuvre and exhausting and im over 6 ft and quite fit and still it ain't good as the discontinued ball cylinders. Its a big step backwards for Dyson
The cylinders didn't perform as well as the other formfactors, as the data shows. Having owned all, I can confirm the latest Dyson cordless cleaners are considerably beyond their mains powered machines. They have comparable performance using much less power (as the data clearly shows), are far easier to use, facilitate bite-sized cleaning, are easier to empty, quieter, and have much better HEPA filtration. The shortcomings you emphasise are simply not a problem in practical use in typical homes. Furthermore, post 2025 when the new battery technology revolution starts, they'll be quantum leaped again. The new design features in the next generation of cordless coming are very impressive.
The Dyson Ball Animal 3 is very similar to the UK Ball Animal 2, except it uses the same wand design as the DC41, and it has the hair removal vanes in the cleaner head, which I really like. It's an improvement over the US version of the Ball Animal 2, which is basically like the DC41 but with better suction and agitation.
The reason they stopped selling the Cinetic Big Ball was although you are told not to go over the Max fill line people still did which in the cinectic led to dust reaching the motor and burning them out prematurely. That's why it's best to have a pre motor filter as Dyson realised :)
Do you have any evidence for that, or is it another myth? Any machine that blocks up will experience the same issue and has nothing to do with it being a cinetic model. Motors degrade faster if they overheat, which is caused by a loss of air flow over it, and could happen even if a premotor filter was blocked by abuse and neglect. You should think more about what you say before you speak and peddle nonsense and myths.
@@VacuumFacts Maybe you should speak to a Dyson engineer as I have. That is what he told me. And that is why they are not going to use it in the future :)
@@2711marcus I don't believe you and that doesn't make sense. They're still sold and manufactured, in case you didn't notice from the video and a simple fact-check. If you have any real evidence, happy to review.
@@VacuumFacts Listen Johnny if they thought the Cinetic technology was so good they would have used it in their cordless models wouldn't they. But they came to the conclusion that it was safer to use a pre motor filter. You can believe what you want, it matters not a jot to me :)
@@2711marcus lol that is not a convincing argument at all. There could be any number of good reasons why they haven't used Cinetic yet (variable speed airflow being the best I've thought of). There's no reason to think it's specifically the reason *you* gave, particularly as it doesn't make much sense (they're still manufactured and still for sale, despite the lies to the contrary). You've not evidenced anything you've claimed despite every opportunity since request. I simply don't believe any of the reasoning you've given. It's consistent only with all the debunked propaganda. Come back if you have evidence because talk is cheap.
I love my Dyson big ball Absolute 2 canister. It is amazing, just one thing I find with it is that hairs and fibers get stuck in the bin at the small opening the dirt leaves the centre and blasts in to the bin! I also swapped the turbine brush for the one you got with the first generation. It is the best and easy only thing to do empty the bin and put it back in the machine no filters to maintain love it once a month i take wetwip through the inside of the bin. Its not i have to but I just do it to make it look cleaner the clear plastic! Cinetic science is amazing not a single bit of dirt gets through and so shocking to see at the end of the week whats living in the bin 🤢 also never clean matress with dyson you never gonna sleep a full night again 😅
Another thing I don't get is how the cylinder with it's turbine head did better than the V11 on Auto, the cleanerhead design isn't as sophisticated and also it's not like its gonna have high suction at the floor due to the clean air design of a Dyson turbine head where the airflow divides into 2- half the suction goes to the floor and the other half goes to the turbine and leaks out the air vent So it's more airflow at the floor than actual suction just like a Kirby. The carpet which restricts the airflow means that the carpet makes more airflow to the turbine and out the vent
I'd guess it utilises the much stronger net suction in such a way that it gives better performance. I was surprised how well it did too, but there you go. The upright's turbine head performed a lot worse, likely due to lower suction and less effective design. Airflow isn't directly important (only the rabid vacuum enthusiasts peddle that); it's actually the speed of the air the particles within the pile experience that counts. Usually they are related, but it is possible with different head design to have higher air currents yet achieve a proportionally lower increase in air speed through the pile.
@@VacuumFacts I agree, I have a DC54 animal cinetic and I can see the head separating the pile well throgh the clear head as well, I'm starting to like it a bit more now!
I think the main problem with the cinetic upright bin as opposed to the canister cinetic bin is the airflow for the upright's bin is in the center which means that every time u empty out the dirt, some dust will float into that airflow chamber. Then when u put it back on the vac and start it up, that said dust will get sucked to the non removable filters. And if you repeat it over and over, more dust gets to the filter and clogs it. The canister bin's airflow comes from the center bottom to the top rear - after the cyclones which means it won't matter if dust floats to the chamber because it would have to go straight to the cinetic tips to get filtered out. So its a better design than the upright cinetic's bin. And I do hope that dyson brings their cinetic technology to their stik vacs. They just have to find the perfect setting of the lowest airflow to keep the tips working perfectly. Then they can have higher airflow settings when necessary
Yeah, to incorporate the brilliant bin assembly design of the cylinder into the cordless, they'd have to direct the airflow out of the centre to the side again. I'm sure doable. That design is just so good though, and understanding how it worked was why I reviewed these machines. I saw some terrible reviews of it and the best I got was 'it's overengineered because I can't clean it overly anally', which was a level of pathetic of such staggering magnitude I almost lost faith in humanity... If you want something doing right...
Loved my old ball hose dyson was a great design I bought it 2nd hand £80 off eBay and worked great. I had the older version without all these last model improvements and I still loved it great on stairs as you said.
It was a huge mistake to stop developing these in parallel to cordless models. Cordless vacuums can never replace corded models for a number of reasons all of which being physics related. One can't change the laws of physics. Both designs have their strengths and weaknesses and should be used for the right task.
What are the 'physics' reasons you claim that a cordless machine can't replace a corded machine, precisely? The rest of your comment is at odds with reality of course, and the empirical evidence is all over my channel.
