Dyson vaccum with laser technology

Comixbooks

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
16,543
This guy had his iconic commercials back in the day with his ball vaccums which just offered better rotation.
 

LOCO LAPTOP

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 4, 2006
Messages
11,154
Doesn't it get to the point of maxing it out? Its a vacuum. It sucks up things off the carpet. I feel like we're trying to improve the toilet plunger here.
Maybe. I have a Dyson V11 Animal. Wonderful little thing, just wish 'boost' didn't suck up so much battery. You will be surprised how much shit comes out of the carpets in boost mode.
 

Nafensoriel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Messages
318
The laser on this product does exactly nothing. The product itself will most likely not use any special motors either. Last one of these I saw used a Panasonic off the shelf motor.

cdabc123 Vaporizing dust produces... well dust. Sure eventually you might be able to reduce it to just heat but at that point its probably not good to be in the room.
 

THRESHIN

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 29, 2002
Messages
3,300
Oh Dyson....the apple of the cleaning world. For a relatively small unit, sure they work great and they look nice. The price of their stuff is outrageous. Know what else works well? The central vac under the stairs in my basement. It was also a lot cheaper than a Dyson.

I once took a Dyson apart for repair couple years ago. I have to say, the build quality wasn't that great. Lots of weak plastic parts just asking for failure. Not easily serviceable either. Good luck getting parts.

As mentioned, how far can we go with a vacuum? Does anyone care at this point?

As interesting as it is, I feel like their laser and dirt counter techs are kind of pointless. I'm going to vacuum the whole house thanks, so who cares if I can see tiny dust particles? And I really don't care what's in the bin.

I guess if you want something that works well (until it breaks) and looks cool, sure great product so long as cost isn't an object.
 

Ocellaris

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
19,034
Doesn't it get to the point of maxing it out? Its a vacuum. It sucks up things off the carpet. I feel like we're trying to improve the toilet plunger here.

You can always find better ways of sucking things off carpet. For me, getting a light battery powered vacuum was a huge benefit compared to a corded vacuum.

Presuming it works, I’ll pickup one of those tangle free Dyson vacuums in a few years when the tech trickles down to cheaper models (and there is a Black Friday type sale).
 

T4rd

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 8, 2009
Messages
18,461
I had a Dyson ball vacuum and wasn't impressed with it for the decade or so I had it. Replaced it with a Shark with dual agitators on the head and thought it was significantly better, esp on hard surfaces and she getting in corners. Cost half as much too.
 
Last edited:

cdabc123

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Messages
3,056
The laser on this product does exactly nothing. The product itself will most likely not use any special motors either. Last one of these I saw used a Panasonic off the shelf motor.

cdabc123 Vaporizing dust produces... well dust. Sure eventually you might be able to reduce it to just heat but at that point its probably not good to be in the room.

Dyson likes wind cyclones. Let's get a gentle one going in the room to help ventilate it. Maybe it can work when everyone leaves the room.

I feel like roombas with lasers would be more fun
 

TheOne&OnlyZeke

100% Irish
Joined
Jul 21, 2000
Messages
10,739
Have a V6 cordless for close on 3 years now. can't use the boost mode as it kills the battery, but I think thats the battery at fault.
I kinda like them, but they are overpriced
 

LOCO LAPTOP

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 4, 2006
Messages
11,154
Have a V6 cordless for close on 3 years now. can't use the boost mode as it kills the battery, but I think thats the battery at fault.
I kinda like them, but they are overpriced
I got a refub V11, I refuse to spend $600 on a vacuum. But you want to talk overpriced? Filter Queen. My mother still has a 1978 Filter Queen Model 31 that she uses. She said she paid $1200 back in 78 and look at them now $3,398.00 for one. I don't see how they are worth that much either. There not much that has changed in 40+ years.
 

GreenLaser

n00b
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
16
1617216882477.png
 

Krazy925

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
5,146
I always thought the blade less fans were slick as fuck.

Not worth the price though.
 

Jonnycat99

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
221
Vaporizing dust produces... well dust.
Acktually... it would create a gas, assuming that the laser could heat the incoming matter stream to a hot enough temperature. More likely is that there would be a tiny fraction that was not vaporized and would need to be dumped out (AKA ash). Of course the main concern with this approach would be the kind of gasses produced from the vaporization cycle and their affect on people living in a confined space.
 

