Compare Dyson V15s Detect Submarine Wet Dry Vacuum vs Dyson Clean+Wash Hygiene

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

Basic cleaning is easy and intuitive, with light steering, clear controls, and grab-and-go convenience. The biggest usability penalty comes after cleaning, when tank handling and maintenance can add extra steps.

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

Tank-status alerts are clear and useful. The screen reliably tells the user when the dirty-water tank needs attention rather than making them guess.

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

Keeping solids and dirty water in the cleaner head avoids long internal tubes where grime can accumulate. This anti-clogging approach is one of the most consistently praised parts of the design.

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

The slim body stores well, but the floorhead itself can be awkward in genuinely tight rooms. Small bathroom gaps, corners, and light-traffic apartments may be better served by a narrower or simpler tool.

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.

The cleaner and dock are compact enough to tuck into a cupboard or corner, and the dock gives the machine a dedicated charging/storage spot instead of leaving it loose against a wall.

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.

The cleaner has enough capacity and speed for more than light household spot cleaning; one tester could see it working on small retail floors as well.

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

Most everyday cleaning leaves little streaking or sticky residue, and several messy tests finished clean. Standardized testing did find above-average residual water, while one very negative reviewer reported severe streaking.

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

Hard-floor hair pickup is mixed. One pet-heavy test collected clumps of dog hair without trouble, while another found loose hair tended to get pushed around rather than decisively collected.

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

The debris container is a mixed experience: some found the removable tray simple, while others thought the multi-piece waste assembly was needlessly complicated and messy to handle.

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

Roller and debris-tray changes are straightforward and tool-free, with simple click-and-slide releases that make routine part removal easy.

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.

Hair-wrap resistance is excellent. The anti-tangle comb kept rollers clear in longer hands-on use, with one tester reporting no wrapped hair after two weeks.

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

The liquid system works well with plain water or compatible low-foaming cleaner, and Dyson's probiotic solution was praised for deeper cleaning and a light scent. Inclusion varies by market, which drew criticism where no bottle was supplied.

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

Low weight is one of the clearest advantages. At roughly 8.4 pounds, it is noticeably lighter than many wet-dry cleaners and easier to steer, carry, and push for longer sessions.

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

Family suitability depends on the kind of messes involved. One tester saw it as well suited to busy pet-and-kid homes, while another thought the poor handling of large, viscous food spills made it a weak choice for messy mealtimes.

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 and ordinary grit are handled well on hard floors, often in a single pass. Dry pickup still trails a dedicated stick vacuum when debris becomes more demanding.

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

Runtime is a major strength, with current ratings up to 70 minutes and multiple testers calling it more than enough for a whole-home clean. In practice, tank capacity is more likely to interrupt a session than the battery.

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 pickup is inconsistent. Oats and many crumbs can be collected quickly, but chunky solids and raw egg expose the limits of the mechanical roller and may need pre-sweeping or another tool.

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

Fresh spills are generally a strong use case, from sauces and mixed liquids to pet messes. Thin liquids clean quickly, while unusually viscous material such as raw egg can overwhelm the suctionless design.

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

Floors usually finish only lightly damp and dry quickly, sometimes within about a minute. A few measurements found more leftover water than average, so drying performance is good rather than universally class-leading.

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

Under-furniture reach is exceptional. The handle lies almost completely flat and the head stays on the floor, making low sofas, beds, counters, and cabinets much easier to clean beneath.

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.

Homes with pets are a strong fit: muddy paw prints, tracked-in dirt, and dog hair were handled well in positive tests, and the cleaning solution was considered suitable around pets. The main caveat is that loose hair pickup was not equally strong in every test.

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

The machine has no true powered self-propel system, but the light chassis and roller action can create a self-propelled feel. Several users barely missed motor assistance, while one comparison treated the missing feature as a premium-spec omission.

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 is the most repeated usability complaint. The separated waste concept is hygienic, but many testers found the tank/tray fiddly, prone to dripping, or in need of careful handling to avoid dirty-water spills.

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.

Tank capacity is a recurring weak spot. It can cover a normal home on lower settings, but higher hydration levels and the water-hungry self-clean cycle can force refills well before the battery is exhausted.

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

The head-contained waste system and hot-air drying dock are genuinely distinctive upgrades over Dyson's earlier attempt. Even so, some tests felt the innovation did not translate into class-leading cleaning performance or value.

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

Dried-on stain performance ranges from good to merely average. Syrup and sticky spreads usually came up with Boost and repeated passes, but standardized stain testing landed below category averages and one harsh test found caked-on messes disappointing.

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

Overall sentiment is positive but far from unanimous. Many found it a major step forward for Dyson and a convenient hard-floor cleaner, while a smaller group considered the leaking waste system and premium price serious enough to return or reject it.

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.

The filter-free, head-contained waste design is one of the strongest hygiene wins. It avoids washable filters and keeps wet grime from being pulled through internal tubing.