@@VacuumFacts By design cordless vacuums are top heavy and have very limited runtime and capacity and you can't increase either of these without making them very uncomfortable to use due to their weight. For instance can feel all that weight in your hand even on their relatively light and most popular V15. I'm not even talking about outsize models, as they are virtually unusable for most people. So there's pretty nothing nothing you can do about it, as you can't make cordless vacuum bottom heavy. It will simply hinder their versatility. In fact according to many users and many reviews the only cordless Dyson that is not cumbersome to use is V12 and it's very limited by its bin capacity. But it has very small bin and not as good for carpets cleaning. All their relatively light models are limited by only 60min runtime at min power. On practice no one is going to use it at min power, so the actual runtime is going to be even less, than that. And so cleaning a large house with cordless vacuum is not practical. It's only suitable for small or relatively clean spaces that don't require much cleaning. Corded vacuums on the other hand always have been and always will be more suitable for large spaces that require long cleaning sessions. And didn't even mention how ineffective modern battery technologies are and that drawing power directly from the wall is always much more effective and doesn't require wasting time on recharge or money on a new battery that inevitably going to lose its capacity and rather sooner than later.
>>”Cordless vacuum runtime and capacity are very limited by design and you can't increase either of these without increasing its weight and making it very uncomfortable to use.” Run time is determined by the power consumption and battery capacity. Poorly designed machines with weak and inferior technology require large heavy batteries and multiple of them to get decent runtimes. It has been established with good design that you can have run times sufficient to perform typical cleaning sessions with performance greater than even good mains machines without large weights. There is thus plenty of evidence showing that cordless can replace mains cleaners. As for bin capacity, the capacity in good designs is enough to last for a cleaning session and the emptying in said good designs takes 5 seconds without mess, making it superior to even the best mains machine emptying methods. Again, this conflicts with the suggestion that mains machines can’t replace cordless-at least when referring to best in class of each. >>”Pair this with the fact that cordless vacuums are top heavy and quite have already. You can feel all that weight in your hand much more than with bottom heavy corded models or canister vacuums that have most of the weight in a separate block altogether.” When used on floor, it is false to suggest you can feel the weight in your hand much more. The lower mass of (good) cordless machines also reduces inertia, making it feel much lighter to push than bottom-heavy mains machines. For above floor cleaning, good cordless machines (that have enough power to clean with simultaneous long run times) are typically 3 kg or less. The best machines are not overly tiring to use above floor and the much greater ease of use than corded machine is a much better use case. Furthermore, next gen battery technology looking to be released in late 2025 will quite revolutionise cordless cleaners. >> “runtime is only 60min at min power, which on practice is not going to be effective to use, especially if there's a lot of dirty carpets.” This is a misunderstanding consigned to the bin long ago. You can get a run time in auto mode enough to complete a reasonable cleaning session with performance superior to even good mains machines. People don’t like the whole-house mega clean chore anymore and habits have evolved now into bite-sized cleaning, which this formfactor champions. Run time is simply not a good argument anymore. >> “…cleaning a large house with cordless vacuum is not practical. It's only suitable for small or relatively clean spaces that don't require much cleaning.” This is complete nonsense as well. We bite size cleaning now and you can do a large house, as plenty of people show online >>”Corded vacuums on the other hand always have been and always will be more suitable for large spaces that require long cleaning sessions.” This is again false. Cordless machines are used in commercial environments quite successfully, conflicting badly with your claim. Weight, bin capacity, and run time tropes are your primary justifications for cordless not being able to replace corded. These have been debunked many years ago. Also, I’m still missing these ‘physics reasons’ you referred to (distinct from correct language associated with physical properties and practicalities of use).
@@VacuumFacts I gave you simple facts and reasons with real world examples of Dyson's own models, but you seem to be one of those mindless Dyson fanboys, that accept only facts in their own favor and discard all the rest. I can only wish you and your "facts" channel good luck. You gonna need it.
I simply didn't agree with your factual claims because they doesn't stand up to scrutiny. You appear to have ignored the details of what I gave you the respect to respond to, then took offense seemingly because the nonsense you claimed was well-challenged in a manner that made sense, and exposed your subjective wonky worldview. Instead you've now fallen back on a bizarre, tribal, form of anti-Dyson racism-like behaviour that constantly litters this place.
Yeah. It's really amazing. And all those utter ignoramuses out there who argued it was 'over engineered' whilst oozing stupifying ignorance of what it did and why it was amazing. Other brands have even copied it since.
If dyson made the perfect stik vac for me, it would be the v11 torque drive with the head from the outsize (since the head of the outsize and the high torque drive have the same watts and volts), and there would be a 2 tier 24 set of cyclones with a second battery in the box (I might not needed but its best to have more and since I'll be switching them back to back, they'll have double the running life than if I had one) the head had led headlights, and I had almost all the tools from their site. That would be a perfect set for me
@@VacuumFacts i have alot of dimly lit areas in my home and it would be nice if they were on em. Plus I dont have to say good performance because dyson stik vacs (v8 and above) already perform well
I wish Dyson sold that corded upright her in the USA. It looks like it would do a good job on hardwood floors as well as carpet. Very informative video.
There you go again! As you are well aware the Sebo Felix now uses a 700w motor, you can buy an extension hose to clean the stairs and you can purchase one today for £226. For hardfloor cleaning you can use the Parquet floor tool which does an excellent job. As your channel is called "Vacuum Facts" please use the latest specs!
It was clear in the video that if you take the 1300 W model and reduce its power to nearer the 700 W model, performance will drop. And you can guarantee if I'd used a 700 W model in review, people would have complained I should have used the 1300 W model. So I gave it the best crack of the whip. Buying an extension hose is additional otherwise avoidable cost, means more hassle getting it out, setting it up, and storing. And the Sebo was designed to be used exactly as shown. I think you're spitefully scraping the barrel and causing an unnecessary leak. And not quite sure why you're fixating on a product that isn't even the focus of the video and had its own review anyway in which you said none of this. Mad... xD
@@VacuumFacts They made the motor more efficient and a tapered hose. The performance matches or comes very close to the1300w motor. Don't make assumptions thats not very scientific is it haha Btw the X series comes with an extension hose as standard.
