dyson cr01
- Thread starter dysoncr01
- Start date
Help Support :
2drumsallergy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 451
That's very true.
I am the proud owner of two Dysons a 6 year old CR01 Memory and a CR02 Allergy, nothing even comes close.
I am the proud owner of two Dysons a 6 year old CR01 Memory and a CR02 Allergy, nothing even comes close.
fredriksam
Well-known member
Hey 2DrumsAllergy, could you please film your Dysons and loading it on Youtube?
It would be nice seeing a wash video, rinse and a spin video. Thanks
It would be nice seeing a wash video, rinse and a spin video. Thanks
I wonder
if they will ever come over to North America. I see them on the internet and they look very interesting.
Guy
if they will ever come over to North America. I see them on the internet and they look very interesting.
Guy
They were a sales failure, and weren't very well received by reviewers either. Dyson have stopped production of them and there's no plans to bring them back - though I guess all the patents etc are up for sale should anyone want them.
death of the dyson
i think they were good machines, like fredriksam i would love to see one hapening - there is only a few second long vid on you tube at the moment. i've always wanted one, the only thing is the noise - no one likes a loud washer! in fact everyone is doing everything to makes quiet machines, so i think that and the 'out there' dyson design let them down a bit
wonder if twin drum machines are really the future?
i think they were good machines, like fredriksam i would love to see one hapening - there is only a few second long vid on you tube at the moment. i've always wanted one, the only thing is the noise - no one likes a loud washer! in fact everyone is doing everything to makes quiet machines, so i think that and the 'out there' dyson design let them down a bit
wonder if twin drum machines are really the future?
rolls_rapide
Well-known member
They weren't particularly environmentally friendly: they used around 96 litres of water for the cotton cycle, whereas other manufacturers had managed to reduce their water consumption.
I've been told of problems with the powder drawer leaking; of the internal pipes clogging; and gearbox failure.
Someone once even posted a review on the internet, stating that their particular machine had the wrong drum installed at manufacture!
I've been told of problems with the powder drawer leaking; of the internal pipes clogging; and gearbox failure.
Someone once even posted a review on the internet, stating that their particular machine had the wrong drum installed at manufacture!
2drumsallergy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 451
Hi Rolls_Rapide,
The Dyson CR01 and CR02 are both rated AAA for energy, wash and spin performance, so I don't think they can be classed as environmentally unfriendly, yes they do use 96 litres of water on a cottons cycle but they rinse properly, and don't forget the Dyson has a 7Kg dry weight cottons capacity, 96 litres for a 7Kg load does not seem so excessive.
As for the wrong drum fitted and I don't doubt that you read it but what total rubbish; there is only one design of drum for all Dyson washers both CR01 and CR02, therefore it would be impossible for the wrong drum to be fitted.
The gearbox in the Dyson is superbly engineered, in fact it is more like a car gearbox than a domestic appliance, every aspect of the gearbox, drum and bearing assembly is if anything over engineered. I own both a CR01 Memory and a CR02 Allergy, both machines have been totally reliable for me in fact the CR01 is 6 years old and has completed more than 5500 cycles without a single breakdown, it still runs perfectly. When I have some free time I will disassemble the gearbox of the CR01 and post some pictures.
There have been comments about Dyson washers being noisy, well they emit 50Db at one meter during contra rotation, but their noise is totally unique with the whirring noise of the gears during contra rotation. The 8 point tub suspension makes the Dyson very stable and quiet on top spin even on wooden floors.
I think it is a total shame that this great washer design is no longer in production, but I admire Dyson for having the courage to challenge and improve on conventional design. Production ceased in 2004 and they are still being talked about three years later.
David
The Dyson CR01 and CR02 are both rated AAA for energy, wash and spin performance, so I don't think they can be classed as environmentally unfriendly, yes they do use 96 litres of water on a cottons cycle but they rinse properly, and don't forget the Dyson has a 7Kg dry weight cottons capacity, 96 litres for a 7Kg load does not seem so excessive.
As for the wrong drum fitted and I don't doubt that you read it but what total rubbish; there is only one design of drum for all Dyson washers both CR01 and CR02, therefore it would be impossible for the wrong drum to be fitted.
