[HN Gopher] Dyson air purifier outperformed by cheap DIY box fan...
___________________________________________________________________
Dyson air purifier outperformed by cheap DIY box fan filter in
Marketplace test
Author : walterbell
Score : 488 points
Date : 2021-02-11 13:19 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.cbc.ca)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.cbc.ca)
| zeroimpl wrote:
| If the only metrics you are comparing is price and purification
| level, then of course you won't want a Dyson. But there are other
| important _objective_ metrics such as size and loudness which
| deserve to be a part of any scientific comparison.
|
| But if the box fan is bigger and 4x as noisy, it's not a valid
| comparison for many situations. Instead should compare fans which
| are similar sizes and operating at similar noise levels.
|
| I have a Dyson fan and a box fan (not air purifies), and the
| Dyson fan is significantly quieter, smaller (same height but
| about half as wide), while having a similar power (not exactly
| sure which one is stronger).
| snickms wrote:
| My neighbour used to have a Dyson leaf blower.
|
| I would wake up thinking I was in the men's room.
| sdfhbdf wrote:
| I thought the Xiaomi Air Purifier line [1] was at least popular
| enough to be considered in such comparisons. Maybe it's my skewed
| European perspective where the Xiaomi phones and home products
| seem to really popular among people.
|
| [1]: https://www.mi.com/global/mi-air-purifier-3H/
| RL_Quine wrote:
| They're nice and hackable too.
| nvarsj wrote:
| Is there any point to air purifiers at all? I remember
| researching them a while ago as a way to alleviate my allergy
| symptoms without medicine. But the overall scientific consensus
| seems very dubious. To be frank, it seems like yet another one of
| those very expensive placebo products that rich people like to
| buy because of media scare mongering.
|
| I can see the obvious exception being a heavily polluted eastern
| city - but don't you need some heavy duty medical grade HEPA
| filters and fans to really make a large impact?
| akeck wrote:
| It's been easier for me to focus during WFH when my HEPA filter
| is running, so I think it depends on the person and the
| location.
| pchristensen wrote:
| If you're in the Western US/Canada, they're very helpful during
| the (more frequent and increasingly severe) fire and smoke
| seasons. See this pic of a filter after 6 days:
| https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/9xroh4/air_filter_aft...
|
| They're also good if you cook with oil indoors.
| gbourne wrote:
| I've been using BlueAir (have the original one that looks like a
| tank) for 20 year and it has been fantastic. I live in NYC, so
| the air can get dirty and the BlueAir def makes a difference.
|
| And I've never even had to change the filter in 20 years! It is
| that good! Kidding - change it about every 6 months.
| syntaxing wrote:
| I always treated my Dyson purifier as a fan that happens to clean
| the air a little. I leave the real heavy lifting to my Blueair
| purifiers which my taped up box fan purifiers cannot beat (I
| measured the 2.5um output during the wildfires).
| dylan604 wrote:
| To be fair, the wildfire situations are pretty much the extreme
| edege of "acceptable" living conditions.However, these consumer
| products aren't meant for those extreme conditions. The fact
| that any filter can handle that is a good testament.
| vanadium wrote:
| I've got two Blueair 121s (the larger sibling to the 211+) that
| were recently on sale at Costco.com for the price of the 211+.
| My family could sense the difference in air quality within a
| couple hours.
|
| I can't say that about any of the prior purifiers we've tried.
| clairity wrote:
| to add on, it helps in some cases to have another fan or two to
| move air (and dust) to your air purifier. i have 2 blueairs
| (211+ & 411 auto) and they do a decent job cleaning by
| themselves, but the fans aren't powerful enough even on high to
| draw all the crap being constantly kicked up farther than a few
| feet away without extra help.
| the-pigeon wrote:
| This headline is intentionally misleading.
|
| They put a Merc 11 filter on a box fan. The Merc 11 filter
| outperformed Dyson. Not some homemade filter.
|
| And duh? Any air purifier where the air actually goes through a
| filter is going to perform better. Worth testing but not
| interesting.
| osrec wrote:
| Back in the day, Dyson vacuums were supposed to be the best of
| the best. I think they lived up to that reputation to some
| extent.
|
| But now, everything they produce is a nice looking pile of barely
| functional junk, with a ridiculous price tag.
| [deleted]
| snickms wrote:
| To be fair, the Dyson model claims to heat and cool the air as
| well as filter it - unlike the DIY purifier.
| bluGill wrote:
| But those are not functions that should be combined with an air
| filter.
| crististm wrote:
| Yeah... No! I don't have an axe to grind here but indeed there
| are more than one way to compare a product.
|
| Air debit is only one dimension. You can pick arbitrary
| dimensions to compare products depending on which one you want to
| (if you would) show preference to.
|
| Did they check also the noise level? The dimensions? How long you
| can run the thing before changing the filters? Do they have some
| form of regulator or are they always on? Do they fall apart when
| you bump on them?
|
| It's like comparing processors by their clock speed. Which one
| 'is outperformed' by the other?
| lxe wrote:
| Attaching an air filter to a box fan doesn't look great and
| sounds loud. There's no remote and no pivot or heating functions.
| bluGill wrote:
| Why would you want a remote on an air filter? You want it on
| 24x7 because you never know when something will happen that
| means the air needs cleaning. If you need a heater, buy a
| heater, don't try to mix the heater with the air purifier as
| they have different needs. Pivot might be useful, but only for
| mixing the air - if you want to feel the air, then you want a
| fan not an air filter.
| Bakary wrote:
| I've spent many hours navigating the air purifier market and it
| is one of the most opaque and customer-unfriendly ones I have
| ever seen. Beyond the advice given in the article, it's also
| important to check what the filter exactly is. Some filters are
| washable, but it often means that they are not as thorough as
| HEPA filters, which is a big deal if your goal is to avoid the
| dreaded PM2.5 that are as far as I can tell the main threat to
| health and the pursuit of happiness.
|
| A more general problem is that there is a conceptual
| contradiction between low noise and high filtering. It will be
| difficult for a silent filter to be quick at filtering your room.
|
| The good news is that even a relatively crappy, low CADR setup
| can still filter a bedroom over time so long as it remains
| closed. You will however be paying for replacements more often
| and it might not be worth it if you have to ventilate daily and
| the filter takes many hours to give you a clean environment.
|
| I like the work that Smart Air China is doing. I am not
| affiliated with them, but they have essentially done and made
| available the same sort of research as the one highlighted in the
| article and have long promoted the no bullshit use of a simple
| box fan with filter combo for lower income and highly polluted
| regions.
| ahaucnx wrote:
| Yes I agree. There are a lot of non or low performing units out
| there that are hyped up by marketing and dubious claims. My
| startup [1] does air quality measurements primarily for schools
| and we very often come across schools that wasted a lot of
| money purchasing non performing units. The best is really to
| get a PM2.5 meter and compare the performance of different
| units.
|
| [1] https://www.airgradient.com/schools/
| technics256 wrote:
| What about something like VOCs? Important also or?
| float4 wrote:
| Between a lot of nonsense I've read today, I suddenly read a
| comment from someone who devotes energy to making air in
| schools cleaner.
|
| Very refreshing. Good luck with your startup.
| turtlebits wrote:
| I'm not a fan of Dyson products, but i really like their air
| purifier (with heat). I'm not that concerned with performance as
| I'm just trying to maintain clean air, not actively clean it.
|
| It's quiet, has an actual thermostat (instead of the 0-10 knob).
| No burning smell and hot air temperature isn't a fire hazard
| (great for clumsy kids).
|
| Best of all, it looks nice.
|
| That said, I don't think I'd be willing to pay upwards of $600
| for one. (I got a refurb HP02 for <$200, and would buy another
| one at that price in an instant.)
| KingOfCoders wrote:
| "Best of all, it looks nice." The Dyson USP.
| turtlebits wrote:
| :). This is why we have terms like "Wife Acceptance Factor"
| and "Happy wife, happy life"
| inssein wrote:
| Not really defending Dyson, but they have a public statement on
| CADR, and also just a note that CBC reviewed the older model.
|
| https://www.dyson.co.uk/air-treatment/purifiers/CADR
| dyno-might wrote:
| I did a bunch of tests with a similar filter (albeit comparing to
| a cheaper commercial purifier)
|
| https://dynomight.net/2020/12/15/some-real-data-on-a-DIY-box...
|
| It's crazy that commercial manufacturers usually don't even
| attempt to provide data like this to show that their products
| actually, you know, work.
| laurent92 wrote:
| This. Instead, they'll come up with whatever irrelevant metric
| like measuring purification power in Watts.
|
| All we want to know is asthma per hour in the room, and cancers
| per years in that city ;)
| DoingIsLearning wrote:
| This could be a HN submission in it's own right. Really
| interesting 'home' science.
| danans wrote:
| Some of the best air filtering systems (and also among the most
| expensive) are systems like the IQAir [1], which are essentially
| boxes with a fan at one end and a series of filters arranged in
| an alternating diagonal pattern: Note: / and \
| are each separate filters Filter
| box ___ | \ | Inflow
| --> / --> Outflow | \ | | / |
| ---
|
| This maximizes the filtration while reducing the static pressure,
| since the filtration is distributed over a large surface area.
|
| Of course a lot of the high cost of installing such a system is
| the whole-house ducting. They also make single room purifiers,
| but there are also not cheap [2].
|
| 1. https://www.iqair.com/us/whole-house-air-purifiers/perfect16
|
| 2. https://www.iqair.com/us/room-air-purifiers/healthpro-series
|
| EDIT: Corrected orientation of diagram
| ahaucnx wrote:
| Be aware that some of the whole house systems might not have a
| fresh air intake. This can lead to relatively high CO2 levels
| inside the building and affect wellbeing and cognitive
| performance.
| danans wrote:
| Ideally yes, they should have a fresh air intake connected to
| something like an HRV, but there is still value in
| dust/smoke/pathogen filtration even if the fresh air source
| for removing CO2 is a different one (i.e an open window).
|
| They are definitely better than no air filtration at all.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| I think the filter is rotated the wrong way in your diagram? It
| looks like they use a normal pleated filter.
| ohyeshedid wrote:
| I believe that's 6 filters in a chamber, not a zoomed in view
| of a single filter.
| danans wrote:
| You're right about the orientation. I've fixed the diagram.
| But they don't just use 1 filter, they use a series of them,
| like you can see at this timestamp of this video:
|
| https://youtu.be/8f6Ih09uaDw?t=401
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| Oh, I see. That's a weird hack to get more surface areas
| instead of just using a deeper filter. All the pictures I
| could find were systems like this that do just use deeper
| pleats: https://images.allergybuyersclub.com/img/IQ-AP-HP-
| airflow.jp...
| danans wrote:
| I could be wrong, but I think using separate filters
| distributes the air streams across independent filtration
| channels, reducing the static pressure of the system.
| Similar to a pleated filter, the angular orientation is
| probably about packing more surface area into a smaller
| space vs. parallel filter channels oriented linearly.
| nostrademons wrote:
| My wife rigged up a similar box fan + HEPA filter + duct tape
| solution during last summer's CA wildfires. They are remarkably
| effective. We also have the BlueAir purifier that was top-rated
| in this report, and arguably the box fan did better. (The BlueAir
| is better for kitchen smells, the box fan is better for
| particulates like wildfire smoke.) I think the filters are like
| $40 each from Costco and the box fan was $30-40, so it totaled
| about $70-80, about the same as the jury-rigged solution in the
| article.
|
| Highly recommend this solution if coolness is not a factor.
| sdljfjafsd wrote:
| Why did you believe the box fan did better? Did you do any kind
| of testing to verify that? The Blue Air's CADR is 2.7x that of
| a box fan.
|
| I do agree that the box fan solution is a great low cost option
| for small to medium rooms, but if you need 1 device to purify a
| large area, it's not gonna cut it.
| nostrademons wrote:
| No objective data, because what I care about is usually "Am I
| choking on smoke? Will I stop choking if I run the air
| filter?" Subjectively we were still having problems with just
| the BlueAir (~1000 sq ft apartment), add the box fan and
| things got better, take away the BlueAir and things are still
| better.
|
| The filter on the box fan also got black faster, which is our
| indication that it pulled more particles out of the air.
| Makes a lot of sense, because the actual filter material is
| the same (they both use HEPA filters inside) but the box fan
| blows a greater volume of air through a larger filter area.
| averynicepen wrote:
| The study doesn't mention the air flow rate of the box fan,
| nor the size of the box fan. I'm not familiar with it, but on
| Wikipedia it looks like CADR is calculated as (fraction of
| particles) x (airflow rate). So one good explanation would be
| that even though the box fan could be less efficient at
| filtering particles, if it's moving 2 or 3 times the air over
| the BlueAir, it will clean a room faster.
|
| I think it's a feasible estimate of CFM, as the diameter of
| the box fan's impeller would be larger than the one used in
| the BlueAir box.
| danShumway wrote:
| > but if you need 1 device to purify a large area
|
| I realize there are other concerns here (noise, power usage,
| aesthetics), but at the price points this article is talking
| about, you can buy 3 box filters for the price of one BlueAir
| device. Or spend a bit of extra money (but still
| comparatively less than $400) on a more powerful box fan.
|
| I am doubtful that a BlueAir would outperform a setup with
| multiple independent fans.
| hinkley wrote:
| There's a box fan design with a slot for a 20x20 air filter on
| the back.
|
| There's an issue of whether the fan motor is designed for that
| sort of pressure, though. Not sure how durable that motor is
| going to be.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| Dyson : Air Products :: Beats : Audio Products
|
| Pretty much every Dyson product I've used, from the public
| bathroom air "blades" to the vacuums, seem like a gimmicky,
| inferior products with a premium price tag. None of them do their
| intended job better than older, cheaper products in their
| category. I know James Dyson is regarded as a genius engineer,
| but the consumer product company bearing his name seems to be 99%
| marketing.
| turtlebits wrote:
| A huge part of their price/product is marketing, but their air
| purifiers are excellent as a whole package (I have the one
| including heat).
|
| Their stick vacuums and they are excellent as well.
|
| That said, you should not judge their performance based on
| their cost, as there are other factors, such as ergonomics,
| WAF, etc.
| ksec wrote:
| You are giving too much Credit to Beats. They are simply Crap.
|
| Dyson on the other hand ranges from poor like the Air Purifier
| to Decent with their Vacuum and Hair Dryer.
| colechristensen wrote:
| Dyson focuses on over-engineering and clever-engineering.
| Sometimes those things get in the way of what is _practical_ ,
| _best_ , or even _useful_.
|
| But I am quite fond of my dyson upright and handheld vacuums.
| Their fans and other things seem more like novelties to me, but
| that doesn't make them bad, they just are what they are.
| Expensive and _neat_ , but not optimal if you want to chase a
| metric or price optimum.
