Sebo Felix Vacuum Cleaner Review 

The fallacy of the 700 W model I've addressed in other comments here. Belts are a well-established weak point and common source of failure; it's why the superior cleaners ditched them a long long time ago. You don't seem to understand what boost is for or why to use it; it's not for general cleaning. This is all clear in the data if you understand it. Edge cleaning was shown quite clearly to suck on the Felix. Maybe you can outline precisely how to recycle a vacuum bag and evidence it. Raising a strawman of a holiday CO2 output is crackpot reasoning that bypasses the entire problem. I've never come across a good, sensible explanation for why someone doesn't like easier bite-sized cleaning over an hour long tiring mega clean. Anyone who argues the house is 'cleaner' is an idiot. Your laptop vs pc analogy assumes the V11/10 achieves a poorer result and takes longer. That is false as the data shows, so is a poorly thought out analogy.

@@a111z >> “To claim that something is “well-established” without providing supporting evidence is a classic “weasel word” argument.” The evidence is that because belts break, spare belts are sold for purchase (this was shown in the video…not that you appear to have watched it). Many ‘tuning’, repair, and maintenance services on old fashioned machines that suffer from these problems, such as Kirby machines, do replace belts. If you can’t see that it’s well established and the evidence is all around you, then you probably need more help than I can provide. >> “An American consumer advocacy organization, Consumer Reports, has stopped recommending Dyson’s cordless offering after finding that 50% of cordless Dyson vacuums fail within the first 5 years of ownership. In the US, Dyson cordless vacuums only come with an uninspiring 2 year warranty.” Ah this old chestnut. Furthermore, your phraseology is not only misleading, but there’s a pinned comment you should checkout in this video ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-sNSr60Vuw0I.html that directly addresses this and exposes the deception. Behaviour like yours leading to petty insults against their betters by accusing them of “weasel word arguments”, are nothing short of shameful. You’re peddling a deception that has been totally debunked. Consumer Reports were also exposed as disgusting deceivers using flawed methodology (as I’ve always noted and criticised), and it’s little wonder that the wretched and foul gravitate towards their falsehoods and propaganda and cite it as gospel. You should read up on the flaws of CR in that article and droop your head in utter shame. You’ve exposed yourself to be someone who doesn’t fact-check, who rejects evidence, who insults in lieu of an argument, who can’t see the obvious, and who peddles lies and deceptions. Your behaviour is a disgrace and fully consistent with the worst I’ve seen out there. >> “SEBO is too niche of a brand in the US to be tested by Consumer Reports, and I haven’t found any official information from the company on repair rates or warranty claim data. But they do have an anecdotal reputation for being extremely reliable and many or most of their models come with 10 year warranties.” Anecdotes are never convincing or a substitute for real evidence; nor is the rest of your straw clutching, desperate speculation. You wrongly criticise me for not presenting evidence, yet you literally ignore the evidence presented in the video showing that Sebo offer replacement belts. seboshop.co.uk/sebo-spare-parts/sebo-x1-spares/sebo-vacuum-cleaner-toothed-drive-belt Why would they do this if your wild speculation, based on vague anecdotes of it never breaking, was true? It makes NO sense. And to reject all this evidence yet simultaneously accuse me of “weasel word arguments” is the most stunning example of hypocrisy I’ve seen in a while. Forshame! You’re 100% wrong at every turn and not respectable. But thanks for the entertainment!

@@a111z You seem to have not noticed the links I provided in the last response that Sebo provides extra TOOTHED belts...because they break (they chemically degrade over time at the very least). Otherwise why sell them? I'm repeating myself, but maybe it'll stick. Similarly, I've already provided a response that debunks your CR claims. I can only assume you didn't read any of it. Not sure why you spent all that time writing more verbosely what you already wrote and I've addressed. o_0

@@a111z Well, in some cases, it's reasonable to assume it does. But there's better tech out there that eliminates that potential weak link. Replacement filters are for cases where abuse and neglect has occurred, so not a reasonable comparison. The belt also leaves unswept lines or prevents full width cleaning. Inferior and avoidable with superior technology and design. I presume you accept the CR debunking and the disgustingly misleading nonsense associated with it being brought up as evidence of anything reputable.

​@@a111z o_0 you read the part where I pointed out the materials the belts are made of can naturally chemically degrade over time, weaking them, right? Their failure occurs without abuse. Nothing like the same thing. It's not reasonable to expect any manufacturer to protect against what would be complete and total abuse for the cinetic filters to clog (I suggest you understand how these systems work from my video; I've shown clearly that only total failure to even empty the bin causes such failures-literally like never ever filling the car up with petrol or getting an oil change because they're just so negligent and careless). No company should cater for that and you shouldn't be effectively justifying such behaviour. Also, no one has (uncured) plaster dust or quick-dry cement in their carpets (cured plaster dust is fine) and it's not just the filter that cement would damage. It would damage any other vacuum too, and would mean the user has to throw away a bag or other component for example (but they do that anyway wastefully). You're flogging a dead horse; belts are inferior, even if you do attempt to dumb down in your admission, and better approaches have been taken. And yes, cordless can be relatively less reliable, and you understood why, right? It's mainly because of the third party old fashioned li-ion batteries. The same ones powering ALL mobile devices, currently. But you didn't criticise that. You specifically singled out Dyson and only Dyson and used that article to weaponise against them. You've been exposed as ignorant or wilfully misleading; take your pick. CR DO NOT concude "Dyson is the least reliable stick vacuum manufacturer"; they conclude they are no less reliable than any of the others (primarily for the battery reason) once they corrected for their disgusting abuse of facts. And what you fail to realise for yourself is that irrespective of whether it's true that any stick vacuum fails within 5 years, it doesn't tell you anything about how or why. They have no data; they rely purely on anecdotes, which is not convincing evidence. These are the data of ignorant charlatans. Are the reasons why Dysons fail down to the battery or other specific means? What are they? How do those reasons differ compared to other manufacturers who cut corners? There are plenty of equally anecdotal cases where people claim to have Dyson stick vacs that work like they day they were new after several years and have also been treated well and not abused or neglected. Dyson machines are all modular now, and any broken parts can be shipped out for hot-swap in. You are consistently making claims that are false, unsupported by objective evidence or relying on testimony, or that are flat out misleading half-truths. This was expected of course. Please, keep it going.