The gearbox in the Dyson is superbly engineered, in fact it is more like a car gearbox than a domestic appliance, every aspect of the gearbox, drum and bearing assembly is if anything over engineered. I own both a CR01 Memory and a CR02 Allergy, both machines have been totally reliable for me in fact the CR01 is 6 years old and has completed more than 5500 cycles without a single breakdown, it still runs perfectly. When I have some free time I will disassemble the gearbox of the CR01 and post some pictures.
There have been comments about Dyson washers being noisy, well they emit 50Db at one meter during contra rotation, but their noise is totally unique with the whirring noise of the gears during contra rotation. The 8 point tub suspension makes the Dyson very stable and quiet on top spin even on wooden floors.
I think it is a total shame that this great washer design is no longer in production, but I admire Dyson for having the courage to challenge and improve on conventional design. Production ceased in 2004 and they are still being talked about three years later.
David
The Dyson Washing machines will not be released in Australia because they will have to train a few hundred people to service them and they would have to sell a large amount of machines to make the spare parts cheaper says one of my anonymous contacts at Dyson Australia
I personally think they were good machines, but I don't really think that they offered any difference over a normal machine like their bagless cleaners do over bagged cleaners. You can't beat our DC14 for cleaning (though the DC03 we had before was an awful cleaner), and the Dyson vacuum cleaners we've had have beaten the Electrolux and Vax cleaners we've had before, but I've always had clean laundry from using a standard tumbling washer for years. Another thing people used to say when I worked in an appliance shop was that they looked awful, and I see their point bearing in mind you can't put the washer back in the cupboard when it's not in use like you can with the cleaners - and most people spending more than £400 on a washer went for the Miele's anyway.
I also think a lot of it was marketing hype, something which Dyson are great at - from what I've seen, read and been told, they only activate the contrarotation for part of the wash cycle, for the rest of the cycle and the rinses they tumble just like any other machine. Plus for on average of £800, I would expect at least a time countdown and the ability to do a 95*C wash, as well as a more sturdy outer door. Otherwise you can't really fault them.
They are a piece of washer history though, and if I ever had the room I would probably snap one up if one ever did become available to me... as David said it's not often that somebody dares to be different and Dyson should be admired for trying - it just looks like the washer market is tougher to crack than that for the cleaners! Unfortunately nowadays most major brands have also cracked the capacity issue, which could make it harder for Dyson to come back.
I have read somewhere a while ago that there's supposed to be a cheaper, more conservative version in development... anybody have any ideas?
Jon
I also think a lot of it was marketing hype, something which Dyson are great at - from what I've seen, read and been told, they only activate the contrarotation for part of the wash cycle, for the rest of the cycle and the rinses they tumble just like any other machine. Plus for on average of £800, I would expect at least a time countdown and the ability to do a 95*C wash, as well as a more sturdy outer door. Otherwise you can't really fault them.
They are a piece of washer history though, and if I ever had the room I would probably snap one up if one ever did become available to me... as David said it's not often that somebody dares to be different and Dyson should be admired for trying - it just looks like the washer market is tougher to crack than that for the cleaners! Unfortunately nowadays most major brands have also cracked the capacity issue, which could make it harder for Dyson to come back.
I have read somewhere a while ago that there's supposed to be a cheaper, more conservative version in development... anybody have any ideas?
Jon
2drumsallergy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 451
Hi Jon,
The Dyson's 78 litre drum is still the largest in a standard cabinet size. Although some of the latest washers claim 8Kg cottons capacity the largest of their drums is only 65 litres. Where the Dyson stands apart is its ability to wash a King size Duvet/Comforter up to 15.0 Tog weight with ease. My sister owns an 8Kg Electrolux Insight which has a 63 litre drum, it is simply to small to accept a King size Duvet any heavier than 4.0 Tog weight yet it can take an 8Kg load of cottons, although I must say the drum is stuffed full with an 8Kg cottons load.
I have heard rumors of a new Dyson washer let them be true or false and it is certainly possible but only Dyson knows for sure. It would be fairly easy to increase the capacity of any new Dyson washer if the contrarotation was dropped and a single drum was introduced; the new drum could easily be 100 litres plus, still use the existing tub design and fit into a standard cabinet. I base this assumption on the fact the existing two drum design has a 10mm clearance between the two drums, this when included with the extra space released by the absence of the inner drum spider could easily accommodate a significant increase in capacity. However going to a single drum design would result in much longer cycle times, the whole point of the contrarotation is to wash a full 7Kg cottons load to an A grade at 40ºC or 60ºC in 60 minutes or less.