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

Maintenance is easier in some ways because there are no dirty internal tubes or filters, and the dock handles roller washing and drying. The tradeoff is frequent tank care, tray rinsing, and a waste assembly that some found fiddly or leak-prone.

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

It is versatile within hard-floor cleaning, working as a quick companion to a normal vacuum and handling both wet messes and light debris. It is not a full vacuum replacement and cannot extend to carpet or above-floor jobs.

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.

The cleaner is light, balanced, and easy to push, with several testers describing it as nimble or almost self-moving. A few found the square head less agile in tight turns or preferred the older WashG1's maneuverability.

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.

The roller does not clean deeply into tile cracks or grooves. Bristles help somewhat, but recessed debris remains a weakness compared with flat-surface pickup.

Packaging was praised for secure, recyclable cardboard protection.

Packaging was easy to move and notably light on single-use plastic around the main unit, while leaving most of the cleaner preassembled.

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

Hygiene is a core strength: clean and dirty water stay separated, waste remains out of internal pipes, and hot-air drying helps keep the roller sanitary. One strongly negative test disputed the hygiene claim because its unit still leaked and retained debris.

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

Self-cleaning is one of the machine's best features in most tests, flushing the roller and then hot-air drying it on the dock. The drawbacks are high water use, noise, and occasional need for manual checking after heavy messes.

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

There is essentially no usable suction, so the machine depends on its roller and mechanical debris separation. That works for many wet messes and light dry debris, but several tests found it weaker than a true vacuum on heavier or loose material.

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

Cleaning itself is notably quiet because there is no large suction motor. The loud part comes later on the dock rather than while moving across the floor.

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

Filter-free operation removes some recurring filter maintenance and replacement burden. Cleaning solution is still consumed during normal cleaning and self-clean cycles, adding a small ongoing cost.

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

Compared with Dyson's first-generation washer, this model is usually seen as a clear improvement. Against the wider premium field, the picture is more mixed because several rivals offer stronger cleaning scores, suction, steam, or smarter automation for similar money.

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

Edge cleaning is very good, reaching close to baseboards from multiple sides. It can still leave a small margin at the wall, but most hands-on use found it substantially better than bulky older designs.

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

There is no steam-cleaning mode. At this price, several comparisons treated that omission as part of a broader shortage of flagship-level cleaning features.

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.

Everyday wet cleaning is generally strong, especially on spills, paw prints, grease, and routine floor traffic. Results become more mixed on standardized stain tests and large, awkward debris, so it is better viewed as a polished electric mop than a no-compromise wet-dry vacuum.

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

The cleaner head is the most divisive piece of hardware. Its low, integrated design helps reach and clog prevention, but repeated leaking, dripping, and multi-part reassembly complaints make waste handling a major downside.

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

Dyson's finish and industrial design are consistently praised. The slim shape, polished colorways, and premium feel make it one of the more attractive floor cleaners to leave visible.

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

Build quality is generally excellent, with solid materials, satisfying fit, and a more substantial feel than the previous generation. One sharply negative test questioned the engineering quality because of the leaking waste design.

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

The low-profile body is a standout design win, flattening to roughly 113 mm and fitting under furniture that bulkier floor washers cannot reach.

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

The waste-in-head layout has a plausible long-term maintenance advantage because there are fewer dirty internal paths to gum up. Long-term ownership data is still limited.

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

The LCD and physical controls are a real strength: hydration modes are easy to change, battery and tank status are clear, and the screen gives useful maintenance prompts.

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

The screen and app ecosystem are useful for guidance, status, and troubleshooting, but the machine is not especially smart for its price. It lacks dirt detection and automatic cleaning adjustment, and the app does not remotely control the cleaner.

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 is exceptionally easy. Multiple hands-on tests had the machine assembled and ready with only a few click-together parts and virtually no learning curve.

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 is the biggest point of disagreement. Some felt the time savings, hygiene, and improved design justified the premium, while others thought the small tanks, leaks, missing smart features, or weaker mopping scores made similarly priced rivals a better buy.

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

Battery performance is strong overall, with whole-home endurance in normal use and convenient dock charging. Charging time was considered normal, and the battery is rarely the first limit because the water tank tends to empty sooner.

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

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

Standing the machine upright automatically turns it off, a small but polished usability detail that avoids hunting for the power button.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Odor prevention is a standout advantage. The filter-free waste path and heated roller drying reduce the damp, sour smell that can develop in conventional wet cleaners, although one test found the drying result inadequate.

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

Docking is inconsistent across tests. One owner found the revised base solid and easy to seat, while another had to jostle the machine because the connector did not always engage on the first try.

One specialist flagged a real scratch risk: the clear plastic near the recline point is likely to be marked over time because the user has to put a foot on it.

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

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

Water prompts are helpful and timely, warning about refills during cleaning or self-cleaning. They reduce guesswork even though the frequent alerts can expose how quickly the smaller tank is consumed.

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

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

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

The dock's drying cycle is consistently audible and often plainly loud. It is usually tolerated because the hot-air drying is effective, but it is not something most people will want running beside a TV or sleeping area.

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

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

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