| [deleted]
| gambiting wrote:
| He's an avid brexiteer as well, which is enough for me to never
| ever touch any of his products again and put maximum effort
| into discouraging people from buying anything from the company.
| raiyu wrote:
| The public bathroom air blades drive me crazy. It keeps
| splashing the water back and forth, the air speed is too high
| and my hands inadvertently touch the sides and probably there
| are a bunch of germs circulating inside, as not everyone washes
| their hands thoroughly.
|
| The old school super blowers that just do hot air down, or
| whichever direction you turn, probably consume more power, but
| certainly dry my hands faster and I don't have to worry about
| touching anything that isn't clean in the process.
| [deleted]
| LegitShady wrote:
| I prefer the Excel XLERATOR hand dryers, and usually spec
| them over most other models. Hands dry in ~10 seconds, not
| spashing onto a lower surface, etc.
| adamscybot wrote:
| Yeh, those are good. Though they seem to have appeared
| shortly after the Dyson blade dryers. Dyson seem to have
| shaken the market a bit into realising you actually need
| power in these things for them to be useful.
| LegitShady wrote:
| No, the XLERATORS predate the dyson airblade by ~4-5
| years. The dyson just made people realize that they were
| more expensive than the garbage units people used before,
| but not _that_ expensive.
| LegitShady wrote:
| I checked and I spec'd an XLERATOR in 2004, and I think
| they became available the year before. The dyson took
| another 2-3 years to reach market, so 4-5 years is
| probably overstating it.
|
| Either way Excel were the innovators. Dyson just made it
| look cool. The apple-style marketers who charged 2x as
| much so could afford some stupid overengineering.
| bluGill wrote:
| I hate them because they are too loud. Sure they work fast,
| but I need to put air plugs in before using them, and those
| are never provided.
| LegitShady wrote:
| its 10 seconds, I prefer loud and fast to mediocre in
| both respects.
| unwind wrote:
| *Ear plugs, hopefully. :)
| SethMurphy wrote:
| The noise is a feature. It is a social signal that you
| are clean for everyone in the establishment, or at least
| for everyone who can see the entrance to the restroom.
| wu_187 wrote:
| Ditto. They dry my hands much faster than the Dyson and I
| don't have to touch a germ infested surface.
| jandrese wrote:
| I thought those were considered to be a bad idea because
| they blasted all of the germs from your hands all over the
| room?
|
| Also, my kids won't use them because they're too loud.
| LegitShady wrote:
| what do you think has more germs, your recently washed
| hands or the bathroom around you?
|
| Also, the dyson's do the same thing.
| jandrese wrote:
| The Dyson ones were also considered bad.
| reaperducer wrote:
| Protip: If you're in a public rest room and there are two
| hand dryers next to each other, use them both at the same
| time. One for each hand. Much faster.
| lurquer wrote:
| Further Protip: Wipe your hands on your jeans.
| reaperducer wrote:
| Unless I'm at the library or a Starbucks, I generally
| don't wear the kind of clothes in public that one wipes
| hands on.
| BoorishBears wrote:
| I had to read this comment like 3 times to parse it...
| and I'm still not sure I get it
|
| Wiping your hands on your pants when there's towels or
| something is kind of silly, but how on earth does the
| article of clothing define if you can wipe your hands on
| it?
|
| Are you wearing vinyl pants or something?
| cat199 wrote:
| think the point is here that things would stain / be too
| expensive.. jeans don't really "show" if you wipe your
| hands on them, and if they do, oh well, just part of that
| 'worn jeans' look
| lurquer wrote:
| It's a very intriguing post. I, too, have been trying to
| work out its logical ramifications. I feel, perhaps, that
| the poster may, at any given time, be in possession of
| two sets of clothing.
| jshevek wrote:
| I interpreted it as: Generally the clothes they wear are
| either too nice or too nasty for wiping clean wet hands.
| At the library and Starbucks they wear clothes
| appropriate for wiping hands. Too nasty makes sense to
| me, if you work landscaping, construction, maintenance,
| auto repair, possibly even in food service.
|
| The too nice viewpoint is less relatable, but could be
| from fastidiousness or OCD applied to the clothes
| themselves, rather than being concerned about your hands.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _how on earth does the article of clothing define if you
| can wipe your hands on it?_
|
| If I'm wearing $50 jeans, I might wipe my hands on them.
|
| If I'm wearing a $2,000 suit, I won't wipe my hands on
| it.
| UnFleshedOne wrote:
| You could permanently attach a small travel towel like
| they sell in camping stores to your shirt somewhere under
| arm. Beats having to use air dryers.
| jnurmine wrote:
| Not only are airblades gimmicky nonsense, they are very loud.
|
| Anything that blows air around will also blow viruses and the
| like into the air. People do not wash hands in a
| "standardized manner" and some people do not even use soap.
| After their hands are wet, they just stick their hands to the
| airblade, sometimes touching the sides and shaking the rest
| of the water all over because they are in a hurry and can't
| wait that 10 seconds or whatever it takes.
|
| I hate airblades and I don't like hot air dryers.
|
| Paper towels are the best.
| mattgreenrocks wrote:
| Reminds me of newer appliances (such as washing
| machines/toilets) that brag about water efficiency yet don't
| do nearly as good a job, requiring a second cycle, thus using
| more water.
| soylentcola wrote:
| I did recently buy a HE washer to replace the junker that
| came with the house. It may just be that I live a (mostly)
| white collar lifestyle, but I do make a mess of clothes I
| wear for renovation and yard work or for camping.
|
| So far, the new washer hasn't given me any issues with
| getting things clean. The only adjustment I had to make was
| learning to use much less detergent than I was used to.
|
| There are also just two people in the house and no kids, so
| perhaps it's more of an issue with larger loads or more
| grass stains, etc.
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| HE washing machines seems to be one of the few things
| where less water is still ok. They make up for it by
| running longer. A water efficient toilet just ends up not
| working as well because it's using less water and not
| reusing it (like washing machines).
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Washers seem to be an exception. My gut feeling is that
| the real HE improvement was switching everyone from top
| loaders to front loaders. Front loaders do a great job
| cleaning and use a whole lot less water in the process.
| mattgreenrocks wrote:
| Front loaders have bad mold issues with the liner though.
| We switched away from an old one. No regrets.
| Symbiote wrote:
| When you're not using a front loading machine, leave the
| door and soap tray ajar.
| ghaff wrote:
| In at least some cases, the greater nominal efficiency may
| be required by regulations.
| [deleted]
| crmd wrote:
| Check out AvE's tear down of a $500 Dyson hair dryer.[1] He was
| expecting to ridicule it but was instead blown away by the
| engineering - tiny high torque zinc cast brushless DC motor,
| CNC-milled impeller, etc.
|
| It's a good watch, including FLIR performance analysis, Fourier
| analysis of bearing noise, and more.
|
| In summary it's definitely more engineering porn / extreme
| overkill than marketing bs.
|
| [1] https://youtu.be/j-vJxez9UF8
| mminer237 wrote:
| It reminds me of a less-extreme version of Juicero. They made
| a $700 WiFi-connected "juicer" that squeezed bags of juice
| using QR codes to scan the bags and then a custom power
| supply, custom machined gears, and a custom 15A 330V DC motor
| to actuate a press to squeeze the bags between two metal
| plates. Of course, a roller could have done it for a fraction
| of the price, or you could have just let gravity pour the
| juice and not even need a $700 machine.
|
| https://blog.bolt.io/juicero/
|
| Dyson's very into moving air in creative ways and blowing
| through holes. They definitely seem to be the best at it and
| are very good at it, but they're just playing with an
| artificial constraint. No one says you have to be able to see
| through your hair dryer or air purifier. You could make much
| more effective or cheaper products without those constraints.
| Just people think they look cool, so they're willing to pay a
| premium for the weird, "futuristic" Dyson product over the
| boring normal product. That does make it seem like largely
| marketing though.
| [deleted]
| edumucelli wrote:
| Talking about Juicero I remember its pressing strength was
| "enough to lift two Teslas" as per its founder. Really
| difficult to find something as over engineered as this now-
| defunct product.
| Twirrim wrote:
| > Of course, a roller could have done it for a fraction of
| the price, or you could have just let gravity pour the
| juice and not even need a $700 machine.
|
| Or, as some journalists found, just squeeze the bag in your
| hands and get more juice out of it than the Juicero did.
| You know you've over-engineered your product when it's that
| hard to get something that simple right.
| cortesoft wrote:
| Sure, but a fan is going to be visible in the room that it
| is in... caring about the aesthetics of it doesn't seem
| necessarily foolish.
|
| People spend way more money for decorative things that have
| no functional purpose at all.
| xyzzy_plugh wrote:
| In the case of the hair dryer, it really is much more
| efficient than any competitor. My wife saves 5+ minutes a
| day over other hair dryers.
| evancordell wrote:
| AvE has a good teardown of juicero[0] as well, of course.
|
| [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ
| kixiQu wrote:
| Yeah, I'm pretty sure the people saying "they have no good
| products" or "their only good product was a bagless vacuum"
| do not have adequate hair dryer experience to be making that
| judgment. It's interesting how quickly commenters are
| assuming that the target audience is incapable of evaluating
| performance when it doesn't take an air particulate sensor to
| do so.
| postalrat wrote:
| It seems like dyson focuses on over optimizing for problems
| that they themselves create.
| jandrese wrote:
| I think they see themselves as reinventing solutions to
| problems that had solutions created 50-100 years ago but
| that the manufacturers are still using basically the same
| 100 year old solution today.
|
| So you have products that are marginally better (because
| those people 100 years ago were smart too and they have not
| been completely sitting on their laurels) because it uses
| modern technology and design informed by modern
| aerodynamics and the like, but is expensive because it
| doesn't have 100 years of cost optimization behind it.
|
| Worse, you have products that have 6 months of heavy cost
| optimization resulting in high precision high power motors
| mounted in flimsy plastic cases that break the first time
| you drop them.
| mywittyname wrote:
| Dyson products are like the Juiceros. They are masturbatory
| exercises for engineers. They get to design a product with an
| almost limitless budget, functionality be damned.
|
| We're all guilty of that too. I bet most of us would love a
| job where you get to play with cool tech all day and not
| really worry about how efficient the program is.
| sjwalter wrote:
| That video you linked is absolutely solid. Learned a tonne
| watching it. Never woulda thought 45 minutes about hair
| dryers would be so great. That dude is awesome.
| crmd wrote:
| I'm glad you enjoyed it! When you have time, check out one
| of his BOLTR (bored of lame tool reviews) videos for more
| of the same. He's a piece of work.
| roelschroeven wrote:
| And in case there's something you don't understand, refer
| to https://avedictionary.com/browse/ for enlightenment.
| mattlondon wrote:
| I was of a similar attitude to you until I tried and failed to
| get a decent cordless vacuum cleaner that has a proper wall
| holster (i.e. putting it in/out of the holster also
| plugs/unplugs the charger)
|
| I went through several other brands (both well known and no-
| name things from china) and then returning them to amazon
| because they were either just crap at cleaning, and/or the wall
| holster was a glorified hook that required you to put it in the
| holster _and_ then still plug it in too as a separate step.
|
| I finally gave in and paid a little bit more for a dyson
| cordless stick vacuum and it has been really quite excellent
| and I cannot fault it. It always gets a lot more "out" of the
| carpets than our previous vacuum, and the usability of the wall
| holster means it is super-fast and easy to just grab and go
| without faffing with cables (vital for me with a small kid -
| we're vacuuming multiple times a day)
| reaperducer wrote:
| _Pretty much every Dyson product I 've used, from the public
| bathroom air "blades" to the vacuums, seem like a gimmicky,
| inferior products with a premium price tag_
|
| That's interesting to me because I've had the opposite
| experience.
|
| I move a lot. For almost decade I moved twice a year. I don't
| like taking the dirt from one place to the next, so I buy a new
| vacuum cleaner every time. So I've been though a lot of vacuum
| cleaners.
|
| I've tried every brand and almost every level of vacuum cleaner
| on the market, because sometimes I have more money to spend on
| a vacuum cleaner, and sometimes things are a little tight, and
| I have to get a cheaper one. The two Dysons have been the best
| of them all. My only complaint is that with the wireless
| models, the battery doesn't last as long as I'd like, but if I
| stick it back on the charger while I'm moving furniture out of
| the way in the next room, it keeps up well enough.
| sorenjan wrote:
| > I don't like taking the dirt from one place to the next, so
| I buy a new vacuum cleaner every time.
|
| That seems extremely wasteful. Why not just emptying the
| vacuum cleaner before bringing it to the new place? One
| person buying 20 new vacuum cleaners in a decade is just one
| of the reasons this planet is running out of resources.
| UnFleshedOne wrote:
| Especially considering that 80% of the dirt the vacuums
| collect are his own skin flakes and hair anyway...
| folkrav wrote:
| Actually, that's supposedly a common misconception[1].
