Electrolux Trilobite
Electrolux Trilobite
I know this is a Roomba forum, but I thought this would be a good place to ask. Other than price, what is the difference between a Roomba scheduler & an Electrolux Trilobite? I know the Electrolux costs ~$1000 more. Does anyone know what you get for an additional $1000?
- RoombaRules
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 482
- Joined: September 17th, 2005, 1:16 pm
- Location: Boston, MA
- Contact:
There are differences, yes. The big ones are that the Trilobite has:
-A thicker filter
-A bigger dust bin
-Room mapping capabilites thanks to...
-Ultrasonic sensors that tell it where it is
-Much more powerful vacuum
There are more but that's the big stuff.
THERE ARE DOWNSIDES, AND MANY...
The filter is actualy worse because it's better , the thicker filter means that it traps more dirt, but it also means that it needs to be replaced every few uses! And it only comes with six filters I believe.
The bigger dust bin only worsens the above problem.
Room mapping capabilities is quite nice, BUT!....
Because the Trilobite uses sonar sensors to detect objects unlike Roomba which uses bumpers.... Well if someone told me that the Trilobite had good edge cleaning I'd laugh in their face.
The powerful vacuum is nice, but Roomba cleans plenty well enough and it's so much cheaper. Plus the Trilobite's vacuum is extremely loud.
Another downside is that the Trilobite CAN NOT be Scheduled.
Here is a link to a site called everydayrobots.com, they have a review (unlike most sites, including this one) of the Trilobite. The page also has reviews of other robot vacs you might be interested in reading about. The review of Discovery is non-2.1.
http://www.everydayrobots.com/index.php ... &Itemid=25
Hope this answers your question,
Seth
-A thicker filter
-A bigger dust bin
-Room mapping capabilites thanks to...
-Ultrasonic sensors that tell it where it is
-Much more powerful vacuum
There are more but that's the big stuff.
THERE ARE DOWNSIDES, AND MANY...
The filter is actualy worse because it's better , the thicker filter means that it traps more dirt, but it also means that it needs to be replaced every few uses! And it only comes with six filters I believe.
The bigger dust bin only worsens the above problem.
Room mapping capabilities is quite nice, BUT!....
Because the Trilobite uses sonar sensors to detect objects unlike Roomba which uses bumpers.... Well if someone told me that the Trilobite had good edge cleaning I'd laugh in their face.
The powerful vacuum is nice, but Roomba cleans plenty well enough and it's so much cheaper. Plus the Trilobite's vacuum is extremely loud.
Another downside is that the Trilobite CAN NOT be Scheduled.
Here is a link to a site called everydayrobots.com, they have a review (unlike most sites, including this one) of the Trilobite. The page also has reviews of other robot vacs you might be interested in reading about. The review of Discovery is non-2.1.
http://www.everydayrobots.com/index.php ... &Itemid=25
Hope this answers your question,
Seth
There is no such thing as gravity, the Earth sucks.
-
- Founding Member
- Posts: 123
- Joined: August 2nd, 2004, 1:36 pm
Well to be fair to the Trilobite, the ultrasound sensors do prevent it from scratching furniture and knocking over things (like a dogs water bowl). It is probably also more durable then the Roomba, and it does have a significantly more powerful vacuum. Also, the filters can probably be cleaned and some people might prefer the Trilobites magnetic strips to the Roomba's virtual walls (since the strips can be permanently installed under carpet).
But then again, the Roomba can actually fit under more things, and like you said, the Trilobite can't edge clean as well as the Roomba. Still, if someone asked me "you can have either a Roomba Scheduler or a Trilobite for free" I would go for the Trilobite without a second thought.
But then again, the Roomba can actually fit under more things, and like you said, the Trilobite can't edge clean as well as the Roomba. Still, if someone asked me "you can have either a Roomba Scheduler or a Trilobite for free" I would go for the Trilobite without a second thought.
