Compare Shark Navigator Lift-Away Upright Vacuum vs Kenmore Intuition Bagged Upright Vacuum

Attachments are generally useful, with praise for pet, upholstery, crevice, and broad above-floor tools, though one pillow/upholstery test found the brush only okay.

Most reviewers liked the included accessories, especially turbo, pet, upholstery, and combination tools, but the technician review criticized the tools as an afterthought.

Design comments were generally positive, with reviewers noting rose-gold styling, a sleek package, and chrome accents.

Airflow blowback evidence was positive in one technician test because the front exhaust did not blow pet hair away.

Area rug handling is mixed-to-negative: reviewers note smooth surface transitions, but shag and larger particles can require extra effort.

Area-rug handling was mixed: reviewers praised rug cleaning, but thick carpet and shag rugs could be hard to push or struggle.

Assembly evidence is limited but favorable, with one test saying the Shark took only a couple of minutes despite needing more assembly than others.

Assembly evidence was positive, with reviewers describing parts that lock in and quick setup from unpacking to full assembly.

The bag-full indicator was consistently liked as a helpful touch that prevents overfilling or unnecessary checking.

The dust cup/bin is usually reviewed positively for capacity, easy emptying, and a straightforward open design, with one sealed-bin test also supporting containment.

The bag system earned praise for capacity, dust control, and allergy usefulness, but the technician review argued the bag size and sealing lagged competitors.

Build quality is serviceable but not premium; reviewers mention plastic construction as a drawback while also linking it to low weight and price.

Build-quality evidence was strongly negative in the technician review, which called the quality unacceptable at higher prices.

High-pile carpet and shag rugs are a recurring weakness because the lack of height adjustment makes deep or tall pile harder to handle.

High-pile carpet pickup was strong in TechGearLab testing, with an outstanding average and easy pushing.

Low-pile carpet pickup is a strength, with reviewers citing strong low-pile results and best-in-test budget carpet performance.

Low-pile and general carpet pickup was a clear strength, with lab and tester evidence showing high collection rates and single-pass debris pickup.

Medium-pile/deep carpet evidence is very strong, including perfect-score and deep-clean praise for embedded sand pickup.

Medium-pile carpet evidence was excellent, including perfect deep-clean scores and strong user praise for deep cleaning.

Hair-related clogging evidence is weak-to-negative, with one test describing embedded pet hair as prone to clumping.

Clogging and debris-prevention evidence centered on the BU4050 hair eliminator, which was praised for tackling hair accumulation.

Comparative performance is generally good for the price, but named comparisons show some rivals beat it on hard-floor pickup, suction, or overall score.

Comparative evidence was positive in Vacuum Wars, where Kenmore beat the compared Shark in head airflow and pickup tests.

Controls are simple, with one comparison calling the Navigator simpler than newer Shark models, though fewer advanced settings are available.

Controls were praised for practical brushroll and wand/lift controls that make switching modes straightforward.

The Lift-Away/portable canister design is a repeated strength, making stairs, furniture, upholstery, and above-floor cleaning easier.

The lift-up or lift-away pod design was widely praised for above-floor cleaning, though the technician review felt it served little practical purpose.

Cord length is acceptable-to-good in reviewed variants, with reviewers calling reach good or sufficient.

Cord length was generally considered good, often around 30 feet, though one technician found the usable cord length closer to 25 feet with the holder attached.

Cord management evidence was negative, with Vacuum Wars criticizing the stiff cord hook.

Crevice/groove pickup is a weakness, with multiple reviews reporting struggles in cracks or crevices despite strong suction elsewhere.

Crevice pickup evidence was very positive in Vacuum Wars, where Kenmore performed significantly better than the Shark.

Cyclone performance has limited but positive evidence, with one review praising cyclonic suction for capturing fine dust and debris.

Debris illumination was praised where reviewers said the LED lights made dust, brush area, or hard-to-see debris easier to spot.

Dual-motor evidence was limited to one review, which credited the system with effective cleaning performance.

Ease of use is mostly positive because of simple operation, light handling, and Lift-Away utility, though pushing can be harder with strong suction.

Ease of use was generally strong, with reviewers praising pushability and simple operation, although some mechanisms needed getting used to.

Edge/baseboard cleaning is mixed: one test found no edge issues, another praised head-on edge pickup, while a third said the model struggled.

Edge and baseboard hard-floor evidence was decent but not perfect, with one lab review saying head-on wall pickup worked better than parallel passes.

Emptying is generally easy and clean, but one comparison disliked the two-clip canister removal compared with a one-button Kenmore.

Emptying and mess control was mostly praised for dust-free, no-touch bag disposal, but one technician said the bag did not seal up well.

Filtration is one of the strongest points: reviewers repeatedly praise the sealed HEPA system and dust containment for allergy-sensitive homes.

Filtration was one of the strongest themes, with sealed HEPA-style bags and lower dust exposure praised, though the technician review questioned the small exhaust filter.

Floorhead design is seen as a strength for budget handling and carpet agitation, though its older/simple geometry contributes to larger-debris limits elsewhere.

Floorhead design evidence was negative in the technician review, mainly because the cleaning path was narrower than most vacuums.

Hair-removal channel evidence is negative because reviewers advise routine roller clearing to avoid hair buildup.

Hair-removal maintenance was a recurring weakness because the brushroll did not pop out and was hard to clean.

Carpet hair pickup is split: many sources praise pet and long-hair pickup, while one lab test found embedded pet hair mediocre.

Carpet hair pickup ranged from good in Top Ten Reviews to mediocre or roller-sticking in TechGearLab and the technician review.

Hard-floor hair pickup receives positive evidence where a pet-focused review says the Navigator handled pet hair across carpet and hardwood floors.

Hard-floor hair pickup evidence was average, with TechGearLab saying it pulled up a fair amount but did not dominate the pet-hair test.

Hair-wrap resistance is a weakness, with multiple reviews noting long hair tangles or regular brush-roll clearing.

Hair-wrap evidence was the most consistent concern, with multiple reviews reporting tangles, wrapped long hair, or pet hair stuck around the roller.

Hard-floor fine-debris pickup is mixed-to-positive: some reviewers praise hardwood results, while one lab review found sand left behind.

Fine-dust hard-floor pickup was mixed: some reviews praised hard-floor debris pickup, while Forbes and TechGearLab said hard floors lagged carpets and fine flour was challenging.

Large-debris hard-floor pickup is mixed: some tests report strong rice/Cheerios pickup, while others say the head pushed or scattered debris.

Large-debris hard-floor intake was mixed, with bigger gates and hard-floor pickup praised by Vacuum Wars but snowplowing and dragged debris noted in other tests.

LED/headlight evidence is limited; one comparison noted the Shark lacks a headlight, but also said it was not a major issue for that test.

LED headlights were consistently praised as useful for spotting debris and lighting the brush area.

Hose and wand reach are common concerns, with several reviews saying the hose or wand is shorter than ideal.

Reach evidence was mixed: some reviewers liked the longer wand or hose, while the technician review strongly criticized the short, stiff hose.

Competitive design evidence is positive because reviewers describe sealed filtration at this price as rare and the budget design as unusually enduring.

Innovation evidence was positive but mostly feature-oriented, with no-touch bagging and uncommon features for the price presented as differentiators.

Low-profile design is mixed; it can help around furniture but can also bump into overhanging objects or struggle with taller debris.

Low-profile cleaning was weak because reviewers said the bin and bulky body made cleaning under furniture difficult.

Maintenance is mixed: the canister and parts are easy to maintain, but hair wrap and regular upkeep remain necessary.

Maintenance evidence was mixed-to-negative, mainly because the wand, bag mechanism, cord hook, and brushroll required extra effort.

Maneuverability is mostly praised for swivel steering, light weight, and easy handling, though one test found it stiffer than higher-end uprights.

Handling evidence was mixed: many reviews praised lightness, swivel steering, and obstacle-course movement, while heavier variants and stair carrying drew criticism.

Noise is generally acceptable for a corded upright, with some tests calling it relatively quiet, though one comparison still described both vacuums as fairly loud.