Technology moves on. Very few people drive cars for 20 years. No one uses a computer or phone 20 years later. Things improve, become more efficient. The old is recycled, the new replaces it. That's simply not an argument in favour of any technology. There is no evidence I've seen that bagged vacuums automatically have to be more hygienic. Plenty of evidence of the mess they make emptying in my Kirby and Henry reviews. Most cheap knockoff bagless clones are terrible and are definitely messier and less hygienic. My reviews of bagless clones show this clearly. But the best bagless cleaners are absolutely hygienic to empty, as demonstrated in my V10, V11, and V15 reviews and as demonstrated here ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-E_ik6qScs0o.html And then there's literally all the other major disadvantages of bags discussed here that can't be so easily ignored ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ptN0kkOtGSM.html People should not be throwing vacuums or any technology into landfill; they should be recycled as happens in all civilised parts of the world by responsible people.

You also seem to have missed all the other problems pointed out in this review, which I think speaks volumes.

I take it you agree, then

No I don’t

@@AwesomeVacuums Then you've put yourself in a position where you don't make any sense, given what you've said is debunked as either wrong or misleading, and don't defend your position when asked. So, I'm left questioning why you even commented in the first place. I guess some people just want to be heard or get disgruntled when facts conflict with subjective opinions. >_>

You're plucking those numbers out of your behind, and you're ignoring ongoing running costs and other non-recyclable environmental impacts. And of course, there's the other metrics other than just environmental impact alone (namely performance and ease of use).

I’ve had a dc08 for almost 18 years. Only replaced the motor once so not sure where you are getting this from

o_0 If only there was something there to even take constructively. You didn't like what you saw, couldn't argue against facts, so expressed your opinion in a manner that suggested I'd done something wrong, yet didn't exactly say what, let alone defend it with evidence. If your issue is with tone, then I've no time for people that are skin deep and can't see past cosmetics to substance. "I hope you can take that constructively."

I'd recommend you watch the video as it was all explained quite clearly and not as you misleadingly summarised. It performs well, but only by brute force. The reasons why this is not good enough and how others achieve the same or greater results in a better way were outlined. To misinterpret that as bias is at best hypocritical. >> "The energy (and therefore waste) required to gain and process the resources for a cordless machine are far greater than the resources to use bags for a Sebo or a Kirby. " Can you evidence that please, because I don't believe you. >> "A good quality corded bagged (or even bagless) unit can last decades without needing much other than preventative maintenance" The same is true of the machine in question. However, most either are not kept that long due to neglect or because technology moves on, as with anything, and people upgrade. Newer technology is also more efficient and makes the job far easier, so it's no virtue to last "decades". This myth has been debunked plenty of times on my channel. >> "The Felix also comes with a hard floor brush with the premium kit " Which you presumably have to pay more for. And better machines don't need extra floor tools to tackle all dirt types across all floor types, as my other reviews show. >> "and also has a height adjustment " The flaws of such a hassle and trial-and-error approach are exposed in the video. This is no virtue. Furthermore, this was the 1300 W model. Performance of the 700W model will likely be equivalent to the slider at low, i.e. lower. This machine performs well, but has many avoidable flaws that better and more modern technology has solved now. The use of bags is unforgivable today. All proposed advantages have been debunked and there are better ways of solving the problems they bring.

@@VacuumFacts Reddit rates the Sebo highly

@@nautzero There's no reason why anyone should respect anything said on reddit. Facts are more important, and they were shown in this video. It performs well, but only because it wastefully brute forces performance. Any machine can do that. Sebo even discontinued this product becaues of its wastefulness and have a 700 W model which likely performs less well, given not much else changed. Better machines perform with a fraction of the costs and impact because they're better designed.

@@VacuumFacts You should actually get a 700 watt one and find out.

@@oeljay You seem to have forgotten everything mentioned in the video. The 700W version, which is the equivalent of turning the dial down on the 1400W version, could only be the same at best but likely worse, given basic science discussed in my other videos.

Yes, the Felix is powerful and a good performer. Unfortunately, to achieve it, it had to brute force sloppily at great and whiolly avoidable cost to the environment due to utterly terrible design as shown in the review. Very unrespectable. Regardless of the Dyson warranty (which is driven by the battery life primarily), the machine should last for at least 10 years by design if treated responsibly. There is no evidence to support your claim of low reliability. Emptying the cordless bin takes 5 seconds and is completely costless and messless, as empirically demonstrated in my videos. The minor inconvenience of emptying is dwarfed by the problems of bags, odours, running costs, environmental impact etc.-all outlined in the video. And yes, people have different likes and dislikes. Some people like using candles rather than electricity. Some people prefer a horse and cart rather than a car. Objectively, the evidence is clear: the stick vac formfactor is vastly superior.

I've had both the Cinetic big ball animal 2 and the animal 2 brought a Sebo Felix pet recently and can say its way better the dysons just based on quality

I don't doubt what you say, but it's a moot point. Manual fiddling with dials to adjust height is evidence of poor design. We know from superior manufacturers and their better products that height adjustment can be done automatically without the need for such user intervention. And it still doesn't address the issue that when you've got it lifted off the hard floor for large particles, you're then losing suction and missing all the fine dust. Totally stupid design that belongs in the past or the dusty loft space of relic collectors.

Sorry, what part of the video did you disagree with and why? Or do you just not like facts when they conflict with what you want to be true.

@@VacuumFacts You left out the most vital part of the review. That Dyson won’t last long when you actually use it. You need to replace the battery if it manages to survive even 2 years thus polluting the landfills. Rating a product by power consumption is flat out ridiculous. A hair dryer can draw 1200 watts but who cares it’s what’s required to do the job. Of course the Dyson has a smaller motor it’s battery powered and needs all the help it can get. Take the vacuums apart and inspect the quality of the motors perhaps? If you’re suckered into believing a cordless stick vacuum is the way to go you may as well buy a Shark for half the price. It’s just as disposable as the Dyson. What’s really odd is you see tonnes of Dysons on the used market because owners realize they made an expensive mistake. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a used Sebo for sale.

@@mikerichardson60 This is a review about the Sebo felix, not the Dyson. The Dyson is just being compared against. Your claims about the Dyson's longeivity are not supported by any evidence (and are false). The rest are either false, or misleading half-truths that a simple fact check will resolve. You ignore the data showing cleaning performance of the V11 vs the Sebo and then contrasting against the wasteful environmental impact of the Sebo that's wholly avoidable. And the Shark and Dyson performance have also been quantified and goes against your nonsense claims. All I see here is falsehoods and Dyson racism. You didn't even discuss anything in the video as asked, which says it all, and your vague anecdotes are very unconvincing.