Thanks for all the info. Just as an FYI, there is now a new Trilobite 2.0 that can be scheduled. http://www.electrolux.com/node613.asp
I'm not sure it's worth ~$1400 more, but interesting to look at. I know the regular electrolux vacuums work for years & years flawlessly.
I'm not sure it's worth ~$1400 more, but interesting to look at. I know the regular electrolux vacuums work for years & years flawlessly.
- RoombaRules
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 482
- Joined: September 17th, 2005, 1:16 pm
- Location: Boston, MA
- Contact:
Yeah but the main reason that they're so good is that they have the most experience of anyone. Electrolux was the first company to ever produce a true vacuum of the type used in the modern day world. They don't have as much experience with robots, but the hardware should be top-notch because of their experience-so I agree with you on that.
I hate how the magnetic strips work, they are just not as convienient or practical as the Virtual Walls.
Yes the filters can be cleaned, but even with cleaning, the longest you'd want to go without changing the filter is probably 3 weeks. Just take a look at what they said in the review on the link I posted before.
Roomba has a non-marring bumper, plus when it goes into wall-following it usualy (not always) uses it's Infra Red sensor to sense the wall and doesn't even touch the wall (with the GOOD exception of the spinning side brush).
Hey what can I say, I'm a Roomba advocate.
Seth
I hate how the magnetic strips work, they are just not as convienient or practical as the Virtual Walls.
Yes the filters can be cleaned, but even with cleaning, the longest you'd want to go without changing the filter is probably 3 weeks. Just take a look at what they said in the review on the link I posted before.
Roomba has a non-marring bumper, plus when it goes into wall-following it usualy (not always) uses it's Infra Red sensor to sense the wall and doesn't even touch the wall (with the GOOD exception of the spinning side brush).
Hey what can I say, I'm a Roomba advocate.
Seth
There is no such thing as gravity, the Earth sucks.
Call me biased but I would never EVER buy an Electrolux or Hoover product again!
For years I struggled with various models of these products. Then along came James Dyson and explained why the technology didn't work very well. Within minutes of use the most powerful suction cleaner has reduced capacity because the bag gets clogged with dust.
That's why in my opinion the Dyson uses superior technology to any cleaner that uses bags. They made a documentary years ago about Dyson trying to get his product made by the cleaner companies. None of them were interested.
Why?
Because IMO they cared more about a product that requires consumers to keep purchasing cleaner bags! The program even interviewed a senior manager from one of the big two companies. He said that, "if he had known that the Dyson was going to be so popular, he would have bought the rights when they were offered and shelved them for ever."
They should have been the first to bring out a bagless cleaner and they weren't. Likewise, irobot beat them with a robotic cleaner and now they are forced to make one too. Well too bad!
I don't care how good they make their cleaner. It's payback time for all those hours vacuuming to no good effect.
Sorry... I went on a bit of a rant there....
Can't wait for the review tho...
For years I struggled with various models of these products. Then along came James Dyson and explained why the technology didn't work very well. Within minutes of use the most powerful suction cleaner has reduced capacity because the bag gets clogged with dust.
That's why in my opinion the Dyson uses superior technology to any cleaner that uses bags. They made a documentary years ago about Dyson trying to get his product made by the cleaner companies. None of them were interested.
Why?
Because IMO they cared more about a product that requires consumers to keep purchasing cleaner bags! The program even interviewed a senior manager from one of the big two companies. He said that, "if he had known that the Dyson was going to be so popular, he would have bought the rights when they were offered and shelved them for ever."
They should have been the first to bring out a bagless cleaner and they weren't. Likewise, irobot beat them with a robotic cleaner and now they are forced to make one too. Well too bad!
I don't care how good they make their cleaner. It's payback time for all those hours vacuuming to no good effect.
Sorry... I went on a bit of a rant there....
Can't wait for the review tho...
