Compare roborock Qrevo Curv 2 Flow Robot Vacuum vs Roborock QV 35A Robot Vacuum and Mop

Included extras were underwhelming; reviewers noted minimalist contents and disappointment over the lack of extra bags, filters, or solution.

Threshold handling was mixed, from easy 1 cm step crossing to criticism that advanced chassis lift was removed or limited.

Threshold and chassis handling are rated well, with reviewers noting it can cross half-inch-plus and 3/4-inch transitions.

Design impressions were strongly positive, with reviewers calling the robot and dock attractive, cute, and easy to place visually in a home.

The finish and manufacturing are described positively, with one reviewer calling them neat and nice.

Smart automation was useful and flexible, but AI cleaning and dirt detection were inconsistent in some tests.

Smart features, mapping, app controls, scheduling, routines, and automation are repeatedly praised as polished and full-featured.

Area rug and mixed-surface handling was mostly positive, especially where the carpet shield and rug traversal worked.

Area rug handling is positive because the mop pads lift and avoid dragging wet pads on carpet or rugs.

Setup and pairing were consistently described as simple or quick across multiple reviewers.

Setup earns very strong praise, with reviewers calling installation and Wi-Fi/app setup simple.

Battery and charging were a weak point in one standardized review, which cited battery efficiency as a drawback.

The onboard bin and dock emptying earned positive marks, with a larger dustbin and trouble-free dock emptying noted.

The onboard dust bin is praised as relatively large for a newer robot vacuum design.

Build quality was mixed, with one reviewer noting heavy-duty components but also substantial plastic use.

Build quality earns a positive note from the same manufacturing praise, but evidence is limited to one hands-on review.

High-pile or dense carpet performance was weaker, with reviewers saying thick carpet or dense fibers reduced hair and debris pickup.

High-pile or deep carpet pickup is mixed: suction is respectable, but reviewers say it lacks deep penetration and cannot replace upright vacuuming.

Low-pile carpet pickup had limited positive evidence from one review that grouped short-pile carpets with good suction results.

Low-pile carpet pickup is positive in the available carpet food-debris test, especially after a second pass.

Medium-pile carpet pickup was generally strong, with above-average or very strong carpet-cleaning results reported.

Clogging evidence was mixed-to-negative, with reviewers reporting clumped hair or a partially clogged dust inlet.

Comparative performance was mixed, with reviewers positioning it as strong value or a hard-floor specialist while some earlier Curv models remained more balanced.

Comparative performance is strong for the price, with reviewers saying it keeps up with higher models in key everyday areas.

The Roborock app and controls were widely praised for power and customization, though some reviewers found settings buried or initially daunting.

Controls and app UI are consistently praised for customization, room/zones controls, and an easy interface.

Cord management evidence was limited and negative, with one reviewer wishing the dock had built-in cable management.

Corner cleaning remained a repeated limitation because the round body and non-extending side brush missed tight corners.

Corner cleaning is only average because reviewers say corners are just okay and note the lack of extending pads or brushes.

Crevice or groove pickup had limited but positive evidence from effective cleaning of stubborn floor gaps.

Dirty-water sensing and remopping received positive but limited evidence when reviewers saw the robot return for additional cleaning.

Docking and auto-empty reliability was positive, with reliable returns, ergonomic dock design, and premium dock automation noted.

Docking and auto-empty reliability are positive in the available tests, including successful emptying after cleaning.

Dock noise was mixed, with one reviewer appreciating a low hum and others finding drying or dock noise too loud.

Dock noise is rated positively in hands-on reviews, with auto-empty and drying described as not very loud or quiet.

Dried-on stain removal was highly divided, ranging from very poor standardized stain results to strong real-world ketchup or coffee cleanup after extra passes.

Dried-on stain removal is a strength in the tests, including maple syrup and dried coffee on hard flooring.

Ease of use was a strength, with reviewers highlighting easy part removal, minimal effort, and practical daily cleaning.

Ease of use is strong, with reviewers highlighting simple setup and a good overall user experience.

Edge and baseboard cleaning was mixed: the extending roller reached close to edges, but corners, quarter-round molding, and some edge cases remained weak.

