Compare Kenmore 400 Series Bagged Canister Vacuum Cleaner vs Miele C2 Canister Vacuum

The included tools and telescoping wand are generally praised for versatility, but one reviewer criticizes the crevice tool as too thin.

The tool set was viewed as useful and well made, though some smaller tools were described as merely adequate or limited.

Two reviewers like the look, with praise for the overall appearance and the dark red finish.

Design comments were positive where present, with reviewers calling the unit attractive or beautifully designed.

Area-rug handling is supported by one comparison review saying it performs as intended on carpets, rugs, and flat floors.

Area rug handling was generally positive with the right head and suction adjustment, though long-pile rugs could require more effort.

Setup evidence is limited but positive, with the hose/pipe connection described as very easy.

Setup drew strong praise; reviewers said assembly was simple, intuitive, and did not require much instruction.

The bag-full indicator receives clear praise as helpful for knowing when to change the bag.

Bag-full indicators were viewed positively when reviewers called them handy or fantastic.

The bag system is viewed positively overall, with easy replacement and a large, quality-feeling bag, though one unboxing notes some figuring out was needed.

Bag handling was mostly praised for cleanliness and sealing, but one reviewer criticized a flimsy dust flap and several noted bag-related tradeoffs.

Build-related comments are positive but narrow, focusing on a good-quality hose and thick bag material.

Build quality was repeatedly praised, with reviewers describing the vacuum or its components as solid, durable, and well made.

High-pile carpet performance depended on configuration: electric heads handled it well, while hard-floor models were not suited to higher pile.

Low-pile carpet pickup performs very well in one direct test where debris cleanup was described as a breeze.

Low-pile carpet performance was positive overall, especially with powered heads, though hard-floor-only heads were more limited.

Medium-pile carpet results varied by head: powered heads performed well, while hard-floor-oriented models were not effective beyond low pile.

Comparative evidence is strong: reviewers say suction is very close to the 600 Series and performance rivals much more expensive canisters.

Comparative performance sentiment was positive, with reviewers placing Miele among top vacuum brands and saying the compact C2 cleans like larger Mieles.

The suction adjustment and handle controls are liked, though one reviewer notes the adjustment location is unusual.

Controls were mostly praised for variable suction and useful surface settings, though one reviewer initially found the dial unclear.

Cord reach is praised, with one review calling the cord very long and another saying it provides plenty of reach.

Cord length was mixed: some reviewers found the reach sufficient, while others complained about short 6.5m or 20-foot cords.

Cord management is positive, with praise for the cord rewind and easier put-away compared with hand-winding.

Cord management was praised for automatic rewind and foot/one-touch operation.

Crevice pickup has a clear limitation from one reviewer who says the crevice tool is too thin for dirt to pass easily.

Groove and crevice pickup on hard floors was excellent in the wood-floor crack test, where debris was removed without hesitation.

The dual-motor system is praised for power and deep-cleaning capability.

Ease of use is a repeated strength, with reviewers saying vacuuming is easy and the swiveling powerhead is easy to use.

Ease of use was praised across cleaning, controls, tubing, and supplied tools, with reviewers calling the vacuum user-friendly.

One comparison review says the floorhead movement helps reach room corners more easily.

Edge and baseboard pickup was a standout strength, with reviewers praising one-pass corner pickup and cleaning right up to skirting boards.

Emptying is praised through the bag system: reviewers describe grabbing the full bag, throwing it away, and replacing it.

Emptying and mess control were strong due to sealed bags and reduced dust clouds, though this assumes careful bag handling.

One reviewer viewed the energy-saving setting positively, though energy efficiency was not a major review theme.

Filtration receives positive comments across reviews, including HEPA/allergy benefits and praise for keeping dust from being pushed back into the room.

Filtration and dust containment were repeatedly praised, especially sealed bags, clean exhaust, and odor-control filters on pet models.

The floorhead earns positive remarks for swivel usability and for being wand-connected, which improves maneuverability.

Floorhead design was generally strong, especially powered, AirTeQ, Parquet, and switching designs, though some heads felt bulky or heavy.

One reviewer found a hard-floor head sealed too strongly to the floor, improving contact but making it more tiring to use.

Carpet hair pickup was strong on pet-oriented or powered-head models, with reviewers praising TurboBrush and powerhead pet-hair removal.

Hard-floor hair pickup was praised in one pet-hair hard-floor test, where stray pet hair was removed effectively.

Hard-floor fine-dust pickup was very strong, with reviewers praising effortless cleaning of dust, flour, powder, and everyday dirt.

Large hard-floor debris pickup was praised where tested or described, including grains of dirt and larger debris handled by the hard-floor brush.

Hose length drew mixed feedback, with some reviewers finding reach adequate and others wishing the hose were longer.

