Compare Dyson V15s Detect Submarine Wet Dry Vacuum vs Dyson V8 Absolute Cordless Stick Vacuum Cleaner

Ease of use was mostly positive for maneuvering and day-to-day cleaning, but push resistance, many parts, and trigger fatigue created caveats.

Ease of use was a major strength, with reviewers calling the V8 simple, convenient, and pleasant to operate.

Headlight performance was praised as better than typical LED headlights in one lab comparison.

Headlight feedback was negative because reviewers flagged the lack of headlights as a missing modern feature.

Debris illumination was one of the most consistently loved features, repeatedly helping reviewers see hidden dust and make vacuuming more thorough.

Debris illumination was a weakness because reviewers noted the lack of headlights or similar visibility features.

Debris handling through the mop head was a recurring weakness, especially with dry debris, liquid mixed with solids, cereal, small debris, or wand blockages.

Clogging feedback was positive in the detailed test review, which found no clogging issues even with larger carpet debris.

Heavy-duty suitability was limited; reviews repeatedly framed the mop as better for light, regular cleaning than deep grime or full mop-and-bucket replacement.

Reviewers found it capable of full-home or heavy-duty cleaning for many households, despite being cordless.

Mess control was polarized: dry-bin emptying could be easy, but the dirty-water compartment, mop debris, and cleanup were messy in several reviews.

Emptying was consistently praised as easy, hygienic, and low-mess compared with older designs.

Crevice and groove pickup was mixed, with one review praising nooks-and-crannies cleaning but lab testing showing weak deep-crevice pickup from the mop head.

Crevice and groove pickup was positive where tested or used, especially for tight and hard-to-reach areas.

Tool changes were usually quick and easy, but several reviewers disliked the extra reconfiguring needed because vacuuming and mopping require separate heads.

Tool changes were praised as quick, robust, and effortless, making the attachment system a clear usability strength.

The cable-free design was praised for portability around domestic cleaning tasks.

Cordless convenience was one of the most praised benefits, especially freedom from plugs, cords, and heavy machines.

Maintenance was mixed: dry-vac maintenance could be straightforward, but the mop head requires washing, drying, and manual cleanup after use.

Maintenance requirements were favorable where reviewed, with low maintenance and easy filter removal cited.

High-pile and thicker carpet pickup was generally workable but less dominant, needing slower passes or more effort with larger lightweight debris.

High-pile carpet results were also excellent in the Modern Castle testing evidence.

Large hard-floor debris performance was mixed: dry vacuum heads often performed very well, but the mop head struggled with cereal, rice, and large pieces.

Large debris on hard floors was the most split cleaning result, poor with the standard head but much better with the soft roller.

Versatility was a major strength because the machine combines high-end dry vacuuming with a mop head and broad attachment set.

Versatility was a strong theme, with reviewers emphasizing use across floors, tools, surfaces, and full-home tasks.

Overall impressions were positive but qualified: reviewers loved the vacuum and versatility, while the mop, maintenance, tanks, and price created tradeoffs.

Overall opinion was very positive across reviews, though not without price, bin, and feature caveats.

Runtime was a strength, with many reviewers reporting enough battery for homes, long mop runtime, or useful auto-mode endurance.

Runtime was usually considered enough for full-house or routine cleaning, despite max-mode limits.

Weight feedback was mixed: some found it light and easy, while others reported hand, thumb, or forearm fatigue.

Weight was mostly praised as light and easy to handle, though some reviewers felt hand or arm fatigue during long cleans.

Kid-friendliness was noted positively when the dust-revealing head made a child's room vacuuming more fun.

Kid-friendliness was indirectly positive because one reviewer said kids used it thanks to its easy handling.

Onboard tool storage was weak because one review found more accessories than mounting solutions.

Onboard tool storage was weak because extra heads and tools had nowhere convenient to sit on the vacuum.

Packaging was praised for secure, recyclable cardboard protection.

Packaging received positive feedback for efficient, well-arranged presentation.

Area rug handling was generally positive across rugs and mixed floor homes, including thick-pile and delicate rug examples.

Area rug handling was mixed because suction lifted hair well but could stick to rugs unless power was lowered.

Maneuverability was mostly praised for swivel, lay-flat ability, easy gliding, and small head size, though some reviewers felt effort or fatigue on certain surfaces.

Maneuverability was a major strength, with reviewers praising tight-space handling, corner access, and nimble steering.

Hair-wrap resistance was mixed: Dyson's anti-tangle tools worked well in some tests, but longer hair still wrapped or needed cutting free in others.

