Bought one last year. It does everything Dyson says. We have a whole house vacuum and this thing puts it to shame. Plus it's light enough to carry upstairs in one hand. Definitely a good deal.

Is this an all-floor or animal?

atburt wrote:Are you kidding me! I love woot, but are you kidding me? Another vacuum,oh joy! Get a clue and clearance these damn things out, no one wants this damn vacuum.

Wow thanks for letting me rant, very therapeutic.

All indications to the contrary, unless you live in N. Dakota, Arkansas, Kentucky, W. Virginia, or Vermont.

Dontja think that if they didn't sell enough acceptable number in the last Woot, they wouldn't bring it back over and over and over? Granted, I would rather see anything else (even a tablet) but obviously the things are selling.

mrlumpy wrote:So does that argument hold true for all of the refurbed iPod touches they sell on Woot (or directly from Apple, for that matter)?

My guess is that the refurbs are mostly returns due to buyer's remorse more so than defects.

markinaustin wrote:I think there's a couple of logic-gaps in this. Perhaps the reason there are so many Dyson refurbs is because they're WORTH refurbing. They throw the Shark's away. Dyson also offers a 5 year warranty, so that's a lot of years to replace or repair them. Most people don't repair out of warranty vacuum's so you could atribute the number of refurbs to a longer warranty.

When people are deciding whether to repair something they generally only care if it still has a warranty. Provided what they purchase isnt simply disposable for $30 or $40, if something has a warranty (and if they can find the receipt) they will send it in for repair.

The Shark has a five year warranty.

Meile has a seven year warranty.

Oreck vacuums can have a six or seven year warranty, and their "Forever" models have a lifetime warranty. Yes lifetime.

Even many Hoover vacs (including their newer Platinum series and "Air" vacs) have a five year warranty.

Thus nobody is going to throw these away if they break, because all of these vacuums can cost several hundred dollars. So why don't we see refurbed Orecks or Hoovers or Sharks on woot every other day?

Why don't we see refurb Hoovers for sale at Best Buy or refurb Orecks for sale on Amazon? It surely isn't because they have shorter warranties.

Plus - and this is an important point - the refurbed Dysons you so often see are current generation models. We aren't looking at six or seven year old DC01s here... we are looking at current gen models.

This tells us that these refurbs are fairly new. Thus either they break down fairly often, or people return them fairly often. Either way they are obviously returned at a higher rate than other brands otherwise we would expect to see other brands as available as Dyson, and we might actually see some other refurb brand available here on Woot.

I personally don't think Dyson's break down any more than other brands, but what I do think is that they are returned more often after people use them and realize they aren't any better than the $100 Hoovers, Bissels, or Eurekas they were used to.

Any new vacuum should perform better than a used model that hasn't been maintained, but if these new Dyson's are impressing people straight out of the box, I can see why they would be boxed up and returned to the store.

cjpowers wrote:My guess is that the refurbs are mostly returns due to buyer's remorse more so than defects.

Why would they suffer from higher levels of buyer's remorse than say an Oreck or Meile? All three brands are expensive - all three are considered a "premium" brand, yet only one of the three seems to provide endless supplies of refurbed units available at any given point.

Is the remorse because they regret spending that amount of cash, or is it merely because they determined the $600 vac is no better than the $100 or $200 vacs they have had in the past?

I can't say for sure, but I do have a coworker who purchased a Dyson canister vac, and after using it a few times he realized it was wearing on the carpet. It seems the brushes were so stiff they were pulling up massive amounts of carpet fiber and when he emptied the dust cup the vast majority of what he was dumping was carpet fiber... not dust or dirt.

He didn't return the Dyson (primarily because he has a lot of disposable income) but he went back to using his older Rainbow that he claims is less damaging to the carpet and does a better job. He tried to sell the Dyson on craigslist, but has had no luck so it just sits in the closet. Don't know what to say - but taht is one case where the Dyson didn't live up to expectations.

