The concept is good but the engineering is wrong. The cutting heads, even if lubricated regularly, and obviously made out of metal, wear out the small plastic parts that hold them together in order to cut. After the plastic wears out the cutting heads no longer hold together and will no longer cut. It sucks but does not cut. It sucks!!!
The product on offer here is a vacuum hair cutter for use at home, which works by sucking the hair up through an adapter called a "styler" into a set of blades. The cut hair accumulates inside the device, and the length of cut is governed by the adapter of choice. The filter needs to be cleaned of loose hair regularly, and the blades of the device need to be oiled before each use but otherwise no particular maintenance is needed.
What is needed, though, is the skill to wield the device in the best possible way to get the result you're seeking. It's not just a matter of running the device through your hair and finding yourself with a great haircut at the end of it, and I would say that judging from the user manual, it's not hard to do but it will take a little practice. You are most definitely urged to read the manual, since it contains safety warnings, and inappropriate use of the device without an adapter fitted can result in you cutting your ears. You need another method of cutting the hair around your ears, sideburns and at the hairline at the back of your neck, and the manual indicates that you may need to vacuum up some loose hairs after you're done.
There are other devices based on the same principle, most notably the Flowbee® and the Robocut®, which work as attachments to a standard vacuum cleaner or come with their own vacuum cleaner attached. The most obvious advantage is that there's no need to keep cleaning out a tiny filter in the device itself, as you have the whole vacuum cleaner to fill before needing to empty it, and the more powerful the cleaner, the better the cut.
Not being American I had to do a bit of research here and it seems the Flowbee and Robocut have a major feud on, check this out:
Wow, this is a serious fight here. And these guys have apparently been going at it for many years. I also found an article at Discover Magazine, which you can read here: http://discovermagazine.com/2007/sep/google-taught-me-how-to-cut-my-own-hair/. It's an amusing article which may put the whole home-haircutting idea into context for you.
Anyway, back to the Aircut. It doesn't really seem to be bringing anything new to the table other than self-containedness, but that may be a disadvantage in terms of the frequency with which you need to clean the filter. It's more expensive than the competition, and there's no warranty on it either:
"www.aircut.com DOES NOT MAKE ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, REPRESENTATIONS OR ENDORSEMENTS WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE) WITH REGARD TO THE WEB SITE, THE MATERIALS, ANY PRODUCTS, INFORMATION OR SERVICE PROVIDED THROUGH THE WEB SITE, OR ANY SITES LISTED THEREIN, AND THE WEB SITE WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY COST OR DAMAGE ARISING EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY FROM ANY SUCH TRANSACTION."
This is probably a solid enough enough product which does what it is claimed to do, but you do need to read that manual to find its limitations and you'll need to practice the technique. There's no indication of how successful it is with anything other than straight hair, nor is it shown as being used for anything other than male haircuts. It's expensive, and without a warranty or any sort of trial period I personally wouldn't buy one, especially as it's not the only player in this field.
2 Questions & Answers
Business owners: What’s your side of the story?
Manage your business