The product line was supposed to grow to include a two-seater C10 and a three-seater C15, but the C5 flopped so badly that those more car-like models never got produced.
> One of the "selling points" of the Sinclair C5 was that its electric motor was built by Hoover and would be serviced at the existing network of vacuum cleaner service centres
But generally, microcars are fun. Eshelman upscaled their ‘Child Sport Car’ (i.e. a Barbie Jeep) and made a three-horsepower Adult Sport Car: https://i.imgur.com/bXXQIlg.jpg
And then they got carried away: https://i.imgur.com/EMicATK.jpg
Notably though, Eshelman began by making lightweight aircraft but somehow switched to light garden tractors before the microcars. But my favorite design of theirs is the Rocket Boat: https://i.imgur.com/4pLbmfe.jpg
Regarding the C5 : it only now makes me think of the introduction of the Segway. Lots of hype, didn't live up to the dream.
And : my physics teacher had a C5. However at the time it was not road legal in The Netherlands so he had to stop using it for his commute. This may have limited adoption.
Also, the C5 was not only ahead of its time regarding the electric aspect of it, it also introduced a sitting / lying position ahead of the popularity of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recumbent_bicycle.
As an aside, I really can't understand why people are so enthusiastic about Dyson products - I find them to be poor to use and poor performers. My gf has a dyson vacuum cleaner (a v6, I think), and it's terrible. Battery life is minimal, the suction is poor compared to anything I've used in the past, all the novelty parts of it (motorised roller, etc) turned to filthy junk pretty quickly, and it trashes the bearings for the carpet roller with monotonous regularity as it can't deal with hair (household with three females with long hair). Emptying it can only be described as like giving a Wookee a prostate examination - it's a revolting process that makes mess everywhere and means I have to scrub my hands afterwards (it doesn't empty like it does in the advert if you have any hair present in there, which there always is in my case).
I had a V1 dyson back in the day, and it was useless as you couldn't get under any furniture. Dyson hand dryers in public toilets don't dry your hands in the claimed 10 seconds, they take about the same time as any other dryer, and usually lead to wet washroom floors as they blow the water all over the place.
I just don't get it - is it form over function and people go mad for them, but clearly I'm missing something. I know he employs incredibly clever people, and no doubt things have been engineered within an inch of their lives, but it always seems they're optomising variables that I don't care about.
This is false. Before the Dyson Airblade and the really loud Xlerator ones, World Dryer was the most common hand dryer (in America at least), and they are awful. Forget about 10 seconds, you could stand there for 60 seconds and still want to use paper towels after.
In contrast, the mechanical action of drying your hands with a paper towel is an additional antibacterial step.
I'll pretty much never use these if I can avoid it. Paper towel is quick, it's quiet, it's mess free, and it's made out of a renewable resource that pulls CO2 from the air. What's not to like about paper towels?
Normal models may be slower, but the only way they are taking 60 seconds if it’s broken or you never move your hands.
EDIT: it looked similar to this one:
Except it had even lower power rating. I don't get why this states "25 seconds". Do people have hands made from sponge?
I don’t know why 25 seconds is hard to believe. That’s the manufacturer’s claim. I’d imagine if anything their claim is optimistic and the 60 seconds people claim is more realistic.
If you have washed your hands properly, you’ll have several milliliters of water spread across the surface. Slow blowing warm air isn’t going to dry that off in 5 seconds.
Because it's 2.5 kilowatt blower making 78 dB of noise, according to the technical spec under that link. With these parameters, you should be able to dry your hands in 5 seconds while keeping them a meter away. Like with the one I mentioned seeing in that McDonald's, which was AFAIR rated at something around 1.2 kW (and I remember thinking that's already impressive for a hand dryer).
> Slow blowing warm air isn’t going to dry that off in 5 seconds.
But fast blowing, slightly less warm air would.
I was subtly suggesting that the reason may be what 'carlmr mentioned in a parallel reply - maybe people don't shake off the water after washing their hands, preferring instead to both waste their time at the dryer and add work to the cleaning stuff that now has extra water to mop off the floor?
