Review: Shark PowerDetect Speed

If you're looking for a great cordless vacuum, there’s one recommendation you’re likely to find on almost every page of the internet: the Shark PowerDetect. And that’s for good reason. When I tested the Shark PowerDetect against the Dyson Gen5Detect earlier this year, the Shark won in overall test results. But now there’s a new version on the market: the Shark PowerDetect Speed.

How does it compare to the original? It’s lighter, slimmer, and cheaper, plus it comes with an optional base station that will self-empty and charge your vacuum for you. It’s a winning combination: The PowerDetect Speed is my new top pick for the best cordless vacuum as of writing (particularly the Clean & Empty version). Read on to find out why.

Carpet Powerhouse

Photograph: Nena Farrell

Video: Nena Farrell

I tested the Shark PowerDetect Speed side by side with the current Dyson vacuum lineup, and came away very impressed. Its 350-watt motor (slightly less than the original’s 380 watts) performed the best on my sand plus thin rug test, and it was just as efficient as more expensive Dyson vacuums during my sand and Cheerios on thick rugs tests. It also pulled up a frankly alarming amount of cat hair and debris from bedrooms I know I vacuumed recently.

I was surprised how easy the vacuum was to push around and maneuver. Like the original PowerDetect before it, the PowerDetect Speed pulls forward a little bit as you vacuum. Compared to some Dyson vacuums, where you really have to put your arm into it to get across a thick rug, the PowerDetect Speed is a breeze to push—It puts the speed in Speed, if you will.

The wand also bends, so you can easily vacuum underneath furniture without needing to physically bend over. On my first few runs, though, I found it easy to get the head locked in its upright position, but as I got the hang of the vacuum (and broke it in more) that stopped happening.

I also really like that the PowerDetect Speed's vacuum head can sense the type of floor you're on, plus how dirty that floor is, and adjust its speed accordingly. The Clean & Empty version, aka the version that comes with a base station, also has two lights built into the motor bar to better spot debris: a blue laser light for when you're on hard floors and a brighter headlight for carpet cleans.

Outpacing the Competition

I tested the Shark PowerDetect Speed and nearly every current Dyson vacuum in five different cleanup tests—sand, Cheerios, litter, stairs, and general carpet vacuuming, and scored each one. The Shark PowerDetect Speed scored a 15 out of 20, only ranking behind the much pricier Dyson Gen5Detect ($800) and Dyson V16 Piston Animal ($980). It scored one point ahead of the Dyson V10 Konical and four points ahead of the Dyson V15 Detect and new V8 Cyclone, which is particularly impressive given that the V15 Detect is so much pricier and comes with an extra cleaner head. The PowerDetect Speed only really got dinged for getting stuck upright when I vacuumed the stairs, but that hasn’t been an issue since really breaking it in.

It got perfect scores vacuuming both sand and Cheerios off of rugs, and it also did better on a thin rug than just about all of Dyson's lineup. (Dyson's vacuums mostly struggled with whether or not they wanted to suction up the whole rug, while Shark had no issues.) It did need more passes on hard floor messes (like litter) than some of the Dyson vacuums, particularly the Dysons with the newer Fluffy Optic head, but it performed similarly outside of this special brush head comparison.

Photograph: Nena Farrell

Photograph: Nena Farrell

Overall, the Shark PowerDetect Speed scored similar to the original Shark PowerDetect from my testing earlier this year. I’m not able to numerically compare the two (I’ve added the litter test since my original PowerDetect review), but both earned the highest scores in sand, cereal, and general vacuuming, with the original PowerDetect doing better on stairs, since the head didn’t get stuck as often as the Speed's. The two vacuums are very similar, with some minor differences that feel pretty negligent when actually using them. (The original PowerDetect is a little stronger, has a 10 minute longer run time, has a larger dust cap, and has edge detection, but it’s also a whole pound heavier.)

The Price Is Right

Photograph: Nena Farrell

Overall, I think Shark's done it again with a great vacuum in the $500 to sub-$500 category, depending on if you get the Clean & Empty version or not. If you're not spending a grand on the most powerful Dyson available, this is the best cordless vacuum to buy.

I do think it’s well worth spending a little more for the Clean & Empty version with the base station and built-in lights. Not only are those useful features, this version also comes in five different colors— the regular Speed vacuum only comes in one. I don’t have an easy place to hide the base station in my home, so it’s nice to have a color that isn’t, well, ugly. I have the walnut version, which I plan to store long-term next to a wooden console table it’ll blend in with (though the orange color of the roller bar in the vacuum head is brighter than photos online suggest).

If you're wondering whether the Shark PowerDetect Speed or the regular PowerDetect is the better buy, I’d go for the Speed. It’s a lot of the same performance in a smaller, lighter, slightly more affordable package (about $20 less). I’ve also seen better sale prices for the PowerDetect Speed than the original—I’ve seen it as low as $280 for the vacuum alone, and the Clean & Empty version is on sale for $400 right now.

Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting and exclusive subscriber content that's too important to ignore. Subscribe Today.