"Dyson racism". Lmao, he does it for free and is a total schizo.

You can get a Dyson Light Ball for £200, which is NOT twice the price; it's less. And it doesn't have running costs, like replacement filters and bags. You're right, it is ridiculous that you have to take time, trial and error guessing what the best setting is for hard floor. And yes, if you make its head lift off the floor so larger particles can fit in, it then loses suction and doesn't clean off the fine dust. The brushbar helps with this, and so you're right, it will also perform worse for fine dust without the brushbar on. It's generally terrible design that has been vastly surpassed by better products, such as this, which can successfully tackle all particle types on all floor types, as shown: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-YnJ6OqVC_wg.html And then there's everything else problematic about this machine you didn't acknowledge, that was raised in the video.

@@VacuumFacts Lol what? The Light Ball has 2 filters that need changing every 6-12 months. Checked the price here in Australia and they are $110 all up. I looked at the Sebo Felix Service kit with both filters and 10 bags. That is $80. The filters get changed after using all the bags. My current bag has taken me a month and a half and doesn't yet need changing. 😂

@@oeljay Please can you provide reputable evidence showing that, without abuse or neglect, that the lifetime washable filters "need changing every 6-12 months"? There is plenty of evidence out there showing this is a flat-out falsehood. As discussed here ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ptN0kkOtGSM.html not changing bags frequently causes a lot of people very bad odour problems, even if you as an individual might not be affected.

... figures >_>

A cord is avoidable hassle that needs to be done every time you use it or move to a new socket that makes the chore even harder than it needs to be. It's not clear what you mean by 'last longer'. It's not good for the environment for such old, power guzzling tech to be used for a long time anyway. The V10 is designed to last for 10 years at the very least with care, but most people will have upgraded by then anyway to improving technology that makes things easier, does things better, and has less environmental impact. So the 'longeivity' argument is a fallacy that's poorly thought out. No one uses an old PC from the 90s any more, or drives old cars from the 1950s that were 'built to last'. Such a stupid argument.

@vacuum facts longs people when they upgrade to new technology they don’t throw the old one out hey 😂😉 We need to be more resourceful with energy, materials etc.. more so then ever before! Using less energy,, less materials but still performs as good if not better then it’s only better for the environment as well as user. As they say ‘’less is more’! It is nice especially if you’ve invested and saved up to buy something that’s works better and uses less energy etc..to last a while, as not everyone can afford to keep buying the latest technology. Valid points you’ve made which do get overlooked most of the time too.

Found an insecure anti-Dyson rabid vacuum enthusiast that's offended by facts that conflict with their wonky worldviews

@@VacuumFacts Not anti-Dyson, just pro-good vacuum. You have to look at the comments on all your videos and see the theme. Your viewers don't think Dysons are the best thing since sliced bread. So many people want a bagged vacuum. You can't have that with a Dyson. So many people want something that isn't a cordless stick vacuum. You can't have that with a Dyson. So how can Dyson, with the only thing its bringing to the table is a semi-decent cordless stick vacuum be the best vacuum manufacturer ever? The SEBO Felix checks the boxes for the people that want a powerful bagged vacuum that will last them a long time.

You just have to look at the evidence to see the theme. What people 'think' is irrelevant. What's true is what matters and the objective evidence is overwhelmingly clear. Bagged vacuums are a silly technology of the past, riddled with disadvantages and shortcomings. Better technology exists that achieves more with less. Bagged vacuums are available for the deluded few who don't appear to appreciate the best technology available to make the chore easiest. If people like bagged vacuums best, fine. Each to their own. But don't come on a channel about facts arguing they're better. They're not and there's no evidence they are. Pointing this out doesn't make someone a fanboy; it makes them truthful.

@@VacuumFacts A non-bagged vacuum has yet to solve the allergy issue. When you open up the canister on a stick vacuum, you get hit in the face by floating dust and debris. And emptying it into the trash is messy. Bagged vacuums have solved that issue.

This is a false statement. The original bagless vacuum can be emptied without mess as evidenced here ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-E_ik6qScs0o.html and bagged vacuums are extremely messy to empty, as evidenced here ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ei3rEQzMoPk.html | ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-c4X9GAOJiLs.html | ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-YPnPwBRpNBc.html | ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ZmzG8XOQAeQ.html | ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-x_Rry3u1Kcs.html | ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-IJz-lYoF1_o.html .

You're raising strawmen; their durability is not disputed. It's everything else in the review that's relevant in the comparison. Not sure where you're plucking the number 15 from...possibly your behind. if you have evidence to support that a statistically significant number of Sebo owners as a percentage of those sold still use them after 15 years, please send it along; otherwise, I don't believe it, and you're portraying wishful thinking as though it were fact. Plus, 15 years of bags and excessive power consumption isn't exactly impressive. I'm not quite sure what the relevance of mentioning Malaysia is. Production was moved there because planning permission was originally denied by the local UK council (a dumb own goal really), and like any business, you thus go where it is most cost effective to produce. There is nothing negative about this fact, and to suggest otherwise is very much racist. Half-truth, anti-Dyson propaganda is often synonymous with such racist tendencies.

@@VacuumFacts I work a vacuum store and the majority of machines that come in for repair are dysons or sharks…many unrepairable. Seeing a Sebo come in is very rare. Maybe once a year. If that doesn’t speak to their reliability I don’t know what does

@@MrMcMuffinJr1999 Did it ever occur to you to normalise the data or acquire a more statistically representative dataset? You, sir, need to go back to school and improve your education level, I'm afraid, because until you do and recognise the absurdity of your logic and conclusions, no one respectable will give you further time of day.

@@VacuumFacts oh I intend to. When I get back there I’m going to go through our thousands of tickets and compare. I’m not just saying this shit for attention. I first gave you a visual observation. Just have to give you actual data. Edit: it’s kinda entertaining you feel the need to insult people’s intelligence every time the offer up an opinion even slightly dissimilar to yours. What’s the point of posting this video if you can’t accept differing opinions. All I did was share a visual observation. Didn’t realize I needed a PHD in observation to share said observations

@@VacuumFacts preliminary results out of 2617 tickets. 936 are Dyson and 4 are Sebos. That’s .0015%

What (relevant) information was left out? What do you think is 'unfactual' (which isn't a word)? You appear to confuse observed facts with bias. Quick to whine; slow to evidence your vague claims...

