Notice: Your browser is not supported or outdated so some features of the site might not be available.
  1. Table of Contents
  2. Top
  3. Main Differences
  4. Design
    1. Build Quality
    2. User Maintenance
    3. Recurring Cost
    4. Storing
    5. Dirt Compartment
    6. In The Box
    7. Range
    8. Portability
    9. Battery
    10. Quality Of Life Features
    11. Tools And Brushes
    12. Alternative Configuration
  5. Performance
    1. Hard Floor Pickup
    2. High-Pile Carpet Pickup
    3. Low-Pile Carpet Pickup
    4. Pet Hair Pickup
    5. Suction
    6. Airflow
    7. Noise
    8. Maneuverability
    9. Pet Hair Furniture Performance
    10. Air Quality
    11. Cracks
    12. Stains
    13. Water
  6. Comments

Black+Decker 16V MAX dustbuster Cordless Hand Vacuum vs Shark UltraCyclone Pet Pro+ [CH951, CH964AMZ]

Side-by-Side Comparison

Products

Black+Decker 16V MAX dustbuster Cordless Hand Vacuum
Shark UltraCyclone Pet Pro+ [CH951, CH964AMZ]

Tested using Methodology v1.3

Updated Feb 14, 2025 07:18 PM

SEE PRICE
Amazon.com

Tested using Methodology v1.3

Updated Nov 01, 2024 07:27 PM

SEE PRICE
Amazon.com
Black+Decker 16V MAX dustbuster Cordless Hand Vacuum Picture
Shark UltraCyclone Pet Pro+ [CH951, CH964AMZ] Picture
  1. Recommended in 3 articles:
  2. Car
  3. Handheld
  4. Budget And Cheap

Variants

  • CHV1410L32 (White)
  • CHV1410L (White/Blue)
  • CH951 (Black)
  • CH950 (Black/Yellow)
  • CH900WM (Blue)
  • CH900 (Blue)
  • CH964AMZ (Blue)
  • CH901 (Green)
  • CH963AMZ (White)

Our Verdict

Black+Decker 16V MAX dustbuster Cordless Hand Vacuum

Shark UltraCyclone Pet Pro+ [CH951, CH964AMZ]

The Shark UltraCyclone Pet Pro+ is better than the Black+Decker 16V MAX dustbuster Cordless Hand Vacuum. The Shark has fewer parts that need regular cleaning, takes less time to recharge while offering a similar overall battery life, comes with a turbo brush attachment, and is significantly more effective in clearing debris on low- and high-pile carpets. Meanwhile, the Black+Decket incurs lower recurring costs, has a larger dustbin, and delivers better performance on hard surfaces.

0