This is a really bizarre statement. You throw some numbers up and then say “obviously it should work how I said”. But it’s not obvious at all. Those numbers don’t intuitively tell me that it should my hands in 5 seconds. Indeed my intuition (and that manufacturer’s specs) says that’s wildly inaccurate.
I’m really confused by your “1 meter away” claim. At a meter away you’re basically just waiting for ambient air to dry your hands. The fact that they measure decibels a meter away doesn’t mean that’s where your hands should be.
It's down to diversity, I suppose. I'm no super-hearer (I don't really think my hearing is different to anyone else's) but obviously the engineers at Dyson didn't care about people like me.
I use another brand of 'blade' type dryers (I forget which) every day and it's fine.
Personally I like the new air blades but also don’t find that they fully dry my hands. They get most of the water off and I move in with life. If I wanted my hands towel dry, I’m pretty sure I’d need more than 12 seconds.
>Hand dryers suck in fecal bacteria and blow it all over your hands, study finds. We know fecal bacteria shoots into the air when a lidless toilet flushes — a phenomenon known, grossly, as a "toilet plume." ... Into a hand dryer and onto your clean hands, perhaps. That's what a new study suggests.
1. Wring them over the sink.
2. Spread your fingers.
3. Shake them for 5 seconds.
That's it, you're done. 15 seconds after you leave the bathroom, your hands will be dry.
Disclaimer: Does not work as well in colder-than-room-temperature environments.
If you've used one and don't get it, you may not be the target audience. On multiple occasions, I've asked a friend of mine to try various products I use which I believe are excellent in many ways, only to be told that they were average or junk compared to what he uses. I believe what he uses mostly to be complete and utter junk! So I don't know ...
As far as Dyson vacuums go, V10 tipped over for me. The suction improved noticeably as did the run time. The bin is quite larger as well and my pet peeve, emptying the bin cleanly, is done perfectly in V10. I used to have to deal with hair in previous models. After V10, I never once touched the inside of the bin to do extra cleaning.
The motor head in V10 does not get hair in it. It's like magic!
As far as industrial design and feel of it goes, it's a pleasure to hold and use, so much that I sometimes over vacuum.
The warranty and support is the best as usual, even past warranty period.
They feel like a vacuum marketing company more than anything. People seem to like them because they've only ever used $100 vacuums and it's their first time with something better, so it feels awesome in comparison.
For the cordless ones, I've used the V7 (I think), and it's worse than a comparable Bosch.
Again, I'm not saying that Dysons are bad or anything... It's just the hype seems to far outmatch the actual quality when you go to use them, and it's taken them years and years just to get competitive.
This is my experience with Cutco knives. They're better than the absolute bottom of the barrel eversharp stuff you can get for $10, but worse than anything that actually looks like a proper kitchen knife.
I think the main reason they get any business is that most people never sharpen their kitchen knives, which is a lot less expensive than buying a set of Cutcos (I get that there's a social pressure aspect as well, but that wouldn't work nearly as well if it were more clear how garbage Cutco's products are).
The steel is mediocre, but not so different from high end German knives (if you want good steel, Japanese is the way to go).
Now I have a Dyson V-8 cordless and it works fine. It runs long enough to vacuum the whole house and a bit more and is more convenient than anything corded.
I need to clean things, I think I'm the target audience!
Maybe from what you say then the V10 could swing me (certainly sounds like it has the issues that annoy me sorted out), but that's what was said about the V6 - corded replacement, easy empty, long running time, etc!
Personally, I like using the Roomba. It's not great, either, but I don't mind picking up the room and letting it run.
I'm sure there's a large market for traditional vacuums, those always seem to get most recommended. Miele canisters are always considered "the best," but reviewers know most people aren't interested just because of the price.
There is a huge range of corded vacuums that should not exist. I'd say this line is marketing crap. Even V10 isn't corded replacement across all corded vacuums.
> I need to clean things, I think I'm the target audience!
It all depends on your use case. If all you have is hard floor and a studio sized apartment, you don't even need a vacuum cleaner. Same way not every one needs a Ferrari to get from point A to B. Dyson's price range is certainly a good indicator as to why it's for a smaller market than your average vacuum cleaner.
Having a cord is no inconvenience to me, I would rather have the power and indurance.
I also have a problem with Dyson himself...