...figures

@@justinhuey7253 You're not making sense and just saying things that seem very poorly thought out, vague, and not explained. It's quite simple. Removing fine dust from this carpet is the most difficult representative challenge for any vacuum cleaner. Both products' cleaning performance was comparable, yet the Dyson required considerably less energy to do so. It is therefore better designed and far more efficient. And then there's literally everything else in the video.

@@justinhuey7253 I see a collection of rabid vacuum enthusiasts whose opinions are at odds with reality and who are offended when someone provides evidence exposing their wonky worldview.

You were asked to state what in the video, which was about the Felix, that you disagreed with. Instead, you didn't actually address anything in the video at all and just tried to smear another brand by making claims you haven't backed up with any objective evidence, are flat out false, or that are full of misleading half-truths. Disgruntled tribalistic, Dyson racist who doesn't like facts. I suggest you watch my reviews of the vacuums you speak of which actually quantifies performance and fully accounts for usability and environmental impact. If you have comments on specific claims raised, then fire away. But keep your nonsense and propaganda to yourself because it's not welcome in a place of facts and truth.

lol thanks for sharing

I would have got it from a dealer. Price is always negotiable and dealer purchases come with the onyx warranty. I managed to get mine for $450. I mean…I work there but people get massive discounts all the time. $450 is perfect for a machine I won’t have to maintain but once every couple of years

Falling to bits is surprising. They're tested savagely and survive where the competition fail. I and many have had such machines used frequently for years and remain as new. If treated responsibly, they'll last for 10 years at the very least. Bad odours are caused by picking up smelly material. I have videos outlining how to minimise smells, and filter replacing is not necessary.

@@VacuumFacts I sent the Dyson away for a service at a local service centre but even they couldn’t solve the smell problem. As for falling to bits it’s been the head that’s given us the most problems. It does get the occasional knock against the skirting and the dog is partial to attacking it but we’ve had to replace a few parts.

You might want to check the data again. It removes low (realistic) concentrations at a comparable rate (based on the gradient of the curve), and still removes a 2/3 super-majority of dirt in high concentrations. It only takes a tiny fraction of the resources to do so and brings with it all the practicality, cost, and environmental impact benefits in the process.

@@VacuumFacts Are you referring to the V11? and I see what you mean but I want Dyson to make the best carpet cleaning vacuum, I appreciate the V11 is miles better designed han the Felix, but carpet cleanliness is important to me. Does the V11 clean better than the light ball/small ball? That has 90 AW but more brushes on the brushroll I feel like I may need to get my Felix out every once in a while to clean my carpets a little more, I use the V11 daily though. Infact, I got out my vax air yesterday and it managed to pull out embedded sawdust that the V11's regular vacuuming left behind, so this kinda confirms it, I'm a bit disappointed even though I love the V11. I imagine if the V11 had longer bristles or even an extra row of bristles it'd clean better

@@parwaz7861 Again, the data. They both achieve the same level of cleanliness; it's just a matter of how many passes. At real-world concentrations, the amount removed per pass is comparable, but is achieved vastly more efficiently and conveniently. Air watts are irrelevant, as I explained in the CFM/airwatts/suction video I did years ago. I want to test against the LB eventually. But too busy atm to do it. I suspect it'll be similar data to what's shown here. It will probably clean faster, but not necessarily 'better' at real world concentrations.

@@VacuumFacts I understand what you're saying but the data from your graph is showing that the V11 on Auto may have picked up more in the initial few extractions, but then with each extraction, up to 12 extractions, it didn't pick up as much as boost, and even then the boost mode didn't pick up as much as the Felix. What Im saying is it's just that Dyson claim their machines clean better than any other, you say this yourself but it's hard to believe now, do you see where I'm coming from? I agree that the high airwatts and CFM nonsense is irrelevant, because it's more about clever design, I understand that too. I just can't get around that Dyson claim of their machines cleaning better than other vacuums. I mean the Felix outperformed the V11, I would expect Dyson to compare their top of the range vacuums to other vacuums including the Felix

@@parwaz7861 Dyson doesn't claim that for the V11 (that's the light ball). The data shows max mode is comparable to the Felix and cleans heavy spot messes faster (the only reason you'd use max anyway). At real world concentrations the incremental dust removal is comparable (or in fact greater, as a quirk of their being more left to get). For normal, real-world cleaning, the V11, using almost 10 times less power in auto, cleans as well i.e. removes residual dirt at comparable rate (and this is not true of all cleaners, which struggle in this region).

Mostly to identify the shallow idiots who think voting is meaningful. They only allow the angry filth, who don't like facts, a means to form a petty dislike mob. On videos with relatively low audiences (so non-review videos), it gives them the false impression they are having an impact by constituting a greater percentage of the total votes. So I deny the dirt the satisfaction. If you want to see the true popularity of my channel and its content, look at the videos with a larger audience. In those videos, the dirty dislike mobs have no power because they're completely drowned out by their betters out there who aren't petty, bitter, and maliced. Their dirty dislike mob votes are the same in magnitude, but make up a tiny little percentage of the total vote, showing how numerically insignificant they really are and how out of touch with reality their views lie. Check out the V15 review for a simple example of this. Only videos with large viewerships have the feature unlocked, therefore. I hope you were able to understand this explanation; I know it did contain words with more than 2 syllables and was quite taxing for simple minds who wrongly think my content is poison because they're otherwise too stupid and backwards to even listen. Such idiots are easy to identify; they're quick to criticise, but slow to defend their position with strong objective evidence, much like that shown in the video. Back under your bridge, troll.

@@VacuumFacts There is a far more plausible explanation for the number of dislikes.

@@johnb4905 Consistently, you fail to evidence your wild claims and conflict with evidence already available. The hallmark of trollsville...

@@VacuumFacts I have not made any claims. And what would be the point if I did? You would simply dismiss it.

Thanks for your subjective opinion. I feel the opposite. However, in my case, my opinion is informed by evidence, as presented in the video.