I got my Trilobite yesterday, the Trilobites build is superb nice fit and nice materials. Its taller then the Roomba and louder when it cleans. The Trilobite has 3 cleaning modes quick, auto and spot. The spot cleaning is like the Roomba but it?s a 10? square instead of a 3? circle. The auto clean maps the rooms outer walls then cleans the room and if the battery is low and its not done cleaning the Trilobite goes back to he charger and recharges by following the wall and after recharging the Trilobite starts cleaning were it left off. The Trilobite uses magnetic strips to set of barriers instead of the invisible walls, the magnetic strips are easy to use. The Trilobite comes with two different types of magnetic strips, permanent with a adhesive backing which can be laid on top of the floor or buried under carpet or temporary strips which are wide and easy to lay down and cut to desired lengths. I put the permanent strips under my carpet and it serves as a barrier that doesn?t need new batteries and no one can see it.
I charged the Trilobite for two hours and then pressed quick clean. The robot moved slower then the Roomba and was louder but it didn?t touch any furniture and didn?t do the same area of the room more then once. One charge lasted 45 minutes on my high pile carpet and it cleaned the entire area my Roomba cleaned when I had low pile carpet. My Roomba was about maxed in its cleaning ability and charge in this area so I came to the conclusion they both cover close to the same area, the Trilobite is slower and doesn?t last as long but it doesn?t cover the same area of the carpet many times making the Trilobite more efficient in its area coverage. The suction power on the Trilobite is very strong compared to the Roomba it sucked up much more dirt and dust then the Roomba. The Trilobite seemed to have a real vacuum clean and brush clean as were the Roomba seemed to use its brushes to clean and the Roomba seemed to have zero suction. To me the Trilobite has two negatives when compared to the Roomba. One negative is the Trilobite doesn?t get as close to the walls as the Roomba since it never touches the walls and doesn?t have a side brush. The second negative is the Trilobite doesn?t have a scheduler, but this seems less of an issue with the Trilobite I would never want it to run at night, its too loud to run when you are sleeping and its easy for me to run when I leave the house. When its all said and done the Trilobite is the superior vacuum, the Trilobite cleans like a upright and will clean an entire floor even if the Trilobite needs to recharge it will keep cleaning after it charges until the job is done. It also wins no contest if you have medium to high pile carpet, the Roomba simply can?t do the job on these carpets. Also the Trilobite sweep right over my rugs no problems unlike the Roomba. But at $1,300 to $1,700 I?m not sure its worth it for someone with low pile carpet or hard floors. If you have low pile carpet or hard floors I would stick with the Roomba unless money is no object. I still use my Roomba Scheduler in my kitchen .
I charged the Trilobite for two hours and then pressed quick clean. The robot moved slower then the Roomba and was louder but it didn?t touch any furniture and didn?t do the same area of the room more then once. One charge lasted 45 minutes on my high pile carpet and it cleaned the entire area my Roomba cleaned when I had low pile carpet. My Roomba was about maxed in its cleaning ability and charge in this area so I came to the conclusion they both cover close to the same area, the Trilobite is slower and doesn?t last as long but it doesn?t cover the same area of the carpet many times making the Trilobite more efficient in its area coverage. The suction power on the Trilobite is very strong compared to the Roomba it sucked up much more dirt and dust then the Roomba. The Trilobite seemed to have a real vacuum clean and brush clean as were the Roomba seemed to use its brushes to clean and the Roomba seemed to have zero suction. To me the Trilobite has two negatives when compared to the Roomba. One negative is the Trilobite doesn?t get as close to the walls as the Roomba since it never touches the walls and doesn?t have a side brush. The second negative is the Trilobite doesn?t have a scheduler, but this seems less of an issue with the Trilobite I would never want it to run at night, its too loud to run when you are sleeping and its easy for me to run when I leave the house. When its all said and done the Trilobite is the superior vacuum, the Trilobite cleans like a upright and will clean an entire floor even if the Trilobite needs to recharge it will keep cleaning after it charges until the job is done. It also wins no contest if you have medium to high pile carpet, the Roomba simply can?t do the job on these carpets. Also the Trilobite sweep right over my rugs no problems unlike the Roomba. But at $1,300 to $1,700 I?m not sure its worth it for someone with low pile carpet or hard floors. If you have low pile carpet or hard floors I would stick with the Roomba unless money is no object. I still use my Roomba Scheduler in my kitchen .
