Compare Eureka Airspeed Ultra-Lightweight Vacuum vs Dirt Devil Multi-Surface Upright Vacuum

One owner-style review said assembly and setup were very easy.

Assembly was a clear pain point in the unboxing review, with the handle and screws described as surprisingly difficult.

Hard-floor seal performance was weak in one test, where debris kicked backward from under the head.

One Rewind review praised the bare-floor seal, saying it helped pick up debris that might normally scatter.

Only one reviewer evaluated noise directly and praised the vacuum as quieter than other vacuums they had used.

Noise impressions were mixed: one reviewer said the vacuum was not very loud, while another called the turbo brush loud and rattly and the Rewind louder than a cordless unit.

Emptying was consistently praised as simple, quick, and easy through the release-button canister design.

Emptying and mess control were mixed: one-touch/removable bins helped, but accidental bin release, grimy handling, and trash-can positioning were concerns.

Area-rug performance was praised strongly in the dedicated rug test.

Area-rug handling was mixed: reviewers saw dirt pickup, but also noted hard pushing and annoying height-setting compromises.

Edge cleaning varied sharply, with budget testing saying it missed edges and one demonstration saying it cleaned right to the edge.

Only one review supplied opinionated edge-cleaning evidence, and it was positive about reducing dirt hiding near walls and corners.

Reviewers liked the dust bin size and easy-empty canister, describing it as sizable, big, and slow to fill.

The bin was praised for capacity/removability in some reviews, but several reviewers disliked accidental release, grimy handling, or awkward reinstallation.

High-pile and thick-carpet feedback was notably better, with one lab test scoring above average and another reviewer praising deep carpet pickup.

High-pile evidence was limited and only moderately positive, mostly pet-hair pickup rather than broad debris testing.

Cord length received positive comments from reviewers who called it decently long or nice and long.

Cord length evidence was split, with CNET calling 25 feet plenty but the detailed newer-model review calling the cord too short.

Onboard tool storage was praised as convenient and nicely designed.

Onboard storage was convenient in the roundup, but reviewers criticized an unused post, missing accessory, and tool-storage oddities.

Hair-wrap resistance was mixed, with one reviewer impressed by a clean brush roll and other testing finding tangles with long hair.

Hair-wrap/tangle resistance was poor in CNET's human-hair test, where hair tangled and wrapped around the rollerbrush.

On ordinary fitted carpet, reviewers described pickup as pretty good in short demonstrations.

Medium-pile performance was context-dependent, ranging from CNET's weak pickup to newer-model reviewers who found carpet contact finicky but workable.

Hard-floor large-debris intake was weak in multiple tests, with snowplowing and scattered debris noted.

Large-debris hard-floor pickup was mixed, with positive claims about fewer passes but CNET's hard-floor Cheerios result was poor.

Large-debris handling was a weakness in tougher tests, where Cheerios or rice were pushed or plowed instead of cleanly collected.

Clogging/debris prevention evidence was split: one review praised multi-cyclonic clog reduction, while CNET found tool clogging and brush-well jams.

Handling was one of the most mixed areas: the vacuum is light, but several reviewers disliked the non-swivel head and carpet resistance.

Handling was usually positive on the newer models, but the CNET Dash review found it less maneuverable than comparable vacuums.

Controls were consistently described as simple, especially the foot-style power control and basic operation.

Controls were generally simple and accessible, but height adjustment and release mechanisms could be awkward or inconvenient.

Reviewers framed it as an entry-level or simple-task vacuum rather than a serious long-term heavy-duty cleaner.

Heavy-duty suitability was limited: the Rewind was framed for heavier cleaning, but CNET found jam-clearing could create extra work.

Cord management received a positive mention for the wrap hooks keeping the cord tidy.

Cord management varied by variant: the non-rewind cord fought the reviewer during wrapping, while the Rewind's retracting cord was praised.

Low-pile or standard carpet results ranged from poor lab performance to very strong owner demonstrations, making this a mixed attribute.

Low-pile pickup split by model/review: CNET measured poor sand pickup, while the newer model did excellently on low-pile commercial carpet.

Pet-readiness was divided: one lab-style review found pet hair performance poor, while a family-use review said regular vacuuming solved their cat-hair problems.

Pet-oriented tools and hair pickup earned praise in positive reviews, but the included pet/turbo accessories were not consistently strong across all evidence.

Overall opinion was split between strong budget praise from video reviewers and a much harsher lab review that placed it near the bottom.

Overall opinion was highly mixed: several reviewers liked the newer models at $100, while CNET strongly rejected the older Dash evidence.

The floorhead drew mixed reactions: the brush roll impressed at the price, but the no-height-adjustment/basic design caused snowplowing and poor debris behavior.

The floorhead earned praise for stiff bristles and a felt gasket, but reviewers also criticized carpet-contact issues and the lack of brushroll shutoff.

Reach was mixed: one reviewer liked the hose for counter-height cleaning, while others wished the wand or hose were longer.

Hose length was decent on newer owner reviews, but CNET considered the Dash hose ungenerous against a named Eureka comparison.

Dust containment evidence conflicted, with one review criticizing the unsealed system while another found it unlikely to worsen sensitivity issues.

Filtration drew praise in roundup-style coverage and from one owner, but the detailed review criticized it as an unsealed budget system with dust getting through.