@@VacuumFacts I've watched a few of your videos and u seem like a dyson fan boy that's fine... neither one is better then the other it's what works for you in your unique situation and cleaning needs

To ignore the evidence and conclude I'm a 'fan boy' is absurd. You clearly haven't watched enough of my videos. There are clear objective criteria that are measurable that determine what is best, so you are simply wrong to think things can be resolved down to an absurd subjectivity as simple as "it's what works for you in your unique situation and cleaning needs". That says nothing, provides no detail, and flies in the face of what can be directly observed-and is shown in the videos. You haven't taken issue with any specific claim made in the video you're commenting on, so I presume you wholeheartedly agree in that case. Otherwise, you might want to say something meaningful.

From experience, whenever you've made a factual claim, it has been false when fact-checked. So presumably you can show clear, reputable data showing no performance difference with a 700 W version, particularly when the bag is dust-loaded. I'm guessing you can't. And then that's also an admission that they could have done that earlier given they've made no technological changes other than swapping out a motor, and all those who complained about lowering power consumption were embarrassingly wrong, as discussed in the video. Of course, if I'd had used a 700 W version (which I deliberately didn't), some clown would have moaned, without engaging brain, that what I was saying wasn't representative because it was only the 700 W version. In fact, I'm surprised some moron hasn't yet winged that I didn't use a different model with trivial cosmetic differences.

@@VacuumFacts You always twist things to show cleaners at their worst. It does have edge cleaning on one side, it's cleans hard floors well with the parquet floorhead the latest models are quieter and use less power. They have very good build quality and I personally like Manuel height adjustment. Its not a chore to occasionally turn the dial. And you can get an extension hose to clean up the stairs..it's a very nice extension too not tight and springy like the Dyson ball

@@2711marcus Twist things? You're confusing with stating facts that someone without a defense might not like. And that also doesn't explain presenting, fairly and honestly, it's excellent carpet cleaning performance (which I might add also verifies the trustworthiness of the testing I do). So yeah, that wasn't the most impressive thing to say. And I noticed you failed to provide reputable evidence to support your claim of no performance reduction at lower power consumption (and thus the associated implications outlined previously). Which I think cements the points raised in the video. A relative pile of crap that's built to last is no virtue. You might like the manual head height change, but there's no good objective reason or benefit for it. It is a chore to many other people to have to do unnecessary things to achieve what is already a chore. Subjectivities aren't really relevant anyway to the relative and objective crappiness of this product.

Two reasons. 1. They are both vacuum cleaners and are both expected to perform the same function: clean dust out of floors; as such they are perfectly comparable. 2. Many out there that have been identified as sources of misleading nonsense have championed the Sebo Felix and made claims that it is good. The level of truth was investigated. Hopefully that clarifies your confusion and you understood the conclusions from the video.

@@VacuumFacts i totally disagree. A Bush cordless Handstick would of been a better comparison to the Dyson. Why diid you not compare a Dyson animal 2 big ball. As it has a time consuming Cord and is more chuncky to move around and clean stairs. AGIAN apple and oranges 😁

@@bladevampire7944 The data shows they perform comparably, confirming their comparability. Except one burns 1300W to achieve what the other accomplishes with just a few hundred watts. I don't think I've anything to add here.

@@VacuumFacts i still do not agree and i think the comparison is totally flawed, but you are allowed to offer an opinon 😁 i may not be a vaccum expert but i have a V11 absolute for every day use and sebo E3 Premium for a full deep clean once a week. But i am defo no expert. Anys i thank you for your replies and time.

@@bladevampire7944 Unless you can demonstrate objectively how the comparison is 'totally flawed' and why you don't agree, you will come across as rejecting facts in favour of a subjective desire.

That literally makes no sense whatsoever and shows no understanding of science or technology at a deeper level. And it's a moot point; there are FAR better machines out there than this across the board of metrics.

It absolutely makes sense scientifically. The more load you place on a motor, the higher the current draw across the motor wingdings and brushes or brush-less contacts. Copper suffers heat stress over multiple heat cycles and eventually breaks causing winding cuts or shorts in the winding. Larger motors aka, larger winding's suffer less heat stress as there is a larger coil to soak the loads. Larger motors also dissipate that heat more freely into their environment which is where the heat you talk of comes from. This is actually a GOOD thing because the motor is dumping it's heat instead of cooking itself. This is basic electrical engineering and is a know variable that is used to place life expectancy on motors, which by the way is where your 1-2 year dyson guarantee comes from. If you are going to just spit "SCIENCE" as a response to everything, you should know some first. @@VacuumFacts

And that confirmed it... If you have any evidence showing this applies to the specific systems you are talking about, send it along for review. I look forward to a careful engineering analysis based around actual data captured for the motors in question that unequivocally shows you understand what you're talking about in context, and wasn't some trivialised misapplication. Or perhaps it was all talk and the conversation ends.

It's pretty easy to test for yourself. Tear out the motor and attach it to an adjustable power supply. Increase watts until one dies. If one is constantly failing before the other it will fail under normal conditions sooner. I am not going to break out an entire engineering lab session just to back what is basic engineering principles. That's as asinine as saying "Prove fires hot!"You're just being unnecessarily avoidant because you know the basic scientific principles are sound. aka, It applies to ALL SYSTEMS.@@VacuumFacts

Yeah, bias everywhere. People seem to become really tribal when it comes to vacuum cleaners for some reason. Reddit is never a good place to get anything. Based on what I've measured objectively, using the criteria of performance, ease of use, and environmental impact, the latest Dyson cordless machines (currently the V15) are the best-albeit with a premium price tag. I've reviewed all the old ones the tribalists claim are good and I just don't observe that at all and found all the flaws you identified. Shark machines are Dyson copycats and fall short. You can watch all my reviews here. I'd recommend you watch them and do more reading and make your own mind up. Look for objective facts rather than someone else's subjective opinion. ru-vid.com/group/PLBxUOcW7kaEtK3qcKCMEaLKTrP8Ehu8sz

Removing the head and general use is an unnecessary pain the arse and totally impractical, as demonstrated in the video. And yes, the total clowns who argued Dyson had 'copied' the Felix's earlier 'swivel head' design are exposed as total idiots now. It's nothing like the same thing, and only a moron would disagree having carefully examined both approaches. But such idiocy was both expected and par-for-the-course. Yes, the edge cleaning is poor. No excuse; superior products solved the problem long long ago. I was surprised how well it did with fine dust though, but it's a bit pointless if the head is simultaneously shit for hard floor cleaning for all reasonable dirt types. The product is an inferior shit-show that reflects very badly on all those mindless zealots who championed it and criticised products which are clearly superior to it. Another myth debunked, another set of rabid vacuum enthusiasts exposed as the liars they were always expected to be, based on history of being in conflict with facts.