Krazy925

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
5,146
There is no such thing for consumer level products. No dyson product is fanless. They just put the fans into a cowl and tell people its fanless.
Shows how much I looked into it after I saw the price tag. Normal box and oscillating fans just keep chugging along
 

Viper16

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
1,753
I have my DC25 for over 10 years, not one part has broken on it, and it still performs like it did day one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this

bink

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Messages
1,655
Our shark sucks just much as a dyson. Although our little eufy dumb robo vac bounces all over the house doing a hell of a job. Our next vacuum purchase will be a robo vac with mapping and dog crap avoidance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zrikz
like this

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
11,445
Oh Dyson....the apple of the cleaning world.
They really are. A marketing company that happens to sell vacuums.

And it sickens me the way I now need a vacuum with an LCD and realtime graphs of the different sized dust molecules that have been collected, alphabetized, "coin-sorted" into groups, tagged and dated; the full analysis of which I can download as a CSV from the DysonCloud with a $29.95 subscription. /wrists

1617306325416.png
 
Last edited:

jfreund

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
1,233
My mother still has a 1978 Filter Queen Model 31 that she uses. She said she paid $1200 back in 78 and look at them now $3,398.00 for one. I don't see how they are worth that much either. There not much that has changed in 40+ years.

Dude, it's lasted 40+ years and still works. I bought a $400 Dyson around 2001 and barely got 5 years out of it, and my ex-wife was not a frequent user of vacuums.
 

Camberwell

Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
755
We have had 2 ball Dysons, each lasting 10 yrs each so no complaints. Would never replace with a cordless Dyson version though, the battery just doesn't last long enough even in non-boost to do the whole house in one go....wouldn't say no to a laser version if I could zap the neighbours damned cat every time it craps in our garden :)
 

THRESHIN

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 29, 2002
Messages
3,300
D
They really are. A marketing company that happens to sell vacuums.

And it sickens me the way I now need a vacuum with an LCD and realtime graphs of the different sized dust molecules that have been collected, alphabetized, "coin-sorted" into groups, tagged and dated; the full analysis of which I can download as a CSV from the DysonCloud with a $29.95 subscription. /wrists

View attachment 344252

I really don't understand. Maybe I'm too practical to care about owning a status symbol. I have never purchased an apple product for that reason. There's stuff out there that does a better job for less. Same goes with Dyson. Since when did a vacuum become a status symbol anyway??

Like I said, I don't understand. I'll keep my money thanks.
 

Jandor

Gawd
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
576
The thing about vaccums is that they need to suck and also get too noisy. I found years ago the Rowenta vaccums beat all the other on both sides. It's a bit heavy but they work like champs. You need to buy the most noiseless one which also is the best in vaccum even if the power appears to be small (1000W). In fact it's a low rotation big tork engine. It's about the same price as most of the expensive Miele but who make a lot of noise.
 

travm

Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
863
There is no such thing for consumer level products. No dyson product is fanless. They just put the fans into a cowl and tell people its fanless.
its bladeless, not fanless, its a fan. The principle of the design is pretty neat actually. It has something more akin to a centrifugal compressor inside. But yea, its not more effective at cooling me down than the $19 rattle cage fan from walmart.
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
14,722
They really are. A marketing company that happens to sell vacuums.

And it sickens me the way I now need a vacuum with an LCD and realtime graphs of the different sized dust molecules that have been collected, alphabetized, "coin-sorted" into groups, tagged and dated; the full analysis of which I can download as a CSV from the DysonCloud with a $29.95 subscription. /wrists

View attachment 344252
I like the old school way of cataloging the filth that my Dyson picks up, it's a mostly transparent cup that is right below the motor, and I just look in there to see how much stuff it picked up no subscription necessary!
 

Nafensoriel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Messages
318
its bladeless, not fanless, its a fan. The principle of the design is pretty neat actually. It has something more akin to a centrifugal compressor inside. But yea, its not more effective at cooling me down than the $19 rattle cage fan from walmart.
It's marketing.
The design is a known effect. Hell we knew how to build cowls in the 50s-60s. Any properly done cowled asymmetric fan design would exceed or match the energy efficiency per CFM and give similar noise levels. The reason you don't see asymetric fans for retail sale is they require a decent bit of engineering and most people don't want to spend that kind of coin for a fan.
There is nothing neat or new about it. Most of dysons new products are just a fancy plastic shell surrounding off the shelf products. Almost all of their newer fans contain Panasonic motors not any special "digital" design.
 