Noise evidence was mixed: Consumer Reports described it as less noisy than the Oreck but still middle-of-the-road, Top Ten Reviews found it surprisingly quiet for its size, and one technician called it a screamer.

Onboard tool storage was mixed: some reviews liked organized onboard storage, while the technician review said tools did not lock in and bumped off.

Ownership cost evidence was mixed: bags and filters add recurring expense, but one technician argued bagged machines can cost less to run than bagless designs.

Long-term sentiment is strong because the NV352 is repeatedly described as having stood the test of time despite newer competitors.

Durability and longevity evidence was limited but strongly negative from the technician review, which said the machine did not meet older Kenmore quality standards.

Overall sentiment is positive: reviewers call it a strong budget performer, an excellent deal, and a time-tested model, with some caveats.

Overall opinion was mostly favorable for carpet-focused buyers, value, and filtration, though the technician review was sharply negative about design and build tradeoffs.

Pet-hair opinions are mixed: several sources praise pet pickup and pet tools, while others report mediocre embedded fur pickup or missing powered pet attachments.

Pet-focused evidence was mostly positive, with reviewers praising pet-hair pickup and allergy-friendly use, though separate hair-wrap evidence shows pet hair can still collect in the roller on some models.

Value is a major strength: many reviews call it affordable, a budget standout, or an excellent deal given its suction, filtration, and lift-away design.

Value evidence was generally positive because reviewers saw strong carpet performance and extras for the price, but recurring costs and higher-price build concerns tempered the score.

Stair cleaning benefits from Lift-Away portability and handheld use, with several reviewers specifically praising stairs or portable above-floor reach.

Stair-cleaning evidence was split: lift-up designs were praised for stairs by several reviewers, while the technician review found the hose and balance awkward enough to feel risky.

Storage footprint evidence is positive because one review calls it compact and far less bulky than most upright vacuums.

Upright stability evidence was negative in the technician review because tugging the short hose could tip or move the machine.

Reviewers consistently describe strong suction and airflow, especially for a budget upright, though one direct comparison measured weaker suction than a Kenmore rival.

Reviewers repeatedly praised strong suction and airflow, especially on carpet, though one older-model review framed the power as part of broader cleaning performance rather than flawless all-surface results.

Heavy-duty evidence is limited but positive, with one review calling it a no-frills workhorse when given extra passes and basic maintenance.

Heavy-duty suitability evidence was negative from the technician review, which said the narrow path and design were not meant for a full house.

Small-space suitability is positive where reviewers call it compact and less bulky than most upright vacuums.

Small-space suitability was mixed: one technician saw it as more apartment or condo sized, yet also said the design still did not make sense for his own apartments.

Support and reliability evidence is positive where reviewers note replacement-part availability and a five-year warranty adding long-term value.

Support evidence was split between praise for a five-year warranty in BU4020/BU4022 coverage and criticism of a one-year warranty in the 31140 review.

Tool-change and lift-away button convenience drew criticism in a head-to-head comparison, where the controls were described as less convenient than Kenmore.

Tool-change evidence was negative in the technician review, where a non-locking attachment came off during use.

Under-furniture pickup is limited; one review specifically noted the Navigator could not fully reach under chairs.

Under-furniture pickup was a weakness because the dust-bin position, bulky body, and bed clearance limited reach.

Above-floor and upholstery pickup are broadly positive, especially with Lift-Away and pet tools, but one test found tougher cushion cleaning required effort.

Above-floor and upholstery evidence was generally strong, with lift-up use and upholstery tools praised for stairs, sofas, and pet hair.

Versatility is a major consensus strength because the vacuum handles carpets, hard floors, stairs, upholstery, and handheld tasks with multiple tools.

Versatility was a major strength, with reviewers praising lift-off use, wand reach, mixed-surface cleaning, and broad cleaning roles.

Weight is a strength for this upright class, though one pet-hair roundup still considered a related Navigator Professional slightly heavy.

Weight evidence depended on model and context: several reviewers called the BU4020/BU4022 light, while older or loaded variants were described as heavy or heftier than expected.