On the subject of contrarotation, I have to say it is not marketing hype it really works. The Dyson delivers outstanding wash performance with a full load and much shorter cycle times than any modern machine. Yes some of the latest washers can deliver an A grade wash in an hour but they can only do this with a 50% load size, they still require a couple of hours to wash a full load to an A standard. During the development of the Contrarotator Dyson engineers also found that 85ºC provides optimum cleaning effect and heating beyond this point only serves to waste energy, and I have to agree. I also own a Hotpoint Ultima WF860P which heats to a full 95ºC on the white cottons wash and takes 3 hours to complete the cycle, yet it does not wash any better than the Dyson does at 85ºC with a total 70 minute cycle time. You say the contrarotation is only in operation for a very short time, on a normal soil (Dirt & Stains) cottons 40ºC cycle there is a total of 26 minutes of contrarotation this is reduced to 16 minutes if the light soil (Dirt) is selected and extended to 40 minutes if (Heavy Stains) is selected. There is no contrarotation during the rinses but it is not required at this point as the stains have already been removed. There is one final contrarotation at the end of the spin cycle to fluff the load and reduce creasing.
All in all the Dyson is a very interesting washer to watch and it does not waste any time between cycle phases and thats always a plus.
David
The Dyson's 78 litre drum is still the largest in a standard cabinet size. Although some of the latest washers claim 8Kg cottons capacity the largest of their drums is only 65 litres. Where the Dyson stands apart is its ability to wash a King size Duvet/Comforter up to 15.0 Tog weight with ease. My sister owns an 8Kg Electrolux Insight which has a 63 litre drum, it is simply to small to accept a King size Duvet any heavier than 4.0 Tog weight yet it can take an 8Kg load of cottons, although I must say the drum is stuffed full with an 8Kg cottons load.
I have heard rumors of a new Dyson washer let them be true or false and it is certainly possible but only Dyson knows for sure. It would be fairly easy to increase the capacity of any new Dyson washer if the contrarotation was dropped and a single drum was introduced; the new drum could easily be 100 litres plus, still use the existing tub design and fit into a standard cabinet. I base this assumption on the fact the existing two drum design has a 10mm clearance between the two drums, this when included with the extra space released by the absence of the inner drum spider could easily accommodate a significant increase in capacity. However going to a single drum design would result in much longer cycle times, the whole point of the contrarotation is to wash a full 7Kg cottons load to an A grade at 40ºC or 60ºC in 60 minutes or less.
On the subject of contrarotation, I have to say it is not marketing hype it really works. The Dyson delivers outstanding wash performance with a full load and much shorter cycle times than any modern machine. Yes some of the latest washers can deliver an A grade wash in an hour but they can only do this with a 50% load size, they still require a couple of hours to wash a full load to an A standard. During the development of the Contrarotator Dyson engineers also found that 85ºC provides optimum cleaning effect and heating beyond this point only serves to waste energy, and I have to agree. I also own a Hotpoint Ultima WF860P which heats to a full 95ºC on the white cottons wash and takes 3 hours to complete the cycle, yet it does not wash any better than the Dyson does at 85ºC with a total 70 minute cycle time. You say the contrarotation is only in operation for a very short time, on a normal soil (Dirt & Stains) cottons 40ºC cycle there is a total of 26 minutes of contrarotation this is reduced to 16 minutes if the light soil (Dirt) is selected and extended to 40 minutes if (Heavy Stains) is selected. There is no contrarotation during the rinses but it is not required at this point as the stains have already been removed. There is one final contrarotation at the end of the spin cycle to fluff the load and reduce creasing.
All in all the Dyson is a very interesting washer to watch and it does not waste any time between cycle phases and thats always a plus.
David
rolls_rapide
Well-known member
AAA Rated
This will only apply if the machine is used to full capacity. It will not be the case if a small load is washed, for example a few white shirts that can't be put in beside a load of darks. The Dyson uses over 13 litres of water per kg of laundry, whereas most competitors have values of half that. This makes the Dyson inefficient in my book.
Dyson should have been able to drastically reduce the water consumption, but chose not to: not good news for water meter consumers. Other manufacturers have managed to give good rinse efficiency with a reduced water consumption and sensible spin profiling: Miele seems to manage it fine.
