Thanks for the comment! Glad you liked the video. Sounds like a familiar experience with the Dyson!

Sub for more butter!

I was thinking the same thing

He will never lose his crown!

Much appreciated!

Thanks, will do!

A N I M E N I M E

Thank you very much!

Cheers! Hopefully have another one up soon, just been so busy with "real" work....

Amazing!

Cheers! Yeah all hand built assets! One viewer messaged me and asked for the washing machine model for a game he was making! Make sure you keep tuned in for my next video I’ve taken the rendering to a whole new level!

@@BehindDesigns looking forward to it - actually, let me drop you an email!

Cheers! e-bay is pretty much the only place you can see a picture of them these days!

Thanks for the comment, I’m still trying to work out the YT algorithm but hopefully if I keep concentrating on making the best videos possible the views will come!

Get on eBay!

; - )

Same, I don’t think it would stand today with social media and the Twittersphere.

@@BehindDesigns Just last night cos the door wud not click shut I have not been able to wash clothes.. I have had to turn into a washing machine engineer since having this...

This sounds like how they deliberately brick older phones. could you not just opt to not have them change it though?

Apparently, it is, or was possible to re-enable contra-rotation on many machine, since it was mostly done with just a firmware update. They only replaced the gearing system with a fixed drive if it was broken. The programmers neglected to enable the copy protection bit on several versions of the firmware, so someone was able to dump firmware from both board versions off still fully working machines, and used to offer a flashing service for a fee.

James Dyson and his company are amazing marketing tools for the British government showing off the sheer might and superiority of British engineering! (Said in a sarcastic colonial British accent) hence the grants and having Boris’s direct number on speed dial! I also totally agree they could have kept the manufacturing in the UK. But bottom line, they do make amazing products.

@@BehindDesigns also for french and Swiss customers the support is in Tunisia. Had 42 different custom reps for a simple refund (they couldn’t deliver my product and then took 5 months to repay me 879EUR… v15 extra)

When the chinese do it and take all the factories again you complain, why dont you support your own?

you'd think they'd have caught that in testing. If they did enough

Couldn’t agree more

Bollocks, we’ve three in the family and never had a torn item. Nothing washes like them and they’re so fast.

@@r25limousine Cute anecdote but it doesn't change the fact.

@@lieferal4984 your word is fact, mine is anecdotal. You must have a god complex

We might as well go back to the days of wringer washers. Can use the same water to wash several loads (as long as clothes aren’t heavily soiled), and wash times are usually 3 to 5 minutes with the aggressive agitation they have.

Incorrect. the biggest problem with washing machines these days is Americans thinking that an astmatic old lazy-spinning trash-loader that makes 70 gallons of murky laundry soup is an effective way to clean clothes. More concentrated detergent just cleans better, that's the honest truth. The problem is, only one type of machine can effectively agitate clothes in a concentrated detergent solution without excessive water - and Americans are convinced that they suck, even though no *actually developed* country on the planet has any issue with them at all. 😂

Top loaders in of themselves wash better than front loaders, given that you have the space to have one. An old top loader can agitate back and forth and pull the clothes into the center spiral while doing so.

@@BrianGon89 the key word is old there. And what if you can't find one of those or just want something more modern. Unless you had one with good wash action a front loader will always be better and by that i means a no frills basic one will still beat out any top loader

Cheers! I’ll give that a listen.

Bet it would’ve cost upwards of £600,000 to buy LOL

@@LadyMoonstar6601 for the base model with optional seating lol

Dyson did recently say that the worst designed product he has to deal with on a daily basis is a printer, so you never know!

I did read some reports of that and originally had it in the script. However I had one of these machines and didn’t experience it so decided to leave it out.

Very true.

Yeah definitely a case of innovation rather than invention.

What was the cyclone filter used for before?

@@johndoe-vc1we used in industrial cleaning but home vac manufacturers avoided the design as there was a lucrative market in replacement vacuum bags.

I read a lot of people saying that however, I had one growing up and didn’t experience it ever ripping or destroying clothes, so didn’t include that in the video. Maybe the one I had was a unicorn!

Really? i saw a video on the channel thesuperwasherlab and the guy returned his within a month

@@johndoe-vc1we I have no idea

Thanks! Dyson's genius is their marketing...

Yeah sure! E-mail me and I’ll send it over. Let me know what format you want it in. I built it for what I needed so there isn’t much behind the surface! If I get a bit of time I plan to put all my models from the videos on turbo squid.

@@BehindDesigns thanks i need an answear from my friend in Germany what format he needs

@@BehindDesigns thx so much for the model btw

@@BehindDesigns oh the commend got deleted so can you send me the e-mail adress?

@@BehindDesigns so... what about it?