Durability impressions ranged from plasticky but maybe serviceable for a few years to one family calling it tried-and-true after a year.

The detailed reviewer saw better construction and motor feel than older Dirt Devils, but still considered longevity below the equivalent Bissell.

The wand and hose changeover drew a caveat because one reviewer warned users not to forget reconnecting the tube properly.

Tool changes and fittings were a recurring weak spot, with reviewers criticizing awkward attachment installation and proprietary/custom hose fittings.

One review found some versatility through the wand for furniture and ceilings, but only in a qualified way.

Versatility was a strength for floor types and above-floor use, but bare-floor safety and custom tools limited the otherwise broad use case.

Hard-floor fine debris results were highly inconsistent but mostly negative, with repeated reports of sand or grit being kicked back or scattered.

Hard-floor fine-dust evidence was mixed: CNET found weak fine-particle performance, while first-impression demos saw fine dust pickup on carpet and bare-floor demos looked better.

Tool feedback was mixed: reviewers liked having a wand or basic tool set at the price, but another called the included attachments very basic.

Accessories were useful in some reviews, but the tool package was inconsistent, with complaints about a stubby wand, custom fitting, missing tools, and a disappointing turbo tool.

One reviewer praised the included second filter as a nice ownership touch.

Ownership costs look moderate: some evidence praised fewer filter replacements, but the detailed review still expects washing and periodic filter replacement.

Ease of use was split: simple controls and setup earned praise, but a lab review found the minimalist design less user-friendly in practice.

Ease of use was generally good once assembled, with simple operation and disassembly, though filter condition affected cleaning performance.

Build quality was polarized, with one review calling it plasticky and others saying it felt high quality or did not feel cheap.

The newer model's build quality received strong praise for sturdiness, thicker plastic, and feeling less cheap than prior Dirt Devils.

Value depended heavily on price: some called it one of the best cheap uprights, while others said full list price made it less compelling.

Value depended heavily on price: reviewers liked it around $100, but criticized it at $119-$130 and strongly rejected the older Dash's value.

In one standardized pickup test it was acceptable but clearly not among the best performers.

Comparative performance evidence diverged sharply, with CNET's Dash test performing poorly and the detailed reviewer calling the newer model a major Dirt Devil improvement.

Carpet hair pickup was split, ranging from untouched pet hair in lab testing to several reviewers reporting easy cat-hair pickup.

Carpet hair pickup was generally favorable in newer reviews, but CNET found the older Dash comparatively weak despite a 92 percent pet-hair result.

Maintenance feedback was mixed, with one review frustrated by a non-removable brush roll and another liking how simple filter access was.

Maintenance requirements were mixed: filters and savings were manageable, but brush access, filter washing, and jam-clearing could be tedious.

Reviewers generally found the AirSpeed strong for its size and price, with measured airflow and repeated praise for suction, though one budget roundup still placed it below pricier uprights.

Reviewers most often praised suction and airflow, especially on the newer Multi-Surface Total Pet, though that strength did not rescue every hard-floor or tool scenario.

Above-floor cleaning was mixed, with one reviewer finding the dusting tool decent and another finding upholstery cleaning ineffective.

Upholstery and above-floor pickup were inconsistent: CNET's turbo tool clogged with pet hair, while newer reviews found the turbo tool acceptable or powerful.

The vacuum was broadly praised as lightweight, although two reviews noted that carpet suction or awkward handling can make it feel heavier in use.

Weight evidence was mostly positive: the vacuum was described as light or easy to carry, though the newer model traded some weight for sturdier build.

The low-profile design was weak because one review said it was not good for cleaning under surfaces.

Low-profile reach was poor because the cyclone assembly prevented getting under low furniture.

Under-furniture cleaning was criticized because the vacuum was not good at getting under surfaces such as beds.

Under-furniture cleaning was a weakness because the bulkier cyclone assembly prevented reaching under low furniture.

One reviewer described the Rewind variant as a nice-looking vacuum, giving limited but positive aesthetic evidence.

One budget test criticized blowback from an unsealed system, saying fine dust and dirt could return to the room.

Cyclone performance was improved versus older Dirt Devils in some owner evidence, but the detailed review still called the cyclone ineffective under dust load.

Hair-removal channel evidence was negative, with CNET finding hair wrapped around the rollerbrush rather than fully entering the bin.

Hard-floor hair pickup was weak in the CNET test and the detailed review remained cautious about bare-floor use despite some pickup ability.

Innovation evidence was limited but positive, centered on the detailed review's view that TTI made real improvements over recent Dirt Devils.

Packaging and out-of-box setup were criticized because filters were not preinstalled and reviewers had to warn buyers to check packaging.

Bare-floor scratch resistance was a serious concern in the detailed review because of the aggressive spinning brush and lack of brushroll shutoff.

Stair use was better than expected for the detailed reviewer, although reach limitations meant the top steps could require repositioning.

The hose clip and parked hose setup were viewed as helpful for keeping the vacuum from tipping during above-floor use.

Small-space suitability was a consistent bright spot, especially for dorm rooms, first apartments, or simple apartment cleaning.

Support evidence was mixed to negative: CNET noted a comparable warranty, while the detailed reviewer criticized TTI after-sales and warranty support.