I had a vacuum that used bags and now have a bagless and I like the bag system more. The bagless make a dusty mess when you empty them throwing away the bags was cleaner and easier.pachovia wrote:I got my Trilobite yesterday, the Trilobites build is superb nice fit and nice materials. Its taller then the Roomba and louder when it cleans. The Trilobite has 3 cleaning modes quick, auto and spot. The spot cleaning is like the Roomba but it?s a 10? square instead of a 3? circle. The auto clean maps the rooms outer walls then cleans the room and if the battery is low and its not done cleaning the Trilobite goes back to he charger and recharges by following the wall and after recharging the Trilobite starts cleaning were it left off. The Trilobite uses magnetic strips to set of barriers instead of the invisible walls, the magnetic strips are easy to use. The Trilobite comes with two different types of magnetic strips, permanent with a adhesive backing which can be laid on top of the floor or buried under carpet or temporary strips which are wide and easy to lay down and cut to desired lengths. I put the permanent strips under my carpet and it serves as a barrier that doesn?t need new batteries and no one can see it.
I charged the Trilobite for two hours and then pressed quick clean. The robot moved slower then the Roomba and was louder but it didn?t touch any furniture and didn?t do the same area of the room more then once. One charge lasted 45 minutes on my high pile carpet and it cleaned the entire area my Roomba cleaned when I had low pile carpet. My Roomba was about maxed in its cleaning ability and charge in this area so I came to the conclusion they both cover close to the same area, the Trilobite is slower and doesn?t last as long but it doesn?t cover the same area of the carpet many times making the Trilobite more efficient in its area coverage. The suction power on the Trilobite is very strong compared to the Roomba it sucked up much more dirt and dust then the Roomba. The Trilobite seemed to have a real vacuum clean and brush clean as were the Roomba seemed to use its brushes to clean and the Roomba seemed to have zero suction. To me the Trilobite has two negatives when compared to the Roomba. One negative is the Trilobite doesn?t get as close to the walls as the Roomba since it never touches the walls and doesn?t have a side brush. The second negative is the Trilobite doesn?t have a scheduler, but this seems less of an issue with the Trilobite I would never want it to run at night, its too loud to run when you are sleeping and its easy for me to run when I leave the house. When its all said and done the Trilobite is the superior vacuum, the Trilobite cleans like a upright and will clean an entire floor even if the Trilobite needs to recharge it will keep cleaning after it charges until the job is done. It also wins no contest if you have medium to high pile carpet, the Roomba simply can?t do the job on these carpets. Also the Trilobite sweep right over my rugs no problems unlike the Roomba. But at $1,300 to $1,700 I?m not sure its worth it for someone with low pile carpet or hard floors. If you have low pile carpet or hard floors I would stick with the Roomba unless money is no object. I still use my Roomba Scheduler in my kitchen .
I know that some people just take the top off the canister and tip it into the bin. They end up with a huge mushroom cloud of dust! It is recommended that you place a bag over the cannister, invert it, wait ten seconds for the dust to settle in the bag and then tie it off.The bagless make a dusty mess when you empty them throwing away the bags was cleaner and easier.
Just a tip for roomba owners like me that have an unused dyson lurking in the cupboard!
Re: fringes?
I've read it works great with rugs with fringes, but I don't' have any rugs with fringes to test my Trilobite.Polly wrote:How does the Trilobite handle hand-woven rugs with fringes (up to 2" of fringe on the end of these)?
Has anyone tried this?