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jn5M48MVWyg
| reaperducer wrote:
| _That seems extremely wasteful_
|
| It is. I'm not afraid to admit that. Old vacuum cleaners
| give me the heebie jeebies. We all have our quirks.
| Brakenshire wrote:
| Do you sell them or give them away? Tell me how you
| haven't thrown away a whole series of functional vacuum
| cleaners.
| patrickk wrote:
| AMA from a vacuum technician: https://old.reddit.com/r/IAmA/c
| omments/7gmsoe/iama_reddits_o...
|
| IIRC he recommends Miele vacuums.
| TorKlingberg wrote:
| I am sort of worried that a lot of internet sentiments go
| back to just one person. I also have a vaguely negative
| impression of Dyson, and realized it came from that same
| Reddit thread. It feels like every internet community just
| recycles information from previous threads and only rarely
| gets input from reality.
|
| FWIW, I have a Dyson wireless handheld vacuum. It's pretty
| good, but I can't way if it's worth the price.
| patrickk wrote:
| It's not only that thread that is giving Dyson a bad
| name. They've been selling overhyped, over-marketed
| products for years. I've heard the same from multiple
| sources. As multiple commenters have said here, they're
| like Bose in that aspect. They're not bad as such, but
| there are much better products out there that are not
| heavily marketed.
| Guest19023892 wrote:
| I was in the market for a vacuum last year and followed the
| advice in that topic. I bought a used Miele C1 Compact for
| $80. Great vacuum for my small apartment and I've been very
| happy with the purchase.
|
| I remember seeing the Dyson Ball vacuum the first time in
| the store and being incredibly underwhelmed after all the
| marketing on TV. It was heavy, and felt like a bunch of
| cheap plastic that was going to break apart. Then I tried a
| few of those handheld Dyson vacuums in different Airbnbs I
| lived for a while. They were a pain to clean, hair would
| get caught in the spinning brushes, and the battery life on
| all of them was terrible (one would only last about 2
| minutes, likely because the battery was aging). It always
| feels like marketing and "cool" gimmicks come first with
| Dyson products and the actual quality is second.
| antoniuschan99 wrote:
| I like Vacuum Wars as he provide fun reviews
|
| https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCvavJlMjlTd4wLwi9yKCtew
| asdff wrote:
| I thought that until I came to own a dyson ball vacuum for
| free. My lord. If a hoover/shark/whatever is a 25 year old
| toyota corolla, this is a brand new rolls royce and feels like
| it. It's extremely powerful despite being used, and collects a
| frankly disturbing amount of dust and hair every time I use it
| (picking up about a full chamber of hair from my longhair cat
| some times, hair that was invisible to the eye on the rugs
| before vacuuming). Pretty much every other vaccume I've had
| turns to hell in a few years with the poor build quality and
| dealing with my cats hair, but this is a tank in comparison and
| has tumbled down stairs. The ball system is actually pretty
| nice and easy to push around, and the low center of gravity
| helps with balance as well. It's loud, but not nearly as loud
| as my old vaccuum (my cat doesn't run away). Maintenance is
| extremely user friendly and easy; I had the whole thing apart
| to clean the filters without looking at a manual, just moving
| bits of plastic conveniently colored red so you know they are
| there for you to move or remove.
|
| But none of this is something you would notice from a sexy
| ipod-esque ad. All of this you pick up on after you start using
| the tool. Then it makes perfect sense why this is such a good
| vacuum and well worth the premium relative to other offerings
| on the market.
| [deleted]
| falcolas wrote:
| One thing I particularly appreciate about our Dyson corded
| vacuum is that I can take the whole damned air path apart if
| needed, without tools. It's quite useful when something gets
| jammed up in a u-bend.
|
| I have no comment about the rest of it, compared to other ones,
| because I haven't had to replace it since we got it a couple of
| decades ago.
| sigstoat wrote:
| > One thing I particularly appreciate about our Dyson corded
| vacuum is that I can take the whole damned air path apart if
| needed, without tools.
|
| the first time i went to clean the filter in ours, i kept
| seeing that i could easily take off/remove one more thing, so
| i did. next thing i knew i had completely dismantled and
| washed it.
|
| then it went back together just as easily. hardest part was
| waiting for things to dry out.
| [deleted]
| vondur wrote:
| I've used Dyson's hand dryers in a public restroom. They seem
| to work really well compared to the standard hand dryers.
| phatfish wrote:
| Dyson the person had one very successful idea (the bagless
| vacuum) and brought it to market himself after being ignored by
| the then-incumbent manufactures of existing models.
|
| Dyson the company has been riding that one idea since, and I
| agree the rest of their products are over-priced luxury items.
| In fact their vacuums are over-priced as well now.
|
| Dyson rubs me the wrong way as well personally by purporting to
| be a "patriotic Brit" moaning about the current state of the
| country. Then upping sticks to Malaysia with the company HQ in
| tow.
| sjg007 wrote:
| He started with the ball barrow but I have a dyson vacuum and
| it's OK. The main part does have a lot of suction that I am
| pretty sure is eating the carpet. The wand stick thing
| attachment though is absolutely the worst designed product
| ever produced. It's impossible to wield and bend into tight
| spaces. The vacuum itself is just too heavy as well. I'll go
| with an upright bagged version though for better Hepa
| filtering or a canister in the future.
|
| Dyson really does have good marketing though.
| dominotw wrote:
| I currently use dyson v11 cordless vaccum. I am in the market
| for a new one, what do you recommend instead ? Price is not too
| much of concern for me ATM.
| duxup wrote:
| I've had a good experience with a Shark vacuum. It had high
| ratings from Consumer Reports. I bought one and found it did
| a great job with heavy carpet and rugs, and wood floors. It
| is easy to take apart, clean, etc.
| JamesSwift wrote:
| Our Shark just died but it served honorably for about 10
| years if I remember correctly. It was very affordable when
| we got it as well.
| phatfish wrote:
| I have a Shark also, sub PS200 (PS170 i think), pretty sure
| a similar Dyson was easily twice the price. It is quite,
| light (its one of the hand held models) and certainly
| powerful enough for general use around the house.
| duxup wrote:
| Yeah the build quality really impressed me about the
| Shark.
|
| It's light, but has been really powerful, durable.
| EarthIsHome wrote:
| It'll depend on your use case (square footage, majority
| carpet vs majority hardwoods with some rugs, etc).
|
| But as others have said, Miele is incredible. Sebo is another
| good one. They'll have specific models for your use case.
|
| You can browse /r/vacuumcleaners [0] for ideas.
|
| [0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/VacuumCleaners/
| ttul wrote:
| Miele makes the best vacuums IMHO.
| SeanLuke wrote:
| Miele. They last forever and are much cleaner, lighter, and
| more powerful than equivalent Dysons.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| I really like my Miele canister vacuum. It's light, quiet,
| and powerful. I find bagless vacuums, including Dyson's, to
| be a pain in the butt to clean by comparison. However Miele
| is certainly not a good value brand either. I've never used a
| cordless vacuum, but I find the concept suspect for basic
| physics reasons. You're either giving up weight, power, or
| both compared to something you can plug into a wall.
| ghaff wrote:
| Even if you are giving something up for cordless--and I'm
| happy to stipulate you may be to some degree, there are a
| lot of situations where you want to do a quick touchup,
| clean up a spill, etc. and a cordless vacuum like a Dyson
| is _so_ much quicker and easier. It 's the same with a lot
| of battery-powered tools. They may not be quite as powerful
| as a corded or gasoline version but they're increasingly
| powerful enough, especially for relatively light duty use,
| and they're a lot more convenient.
| Siecje wrote:
| Is there a vacuum that doesn't have a battery but uses the
| same form factor? I don't mind plugging it in but I don't
| want to drag around another object I just want to use it
| like a swiffer.
| ooboe wrote:
| I have used a Miele bagged cannister and a Dyson bagless
| cannister, both corded, and a variety of cheaper units. Miele
| all the way.
| city41 wrote:
| I think Dyson is the best example that shows marketing really
| works. I've yet to find a single Dyson product of quality.
| Their vacuums are downright terrible.
| Amasuriel wrote:
| I'm surprised to hear that sentiment about the vacuums in
| particular!
|
| I found the v11 I bought to be vastly better than previous
| vacuums I've owned, with excellent power despite being
| cordless, really light and much much quieter.
|
| I haven't used any other Dyson products; I opted to buy
| Rabbit air purifiers over a Dyson Air.
| SeanLuke wrote:
| Miele. Every Miele I've found is superior, hands down, to
| its Dyson equivalent.
| tomjakubowski wrote:
| Maybe true for corded vacuums, but the Dyson cordless
| models have superior battery life.
| city41 wrote:
| It's actually the cordless ones in particular that I
| think are so terrible. They get jammed just about every
| time you use them, the max button gets stuck, the battery
| doesn't last, etc. I struggle to think of a positive for
| them if I'm honest. We've owned two of them and have
| vowed never again.
| sremani wrote:
| Dyson proves we care about beautiful things. Aesthetics
| matter.
| SeanLuke wrote:
| The nonsensical Dyson canister vacuums are the ones that amaze
| me. Dyson competes based on premium coolness, so just consider
| at its primary coolness competitor: Miele. Across the board,
| Miele canisters are lighter, more powerful, cleaner, and much
| more effective than their Dyson cost equivalents. They have a
| far lower failure rate and last much longer. Bagless canisters
| have so many negatives compared to bagged vacuums, it's a
| wonder they're still being promoted.
| ooboe wrote:
| I have to agree with this. I have a Miele bagged canister and
| my partner has a Dyson bagless canister. The Miele is
| superior (often significantly) in every measure, including
| price. Granted I do have to buy bags but it'll take decades
| of bags to negate the price difference.
| kevstev wrote:
| Do you have any more info to back this? I am honestly
| curious- I bought a Dyson Animal about 12 years ago now, and
| its still going strong, and is the best vacuum I have ever
| used. Not having to keep bags around is nice too. Our usecase
| is relatively light- we have area rugs mostly, but its still
| head and shoulders above the previous vacuum we had, and any
| of the ones my parents had growing up.
| damontal wrote:
| how do you dump your cannister? i empty mine after every
| use and it always releases dust into the air. bagged seems
| much better as it just keeps the dust inside.
| kevstev wrote:
| I just do it over the garbage can, the cannister is
| removable and just flips open up top. I guess some dust
| escapes, but its mostly contained. The cannister being
| clear, its also very transparent as to when its full and
| needs to be emptied. Its been awhile, but I remember this
| being problematic on my previous units- the "indicator"
| mechanisms didn't work very well, so you eventually
| ignored them, until suction was noticeably deteriorated,
| then you finally changed out the bag and it felt like you
| had a new vacuum.
| BHSPitMonkey wrote:
| The common reason I see for vacuum enthusiasts bashing on
| bagless units is air hygiene; as soon as you take out the
| canister, you're releasing a bunch of the vacuumed matter
| back into the air and breathing it into your lungs. This
| can probably be mitigated by carefully emptying the
| contents outdoors, but a lot of apartment-dwellers can't
| really do that.
| SeanLuke wrote:
| Bagless is also an excellent way to shorten the life of
| the motor and fan subsystem.
| ooboe wrote:
| Yes, emptying bagless units is a disgusting process. Even
| outdoors, it's not pleasant.
| Thaxll wrote:
| I don't think there is an equivalent of the Dyson vacuum on the
| market atm, it's that good, so I'm not sure what you're talking
| about, you definitly never tried their product.
| misiti3780 wrote:
| i recently purchased a vacuums on sale and i am very happy with
| it. what problems have you had with the vacuums?
|
| I also bought a pair of beats running earphones that work
| better for me than the apple airpods because they do not fall
| out, they were both about the same price.
| arp242 wrote:
| The air blades work quite well; you can _actually_ dry your
| hands in a few seconds instead of holding it underneath some
| lukewarm air for 30+ seconds. I never even use them as they 're
| borderline pointless and so damn loud (I dry my hands on my
| trousers if there are no towels), but airblades work well
| enough for me to us them.
|
| I can't speak to the other products as I never used them, but
| air blades really are a big improvement IMO.
| dirktheman wrote:
| Yes, we have the vacuum on a stick at work. It's a cheap
| plastic thing that looks like a sex toy for Buck Rogers and it
| doesn't perform nearly as well as the Numatic Henry we have at
| home.
| rblatz wrote:
| We have the Dyson v10 animal vacuum stick and use it daily to
| clean up after our 1 year old. It's fantastic, easy to use,
| strong suction, easy to empty/clean. I'm thinking of buying a
| second for our upstairs.
| kelvie wrote:
| We also have a Real vacuum (the numatic, we have a George but
| same thing), as well as a dyson v7.
|
| The dyson's are bagless but they have to be emptied all the
| time, and the maintenance is a lot more of a chore.
|
| I think the ideal mix would be to have a cordless dyson but
| with sort of a base that empties into a bagged vacuum,
| similar to the robot vacs nowadays that empties themselves
| and have a bag that can be thrown away once a month.
|
| Having to empty the dyson every 3 days sort of defeats the
| point of having a HEPA filter for allergy viewers.
| simias wrote:
| I have the same take. I had a cordless Dyson that worked
| okay, but I would spend a lot of time cleaning the rotating
| brush and crap getting stuck in the small inlet (which
| probably had to be small in order to get good suction with
| the smaller capacity of the battery-powered motor).
|
| And while it's bagless, with my cats I had to empty the
| canister a couple of times every time I cleaned the house.
|
| Now the power supply to the rotating brush seems to have
| died, I'll probably try to fix it eventually but I took the
| opportunity to buy a good old Henry as a replacement. It's
| got a huge bag, a huge filter, it's much more powerful and
| does a great job. Yeah, I have to buy bags, but they're
| cheap and that's basically the only maintenance I have to
| worry about.
| praveenperera wrote:
| I think that maybe be true for some of their products, but when
| it comes to cordless stick vacuums Dyson is still king.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| All I know is the two vacuums we have. Both have absolutely
| exceeded expectations. The first was a wedding present in 2005,
| and it still works GREAT -- we only bought the 2nd (a cordless
| model) to avoid lugging the big one up and down stair so much.
|
| I absolutely would buy another Dyson if either of these failed
| or broke, no question. We're super happy with them.
| bhouston wrote:
| Their handheld household vacuums are so nice. We have one on
| each floor. So light, powerful and always ready.
| lambda_obrien wrote:
| The only thing they make that's good is the stick vacuum,
| everything else is just trying to put their nice, fancy motors
| into other products.
| sdfhbdf wrote:
| Interesting since the cordless vacuum (dyson v11) I use at home
| seem to work really well. The previous big corded model we had
| (Dyson DC33) was also built like a tank and served for almost
| 10 years before being passed on and still works so maybe I
| bought into marketing or maybe just different people have
| different experiences with Dyson products?
| tidepod12 wrote:
| Yea, it's weird reading this thread to me. I have a cordless
| Dyson vacuum and it is _by far_ the best home vacuum I have
| ever used, both in terms of suction power (even compared to
| non-cordless ones) and in terms of other usability /features.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| This thread is filled with anecdotes. But vacuums do get
| tested periodically by objective reviewers. As I recall,
| the Dyson usually does okay, but it rarely wins overall,
| and never on price.
| beefalo wrote:
| I think Dyson benefits from the same effect as
| Apple/Tesla/Beats/etc. Their products are good but their
| triumph is upselling. Dyson cordless vacuums are like
| $800+, was your previous one that expensive?
| tenpies wrote:
| Perhaps, but just like Apple they have a refurbished
| category where you can get very good deals - and that's
| on top of them having sales regularly.
|
| I should add that I called Dyson once for my 7 year old
| wireless vacuum which was having battery problems. They
| mailed me a replacement completely free of charge. The
| upselling might be there, but the up-service also seems
| to be there.
| belval wrote:
| My dyson cordless vaccum (v7) was 399$ (CAD) so it was
| not insanely expensive and I would not go back.
|
| Their tech can probably be imitated at a lower cost, but
| I won't take chances with the cheaper knockoffs, the
| tradeoff is not worth it.
| cutenewt wrote:
| Is there a Dyson-equivalent cordless vacuum that goes for
| less than $200?
| jandrese wrote:
| Their tech probably can't be imitated at the moment
| because they've got it patented up the wazoo. Luckily
| patents have a sane lifetime and once they expire I'd
| expect many competitors to show up with similar designs
| at lower price points and possibly better engineering.
| ljf wrote:
| We must have had a dud as we got the Dyson animal hair one
| and it was terrible. Battery life was rubbish, the suction
| was crappy and the pick up just wasn't that good.
