Skip to main content

30% Cordless Upright Vacuum Cleaners Tested Reveal Unsatisfactory Cleaning Performance and Wide Variations in Operating Time

  • 2018.03.15
Handy and space-saving, the cordless upright vacuum cleaners – some could even  double as a handheld vacuum cleaner – have found favour with consumers, despite their higher prices, in the market in recent years.  A Consumer Council test has found, however, the cleaning performance in nearly one-third of the test samples were rated with only 2.5 points or below; one had a mere 1 point which has great room for improvement. The samples generally took a long time to recharge but operated a short time. Further, the 4 samples with the best cleaning performance were measured with the least operating time – only 7 to 11.5 minutes non-stop. The Council noted that besides the high average price of several thousands, cordless vacuum cleaners also varied significantly in their efficacy. Consumers should carefully compare between the conventional wired and cordless vacuum cleaners for their various functions in reaching the right choice for home.
 
The test was conducted in collaboration with multiple international consumer organisations on 18 cordless upright models priced from $1,098 to $6,980, among them 14 models could be converted for handheld use. In reference with the European Standard EN 60312, the test covered: cleaning performance, operating time and suction power maintenance, energy efficiency, quietness and convenience of use. On the whole, the performance of cordless upright vacuum cleaners was given an ordinary overall rating – with only 1 sample scored an overall rating of 4 points, 5 others only 2 to 2.5 points, and the 12 remainders 3 to 3.5 points.
 
In assessing their prime function of cleaning, the samples were put to a series of tests to find out how well they could clean up the dust and confetti on the hard floor and carpet. The results showed their performance on the hard floor to be least satisfactory – though 4 samples scored well with 4 points, 10 others were given only 1 to 2.5 points.  A few of the samples were equipped with electric motorised nozzle with roller brush inside designed purportedly to suck up minuscule dirt and particles but the test could find no obvious difference in their performance. 
 
In comparison, the samples cleaned better on carpet – 13 samples scored 3 to 4.5 points, and the rest (5 samples) 2.5 points or below, reflecting wide variations in performance among them.  
 
Further, 15 of the 18 samples made the claim that they could be converted for handheld use; but as 1 sample, after being removed of its extension tube, was judged to be still too long for handheld purpose, therefore only 14 were included in the test for cleaning performance as handheld cleaners.  But the results were less than satisfactory with 5 of these handheld vacuum cleaners rated a bare 1.5 to 2 points. 
 
As the latest models of upright vacuum cleaners are designed to operate wireless, the battery operating time is obviously critical. The test revealed substantial differences among the samples in battery recharge and operating time. From the test, battery recharge took from 1 hour 37 minutes to almost 11 hours, a whopping 6 times difference. The operating time of a sample, 3 hours after full battery recharge, and operated at their highest suction power, lasted only 7 minutes non-stop. Even the sample with the best operating time, 5.5 hours after battery recharge, could last for only 33 minutes. Given their small energy capacity, cordless vacuum cleaners are not suitable for cleaning large units at one time, but for smaller areas or cleaning jobs of a short duration.
 
In the test, the samples were compared for their ability to maintain high suction power throughout the cleaning operation. Wide variations were detected in their sustainability. Only 5 samples could maintain consistently at more than 90% of their highest suction power throughout the operation, scoring 4 to 5 points. But 11 samples were unable to maintain a stable suction power falling progressively during the operation, with a low rating of 2 points or below.
 
On quietness, the noise level measured was between 65.8 and 77 decibels, equivalent to the noise level generated by normal conversation or busy city traffic.         7 samples were rated with 2 points or below on account of their high noise level. On convenience of use, the performance of the samples was more even compared with other test items, with rating ranging from 2.5 to 3.5 points.
 
In addition, consumers were reminded of the considerable costs involved in repairs and maintenance services though the samples were generally provided with warranties of 1 to 3 years. Prolonged use of rechargeable batteries will inevitably lead to a reduction in performance. Among the 18 samples, only 10 offered users with the cost of purchasing a spare detachable battery or internal battery replacement, at $250 to $1,200. In the case of a sample priced at $1,980, the cost of battery replacement reached a high $730, equivalent to 37% of the price of a new appliance.
 
Owing to the high maintenance costs, couple with the lack of spare part replacement for older models, many consumers would rather give up the machine or agree to only simple repairs, thus effectively shortening the durability of the product.  The Council called on manufacturers to take up the responsibility as the product producers in offering a sound repair and maintenance service at reasonable prices to help prolong the product life span, and in doing so fulfil the goal of sustainable consumption.
 
The Council suggests the following to consumers in the choice and purchase of vacuum cleaners:
  • Your purchasing decision should take into account: the size of your home, storage space, frequency of use and your own needs, and compare the different types of vacuum cleaners in the market for their functions and limitations; don’t blindly follow the trend for new design or feature;
  • Cordless upright vacuum cleaners are space-saving while the traditional  cleaners have to be wired but their overall suction power is stronger and their average price lower;
  • Pay heed to the handle if it fits your hands comfortably, and whether it does offer better convenience to fit on other nozzle;
  • Most vacuum cleaners cannot be used to suck up water, don’t attempt to try it recklessly. 

The Consumer Council reserves all its right (including copyright) in respect of CHOICE magazine and Online CHOICE.