@@2711marcus Any evidence to support any of that (and more specifically that it makes any difference)? I'm guessing not. Don't forget, it was a review of that model of the Sebo Felix. The video doesn't discuss other models.
@@VacuumFacts why not test both variants of the felix then? Then you dont have to worry about discrepancies between variants, and it the newer variant works more effectively, it would further prove the point of not needing increased power consumption for solid cleaning Performance.
@@IntellitechStudios Because time, money, lack of good reason to, and the more powerful version was tested and relevant conclusions drawn. I've no good (evidenced) reason to think the 700 W will perform better.
Some sources out there have described the cylinder's bin as "over engineered" on grounds as trivial and cosmetic as ‘how easy it is to clean’. The bin doesn’t even need to be cleaned that obsessively and is still perfectly cleanable. The failure to even acknowledge, let alone appreciate, the brilliant engineering and function is sad. The lies and propaganda around the Cinetic technology was shown to be wrong. First, they lied that it was unworkable on lower power machines, yet it works fine on these 700 W models. Then, when realising they'd been debunked, they claimed it just didn’t work and had high failure rates, but never evidenced how it could be reproduced. Such machines were almost certainly abused, in other words, the users just couldn’t even be bothered to empty the bin. It’s propaganda and unevidenced naysaying by people who seemingly don't like the Dyson brand. It’s truly amazing tech and design.
great video, i havethe dyson animal cylinder big ball 2 Ive had it around 8yrs now and its starting to smell of vomit when i turn it on ive always cleaned the filter, emptied the bucket but it still comes back what should i do to stop the smell ive tried everything i cant afford to buy a new one as dysons are expensive
Ok now here's a question that not a lot of other people than you could answer for me: are the cinetic mains vacuums good enough at centrifugal filtration that I could use it as a home shop vac for drywall and wood dust? My outsize absolute was struggling quite a bit when sucking up drywall dust upside down.
No! The Cinetic can not handle drywall dust. It will clog the cyclones and choke the machine from the inside out. I like Dysons but Numatic make much better shop vacs. You need a bag vacuum.
I have a Dyson upright but it's heavy and loud, lacks tools (available as extras). The other issue is that its too powerful and makes really hard to clean small mats. I switched to the V10 and it's so much easier to use and can get into places the full size upright can't. I am trying to decide if getting a V11 Outsize would be better for me. In the US the upright with cinetic is still sold while the canister version isn't.
I'd wait until the next flagship cordless comes out. I'm hoping soon; it's been 2 years; the V11 is ancient, even though it still pisses on literally everything else cordless out there.
@@VacuumFacts No. I don't understand either. I followed the Dyson troubleshooting on the website and thats the soution it came up with after I tried all the other steps. Of course that doesn't mean the filter is the issue. The clogged light comes on even with no attachments.
I could see that being true. I've never been a fan of straight-suction or air-powered turbine heads. As I said in the video, I don't understand why Dyson made those cleaner heads; they had historically had motor driven heads on their cylinder models.
@@VacuumFacts This air -powered turbine head is more effective then many other brands motor driven heads and unless you have huge amounts of high pile carpet it is totally adequate.
@@markurbanetti6195 Yeah, but on this Dyson machine, it just felt to me they were gettig rid of old stock because they knew the formfactor was beign phased out and it wasn't good to invest in more R&D.
☝🏻🤓One day maybe they will add a shoulder strap… or better yet, BACKPACK straps to the canister ball!! (I added my own but for the money I think they could include that upgrade.) Alas, it seems technology just isn’t there yet…
The canister formfactor has been done away with for many years now for most home users. No one in their right mind would want to carry that much weight on their body.
The limit is 900 W. That was a pre EU energy cap model. And yes, it needed to squander that kind of power to achieve the level of performance that Dyson have shown, through hard work and scientific research, can be achieved with a few hundred watts. You can use much less power on the Sebo machine by turning the dial down to minimum, but performance will correspondingly decrease. The new models, which are all but identical, are capped at near that minimum setting by default, so couldn't perform as well. The product design is fundamentally flawed because it is affected by the energy caps. People have wildly claimed otherwise, but not evidenced it, and there's therefore no good reason to believe them. Better designs embrace such caps and still improve performance, as shown.
It's not necessarily better performing because the upright also has more suction. The fact the head weighs a tonne may be a factor. The V11 head has likely advanced beyond the upright head now once tuned with the system its designed to work with. There may even be a new version in whatever product they release next. The mains performance is primarily driven by both larger suction and how that's utilised by a fine-tuned head. Working towards that performance level using much less and with the cordless formfactor is all part of the future technology developments. The fact it's so close already is nothing short of amazing. No other cordless competitor I'm aware of approaches what Dyson achieve with their now technologically ancient V11.
@@VacuumFacts That doesn't make sense because if the Sebo felix peformed better than the V11 on boost but you said the light ball cleans better than the V11 and felix then how is the V11 gonna be better? I appreciate the V11 head is close to being almost as good as the light ball at performing but I want it to be either as good as the same or better
@@parwaz7861 I meant better at utilising the resources available, not in an absolute sense. Both heads are probably comparable given they're both tuned to their respective systems. But the V11 head requires less. Hard to say without research. But they are both exceptional performers.
@@VacuumFacts Yes I appreciate that the V11 can achieve more with less which is why it's beautifully engineered but I want the best deep cleaning vacuum In your felix video the total extracted mass by the felix was 20620 grams whereas the V11 on boost with the head on + mode extracted 20530 grams which suggests the felix is better at deep cleaning even though it burns through more power- You mentioned the light ball/ animal 2 upright cleans better than the felix so this means the V11 doesnt pick up as much as the Dyson uprights now do
@@parwaz7861 Well, the total mass extracted was virtually the same as a percentage of the amount it had available to remove. It's within the statistical noise (although I didn't test statistically because that's days of work and this isn't formal science). And yes, the V11 doesn't perform as well as the upright, but is in the region of mains cleaner performance (it outperforms the cylinder for first few passes with straight suction head and the upright without brushbar on), validating the claim they're mains replacements. This is unlike other cordless, which are back in the stone age.