|
| Ended up getting a gtech which was fine for 2 adults in a
| small 2 bed house with wooden floors, but now we have kids
| and a bigger place we got a Shark corded and it is amazing.
| Literally the best vacuum we've ever owned.
| dnanabkchsbxb wrote:
| I had a similar experience with the Dyson and then the
| battery died. After getting the battery replaced under
| warranty, the machine has worked great ever since.
| cgriswald wrote:
| FWIW, we have six furry animals of our own (with four
| different hair types) and also foster and board dogs. We
| never buy the "animal" cleaning machine. I've never seen
| a product that in any way shows it's somehow more capable
| of dealing with hair or messes than other products in the
| same line. I have had them be more expensive and flimsier
| relative to that same line though.
| slacktide wrote:
| The "Animal" product line is identical to the regular
| product but comes with a few additional attachments
| (powered hand hair brush) and is a different color. We
| have a Husky dog that blows her coat twice a year, 2
| longhaired cats and a shorthair. The machine is amazing.
| nostrademons wrote:
| We have both a Dyson cordless vac and a Shark corded one.
| We use them for different things - the Dyson is for spot-
| cleaning, toddler messes, cars, furniture, bedspreads
| while the Shark is for our floors. Both are very good at
| what they do.
| ghaff wrote:
| I'm not sure the cordless Dyson I have compares well to a
| good corded vacuum cleaner for cleaning power. But for
| me, I got one a couple of years ago (after thinking about
| getting a Roomba for the umpteenth time and concluding it
| wasn't for me) and it's been perfect for my use case. I
| normally have a housekeeper come by once a month. But the
| high traffic areas including the kitchen really need a
| quick vacuum now and then in between cleanings and the
| Dyson's been perfect for that. I hated having to haul my
| corded vacuum out to do this. (So I mostly didn't.) Now
| it's literally a couple minutes work to grab the Dyson
| and give a quick cleanup.
| SaintGhurka wrote:
| Same experience for us. The cordless Dyson is a lesser
| vacuum cleaner compared to our old corded hoover. But
| it's light, it's easy to grab from the charger and you
| don't have to deal with a cord, so it gets used more. It
| just removes all the friction from the chore.
| ljf wrote:
| Yeah, the gtech was a battery vacuum too, but placed the
| motor/impeller right next to the entrance of the device,
| no long pole. I wanted to love the Dyson because of what
| we paid for it, but I left me a bit meh. My folks have a
| corded Dyson now and it is a good machine, but I really
| feel the shark just wins. Man I am dull :p
| mywittyname wrote:
| My cordless Dyson (V10 Animal, I think) is strong enough
| to get stuck to the carpet on the highest power setting.
| I won't use it past medium because I'm afraid that it
| will tear up the carpet.
| orwin wrote:
| For a "wired" vaccum, i'll go with Festool every time, but
| yeah, Dyson wireless vacuum are pretty good.
| Domenic_S wrote:
| People are talking about the household vacuum type
| (upright & cordless) not shop-vacs or dust collectors.
| soylentcola wrote:
| My household vacuum cleaners have almost always been
| corded (with the exception of a couple battery powered
| ones I had 5 or 10 years ago). Granted, I didn't shell
| out several hundred dollars for the cordless ones, but
| dead batteries and replacements got old after the first
| round so I've stuck to corded ever since. It's just not
| something I ever really had a problem with. The cords are
| typically quite long and I never have to worry about
| battery capacity or lifespan.
| Domenic_S wrote:
| I was referencing GP's Festool comment - Festool does
| make great stuff, but in the vacuum space they mostly
| make dust collectors for woodshops and shop-vac style
| shop vacs -- not the household-style vacs we're talking
| about.
| soylentcola wrote:
| Gotcha. Sorry I misunderstood.
| bmurphy1976 wrote:
| That's weird because the cordless Dyson vacuum we had was
| utter garbage and my 20 year old Dirt Devil was better in
| almost every single way except it didn't look as cool and
| had a cord.
| DanBC wrote:
| > and served for almost 10 years before being passed on
|
| Wait what, is ten years supposed to be a good lifetime for
| vacuum cleaners?
| sdfhbdf wrote:
| I'd say with couple of times a week usage for a thing made
| out of plastic I could expect a lot more troubles than it
| had.
|
| It did require one dyson service which they kindly provide
| even for old devices and one this pipe thingy swap since it
| ripped.
|
| But as other commenter pointed out - it still works we just
| wanted to move on to something smaller and cordless and we
| expect the first thing that will fail in V11 is going to be
| batteries because other than that they're really sturdly
| built.
| jandrese wrote:
| Any cordless appliance with non-replaceable batteries is
| going to be designed to last only as long as the
| batteries. Typically 5 years or so.
|
| At least cordless tools usually use replaceable (but
| absurdly expensive) battery packs. Home goods however
| seem far slower to adopt battery pack technology.
|
| One thing I hate is that every single manufacturer has
| their own special battery tech that is expressly
| incompatible with every other manufacturer. This is an
| area that is absolutely crying out for standardization
| but probably won't get it because they're making too much
| money selling literally $7 of materials and labor for
| $80. I meant that too. 8 18650s for $0.50 each, plus a
| cheap off-the-shelf $1 charge controller and plastic
| case.
| hundchenkatze wrote:
| > before being passed on and _still works_
|
| They said it's still working, so seems like its lifetime is
| greater than 10 years.
| jandrese wrote:
| My mom still uses her Hoover from the early 70s. It's
| mostly metal and the bags for it are still readily
| available at the store.
|
| A Dyson would probably clean better, but she's not going to
| upgrade until her old one breaks, which may be never.
|
| That said, it hasn't been completely care free. My parents
| have had to replace the belts several times, but those
| parts that are easily available and very cheap. The light
| bulb is more of a special order part, but you can find them
| on the internet.
|
| In comparison I bought a Dyson vacuum back in the early
| 2000s and it died due to the plastic at the joint between
| the handle and the body breaking after about 15 years.
| There was no repair that didn't cost more than a new vacuum
| cleaner. Also, the hose that connected to the corner brush
| never connected properly because of a factory error, so it
| always had tape holding the hose on.
|
| But we replaced it with a Dyson ball vac because my wife
| was convinced they did a better job getting the dirt up.
| The ball vac is still going strong, although I think we may
| have shortened it's life at one point. It had gotten
| plugged up at one point and after my wife had tried to
| vacuum two rooms it suddenly shut off. I took it apart and
| removed the blockage but it still wouldn't turn on. So I
| used a shop vac on the blow side to force air through the
| motor to get it spinning again and discovered that it had
| probably thermally shut down because the air that came out
| the other side was so hot you couldn't put your hand over
| it. A few seconds of that and the vacuum turned back on and
| sent out a blazing hot stream of air for several minutes.
| I'm pretty sure if I took it apart I'd find cooked and now
| brittle plastic around the motor housing.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| I wonder how much that Hoover cost brand new (adjusted
| for inflation, of course).
|
| I've always had the narrative in my head that appliances
| have become flimsy and have shorter lives because people
| tend to buy whatever is the lowest price. A race to the
| bottom on prices means a drop in quality.
| leesalminen wrote:
| My wife has caused every vacuum we've ever owned to
| literally catch fire. Ranging from cheap Bissell to
| expensive Dyson. It's quite impressive, actually. The
| cheap ones usually last <1 year while the Dysons last ~2
| years. So now we just buy the cheapest one and run it
| into the ground. It probably doesn't help that we have 5
| animals + 1 husband in the house.
| jandrese wrote:
| Ouch. Maybe you should be more aggressive about cleaning
| out the filters? Our Dyson says to clean them every 6
| months or so I think, but if your house is especially
| dirty (say because the dogs track in a lot of dirt and
| shed) you should do it more often.
|
| If you have not done it in awhile it can be surprising
| just how much better at picking up dirt it will become
| after a good cleaning. Because the filters are trying to
| get down to 2.5ppm they clog easily.
| vhost- wrote:
| If Dyson had to choose one product to keep making, but
| discontinue all others, it should be the V11 vacuum. Runs
| forever and cleans very well. All their other shit can kick
| rocks.
| ghaff wrote:
| I have one of their circular fans in my bedroom. It's got a
| remote, it's quiet. Yes it's expensive but it's definitely
| better than the cheap fan I used to have there.
| mabbo wrote:
| Seriously, the Dyson cordless is one of the best investments
| I've made. Having the charging station hang on the wall means
| it takes up no space that I was previously using.
| mr_custard wrote:
| I don't diagree with you on some of the Dyson products being
| gimmicky with a premium price tag, and the air purifier does
| look suspect to me. However, the Dyson v11 cordless vacuum I
| just bought is phenomenal.
|
| It has far better suction and cleaning effectiveness than
| anything I've ever used - which is partly why I bought the v11.
| Our mains powered central vacuum just wasn't cutting it, and
| was bothersome to use.
| hrktb wrote:
| I hated the vacuums (the one I bought was way too heavy, loud,
| expensive for what it did) and air blades, but love the fanless
| ventilators. It's light, cute, easy to move, with no visible
| moving parts, is still surviving spotlessly. I wish there was
| better competitors.
| jfk13 wrote:
| Perhaps you could make your own out of scrap wood:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a19OpQfwB2w
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| I love the public bathroom Dyson thingies. They kinda became a
| standard for me now, love how quickly they dry hands. Way
| better than paper, towels or weak fans. But yeah, the other
| stuff is a bit gimmicky.
| newsbinator wrote:
| Those bathroom hand dryers do spread bacteria around at an
| alarming rate: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/the-
| bacterial-horror-of-...
| cpmsmith wrote:
| > the researchers attached high-efficiency particulate air
| (HEPA) filters to the dryers, which would eliminate most of
| the bacteria from the air passing through the dryer.
|
| As I recall, one of the selling features of the Dyson
| Airblade is that it has a HEPA filter built-in.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| they might have a hepa filter, but the output drags a
| tonne of air with it. They are pretty unhygenic, but I'm
| not sure how bad it is compared to having wet hands.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| Maybe one could make an air drier that sucks air around
| the hands and into a filter instead of onto the hands?
| maxerickson wrote:
| On the output?
| mchanson wrote:
| I hate them. They blow water all over the place and I can't
| help but touch them by mistake. I don't even use them and
| just wipe my hands on the back of my t-shirt like an animal
| after washing if there are no paper towels.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| The best hand dryers I've user are the really powerful
| blowers that can peel paint if you need them to. They're
| extremely loud though.
| datameta wrote:
| I wondered how powerful an Xcelerator dryer is compared to
| an ion thruster a few years back. I'd looked at dryer
| specfications and realized they're in the same magnitude in
| terms of mN!
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| You just sent me into a very weird YouTube rabbit-hole.
| craftinator wrote:
| I've worked in a place with those. Over time they build up
| mould in tiny crevices that are nearly impossible to clean
| without taking the whole thing apart, which is not an easy
| task. Plus, they blow water drops all over when you use them
| (put down some strips of water reactive paper... It blows
| them up to 10 feet away). Not a very healthy technology.
| cesis wrote:
| To me these seem unhygienic - hands often touch the dryer
| also droplets are projected upwards(often in your face).
| [deleted]
| isatty wrote:
| Air dryers are super unhygienic. One person who did not wash
| their hands properly means droplets with germs all over the
| place. Plus, in places with high humidity (or even otherwise)
| it takes a long time to actually dry your hand. Recyclable
| paper towels are so much better.
| ska wrote:
| They are basically terrible, as they spread whatever is on
| your hands all over the room.
|
| Paper is actually really effective, but only if you use it
| properly (don't crumple, always fold in 2, and wipe). 1 small
| piece is actually enough for both hands unless they are still
| dripping water.
| greggturkington wrote:
| I'm glad they changed it from "insert your hands between two
| blades of air" to "put your hands under ONE blade."
|
| The old design would just push your hands into one side or
| the other, where the bacteria-laced water from the last
| person still remained.
| notJim wrote:
| I don't understand comments like this, I have never had a
| problem not touching the sides.
| greggturkington wrote:
| I figured that was _why_ they changed the design?
| Semaphor wrote:
| > the public bathroom air "blades"
|
| That's interesting, I always found those vastly superior to all
| other solutions. They dry my hands the quickest, only the
| copycats come close.
| ahaucnx wrote:
| I am living in Northern Thailand that goes through the annual
| smoke season with often US AQI beyond 300 and in the Hazardous
| area. That experience lead to the foundation of my startup
| AirGradient [1]. More and more people here are moving beyond air
| purifiers and install positive pressure systems in their house,
| offices or schools. Positive pressure systems take the outside
| air, run it through a set of high performance filters and pushes
| it inside the rooms. This has mainly two significant benefits:
|
| a) The positive pressure prevents dirty air from entering the
| room in the first place. As a results you become totally
| independent from the outside pollution and you can achieve zero
| PM2.5 inside even on the worst polluted days. I made a
| performance comparison between a standard air purifier and a
| positive pressure system and the positive pressure system won by
| a huge margin [2].
|
| b) Low CO2. If you use normal air purifiers you are in a catch-22
| situation. In order to get good results you need to keep your
| doors and windows closed. This leads to a very fast build up of
| CO2 in a room. High CO2 levels significantly impair cognitive
| performance and can lead to drowsiness and headaches. We measured
| the CO2 in classrooms [3] and very quickly you will see CO2
| levels beyond 3000ppm (most Standards recommend levels below
| 1200-1500ppm).
|
| Against Covid transmission prevention, the best setup would
| probably be a combination of positive pressure system (to ensure
| a constant ventilation rate) together with a recirculation unit
| (standard purifier) inside the room to trap aerosols with
| viruses.
|
| We have open-source open-hardware build instructions for a DIY
| air quality sensor measuring PM2.5 and CO2 [4]. I am more than
| happy to send you some free PCBs (you just paypal me the cost of
| the postage) and you can build your own sensor and log the data.
| Contact me if you are interested.
|
| [1] https://www.airgradient.com/schools/
|
| [2] https://www.airgradient.com/blog/2020/03/30/air-purifier-
| vs-...
|
| [3] https://www.airgradient.com/blog/2020/02/07/we-measured-
| the-...
|
| [4] https://www.airgradient.com/diy/
| tw04 wrote:
| If you're trying to move air, a vornado works far better than a
| dyson.
|
| On the flip side, if you have young kids, the heaters are great
| because there's no hot element to burn themselves on like a
| normal space heater, and no fan to stick their fingers in.
|
| The built in t-stat + timer are nice as well.
| ortusdux wrote:
| I still cannot get over this product. They whole selling point of
| a dyson fan is the 'air multiplier' tech, which creates a low
| pressure zone that propels air through the ring. According to
| dyson, this tech can move 15x more air than the fan in the base
| of the unit. Why in the world would you build an air filter
| around a system that does not directly interact with 93% of the
| air it moves?
