Bagged versus bagless vacuum cleaners

Since the introduction of the first domestic bagless vacuum, the Dyson, every major manufacturer has been playing catch-up. It was seen as such a unique selling point, that Dyson's (a new company) were literally appearing in every home in the UK. Never before had a vacuum produced such a buzz of excitement and widespread popularlity.

However, the question is whether cyclonic bagless vacuum's are all they are cracked up to be. Bagless cleaners are still more expensive to buy, but considering the long-term savings on bags they are a cheaper alternative.

Bagged vacuums still offer an easier disposal of dirt. Due to the dimensions of a bagless dirt container, it may not always been an easy task to empty the contents into a bin. Especially if the dirt container is wider than the bin.

And what happens if the bin is full, or nearly full? typically you will have to use a plastic shopping bag to insert the dirt into. Which makes the point of a bagless cleaner null, except for the savings on the bags.

Certainly using a bagged vacuum makes disposal less messy, there is no dust flying about like when you empty a bagless container, which is not ideal for people suffering from allergies.

The real advantage of a bagless vacuum seems to be from the savings you make from not having to buy replacement bags. These bags can cost upto £2 a pop, and should be replaced after every clean.

Doing the maths, you are going to save a considerable sum over a 3-4 year period. Even factoring in the initial expensive of the bagless vaccum itself, which is usually more expensive than it's bagged counterpart.

But when it comes to ease of use, we cannot see a huge advantage in the bagless vaccuum. Disposing of the dirt in a bagless container is still a messy job, and can in some circumstances be a messier job than with a bagged container.