Purple icon! (Dyson DC05)

Member Name: FraserP

Product:	Dyson DC05
Date:	04/03/01 (512 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Easier to carry, cheaper to run, fun!

Disadvantages: More messy to empty, expensive

This is a joint review; I chose and purchased the machine and my wife uses it most and has given me her views.

Reasons for purchase
We tend to research a little in "Which" magazine or other similar comparative testing review before buying, although in this case I think I was persuaded by the fact that it is a great British invention, and as a lawyer I am tickled by the fact that James Dyson has managed to win a significant patent action against the Hover rip off! Also I read the review on this site, most of which are positive.

We have a Miele machine which needed replacing.

The challenge
We have a medieval house (500 years old) with 5 bedrooms, two stair cases, floors with carpets, wood, tiles and bare bricks, beams, draughts, spiders, children and a messy DIY person (who shall remain nameless)


The machine
The Dyson is highly colourful, with the appearance of being built from plastic, but it feels sturdy enough. Compared with the Miele cylinder machine (which I would say is a typical bag based cylinder vacuum) the Dyson DC 05 is much neater and lighter. This is a plus in a number of ways; it takes less storage space around the house, and carrying it is no longer a chore. The Miele weighs over 12 kilos where the Dyson is a little over 8. It is also a little quieter.


Warranty.
It comes with a two year guarantee; Comet where we purchased it tried to sell me an extended warranty, but Dyson offer their own extra 3 years (a total of 5 years with the manufacturer's initial 2 year cover) for £54. We have decided not to take the extra guarantee as if it breaks down in say 3-4 years time, we might as well put that money towards a new one, however if you like piece of mind it does give you the choice. Our machines don't seem to get too hard a life

Model Choice
We have the model with the absolute filter and turbo brush head. Both of these are extra cost options. The
filter was about £10 extra and the brush added about £15 (about £23 if purchased separately).

In use.
The turbo brush head is much better at picking up hairs off carpets than a straight forward vacuum; the only downside is that the hairs tend to get tangled around the brushes, so they have to be cut off from time to time. Also, if you lift the head before a patch is fully cleaned, it tends to "spit" out the residue which it has not collected. You have to be sure it has completed cleaning the patch you are working on. It is however a worthwhile extra if you have carpets or pets.

You can now get a model with a motorised brush head that can be switched on and off from the handle, which is an improvement.

Compared with the old but high quality machine it replaces, we find it is easier to carry or pull about, lighter, and has its tool kit attached to the hose, so it is much less fiddly to get to when you need to swap a fitting over. Also, because the tools are not in a part of the base near the motor, you do not get a face full of exhaust air as you collect the tools.

There are good little design touches like being able to reduce the suction for curtains or fabrics with a trigger on the hose, which is much better than a sliding switch on the body of the machine since you don't have to pause when switching from carpets to curtains.

Bag or bagless?
The fact that we do not need bags is a considerable boon; we always seem to run out at an inconvenient time, they were about £1 each for the manufacturer's own brand (and the copies were of poor quality). Emptying and cleaning the machine could be messy if you are not careful, however with care we find it reasonably easy. We prefer to empty it straight into the outside dustbin, which means a trip outside, or you could empty it into any clear plastic bag, if you prefer.

The hidden benefit is that you do not notice any reduction in suction powe
r as it fills up, even when it has swallowed pieces of paper or plastic.

You must not use detergent, but if you like you can rinse the plastic "bag" substitutes under a tap, or simply wipe them clean with some kitchen paper. The only part which may wear out is the "absolute filter" which is a foam pad, costing £10. The foam should last 6 months before needing a clean. It can then be rinsed in plain water and dried fully before replacing. Even if it only lasts a couple of years or so, replacing the foam element is relatively painless compared with bags, which cost Us not less than a £1 a week.

You have to be prepared to see the dust and fluff collected in the collection chamber, but it does not bother us much.

Downside?
Emptying the rubbish is a bit messy, and either you have to wear rubber gloves or expect to wash the grey dust off your hands afterwards. The cable rewind mechanism is only just strong enough, As I find myself having to "feed it in" to some extent, and this is the one area where it is not as good as the old machine. The turbo brush gets tangled up with hairs and will need clearing out from time to time. It is also more expensive than many rivals.

The next improvement in the machine should be to make it whisper quiet and easier to empty.

Conclusion
Overall, a success! How many times can you say a man is keen to try out a machine as mundane as a vacuum cleaner. It is a piece of art and a domestic appliance. Well done James!

Summary: