Eureka Mighty Mite Review
Pros: Maneuverable, easy to use, light
Cons: Awful at pet hair cleanup, average at cleaning carpets
Our Analysis and Test Results
The main merit of the Eureka is its handling and maneuverability, mainly due to its compact size and relatively lower weight. It delivered an unremarkable performance in our cleaning tests, delivered an abysmal performance at collecting animal hair, but is decently easy to use.
To find out which vacuum swept the rest of the competition away, we bought the top model on the market today and tested them head-to-head. In total, we conducted over 20 different tests grouped among our five weighted rating metrics: Handling, Ease of Use, Carpet Cleaning, Hard Surface Cleaning, and Pet Hair. The sections below provide more information about how the Eureka performed, how it scored, and why.
Our Carpet Cleaning metric consisted of assessing how well each vacuum collected rice, oats, cereal, and flour. We conducted each test on both flat, low-pile carpet and fluffy, medium-pile carpet, comparing the amount of debris each vacuum successfully collected and the number of passes it took. The Eureka did an acceptable job, meriting it a 5 out of 10 for its efforts. This metric made up 35% of the total score.
For the first test, we used rice as our sample mess. The Eureka actually didn't impress us in this set of tests, doing a slightly subpar job. This model took about two passes to collect the whole rice grains on low-pile, but about five to completely collect all of the partial grains and the dust. The performance was similar on the fluffier carpet, taking over four passes and still leaving behind residual grains.
For the flour collection assessment, the Eureka delivered a slightly subpar performance. For the flat carpet, it collected most of the flour on the surface, but failed to dig deep down into the fibers. It didn't improve when it came to the fluffy carpet, tying for the second-worst out of the whole group.
The performance of the Mighty Mite did improve in our cereal test, taking about three passes to do an acceptable job on the low-pile carpet. It took multiple passes to get the fluffy carpet clean, but it was easier to collect the Cheerios with the Eureka than the Oreck or the Navigator Deluxe.
For the final test, the Eureka did alright, collecting most of the oats on the surface of the low-pile and medium-pile carpet, but failing to collect any fragments that were deeper in the fibers.
Ease of Use
Our collection of tests in this metric made up 25% of the total score, based on the performance of each vacuum at transitioning between floor surfaces, cleaning in close to edges, under furniture, as well as comparing the maximum reach and noise levels. The Eureka did quite well in this metric, earning a 7 out of 10.
The Eureka did very well at cleaning in close to edges, but did take a little longer than other top vacuums at collecting all of the rice. This model did do an excellent job at cleaning under furniture, reaching the entire distance under our simulated sofa with ease.
This model does have a button on the cleaning head that you press with your foot to transition between hard and soft floor types.
However, this model doesn't have an option to turn a rotating brush off, as it doesn't have one. This model does have an alright reach, able to make it 30' from the outlet. This puts it in the middle of the pack, as shown below.
This model is on the quieter side, sounding off at 74.5 dBa on the SPL meter.
The Eureka did very well in our Handling metric, earning an 8 out of 10 for its exceptional performance. We compared the proficiency of each model at cleaning a flight of stairs, maneuvering around typical furniture, and the effort required to pull or push the cleaning head. This set of tests combines to take credit for 20% of the total score.
The Mighty Mite did quite well at cleaning a flight of stairs, earning points for both its reach and its weight. This model can reach up to 9 stairs without being moved, and was one of the lightest vacuums of the group, as shown below.
This reduced weight allows the Eureka to be highly maneuverable, on par with the Miele at navigating through our obstacle course of typical furniture. The long hose of the Eureka was a little prone to getting tangled up. This lightweight canister also takes minimal effort to push or pull across the floor — much less than the larger upright models.
Hard Surface Cleaning
For the second to last metric — worth 10% of the final score — in our testing process, we evaluated how well each vacuum cleaner did with hard floors. We used rice, oats, flour, and cereal as our test messes, evaluating and ranking how well each vacuum performed. The Eureka did alright, earning a 6 out of 10 for its slightly above average job.
The Mighty Mite did fine at collecting rice, though it would push the rice around into a pile occasionally. This model did about average at collecting flour, picking up the surface debris without issue, but leaving plenty behind in the cracks, having less suction power than the Bissell Zing.
The Eureka performed similarly to the rice test in our oatmeal, doing a decent job of collecting the debris when it didn't pile it up. The performance dropped when it came to Cheerios, almost exclusively piling them up — rather than sucking them up.
The final metric, Pet Hair, accounts for the remainder of the total score — 10%. The challenge for each vacuum was simple: Collect as much of the 5 grams of pet hair that we spread on a fluffy carpet as possible. The results for the Eureka were quite abysmal, with this model earning a 2 out of 10 — the lowest score of the entire group.
The Eureka only collected 19% of the hair, significantly less than the 96% of the top performing model, the Shark Navigator.
This relatively poor performing, pricey model isn't a good value pick. You would be much better served by our Best Buy award winner, the Bissell Zing.
The Eureka Mighty Mite is a lightweight, mediocre canister vacuums. It's a poor choice for those with pets, but otherwise isn't too bad. It's not our favorite by any means and you could do much better for the price, but we didn't thoroughly dislike it.
— David Wise and Austin Palmer