But not the best performer, which is also consistent with the data in the video showing no direct relationship between cleaning performance and the motor air power available. It's how well it's utilised at the microscopic level by the cleaner head that's one of the important points to take away and understand from this video.
It's important going forward to make sure that the myth that airwatts has any direct relevance to cleaning performance and how good a cleaner is, is not spread and is called out whenever it's seen, citing this video if necessary as evidence.
@vacuum facts agree it’s not how big the motor is or how high the airwatts are to achieve decent performance! Problem is there has been that much advertising by Floorcare brands over the years about bigger motors wattage wise gives better performance (before the EU regulations) and even Dyson previously in the past was the one to use airwatts to market and measure performance in their marketing so the general public have it etched on their brains the bigger the motor or the higher the airwatts the better the machine is....but we know that is not the case! Now we have a motor cap that type of marketing has since disappeared for obvious reasons!
They didn't. This very video points out they're still sold in France and other parts of the world where that formfactor is just more popular for some reason.
You never address if the heads from v11 ..v10 or v15 can be used or if they are interchangable with the cylinder wand. Maybe if the cylinder isnt updated anymore and has a superior cynetic tech it can be used with updated heads of the cordless vacums.. I guess they are not compatible but i bet there is an adaptor for it
It's weird now to see how big and bulky those vacuums are compared to the V10 and V11. We always had to find somewhere to store the old style vacuums out of view. Now my V10 is mounted to my kitchen wall and takes up zero space. I will never own anything other than a Dyson. Nothing comes close to the design engineering and performance of a Dyson. Fact.
Same. Although if something objectively better comes along, I've no allegiance to Dyson. I don't see that happening though and Dyson maintains its effective monopoly.
At least it's lighter than the Kirby and more manoeuvrable, as my review of the Kirby shows. I don't believe that, in general, the product 'breaks easily' (abuse excluded); that needs qualifying with some strong, statistically significant, objective evidence.
Ah, now I see why you commented. In your recent video where you attempted to debunk observed facts you didn't like about the Kirby. What anyone with an ounce of sense will spot though, is that you deliberately packed in three dirt meter pads instead of 1, so artificially blocked the dirt meter, reduced the Kirby's already paltry suction, and made its performance even worse. That's such an obvious deception. If you think you need to use 3, that makes Kirby look stupid for not making their pads three times thicker. Even if you used 1 pad like any sensible person would and as I myself used, using only sand is absurd and unrepresentative of natural household dust. Nothing you showed actually explains any of the empirical observations and measurements made under the honest conditions I tested.
@@Boodieman72 Yeah. But it's the deception of the OP that I wanted to expose. To deliberately use three air-blocking pads to attempt to suggest the Kirby meter restricts airflow is the most obvious deception I've seen from the generally rabid Kirby fan community. Pure deceitfulness. As an aside, I love how, in addition to the lie that you don't find Kirby's dumped at the side of the curb unlike Dyson machines, you never hear stories about how the old lady ditched her V11 for being 'tiring on her wrist' for a nice Kirby, especially for stairs cleaning. xD Oh wait no, plenty of examples of overpriced Kirby machines being given away by old people for being "too heavy".
@@VacuumFacts I have a Kirby, used it twice and now its in "storage". You don't have to be a little old lady to find a Kirby too heavy to use let alone trying to carry it up stairs. Kirby was probably the height of technology for the 1930's but hasn't advancened since then.
Batteries have harmful chemicals in them which aren't good for the environment. If you really want to save the environment, have lino everywhere in the house and use a mop lol.
0_o That applies to EVERY battery-powered product available to buy whose batteries are not recycled by their owners at end of life. So presumably Dyson should be praised for having the only cordless vacuum cleaner that only needs a single battery for most homes due to all the tech that makes bite sized cleaning a thing, is so efficient that it consumes less power, and has a trigger to squeeze up to 30% more cleaning time out of the charge by avoiding wasting? If you mop everywhere all the time, then you're using water too. And replacement mops (or equivalent tech) if you buy cheap ones. Everything has impact; just have to minimise it and be efficient.
I agree with many others who commented. Dyson ball Cylinder corded are the best vacuums Dyson ever made (not the tall uprights but the standard looking ones like the big ball animal/ multifloor etc). If used with a Turbine brush and not the standard flat head it mostly comes with, it will beat anything on the matket. They have the best suction with deep clean and removes all hair. Avoid cordless as their batteries degrade, limited runtime, not much suction and very expensive that's why they have these gimmicks now like the green light to see crumbs on the floor and lcd screen to switch between normal and maximum power but u can't use normal as it doesn't pick anything up so u have to use max power but that isnt advised as battery and motor can't handle it. They sell the upright corded still but u can barely do one room as its really heavy to manoeuvre and exhausting and im over 6 ft and quite fit and still it ain't good as the discontinued ball cylinders. Its a big step backwards for Dyson
The cylinders didn't perform as well as the other formfactors, as the data shows. Having owned all, I can confirm the latest Dyson cordless cleaners are considerably beyond their mains powered machines. They have comparable performance using much less power (as the data clearly shows), are far easier to use, facilitate bite-sized cleaning, are easier to empty, quieter, and have much better HEPA filtration. The shortcomings you emphasise are simply not a problem in practical use in typical homes. Furthermore, post 2025 when the new battery technology revolution starts, they'll be quantum leaped again. The new design features in the next generation of cordless coming are very impressive.
The Dyson Ball Animal 3 is very similar to the UK Ball Animal 2, except it uses the same wand design as the DC41, and it has the hair removal vanes in the cleaner head, which I really like. It's an improvement over the US version of the Ball Animal 2, which is basically like the DC41 but with better suction and agitation.
The reason they stopped selling the Cinetic Big Ball was although you are told not to go over the Max fill line people still did which in the cinectic led to dust reaching the motor and burning them out prematurely. That's why it's best to have a pre motor filter as Dyson realised :)
Do you have any evidence for that, or is it another myth? Any machine that blocks up will experience the same issue and has nothing to do with it being a cinetic model. Motors degrade faster if they overheat, which is caused by a loss of air flow over it, and could happen even if a premotor filter was blocked by abuse and neglect. You should think more about what you say before you speak and peddle nonsense and myths.