@@VacuumFacts like removing the head to fit the fluffy head or removing the wand to use in handheld mode and it's very cumbersome and heavy to use as a handheld. The V11 is far from perfect. And the Sebo will still be working long after the Dyson has given up the ghost it also has a 5 year warranty compared to the measly 2 year on the Dyson

@@2711marcus Well, ignoring that's considerably easier, I still agree, it's dumb. And why the fluffy has been all but dropped from the V11, as I've already covered in my fluffy video. The V11 is the best thing I've ever used as a handheld (and achieving the industry leading performance it does of that form-factor). To say that and somehow ignore what I showed in the video is lunacy. No one ever said the V11 is perfect, so I'm not sure why you raised that; my review even faulted it in several areas--not that the rabid notice. The argument about longevity has been debunked long ago (see comments below on this very video), as has the absurd fallacy conflating warranty with expected lifetime.

@@VacuumFacts It's clear Dyson are not confident it the V11 build quality by reducing the warranty from 5 years on the corded cleaners to just 2 years on the V11. The Felix is far from a piece of crap. But there's certainly a pile of crap that comes out of your mouth haha. Happy Christmas

@@2711marcus That's not what a guarantee suggests at all. And the 2 years is driven principally by the battery. You'll notice other manufacturers offer similar warranties. None have claimed their products are expected to last 10 years at the very least with care. Nor do they talk of 15 year time spans when it comes to their battery capacity lifetime. None of this really addresses the issues raised in the video and just comes across as desperate straw clutching. No the felix isn't a piece of crap, but it is relatively, and the claims made of its 'superiority' by some rabid vacuum enthusiasts out there are now exposed.

Opinions aren't required on matters of fact because there's evidence. They can match the performance of good corded cleaners (especially at real-world concentrations of natural dust), as the data clearly shows, and they are FAR more practically convenient. It's a no-brainer and there's literally no argument for most people in normal households they are currently designed for. Even Dyson have all but killed their industry-leading corded product line now.

@@VacuumFacts When is the review of you destroying The Lupe being uploaded? 😁

@@2711marcus I state facts only. That you think I'm going to 'destroy it' doesn't say much about your confidence in it! Remember all your bragging?

@@VacuumFacts I think we know you will destroy it as you do every cleaner that isn't a Dyson. But I'll still be interested to see your views

@@2711marcus I present the good parts and the bad parts that are measurably inferior to the competition. People can then make their own minds up. It also exposes the idiots out there that make absurd claims; people then know to disregard anything they say.

That's right and I say as much in the V11 1 year update review. It still has more inertia by virtue of its considerably greater mass, and requires more force to accelerate, meaning harder work from that aspect and a greater feeling of tiredness after longer use. The greater mass also means it consumes far more materials, which when scaled up, means much greater avoidable environmental impact.

​@@VacuumFacts The greater mass of the unit gives an impression of solid construction and therefore leads to greater consumer satisfaction.

@@alantgv3618 To psychologically fall victim to that fallacious nonsense would mean people need to start watching my channel's videos to help them learn facts from falsehoods.

@@VacuumFacts exactly

I'm totally unconvinced of any of that.

@@VacuumFacts That's fine, the best way is to try one out, they're incredibly popular for the reasons above I'm sure you'll get to try one out some day. Would you mind replying to my responseon my other comment, please? Thank you

@@parwaz7861 I don't believe they're popular (I've seen no data to support that). And the logic I should try one is logic that could be applied to any cleaner. I've no good reason to give any attention to that one in particular.

@@VacuumFacts it's up to you but i don't see why not when the opportunity is there for you when it happens, you may be surprised just like the results of the felix on carpet fine dust extraction ;)

Useless comment

Well that comment was laden with falsehoods. The cleaning charts are the most relevant thing and empirically show you are completely incorrect; you can have high cleaning performance and low power consumption. I have seen no evidence to support your wild assertion that "For most people who suffers from allergy Sebo and Miele are only choices", and plenty of evidence to the contrary. The rest of your speculative opinions are in conflict with evidence. You can't just dismiss objective evidence and facts in favour of your subjective opinions and expect to remain respected.

@@VacuumFacts the point is you have exaggerated the numbers too much to discredit a decent machine ignoring many other factors. If you run the same test on a three year old dyson vs Miele or even Sebo you will be surprised by the outcome and non existing seals on dyson which literally become a dirt spreader. I have 10 year old Miele works as good as brand new. Before that we were throwing vaccums every two years, so yes I am preventing landfills for plastic debris, The land fills filled by Dyson and many others are far worse then 500 watts power extra used for 10-20 minutes. Minutes per week. I know many people throw dyson away as it can’t perform same three year old. Your rating is totally biased solely on numbers. I am user and seen it all in my own experience. I am not affiliate to Sebo or Miele or any other manufacturer. The reason for my post is to warn people not fall for number only. There are real word consequences of usage.

The numbers were measured empirically. How have you determined they were exaggerated? That's just a wild claim made up to attempt to discredit what you don't seem to like. Well, it's a fact, so tough. You've provided absolutely no evidence to support your wild assertion that the numbers will change over time. You're full of wild speculation and assumption and offer very little convincing evidence. You have no convincing argument here and simply come across as not liking what you see. The evidence in the video speaks for itself, and you've got nothing to offer but speculative denial of reality. I don't think there anything more to add here. People can look at the conclusions drawn and the evidence leading to them and make up their own minds. The Sebo machine is adequate but there is far better technology out there.

Talked about a biased and agendaized review. I have the Sebo Felix, Miele S147, and Miele Aluminum. The Mieles are over 20 yrs old and operate like new. The Felix is an amazing machine for everyday use. I have looked at many Dysons and can confirm that they are mediocre, gimmicky, and short-lived purchases. Forget bagless, how dumb and messy. Forget cordless, just WAY less suction power and thin construction due to need for light weight. Get a plug-in and bagged Sebo or Miele and you will have it for many, many years. BTW, I'm a retired NASA aerospace engineer, and I am very, very particular how I spend my money. I focus on function, performance, reliability, maintainability, and longevity. That's how we got to the moon!