This will only apply if the machine is used to full capacity. It will not be the case if a small load is washed, for example a few white shirts that can't be put in beside a load of darks. The Dyson uses over 13 litres of water per kg of laundry, whereas most competitors have values of half that. This makes the Dyson inefficient in my book.
Dyson should have been able to drastically reduce the water consumption, but chose not to: not good news for water meter consumers. Other manufacturers have managed to give good rinse efficiency with a reduced water consumption and sensible spin profiling: Miele seems to manage it fine.
hotpointwf220
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2006
- Messages
- 241
I think you can beat the DC14 for cleaning with the DC 15 the ball, Easy to move around with the tilting etc.
2drumsallergy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 451
EU Energy Label
Hi Rolls_rapide,
As I said before the Dyson's EU energy label is AAA. This figure is calculated on the total amount of energy consumed by a standard 60ºC cottons cycle, if as you say "This makes the Dyson inefficient in my book" how did it achieve this triple A rating? Thankfully appliances are graded by the EU and not by your book.
Personally I prefer my clothes properly rinsed and both my Dyson's provide excellent deep rinses by default, in fact the Dyson CR02 Allergy was the first washing machine to be awarded the British Allergy Foundation seal of approval. I am sure the majority of the users on this site would agree when it comes to rinsing there is no substitute for a decent amount of water. You talk about profile spins aiding rinsing and I totally agree, but a decent amount of water is still required. Rinsing is all about dilution the more water the greater dilution.
As an appliance engineer and I regularly work on all makes and models of washing machines. I am called out to machines regularly because of poor rinsing including so called top end machines, unfortunately there is not a lot I can do as the machines are designed to use so little water. Some models have an extra rinse option which I can advise using, high end machines can usually be altered via the Software to provide deep rinsing by default, lower end machines are a problem as they have neither of these options so I usually adjust the water level pressure switch to increase the water level slightly. Complaints of poor rinsing are increasing among my customers and I have no doubt that the situation will only get worse as less and less water is used.
I almost forgot, my house is on a water meter and I can honestly say the Dyson's water consumption is not a problem.
David
Hi Rolls_rapide,
As I said before the Dyson's EU energy label is AAA. This figure is calculated on the total amount of energy consumed by a standard 60ºC cottons cycle, if as you say "This makes the Dyson inefficient in my book" how did it achieve this triple A rating? Thankfully appliances are graded by the EU and not by your book.
Personally I prefer my clothes properly rinsed and both my Dyson's provide excellent deep rinses by default, in fact the Dyson CR02 Allergy was the first washing machine to be awarded the British Allergy Foundation seal of approval. I am sure the majority of the users on this site would agree when it comes to rinsing there is no substitute for a decent amount of water. You talk about profile spins aiding rinsing and I totally agree, but a decent amount of water is still required. Rinsing is all about dilution the more water the greater dilution.
As an appliance engineer and I regularly work on all makes and models of washing machines. I am called out to machines regularly because of poor rinsing including so called top end machines, unfortunately there is not a lot I can do as the machines are designed to use so little water. Some models have an extra rinse option which I can advise using, high end machines can usually be altered via the Software to provide deep rinsing by default, lower end machines are a problem as they have neither of these options so I usually adjust the water level pressure switch to increase the water level slightly. Complaints of poor rinsing are increasing among my customers and I have no doubt that the situation will only get worse as less and less water is used.
I almost forgot, my house is on a water meter and I can honestly say the Dyson's water consumption is not a problem.
David
David - interesting to hear the Dyson's do contrarotate for a long period... for some reason I was under the assumption that they only contrarotated for a few minutes.
I agree with you that the Dyson still truly holds more laundry than one of the newer Bosch or Electrolux 8 kilo washers, unfortunately Mrs Joe Housewife wouldn't really know the difference when it comes to that as, as you probably know, manufacturers like to exaggerate rated load capacities nowadays and when Mrs X is buying a new 8kg washer she takes that as gospel. Saying that, I'm able to wash all the duvets in our house in mum's 6 kilo Miele (I think the drum is 54 litres), especially with the Pillows cycle which uses a higher water level and a specially adapted wash rhythm as well as a pre-spin, and the only duvet I can't fit in is the one that won't fit in a washer smaller than the 35lb Ipsos at the local launderette
. Unfortunately due to the way I sort laundry I struggle to build up 6 kilo loads in a fortnight (only weekly loads that are done are jeans, which I change once or twice a day, ending up in a load of 8 or 9 pairs of jeans every week) I doubt I'd ever be able to fill a Dyson, or one of those new 8 kilo machines.