travm

Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
863
It's marketing.
The design is a known effect. Hell we knew how to build cowls in the 50s-60s. Any properly done cowled asymmetric fan design would exceed or match the energy efficiency per CFM and give similar noise levels. The reason you don't see asymetric fans for retail sale is they require a decent bit of engineering and most people don't want to spend that kind of coin for a fan.
There is nothing neat or new about it. Most of dysons new products are just a fancy plastic shell surrounding off the shelf products. Almost all of their newer fans contain Panasonic motors not any special "digital" design.
Thats not exactly true. They call it an air multiplyer, where you get more actual air flow by speeding up a thin sheet of air in a ring, then propelling it into still air. It makes the still air move as well. Its actually pretty neat engineering. But like I said, you can just put a bigger motor on a bladed fan and achieve the same result for considerably less input.
 

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
4,088
its bladeless, not fanless, its a fan. The principle of the design is pretty neat actually. It has something more akin to a centrifugal compressor inside. But yea, its not more effective at cooling me down than the $19 rattle cage fan from walmart.
We have one and it is pretty nice. Though I got the one with the heater in it too so the dual mode is nice. But got it refurbed so it was sub $200 at the time, been using it for 3-4 years now i think.
 

RanceJustice

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
6,099
Admittedly there are very few competitors for Dyson when it comes to "powerful, battery powered, stick vac with suction, filter, and motor head" cordless models. I've not seen anyone compare to what they've done with a V11 or newer in terms of power, battery life, and features. Likewise, their hairstyling products are top of the line - I bought one as a gift for the lady who cuts my hair ( a clasically trained stylist who I've known for like 20 years now) and even as a pro she was impressed with the blow dryer for its usability, low weight, and lack of damage. The fans are good too, but they don't filter as much as some air filter fans with other designs. However, this doesn't mean that Dysons are perfect. I each of them have some feature I wish I could fix or tweak a lot easier.

Ultimately if you want a cordless or some other unique appliances, they're great. If you want a top of the line canister vac or upright, Miele is a better choice but realize its going to do a great job but its going to be comparatively heavy and loud, still expensive, but will last forever and can be upgraded. So ultimately its a niche. I'd like to see more competitors in the style and features that Dyson does well but I worry their patents make that nigh impossible.
 
Last edited:

Nafensoriel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Messages
318
Thats not exactly true. They call it an air multiplyer, where you get more actual air flow by speeding up a thin sheet of air in a ring, then propelling it into still air. It makes the still air move as well. Its actually pretty neat engineering. But like I said, you can just put a bigger motor on a bladed fan and achieve the same result for considerably less input.
That is an utter bullsh*t marketing statement that physics promptly says no to. Think of air like a swimming pool. Pumping water through a ring in a swimming pool does not magically move more water compared to simple surface area of a fan.

This is entirely evident if you look at the technical specs of these devices. Take a Dyson am06 vs a vornado 660. They either trade blows equally or the vornado absolutely trainwrecks the dyson. The vornado is a third the price on a bad day. The blade diameter difference is only 6 inches. The difference is RPM. Guess what happens when you spin a blade faster? A fan is a fan and the physics dont magically change with a terminology addition. The reason real world tests favor larger fans vs faster RPMs is resistance, pressure, and surface area limits tend to put diminishing returns on any flow increases. The dyson methodology is flawed and was known to be flawed when they came out with this design. Oh.. the vornado is actually as quiet as the dyson in practical applications. In low powered situations its actually quieter... again because of the phyiscs of fan design. When you want a "quiet" pc you dont pony up for a 40mm 9000+RPM fan... you try to get a 140 or even a 220/240 model. Why? Large moves more air quieter and with less effort because... well surface area. Also motor efficiencies at scale.

If you bought a dyson that's great. They are pretty products and they do actually perform adequately. I'm all for capitalism in just about every single form. Just don't buy into the bullsh*t. Know what you are buying... and know that you are paying a premium for said marketing.
 

travm

Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
863
That is an utter bullsh*t marketing statement that physics promptly says no to. Think of air like a swimming pool. Pumping water through a ring in a swimming pool does not magically move more water compared to simple surface area of a fan.
Actually the physics is the only interesting thing, and it does not say no. Yes, pumping a high velocity stream of water through a ring in a swiming pool will induce a current through the centre of that ring. Dyson makes some weird shit, and its super expensive. I own no Dyson things. But the engineering is cool.
 
Top