@@VacuumFacts Maybe you should speak to a Dyson engineer as I have. That is what he told me. And that is why they are not going to use it in the future :)
@@2711marcus I don't believe you and that doesn't make sense. They're still sold and manufactured, in case you didn't notice from the video and a simple fact-check. If you have any real evidence, happy to review.
@@VacuumFacts Listen Johnny if they thought the Cinetic technology was so good they would have used it in their cordless models wouldn't they. But they came to the conclusion that it was safer to use a pre motor filter. You can believe what you want, it matters not a jot to me :)
@@2711marcus lol that is not a convincing argument at all. There could be any number of good reasons why they haven't used Cinetic yet (variable speed airflow being the best I've thought of). There's no reason to think it's specifically the reason *you* gave, particularly as it doesn't make much sense (they're still manufactured and still for sale, despite the lies to the contrary). You've not evidenced anything you've claimed despite every opportunity since request. I simply don't believe any of the reasoning you've given. It's consistent only with all the debunked propaganda. Come back if you have evidence because talk is cheap.
I love my Dyson big ball Absolute 2 canister. It is amazing, just one thing I find with it is that hairs and fibers get stuck in the bin at the small opening the dirt leaves the centre and blasts in to the bin! I also swapped the turbine brush for the one you got with the first generation. It is the best and easy only thing to do empty the bin and put it back in the machine no filters to maintain love it once a month i take wetwip through the inside of the bin. Its not i have to but I just do it to make it look cleaner the clear plastic! Cinetic science is amazing not a single bit of dirt gets through and so shocking to see at the end of the week whats living in the bin 🤢 also never clean matress with dyson you never gonna sleep a full night again 😅
can you still get the first gen turbine brush? Why is it better?
The brushes dig further in the carpet! And the brush is wider
Another thing I don't get is how the cylinder with it's turbine head did better than the V11 on Auto, the cleanerhead design isn't as sophisticated and also it's not like its gonna have high suction at the floor due to the clean air design of a Dyson turbine head where the airflow divides into 2- half the suction goes to the floor and the other half goes to the turbine and leaks out the air vent
So it's more airflow at the floor than actual suction just like a Kirby. The carpet which restricts the airflow means that the carpet makes more airflow to the turbine and out the vent
I'd guess it utilises the much stronger net suction in such a way that it gives better performance. I was surprised how well it did too, but there you go. The upright's turbine head performed a lot worse, likely due to lower suction and less effective design. Airflow isn't directly important (only the rabid vacuum enthusiasts peddle that); it's actually the speed of the air the particles within the pile experience that counts. Usually they are related, but it is possible with different head design to have higher air currents yet achieve a proportionally lower increase in air speed through the pile.
@@VacuumFacts I agree, I have a DC54 animal cinetic and I can see the head separating the pile well throgh the clear head as well, I'm starting to like it a bit more now!
I think the main problem with the cinetic upright bin as opposed to the canister cinetic bin is the airflow for the upright's bin is in the center which means that every time u empty out the dirt, some dust will float into that airflow chamber. Then when u put it back on the vac and start it up, that said dust will get sucked to the non removable filters. And if you repeat it over and over, more dust gets to the filter and clogs it. The canister bin's airflow comes from the center bottom to the top rear - after the cyclones which means it won't matter if dust floats to the chamber because it would have to go straight to the cinetic tips to get filtered out. So its a better design than the upright cinetic's bin. And I do hope that dyson brings their cinetic technology to their stik vacs. They just have to find the perfect setting of the lowest airflow to keep the tips working perfectly. Then they can have higher airflow settings when necessary
Yeah, to incorporate the brilliant bin assembly design of the cylinder into the cordless, they'd have to direct the airflow out of the centre to the side again. I'm sure doable. That design is just so good though, and understanding how it worked was why I reviewed these machines. I saw some terrible reviews of it and the best I got was 'it's overengineered because I can't clean it overly anally', which was a level of pathetic of such staggering magnitude I almost lost faith in humanity... If you want something doing right...
Loved my old ball hose dyson was a great design I bought it 2nd hand £80 off eBay and worked great. I had the older version without all these last model improvements and I still loved it great on stairs as you said.
It was a huge mistake to stop developing these in parallel to cordless models.
Cordless vacuums can never replace corded models for a number of reasons all of which being physics related. One can't change the laws of physics.
Both designs have their strengths and weaknesses and should be used for the right task.
What are the 'physics' reasons you claim that a cordless machine can't replace a corded machine, precisely? The rest of your comment is at odds with reality of course, and the empirical evidence is all over my channel.
@@VacuumFacts By design cordless vacuums are top heavy and have very limited runtime and capacity and you can't increase either of these without making them very uncomfortable to use due to their weight.
For instance can feel all that weight in your hand even on their relatively light and most popular V15. I'm not even talking about outsize models, as they are virtually unusable for most people.
So there's pretty nothing nothing you can do about it, as you can't make cordless vacuum bottom heavy. It will simply hinder their versatility.
In fact according to many users and many reviews the only cordless Dyson that is not cumbersome to use is V12 and it's very limited by its bin capacity. But it has very small bin and not as good for carpets cleaning. All their relatively light models are limited by only 60min runtime at min power. On practice no one is going to use it at min power, so the actual runtime is going to be even less, than that.
And so cleaning a large house with cordless vacuum is not practical. It's only suitable for small or relatively clean spaces that don't require much cleaning.
Corded vacuums on the other hand always have been and always will be more suitable for large spaces that require long cleaning sessions.
And didn't even mention how ineffective modern battery technologies are and that drawing power directly from the wall is always much more effective and doesn't require wasting time on recharge or money on a new battery that inevitably going to lose its capacity and rather sooner than later.
>>”Cordless vacuum runtime and capacity are very limited by design and you can't increase either of these without increasing its weight and making it very uncomfortable to use.”