Thanks for the comment, I really appreciate you dissecting the video in such a thorough way. However if I might put forward my rebuttal to some of your comments. I grew up in a household with a CR01 washing machine. You say speculation but this is effectively eye witness testimony! Something that I should have probably referenced in the video, I witnessed the machine fail over and over and we indeed did have our engineer on speed dial… this is also echoed in every article and blog post you find relating to the CR line of Dyson products. You mention a paper that says 1 in 3 machines fail - well 2 out of 3 Dyson machines failed, and that’s one brand not all washing machines on the market so it’s not a comparable number and just goes to highlight how unreliable their machines were! Whatever way you look at it, Dyson stopped production due to profitability. Dyson say they made it too complicated and charged too little hence no profit. I’m saying it was too complicated and therefore massively un-reliable hence no profit… their competitors also confirmed this (not that a competitor is a reliable source of information, and could just have been them twisting the knife) I’m also not sure you watched the whole video as you would have seen that James dyson himself remarked that the washing machine venture was a “educative failure” The entire dyson washing machine line including the CR02 was cancelled 4 years after the original one was launched and the CR02 had such minor upgrades it was hardly worthy of its own number it was more like the CR01.5. In an attempt to keep the video under 30 mins I omitted the inclusion of the CR02 on purpose, as explaining how that fitted into the product line and what the differences were was in my opinion unnecessary. And a click bait title? As someone who actively, to the detriment of their channel avoids clickbait in all forms I don’t think that qualifies… But keep up the good work KZfaq needs people like you keeping content creators honest! Even the small ones like me!

​@@BehindDesigns Thanks for the response. A few thoughts in the interest of a conversation. >> “You say speculation but this is effectively eye witness testimony!” I don’t doubt your observations. However, the video at no point talked about your specific machine; it made sweeping generalisations and made specific factual claims about all the machines, which were not supported by any convincing evidence. I only intended to point this out and explain why I found it misleading and unconvincing. >> “You mention a paper that says 1 in 3 machines fail - well 2 out of 3 Dyson machines failed” In my original comment, I said I didn’t believe these quoted figures. They were not supported by any convincing evidence, or any detail of the level found in basic-fact checking on machine reliability. The video claimed this was simply asserted by a competitor. Vague subjective testimony by a no doubt threatened competitor on a factual matter is deeply unconvincing. Again, I’m just explaining why I was unconvinced and found it misleading. >> “Whatever way you look at it, Dyson stopped production due to profitability.” Precisely-because there’s evidence for this. But in the video, you started to imply there were other reasons. This was speculative, unsupported, and came across as half-truthy infotainment which had the effect of being misleading. Again, just expressing my thoughts. >> “Dyson say they made it too complicated and charged too little hence no profit. I’m saying it was too complicated and therefore massively un-reliable hence no profit” The first statement is true; the second is speculation that I didn’t believe. There is no evidence the mechanical failures of their first machine were a result of the ‘complexity’. Again, no data is available looking statistically at the sources of failure-which can be numerous, even today with simpler machines, as a simple fact-check can reveal. >> “their competitors also confirmed this (not that a competitor is a reliable source of information, and could just have been them twisting the knife)” Their competitors did not confirm this. They simply made statements without evidence and so I don’t believe it, for the reasons you suggest. >> “I’m also not sure you watched the whole video as you would have seen that James dyson himself remarked that the washing machine venture was a “educative failure”” If you watch other interviews, he values failure as a means to learn (i.e., basic common sense). Such a comment from him simply means they learned a lot, as they do with all their product evolutions, and says absolutely nothing about reasons why they discontinued the line beyond what they’ve already said. >> “The entire dyson washing machine line including the CR02 was cancelled 4 years after the original one was launched…” Four years on the market is not as short as you imply. Regardless, this simply means it was determined by this time that it was never going to be profitable. The 4-year market lifetime says nothing much, especially as they were under guarantee for 20 years and thus contractually supported for those two decades. >>”…the CR02 had such minor upgrades it was hardly worthy of its own number it was more like the CR01.5.” I’m not sure I believe this statement. There is no evidence presented of what was different at a deeper technical and design level to justify the claim it was a minor upgrade. There could have been many changes under the hood, as is often the case with future versions, that improved reliability. They’d accumulated a lot of data by that point. >> “In an attempt to keep the video under 30 mins I omitted the inclusion of the CR02 on purpose, as explaining how that fitted into the product line and what the differences were was in my opinion unnecessary. ” What’s special about 30 minutes? Plenty of equivalent videos far longer than that out there. I felt the omission of the CR02 helped generate a storyline that had misleading elements and fuelled unevidenced speculation. Overall, I’ve no doubt version 1 of any new product line is bound to be considerably weaker than future iterations; this is clear for all complex products and all manufacturers. To imply in the video there were reasons other than profitability for discontinuation, were simply not supported, and purely speculative. Again, this is simply the reasoning for my original comment. Some of the historically factually accurate parts of the video (that can be fact-checked) were, in fact, quite interesting. Their approach and technology was brilliant. If it was profitable, I’ve no doubt they would have continued evolving and improving the product line, just as with every other. You don’t see equivalent videos about their very first cyclonic vacuum cleaner (or other products) and all their issues-mostly because they’re still in production. It being stopped doesn’t mean there was anything wrong or negative about what they were doing at a technological level. Essentially, credit where it's due and critical claims require evidence (statistically significant and objective).

Lol, noted!