Here it was Last Time
IT HAS BLADES! THEY ARE HIDDEN IN THE BASE!
That is all.
Check out these comments from when this was sold back in February.
I wouldn’t venturi to evaluate it.
nice reviews (3.9 out of 5.0) over at amazon
I bought the 10" model when it was first offered on Woot. I was skeptical when these came out but I actually tried one in a store and was impressed. BUt like most people, I thought it was way too expensive so when Woot had the 10" model for $169, I grabbed it (sadly, Amazon had a one day sale where it was only $129 just a week after!!!).
Well, I’m duly impressed and it actually surpassed my expectations. It has replaced my Vornado as my daily fan. I base this opinion on performance only and not on aesthetics or the Dyson name. Here are some points
I never considered “buffeting” a problem but the smooth air transfer of this Dyson really does make a difference. It’s more “natural,” i.e. like the wind.
The aerodynamics that Dyson claims are true, and that’s what amazed me most. It really does multiply the air flow – A LOT. If you take off the multiplier ring and just rely on the small-bladed fan in the base, you could hardly feel any air movement about a yard away. Even on high, the thrust is weak. Yet with the ring, I can feel the air about 10’ away. And the dispersion is rather wide.
More proof of the multiplying aerodynamics can be seen simply by putting a strip of paper in back, within the perimeter of the ring. You can see it being pulled forward despite there not being any blades parallel to the air current. That proves that air movement is multiplied beyond what is coming out of the holes in the ring (from the base fan).
Yet more proof can be seen if you put a strip of paper outside the ring. It too will be pulled forward, albeit not as vigorously as the strip inside the ring.
The addition of air movement inside and outside the ring is why Dyson calls this an air multiplier. This is more efficient than normal fans, where the only air movement is what is directly moved by the blades.
the above means that this Dyson is more energy efficient than a normal fan
The oscillation is very smooth, mostly because it’s so light. Normal oscillating fans use gears to move a very heavy head (where the motor resides). That not only requires a lot of energy (torque) but the gears break easily. Because the Dyson’s motor is on hte base, the only thing it needs to oscillate is the very light hollow ring. That means most of the energy is used for moving air, and very little energy is used for oscillation.
It’s extremely light and can be easily moved from room to room. I can lift the 10" model with my pinky. This floor model is obviously heavier.
Cleaning is much easier. No need to disassemble grilles and blades. You can simply wipe the ring and base with some mild detergent. I will say that the air holes in the base are getting somewhat grimy and clogged with dust,
The ring twists off easily making storage simple. I can easily put the 10" model beneath my bed,
Placement is easy. I sometime place it on its side on my bed.
It’s noisier than some fans, especially when comparing the lowest speeds. This may be due to the high amount of air moved, and not the motor, which is brushless (thus arguably quieter).
You also can’t mount it on a wall.
I bought one this past February and have been using it for about two weeks now. It really is a great price if you are looking to purchase one. I already own a 10" small version that runs in our daughter’s room and we needed one for the master bdrm. The refurbished models do come with some minor scuff marks and please note that the infrared sensor is on the base of the unit, so if you don’t have a clear line of sight to use the remote, expect to get up or sit up to control it.
Is the power adapter 110-240v? Can someone already owned one help to confirm?
At $180 for a refurbished model, aren’t we approaching air conditioner price? Are there advantages to this fan over an air conditioner?
Holy Schnikeys… A giant Self-Blowing-Bubble-Wand!
Of all the things I’ve bought on Woot – and I have 150+ Woots – the 10" Dyson fan is the one I use the most. In fact, I use it almost daily. I like having some moving air around me and oscillating at the lowest setting from about 6’ away, it feels like a natural breeze. That’s where the non-buffeting aspect really shines. A normal axial fan never feels quite “natural.” And at the lowest speed, it only use about 8-10 watts, according to my watt meter.
Yeah, that’s always a criticism when these Dyson fans come up. My defense is that wireless technology, i.e. cellphones, doesn’t mean that the phones don’t have wires inside them.
The point of these bladeless fans is that there all the negative aspects of fan blades have been eliminated, i.e. injuries, difficulty of cleaning, buffeting, etc. Plus, much of the air being moved isn’t directly propelled by the blades at all. See my above review, especially the part about removing the multiplier ring.
This is for those who doubt Dyson’s claim of multiplying air movement. First, please read my above review of how a piece of paper moves inside and outside the multiplier ring. Here is a more scientific explanation.
YES! My bedroom air conditioner was only $98 while my 10" Dyson was about $160 on sale here at Woot. Despite costing more, I find the Dyson to be a better value because I get much more use out of it – almost daily, in fact.
The Dyson uses MUCH less energy. According to Kill-a-Watt, my 10" Dyson only uses about 8-10 watts on its lowest setting, which is the one I use most. My air conditioner uses about 400-600 watts when cooling. The point is that most of the time, it’s not hot or humid enough to require air conditioning.
The fan only setting of an air conditioner is very limited, and is only effective if you sit nearby. I can bring a Dyson wherever I am, and can use the oscillation to cool an entire area.
Air conditioners need maintenance. Dirty air conditioners can harbor mold and dust which isn’t good for my allergies. No such problems with this Dyson or any fan.
A fan can be used drying things. For example, I can bring it to the bathroom to help dry clothes. Or aim at a wall or furniture to dry paint and lacquer. Or to cool food. The botom line is that I can bring the Dyson to the object needing cooling/drying, instead of having to bring the object to an air conditoner.
Fans can be used to help circulate heat. In the Winter I often put my Dyson in front of the radiator to circulate the heat around the room. The gentle breeze on its lowest setting feels great. If I need more aggressive air circulation, I pull out the Vornado. BTW, I also put the Dyson/Vornado in front of the air conditioner to circulate cool air in the Summer. Whether cool or hot air, using a fan can save energy.
My ex liked drying her hair using the Dyson because it’s more “natural” and less damaging (and uses MUCH less energy) than a ahir dryer. Because her hair is long, she’d never do the same with an ordinary fan because it may suck her hair in.
Does anyone know how these hold up against pet hair? I’ve gone through several Vornados, because despite brushing my golden retriever mix and cat and vacuuming often, pet hair still accumulated inside the ‘cage’ around the motor and blades where it was impossible to clean, eventually clogging the whole system. I’ve been trying to look around online but haven’t found much regarding this. I’m wondering if the Dyson fan is really not that much different as the intake is so low in the base. Thanks!
Yup. Dyson seems to like technically-incorrect marketing. Just try to figure out what a digital motor is.
Somewhere out there in Wootland there is a yuppie sitting in a $200 bean bag chair being cooled by this $180 bladeless fan drinking a home made esppreso surrounded by 47 iPod speaker docs.
But not here.
i’m actually just drinking a water.
Now that home.woot is selling the new rotating and tilting Quidditch hoop, can we expect brooms and quaffles and such in the future?