@@markkowaleski3608 THANK YOU MARK! Nailed it.

1:02 explains the process per 'cleaning session'; not sure how you missed it seeing as you apparently managed to make it all the way to 3:26. And unless you have the same carpet and test dust, you'll not be able to reproduce it exactly. The limits of my testing though is a relative qualitative assessment. Only formal international industry standard testing can give quantitative statistical confidence.

lol Another random plant. I don't think anyone can. I'm not quite sure what benefits, specifically, you think being imbued with the cosmetic label 'technicial' somehow provides on matters of objective fact. Being able to take the cover off something old and defunct doesn't mean squat. Perhaps you could outline something very specific? I've observed nothing but misleading nonsense on factual matters from that source.

@@VacuumFacts Working on so many cleaners you are going to get a feel for what works well and what doesn't wouldn't you think? No you probably wouldn't 😂

@@2711marcus Like what, specifically? I asked you for examples of specific objective knowledge available to a 'technician' on factual matters I cover in my videos and you vaguely refer to 'feelings' about what 'works best' (whatever that even means). I think that's pretty much what I was expecting; a bullshit non-answer. As was shown from being thoroughly incorrect about the Henry cordless, to utterly embarrasing levels, the subjective opinions from some polluting YT sources are in conflict with reality. Absolutely no respect is deserved for such sources when it comes to what is true in such areas. 'Technician' in rabid vacuum enthusiast land is now synonymous with 'clueless' and peddling subjectivities, shown to be false, as though they are facts. Like any old nellie out there, people are entitled to their own subjective opinions, but I respect people too much to respect their ridiculous opinions.

@@VacuumFacts I don't see any respect coming from your mouth, I think I must have missed that.

@@2711marcus Re-read the comment

See my review

Performance is almost certainly lower in the current range given only motor power reduction. Do you have any evidence to support any of your claims about durability? Not vague hearsay, but something reputable that suggests you're worthy of being heard? Dyson stops officially supporting their products after they're considered old and defunct-so like almost everything else in the tech world; hardly a criticism. Where is the evidence that a Dyson breaks if you stand on it? Or are you just making up myths? Do you have any evidence a Dyson (V10+) battery needs changing after 5 years due to reduced capacity, or is this another myth? ALL cordless vacuum products currently advise against prolonged use of high power drain modes, so it's misleading to suggest this is some Dyson problem. It's not even an issue for normal, sensible use of the machine anyway. Do you have any evidence at all that Dyson's claim of 'No Loss Of Suction' is not true, or is this yet another thing you're making up because you don't like facts? Talk is cheap and you're full of it every comment. I can only assume this means you don't like the facts presented, can't argue against them, so hurl faeces in a tantrum. >_>

What I'm noticing about all those that come here just to criticise my work is that they wilfully ignore the evidence presented to spin their own hypocritical agenda of discrediting unduly. The purpose of my channel has nothing to do with pushing any given brand (a common misunderstanding by those who never intended to listen) and has always been about exposing deception, stating the facts, and compensating for the inadequacies of the misleading, by proving clear explanations and supporting evidence.

You mean: less powerful, equivalent to turning the power dial down on the old and more powerful version, and without any good reason to suspect it wouldn't therefore perform less well? They need to brute force performance because they just don't get it using less power with their poor design.

lol "Vacuum Wars" You might as well ask the cat

@@Olliebobalong I praise the praiseworthy. Unfortunately, I'm only here because I couldn't find much out there. There is evidence of praise I sent to a few videos I've found over the years.

Since it came after the Cinetic machines, it can't be 'old technology'. The cinetic filtration was better, yes. It's not confirmed why cinetic isn't in handhelds. Nevertheless, the filtration is light years ahead of any other product on the market, which rely much more on filters.

Wouldn’t be surprised if they are not working on a version of the Cinetic to go into the cordless models. They are always continuing to improve on their current technology as we know! If they did there would be no need for a post motor filter as there is no carbon emissions off the DDM used in the cordless models. I hear they are using scroll cyclones on the new cordless models launched in the Far East. This is another improvement for their cyclone technology.

@@Dysonballs Yeah, I pointed that out a while back and people are picking up on it now. The copycat clones have poor cyclone efficiency and a lot of fine stuff escapes, relying on the filters more.

True! It goes to show other bagless vacuum cleaner manufacturers are not prepared to invest in their own technology to produce their own designs and solutions! That’s is true I’ve seen it first hand, clones that their bagless technology reply more on the filter!

@@VacuumFacts So should I get a big-ball or a V11?

Dyson have launched another robotic vacuum called the 360 Eye a few years ago followed by the 360 heurist.

@@Dysonballs Hasn't shown up on the US Dyson website yet

The original 360 eye was launched in 2016 which I believe was available in the US at the time but since been discontinued! The 360 Heurist is only available in U.K., Europe and Asia. From what I’ve read online Dyson has no plans to launch this version in the US due to feedback and data they received I’m assuming from the first 360 Eye!

Another factual claim about performance without evidence. Colour me totally unconvinced, given fact-checking your comments usually reveals you make claims that are false. If you have the data, send it along for review. I'm sure you said that about the Lupe... And it costs how many times more than the V11 again? And has bags and the absurd old-fashioned upright-like formfactor? I believe that you like it though...at that price, you'd be insane not to force yourself to like it.

@@VacuumFacts I purchased mine for £290 it was an ex demo model 😊 But you can get a new one for around £700 but without all the expensive accessories

@@2711marcus Figures. Not being prepared to pay the RRP says much. Ignoring the RRP says even more. Rationalising the cost by suggesting you can get half a product for even more than the cost of the V11 full product nails the coffin.

@@VacuumFacts Haha it's not half a product it's a vacuum cleaner but without the floor mopper and electric turbo brush etc but still compares with other corded cleaners.

But you're correct I wouldn't pay £700 for one.

Review here ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-2BHbIgOG9qA.html

@Dynamite Kid I agree. Rubbish on hard floor too for me.

Such as, specifically? I've observed nothing but thoroughly misleading nonsense 'testing' from what I've seen (reasons all covered in my earlier videos).

@@VacuumFacts Happy new year to you Johnny 👏

@@2711marcus I don't understand why you're evading defending a claim I find unbelievable. What are these 'good points' made and how is he 'very thorough' on matters that are relevant and accurate?