Edge cleaning is mixed: it can track along an edge well, but lacks extendable edge hardware found on higher models.

Edge-following accuracy had limited positive evidence where edge mopping worked as expected along furniture and flat baseboards.

Edge-following accuracy earns a positive test result for going right up to an edge without hassle.

Wet-mess control had positive evidence from a reviewer who said the mop did not push liquid around.

Emptying and mess control are positive, with reviewers reporting automated maintenance and successful dust-bin emptying.

Energy use drew a caveat from Notebookcheck, which found it somewhat more energy-hungry than a related model.

Auto-empty dust containment gets a strong but narrow positive note for preventing dust from escaping around the bag during suction.

Floor or mop drying performed well in some tests, but drying noise was a caveat.

Drying performance is a recurring compromise because it uses room-temperature air and takes hours to dry the pads.

Floorhead design scored highly where the dual-roller and DuoDivide layout reduced tangles and performed well in practice.

The rubber floorhead design is viewed positively because it is easy to clean.

Floor shine and finish were positive, with reviewers describing hardwood and tile floors as clean, shiny, or pleasant after cleaning.

Fresh liquid pickup was one of the stronger mopping use cases, with reviewers praising cleanup of spills and wet messes.

Fresh large liquid or spill pickup is a poor fit because reviewers say robot vac-mops are not engineered to suck up big wet spills.

Hair-removal channel issues had negative support from dust and hair clumping around the mop area.

Hair-removal channel design is positive because hair that reaches the ends is described as easy to remove.

Carpet hair pickup was mixed, with some reviewers praising results and others finding dense-carpet fur left behind.

Carpet hair pickup is weak in the available carpet test, where it struggled to lift hair from carpet.

Hair pickup on hard floors scored strongly, especially for pet fur and fluff on tile or hard flooring.

Hard-floor hair pickup is generally strong, with reviewers saying it got most long hairs and performed amazingly on hard floors.

Hair-wrap resistance was usually excellent, though one reviewer found longer strands were not fully tangle-free.

Hair-wrap resistance is mixed: some design choices help, but multiple hands-on tests still found hair wrap on the roller.

Hard-floor fine dust pickup was strong in home testing, with reviewers praising dust, dirt, and cat-fur cleanup.

Hard-floor fine debris pickup is excellent in tests, including a tile run that left no crumbs behind.

Hard-floor large debris intake was strong for Cheerios, litter, and similar debris in several tests.

Hard-floor large debris intake is strong, with food debris mostly picked up on the first pass and finished by later passes.

Heating performance drew a negative note from one reviewer who felt the heater implementation wasted electricity.

Innovation scored strongly because reviewers saw the roller mop and software-hardware integration as a meaningful step forward for Roborock.

Innovation is viewed as strong value-driven trickle-down tech, though one reviewer notes it is not the cutting-edge flagship design.

Kid-friendliness was supported by one family-home review where daily cleaning stayed useful with young children.

Large debris handling was mixed because one reviewer saw strong cereal and litter pickup but trouble with dock extraction of larger debris.

Large debris handling on hard floors is positive in one food-debris test, where two passes picked everything up.

Low-profile design was a weakness because several reviewers found the robot tall enough to limit under-furniture access.

Maintenance was generally easy thanks to removable rollers, trays, tanks, and simple cleaning access.

Maintenance is a strong point, especially the removable dock tray, washable parts, and easy access for cleaning.

Maneuverability was strong in one home where the robot crossed a kitchen step without repeated intervention.

Handling over thresholds receives positive evidence from a tested 3/4-inch transition.

Mapping and pathing were a major strength, with efficient LiDAR navigation and strong route planning reported across many reviews.

Mapping and route efficiency are among the strongest areas, with repeated praise for accurate maps, straight lines, and efficient coverage.

Mop lifting and shielding were widely praised for keeping carpets dry, though one review caught a carpet-recognition failure.

The mop-lifting system is positive for short-pile carpet and rugs because it keeps wet pads from dragging.

Mopping performance was the most debated attribute: many home reviewers loved it, while standardized tests found poor dried-stain and water-distribution results.

Mopping performance is good for routine cleaning and dried stains, but less ideal for severe muddy messes or perfect residue-free results.