The vacuum is OK, but having to clean the canister multiple times per use is a major pain. Bagged are superior for this reason alone.
Dumping the dusty container is much better than using bags in my own experience. When I used them they were extremely expensive and hard to find. The vacuum loses power as it fills.
If bags are cheap, that I don't know, it is only because Dyson has made them a commodity.
Using it for years (maybe decades) and never changed the filter, which is extremely easy to clean regularly.
I remember ranting about it whenever they were held up as masters of industrial design etc - clearly people saying that did not have one :)
I've not used any since, so don't know if they are any better these days or not.
I end up chasing bits of pet hair around the floor with it because it blows them away faster than I can vacuum them up.
Whoever designed that really shouldn’t be designing things.
I got a V8 after my old cheap handheld vacuum died, in part because I almost never could be bothered hauling my old canister vac out of the closet. (I have a housekeeper once in a while so that mostly takes care of the full-house periodic vacuuming.)
It works plenty well for my needs and it's so quick and easy to pull out and do a quick pass of a room or two.
I combined it with a Neato Robot Vac a few years ago and with those 2 I rarely have to take out my behemoth Miele vacuum anymore.
The Airblade "V" I find good enough, but still not worth all the hype.
If someone knows of any better cordless full sized vacuum cleaners, I’d love to know about them. Right now there are lot of low quality Chinese models available, but if you have problems with the Dyson, then you definitely wouldn’t be happy with those.
I find it rather annoying that every generation of them seems gratuitously incompatible with every other generation, and they don’t seem all that well designed or particularly reliable.
If you had a reputation for highly engineered/polished electric devices, would you admit that you hadn't managed to build a working electric car?
You'd put up some vague reason that's impossible to disprove, and try to salvage your reputation.
Sure it's kind of cool to skip having to have replace vacuum bags, but it's much more of a pain to have to replace the entire unit because of a relatively minor problem.
So I think it's mostly just good marketing and attractive products and consumers who don't look at the reliability/expected lifetime before purchase.
A few family/friends had Dyson vacuums over the years - always worked pretty good but failed frequently. Generally they grew to dislike Dyson products based on those experiences. I now have a perception of low reliability towards Dyson products as a result.
However, many of the same friends/family (years later) now have Dyson stick vacuums and swear by them.
> Dyson hand dryers in public toilets don't dry your hands in the claimed 10 seconds, they take about the same time as any other dryer, and usually lead to wet washroom floors as they blow the water all over the place.
I find these particularly disgusting with how the design promotes build up.
Just disgusting mold and bacteria traps, absolutely terrible design, just blows the water back in on itself and it collects or leaks down the side of the walls. Give me an Xlerator Dryer any day.
You already gave the answer: Dyson products are pricey for what they offer, so Dyson has a healthy profit margin (20%+), which isn't possible at this time with EV due to very strong competition that's not keen on being profitable, but makes very good cars and has a significant lead in advanced car software too.
What more could I ask for?
I recently bought V11 and have been blown away with how well it does its job and how effortless vacuuming has become. As a corgi owner, I am forced to do vacuuming pretty much every day and I could not stand dragging a regular vacuum cleaner with a cord everywhere, especially up the stairs... I honestly don't understand how I was able to live without a cordless vac for so long!
What did you use in the past?
I went back to using my 20 year old Dirt Devil. That thing is awesome and will suck up anything. Emptying it is slightly annoying but it's way better than the Dyson ever was.
The more recent models have plenty of battery life.
My point being, I don't think the comparison is fair. B&O used to be something. I don't think Dyson ever was.
 to the point of causing electronicians headaches because the technology used was too peculiar
They marketed a portable vacuum that doesn't use a bag or filter as the first dirt separation stage.
Can't stop laughing at this
The UK government are pushing EVs heavily but there's no charging infrastructure in place and very few can afford the £30-40K it costs to buy them :(
There are over 15,000 EV charging points in the UK today, which is about 2X the number of petrol stations. Ionity will have 40 350 kW fast charging stations in the UK as well.
Is a "point" a single cable, or a location with potentially several cables?
>which is about 2X the number of petrol stations
Sounds like a useless comparison when a petrol pump can serve far more vehicles per hour than a charging cable.
Not to say that GP is right, but accurate comparisons are much more convincing.