Comparison of Trilobite 2.0 and Roomba Discovery
Here's a review which compares Trilobite 2.0 and Roomba Discovery (it also includes Zoombot, an ultra-cheap robovac). The article is old, but useful I think, because there are very few comparative reviews like it. It answers some questions, like rugs with long fringes/tassles (Trilobite 2.0 could handle them, but Roomba Discovery couldn't).
From: The Far Eastern Economic Review, Nov 2004
TECH REVIEW: HOME AUTOMATION
Suck It to Me
Hate housework? Here's a gadget to relieve you of at least one chore: vacuum cleaning. Let the robot do the work (but it doesn't do stairs)
By Simon Burns/TAIPEI
Issue cover-dated November 04, 2004
LIKE ANY FAMILY WITH A NEW PET, we looked proudly down at Zoombot. We patted its start button. The robotic vacuum cleaner shot forward enthusiastically and rushed under a sofa. Seconds later came the sound of the motor spinning frantically, followed by mournful beeping when Zoombot realized it was wedged in and couldn't get out.
Robot vacuum cleaners might still sound like science fiction, but they've been on the market for several years, and despite occasional mishaps like Zoombot's, they really do clean the floor while you do other things, or even when you're sleeping or out at work. My partner and I tested three of the most popular models.
They have some things in common. All are battery powered. They all have some basic safety features. Infra-red sensors prevent them running off the top of stairs (which none of them can clean, by the way). Their motors switch off automatically if the vacuum is blocked, if the wheels stop turning (because the unit is stuck), or if the machine is lifted off the ground. All feature a large front bumper with a sensor inside it. This ensures the robovacs know when they have bumped into something and helps avoid damage to furniture.
In the cheapest models, the bumper is also the primary means of navigation. For example, they can clean along the edge of a wall by bumping into it, backing up a little, turning slightly, and moving forward until they hit the wall again. The pricier models also use infra-red beams and ultrasound radar to find their way around.
For a lowly robovac (they're all under 12 centimetres high), the floor of a modern home is a real obstacle course. First hurdle: carpets. The Zoombot RV500, made by Applica (and sometimes sold under the Black and Decker brand), is the cheapest on the market, at around $90. Despite the manufacturer's claims, the Zoombot really doesn't do carpets--its vacuum is puny and it lacks the rotating brushes that, in the other robots, beat the carpet and throw dust up for the vacuum to suck in. On smooth wood or tile floors, however, Zoombot cleans as well as any other vacuum, robotic or manually operated.
In the robovac race, Zoombot is a bit of a cheat really, since it depends on a disposable cloth to pick up larger bits of dirt. The cloth needs replacing once or twice a week--they're available very cheaply in supermarkets, under names like "electrostatic dusting cloths."
The other two models we tried, iRobot's Roomba Discovery (about $250), and Electrolux's Trilobite 2.0 ($1,500-plus), both handled carpets with ease. The Trilobite, in particular, sucked an embarrassing quantity of dust out of carpets we had ignorantly classified as clean. Next on the robovac assault course: rugs.
Roomba had trouble with small, light rugs and mats which were not fixed to the floor. It tended to lift up the rug's edge and push it along slowly (apparently under the illusion that it was making progress) until the rug folded over and piled up. Roomba would then maroon itself on top of the folded heap, beep pathetically and switch off. Zoombot had similar problems, and, as noted, couldn't really clean the rugs anyway. The simplest solution is to shake rugs out and put them on a chair before starting to clean.
Roomba also didn't like tassels on the edge of rugs, or perhaps we should say it liked them too much, since it would try to ingest them, and would then grind to a halt when it discovered it had bitten off more than it could chew. Avoid this by folding the edge of the rug under itself before you start.
The Roomba we tested came with two "virtual wall" units which project a beam of invisible infra-red light that Roomba won't cross. You can use them to keep it away from places that you don't want cleaned, and from problem areas like tasselled rug edges and cables. Trilobite has magnetic strips to demarcate off-limit areas.
