I wish that they would put all of these extra features (lights on crevice tools & cetera) on the better Hoover models, they would outsell the competition in the blink of an eye. Hoover at one time about 15-20 years ago sold a model that did actually have two brushrolls. The only problem was getting both of the brushrolls to spin, the system had various weak points and would often break because it was not well tested or designed before going off to market but they did try back in the day before the TTI days of just outsourcing designs to a Chinese OEM. Hoover does have a quite better cyclone design compared to Shark and even Dyson in some regards i.e. easy to clean out Hoover cyclones versus Dyson ones. This new design actually has a slight aerodynamic boost and better filter surface area due to the way that filter is shaped in a conical manner.
If this vacuum cleaner did have a rating from the CRI it would only probably achieve a bronze if it even did. The only present Hoover consumer models to attain a CRI rating are the Windtunnel 3 & the only bagged consumer model that they still offer. I think that the Windtunnel 2 May have or have had a rating but the CRI ratings are periodically updated and the list is purged of the old models. This Hoover All Terrain and the similiar Shark models will do more damage to carpets and floors overtime for various reasons. The agitation is not intense enough to shake the deeply embedded dirt out of the carpet fibers. Suction and airflow are not adequate enough to grab the deeply embedded dirt either. There is almost no bristle depth as there are no bristles but only rubber strips. The front roller will also further embed dirt into the carpet or scratch bare floors overtime. I am not for certain about the newer designs but the original Shark design had no airflow whatsoever to the forward roller. In the newer marketing materials I see that there is now not a full plastic bar to seperate the front roller and brushroll. The Hoover Tangle Guard would perform better than this model over time but it also lacks adequate agitation so one would either have to at least annually shampoo the carpets or periodically use another vacuum with more adequate carpet cleaning. Those machines are only for surface level dirt and a psychological play on the end consumers' minds to make them think that they are cleaning more/better. But hey if that is what it takes to get you to clean more and get pumped up for cleaning then so be it.
Thanks. Just bought the same vacuum. Very much appreciate you taking the time to make the video. 👍
I wish that they would put all of these extra features (lights on crevice tools & cetera) on the better Hoover models, they would outsell the competition in the blink of an eye. Hoover at one time about 15-20 years ago sold a model that did actually have two brushrolls. The only problem was getting both of the brushrolls to spin, the system had various weak points and would often break because it was not well tested or designed before going off to market but they did try back in the day before the TTI days of just outsourcing designs to a Chinese OEM. Hoover does have a quite better cyclone design compared to Shark and even Dyson in some regards i.e. easy to clean out Hoover cyclones versus Dyson ones. This new design actually has a slight aerodynamic boost and better filter surface area due to the way that filter is shaped in a conical manner.
Is this vacuum approved by the Carpet and Rug Institute for deep cleaning ability like the order Hoover vacuums who have a rating by the Institute ?
Not sure 🤔
If this vacuum cleaner did have a rating from the CRI it would only probably achieve a bronze if it even did. The only present Hoover consumer models to attain a CRI rating are the Windtunnel 3 & the only bagged consumer model that they still offer. I think that the Windtunnel 2 May have or have had a rating but the CRI ratings are periodically updated and the list is purged of the old models. This Hoover All Terrain and the similiar Shark models will do more damage to carpets and floors overtime for various reasons. The agitation is not intense enough to shake the deeply embedded dirt out of the carpet fibers. Suction and airflow are not adequate enough to grab the deeply embedded dirt either. There is almost no bristle depth as there are no bristles but only rubber strips. The front roller will also further embed dirt into the carpet or scratch bare floors overtime. I am not for certain about the newer designs but the original Shark design had no airflow whatsoever to the forward roller. In the newer marketing materials I see that there is now not a full plastic bar to seperate the front roller and brushroll. The Hoover Tangle Guard would perform better than this model over time but it also lacks adequate agitation so one would either have to at least annually shampoo the carpets or periodically use another vacuum with more adequate carpet cleaning. Those machines are only for surface level dirt and a psychological play on the end consumers' minds to make them think that they are cleaning more/better. But hey if that is what it takes to get you to clean more and get pumped up for cleaning then so be it.
this reminds me of my shark upright vacuum