Noise was acceptable for scheduled cleaning in some homes, but reviewers noted louder maximum suction and dock/drying sounds.

Noise levels are praised in the dock/drying context, with reviewers saying it is hard to hear.

Obstacle avoidance was one of the most mixed areas, ranging from admirable or fantastic results to failures with cords, small objects, and carpet tests.

Obstacle avoidance is mixed: larger objects are handled well, but cables and low objects remain a repeated weakness.

Odor control received positive support from hot-air drying and mold/odor prevention after mop washing.

Odor control is a weak point because dirty water tanks and wet pads can stink if not emptied or dried promptly.

Ownership cost evidence was negative-to-mixed because one reviewer highlighted the need to buy dustbags and detergent.

Cleaning convenience was a major strength, with reviewers describing major time savings and much less hands-on effort.

Overall cleaning convenience is strong because the dock automates maintenance and the robot can handle routine vacuuming and mopping.

Overall sentiment was positive but not unanimous: many praised the robot, while lab-style testing raised concerns about mopping consistency and value.

Overall sentiment is positive across the reviews, centered on strong value, capable cleaning, and a polished app despite budget tradeoffs.

Packaging received a positive but limited mention for being protective without feeling excessive.

Pet suitability was supported by strong hair handling and pet-focused use cases, with reviewers calling it a good option for homes with pets.

Value was mixed: several reviewers saw strong value versus flagship pricing, while others still considered it expensive.

Reviewers frame price as a major strength, especially below $500, though one says the deal improves when it drops lower.

Privacy controls were positively described, with camera use requiring permission or privacy-first controls highlighted.

Runtime was mixed: one reviewer criticized battery life, while others measured strong coverage or acceptable area per charge.

Scratch resistance had limited but positive evidence from a reviewer who saw no scratching near wood edges.

Self-cleaning was generally praised; reviewers found the mop/roller clean after dock cycles and fresh-water operation effective.

The self-cleaning mop cycle is a clear strength, with reviewers praising the dock's ability to wash pads effectively.

One reviewer noted an early firmware update positively, supporting limited evidence of ongoing software support.

The liquid system was praised for direct tank dosing and fresh-water mopping, but multiple reviewers disliked the lack of automatic detergent dispensing.

The dock was praised as compact and convenient, supporting a positive storage-footprint score.

Residue and streaking were polarizing: some reviewers saw clean, streak-free floors, while others reported uneven wetting and visible streaks.

Streaking and residue are mixed, with repeated smearing noted after muddy paw-print mopping.

Stuck resistance was mostly strong, with several reviewers reporting few or no failed sessions, though cords and small objects could still cause trouble.

Stuck resistance is mixed: it generally navigates well, but reviewers warn that cables and floor clutter still need prep.

Reviewers generally found real-world pickup strong, especially on hard floors and carpets, though one lab review measured unimpressive bench airflow and suction.

Suction is viewed as good enough for daily use and strong for the price, though not a dramatic upgrade over close budget models.

Heavy-duty suitability had limited positive support from one reviewer calling components heavy duty.

Heavy-duty mess handling is limited; reviewers say huge muddy messes are outside what this robot should be expected to clean fully.

Small-space suitability was limited because one reviewer felt the robot may be overkill for smaller homes.

One reviewer gave Roborock's after-sales service a positive reliability mention.

Reliability and support are viewed positively overall, with reliable operation and decent support but slower service noted in context.

Under-furniture pickup was limited by the robot's height, which restricted access under furniture.

Under-furniture pickup is positive but limited to furniture with enough clearance.

Value-for-money was generally positive at sale or sub-flagship pricing, though it still sits in a premium category.

Value-for-money is the clearest consensus strength, especially when the robot is discounted into the $350-$500 range.

Versatility scored well where mixed flooring was handled accurately by floor type.

Versatility is praised because the robot can switch between vacuuming, mopping, and combined vacuum-mop cleaning modes.

Water tank feedback was mostly positive for ease of use, but the small onboard dirty-water tank requires cleaning after mopping.

The onboard water tank and water-flow control are praised for keeping mop pads wet and improving everyday mopping.

Wool carpet compatibility had limited negative evidence from clumps left on a new wool carpet.