Rugs were no challenge for Trilobite. It didn't catch the edges, and if it ever did suck in one of the tassels, it would simply turn off its vacuum and brush motors briefly and trundle smugly away. Trilobite did occasionally suffer a hitch when its powerful suction would actually lift the rug up and block the vacuum inlet, causing it to shut off. However, Electrolux demonstrated to our satisfaction that this was a software problem with the prototype we were testing, and would not affect products being sold.
On to the next obstacle in the robovac race: cables, slippers, newspapers, money and similar small items. A single word of advice to new robovac owners: preparation. If there's anything you wouldn't run a manual vacuum cleaner over, take it off the floor before robovac gets there and gobbles it up. Trilobite can handle loose objects better than the others, and unlike them, isn't troubled by cables, but it may still attempt to eat stray banknotes, screws, coins, and so on.
The final hurdle for robovacs is endurance. Both Trilobite and Roomba drive back to their recharging station when their batteries are low; they might have trouble finding it if it's in a different room. Trilobite even resumes cleaning automatically once it's recharged; Roomba needs to be restarted.
Zoombot could only run for about 35 minutes before needing a recharge--roughly enough time to clean a room 16 metres square. Trilobite managed about 50 minutes. Roomba ran for an impressive 100 minutes or more, and is also faster than the other two, covering more area.
While Roomba's short-term endurance is excellent, we were concerned about its long-term reliability. Our Roomba initially suffered from a faulty sensor in its front wheel, which made it unusable. We made a temporary repair with some tape, and the problem eventually cleared up on its own.
Trilobite is definitely the Rolls-Royce of robovacs. It cleans the best and needs the least attention. Among the few drawbacks were its small buttons and display, which meant more-advanced functions (like a built-in timer) were a chore to use. We were baffled, too, by its lack of a remote control; even the cheap Zoombot has one. But since our interaction with Trilobite was mostly limited to pushing the start button and leaving it to get on with its work, the unfriendly user interface is less of an issue than it might be on a more cantankerous product.
Given the rare privilege of having three robovacs in the same room, we were tempted to set up a duel. Obviously, this would have been utterly unprofessional. So we jumped at the chance. Sad to say, they coexisted peacefully, much as we assume they would with any other pet. Since the robovacs we tested all have to go back to their manufacturers, it looks like the only fighting will be us wrestling with tubes and cables on our boring old vacuum cleaner.
Original Source Link:
http://feer.com/articles/2004/0411_04/p044innov.html
(use bugmenot.com to find a login/pswd)
From: The Far Eastern Economic Review, Nov 2004
TECH REVIEW: HOME AUTOMATION
Suck It to Me
Hate housework? Here's a gadget to relieve you of at least one chore: vacuum cleaning. Let the robot do the work (but it doesn't do stairs)
By Simon Burns/TAIPEI
Issue cover-dated November 04, 2004
LIKE ANY FAMILY WITH A NEW PET, we looked proudly down at Zoombot. We patted its start button. The robotic vacuum cleaner shot forward enthusiastically and rushed under a sofa. Seconds later came the sound of the motor spinning frantically, followed by mournful beeping when Zoombot realized it was wedged in and couldn't get out.
Robot vacuum cleaners might still sound like science fiction, but they've been on the market for several years, and despite occasional mishaps like Zoombot's, they really do clean the floor while you do other things, or even when you're sleeping or out at work. My partner and I tested three of the most popular models.
They have some things in common. All are battery powered. They all have some basic safety features. Infra-red sensors prevent them running off the top of stairs (which none of them can clean, by the way). Their motors switch off automatically if the vacuum is blocked, if the wheels stop turning (because the unit is stuck), or if the machine is lifted off the ground. All feature a large front bumper with a sensor inside it. This ensures the robovacs know when they have bumped into something and helps avoid damage to furniture.
In the cheapest models, the bumper is also the primary means of navigation. For example, they can clean along the edge of a wall by bumping into it, backing up a little, turning slightly, and moving forward until they hit the wall again. The pricier models also use infra-red beams and ultrasound radar to find their way around.