|
| https://www.jameco.com/Jameco/workshop/Howitworks/dysonairmu...
| u678u wrote:
| I think its a good quality fan and a fan heater that also
| purifies. Purification isn't its only goal, so if you care only
| about that just get a purifier. Presumably the cheap DIY box
| did a bad job at heating the air.
| ortusdux wrote:
| Check out dyson's website. They don't even list fans on their
| product page. It's just variations of air purifiers. They are
| all advertised first and foremost as purifiers.
|
| https://i.imgur.com/GaYU6ZD.png
|
| https://www.dyson.com/air-treatment
| ihuman wrote:
| I don't think they sell the non-purifier ones anymore.
| Google searching led me to a page with a mix of purifier
| and non-purifier fans [0], but the links either bring me to
| the "air-treatment" section or break completely.
|
| [0] https://www.dyson.com/fans-and-heaters
| TheSpiceIsLife wrote:
| 15 x 7% = 105%
|
| Obviously that's not how those numbers work, but you get the
| idea: it's not necessary to filter all the air at once.
| ortusdux wrote:
| I rounded up to be generous.
| renerthr wrote:
| 1. I concluded that's what you did, but found it a bit
| annoying. 100x15/16=93.75 . I find it unnecessarily
| confusing (as the parent commenter probably did) to round
| it to 93, when the correct rounding is 94.
|
| 2. The article says "15x more", so the right math would be
| 100x16/17=94.12 .
| ortusdux wrote:
| This is exactly the kind of pedantry I was trying to
| avoid by rounding.
|
| Fan X moves "15x more" air than fan Y. For every 1 unit
| of air fan X moves, Y will move 1x15 = 15 units. In the
| time it takes fan Y to move 100 units of air, fan X will
| move 100*(1/15) units, or 6 2/3rds units. 6.666... rounds
| to 7.
| cjohansson wrote:
| Don't underestimate the placebo-effect of having a Dyson,
| regardless of it's physical effects. This is what you can do
| with a premium brand.. only a Dyson is like a Dyson
| Aunche wrote:
| > Why in the world would you build an air filter around a
| system that does not directly interact with 93% of the air it
| moves?
|
| Dyson fans produce a continuous stream of air. Regular fans
| produce choppy air. I don't think anyone actually notices this
| effect until you point it out though.
| odux wrote:
| And, in my experience, a lot of noise. Way more than a
| regular fan for the same perceived amount of air flow.
| xyzzy_plugh wrote:
| What? My Dyson fan is incredibly quiet compared to any
| other fan I've used.
| souprock wrote:
| This dispute could be a matter of frequency range. Older
| ears can't hear high pitch. If the Dyson noise is mostly
| high pitch, older ears will perceive it as quieter.
| IndySun wrote:
| I agree on the noise of the Dyson. The quietest Dyson
| fans are not that quiet. I work in studios that require
| quiet fans. A Dyson fan that rotates is especially noisy
| due to the squeaking motor. If you need a quiet portable
| fan/filter find one that is static and has more than 7-8
| speeds, preferably in double figures - and put it close
| to where you want the air, on low.
| xattt wrote:
| The "choppy" air is the effect that you get when you are
| close to a fan and you talk into it. This diminishes
| significantly at very short distances.
|
| If you're at a distance where you can talk into the airflow
| and sound normal, you're probably not experiencing "choppy"
| air.
| fossuser wrote:
| The fan also sucks compared to something like a Vornado.
|
| "Buffeting" of air is not a practical issue when using a fan -
| you want a fan that can create a lot of air flow.
|
| The Dyson fan comes across form first then making up reasons to
| explain the form retroactively. It feels like an interesting
| look is the goal rather than something that's actually better.
|
| Am I wrong about this? Do people that have the fan like it? Is
| it better? I've only played with one in a store, but haven't
| owned one myself. I have owned Vornado fans which I liked.
|
| Another one that comes to mind is the Molekule air filter which
| is basically fraud.
|
| Large HEPA filters work, people should use them.
|
| My favorite: https://medifyair.com/
| yreg wrote:
| Why is Molekule a fraud?
| fossuser wrote:
| See: https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-air-
| purifier...
|
| They make nonsense claims about their technology - none of
| which empirically hold up. They lie about it and are just
| generally full of shit, quoted below:
|
| "In the summer of 2019, we purchased a Molekule Air (the
| flagship model) and tested it. We bought an Air Mini that
| fall and tested it in February 2020. At the time we tested
| the Molekule Air, the company claimed that its
| "scientifically-proven nanotechnology outperforms HEPA
| filters in every category of pollutant."
|
| Our tests proved otherwise. And by mid-2020, that language
| had been withdrawn, after many of the company's claims were
| ruled against in a case before the National Advertising
| Division and upheld in a later appeal before the National
| Advertising Review Board. The Molekule Air turned in the
| worst performance on particulates of any purifier, of any
| size, of any price, that we have tested in the seven years
| that we have been producing this guide. The Air Mini
| outperformed it, but that's not saying much: It still gave
| the second-worst performance we've ever seen.
|
| Guide author Tim Heffernan asked Molekule CEO Dilip Goswami
| why the language was removed. He answered, "The point about
| 'in all categories' is that we see a device that
| outperforms across all of the categories. Right? So we're
| not trying to say that individually, on any particular
| metric, we would be number one. Right? What we're saying
| is, when you look across all the categories, we outperform
| HEPA. Right? And that's what we're attempting to convey
| with that. And so--it's fair to say that we needed to re-
| examine some of the language to make sure that it's saying
| what we're intending to say."
|
| The NAD and NARB cases made clear that this was an
| understatement: All of Molekule's quantified claims about
| the Air's performance; all of its claims about superiority
| to HEPA; all of its customer and doctor testimonials about
| the ability of the Air's filter to reduce asthma and
| allergy symptoms; and many of its claims to have been
| independently tested, were ruled unsupported. Other claims
| were ruled too broad."
| alasdair_ wrote:
| We bought a Dyson fan when we had very small children that
| liked to stick their fingers into moving fan blades. It works
| really well for that purpose.
| SamBam wrote:
| We have two cheap, basic standing fans with the standard
| wire guard around them.
|
| At various ages we wondered if the kids could put their
| fingers in and touch the blades, and so prompted them to
| (while the fans were off, of course).
|
| At no point could the kids' fingers get to the blades.
| Either their fingers were too short, or, eventually, too
| fat.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| Yeah, I'm skeptical that any reasonably new fan under
| modern safety standards could a) allow children's fingers
| to reach in to the blade, or b) do any real damage if
| they can reach it. The idea that it's a Dyson or fingers
| get chopped off is funny. But I guess people have to
| justify spending $500 on a fan.
| Angostura wrote:
| I bet they could get pencils in there though. I Know _I_
| did.
| toast0 wrote:
| newer fans have much tighter spacing on the guards. Of
| course, plastic is still plastic, so 10 year old fans
| that had tighter spacing are going to have lots of broken
| off sections so you can make cool noises with the fan and
| [other objects]
| fossuser wrote:
| Nice - yeah that sounds like a great use case for it.
| WiseWeasel wrote:
| They'd probably only do it once. It builds character,
| similar to == in JS or PHP.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| strcpy() has entered the chat.
| dwaite wrote:
| They'd probably do it no more than ten times.
| smileysteve wrote:
| Assuming now tongues, toes, or ears.
| bayindirh wrote:
| In some extreme cases they can go up to ~20. But after
| 25, it becomes really a corner case.
| Cerium wrote:
| I sure did it more than ten times, but quickly learned to
| be careful and insert the finger slowly into the moving
| fan.
| edelans wrote:
| I'm afraid you missed the joke here =)
| jodrellblank wrote:
| I can't tell if they missed the joke about losing 10
| fingers and having to stop there, or if you missed their
| joke that you can insert the same finger multiple times
| as long as you only lose a bit of a finger each time.
| jb1991 wrote:
| Says no one who has ever raised kids.
| Judgmentality wrote:
| Plenty of people raise their kids this way. When I see
| parents laugh when their kids fall down instead of panic,
| I smile. And the best part? The kids smile too, because
| they're actually looking to their parents for how to
| react.
|
| I'd rather raise daredevils than anxious wrecks. My best
| friend has a kid who's always climbing on stuff, falling
| down, getting hurt. That kid is going to grow up to be
| awesome.
| jb1991 wrote:
| Falling down is totally different than sticking your
| fingers into a fan.
| semi-extrinsic wrote:
| Well, for both cases the risk depends entirely on the
| (here unspecified) circumstances. Sticking your fingers
| in a fan where the blades have a low moment of inertia
| and the motor has low stall torque? You'll be fine.
| Falling down and hitting your head on the edge of a rock?
| Could put you in hospital for weeks.
| VRay wrote:
| Yeah, if the kid grows up he'll be awesome for sure
| Judgmentality wrote:
| Would you rather take a chance at greatness, or a
| certainty at mediocrity?
|
| No guts no glory.
| catmanjan wrote:
| Surely laughing when your child falls over leads to them
| enjoying others misfortunes
| Judgmentality wrote:
| I think you're assuming the laughter is _at_ the child,
| not _with_ the child. It 's laughing about a mistake
| because that's what makes us human.
| catmanjan wrote:
| Do children understand that nuance? I would have thought
| they would associate people falling with laughing
| harperlee wrote:
| When I pick up my children from a small fall, and I laugh
| belittling the hit, they do not feel mocked at, instead
| laughing with me. I think the kind of insecurity that
| makes you suspect that people are laughing _at_ you comes
| later - and if you don 't have crappy parents you don't
| even come close to suspecting that _your parents might be
| laughing at you_...
|
| Obviously you don't laugh with big falls and broken arms.
| catmanjan wrote:
| But when your children are with their friends, and their
| friends fall over, do they laugh? Maybe their friends
| aren't as confident
| harperlee wrote:
| They are still very young.
|
| But from my own childhood I can remember that kids are
| not subtle - if they are mocking you, you will know
| (names, finger-pointing, jokes, etc.). Whereas if a
| friend laughs with you about a silly fall, you get a
| completely different kind of scenario played out.
|
| Coming back to your initial point, and being blunt:
| showing your children that clumsy falls can be funny, and
| not to panic about them, does not increase their cruelty
| towards other kids.
| thekingofravens wrote:
| They aren't dogs. They understand a lot more than you
| would expect.
| Spivak wrote:
| I mean you can tell you kid 100 times not to touch the
| stove but they don't lean the lesson until they actually
| try once when you're not looking.
| victor106 wrote:
| Why is the medifyair your favorite? I wasn't able to find any
| reviews I could trust on it.
| hedora wrote:
| Wirecutter has a review of one of the Medifyair models.
| They don't recommend it because it's too big, and overkill
| for their test apartment in New York City. It had the
| highest CADR in their testing.
|
| For a modest house in the Bay Area during fire season, we
| needed a high MERV furnace filter and also two filters
| similar to their recommended models, so I moved up to the
| Medifyair. It arrived after the last fires, but it seems to
| work extremely well.
|
| Hopefully, we won't need it this year...
| fossuser wrote:
| I have a bunch of air filters (I live in the bay area
| during fire season).
|
| Coway Air Mega
|
| Coway Mighty
|
| Blue Air
|
| Medify Air
|
| They're basically all equivalent and they all work.
|
| The reason I like the Medifyair is because it can move the
| largest volume of air relative to those so it can clear a
| space quickly (and quietly). I also think it looks nice
| (though it is huge).
|
| Of the rest, the Blue Air uses weird custom filters which I
| think cost a little more (though I haven't had to replace
| them yet). The Coway Mighty is also pretty small and mostly
| for a tiny room.
|
| Relatedly, if you're interested in sensors I think the
| TemTop sensors are the best (I've tried a bunch of
| different ones, and a lot of them suck).
|
| Some details on this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/AirQu
| ality/comments/ikf1ed/are_ther...
| krrrh wrote:
| I have one that we keep in our daughters nursery. The thing I
| like most is that it can run in auto mode and night mode
| meaning that it's on all the time and the fan only runs from
| level 1-4 out of 10, which also means silent operation. It
| has a sensor for air particle and VOC that causes it to turn
| up. It seems to work (like if I fluff pillows or make the bed
| beside it it will detect a spike in particulates on the graph
| around that time. So, set and forget, silent operation, and
| safety for small fingers made it the best choice for us
| despite tests showing lower efficacy over a defined time
| frame.
| hedora wrote:
| We recently bought the giant one with the ridiculously high
| CADR. They removed the air quality sensor (covid parts
| shortage?), so there's no auto mode for that model, at
| least. :-(
|
| It's noisier than expected, but on low it's quiet enough
| and fine for our entire house during "normal" bad pollution
| days (PM 2.5 between 100 and 300). During severe smoke from
| wildfires (PM 2.5 > 300), I'm OK with it being noisy.
| dec0dedab0de wrote:
| I had the dyson fan with the heater and filter for a short
| time, as well as a medify. I was disappointed with both, and
| returned them.
|
| The dyson looked cool, but the heat function was kinda
| useless unless you sat right next to it. i might get another
| one without the heat.
|
| The medify seemed to work well, but it felt like it was
| poorly made. I kept thinking I could probably diy something
| just as good. Though the main reason I returned it was
| because the advertising claimed it came with two sets of
| filters, when it only came with one.
|
| I bought both of these last year after almost a decade of
| wanting to get an air filter, and not doing it. The whole
| industry feels like a scam. This is why I stopped shaving 20
| years ago.
| numpad0 wrote:
| Fan intakes on non-purifying Dyson do get plugged with dust
| over time, so it makes sense to add filters. Aside from whether
| it makes sense to advertise them as air purifiers.
| hangonhn wrote:
| That makes me wonder if that was how the product originated.
| Dyson realizes its fans have a problem. Engineers suggest an
| air filter. Marketing see an opportunity.
| wombatmobile wrote:
| The Dyson marketing person's angle is a sleight of hand:
|
| "Dyson has developed its own testing methodology, the POLAR
| test method, which, unlike the CADR, Hill said, "measures
| the intelligence of the purifier, the ability for it to
| know when that room is clean or dirty and automatically
| react, and its ability to mix that pure air around the
| room."
|
| The detection function seems of spurious value if the
| device is operating at max capacity regardless of whether a
| pollutant is detected or not.
|
| Is that the case, or does the Dyson adjust volumetric flow
| to match the detected level of pollutants? That would make
| sense in the case of smoke, although humans could detect
| smoke and turn the device on or off accordingly.
|
| COVID19 particles are a different case. If the Dyson can
| detect those and switch itself on, eliminating the virus
| from the room, $800 is a bargain. But it can't.
