On 2019-02-11 4:29 p.m., wrote:
> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 3:13:07 PM UTC-6, wrote:
>>
>> That's why I bought the Dyson, to cope with litter, best get at it
>> daily. I have hardwood and tile and it's not nice underfoot
>>
> Her litter box is near a laminate floor area and you're right, it's not nice
> underfoot. I think the problem descends from her being declawed whereas
> Smitty was not and there was no litter being scattered everywhere.
>>
>> Have you checked the Dyson site, I wouldn't be surprised if they do
>> 'refurbished' ones, or if not, pretty sure I have seen them on ebay.
>>
> I still cannot justify the price even for a refurbished one when my 'ball'
> is in like new condition.

Given my experience with it I think you would be better off to stick
with the ball. It is handy to have the cordless one, It is light and it
does a good job. It is a PITA to have to keep emptying the canister and
then having to clean out the filter and waiting more than 24 hours to be
able to use it again. I know we have more to suck up than most people
because we have two dogs tracking dirt and shedding hair. I am not
going to get rid of my central vac any time soon. If it was a question
of one or the other, I would stick with the central vac.

>

On 2/11/2019 4:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:

> Given my experience with it I think you would be better off to stick
> with the ball. It is handy to have the cordless one, It is light and it
> does a good job. It is a PITA to have to keep emptying the canister and
> then having to clean out the filter and waiting more than 24 hours to be
> able to use it again.

You might consider buying a spare filter...

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 19:33:17 -0500, S Viemeister
> wrote:

>On 2/11/2019 4:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>> Given my experience with it I think you would be better off to stick
>> with the ball. It is handy to have the cordless one, It is light and it
>> does a good job. It is a PITA to have to keep emptying the canister and
>> then having to clean out the filter and waiting more than 24 hours to be
>> able to use it again.
>
>You might consider buying a spare filter...

lol

On 2019-02-11 7:33 p.m., S Viemeister wrote:
> On 2/11/2019 4:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>> Given my experience with it I think you would be better off to stick
>> with the ball. It is handy to have the cordless one, It is light and
>> it does a good job. It is a PITA to have to keep emptying the canister
>> and then having to clean out the filter and waiting more than 24 hours
>> to be able to use it again.
>
> You might consider buying a spare filter...
>

Good idea. I had been considering sending it back. It does a good job
when it is working. It is just that I spend far too much time fiddling
with it.

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 19:33:17 -0500, S Viemeister
> wrote:

>On 2/11/2019 4:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>> Given my experience with it I think you would be better off to stick
>> with the ball. It is handy to have the cordless one, It is light and it
>> does a good job. It is a PITA to have to keep emptying the canister and
>> then having to clean out the filter and waiting more than 24 hours to be
>> able to use it again.
>
>You might consider buying a spare filter...

Yes, I see them frequently on amazon