Tangle resistance was generally good, but not perfect, with minimal tangles in tests and occasional hair wrap in personal use.

Carpet hair pickup was strong, lifting ingrained long hair and fur well in hands-on testing.

Carpet hair pickup was praised for pulling human and pet hair from carpets and rugs.

Filtration and dust containment drew strong praise, with reviewers describing the filtration as excellent and the system as keeping fine flour or microscopic dust well contained.

Filtration earned positive comments for sealed HEPA-style containment and cleaner exhaust that helps keep dust and allergens out of the air.

Pet-related feedback was positive: dog owners liked the mop option for paw prints and reviewers found pet hair pickup strong, though hair wrap still required attention in some tests.

Pet and hair-related tools were generally viewed positively, especially for pet hair and hair pickup, though one reviewer found dog hair difficult with the crevice tool.

Above-floor and upholstery pickup was praised, especially for sofa, dog-bed, mattress, shelf, and couch-corner use.

Above-floor and upholstery performance was praised for dust, upholstery, cars, stairs, and difficult ground-in debris.

Medium or conventional carpet pickup was praised in one hands-on review for pulling dust, bunnies, and grime from carpeting.

General carpet pickup was rated highly in testing, with reviewers calling carpet cleaning ability a major pro.

Low-pile carpet pickup was one of the strongest areas, with reviewers describing carpets as nearly new, excellent, or crushed in tests.

Low-pile carpet results were excellent in the Modern Castle testing evidence.

Hard-floor fine-dust pickup was excellent, especially with the Fluffy Optic head and laser revealing fine dust, sugar, hair, and corner debris.

Fine dust pickup on hard floors was consistently strong, especially with the soft roller head.

The accessory set was widely praised as versatile and complete, with multiple cleaning heads and specialty tools for floors, crevices, hair, stairs, and upholstery.

The included tools were consistently valued as useful, versatile, and worth having, especially in the Absolute package.

Hard-floor hair pickup was praised across tests, especially with the Fluffy Optic head and strong suction.

Hard-floor hair pickup was praised by reviewers dealing with dust, human hair, and dog hair.

The dry bin was viewed as adequate and generally usable, but some reviewers still had to reach in for stuck hair or debris.

The bin received mixed feedback: reviewers liked stronger performance and reduced emptying frequency, but several noted the bin is small.

One reviewer noted hair could get trapped in crevices and need manual attention.

Hair-removal channel feedback was mixed to negative due to hair wrapping or needing to pull lingering hair from the bin.

Storage feedback was split: the compact attachment system helped in small spaces, but the vacuum is not freestanding and several reviews complained about attachment or dock storage.

Storage feedback was mixed because the dock and compact body help, but plug placement and separate accessory storage were recurring annoyances.

Small-space suitability was strong because reviewers saw the compact, multi-function design as a way to avoid owning multiple floor-cleaning devices.

Small-space suitability was strong, with reviewers recommending it for apartments, smaller homes, and cramped quarters.

Under-furniture pickup was praised in one review for the thin wand and flexible head joint.

Under-furniture pickup was positive, with reviewers saying it handled under-furniture cleaning and tight spaces well.

Smart features were praised for auto suction adjustment, battery efficiency, particle detection, and display feedback, though there was no app-centered praise.

Smart-feature feedback was negative because the V8 lacks the modern smart features some buyers may expect.

The LCD and smart display were often praised, but the trigger operation and some particle-readout usefulness drew repeated complaints.

Controls were mixed: battery or power indicators helped, but the trigger and grip drew comfort and sensitivity complaints.

Noise feedback was mixed: one lab result found mopping slightly quieter than average, while another reviewer found Boost mode very loud.

Noise feedback was favorable overall, with reviewers saying the V8 is quieter than newer Dysons, older predecessors, or loud uprights.

Ownership-cost feedback was limited and mixed, mentioning optional spare batteries and likely mop-roller replacement costs.

Ongoing ownership costs looked favorable where mentioned, with low maintenance needs cited as a strength.

Airflow blowback was a negative edge case, with one reviewer getting a blast of vent air when cleaning under low furniture.

Airflow blowback was a mild drawback in max mode because one review noted more air firing out the back.

Stair-cleaning feedback was favorable where the hair screw and smaller tools were used for stairs, furniture, and pet-related jobs.

Stair cleaning was praised, especially when using the mini motorized or hair screw tools in handheld mode.

Edge and baseboard cleaning was mostly positive, but one lab review found the exposed roller could miss debris at wall contact.