I agree with you entirely about the rinsing on newer machines. Worst offender we had was the Bosch - even 4 rinses would leave clothes smelling of detergent and left clothes strewn with lint, yet even the 2 standard rinses in our current Miele rinses perfectly, even more so if you select water plus and extra rinse - no Allergy approval but the fact that I can use Ariel or Persil biological on the laundry now without skin complaints from people in the family speaks for itself. Also manages to wet the load down thoroughly within the first minute or two of the cycle... I'm sure the Dyson is similar with the amount of water it uses. the amount of water your Dyson uses isn't really that inefficient anyway, bearing in mind 10 years ago machines would easily use 70-90 litres of water to wash only 5 kilos of laundry.
I still have to say though that I've always had great wash results on a short cycle on a standard washer, except one we used to have but that's a different story. I think our Miele averages 1.05-1.38 on cottons, depending on the rinsing needed based on the absorbency of the load, and about 1 hour for minimum, but then I have always used a good washing powder - that and clothes in this house are rarely more than normally soiled.
As I've learnt more about these Dyson washers (and had a good experience from the Dyson company itself in the form of the DC14), it saddens me that this great washer design was discontinued and I really wish I wasn't so stubborn in my own ways back then and bought one while I could!
Would love to see some pictures of your Dyson when you have the chance!
Take care,
Jon
I agree with you that the Dyson still truly holds more laundry than one of the newer Bosch or Electrolux 8 kilo washers, unfortunately Mrs Joe Housewife wouldn't really know the difference when it comes to that as, as you probably know, manufacturers like to exaggerate rated load capacities nowadays and when Mrs X is buying a new 8kg washer she takes that as gospel. Saying that, I'm able to wash all the duvets in our house in mum's 6 kilo Miele (I think the drum is 54 litres), especially with the Pillows cycle which uses a higher water level and a specially adapted wash rhythm as well as a pre-spin, and the only duvet I can't fit in is the one that won't fit in a washer smaller than the 35lb Ipsos at the local launderette
. Unfortunately due to the way I sort laundry I struggle to build up 6 kilo loads in a fortnight (only weekly loads that are done are jeans, which I change once or twice a day, ending up in a load of 8 or 9 pairs of jeans every week) I doubt I'd ever be able to fill a Dyson, or one of those new 8 kilo machines.I agree with you entirely about the rinsing on newer machines. Worst offender we had was the Bosch - even 4 rinses would leave clothes smelling of detergent and left clothes strewn with lint, yet even the 2 standard rinses in our current Miele rinses perfectly, even more so if you select water plus and extra rinse - no Allergy approval but the fact that I can use Ariel or Persil biological on the laundry now without skin complaints from people in the family speaks for itself. Also manages to wet the load down thoroughly within the first minute or two of the cycle... I'm sure the Dyson is similar with the amount of water it uses. the amount of water your Dyson uses isn't really that inefficient anyway, bearing in mind 10 years ago machines would easily use 70-90 litres of water to wash only 5 kilos of laundry.
I still have to say though that I've always had great wash results on a short cycle on a standard washer, except one we used to have but that's a different story. I think our Miele averages 1.05-1.38 on cottons, depending on the rinsing needed based on the absorbency of the load, and about 1 hour for minimum, but then I have always used a good washing powder - that and clothes in this house are rarely more than normally soiled.
As I've learnt more about these Dyson washers (and had a good experience from the Dyson company itself in the form of the DC14), it saddens me that this great washer design was discontinued and I really wish I wasn't so stubborn in my own ways back then and bought one while I could!
Would love to see some pictures of your Dyson when you have the chance!
Take care,
Jon
newwave1
Well-known member
I tried n tried to get one of these when i worked at comet! I always liked the design, deeply different, bit like myself!
I always look for a machine that uses more water, not less. Proper rinsing is so rare nowadays, last years ranges saw an increase, and im hoping this year is no different!
