My sister had a TT5000
It was absolute shit and the 10 year old DC01 my mum gave her worked better.
( Maximinimus you stick around I'll make it worth your while, Mon 29 Jun 2009, 13:20, archived)

I'm sure all companies make some duff individual appliances occasionally?
I'm not really talking about personal experinece here. It's just a statement of engineering fact, dyson's marketing hype is bullshit. beyond a very basic level that is achieved by all reasonable quality models, the vacuum part of a vacuum cleaner is identical. Dysons don't "suck better" because they can't.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Mon 29 Jun 2009, 13:26, archived)

it can't do much for efficiency to have to suck through a paper bag, mind you.

( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Mon 29 Jun 2009, 13:38, archived)

it's harder to suck through a HEPA filter than paper bag, by a mile*



*a mile being the official measure of vacuum inefficiency, obviously
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Mon 29 Jun 2009, 13:41, archived)

I don't know what that is,
so I'll just say yeah, alright.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Mon 29 Jun 2009, 13:42, archived)

high efficiency particulate air filter.
They are what we've used in the pharma and biotech industries for years for clean room air handling, till some bright spark decided to put them in a domestic vacuum cleaner. Yes, James Dyson, you again. Now everyone does it.

They are completely pointless in that role, save for almost certainly upping the rate of childhood asthma, and they cost a lot to replace, and block quite quickly. and have very small pores so restrict flow. Take them out, put a normal filter in, bosh, better cleaning.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Mon 29 Jun 2009, 13:53, archived)