One reviewer highlighted Miele’s edge-channel design as unusually effective compared with what other manufacturers include.

Kid-related evidence was limited but positive, tied to quiet operation around sleeping children and effectiveness in a household with young children.

Low-profile feedback was split between a Parquet head reaching under low furniture and a chunky head failing to fit under a sofa.

Maintenance is mostly positive, though one unboxing finds bag/filter handling a little tricky to figure out.

Maintenance was mostly easy, with accessible filters and simple upkeep, but one reviewer found bag-change instructions unclear.

Maneuverability is a repeated strength, with reviewers praising easy movement, lightweight handling, comfortable movement, and tight-space maneuverability.

Maneuverability was broadly praised thanks to smooth tracking, swivel casters, and easy steering, though deep carpet sometimes required more tugging.

Noise feedback was strongly positive overall, with multiple reviewers calling the C2 quiet or bearable even at higher settings.

Odor control was praised on pet-focused configurations using activated charcoal or odor-absorbing filters.

Onboard storage is mixed: some tools fit nicely, but the 600 Series is considered more convenient because it hides all attachments.

Onboard or attached tool storage was useful when close to hand, but hose clips were criticized as less elegant than built-in storage.

Ownership cost evidence is tied to the bagged design being described as not very high maintenance despite requiring bags.

Ownership costs were the main value caveat, with repeated complaints that bags and filters add expense.

One reviewer describes the vacuum as reliable, supporting a positive but limited durability/longevity score.

Longevity sentiment was very strong, with reviewers framing the C2 family as buy-it-for-life or expected to last for years.

Every review that gave an overall judgment was positive, ranging from good and impressive to extremely satisfied.

Overall opinion was highly favorable across hands-on reviews, with reviewers repeatedly calling the C2 worthwhile, effective, or impressive.

Packaging evidence is limited to one reviewer describing the box as compact and containing everything needed.

Packaging received limited mixed feedback: protective materials were noted, with a more environmentally friendly cardboard accessory box praised.

Pet-related evidence is mixed: one comparison frames the 400 as better for people without pets, while another review says the included attachments can handle pet-hair cleanup.

Pet suitability depended strongly on the configuration: Cat & Dog/TurboBrush versions drew praise, while non-pet versions were described as poor fits for pet hair.

Value is a major strength, with reviewers calling the price good, a great buy, and the best bang for the buck.

Value sentiment was positive despite high prices, with reviewers calling sale pricing, under-$400 versions, or full-featured packages worthwhile.

Runtime was praised in corded terms: one reviewer valued having no battery-life worries.

Stair cleaning was mixed: the compact body and telescopic tube helped, but the turbohead size and weight made stairs harder in some reviews.

One unboxing praises the way the hard-floor tool fits snugly into the back of the vacuum for storage.

Storage was one of the clearest strengths, with reviewers repeatedly calling the C2 compact, easy to tuck away, and suited to small cupboards or apartments.

Reviewers consistently describe the vacuum as powerful, with nice suction power, strong brush-roll performance, and successful pickup in direct debris testing.

Reviewers consistently praised strong suction and airflow, with especially high marks for edge pickup, carpet power heads, and hard-floor cleaning.

One direct pickup test supports heavier-duty use by showing tough debris was no match for the sweeper.

One reviewer highlights the canister design as a strong option for smaller rooms and tight spaces.

Small-space suitability was excellent, with reviewers recommending the compact body for apartments, cupboards, and homes with minimal storage.

Reliability is supported by one reviewer calling it a reliable vacuum, but there is no separate customer-support evidence.

Reliability comments were positive, focused on Miele’s better-built feel and reputation for lasting performance.

Surface safety comments were positive, especially for hardwood and delicate floors when using appropriate brushes or non-marring wheels.

Tool changes and attachment fit are mostly easy, though one comparison says the 600 Series makes the wider attachment easier to pick up.

Tool and head changes were generally easy, with reviewers praising click-on fittings and simple head removal.

Under-furniture cleaning is a clear positive in one review, which calls it a huge advantage for hard-to-reach areas.

Under-furniture cleaning was mixed: low-profile or multi-pivot heads helped, while a chunky head could not fit under a sofa.

Above-floor cleaning is supported by comments about couches, curtains, car floors, crevices, and attachment-based versatility.

Above-floor and upholstery cleaning drew praise for cars, sofas, cushions, dusting, tight spaces, and general furniture cleaning.

Versatility is praised across reviews, especially because the attachments and canister design cover varied cleaning tasks.

Versatility was a major strength for mixed hard-floor and carpet homes, except where pet hair or heavy carpeting required a more specialized head.

One reviewer praises the vacuum as lightweight and easy to move around.

Weight was mostly a strength because the canister is light and portable, but one reviewer found it heavy for stairs.