| Karawebnetwork wrote:
| I live in a large loft-style apartment on two floors which is
| actually a large room. There are only a few windows and they
| are placed in a way that no air draft gets created.
|
| When I bought a purifier, one of the things I was looking for
| was air movement. I position my Dyson so that there's a draft
| throughout the apartment.
|
| I thought this would improve the air filtration because the air
| would move through my home and eventually reach my purifier.
|
| My previous experience with a purifier was a Honeywell tower
| that didn't move air. I noticed an improvement when I switched
| to a unit that moves air better.
|
| Am I wrong? Should I give up Dyson anyway and choose another
| product?
| winkeltripel wrote:
| The answer is always a boxfan taped to whatever filter you
| want to use.
| ortusdux wrote:
| My issue is the cost.
|
| My local costco has these units in store for $800 USD.
| Further down the isle they have oscillating tower fans for
| $30, and smart air filters for $100. I bought two pairs of
| each before winter. The fans are quiet, have plenty of
| control options, and non-volatle memory so you can use them
| with smart plugs. The air purifiers are 4 stage, with active
| charcoal and a long life (6 mo, 20$) hepa filter. They are
| wifi enabled, monitor and log air quality, and controllable
| from a phone. The purifiers should filter my bedroom's air
| once every 10 minutes, and ~15 min for my living room. This
| was all under 300$.
|
| Edit: to answer your question, the regular dyson fans are
| great. They quietly and efficiently move air. Pointing one at
| a real air filter should really help the filter do its job.
| My issue is that dyson built a small filter into their fans
| and doubled the price.
| pmontra wrote:
| Serendipity happens: I was looking at a number of videos
| about DIY Dyson fans after I learned that bladeless fans
| exist. Then this post on HN.
|
| Examples
|
| https://youtu.be/vyJ4wA-3dnY
|
| https://youtu.be/sFRXkH2XjsU
| ortusdux wrote:
| They 3d print well if you have a good printer. I've seen
| designs that use standard size computer fans, which make
| them cheap and easy.
| throwaway180118 wrote:
| I wonder if the porous surface of 3D printed materials
| affects the airflow
| hoytschermerhrn wrote:
| Dyson, like Apple, doesn't make products for nerds like us
| who are willing to go through that level of effort. Their
| prices are high because their products are simple and "just
| work" without much fiddling.
| driverdan wrote:
| They charge high prices because of marketing. Suckers are
| willing to pay more than their products are worth because
| marketing has them convinced it's better.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| What's being questioned here is whether this product
| actually works (as air filter, as advertised).
| NullPrefix wrote:
| Sold for a high price and andertised as a working
| solution is equivalent to a working product, in the mind
| of a normie.
| Karawebnetwork wrote:
| While it may not be the best, it still does the job.
|
| My partner smokes indoor when I am not present and
| there's no smoke odor when I get home.
|
| According to the chart on their app, the peak low air
| quality from several cigarettes goes away within an hour
| or so. https://imgur.com/a/0qgwT1F
| IgorPartola wrote:
| I recently got into building DIY air quality sensors. Any
| kind of smoke hangs around in a room for many hours well
| past when you can smell it. My house periodically spikes
| in air pollutants (still looking for the cause but we are
| moving soon anyways). The one night when PM2.5 spike from
| safe levels of below 12 ug/m^3 to over 1000 for one night
| was the worst sleep everyone in our house got. It seems
| that it was the equivalent of smoking something like 44
| cigarettes in a day. Don't smoke, especially indoors.
| It's a bad time.
| Karawebnetwork wrote:
| > Any kind of smoke hangs around in a room for many hours
| well past when you can smell it.
|
| But once the sensors indicate that the PM2.5 is gone,
| everything is fine, right?
| IgorPartola wrote:
| If that's sarcasm, you aren't providing enough context
| for me to pick up what you are putting down. If not, then
| the honest answer is "I don't know for sure, I'm still
| researching it."
|
| From what I can tell, PM2.5 isn't the end-all be-all
| metric and sensors can give false readings. That's why
| I'm building multiple devices with different types of
| sensors and monitoring multiple metrics. PM10 and PM1.0
| are also concerns, as is CO and CO2. I am researching
| which VOC sensors to get because unfortunately not much
| info is readily available. But from the research I've
| read PM2.5 is the most prevalent and damaging in typical
| households (CO being a big exception, but that's also
| monitored by regular household CO alarms). I can tell
| when someone has been frying something in the kitchen
| from my bedroom sensor for example, and it lingers for a
| while. I can also tell when outdoor air quality is poor,
| and then my indoor air filter and closed windows do help.
| I am still learning about all this, but in general this
| data has been helpful to figure out when to open windows
| to avoid headaches.
|
| I plan on publishing my findings at some point, but
| currently I am still waiting on parts and PCBs and
| working out the software to make it more usable without
| having to run to grab a USB cable to flash new firmware
| on the sensors. I was inspired by
| https://www.airgradient.com/diy/ but those plans are
| outdated and the dashboard is proprietary so less than
| ideal. I am working with simply integrating my sensor
| network with Home Assistant so I have to do very little
| with frontend stuff. It was very quick to set up
| notifications to my phone so I don't have to look at
| sensor screens all the time.
| ortusdux wrote:
| I've never claimed that it does not filter, just that it
| is a fraction as effective as the alternative at 5x the
| price. We heat with wood in the winter and some smoke
| escapes when you open the door to tend the fire. My $100
| unit filters the living room back down to the baseline in
| ~15 min.
| joncrane wrote:
| Why wouldn't you just use a cheap fan in place of the Dyson?
| Sounds like you have a separate purifier that does the
| cleaning, and all you need is something that will move air.
| Karawebnetwork wrote:
| The only fans I can find that are big enough to move air
| over two floors make more noise on their low setting than
| the Dyson's on its high setting. Then there's the issue
| that the fans would need to be connected to an app in order
| to power automatically as air quality drops.
|
| (I don't have the Honeywell anymore as it was my ex's)
|
| This conversation makes me want to buy a second purifier
| and simply stop purchasing filters for my Dyson. That way,
| it would continue to work as a space heater and fan but the
| air purifying would be done by a dedicated device.
|
| Makes sense as by rule of thumb, no "jack of all trades"
| devices will ever be better than a dedicated device.
| Hindsight is 20/20.
| ortusdux wrote:
| It sounds like you need a ceiling fan. I have an ADU with
| a half loft and 26' ceiling over the other half. One
| decent fan really moves the air.
| Karawebnetwork wrote:
| Sadly the second floor is a low and angled ceiling. We
| had installed a ceiling fan with an adapted mount but it
| wasn't long before one of us hit the fan while removing a
| shirt.
|
| This sent the fan spinning at a weird angle and it hit
| the ceiling. This broke the wooden blades and sent them
| flying in all directions.
|
| So floor fan it is now.
| koolba wrote:
| Ceiling fans are awesome. Especially when you operate
| them in reverse in the winter.
| timthorn wrote:
| The Unix philosophy of air handling.
| hinkley wrote:
| Vornado used to make an air filter that fires straight
| upward, but they discontinued it in favor of a design with
| proprietary filter media.
|
| Air filtration shouldn't be this expensive.
| noodlenotes wrote:
| It sounds like you're using the Dyson as a fan and something
| else as the actual purifier. Sounds like that setup works
| great for you, but it does prove the point that the Dyson is
| a fan, not a purifier.
| Karawebnetwork wrote:
| My previous experience was with a Honeywell tower but I do
| not have the device in my apartment anymore.
|
| What I am describing is that the Dyson ends up doing a
| better job alone than the Honeywell did. Especially when it
| comes to the second floor. However, as you said one could
| quite likely achieve the same result with any air purifier
| and a strong fan.
| timthorn wrote:
| The idea is that the fan is deployed in a closed room and over
| time, all the air in the room will be circulated through the
| filter.
| wincy wrote:
| But isn't using a fan too long in an enclosed room dangerous?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_death
| gmfawcett wrote:
| To the downvoters on wincy's comment: please let's not
| downvote people for asking questions, or just because you
| believe they are misinformed -- that's what replies are
| for.
| pdpi wrote:
| You shouldn't downvote people for asking questions, but
| asking a question and supporting it with a link that
| tells you the answer is fair game, especially when your
| "question" is an argument hidden behind a question mark,
| and the link disproves that argument.
|
| There is, of course, the possibility that wincy's comment
| was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, though. I personally
| can't quite tell which way it was meant.
| mindcrime wrote:
| From the HN guidelines:
|
| _Please respond to the strongest plausible
| interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one
| that 's easier to criticize. Assume good faith._
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| I'm not sure what you're implying, because both
| interpretations are valid to downvote.
| mindcrime wrote:
| I'm saying that this statement _especially when your
| "question" is an argument hidden behind a question mark,_
| is not consistent with the suggestion to "assume good
| faith" espoused in the guidelines.
| gmfawcett wrote:
| I guess I was being charitable, and imagining that the
| poster might be a Korean of a certain age where this myth
| held weight. The article suggests that young Koreans have
| changed attitudes, but that doesn't mean that everyone
| has. I think the comment replies to his question did a
| fine job challenging the myth. Obviously it's just my
| opinion, but I'd rather save downvotes for people who
| were clearly trolling or maliciously off-topic (and I
| don't see that here).
| pdpi wrote:
| To be clear, I didn't downvote their comment -- I don't
| think it warranted it -- I'm just saying I can sympathise
| with the argument that a comment that doesn't add
| anything useful to the discussion is a fair target for a
| downvote.
|
| Saying "But what about x?" when you yourself provide a
| link that says that X is a non-issue doesn't make for an
| engaging discussion. "But what about x? This link
| suggests it's not a problem but I think it is because of
| y" does make for an engaging discussion, even if y is
| seemingly nonsense.
| gmfawcett wrote:
| That's a fair point. Thanks for the respectful
| conversation about this. :)
| [deleted]
| mmastrac wrote:
| No. This is yet another urban myth.
|
| "Despite no concrete evidence to support the concept,
| belief in fan death persists to this day in Korea,[further
| explanation needed] and also to a lesser extent in
| Japan.[1][2][3]"
| rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote:
| I'm sure the comment was sarcastic.
| encom wrote:
| Better downvote, just to make sure. --Hackernews
| renerthr wrote:
| The Japanese version of that Wikipedia article has the
| Japanese phrase for "Urban legend" in the title, unlike
| the English version. The literal translation of that
| title would be "Urban legend of electric fan".
| bloomingeek wrote:
| I have worked night shift for 30 years. I sleep with a
| box fan in my bedroom with the door shut to filter out
| noise. Works really well.
| ortusdux wrote:
| IIRC, this myth stems from a successful govt propaganda
| campaign that aimed to reduce power usage at night and
| put an end to rolling blackouts.
| mminer237 wrote:
| The Wikipedia article cites that as being yet another
| myth, although it is disproven by evidence of belief in
| fan death long before the blackouts.
| WillPostForFood wrote:
| The wiki page links to the EPA which does advise against
| fans in a closed room when it is over 90F:
|
| _Don 't Use a portable electric fan in a closed room
| without windows or doors open to the outside. ... Don't
| Use a portable electric fan to blow extremely hot air on
| yourself. This can accelerate the risk of heat
| exhaustion. ... Don't direct the flow of portable
| electric fans toward yourself when room temperature is
| hotter than 90 degF."_
| kemayo wrote:
| That one's interesting in part because South Korea mostly
| doesn't get that hot. (Summer highs seem to be mid-80s
| Fahrenheit.)
|
| Looking at climate data for the country, I was struck by
| how similar it is to upper Missouri. Saint Louis is about
| as humid, but a bit hotter on average. Which would make
| me suspect that if "fan death" was a thing, we'd be
| seeing it in a band of US States that're similarly hot
| and humid.
|
| Speculative difference would be if air conditioning is
| really uncommon in South Korea, but presumably we could
| even that out by comparing to poorer people in the US.
| djrogers wrote:
| No, it's not.
| solarmist wrote:
| Lol. Been a while since I've seen that.
| [deleted]
| radicaldreamer wrote:
| For recurring revenue... selling only the fan, you get one sale
| and you're done. Selling the fan but with a filter unit, some
| subset of customers will replace the filter every 6 months as
| "recommended" and you have recurring revenue on that fan
| forever.
| cptskippy wrote:
| Dyson filters aren't consumables. You wash them out and reuse
| them.
| ska wrote:
| I'm pretty sure there aren't any reusable HEPA filters
| regardless of vendor.
|
| Lots of units will have a washable pre-filter, but that's
| to pick up big stuff and extend the life of the disposable
| part.
| thesh4d0w wrote:
| On a vaccum they are washable, on my tower fan they're
| replacable.
|
| I ordered some from china (probably fake) for $30 rather
| than the $100 dyson wanted.
| soylentcola wrote:
| Then I imagine part of it is the fact that people are
| willing to spend $x on a fan (of any sort) and $x+y on an
| air purifier.
|
| If an air purifier is generally accepted to be a higher-
| price item, then making a fan into one with some sort of
| filter helps justify the higher price.
|
| (Just speculation, though. I have no info about their
| design or marketing decisions.)
| kelvie wrote:
| Are they? We have a modern unit (with the 2 stage filter),
| adn they send a notification when you have to buy a new
| one, for $99 CAD
| detritus wrote:
| The company famed for creating bagless vacuums added a
| 'bag' to a product that doesn't necessarily need it?
|
| Dyson's stance on Brexit makes ever more sense... .
| ashtonkem wrote:
| Having just gone back to a bagged vacuum, I genuinely
| wonder why people ever accepted bag-less vacuums in the
| first place.
|
| Aside from the "empty the canister out and watch all fine
| dust float back into my house" issue, vacuum bags
| function as one massive filter. It's not physically
| possible to build a filter into a bag less vacuum that
| approaches the size or capability of the vacuum bag
| itself.
| cma wrote:
| Bagless vacuums will typically have a pleated filter for
| the fine particles. Pleating expands the surface area.
| tpxl wrote:
| Water works really well as a filter.
| ortusdux wrote:
| Wow, they have a payment plan for the filters.
|
| https://www.dyson.com/support/journey/tools/970341-01
| Dumblydorr wrote:
| We bought a larger Honeywell model for around 250 USD to help cut
| down on smokiness from woodstove, cat hair, and general dust. It
| works quite nicely, though it does have a high pitched whirr on
| higher settings. I don't have a PM monitor but anecdotally, it
| cuts through smokiness quite nicely.
| carabiner wrote:
| If you're on the west coast, the time to buy these filters is
| now. They regularly sell out during the summer/fall fire season.
| joshe wrote:
| If you are in the SF bay area, LA, Australia, or another place
| with wildfire smoke problems, the 3M filtrete MPR 1900 filters
| with a fan is close to ideal.
