Depending on how you look at it, the company is either remarkably lazy, making minor tweaks to a product so it can be retrofitted or adapted to old or new, or amazingly efficient and forward-looking. I myself incline towards the latter view, as it undoubtedly makes the company's products easier to use, update, repair, and maintain. It also gives the user a feeling of 'security', if I can put it like that, because the products remain useful and relevant for a long time. Look at, for example, the longevity of the Style C bag, in use since 1952, I believe, and since 1957 in Canada*.
Take another simple example, the combination dusting brush and upholstery tool, quite a revolutionary development in itself when it was introduced in, I believe, 1954**. It was subsequently used (or able to be used) on all the vacuums since then, until the Renaissance and Epic 6500 were introduced, in the early-mid '90's. These models featured the larger gas pump hose handle and larger integrated wands, so the old combination tool was, apparently, no longer useful.
Enter Electrolux ingenuity? The company simply added an adapter that fitted into the tool and locked into the wand or hose handle. Of course, for the Renaissance, they developed an entirely new set of tools, but that's another story. I thought, when I first saw the adapter on the Epic 6500, that it was a bit cheap looking, but I can see the other side of it too...i.e. taking existing technology and tweaking it to make it useful in the future, without spending more money. I've found the adaptor useful in its own right as a sort of 'narrow space' tool.
Some other examples I can think of:
1. Upright power nozzles - same motor, brush roll, and interior as the cylinder power nozzles, but with slightly expanded outer cover and shell to accommodate the upright vacuum body, intake hose, etc. This means, of course, that the interior parts (brush, belt, motor, electronics) can be used on all the similarly shaped power nozzles.
2. Upright electric hose - same as the standard canister hose, with a different machine end with pigtail cord. The machine end diameter is the same with all uprights, except for the Lux 4000/6000.
3. Upright power cord location and Sidekick plug location - when the cord started to come out of the handle, the plug on the back of the machine was used for the Sidekick. Not only that, but the models with the cord coming out of the bottom of the handle could, with the addition of an adaptor port, accept the Sidekick plug alongside the power cord.
4. Lux 4000/6000 electric Sidekick hose and on board hose - adapted the machine end of the Style R hose.
5. Bags - of course, the bags across the board have the same basic design, but different dimensions, and the bag change is exactly the same on all machines.
6. Upright after filters - the two piece holder or shell and filter means they can be attached to any of the uprights (this doesn't apply, of course, to the models with the front loading filter).
7. Upright attachments - the combination dusting brush/upholstery tool, crevice tool, Sidekick, and plastic wands are exactly those of the cylinders, with the addition of a storage caddy.
8. 80 series power nozzle plug - when the power nozzle was introduced in Canada somewhere in the early 60's, the 80 series carrying handles 'gained' a plug. This meant that any of the previous models in the 80 series could get a new powered handle and use the new power nozzle.
9. Combination floor/rug tool - this received a new neck to fit the Renaissance style plastic wands. The brush and carpet ends were exactly the same as before. Incidentally, when I'm strictly cleaning bare floors, I much prefer the dedicated floor brush...it's lighter, more maneuverable, and sticks to the floor better. The combination tool is good, however, when you happen upon a lightweight rug, such as in the bathroom, and don't want to bust out the power nozzle or Sidekick to clean it. Actually, the power nozzle can and does chew up light rugs.
10. Epic 6000 and subsequent models (Epic 6500, Lux 7000, and Lux Legacy) - the base section of all these models, of course, was exactly the same as the preceding ones, with a redesigned, larger top cover to accommodate the attachments. Really, this design change wasn't absolutely necessary, as preceding models had the attachment clip on top, but, on the other hand, the attachments had the latch fittings, so perhaps a new design was in order. The Epic motor was only slightly different than its predecessors, with a larger-bladed (but smaller diameter) front fan, increasing the suction power. I would assume the 7000 and Legacy have similar fans?
11. Baby crevice tool - easily stored on the attachment clip on the filter/blower cover along with the combination duster/upholstery tool, but the useful length of the tool was considerably reduced. Maybe this is what led to the Style R telescopic crevice tool?
12. HEPA filters - when the company equipped its top-of-the-line model, the Guardian 75th Anniversary, with a HEPA filter, it didn't need to make much fuss about it. They simply removed the blow port door, present on the Renaissances and Epic 8000, and the filter clipped on to the existing notches. Cosmetically, the logo was relocated to the attachment compartment door. A small change in terms of engineering and design, but a big one if you happen to think HEPA filters are the way to go. I must say, I think they provide much better filtration than the older secondary filters. The house always smells nicer after using one of the HEPA filter equipped models, and the HEPA filter tends to absorb bag odors much longer than the electrostatic filter.
13. Lux 4000/6000 redesign - I think the addition of the on board hose and wand to these models was quite clever. Not only does it make the vacuum more functional and user-friendly, it is also an integral part of the design. When connected on both ends, it forms part of the suction/intake path for floor and carpet cleaning, and allows the power nozzle to run. Naturally, the wand can be disconnected, and the ensemble used for above the floor cleaning as well. Very clever.
There are a few instances where the company went backwards as well. No company is perfect, after all.
1. The change from the Canadian direct connect/swivel/trigger hose handle to the U.S. handle - The U.S. handle unfortunately became the standard, and is still used today on the Lux Classic. There are two things I hate about this handle...it doesn't have the on/off trigger for the power nozzle, nor does it even have a switch***, and it has that stupid suction valve knob, instead of the Canadian slider. Really, its completely for the birds, and I don't like using it.