I can only conclude you made another claim that cannot be defended (because it's wrong)...there'll be plenty of those cropping up again soon. So your original post just looks like an OT troll comment now that I suspected it was.

What makes you think I'm doing a review of the Lupe?

@@VacuumFacts 5:04 appears to be a Lupe Pure with your hands and the same hard flooring shown in the rest of the video. If that's correct, I'd be disappointed if you weren't going to make a video on it.

@@Rhiunlol Yeah that was a deliberate plant. Full review here ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-2BHbIgOG9qA.html

I've seen nothing (on paper) from that company which has impressed me. Except their RRP.

​@@VacuumFacts It is indeed very high priced, that's why i'm interested how it would perform against the dyson

@@Markus2801A From what the manufacturer says (and, importantly, doesn't say), not that great based on experience with products like that. There's nothing interesting about it to me, so unlikely to get much of my interest.

​@@VacuumFacts I think Dyson made the first really good cordless handheld vacuum cleaners. Other company tried to copy or join with other types or concepts of bagless filtration (sometimes with very poor success). Vorwerk is the only company I know which didnt try to come up with a copy of bagless filtration system (even Miele did last year). They are relying on their bagged system. As both, Dyson and Vorwerk (also Miele) are very pricey premium vacuum cleaners, I think a comparison of performance etc. is justified :-)

@@Markus2801A I'm not convinced, from a technological point of view, alas.

The performance is excellent on this machine; there's no doubt about that (this fact is often ignored, conveniently, when I'm being criticised for this video). Unfortunately, it consumes 1300 W to achieve it, which by today's standards is NOT impressive. I've not tested the 700W version, but I've no reason to believe it isn't the equivalent to reducing the power slider on this 1300 W machine, given its otherwise identical, which will invariably reduce performance. Usability-wise, it's piss-poor. Unfortunately, my testing methodology back when I made this is different to the 'standardised' methodology I use now, preventing wider comparison. And yes, people get tribal and defensive over brands. I only get defensive over truth and facts vs bullshit.

@@VacuumFacts I've also heard the Felix is weighted oddly and can be prone to falling down when using the hose on stairs. At the end of the day if I can get something that performs as well or nearly as well but is much more convenient to use, convenience wins every time. I don't like the idea of having to change the height setting either. I was thinking about the Sebo Automatic to solve this but heard they are terrible on hard floors which most of my home is. Thanks!

It's fairly academic, really; the upright formfactor is a thing of the past. There is far better technology out there and my channel discusses the details.

Nice clear comment. I really understood what you were talking about there >_>

Yeah, I only present the facts and people can make their own minds up. It performs great, but is a usability and environmental nightmare. There's far better technology out there if you want mains. Although, to be honest, a modern Dyson stick vac provides the best experience to minimise the burden of the vacuuming chore.

@Vacuum Facts well, I definitely enjoy and appreciate the hard work you put into your videos - the research, facts, and data that actually matters.

And before you go rabid telling me you have another video about how dust in the cyclone chamber doesn’t smell, your house is wayyyyy less demanding than a standard American family’s home. Many people have smelly pets and smelly dirt, your dirt may be less smelly.

And can we talk about hate HARMFUL chemicals in the battery that you will have to replace?????

Also, most people’s main hobby isn’t vacuums so they pay less attention to maintenance.

It's more than the 'cost of a few dollars', and let's not forget the wholly avoidable environmental impact when scaled up across nations. Trivialising it away is a cheap copout that commands no respect. It’s true that odour-producing micromaterial can accumulate along parts of the air path not easily reachable, as mentioned in other videos about Dyson machines, however, there are far better, cheaper, and environmentally friendly solutions to this-namely tackling the problem at its source. Smells occur if you suck up smelly material. If you clean carpets correctly using microsponges, then they clean the cyclones as well, as evidenced by the fragrance long after the bin is emptied. This also addresses your silly comment about how ‘American homes’ are smellier than someone else’s (even though it has nothing to do with being American). Knowledge, education, understanding, all to the most basic level are far better approaches to the trivial issues you raise. As for batteries, if recycled responsibly, their ‘chemical’ impact is minimal. And presumably you take issue with all products on earth that use batteries…which is quite a lot. Nothing you’ve said here is impactful.

@@VacuumFacts What you say is semi-true, I just feel for most people bags are better.

Batteries are polluting. Offering two is even worse. Even I was disgusted by Dyson 'spec matching' with competitors who offer several batteries (Dyson needed two). Future ratings may likely take battery pollution into account. Fortunately, batteries can be recycled by the more thoughtful and decent people, minimising their impact. However, batteries exist in all products, so such criticisms can't be labelled on just this class of product when it comes to issues of mining materials etc. And yes, batteries are only an issue now due to appalling under-investment in research into them back in the day, putting us back decades. Suddenly there's a need for batteries and there's renewed funding, but there's a lag time, so we're all stuck in the past due to a broken model. Future battery tech over the next decade will sort much of this out.

In time batteries I’m sure will become less polluting! Suppose Dyson was responding to competition and customer response! Yet contradicted their one battery technology and use! Usual as they like to be different to the crowd and stand out from the rest with what they believe in with their technology and designs. That’s right there is other products that use batteries too! Suppose I was coming from the rapid growth of cordless vacuum cleaners and also battery powered cars over the last few years or so. Maybe no one thought that well ahead years ago we would be wanting to use battery technology more especially in the home or in transport! That’s my thinking too along with solid state and battery storage too. Thank you for replying back.

@@Dysonballs I think their hand was forced on the V11 outsize. A single Dyson battery lasts longer than the competition's single battery solutions. Weak competitors bundled up to several batteries (at great cost to the user and environment) and then brag about run times in excess of a top end Dyson. Misleading. So Dyson, whose business model is to be the best on the market, had to bundle two batteries to silence them-short of a major redesign, which will likely come next model. Battery pollution is substantially less if they're recycled, but not everyone cares; they just dump them into landfill and pollute the place.

Your probably right there, especially considering the market the Outsize was designed for! Competitive competition! Agree there others adding extra batteries at the expense of the environment and cost to the consumer due poor design and engineering too! Shame they had to do that considering how they normally work! I’m sure battery technology will improve as time goes on! That’s true, I like to think I do my bit for the environment and recycle where I can or use less that’s polluting where I can. Like you say not everyone cares!