496 of 514 people found the following review helpful
I do not normally write glowing reviews,
This review is from: Vax U91-MA-B Air Multicyclonic Upright Bagless Vacuum Cleaner (Kitchen & Home)
I should first of all say I am a physicist: not, perhaps your average user. I have read Dyson's biography so I know about the development of the cyclonic separator from industrial to domestic use. I have never bought a Dyson partly because they are expensive and partly because almost everybody I have asked has found some fault with them. However the cyclone technology must be one of the most amazing developments of the last 30 years.
Knowing that some of the expense of a Dyson is due to the materials they use and the extensive testing, and that I bought the Vax for less than half the price of the cheapest Dyson, I did not expect the Vax to be particularly well designed or constructed.
My previous vacuum cleaner was an Electrolux bagless cheap device from Tescos. I bought it a few years ago. Though it is bagless it only bears a feeble resemblance to a cyclonic separator: the filter blocks almost immediately and the 1600 watts of power can then only be dissipated in heat within the motor which then cuts out. An extremely bad design.
I do not normally write glowing reviews. I am picky and difficult to please and my engineering background and aesthetic sense will normally find fault in several areas of design. Do not underestimate the significance therefore when I say that the Vax is a thing of beauty and of impeccable design and construction. They have made good use of Dyson's expired patents with the double stage of cyclonic filtration. The dirt left to be deposited in the pre-motor filter is a minuscule proportion of that which is trapped in the cyclonic separators. It drags out dirt from deep within the carpet and continues to do so without noticeable reduction in suction. The floating brushbar sets itself at the ideal height. They have out-designed established names in the parts other than the cyclonic separator as well.