You folks do realize that Woot is selling a refurb dyson that can be bought at any brick and mortar store, correct?

You don't see alot of the other high end brands of vacuums being sold as refurbs here because you have to be a factory authorized dealer.

Dyson, you just need to have a pulse.

starbird2005 wrote:I actually found that Dyson will send you spare parts if you ask nicely. e.g. the cat clawed the hose and Dyson sent me a free replacement.

Had a similar experience. I've had mine for about 2 years. The motor has been solid, but the peripheral parts seem sort of cheap. When the machine was a few months old, the accordion-style rubber hose broke. Fortunately Dyson customer service was great, and they sent a new part for free.

I would probably not spend $500 on a Dyson again, but this seems a good deal, even for a refurb.

I bought one of these last time they showed up on woot. My mother-in-law had one and my wife loved it, so I thought I'd get one for her in her favorite color. Unfortunately, it was labeled wrong... it wasn't the color that the box said it was (so it wasn't woot's fault at all).

After about a month I finally got Dyson to let me exchange it because it was obviously their mistake. They have had it for over a month now and I haven't heard anything despite multiple attempts.

So.... I can't really say much as far as performance because I haven't actually used it yet. But as far as customer support... Dyson is really lacking. It should have taken less than a week to switch for the right color. Now, two months later, I'm $250 poorer and still no vacuum to show for it. If I could get a refund from Dyson instead of waiting who knows how long for my replacement, I'd take it and buy a different vacuum and never get a Dyson again. It really is pretty sad that they are losing customers just because they can't be bothered to answer an email or own up to their little mistake of putting the wrong color sticker on the box.

This vacuum ruins your carpet don't get it.

Got one of these for my grandma (she was using one of the most ancient vacuums known to man... IT STILL USED BAGS!) because it was VERY lightweight and she could use it anywhere. Trust me, it's NICE! It's very easy to maneuver it and it picks up dust that no other vacuum I've ever used has been able too. No matter how clean you think a room is, this vacuum somehow is always able to find more dirt and dust.

Also, just so you know, that woot picture sure makes it look far more big and mighty than it really is... This thing is REALLY small (but still gets the job done)

dinkledort wrote:Attention Dyson fanboys with your anecdotal evidence (“I bought one and it picked up lots of stuff! I’ll never buy anything else!”): Consumer Reports scores a total of 6 different Hoover models above the highest Dyson, which is the D28 Animal. With a score of 67, the D28 is ranked tied for 16th. And at a retail price of $650 it was somehow overlooked for a CR Best Buy. This model scores a 54.

But don’t worry, they can never take your stories! Oh, the wonderful stories!

Consumer Reports writers are not gods, rocket scientists, or even experts in the products they test. They're just people telling stories about products. Their anecdotal evidence is no more valid than the next person's.

I have an old fashioned bag vac (I'm 28), and I think if you just buy a nice quality bag vac, it will last longer than any of these bagless vacs. My last bagless vac need to be emptied (messy) and the filters rinsed everytime I used it per manufacturer. Use a bag vac, and empty it when the bag is full, so once every couple of weeks. I have a couple kids so the vac gets used a lot. Plus the everyone thinks they are messy, but they aren't, take the old bag off....put the new one on...done.

This model is really only effective on bare floors, which at this price still makes it a ripoff. Dyson products rarely test well in Consumer Reports, this one included.

With Dyson, you're overpaying for an inferior product that the company has spent a fortune marketing as the latest technology. But it isn't effective technology.

RWoodward wrote:Consumer Reports writers are not gods, rocket scientists, or even experts in the products they test. They're just people telling stories about products. Their anecdotal evidence is no more valid than the next person's.

They scientifically test and measure and report the results with no bent towards any one manufacturer. They refuse commercial advertising of any sort in the magazine, flatly refuse permission for leading manufacturers to reference their reports in their own product advertising, and have been at it for longer than most of these companies have existed.

