Roomba i5+ Combo Robot Vacuum and Mop Feature Scores
Explore all 54 feature scores for Roomba i5+ Combo Robot Vacuum and Mop, organized into pros and cons.
Scores by Feature
Summary
54 reviewed features-
Very positive 4.5-5.012 (22%)
-
Positive 3.5-4.418 (33%)
-
Neutral 2.5-3.412 (22%)
-
Negative 1.5-2.49 (17%)
-
Very negative below 1.53 (6%)
Pros
Sort
-
Reviewers praised the iRobot cleaning system and reported strong deep-cleaning or suction results, including easy handling of fine dust and larger debris.
-
Cleaning convenience was a clear strength when reviewers emphasized not thinking about vacuuming and praised the self-empty base.
-
Large hard-floor debris pickup was generally positive, including 97.2% test pickup and praise for handling fine-to-large debris.
-
Design impressions were positive, with reviewers liking the textured finish, clean-looking top, and overall appearance after use.
-
Ease of use was strong in the positive reviews, especially for room-by-room cleaning and app pairing.
-
Large debris handling was positive in reviews that said suction or the cleaning system could pick up larger objects and debris.
-
Pet-readiness was positive where reviewers discussed pet hair and hair-heavy households, especially on hard floors and with rubber rollers.
-
Value-for-money was strong in sale-price and affordability-focused reviews, especially when the self-emptying feature was considered.
-
Versatility was positive when reviewers valued the combination of smart mapping, self-emptying, and vacuum-mop use in one robot.
-
Price sentiment was generally favorable at sale or lower pricing, though one reviewer warned it remained a tempered-expectations purchase.
-
Emptying and mess control ranged from poor dense-debris clearing in one test to strong self-emptying convenience in everyday use.
-
Setup was strongly praised in one review for being easy to unbox, connect, and pair with the app.
-
Carpet pickup was highly inconsistent: one comparison test put it near the bottom, while other reviewers praised carpet cleaning and deep-cleaning results.
-
Overall opinion was mixed: reviewers ranged from enthusiastic convert to hesitant or disappointed, with the main split around mopping and smart-feature limits.
-
Adaptive floor contact and chassis behavior scored well because reviewers described uneven-floor adjustment and wheels that climb carpet.
-
Bag and bin feedback was positive because the self-emptying setup reduced bin handling and the bag design was described as sealed.
-
Tangle resistance was mixed-to-positive: one reviewer noted periodic hair clearing, while another called the anti-tangling system among the best.
-
Controls and UI were sharply mixed: several reviewers found the app easy and enjoyable, but one found the Roomba app buggy and map-forgetting.
-
Hard-floor fine-dust pickup was mixed: some reviews reported strong dust pickup, while one hard-floor experience stayed dirty after cleaning.
-
Cord management was positive because the base includes channels that route the cord neatly.
-
Dust containment was positive in the auto-empty particle test because the non-Switchbot vacuums, including the i5+ group, showed no particle increase.
-
Packaging was rated positively because the retail box and packaging were described as looking great.
-
Clog handling received a positive maintenance note because the base could be opened for self-empty clog access.
-
Hard-floor hair pickup was positive in one review that specifically praised light pet-hair handling on hardwood floors.
-
Low-profile design was positive because the robot was said to reach under many pieces of furniture.
-
Disposable bag ownership costs and upkeep were framed positively because bags were described as cleaner to use and change.
-
Software-update support received a positive forward-looking judgment because the reviewer framed updates as a way the product can improve automatically.
-
The base footprint earned a positive note because the cord routing helped it sit flush against a wall.
-
Under-furniture pickup was positive where the reviewer said the robot had enough reach to get under many furniture pieces.
-
Battery and charging were acceptable in one review because recharge-and-resume reduced the practical impact of runtime limits.
Cons
Sort
-
Mop lifting scored poorly because reviewers described missing mop-lift automation and no reliable carpet awareness during mopping.
-
Obstacle avoidance was a consistent weakness because budget models were described as plowing through objects and the i5+ lacks camera-based avoidance.
-
The liquid system was a repeated weakness due to leaking risk, wet-bin failure, and lack of water-flow controls.
-
Mopping was the main weak spot: reviewers called it basic, carpet-risky, or failed in one case, though one saw it as useful light maintenance.
-
Comparative performance was mostly unfavorable, with the i5+ described as worse in a budget roundup, very similar to the I3, or behind Narwal overall.
-
Odor control was poor in one wet-bin failure case where the collection bag and second floor were affected by odor.
-
Build quality was mixed-to-negative: reviewers noted no hardware upgrade and one brush failure, while another felt the bumper could handle impacts.
-
Innovation scored low because reviewers said it was not built around the best tech and felt years behind competitors.
-
Reliability scored poorly in the ZDNET review because the wet-cleaning function failed and undermined the recommendation.
-
Durability was split: one reviewer had brushes fail quickly, while another said the robot still functioned fine after cosmetic impacts.
-
Mapping and path efficiency were highly mixed, from useful room learning to basic, limited, or worse path planning with no no-go zones.
-
Dried-on or sticky mess performance was weak because the mop was not expected to handle sticky messes or ground-in stains.
-
Maneuverability was weak in the comparison review because the robot was described as clumsily bumping around while navigating.
-
Dock noise was a caveat because the self-emptying cycle was described as jet-engine loud, even if brief and infrequent.
-
The water tank was judged limited in one review because the reviewer described the tank system as not huge.
-
Area-rug handling was split: wheels were praised for climbing carpet, but mopping was cautioned for homes with rugs or carpets.
-
Carpet hair pickup was split: one comparison found it left the most hair, while another praised the dual rubber rollers for hair-heavy homes.
-
Noise feedback was mixed: one reviewer called impact noise jarring, while another measured it as roughly typical for robot vacuums.
-
Smart features were polarizing: reviewers liked routines, mapping, and app use, but also criticized missing AI detection, no-go zones, and wet-bin detection failures.
-
Floorhead feedback was split between a brush failure complaint and praise for rubber rollers that pick up debris well.
-
Maintenance was mixed: one reviewer warned about regular brush replacement, while another praised easy roller cleaning.
-
Tool swapping was only lightly positive-to-mixed because the mop attachment could be a little difficult to install when visibility was poor.
-
Runtime was mixed: a comparison run used a lot of battery, but other reviewers found recharge behavior or short-use battery status acceptable.
-
Auto-empty reliability was mixed: one comparison found debris left behind, while other reviews praised the base as a time saver; one wet-bin case created a serious failure.