For a lowly robovac (they're all under 12 centimetres high), the floor of a modern home is a real obstacle course. First hurdle: carpets. The Zoombot RV500, made by Applica (and sometimes sold under the Black and Decker brand), is the cheapest on the market, at around $90. Despite the manufacturer's claims, the Zoombot really doesn't do carpets--its vacuum is puny and it lacks the rotating brushes that, in the other robots, beat the carpet and throw dust up for the vacuum to suck in. On smooth wood or tile floors, however, Zoombot cleans as well as any other vacuum, robotic or manually operated.
In the robovac race, Zoombot is a bit of a cheat really, since it depends on a disposable cloth to pick up larger bits of dirt. The cloth needs replacing once or twice a week--they're available very cheaply in supermarkets, under names like "electrostatic dusting cloths."
The other two models we tried, iRobot's Roomba Discovery (about $250), and Electrolux's Trilobite 2.0 ($1,500-plus), both handled carpets with ease. The Trilobite, in particular, sucked an embarrassing quantity of dust out of carpets we had ignorantly classified as clean. Next on the robovac assault course: rugs.
Roomba had trouble with small, light rugs and mats which were not fixed to the floor. It tended to lift up the rug's edge and push it along slowly (apparently under the illusion that it was making progress) until the rug folded over and piled up. Roomba would then maroon itself on top of the folded heap, beep pathetically and switch off. Zoombot had similar problems, and, as noted, couldn't really clean the rugs anyway. The simplest solution is to shake rugs out and put them on a chair before starting to clean.
Roomba also didn't like tassels on the edge of rugs, or perhaps we should say it liked them too much, since it would try to ingest them, and would then grind to a halt when it discovered it had bitten off more than it could chew. Avoid this by folding the edge of the rug under itself before you start.
The Roomba we tested came with two "virtual wall" units which project a beam of invisible infra-red light that Roomba won't cross. You can use them to keep it away from places that you don't want cleaned, and from problem areas like tasselled rug edges and cables. Trilobite has magnetic strips to demarcate off-limit areas.
Rugs were no challenge for Trilobite. It didn't catch the edges, and if it ever did suck in one of the tassels, it would simply turn off its vacuum and brush motors briefly and trundle smugly away. Trilobite did occasionally suffer a hitch when its powerful suction would actually lift the rug up and block the vacuum inlet, causing it to shut off. However, Electrolux demonstrated to our satisfaction that this was a software problem with the prototype we were testing, and would not affect products being sold.
On to the next obstacle in the robovac race: cables, slippers, newspapers, money and similar small items. A single word of advice to new robovac owners: preparation. If there's anything you wouldn't run a manual vacuum cleaner over, take it off the floor before robovac gets there and gobbles it up. Trilobite can handle loose objects better than the others, and unlike them, isn't troubled by cables, but it may still attempt to eat stray banknotes, screws, coins, and so on.
The final hurdle for robovacs is endurance. Both Trilobite and Roomba drive back to their recharging station when their batteries are low; they might have trouble finding it if it's in a different room. Trilobite even resumes cleaning automatically once it's recharged; Roomba needs to be restarted.
Zoombot could only run for about 35 minutes before needing a recharge--roughly enough time to clean a room 16 metres square. Trilobite managed about 50 minutes. Roomba ran for an impressive 100 minutes or more, and is also faster than the other two, covering more area.
While Roomba's short-term endurance is excellent, we were concerned about its long-term reliability. Our Roomba initially suffered from a faulty sensor in its front wheel, which made it unusable. We made a temporary repair with some tape, and the problem eventually cleared up on its own.
Trilobite is definitely the Rolls-Royce of robovacs. It cleans the best and needs the least attention. Among the few drawbacks were its small buttons and display, which meant more-advanced functions (like a built-in timer) were a chore to use. We were baffled, too, by its lack of a remote control; even the cheap Zoombot has one. But since our interaction with Trilobite was mostly limited to pushing the start button and leaving it to get on with its work, the unfriendly user interface is less of an issue than it might be on a more cantankerous product.