You, sir, are woefully misinformed.

The DC25 is the best vacuum bar none. We've own several vacuums, including the Kirby, and this one still beats it. And they have come down in price considerably. They are the Apple of vacuums- simply the best.

If an expensive product like this doesn't pass its final test 100%, wouldn't it go to a reject pile, and refurb from there?

nnssandman wrote:They scientifically test and measure and report the results with no bent towards any one manufacturer. They refuse commercial advertising of any sort in the magazine, flatly refuse permission for leading manufacturers to reference their reports in their own product advertising, and have been at it for longer than most of these companies have existed.

You, sir, are woefully misinformed.

Not true for all products. Apple's antenna gate turned out to be a farce.

adavid10 wrote:So it only turns left?...

It's not an ambi-turner.

I used to have this vacuum, it's really good. Then, no joke, my life left me and now I need a new vacuum cleaner. Thanks for hitting way too close to home, Woot.

starbird2005 wrote:I actually found that Dyson will send you spare parts if you ask nicely. e.g. the cat clawed the hose and Dyson sent me a free replacement.

me too. i got free parts as well.

heathbug wrote:But the Miele is TWICE the price on Amazon. Is it worth it if my maid only vacuums once every two weeks? I doubt it.

That's up to you to determine whether the extra value is there. For me, it is.

I have sensitive hearing and asthma, I care very much about the particles that come out of a vacuum and noise. I'd gladly pay double for a better vacuum that would not make me sick (asthma) and cause me ear pain. Also, you are comparing the price of a Refurbed Dyson with a brand new Miele, price-wise.

It's not like I am just quoting Consumer Report, I have personally tested both of these exact models; the Dyson's result in CR was accurate; it does not have as much suction power, it is not sealed well, it leaks measurable particulate matter into the air, and it is a whole 3 dB louder (that's 8 times louder) than the Miele.

Your choice.

Dyson vacuums do last a very long time...(and suck as much as the first day) which is great for the consumer but eventually could cause a problems for woot! Since they have been featuring vacuum cleaners quite often on their sites.

Just the truth: I've had two smaller wood floor-type Sharps and one more on par with this Dyson, and I've been consistently disappointed. The last one is sitting out in the garage as I decide how to get rid of it. Let me emphasize: I do not know if my Sharp is a direct comparison to the Dyson, but I won't buy any kind of Sharp vacuuming product again. Actually, given other good choices, I doubt I'll buy Sharp products at all.

I had the same kind of problem with Dyson over another model sent me by Woot. Wouldn't stay "on." Went round and round with Woot, who kept trying to get me to deal with Dyson - now there's a hill to climb - but, after a lot of fruitless time spent, I insisted that Woot take it back. I think you should make a claim against Woot, get them to refund your money, and let them deal with the demons at Dyson. Let Woot then just deduct your $250 from the thousands that they pay to Dyson. That was my second problem with Dysons. No more, thanks, ever.....

ok. I broke down and bought one. Lets see how it works out when i get it. Heard mixed reviews and a bit scared.

It certainly is one of the prettiest, expensively priced, average performing vacuums money can buy.

Dyson is really good at sucking money from unwitting people's pockets.

I bought a refurb from woot when it was offered months ago. It looks and performs like brand new. No scratched plastic or anything.

mrlumpy wrote:So does that argument hold true for all of the refurbed iPod touches they sell on Woot (or directly from Apple, for that matter)?

Uh.... ya. (4 iPods later for me).

Anyone notice the same model available for about 5 bucks less over at overstock. Requires a new account and a code found at another site that advertises on woot to get the lower price which includes free shippping.

Woot followers would benefit greatly if woot got their hands on a lot of recent model LG vacuums. Their quality rivals that of vacuums costing hundreds more. Ours is the canister powered head version, but CR rates all versions highly. I never thought much of any turbine head (air-powered head) vacuums, including LGs.

