Finishing in the lower portion of the group, the BLACK+DECKER HHVI320JR02 definitely isn't the best we have seen when it comes to these products. It can't come close to matching the cleaning abilities, battery life, or ease of reaching difficult places as the top products, but it does cost significantly less — up to $200 less than some of our other award winners.
BLACK+DECKER HHVI320JR02 Review
Pros: Great for tough messes, inexpensive
Cons: Not great with pet hair, unimpressive battery life
Compare to Similar Products
$35.99 at Amazon
$239.00 at Amazon
$97.97 at Amazon
$64.99 at Amazon
|Pros||Great for tough messes, inexpensive||Unmatched cleaning performance, unrivaled battery life||Great for getting those hard-to-clean areas, good value||Fantastic at picking up pet hair, great value||Exceptional runtime, fairly easy to clean with|
|Cons||Not great with pet hair, unimpressive battery life||Expensive, heavy||Lackluster battery life, two hands to operate, obnoxiously loud||Not the best for tight spaces, can’t clean small gaps or corners||Abysmal at picking up pet hair, not the best at cleaning|
|Bottom Line||The HHVI320JR02 isn’t great, but at least it’s cheap||The V7 is the absolute best of the best when it comes to these products||If you want a great all-around handheld vacuum that won’t break the bank, the Flex Vac is a fine choice||If you are shopping for a handheld vac on the tightest of budgets, then the Pet Hair Eraser is a great choice||We would be hard-pressed to find an area where this vacuum stands out from the rest|
|Rating Categories||BLACK+DECKER...||Dyson V7 Car+Boat||Flex Vac BDH2020FL||BISSELL Pet Hair...||Cleaner KB-9005|
|Dust & Dirt (20%)|
|Tough Messes (20%)|
|Hard To Reach Areas (20%)|
|Battery Life (15%)|
|Pet Hair (10%)|
|Specs||BLACK+DECKER...||Dyson V7 Car+Boat||Flex Vac BDH2020FL||BISSELL Pet Hair...||Cleaner KB-9005|
|Measured weight (no tool)||2.4 lbs||2.9 lbs||3 lbs||2.6 lbs||2.4 lbs|
|Measured weight (heaviest tool)||N/A||3.7 lbs||3.1 lbs||3 lbs||2.5 lbs|
|Usage type||Dry||Dry||Dry||Dry||Dry & wet|
|Dust capacity||0.61 L||0.5 L||0.5 L||0.73 L||0.6 L|
|Wet capacity||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||0.1 L|
|Measured runtime||15 min 24 sec||Normal: 33 min 57 sec
High: 6 min 23 sec
|15 min||Without motorized brush: 20 min 42 sec
With motorized brush: 17 min
|25 min 18 sec|
|Charge time||13.5 hours||3.5 hours||4 hours||8 hours||3-5 hours|
|Measured noise (at arms length)||83 dBa||70 dBa||82.5 dBa||71.4 dBa||70.7 dBa|
Our Analysis and Test Results
The BLACK+DECKER HHVI320JR02 finished a few points behind the Homasy Handheld Vacuum Cleaner and just ahead of the BLACK+DECKER HHVI315JO42. The Homasy costs about $30 more, but is a little better at dusting and has a way longer battery life. However, the BLACK+DECKER HHVI320JR02 is better at caked-on messes and pet hair cleanup, as well as getting into more difficult to clean areas. The HHVI315JO42 cost about $5 less than the HHVI320JR02 and is better at dusting and pet hair collection, but can't match the HHVI320JR02 at getting into tight places and cleaning up more difficult types of mess.
To decide which handheld vacuums are really the best out there, we bought all the most promising models and tested them head-to-head. We split our review process into six weighted testing metrics, with the HHVI320JR02's performance discussed below.
Dust & Dirt
This first testing metric accounts for a fifth of the overall score for each mobile vacuum. We rated and scored their skills at sucking up light dust and caked-on dirt and grime, as well as how easy it was to use the dusting attachment in small cracks and corners. The HHVI320JR02 didn't do amazing, earning a 5 out of 10 for its mediocre results.