Baseboard and edge cleaning received positive feedback from the crevice tool’s ability to reach narrow areas.

Cyclone performance received one positive assessment that the core dust-separation technology seemed to do the job.

Cyclone performance was viewed positively for improving airflow and helping capture or store fine dust efficiently.

Reviewers consistently praised the vacuuming side as powerful, with strong suction and airflow across general cleaning, carpets, hard floors, and hard-to-reach areas.

Reviewers repeatedly described suction as strong, powerful, and consistent across floors, with enough airflow for routine cleaning and carpet work.

Comparative performance was favorable against Dyson's V15 lineage, with the Submarine treated as comparable to or based on a top cordless platform.

Comparative performance was favorable against older models in some areas, though newer models still offer more advanced features.

Setup ranged from very easy to confusing: several reviewers assembled it quickly, while others needed manuals, videos, or clearer instructions for the Submarine head.

Setup was described as extremely easy, with little or no real assembly process required.

One reviewer specifically praised Dyson customer service as excellent and efficient for support and faulty-part replacement.

Reliability signals were positive, with high customer satisfaction and online review strength cited by reviewers.

Value was one of the most divided areas: reviewers liked the added mop at Dyson-tier performance, but repeatedly flagged the high price or weak mop premium.

Value was strongly context-dependent: reviewers praised sale pricing and lower entry cost, but still called the vacuum expensive.

Build quality was generally strong for the main vacuum, but some reviewers criticized plastic feel or dock/head design elements.

Build quality was viewed favorably, with reviewers describing the V8 and its attachment system as solid and robust.

Design comments leaned positive on the colorful, quirky Dyson styling, though one reviewer felt the plastic mop head looked more toy-like than premium.

Design impressions were positive, with reviewers calling the V8 sharp, modern, stylish, lightweight, and functional.

Low-profile capability was excellent in lab testing because the vacuum could fully lay flat.

Low-profile cleaning was positive, with reviewers saying it could clean under furniture and tight spaces.

The handheld conversion was praised for sofa, mattress, and tight-spot cleaning.

The handheld conversion was a major benefit, expanding the V8 from floors to cars, furniture, stairs, and above-floor cleaning.

Floorhead design was strong for dry heads and surface matching, but the separated vac-mop layout reduced the all-in-one feel.

Floorhead feedback was mixed: the older fluffy roller was called chunky, but the soft roller itself was praised for hard floors.

One lab review saw promising long-term durability in the Submarine attachment's lightweight, sturdy plastic construction.

Durability feedback was mostly positive for build and longevity, tempered by concerns that batteries eventually fade.

Battery and charging feedback was strong overall, with long runtime, useful countdowns, fade-free behavior, and removable-battery benefits.

Battery and charging feedback was mixed: runtime was usually enough, but max mode and charging time were limitations.

The automatic shutoff behavior was described positively as motor protection when airflow is blocked.

Dirty-water sensing was a clear weakness in TechRadar's review because the display only showed clean-water level, not dirty-water buildup.

Dried-on stain performance ranged from excellent one- or two-pass results to needing many extra passes or struggling with overnight sticky stains.

Floor drying time was praised in two reviews, with quick drying and floors not left saturated after mopping.

Fresh liquid pickup was useful for small spills and standalone liquids, but multiple reviews warned against large wet spills or wet-solid mixtures.

One review highlighted the product's versatility as the factor that sets it apart from other wet-dry mops.

The self-propelled mopping feel was praised as lightweight and easy to propel along.

Liquid delivery feedback was mixed: some liked the controlled water output, while others disliked the single wet mode and lack of water-flow adjustment.

Streaking and residue were recurring mop-head concerns, especially after pauses, large spills, dirty rollers, or uneven initial water flow.

Stuck resistance was weaker on rugs when suction was too high, requiring users to lower power.

Surface safety feedback was positive from a reviewer who felt the head protected tile from scratches.

Water tank feedback was mixed to negative: reviewers liked the reach of the small tank in some rooms, but repeatedly called the reservoirs small or spill-prone.

One reviewer successfully cleaned a delicate wool woven rug despite initial hesitation.

Mopping performance was useful for light cleaning, small spills, and general maintenance, but reviews agreed it is not a full true wet-dry or deep-clean replacement.

Sanitizing feedback was negative because the Submarine cannot steam-sterilize floors.

The lack of an auto self-cleaning cycle was a repeated weakness, making mop-head cleanup more manual than competing wet-dry vacuums.

The product does not provide steam cleaning, and one review treated that as a limitation versus hot, sterilizing mop methods.