|
| All the smoke uses up a lot of filter material, and this
| alternative has 10x cheaper filter replacement. It also moves a
| lot more air through a lot more filter, cleaning everything up
| more quickly. And the lack of aesthetics is fine for a few weeks.
| It's worth doing even if you rock a normal filter most of the
| year.
|
| For an upgrade use a few silent computer case fans instead and
| you can have a super quiet setup to run all day.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| > Using incense smoke in 24.0 m3 chamber
|
| Yeah, that's not the sort of indoor air that people actually
| have.
| ListenLinda wrote:
| One of the best air filters is your furnace + good air filter. No
| need for additional products.
|
| But if you go with a Merv 14 filter (which is amazing by the
| way), you will spend some serious money. Merv 12 is affordable.
| Merv 11 is an insult to air filters.
| tareqak wrote:
| The recommended pick from the Wirecutter is the Coway AP-1512HH
| Mighty (as of this post, the recommendation was last updated
| January 15, 2021) [0]. The CADR is available on Coway's product
| page in what I assume to be imperial units given the units of the
| other specifications: "233 (Smoke), 246 (Dust), 240 (Pollen)"
| (under "Specification") [1]. This CADR score puts it just between
| the BlueAir Blue Pure 211 and GermGuardian AC530B in the graph
| from the post [2].
|
| [0] https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-air-
| purifier...
|
| [1] https://cowaymega.com/products/coway-mighty-ap-1512hh
|
| [2]
| https://i.cbc.ca/1.5902727.1612545406!/fileImage/httpImage/i...
| liminalsunset wrote:
| Some additional info about this device is available from Energy
| Star to confirm the CADR ratings are in cfm. [0] This is odd,
| as the standard for CADR is often in m3/h. That works out to
| about 420 ish m3/h in this case.
|
| I rememeber seeing a video on YouTube indicating this device
| takes 2.2W on low, 4.4 on medium, and about 40 on high. [1] The
| disparity is reasonable, as the fan laws state that power
| increases with the cube of shaft speed, and airflow is
| proportional. Given that the product runs with such low power,
| it uses a brushless dc motor.
|
| The only issue with this device is that it appears to lack
| serious amounts of carbon filtration - no hundreds of grams of
| carbon pellets for odor and chemical adsorption. Not sure if
| this could be added as a DIY addon.
|
| [0]
| https://www.energystar.gov/productfinder/product/certified-r...
|
| [1] 5:25 of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBv2aPMWdmI
| ska wrote:
| > [0] This is odd,
|
| I suspect by "odd" here you just mean "american". US
| consumers really don't like having to convert units.
| pchristensen wrote:
| Our Coway (bought from the Wirecutter recommendation) has been
| running for 2.5 years straight. The members of my household
| with asthma appreciate it year-round and especially during
| fire/smoke season.
| JohnBooty wrote:
| We have four in our house and they are _workhorses._ Still
| running strong and quiet 3-4 years later of running 24 /7.
| Probably one of the best things I've ever bought.
|
| They are also popular enough, and have been around long enough,
| that there is an "ecosystem" of third party replacement filters
| that are affordable and capable.
|
| The sound of the Coway is also quite nice for sleeping in our
| opinion. It's a quiet "whoooosh", not grating at all.
|
| Given the observed longevity of the Coways, I suspect they are
| actually cheaper than "DIY box fan" solution after a couple of
| years if you're running them 24/7. Sure, you can get a cheap
| box fan, but you'll be lucky if it lasts 6-12 months running
| 24/7 while trying to suck air through a filter.
| budlightvirus wrote:
| What benefits do you feel from having four filters? Not
| hating, genuinely curious. It's just never occurred to me to
| filter the air in my home aside from burning something on the
| stove or similar
| rickyc091 wrote:
| It's not a necessity if you have the window open to move
| around the air, but that's typically not as much of an
| option in the winter. You'd be surprised how much dust and
| particles a purifier picks up.
|
| If you take a look at the photos for the Blue Air 211 on
| Amazon, you can see how much it picks up. Mine was exactly
| like the photos. The pre-filter was completely covered in
| dust, and the inner filter was completely dark after 6
| months of use.
| JohnBooty wrote:
| It's not a necessity if you have the window open to move
| around the air,
|
| If you live in an urban area or someplace else with lots
| of air pollution, the outdoor air might be a problem!
|
| Of course, I don't think an air filter like this would be
| very effective with the windows open.
| s0rce wrote:
| I have one in the bedroom and one in the main living/office
| area. They were essential in California during the past few
| years of fires. The indoor air quality was maintained
| consistently while outdoors was horrendous.
| JohnBooty wrote:
| That's a good question, happy to answer.
|
| I have asthma and mild allergies triggered by pet dander
| and sometimes seasonal pollen and such. It's a 3 bedroom
| house. 7 rooms total. And we have pets, because we're dumb.
|
| Ideally we'd have one filter for each room, but they're not
| the cheapest things, so we just keep them in the rooms
| where we spend the most time.
|
| Do they work? They've had a positive impact on my
| asthma/allergies. Not a magic cure, but nothing is.
| Obviously, it is a part of a comprehensive strategy that
| includes vacuuming and so forth.
|
| Side benefits of the filters are that they also cut down on
| dust accumulation on surfaces, and are somewhat effective
| at reducing odors in general thanks to the swappable
| charcoal filters.
|
| (FWIW they used to go on sale for like $119 once in a
| while, in pre-COVID times. That's when we got ours...)
| It's just never occurred to me to filter the air
| in my home aside from burning something on the
| stove or similar
|
| Yeah, I don't think this is some sort of thing that
| _everybody_ needs to do.
|
| If you're currently doing fine, then this doesn't seem like
| something you need....
| debaserab2 wrote:
| It depends greatly on your climate. I didn't need one in
| the midwest, where air quality is pretty good and there's a
| lot of humidity in the air, but when I moved westward I
| definitely noticed the difference in air quality (my
| asthmatic symptoms came back which I haven't had since I
| was a child).
|
| Especially in autumn when the wildfires start up - even if
| it's many miles away there is a very noticeable degradation
| in air quality.
| fireattack wrote:
| I'm also curious about running them 24/7.
| s0rce wrote:
| Mine run 24/7 on low for a few years so far, one is going
| on 3 years and the other is about 8 months. No issues
| other than periodic cleaning and filter replacement. Main
| hint: keep a spare filter before California fire season.
| JohnBooty wrote:
| I've actually been running mine on "2" the ("medium")
| setting for 3-4 years with no problems.
|
| I have asthma, allergies, and pets so.... yeah. Medium it
| is for me.
| jjjeii3 wrote:
| Dyson also created an awful robot cleaner:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TH56kTJ-h4
|
| (video in German)
|
| It works worse than almost anything on the market and is
| ridiculously expensive.
| ogre_codes wrote:
| If I was running a business and wanted maximum filtration for
| cheap, the box fan is rad. I want something which sits in my
| office and quietly sucks little bits of crud from the air. The
| Dyson absolutely does that job. Probably not as much as a loud
| ass box fan, but that's not the point.
|
| There are other solutions which might do what the Dyson does in
| terms of noise/ air circulation, but the box fan rig isn't it.
| clarkevans wrote:
| This seems similar to https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/how-to-
| make-diy-air-puri... (2013)
| burlesona wrote:
| Meanwhile I can vouch for the top performer in this test. I have
| multiple BlueAir filters in different sizes. They work very well,
| are reasonably quiet, look nice, and while they're not cheap they
| aren't the most expensive either. Most importantly I also measure
| particulate and the measurements back up what I can already tell
| just by smell: the BlueAir really do filter the air well.
| butterisgood wrote:
| I've got one of these Dyson purifiers + humidifiers, and it does
| seem to make the air noticeably nicer in the room we us it in.
|
| But it's definitely NOT worth the price tag, as with all things
| Dyson lately. (Loved my vacuum 10 years ago, but the stick
| vacuums are kind of overpriced idiocy - get an Oreck)
| hansvm wrote:
| Box fan filters are great. The fans aren't really designed to
| operate with much load, so I had issues with the motors burning
| up eventually (3-12mo) when trying to force air through too fine
| of a filter (somewhere around merv 15 iirc, taped at the edges to
| prevent air from going around).
|
| In college I had a _really_ cheap flat, and all my neighbors were
| chain smokers. I didn't realize quite how bad it was in my
| apartment (large gaps under the door, etc) till a classmate
| pulled me aside and asked how long I'd been smoking -- apparently
| the residue on my clothes was easy for anyone with a functioning
| nose to recognize when I walked nearby. Long story short, box fan
| filters completely fixed that problem, and as an added benefit
| you could set one up next to any cooking disasters and watch the
| smoke get pulled from the air.
| cjlars wrote:
| You can reduce load on the fan by increasing the number of
| filters. Arrange 2 into a wedge or 4 into a cube around the box
| fan and direct the airflow with cardboard and tape. Worked
| great at our drafty place during the forest fires last summer.
| dirktheman wrote:
| Technology Connections did an episode on air humidifiers a while
| ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHeehYYgl28
|
| The fan and filter size matter the most. Most of these things are
| hugely overpriced for what they are.
| rblatz wrote:
| After watching his dishwasher episode I lost all respect for
| him. He clearly forced that episode and his conclusions were
| predetermined so he could have a clickbait video title/theme.
| [deleted]
| ljf wrote:
| Can you elaborate? That episode really worked for me, and fit
| with my own experience of dishwashers and adding pre wash. My
| latest machine doesn't have a prewash holder, but does have a
| prewash cycle on the eco setting - which cleans fine for the
| majority of my needs - but if things are filthy I through
| some bicarb in to the machine before I turn it on and it is
| awesome.
| rblatz wrote:
| I'm getting ready to hop into some meetings, so here is the
| short version, I can elaborate more later today.
|
| So he only measured cleaning results after the pre wash
| cycle and not after the full cycle. Obviously you would
| expect a short wash with soap to be better than a short
| wash without. And the results there were a lot closer than
| I would have expected.
|
| He completely ignored final results while opining that
| dishwasher tabs aren't effective without actually testing
| them side by side.
| ljf wrote:
| Cheers, I get your drift ;)
|
| I can see what you mean but I feel his outcome has some
| validity and I find his video/tv stuff far far more
| interesting
| darkstar999 wrote:
| All respect? Sheesh. He still makes great content even if you
| don't agree with that single video.
| 0x486566e7279 wrote:
| I have tired this with an air quality sensor (measuring VOC,
| PM2.5, and PM10) and found doing this method I had a huge
| increase in PM2.5 compared to baseline levels (1-2 to 100-280),
| so I imagine this method would only work well if you have
| distilled water. I would also be worried about bacteria and
| mold.
| KingOfCoders wrote:
| I was a Dyson fan boy for years. Then bought a 1/3 price Miele
| vacuum cleaner which was less noisy and more effective.
|
| The Dyson looked nicer though with the designer colors.
| [deleted]
| liminalsunset wrote:
| Was personally hoping for a noise-normalized version of the test,
| as well since I'd imagine most people aren't going to keep an air
| purifier running on high, and the low setting may not deliver the
| requisite airflow.
| hytdstd wrote:
| The article completely ignores noise. I personally have a box fan
| filter, but I don't pretend that it's appropriate or better for
| most people-- it's loud and annoying to work in the same room,
| and almost impossible to sleep with. And it is important that
| they're constantly on [0] (air quality generally reverts to
| normal levels in less than 2 hours), because all homes breathe to
| mitigate moisture and mold growth.
|
| [0]: https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/can-you-turn-off-your-
| pu...
| chmod600 wrote:
| > "I think what we're trying to do is pull back a little bit from
| the CADR metric," he said. "Not everyone needs an enormous CADR,
| has huge rooms or incredibly dirty air."
|
| It seems plausible that CADR is becoming just a bigger number
| without improving effectiveness, like megapixels.
|
| It also seems plausible that Dyson is just struggling to avoid
| commoditization because it's a losing battle for them. And it's
| possible some of that has merit, because running a noisy fan when
| the air is already clean seems annoying.
| sdljfjafsd wrote:
| CADR is an important metric for determining if a purifier is
| correct for your room. You can use it to calculate how many air
| changes it does per hour. If that number is too low, the air
| purifier is not going to work well in your room. Basically
| there's a minimum CADR for each room in your house, but of
| course, exceeding that gives you little benefit. Most people
| search for devices that are ~4 air changes per hour.
| oblib wrote:
| I've been taping filters to box fans for decades. Got them
| running in my home and office 24/7. I put a filter on each side.
| It's pretty impressive how much they catch.
| pwinnski wrote:
| My Coway AP-1512HH has a CADR of 400 m3/hr, higher than all but
| the most expensive purifier they tested, and was $150 when I
| bought it. Looks like it's $200 now, though.
| okprod wrote:
| I bought a Blueair and a Winix based on wirecutter and other
| reviews, they've been performing pretty well against cigarette
| smoke and cooking.
| Exuma wrote:
| Saving for later when I need an air purifier
| tomhoward wrote:
| In Australia, K-Mart has a house-brand bladeless fan for AUD$89.
| The Dyson full-sized bladeless fans cost $600-$800. The reviews
| of the K-Mart cheapo one are very positive, both from customers
| and review publications.
|
| We bought one for the baby's room and it's been great so far. It
| also doubles as a white noise generator.
| dylan604 wrote:
| That's a name I haven't heard in a long while. K-Mart was
| always one of those stories of going to live on a farm upstate.
| Now, I know that it actually went to live in a land down under.
| julianlam wrote:
| After watching this segment, I immediately bought a 20" box fan,
| a 20x20 MERV 11 filter, and put one together.
|
| It kicks the pants off of air purifiers twice the price and it
| moves a lot of air through. Best investment ever.
|
| CBC was testing CADR, which is one metric among others, but an
| important one if you're looking to clean a room's air, fast.
| kube-system wrote:
| I've used a box fan with a 20x20 filter for years when I'm
| doing woodworking, but it's a little too clunky of a solution
| to use in my primary living space.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I love the fact that Lasko has decided to own this concept
| with box fan designed specifically for this setup. It looks
| much better than a filter taped to the outside of the fan.
| Maybe this would help with your decor vs cleaner air
| conundrum?