Darren
I always look for a machine that uses more water, not less. Proper rinsing is so rare nowadays, last years ranges saw an increase, and im hoping this year is no different!
Darren
rolls_rapide
Well-known member
Rinsing with less water. is perfectly possible...
I came across a patent listed on the internet (possibly by Dyson, but cannot be sure), whereby the clothes are subjected to the following process:
Soapy water is spun out of the laundry;
then drum speed is reduced to a slow speed so that laundry is still plastered to drum walls by centrifugal force;
then a fresh water spray-jet, built into the door seal, introduces 1 litre of water directly into the rotating laundry;
then rotational speed increases to 1200-1400rpm for a minute or two;
then reduce speed back to slow speed, and repeat water spray.
The blurb says that repeating this process a dozen times will reduce water consumption, whilst giving good rinsing results. It goes on to say that the final rinse will be the conventional higher water level with conditioner, etc.
I came across a patent listed on the internet (possibly by Dyson, but cannot be sure), whereby the clothes are subjected to the following process:
Soapy water is spun out of the laundry;
then drum speed is reduced to a slow speed so that laundry is still plastered to drum walls by centrifugal force;
then a fresh water spray-jet, built into the door seal, introduces 1 litre of water directly into the rotating laundry;
then rotational speed increases to 1200-1400rpm for a minute or two;
then reduce speed back to slow speed, and repeat water spray.
The blurb says that repeating this process a dozen times will reduce water consumption, whilst giving good rinsing results. It goes on to say that the final rinse will be the conventional higher water level with conditioner, etc.
aquarius1984
Well-known member
I dont bull**** I say it how it is
I agree totally with Jon and RollsRapide.
If you need to wash that big duvet it is far better to do it at the launderette and have a Miele Premier 520 and save the £300 of the Dyson which apperas to be the UKs most unrelaiable machine to date.
Electrolux machines rinse to a superior standard using 49l in total for the whole cycle on 6kg capacity form what Ive experienced.
I would say having 2 motors to turn 7kg of washing is a massive waste of resources just to be different.
and dont get me started on how cheap and plasticky they look.
Electrolux vacuums all the way too... current "Velocity" line up is better than Dyson in that it picks up more and is at least half the price than a basic DC07.
A good friends Dyson packed up for good 14 months ago after a long string of problems from day 1 and she is now happily rid of it and back to a basic Zanussi.
Nick
I agree totally with Jon and RollsRapide.
If you need to wash that big duvet it is far better to do it at the launderette and have a Miele Premier 520 and save the £300 of the Dyson which apperas to be the UKs most unrelaiable machine to date.
Electrolux machines rinse to a superior standard using 49l in total for the whole cycle on 6kg capacity form what Ive experienced.
I would say having 2 motors to turn 7kg of washing is a massive waste of resources just to be different.
and dont get me started on how cheap and plasticky they look.
Electrolux vacuums all the way too... current "Velocity" line up is better than Dyson in that it picks up more and is at least half the price than a basic DC07.
A good friends Dyson packed up for good 14 months ago after a long string of problems from day 1 and she is now happily rid of it and back to a basic Zanussi.
Nick
rolls_rapide
Well-known member
Another thing about the Dyson washer...
... was the fact that the drum paddles had no perforations, and thus no attempt was made to shower water onto the clothes, when all the other manufacturers were bending over backwards to reduce water consumption (remember the 'shower' analogy, as opposed to 'having a bath'?).
To me, it looked like (and still does) that Dyson couldn't design reduced water consumption into their machine, so therefore they had to increase the machine's load capacity to compensate.
And what was wrong with using a pumped spray, ala Zanussi "Jetsystem"? Couldn't Dyson design a higher pressure pump to blast the dirt out of clothes? In conjunction with 'contrarotation' they might have been on to a winner.
... was the fact that the drum paddles had no perforations, and thus no attempt was made to shower water onto the clothes, when all the other manufacturers were bending over backwards to reduce water consumption (remember the 'shower' analogy, as opposed to 'having a bath'?).
To me, it looked like (and still does) that Dyson couldn't design reduced water consumption into their machine, so therefore they had to increase the machine's load capacity to compensate.
And what was wrong with using a pumped spray, ala Zanussi "Jetsystem"? Couldn't Dyson design a higher pressure pump to blast the dirt out of clothes? In conjunction with 'contrarotation' they might have been on to a winner.
