BISSELL 9595A Review
Pros: Good at pet hair cleanup
Cons: Mediocre at cleaning carpets, poor performance on hard floors
Our Analysis and Test Results
The lackluster and uninspiring performance by the BISSELL 9595A makes it exceptionally difficult to recommend, especially considering there are plenty of better models that cost less.
To see which vacuums took home top honors, we bought the best vacuums that you can get on the market today, then conducted a thorough series of side-by-side tests to rank each product, scoring them from 0-100. Our review is divided into five weighted testing metrics — Hard Surface Cleaning, Carpet Cleaning, Pet Hair, Ease of Use, and Handling.
This set of tests carried the highest weight of the whole review, comprising 35% of the final score. We used both flat, low-pile carpet and fluffy, medium-pile carpet as test substrates, evaluating the BISSELL's performance at collecting rice, flour, oats, and cereal to determine the score. It did a slightly below average job, earning a 4 out of 10 for its efforts.
This model did quite abysmally at picking up rice from the flat carpet, tending to spray rice around or drop it randomly, rather than collecting it nicely. However, its performance did improve slightly on the fluffy carpet, though it did take five passes.
The BISSELL didn't do a terrible job at collecting flour from both flat and fluffy carpet, though it was still subpar compared to other models.
The 9595A finished out the test with a mediocre showing at collecting oats, leaving behind tons of fragments even after tons of passes.
This model actually did decently well at collecting Cheerios. It took a little adjusting on the flat carpet, but eventually, we got the vacuum to pick them up, rather than just pushing them into a pile. The 9595A did quite well at getting the Cheerios from fluffy carpet, only taking two passes.
Ease of Use
The Ease of Use metric takes credit for 25% of the total score, based on the noise level of each vacuum, its ease at transitioning between different flooring types, competency at cleaning under furniture and close to edges, as well as its maximum reach. The 9595A did an overall subpar job, meriting a 4 out of 10 for its showing.
It was a little more difficult to adjust the brush height on this model, requiring you to twist a knob on the front of the vacuum. The 9595A didn't clean particularly close to the edge, performing worse than the Hoover.
The BISSELL is also quite tall, meaning that it can't clean very far under furniture. It only reached about 5"-5.5" under our simulated sofa — less than half the distance that the top models did. The 9595A also had one of the shortest maximum reaches of the entire group.
Finally, this model redeemed itself slightly in our noise assessment. It was by no means a particularly quiet vacuum, but it had less high-pitched noise than the Hoover.
For the Handling metric, making up 20% of the final score, we compared and evaluated the difficulty at cleaning a flight of carpeted stairs, the effort required to push or pull the vacuum, and its overall maneuverability. The BISSELL 9595A scored about average, earning a 5 out of 10.
This vacuum's accessory hose has an average reach, able to clean about eight stairs without moving the main vacuum base. It also isn't particularly heavy, but the stair brush on the BISSELL did clog up temporarily with Cheerios.
The 9595A isn't terribly agile, making it a little more difficult to complete out obstacle course of standard furniture, performing like a traditional upright model. This model also took mild effort to push or pull, more than the Hoover and equivalent to the Shark Navigator.
Hard Surface Cleaning
This model did poorly in our Hard Surface Cleaning, earning an abysmal 3 out of 10. This metric made up 10% of the final score, consisting of evaluating the performance at picking up rice, flour, oats, and cereal from a hardwood floor.
This model caused a disaster in our rice collection test — the BISSELL 9595A sprayed rice everywhere. Everywhere. It was a rice-pocalypse. There was no brush off option, contributing to the issue. This vacuum did redeem itself a little in the flour test, picking up most of the surface flour, but leaving plenty in the cracks between the boards.
A similar disaster occurred in our cereal and oat test. Debris was flung everywhere, taking an inordinate amount of time to cleanup. The oatmeal was an exceptionally awful crisis.
Our Pet Hair metric consisted of tasking each vacuum with collecting five grams of pet hair from medium-pile carpet. This metric made up the remaining 10% of the total score. The 9595A did quite well, earning an 8 out of 10. It collected 86% of the total hair laid out, about 10% less than the top model.
This model isn't an amazing value. While it does have a lower price, it performed very poorly.
The BISSELL 9595A isn't a great vacuum, failing to excel in our tests. It might be a good bet if it was severely discounted, but you still could do a lot better.
— David Wise and Austin Palmer