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Lasko-FF305-20-inch-Purifier-
| Purifyin...
| arctangos wrote:
| I am an EU resident (Netherlands) and have wanted to make a DIY
| air filter for myself for several years. Unfortunately, I
| simply can't find any flat box fans on the market. Would
| someone else in the EU be willing to point me in the right
| direction?
| turtlebits wrote:
| They are great for reacting to bad air quality (like
| wildfires), but are way too loud for normal use.
|
| I have an Awair and did that dance of turning on the box fan
| filter when levels were higher than normal, then turning it
| back off once in normal range.
|
| Now I much prefer keeping a quieter (less performant unit) on
| continuously to keep the levels low.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I've had one of these for years with MERV10-12 (depending on
| availability) filters. This is in addition to the 20x25 filter
| in the central unit. Judging by how dirty the filter on the box
| fan gets, it is amazing how the central unit is just unable to
| do an adequate job.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| Does your central air also use a merv 10 filter? A lot of
| people use the cheap fiberglass ones which are not very
| effective
| Zardoz84 wrote:
| > Siegel and other indoor air experts said you should avoid ion
| generators and plasma air cleaners, which can emit ozone, a
| respiratory hazard that can cause serious health problems.
|
| Ozone (O3) are used to deodorize, fungicide, and disinfect air
| (and water, or products bathed with ozonized water). O3 is secure
| if the concentration isn't too high. And it's really effective
| doing this. Far better and secure that chlorine. Plus the O3
| becomes natural O2 given enough time (like 10 to 30 minutes for a
| room with a high O3 concentraion to be enought low to be safe.)
|
| I know very well that were it's used to disinfect air coiling
| tower, the risk of legionella bacterium infections, becomes 0.
| And I saw personally how effective it's to keeping at bay fungus
| on a problematic damp basement.
| pyrophane wrote:
| From what I can tell getting a good air purify is all about how
| much air the thing is actually able to move through the filter,
| which is primary a combination of filter size and the design of
| the fan itself. At its core, an air purifier is a remarkably
| simple product. The biggest mistake people make when buying these
| things is getting something that cannot exchange enough air to
| keep the room it is in clean. Manufactures contribute to this
| problem by overstating the square footage their units can cover.
|
| With respect to Dyson, I think that their cordless stick vacuums
| are pretty good, and you can sometimes find good deals on them
| that can make them not too expensive. They have decent suction
| that probably compares okay to many low-end corded vacuums, and
| the battery life is reasonable. If you have only a small area to
| vacuum, and it is mostly hard floors, the Dyson cordless vacs are
| a reasonable purchase. Just don't expect them to compare to a
| decent corded vac in the same price range in terms of power.
| sgustard wrote:
| Wirecutter came to similar conclusions about the Molekule:
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/worst-air-purifier-w...
| Tade0 wrote:
| Last year I bought an air purifier for ~800, but _PLN_ ($1 =
| 3,7129 PLN at the time of writing) to deal with the Polish winter
| - already swapped out the HEPA and carbon filter( <$40 total
| cost) because the air coming out started to smell bad(four days
| of 120ug/m3+ smog with peak at 200ug/m3 tend to do that to
| filters).
|
| At a CADR of 300m3/h I think the price/value ratio is decent, as
| opposed to whatever Dyson is trying to con people into buying.
| reaperducer wrote:
| The cobbled together box fan may work better than a Dyson, but my
| wife isn't going to let me put a cobbled together box fan in the
| library.
|
| People care about aesthetics. There are entire industries built
| around this, even in technical areas (industrial design, UX,
| etc...)
|
| So the Dyson wins simply because it will exist in the house and
| clean a portion of the air, while the Sanford and Son rig won't
| be in the house and will clean zero air.
| bluGill wrote:
| So hire a cabinet maker to build a nice box around it.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _So hire a cabinet maker to build a nice box around it._
|
| For that price of a good cabinet maker, I could buy a whole
| fleet of Dysons.
| h2odragon wrote:
| Great project for kids and cardboard, too.
| clarkevans wrote:
| > my wife isn't going to let me put a cobbled together box fan
| in the library
|
| Perhaps https://smartairfilters.com/en/product/sqair-air-
| purifier/ ? It's simply a fan + filter in an attractive box.
| hinkley wrote:
| Vornado has a similar model (qube50) and I would trust them
| to stick around longer.
| kyriakos wrote:
| I don't understand how air purification systems work. I live in a
| relatively warm climate so windows are at least partly open most
| of the year. How would an air purifier help me if air keeps
| flowing in and out the windows?
| hiven wrote:
| The quality of the products is really poor. Cheap materials,
| sloppy tolerances and no longevity. The best team in Dyson is the
| marketing function to make people spend so much on so little. I
| won't even comment on the man himself.
| hedora wrote:
| I wish they'd tested this DIY air filter instead. They made a 20"
| cube, where one face is a box fan, and four faces are filters.
| Brilliant:
|
| https://www.thisoldhouse.com/green-home/22231148/diy-air-fil...
|
| It should have a much higher CADR than the single filter version
| at lower backpressure. That means less noise and more energy
| efficiency.
| f430 wrote:
| People are surprised that people are overpaying for a brand
| premium for a dismal product like Beats headphones.
|
| How else will Mr. Dyson be able to afford an 8~9 digit
| Singaporean penthouse?
|
| Certainly didn't become a billionaire by building an affordable,
| efficient working product and not using misleading marketing to
| obfuscate the short comings.
| JPKab wrote:
| "Marketplace took its results and questions to Dyson engineer
| David Hill at the company's headquarters in Malmesbury, England.
|
| "We are, we think, delivering quite a good value proposition for
| the consumer," he said, stressing that Dyson purifiers can sense
| pollutants in the air as well as capture them, and also provide
| strong air projection."
|
| I just want to point out the above: Along with the picture, it
| gives the appearance that a reporter waited outside of a Dyson
| office and started interviewing an engineer.
|
| I've literally never seen a piece like this where the company's
| PR department ALLOWED an engineer to be interviewed.
|
| I certainly hope Mr. Hill didn't get in big trouble for this. At
| my company, if I speak to a reporter without explicit permission
| from legal, I'm a goner immediately.
| PieUser wrote:
| It's the same guy from this video [1].
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1k1-ui-hOOs
| indigomm wrote:
| I've been to Dyson's HQ and I very much doubt they just grabbed
| an engineer. There is a security post and employees generally
| drive straight in and out. I can't see how you could interview
| anyone, assuming you work out who the engineers are.
| post_break wrote:
| I bought an expensive Dyson air purifier for a couple of reasons.
| It has a remote so I can turn it on from bed. It looks
| attractive. The sound profile is much different than a box fan
| for sleeping at night. It can analyze the temperature, humidity,
| and air quality in real time and turn on if it notices air
| quality is getting bad. It also oscillates.
|
| That said yes it was expensive, but it replaced needing a fan for
| cooling and an air purifier, and if I needed a heater it could
| have done triple duty.
| kelvie wrote:
| We're also in the same boat. It's something that stays out all
| the time. It's just unsightly to keep a box fan filter out all
| the time (we used one when we first moved out, and man, the
| back of the filter gets _disgusting_ ).
|
| Looks do matter, and at least for our decor, there isn't really
| much choice. We pick our furniture based on how it mathes our
| interior decor, why would an air purifier be any different if
| it's out and on all the time?
| ska wrote:
| I suspect the answer here isn't "replace your dyson with a
| box fan and bungie cords" but - if you care about air
| filtration, buy a cheaper more effective one that looks ok.
|
| It's not surprising a 3-in-1 product isn't very good at (at
| least) 1 of those functions.
| rconti wrote:
| It's obviously popular to hate on silly-expensive tech, but
| these quotes were telling for me:
|
| > "I think what we're trying to do is pull back a little bit
| from the CADR metric," he said. "Not everyone needs an enormous
| CADR, has huge rooms or incredibly dirty air."
|
| > Several experts told Marketplace the CADR is the most
| important metric and an internationally recognized benchmark.
|
| > "CADR is what you want to know, period," said Francis (Bud)
| Offermann, an indoor air quality researcher who has helped
| develop test methods for the performance of portable air
| cleaners with the American Association of Home Appliance
| Manufacturers (AHAM).
|
| CADR may well be "what you want to know, period" when it come
| to air filtration. However it might NOT be all you want to know
| when buying a consumer product. If the filter is quiet and
| effective and good looking and only ramps up when needed, is
| this not in _some ways_ a better PRODUCT than a box fan running
| at full speed all the time with a filter taped to it?
| pfortuny wrote:
| Exactly. Like dB.
|
| Same as "processor speed is all that matters"... well, not. I
| honestly would gladly pay more for a QUIET computer (they are
| become more available).
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| Yeah, it felt a bit like me (a software developer)
| recommending to someone to use Google Cloud for their blog
| infrastructure rather than some basic one-size-fits-most
| solution that may or may not meet their needs forever.
|
| These people come from civil engineering backgrounds where
| air filtration requirements might often be thought of from an
| industrial or at least much larger than a domestic/micro loft
| scale.
|
| Having any air filtration at all at a smaller scale is
| generally just great if you replace filters often enough,
| don't aren't near industry or aren't in a city, don't cook at
| home often... Even then, a smaller air purifier's going to do
| an awesome job if you let it run regularly.
| cowmoo728 wrote:
| I'm also a little suspicious of relying entirely on the CADR
| metric. If you're running a filter in an environment that's
| constantly producing particulates and you need to filter
| large volumes of air, it seems useful. If you're about to
| walk into a smoke filled room and have 25 minutes to clean
| the air first, there's no question that CADR is king.
|
| I think it would be interesting to run a purifier in a normal
| house for 48 hours and see what the steady state particulate
| levels settle at around the house. I would guess that over a
| certain threshold CADR, there might not be that much
| difference. Room air circulation combined with a good enough
| CADR might even be more important, which is what Dyson
| claims.
|
| For all the people in the bay area worried about the next
| fire season, CADR is probably the most important since
| there's an extreme source of particulates. I'm just not sure
| that's the final say on air purifier effectiveness in less
| extreme conditions.
| bluGill wrote:
| I'm more worried about the random friend who drops by. Sure
| we wear a mask, but when can we take it off when they are
| gone?
| Bakary wrote:
| You have to make sure the filter is HEPA, and calculate
| whether the device has had the time to do a full air
| change given the room size and its CADR rating.
|
| Viruses are generally too small for even the best
| filters, but the droplets that carry them are well within
| what a HEPA filter can manage.
| ahaucnx wrote:
| I am also living in an area with high periodic air
| pollution from wildfires. I have now removed all my stand-
| alone air purifiers and replaced them with a positive
| pressure system that works so much better. I wrote about
| the benefits of that system on our blog:
| https://www.airgradient.com/blog/2020/01/08/positive-
| pressur...
| ListenLinda wrote:
| Compare to your furnace (on fan mode) + air filter ...
|
| > It has a remote
|
| Check
|
| > It looks attractive
|
| Check. It's invisible.
|
| > sound profile
|
| Check. Furnace fans are in the garage.
|
| > analyze the temperature, humidity, and air quality
|
| Nope. But purpleair will sell it to your for $175.
|
| > oscillates
|
| Check. Covers entire flat.
| ACow_Adonis wrote:
| Disclaimer: Own the dyson cool-tower thingy, not the heat/cool
| one (as it didn't seem worth the money IMO). It was $200-$300
| cheaper iirc.
|
| It does seem that they're comparing apples to oranges. Of
| course if you optimise for one metric ignoring the trade-offs
| and extra features: fixed air flow for a single given
| particulate removal measure, the cheapest solution that arrives
| at and maximises that metric is going to come out on top.
|
| But if you consider:
|
| - Hepa vs Merv - Additional carbon filter - Remote control -
| Multiple pivot options - Multiple power options - In built
| sensors and real-time reporting for small particles, large
| particles, no2, volatile organics, temperature and humidity -
| smaller horizontal footprint - Smartphone integration + remote
| operation - noise footprint
|
| then "shock", you have to pay more to have those features! (and
| they do provide value).
|
| Dyson certainly offers "I like to burn my money" options like
| many other companies, and they're not priced cheaply, but it's
| dishonest to review a sports car and a utility van on the
| metric of boot space and proclaim a "one little trick they
| don't want you to know about" type headline.
|
| Also, I haven't seen anyone else tackle it: what the hell is up
| with this "corona-virus protection" hints and claims in this
| article? Is that not enough to set off most people's internal
| alarms that the article is quackery?
| nateburt wrote:
| I am surprised that so few people discuss the centralized,
| presumably less-wasteful, less-cluttered alternative that is a
| furnace-adjacent air bypass + filter (particularly relevant for
| those of us with access to our own fans/furnaces).
|
| The idea, as I understand it, is that a furnace can be modified
| by an HVAC specialist to send a portion of the air through a low-
| flow bypass duct containing a HEPA filter (or some other high-
| MERV-rating filter). This highly filtered air is, of course,
| combined with the less-clean air that passes through the low-MERV
| (standard) furnace filter before being delivered to ducts/rooms.
| This enables filtering of air for the entire living space without
| the need for an air purifier (a large plastic box containing
| future e-waste) in each room where clean air is desired. One
| obvious shortcoming of such a system is that in-duct/in-room
| sources of particulates (including concentrated bursts of
| particles from things like cooking) might be harder to combat. I
| don't know whether such a system can reduce particulates to
| levels commonly reached with in-room purifiers.
|
| Thoughts/adecdata on such setups?
| Der_Einzige wrote:
| Just buy a high merv (e.g. merv 16) filter and you'll be good.
| No need to move the HEPA. Most modern hvac systems can support
| high MERV filters and doing this will significantly clean your
| air.
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| Dyson is about design (art) not practicality. You want a boxy
| filter that works well, go right ahead. But some people don't
| want that in their living space.
|
| Ideally they could be beautiful, and clean properly. You can't
| win them all.
| ph4te wrote:
| Not sure I like this article. I would have liked to see the
| Levoit LV-PUR131 which is rated for 1000sqft/hr, 500sqft in 33
| mins at $190, instead of the little one which we know will have a
| really low CFM/CADR.
|
| Blue Pure 211 rated 540sqft, GermGuardian rated 167sqft,
| Honeywell HPA160 rated 170sqft, Dyson Hot + Cool Air Purifier
| rated 290sqft. Levoit LV-H132 rated 68sqft,
|
| Also the Levoit is called out for being $150, as their cheapest,
| however they are on Amazon or at the local box store for $90.
| akeck wrote:
| I've been making cubes with 3x 2" MERV-13 filters, two cardboard
| panels, and a box fan. While large, they work really well for big
| rooms.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| I guess I'll bring up the "let your kids play in dirt argument"
| and see if I get any comments. I've personally taken this path in
| life and I seem to have much fewer allergies and immune issues
| than lots of my friends who grew up with hospital-like childhood
| circumstances. It could just be observor bias but it seems like
| there is some underpinning to the theory of if you don't use it
| you lose it when it comes to immunity. I do wash my hands and
| keep my house tidy, but I don't dust every day or put in MERV32
| level air filters. (just cheapest-that-i-can-find MERV 8
| recommended by my HVAC manual)
| s5300 wrote:
| I think people tend to seek these types of things out after
| they're already suffering from adverse effects that they want
| to try to fix.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-02-11 23:00 UTC)