Run time is determined by the power consumption and battery capacity. Poorly designed machines with weak and inferior technology require large heavy batteries and multiple of them to get decent runtimes. It has been established with good design that you can have run times sufficient to perform typical cleaning sessions with performance greater than even good mains machines without large weights. There is thus plenty of evidence showing that cordless can replace mains cleaners. As for bin capacity, the capacity in good designs is enough to last for a cleaning session and the emptying in said good designs takes 5 seconds without mess, making it superior to even the best mains machine emptying methods. Again, this conflicts with the suggestion that mains machines can’t replace cordless-at least when referring to best in class of each.
>>”Pair this with the fact that cordless vacuums are top heavy and quite have already. You can feel all that weight in your hand much more than with bottom heavy corded models or canister vacuums that have most of the weight in a separate block altogether.”
When used on floor, it is false to suggest you can feel the weight in your hand much more. The lower mass of (good) cordless machines also reduces inertia, making it feel much lighter to push than bottom-heavy mains machines. For above floor cleaning, good cordless machines (that have enough power to clean with simultaneous long run times) are typically 3 kg or less. The best machines are not overly tiring to use above floor and the much greater ease of use than corded machine is a much better use case. Furthermore, next gen battery technology looking to be released in late 2025 will quite revolutionise cordless cleaners.
>> “runtime is only 60min at min power, which on practice is not going to be effective to use, especially if there's a lot of dirty carpets.”
This is a misunderstanding consigned to the bin long ago. You can get a run time in auto mode enough to complete a reasonable cleaning session with performance superior to even good mains machines. People don’t like the whole-house mega clean chore anymore and habits have evolved now into bite-sized cleaning, which this formfactor champions. Run time is simply not a good argument anymore.
>> “…cleaning a large house with cordless vacuum is not practical. It's only suitable for small or relatively clean spaces that don't require much cleaning.”
This is complete nonsense as well. We bite size cleaning now and you can do a large house, as plenty of people show online
>>”Corded vacuums on the other hand always have been and always will be more suitable for large spaces that require long cleaning sessions.”
This is again false. Cordless machines are used in commercial environments quite successfully, conflicting badly with your claim.
Weight, bin capacity, and run time tropes are your primary justifications for cordless not being able to replace corded. These have been debunked many years ago. Also, I’m still missing these ‘physics reasons’ you referred to (distinct from correct language associated with physical properties and practicalities of use).
@@VacuumFacts I gave you simple facts and reasons with real world examples of Dyson's own models, but you seem to be one of those mindless Dyson fanboys, that accept only facts in their own favor and discard all the rest.
I can only wish you and your "facts" channel good luck. You gonna need it.
I simply didn't agree with your factual claims because they doesn't stand up to scrutiny. You appear to have ignored the details of what I gave you the respect to respond to, then took offense seemingly because the nonsense you claimed was well-challenged in a manner that made sense, and exposed your subjective wonky worldview. Instead you've now fallen back on a bizarre, tribal, form of anti-Dyson racism-like behaviour that constantly litters this place.
Gravity wouldn’t allow the the cyclones to clog even if it were upside down….. that’s e point. Like…a Centrifuge 🤓
Thank you for all this info!
They definitely need to implement the technology of the cylinder into their cordless vacuums.
Yeah. It's really amazing. And all those utter ignoramuses out there who argued it was 'over engineered' whilst oozing stupifying ignorance of what it did and why it was amazing. Other brands have even copied it since.
If dyson made the perfect stik vac for me, it would be the v11 torque drive with the head from the outsize (since the head of the outsize and the high torque drive have the same watts and volts), and there would be a 2 tier 24 set of cyclones with a second battery in the box (I might not needed but its best to have more and since I'll be switching them back to back, they'll have double the running life than if I had one) the head had led headlights, and I had almost all the tools from their site. That would be a perfect set for me
LED lights? >_< My criteria: High performance, maximum ease of use, minimal environmental impact.
@@VacuumFacts i have alot of dimly lit areas in my home and it would be nice if they were on em. Plus I dont have to say good performance because dyson stik vacs (v8 and above) already perform well
I wish Dyson sold that corded upright her in the USA. It looks like it would do a good job on hardwood floors as well as carpet. Very informative video.
The future is cordless, so I wouldn't fret over it.
I only reviewed them because I was interested in the tech I saw. I wouldn't use those machines, personally. Far too cumbersome.
There you go again! As you are well aware the Sebo Felix now uses a 700w motor, you can buy an extension hose to clean the stairs and you can purchase one today for £226. For hardfloor cleaning you can use the Parquet floor tool which does an excellent job. As your channel is called "Vacuum Facts" please use the latest specs!
It was clear in the video that if you take the 1300 W model and reduce its power to nearer the 700 W model, performance will drop. And you can guarantee if I'd used a 700 W model in review, people would have complained I should have used the 1300 W model. So I gave it the best crack of the whip. Buying an extension hose is additional otherwise avoidable cost, means more hassle getting it out, setting it up, and storing. And the Sebo was designed to be used exactly as shown. I think you're spitefully scraping the barrel and causing an unnecessary leak. And not quite sure why you're fixating on a product that isn't even the focus of the video and had its own review anyway in which you said none of this. Mad... xD
@@VacuumFacts They made the motor more efficient and a tapered hose. The performance matches or comes very close to the1300w motor. Don't make assumptions thats not very scientific is it haha Btw the X series comes with an extension hose as standard.
@@2711marcus Any evidence to support any of that (and more specifically that it makes any difference)? I'm guessing not. Don't forget, it was a review of that model of the Sebo Felix. The video doesn't discuss other models.
@@VacuumFacts why not test both variants of the felix then? Then you dont have to worry about discrepancies between variants, and it the newer variant works more effectively, it would further prove the point of not needing increased power consumption for solid cleaning Performance.
@@IntellitechStudios Because time, money, lack of good reason to, and the more powerful version was tested and relevant conclusions drawn. I've no good (evidenced) reason to think the 700 W will perform better.