It is, but you also have to consider all the charging points people have at their homes. Depending on the type of area (urban/rural) people charge 80% of the time or more at home rather than at public charging points.
I wouldn't say there is 'no infrastructure in place' - yes, it's less than the ICE infrastructure, but it's perfectly possible for many people to use an EV for their transport requirements. Not everyone, but plenty of people can do - and do.
Because their products are not as great as Dyson's?
I'm kinda surprised people here are focusing on this. As an example, if I make a $10K vacuum cleaner for residential use, and it's way better than all existing residential vacuum cleaners, then that would be an example of a great product that is not economically viable.
Dyson isn't saying electric cars are not economically viable. He's not even saying that good electric cars are not. He is saying that the one they had designed is really good but would need to be sold at a price that is not viable.
Of course, given that Teslas are selling very well in the UK, I do wonder...
Teslas are often touted as great products, yet there is no sign that they will ever turn a penny in cumulative cash profit.
NIO is going bankrupt.
Chevy bolts are touted as great products, but GM loses money on them and don't see profit potential for several more years. And they have the supply chain and experience.
There has yet to be a commercially viable plug in electric car. Not a shock that it is also true for Dyson.
Why is this being downvoted? I didnt say electric cars will never make money. I am stating the FACT that no company makes money on them YET.
I bought the dyson air purifier that's cold and hot, it's so bad...works at the same level as a USB fan...
The vacuums are loud and look futuristic but can't clean anything properly.
Any recommendations for a good vacuum are welcome!
They're a little harder to move around, that's why most people only use them for heavy-duty cleaning.
(And yes, I clean my fireplace with one.)
Any German-built Miele vacuum would beat a Dyson any day.
And even the knockoffs of the Dyson design from other companies don't work as good as the Dysons, I recently had one that was build too short so I couldn't fit the whole hand in there.
But yeah the household appliances just seem to expensive.
I think the Mitsubishi one - which predates the Dyson by some years, so arguably the Dyson is a knockoff of it - works pretty nicely, and it's much quieter.
My mom brought down her old vacuum, plus her Shark vacuum, with the idea that we could keep her old vacuum if we wanted it, but that we could try the vacuum she uses and see if we liked it better.
The old vacuum she had was super heavy and real pain to go up and down the stairs with. The Shark is really light and easy to maneuver. Seems to do a good job vacuuming too.
I remember when she first got it, I figured it was like all the other "As Seen on TV" crap she buys, but it really does seem like a nice vacuum. We've had ours for a little over two years now and are quite happy with it.
I use a Botvac for floor cleaning and have been happy with that, apart from the battery being a bit crap
Bought a Neato Botvac and I'm close to saying it's the single product that has improved my life the most in recent years.
I'm only cleaning a small flat but going from having to scrape dirt out of the carpet with an ineffective Dyson vacuum manually for an hour to literally pressing a button is crazy.
Mine runs automatically every night and there is rarely any dust or dirt on my floor. The amount of stuff it picks up is amazing.
But yes, batteries and motors get you a long way toward producing an electric car. At first approximation, EVs are batteries, motors, and motor speed control systems, essentially huge equivalents of electric RC cars that many played with as children.
I suspect that VW's big push into mass market electric vehicles (the ID3) probably made them reconsider, especially given VW's production scale in the mass market segment. Consider the heroics Tesla has had to undertake to ramp to the scale they are at. My guess is that they are the last "new" car maker who will make it through the finish line.
Has one ever been spotted in the wild? Or even at an orchestrated photo event?
I could not find any.
More competition in the EV market is good - it is pleasing to see slightly more "normally priced" EVs coming to the market now rather than selling them as a premium luxury product. Perhaps Dyson was aiming for that premium pricing point (kinda how they do with their appliances), but have changed their mind now that you can get a ~150 mile range (163 WLTP) EV for £22,000 now (e.g. https://mg.co.uk/mg-zs-electric/). Would people be prepared to pay mega-prices for what people would inevitably call a glorified vacuum cleaner?
I’m also skeptical about Apple but at least they have one of the largest treasure chests in the world of cash so they can more afford a moon shot.