Love the machine. Wouldn't buy a different type. I've spent a couple thousand over the years on vacuums, and this is the one, finally thank God.

nmill005 wrote:Save some money and buy a new Shark. I'm not a Dyson hater, but they the Shark is just as good and much cheaper. The premium in price is simply to pay for the fancy marketing that so many wooters have apparently fallen for.

Dyson fanatics, commence attacking me...

The Shark looks like a Dyson on crack:



But I have to admit you don't see nearly as many refurbs being sold, and they still sell a bunch of sharks.I am not a Dyson fan, I think they are way overrated. I have a Hoover windtunnel that is 15 years old that cost me $200 back then, and it works well. The Sharks get great reviews, but I could not resist ripping on the looks of this model.

woot4rudy wrote:Love the machine. Wouldn't buy a different type. I've spent a couple thousand over the years on vacuums, and this is the one, finally thank God.

^ Paid Post

Dyson Pet Clean-Up Accessory kit for $31.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0037Z9M54/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?t=slicinc-20&tag=dealswoot-20&ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER

lll0228 wrote:

I'd spend a little more and stick to the Miele.

Lol, a little being 70% more... $249 vs $429. Don't forget to add in the costs of bags and filters too. Oh ya and the Mieles require regular service. But hey, at least you didn't go and recommend one of the $800 Mieles as a comparison.

Costner wrote:A whole bunch of words no one read

Or maybe woot! just has a deal with the dyson refurb factory and not with shark/hoover/whatever else you're trying to advertise

Our Dyson works great and we've had it several years, longer than I can remember

heathbug wrote:But the Miele is TWICE the price on Amazon. Is it worth it if my maid only vacuums once every two weeks? I doubt it.

I got lucky and found a virtually new Miele S7280 Calypso on Craigslist for just $200. The couple I bought it from got a maid service and no longer needed it.

nnssandman wrote:^ Paid Post

Maybe a touch cynical, it sounds like. There are very few things in life to totally discount anything on the opposing side like you have. I've subscribed to Consumers Reports for years, but I don't accept everything at face value from them. That wooter that you shot down has been around for a few years, has quality posts, and bought at least 10 items.

I understand your fervor, but I think you and others are taking it a bit too far.
For the record, I don't own a Dyson and have no interest in changing from my old vacuum. I think the mixed reviews say all that needs to be known (including the mixed comments on customer service).

I am up to my neck in work and shouldn't be writing this, but taking a quick break and reading the back and forth on this, I'm not surprised by the comments, just a bit disappointed in the tone mixed in with the info by some of the posters, and throwing my 2 cents in for the 5 people still reading these posts until the next woot. Good night.

I looked into this model, but after a bit of checking online I decided to go for a Miele. They are more expensive up front, but they are designed to last much longer and their filtration is far superior. This is especially important for my wife who is allergic to dust mites! To offset the higher cost, I bought one slightly used on eBay.

jakehoey wrote:The average cost of the items available today on the 6 woots (woot, home, kids, shirt, sellout, and wine) not counting shipping is $111.33 ...

Why does woot think I'm made out of money?

Woot doesn't think you're made out of money. I've bouht 200 items more and if I didn't have 3 Dyson already, I would be buying 1 of these. It's a sweet deal, your loss if you blew it off.

nnssandman wrote:They scientifically test and measure and report the results with no bent towards any one manufacturer. They refuse commercial advertising of any sort in the magazine, flatly refuse permission for leading manufacturers to reference their reports in their own product advertising, and have been at it for longer than most of these companies have existed.

Their editorial stance has nothing to do with the accuracy of their opinions, only their independance. They are writers, not scientists. I challenge you to post any evidence of valid scientific methodology in their "tests." Look at a typical issue and count the number of times you see the words "like" "feel" "think" and "believe" appear. Those are not scientific findings. They are simply opinions, and no more valid than any other.