This vacuum struggled to remove the flour from the plastic sheet in our dusting test, leaving quite a bit of flour behind and marking up the surface.
It did a little better at removing dried dirt and mud from the linoleum, but not by much.
The shape of the brush also isn't very well suited for cleaning in small corners and edges of the room. You could use it to clean the top of your baseboards or a window sill, but we would be concerned about scuffing up your walls.
Our next series of tests is also worth a fifth of the final score for the HHVI320JR02 and focused on how well it did at picking up tougher messes from carpet and fabric, as well as how it handled larger items and the overall power of the vacuum motor. The HHVI320JR02 did slightly above average, receiving a 7 out of 10 for its results.
Starting off, we scored each vacuum on how well it did at cleaning up flour from a sample of low-pile, automotive style carpet. It did fairly well, but plenty of flour eluded it.
Next, we looked at how it did at removing crushed oats from the same type of carpet and from a cushion. It did significantly better, removing almost all of the mess without any issue. However, it did leave a bit of dust behind, making it slightly inferior to the models that have a powered brush head, but it did do the best of the models that lack a motorized brush roll attachment.
It also handled the large items without any sign of a struggle, sucking up all of the mini-wheats in our test without any clogs. Finally, we measured the airspeed generated by each vacuum in our wind tunnel chamber using an anemometer. The HHVI320JR02 got one of the higher scores, clocking in at 1564 FPM.
Our third metric also comprises 20% of the overall score for each handheld vacuum. We awarded points on how far each one could clean under furniture and appliances, as well tight slots, like a sliding window track. The HHVI320JR02 decently well, meriting a 6 out of 10.
The crevice tool is a little on the wider side, but you can still effectively clean small slots, just not efficiently as some of the other products. The HHVI320JR02 removed all of the oats we filled the sliding window track with, it just took a bit longer than the top products.
Next, we measured how far it could effectively clean in a 3" tall and 1.25" tall slot, simulating cleaning under a nightstand or an appliance. It reached 10" into the taller slot and 5.5" into the narrower — slightly further than average for these products.
For our next round of tests, we compared the effective battery life of each vacuum, which accounts for 15% of the final score. We started the HHVI320JR02 with a completely full battery and timed how long it lasted before it was totally depleted. It scored alright, earning a 4 out of 10 for lasting about 15.5 minutes.
Also accounting for 15% of the final score, our next group of evaluations focused on how much of a hassle it is to use each vacuum on a daily basis. We compared the ease of emptying the dust bin and its size, as well as the weight, noise level, and ease of organizing all of the different tools and accessories. The HHVI320JR02 is a little above average in terms of convenience, earning it a 6 out of 10.
This vacuum is one of the louder models, with our SPL meter recording noise levels of 83 dBa from about 3' away.
It's about average in weight for these products, weighing in at 2.4 lbs on our scale.
It is also quite easy to empty its moderately sized collection bin.
We also liked that all the tools are integrated into the main unit, making it impossible to lose them.
You can also rotate the nozzle to make it easier to clean with.
Our last metric scored how well each vacuum did at picking up pet hair, which accounts for the final 10% of the score. The HHVI320JR02 didn't finish with the greatest results, earning a 3 out of 10 for its poor results.
It eventually got about 90% of the hair from both carpet and a cushion, but it took a really long time — we would definitely recommend against using it for pet hair cleanup on a regular basis. Additionally, about half of the hair became tangled on the brush, rather than making it into the dust bin.
This vacuum isn't the best, but it does fairly well for its price tag, making it an alright value.
The HHVI320JR02 is one of the cheapest handheld vacuums we have tested, but it also scored at the back of the group — making it very clear that you get what you pay for. If you are only going to use it for the occasional small mess and have pretty low expectations, then it might be a good choice, but we would recommend spending a bit more and getting a vastly superior vacuum for most people.
— David Wise and Austin Palmer