Good:
Not so good:
Good:
Irritating:
Very, very, very abysmal and ridiculous:
2. The change from the Canadian electric telescopic wand to the 'sheath' - The sheath can only really be sensibly used with the power nozzle or the floor/carpet brush. It can't be broken down, collapsed, or detached for use with attachments, as the telescopic wand and two-piece electric wand set can. Another for-the-birds development, in my opinion.
3. Electric braided hoses - in addition to the comments above about hoses, I think the company should have abandoned the braided/woven hoses when the electric hose came out, and switched to the modern vinyl ones as used today. They're at least 1 000 000 times more useful and reliable than the older ones. Some of the braided hoses had, as shown above, the rubber strain relief collar on the handle end, shortening the usable length of the hose so much as to render it useless. A disastrous and near fatal flaw, in my opinion.
I'm sure I'll be adding to this post as time goes on.
It may not be remiss to add that, aside from the odd model, I'm a VERY lukewarm fan of (strictly) American Electrolux. The only model I really care anything about is the Model G, and even this is not, in my humble opinion, as good as its Canadian contemporaries, namely the 88 and 89 (although it certainly is a very good vacuum).
That being admitted, there has always been a close connection between Canadian and American Electrolux, with shared styling, technology, and 'accoutrements', so, if you like one, chances are you might have a small appreciation of the other.
*One of the selling points of some bagless vacuums is that they don't lose suction. I've NEVER experienced a loss of suction with ANY Electrolux or Aerus model, even after the bag has become VERY full, unless I immediately vacuum up a large quantity of very fine dust in a new bag. The 'tunnel' design of the Electrolux/Aerus vacuum body tends to push the vacuumed up dirt to the sides of the bag, leaving a straight path down the middle. I've cut open bags before, and the masses of dirt are indeed twisted into a cyclonic shape, so I'm not concerned with diminishing suction in Electrolux and Aerus vacuums.
There are a few instances where the company went backwards as well. No company is perfect, after all.
1. The change from the Canadian direct connect/swivel/trigger hose handle to the U.S. handle - The U.S. handle unfortunately became the standard, and is still used today on the Lux Classic. There are two things I hate about this handle...it doesn't have the on/off trigger for the power nozzle, nor does it even have a switch***, and it has that stupid suction valve knob, instead of the Canadian slider. Really, its completely for the birds, and I don't like using it.
Good:
Not so good:
Good:
Irritating:
Very, very, very abysmal and ridiculous:
2. The change from the Canadian electric telescopic wand to the 'sheath' - The sheath can only really be sensibly used with the power nozzle or the floor/carpet brush. It can't be broken down, collapsed, or detached for use with attachments, as the telescopic wand and two-piece electric wand set can. Another for-the-birds development, in my opinion.
3. Electric braided hoses - in addition to the comments above about hoses, I think the company should have abandoned the braided/woven hoses when the electric hose came out, and switched to the modern vinyl ones as used today. They're at least 1 000 000 times more useful and reliable than the older ones. Some of the braided hoses had, as shown above, the rubber strain relief collar on the handle end, shortening the usable length of the hose so much as to render it useless. A disastrous and near fatal flaw, in my opinion.
I'm sure I'll be adding to this post as time goes on.
It may not be remiss to add that, aside from the odd model, I'm a VERY lukewarm fan of (strictly) American Electrolux. The only model I really care anything about is the Model G, and even this is not, in my humble opinion, as good as its Canadian contemporaries, namely the 88 and 89 (although it certainly is a very good vacuum).
That being admitted, there has always been a close connection between Canadian and American Electrolux, with shared styling, technology, and 'accoutrements', so, if you like one, chances are you might have a small appreciation of the other.
*One of the selling points of some bagless vacuums is that they don't lose suction. I've NEVER experienced a loss of suction with ANY Electrolux or Aerus model, even after the bag has become VERY full, unless I immediately vacuum up a large quantity of very fine dust in a new bag. The 'tunnel' design of the Electrolux/Aerus vacuum body tends to push the vacuumed up dirt to the sides of the bag, leaving a straight path down the middle. I've cut open bags before, and the masses of dirt are indeed twisted into a cyclonic shape, so I'm not concerned with diminishing suction in Electrolux and Aerus vacuums.
I read somewhere once that vacuuming up a small quantity of (uncooked) rice in a brand new bag would prevent fine dirt (I.e. the dirt that clogs the bag faster) from clogging the bag, thus prolonging its life. I've made it a habit to do this, but I can't say for certain whether it really works.
All this is not meant to disparage bagless vacuums. It's just that I'd need a more compelling reason than 'no loss of suction' to buy one. I could see, for example, buying one of the Dyson 'balls' for the maneuverability. I wonder, too, why Electrolux/Aerus never adopted bagless technology? Could it be because their dirt capture system works just fine, and has done so for seven decades?
**Electrolux Canada adopted the combination tool approximately 30 years later!
***There are after-market hoses available with the sliding suction reducer and powered accessory switch. Why couldn't there be an official Electrolux version as well?
All this is not meant to disparage bagless vacuums. It's just that I'd need a more compelling reason than 'no loss of suction' to buy one. I could see, for example, buying one of the Dyson 'balls' for the maneuverability. I wonder, too, why Electrolux/Aerus never adopted bagless technology? Could it be because their dirt capture system works just fine, and has done so for seven decades?
**Electrolux Canada adopted the combination tool approximately 30 years later!
***There are after-market hoses available with the sliding suction reducer and powered accessory switch. Why couldn't there be an official Electrolux version as well?
No comments:
Post a Comment