Given the rare privilege of having three robovacs in the same room, we were tempted to set up a duel. Obviously, this would have been utterly unprofessional. So we jumped at the chance. Sad to say, they coexisted peacefully, much as we assume they would with any other pet. Since the robovacs we tested all have to go back to their manufacturers, it looks like the only fighting will be us wrestling with tubes and cables on our boring old vacuum cleaner.
Original Source Link:
http://feer.com/articles/2004/0411_04/p044innov.html
(use bugmenot.com to find a login/pswd)
Reply on April 19 2007RoombaRules wrote:There are differences, yes. The big ones are that the Trilobite has:
-A thicker filter
-A bigger dust bin
-Room mapping capabilities thanks to...
-Ultrasonic sensors that tell it where it is
-Much more powerful vacuum
There are more but that's the big stuff.
THERE ARE DOWNSIDES, AND MANY...
The filter is actually worse because it's better , the thicker filter means that it traps more dirt, but it also means that it needs to be replaced every few uses! And it only comes with six filters I believe.
Replying April 19 2007
I think many people have found these filters clean up pretty easily. I use my upright hose attachment and find this works well for the Trilobite, while I just rinse my Scheduler filter under running water.
The bigger dust bin only worsens the above problem.
Room mapping capabilities is quite nice, BUT!....
Because the Trilobite uses sonar sensors to detect objects unlike Roomba which uses bumpers.... Well if someone told me that the Trilobite had good edge cleaning I'd laugh in their face.
Reply on April 19 2007
Edge cleaning in my opinion on the Tri is terrible in comparison to the Roomba
The powerful vacuum is nice, but Roomba cleans plenty well enough and it's so much cheaper. Plus the Trilobite's vacuum is extremely loud.
Reply on April 19 2007
My Trilobite is only a bit louder than my Scheduler, and I love the more powerful suction.
Another downside is that the Trilobite CAN NOT be Scheduled.
Reply on April 19 2007
This is really a major inconvenience once you are used to using a scheduler
Seth
My experience added to the above review:
My Trilobite can not map a room well that is at all complicated. It is NOT at all good at doing two rooms. I have found that it goes three quarters around and then often just starts its random pattern so never calculates the time to clean the areas properly. It does well on a small square room.
I do not like, (mostly because of the above) that it never goes back to a follow the wall pattern, which is very useful in getting full coverage to a large room or two adjoining rooms.
I HATE the magnetic strips used by the Trilobite and still haven't figured out how to use them i.e. how do you get them under your wall to wall carpeting?
There is definitely a great advantage to the Tri in regular maintenance. It has no bristle brush to clean and thus more dirt and hair goes into the bin rather than the brush.
If you have medium to high pile, you are likely to be MUCH happier with the Tri as I don't feel the Roombas handle this well and the Tri has the more powerful motor to handle this.
If you have mostly bare floors, and for any kitchens with a kick board, you are more likely to want a Roomba which I believe cleans many times better than the Tri in this area.
The Tri does much better crossing rugs and thresholds that are often problematic for the Roomba.
I can put my Roomba homebase under an easy chair and it will return to it's base pretty consistently, while the Tri base requires it to be against the wall with 8 inches of unencumbered space so it is often not possible to hide your vacuum or base in your room, which because it is red, sticks out like a sore thumb in your room.
I find that the Trilobite is more gentle with my antique furniture legs because it generally does not hit them although I find that it bumps things MUCH more often than I expected it to and has run into my blind and deaf dog, several times which it's advertising said it would not.
There is growing concern regarding the availability of replacement batteries for the Tri, to which there does not appear to be any current solution. These may or may not be available when needed. The company has not provided any assurance on this to date to my knowledge.
New Mom to four irobots