Compare Bissell CrossWave OmniFind Cordless Vacuum vs Dyson V15s Detect Submarine Wet Dry Vacuum

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

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

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

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

Area rug performance was positive, with reviewers saying rugs cleaned well and did not feel overly wet.

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

Setup was consistently easy, with reviewers saying assembly was straightforward and instructions were clear.

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

Automatic standby behavior was a drawback because the machine can power off when it stands too upright.

Battery feedback was mostly positive because it covered whole-home or hard-floor cleaning, though it was not class-leading.

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

The dirty-water collection design earned praise because the built-in strainer made disposal cleaner and easier.

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

Build quality was viewed positively, with reviewers describing the unit as sturdy, high-quality, and well-made.

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

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.

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

One reviewer found it much better than a previous Cross Wave, especially for drying.

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

Controls were generally simple and intuitive, but mid-body button placement and upright shutoff were drawbacks.

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

The lack of handheld conversion limits above-floor and stair use.

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

Cordless operation was a recurring advantage, making the machine easier to move around rooms without being tethered.

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

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.

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

Debris illumination was mostly praised for revealing fur and messes, though one reviewer was underwhelmed.

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

The dirty-water indicator was useful because it clearly prompted the user when the tank needed attention.

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

Dock cleaning noise was a small drawback because the clean-out cycle was described as a little loud.

Dried-on mess performance was mixed: some stubborn dirt came up well, but stuck-on food or tougher spots needed more scrubbing.

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

Ease of use was one of the strongest themes, with reviewers calling it intuitive, effortless, and life-easing.

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

Edges and corners were a repeated limitation, with reviewers saying it could not reach concealed crumbs or tight corners well.

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

Emptying and mess control were positive thanks to easy decanting, straining, and cleaner debris separation.

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

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.

Drying feedback was mixed by surface: one reviewer found hard floors dried fast, while another found floors wetter than a mop.

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

The floorhead design was praised for its large brush roll and seal, which the reviewer linked to better drying.

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

The hard-floor seal was praised as part of why the machine dried floors well.

Fresh liquid pickup was strong, with reviewers reporting fast pickup of spills and wet messes.

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

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

Carpet hair pickup was positive, with a reviewer saying it collected pet hair and crumbs well on carpets.

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

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

Hair-wrap resistance was a clear strength, with reviewers praising minimal hair wrap and easier detangling.

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.

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

Large debris pickup was generally good, though cereal sometimes needed extra passes and could scatter.

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.

LED/headlight feedback was mostly positive, but one reviewer found the feature less impressive than on other power mops.

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

Innovation was viewed as limited; one reviewer said it was not the most advanced or fancy floor cleaner.

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

The vacuum mop was viewed as useful for kid-related mealtime messes.

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

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

Maintenance was considered easier than similar machines, though users still need to empty, rinse, and dry parts.

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

Maneuverability was praised across reviews, with reviewers saying it glides, swerves around furniture, and feels easy to move.

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.

Mopping performance was repeatedly praised for making floors visibly cleaner and handling everyday wet and dry messes.

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.

Noise was viewed positively during normal cleaning, with one reviewer saying it was quiet enough for nighttime use.

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

Odor feedback was mixed: cleaned floors could smell fresh, but the dirty tank can stink if it is not emptied.

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

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

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

Overall sentiment was strongly positive, with every reviewer recommending or praising the OmniFind despite caveats.

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

Packaging was praised as minimal, recyclable, and still protective.

Packaging was praised for secure, recyclable cardboard protection.

Pet hair pickup was one of the clearest strengths, with reviewers repeatedly praising its ability to lift hair and debris.

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.

Reviewers considered it worth considering for the price because of its two-in-one cleaning role and overall usefulness.

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.

Runtime was generally enough for full-home or hard-floor cleaning, though the water tank could empty before the battery.

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

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

The self-cleaning cycle was praised for simplifying cleanup and clearing hair, debris, and dirty water.

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

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

The liquid system earned praise for separating clean and dirty water, but reviewers disliked the lack of dry-only or water-off control.

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

Stair cleaning was a clear weakness because the machine is too large and does not convert to a handheld vacuum.

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

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

Storage was mostly positive thanks to compact docking, though one reviewer found outlet placement frustrating.

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.

Streaking and residue can occur if the cleaning-solution ratio is wrong.

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

Rug handling included a positive note that the machine did not get stuck at rug corners.

Reviewers generally found the suction effective for dirt and hair, though one noted there are limits to what it can pick up.

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

Heavy-duty suitability is limited because reviewers framed it as a surface-cleaning tool rather than a deep scrubber.

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.

Small-space suitability was positive thanks to a compact body and neat charging base.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reviewers valued the two-in-one vacuum-and-mop design, especially for everyday messes.

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

Water tank feedback was mixed: the tank could run out quickly, but another reviewer used very little water during testing.

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.

Weight was praised, with reviewers calling it lightweight and easy to carry or use.

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

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