Some sources out there have described the cylinder's bin as "over engineered" on grounds as trivial and cosmetic as ‘how easy it is to clean’. The bin doesn’t even need to be cleaned that obsessively and is still perfectly cleanable. The failure to even acknowledge, let alone appreciate, the brilliant engineering and function is sad. The lies and propaganda around the Cinetic technology was shown to be wrong. First, they lied that it was unworkable on lower power machines, yet it works fine on these 700 W models. Then, when realising they'd been debunked, they claimed it just didn’t work and had high failure rates, but never evidenced how it could be reproduced. Such machines were almost certainly abused, in other words, the users just couldn’t even be bothered to empty the bin. It’s propaganda and unevidenced naysaying by people who seemingly don't like the Dyson brand. It’s truly amazing tech and design.
Their cylinders are crap!! Full of 'amazing tech' but crap performance
@@lahonymanor2927 Might want to look at the data again...
@@VacuumFacts Oh shut up with your patronising speech. I don't need data!!! I bought one!!!! It was so CRAP I had to get a refund!!
@@lahonymanor2927 "I don't need evidence; I have subjective feelings and make up stories to peddle propaganda! oink"
@@VacuumFacts You DO need evidence if you are going to put false claims online though. I want lab tests not your opinions!
great video, i havethe dyson animal cylinder big ball 2 Ive had it around 8yrs now and its starting to smell of vomit when i turn it on ive always cleaned the filter, emptied the bucket but it still comes back what should i do to stop the smell ive tried everything i cant afford to buy a new one as dysons are expensive
ruclips.net/video/hsl4tCaL6g8/видео.html
Ok now here's a question that not a lot of other people than you could answer for me: are the cinetic mains vacuums good enough at centrifugal filtration that I could use it as a home shop vac for drywall and wood dust? My outsize absolute was struggling quite a bit when sucking up drywall dust upside down.
ruclips.net/video/Z3MefmIot6M/видео.html and ruclips.net/video/bP1vdnWIZSY/видео.html
No! The Cinetic can not handle drywall dust. It will clog the cyclones and choke the machine from the inside out. I like Dysons but Numatic make much better shop vacs. You need a bag vacuum.
I have a Dyson upright but it's heavy and loud, lacks tools (available as extras). The other issue is that its too powerful and makes really hard to clean small mats. I switched to the V10 and it's so much easier to use and can get into places the full size upright can't. I am trying to decide if getting a V11 Outsize would be better for me. In the US the upright with cinetic is still sold while the canister version isn't.
I'd wait until the next flagship cordless comes out. I'm hoping soon; it's been 2 years; the V11 is ancient, even though it still pisses on literally everything else cordless out there.
@@VacuumFacts A cinetic one would be nice.
@@VacuumFacts Shame my V10 has stopped working and its two weeks for a new filter, which I hope fixes it.
@@Boodieman72 Never understood how that happens. My filter is like new. Did you put it in the washer or something?
@@VacuumFacts No. I don't understand either. I followed the Dyson troubleshooting on the website and thats the soution it came up with after I tried all the other steps. Of course that doesn't mean the filter is the issue. The clogged light comes on even with no attachments.
The non-electric turbo brush it ships with is completely inappropriate for wall-to-wall carpet, Mine stalls on high pile with the suction adjusted.
I could see that being true. I've never been a fan of straight-suction or air-powered turbine heads. As I said in the video, I don't understand why Dyson made those cleaner heads; they had historically had motor driven heads on their cylinder models.
@@VacuumFacts This air -powered turbine head is more effective then many other brands motor driven heads and unless you have huge amounts of high pile carpet it is totally adequate.
@@markurbanetti6195 Yeah, but on this Dyson machine, it just felt to me they were gettig rid of old stock because they knew the formfactor was beign phased out and it wasn't good to invest in more R&D.
☝🏻🤓One day maybe they will add a shoulder strap… or better yet, BACKPACK straps to the canister ball!!
(I added my own but for the money I think they could include that upgrade.)
Alas, it seems technology just isn’t there yet…
The canister formfactor has been done away with for many years now for most home users. No one in their right mind would want to carry that much weight on their body.
That sebo is way past the 700w uk power limit.
The limit is 900 W. That was a pre EU energy cap model. And yes, it needed to squander that kind of power to achieve the level of performance that Dyson have shown, through hard work and scientific research, can be achieved with a few hundred watts. You can use much less power on the Sebo machine by turning the dial down to minimum, but performance will correspondingly decrease. The new models, which are all but identical, are capped at near that minimum setting by default, so couldn't perform as well. The product design is fundamentally flawed because it is affected by the energy caps. People have wildly claimed otherwise, but not evidenced it, and there's therefore no good reason to believe them. Better designs embrace such caps and still improve performance, as shown.
I don't know why Dyson don't use the better performing ball animal 2 upright cleanerhead on their cordless vacs since it performs better
It's not necessarily better performing because the upright also has more suction. The fact the head weighs a tonne may be a factor. The V11 head has likely advanced beyond the upright head now once tuned with the system its designed to work with. There may even be a new version in whatever product they release next. The mains performance is primarily driven by both larger suction and how that's utilised by a fine-tuned head. Working towards that performance level using much less and with the cordless formfactor is all part of the future technology developments. The fact it's so close already is nothing short of amazing. No other cordless competitor I'm aware of approaches what Dyson achieve with their now technologically ancient V11.
@@VacuumFacts That doesn't make sense because if the Sebo felix peformed better than the V11 on boost but you said the light ball cleans better than the V11 and felix then how is the V11 gonna be better? I appreciate the V11 head is close to being almost as good as the light ball at performing but I want it to be either as good as the same or better
@@parwaz7861 I meant better at utilising the resources available, not in an absolute sense. Both heads are probably comparable given they're both tuned to their respective systems. But the V11 head requires less. Hard to say without research. But they are both exceptional performers.
@@VacuumFacts Yes I appreciate that the V11 can achieve more with less which is why it's beautifully engineered but I want the best deep cleaning vacuum
In your felix video the total extracted mass by the felix was 20620 grams whereas the V11 on boost with the head on + mode extracted 20530 grams which suggests the felix is better at deep cleaning even though it burns through more power- You mentioned the light ball/ animal 2 upright cleans better than the felix so this means the V11 doesnt pick up as much as the Dyson uprights now do
@@parwaz7861 Well, the total mass extracted was virtually the same as a percentage of the amount it had available to remove. It's within the statistical noise (although I didn't test statistically because that's days of work and this isn't formal science). And yes, the V11 doesn't perform as well as the upright, but is in the region of mains cleaner performance (it outperforms the cylinder for first few passes with straight suction head and the upright without brushbar on), validating the claim they're mains replacements. This is unlike other cordless, which are back in the stone age.