An ipad, an iphone, a macbook. What do they have in common? They have batteries on it and sell in the tens of millions or hundreds of millions a year.
The most expensive thing in an electric car is batteries. The hardest thing to manufacture and get supplies for(cobalt and lithium mainly).
Apple already have lots of expertise in the area.
Dyson also sells batteries, because cordless vacuum cleaners use lots of batteries. And also have lots of experience in efficient , extremely powerful electronic motors.
Electric cars are extremely simple compared with ICEs.
So Dyson claims to have a more better digital motor AND they are exiting the EV space. If this is in fact a practical motor for cars then they should license it to one of the other players, VW, Volvo, ....
Also, it could be some of these companies have existential threats that they must try something big and new or risk going out of business or being forced to sell to a rival.
But Tesla has a huge lead at this point with a factory and battery factory. With Tesla batteries, the Model 3 is 95% American made with most of that Tesla made meaning hire marginal profit margins. Anyone entering this market has to compete against that lead.
I think of it as, "most of the people who made money during the gold rush were those who sold shovels." They're looking to find the right shovel, but need the whole process in-house to do that.
Dyson may have had something with their digital motor. It's hard to say whether that is an advantage let alone a competitive advantage. But at this point they should license that to one of the other EV players.
Dyson is famous for tiny high RPM motors which are cool but irrelevant in a car (?), and the battery in it's latest vacuum has 7 cells - my Tesla has over 7000.
Same with self-driving AI companies. Release a better-than-Tesla and better-than-human highway driving lane assist system first then move on to the harder problems.
This is akin to if a bicycle company tried to build cars, thinking their engineers can simply shift from bicycles to cars...
I have no stake in the Dyson car, but there are other reasons that it didn't work out.
I guess China probably has the newest automaker startups outside of Tesla, but they don't have much volume outside of their domestic markets.
I can believe that they designed a nice product, but it seems to me that car manufacture is very economically hostile to new entrants. The only place where new entrants typically succeed is super-cars, where money is no object.
Taking Tesla as example, they had a successful strategy of starting with the high-end Roadster, then developing their business until they could make the Model S then Model 3 economically viable.
(Sorry, not comparable but I had to make the pun.)
went from cycling to electric cars
I remember a while back they tried to make a washing machine, totally over engineered it with a drum spinning both ways at once so it would finish the cycle quicker. The downside? It was 6 inches or so deeper than other machines and stuck right out into your kitchen. No thanks.
Even if that's somehow not true, he won't suffer any of the consequences of brexit.
I don't see why this makes Dyson a terrible person.
I assume he still has considerable interest in the UK economy.
January 22, 2019 - Dyson announces move to Singapore. 
After such strong support for Brexit, it is not a good look.
I am not sure this mattered in the decision much.
Simply finding talent elsewhere doesn't make Dyson a 'bad person' and this move has nothing got to do with the EU or Brexit in general.
Which Brexit will make a lot worse
Why can't our "betters" resolve such a problem instead of side-stepping it. That's what a good person would do.
Because our politicians do not serve the population first. They serve their respective parties and their donors first, no matter the country.
Additionally, improving education systems is hard, expensive and takes longer than a typical election cycle, while it is easy, cost-saving and fast to gut education systems. When shit hits the fan after ~10 years, the politicians who decided to gut the systems often enough are no longer in office.
Dyson's move to Singapore had nothing to do with Brexit.
Not solely, no. He's terrible for being a spokesman for Brexit as good for Britain and British business, and then moving his British business to Singapore: i.e. for saying one thing and then doing the opposite. Hypocrisy. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/23/james-...
He gets a lot of personal benefit from the EU, as well: https://www.fwi.co.uk/news/dyson-defends-his-1-6m-farm-subsi... https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/sir-james-dyson...
If you believe that the exodus of businesses, of which this is an example, has "nothing to do with Brexit", then I have a second-hand car plant to sell you.
He's been buying up plenty of agricultural land in prevision of Brexit (which he obviously supported)
Obama was against school choice, but he and all his children went to private schools.
Does that hypocrisy make Obama a terrible human being?
The argument isn't "should you be able to send your kids to private schools?", it's "should you be able to take tax revenue from the public system with you when you do?"
No knowledge/opinion/comment on the individual though.