What are you using for fine dust in your tests?
Aged, dried Zorb microsponge dust
The ball animal 2 is the uk model
Whoa; how'd you guess? Did you figure that out when I actually said this in the video?
@@VacuumFacts the uk model has red lines on the ball the brush roll is different and the handle is yellow
@@VacuumFacts I didn’t even know you said that in the video
Surprising, seeing as it was said 30 seconds into the video, if you managed to watch for that long.
Wait the UK model has only 90aw. The US version has 306. Making it one of the most powerful uprights out there.
But not the best performer, which is also consistent with the data in the video showing no direct relationship between cleaning performance and the motor air power available. It's how well it's utilised at the microscopic level by the cleaner head that's one of the important points to take away and understand from this video.
@@VacuumFacts yes definitely. I was just pointing it out.
It's important going forward to make sure that the myth that airwatts has any direct relevance to cleaning performance and how good a cleaner is, is not spread and is called out whenever it's seen, citing this video if necessary as evidence.
@vacuum facts agree it’s not how big the motor is or how high the airwatts are to achieve decent performance!
Problem is there has been that much advertising by Floorcare brands over the years about bigger motors wattage wise gives better performance (before the EU regulations) and even Dyson previously in the past was the one to use airwatts to market and measure performance in their marketing so the general public have it etched on their brains the bigger the motor or the higher the airwatts the better the machine is....but we know that is not the case!
Now we have a motor cap that type of marketing has since disappeared for obvious reasons!
Any idea why they discontinued the canisters?
They didn't. This very video points out they're still sold in France and other parts of the world where that formfactor is just more popular for some reason.
You never address if the heads from v11 ..v10 or v15 can be used or if they are interchangable with the cylinder wand. Maybe if the cylinder isnt updated anymore and has a superior cynetic tech it can be used with updated heads of the cordless vacums.. I guess they are not compatible but i bet there is an adaptor for it
The cordless heads don't work with the mains units. They run on different voltages and are tuned to different parent hardware.
@@VacuumFacts ok i understand..i didnt realized they were powered i tought they used the vacum power of the suction to turn but i was wrong
It's weird now to see how big and bulky those vacuums are compared to the V10 and V11. We always had to find somewhere to store the old style vacuums out of view. Now my V10 is mounted to my kitchen wall and takes up zero space.
I will never own anything other than a Dyson. Nothing comes close to the design engineering and performance of a Dyson. Fact.
Same. Although if something objectively better comes along, I've no allegiance to Dyson. I don't see that happening though and Dyson maintains its effective monopoly.
How many Dyson's do you own?
Just the V11. I only need (and want) one vacuum. I usually borrow and get rid of the ones I use for review purposes.
@@VacuumFacts You work for Dyson by any chance?
@@lahonymanor2927 No. Do you happen to accept facts by any chance?
@@VacuumFacts Are you able to supply real facts by any chance????
@@lahonymanor2927 Might want to watch the videos instead of crying... Or at least form some kind of cogent argument that justifies your position.
I have Dyson ball its heavy awkward to use and breaks really easy, not worth the $1000 price tag
At least it's lighter than the Kirby and more manoeuvrable, as my review of the Kirby shows. I don't believe that, in general, the product 'breaks easily' (abuse excluded); that needs qualifying with some strong, statistically significant, objective evidence.
Ah, now I see why you commented. In your recent video where you attempted to debunk observed facts you didn't like about the Kirby. What anyone with an ounce of sense will spot though, is that you deliberately packed in three dirt meter pads instead of 1, so artificially blocked the dirt meter, reduced the Kirby's already paltry suction, and made its performance even worse. That's such an obvious deception. If you think you need to use 3, that makes Kirby look stupid for not making their pads three times thicker. Even if you used 1 pad like any sensible person would and as I myself used, using only sand is absurd and unrepresentative of natural household dust. Nothing you showed actually explains any of the empirical observations and measurements made under the honest conditions I tested.
@@VacuumFacts Everything is lighter than a Kirby :)
@@Boodieman72 Yeah. But it's the deception of the OP that I wanted to expose. To deliberately use three air-blocking pads to attempt to suggest the Kirby meter restricts airflow is the most obvious deception I've seen from the generally rabid Kirby fan community. Pure deceitfulness.
As an aside, I love how, in addition to the lie that you don't find Kirby's dumped at the side of the curb unlike Dyson machines, you never hear stories about how the old lady ditched her V11 for being 'tiring on her wrist' for a nice Kirby, especially for stairs cleaning. xD Oh wait no, plenty of examples of overpriced Kirby machines being given away by old people for being "too heavy".
@@VacuumFacts I have a Kirby, used it twice and now its in "storage". You don't have to be a little old lady to find a Kirby too heavy to use let alone trying to carry it up stairs. Kirby was probably the height of technology for the 1930's but hasn't advancened since then.
But why is it called "Animal"?
I think because it was a label originally used to denote models better at removing fur if you had pet animals.
Batteries have harmful chemicals in them which aren't good for the environment. If you really want to save the environment, have lino everywhere in the house and use a mop lol.
0_o That applies to EVERY battery-powered product available to buy whose batteries are not recycled by their owners at end of life. So presumably Dyson should be praised for having the only cordless vacuum cleaner that only needs a single battery for most homes due to all the tech that makes bite sized cleaning a thing, is so efficient that it consumes less power, and has a trigger to squeeze up to 30% more cleaning time out of the charge by avoiding wasting? If you mop everywhere all the time, then you're using water too. And replacement mops (or equivalent tech) if you buy cheap ones. Everything has impact; just have to minimise it and be efficient.
…what? I assume this is bad attempt at sarcasm, but if it’s not, educate yourself because this comment is absolutely nonsensical