Earning the fourth highest score of the entire group and the highest score of the canister models, the Miele Compact C1 Turbo is an excellent, albeit very pricey, vacuum. This model did well across the board, doing exceptionally well at cleaning carpets and collecting pet hair. This is a great bet if you are a fan of canister vacuums and has a reputation online at being extremely reliable and having a long lifespan.
Miele Compact C1 Turbo Review
The Miele is the top performing canister vacuum of the group, perfect for those that dislike upright models
Price:
$400 List
Pros: Did very well at picking up pet hair, light, maneuverable
Cons: Pricey
Manufacturer: Miele
Pros: Did very well at picking up pet hair, light, maneuverable
Cons: Pricey
Manufacturer: Miele
By David Wise and Austin Palmer ⋅ Jul 12, 2017
RELATED: Best Vacuum Cleaners of 2019
Our Verdict
Compare to Similar Products
Our Analysis and Test Results
The Miele Compact C1 Turbo stood out by being an overall exceptional vacuum and the top canister model. This model handled our test messes with ease, delivering noteworthy performances at collecting pet hair and cleaning carpet. This model is light and easy to move, being particularly adept at cleaning cluttered areas.
To test vacuums, we conducted hour upon hour of research online, eventually narrowing our selection down to the top models. We purchased these prime contenders, then tested them head-to-head to find the winners. The overall score, ranging from 0-100, was based on the performance of each vacuum in our five weighted rating metrics: Carpet Cleaning, Ease of Use, Handling, Hard Surface Cleaning, and Pet Hair. The following sections detail the results of the tests, specifically where the Miele excelled and where it fell a little short.
The Carpet Cleaning metric was worth the largest portion of the total score, accounting for 35% of the final score. To evaluate the performance of each product at cleaning carpets, we used four different debris types on both low and medium-pile carpet, comparing the amount of material collected. The Miele did very well, earning a 7 out of 10 for this metric, putting it in a tie for the runner-up position, as shown by the chart below.
The Miele did very well at collecting rice on the flat carpet, only taking two passes to collect all of the whole and partial grains, with an additional third pass to get the remaining dust and small pieces. This model thoroughly exceeded the performance of every other canister vacuum in this test, including the Dyson Cinetic Big Ball. Performance did drop slightly in the fluffier carpet test, taking about eight passes and still leaving plenty of rice behind.
This vacuum did an exceptional job in our next test: flour collection. This model tied for the second best performance of the group, only exceeded by the Shark Rotator and the Dyson Cinetic Big Ball. This performance carried over to the fluffy carpet test, where the Miele once again tied for the second place position, just slightly worse than the Kenmore Elite.
The Miele did a solid performance in the oatmeal collection test. This vacuum collected all of the debris laid out, but took five passes to do it, much more than models like the Shark Navigator or Shark Rotator. The Miele did do better on the fluffy,medium-pile carpet, matching the performance exactly of the Navigator or the Kenmore.
Moving on to our cereal test, this model — along with the other canister vacuums — seemed to struggle more than the upright models. The Miele did alright on flat carpet, but occasionally would crush the cereal instead of collecting it, exacerbating the mess. However, it still outperformed the Bissell Zing and the Eureka. The Miele did a slightly subpar job at collecting the Cheerios from fluffy carpet, plowing them around a bit and missing some after multiple passes, performing on par with the Shark Navigator.
This metric — accounting for 25% of the overall score for each vacuum — consisted of evaluating the ease at swapping between different types of flooring, how well each model could clean close to edges and under furniture, as well as assessing the maximum reach of each model and its noise level. The Miele did reasonably well in this metric, earning a 6 out of 10 for its above average performance — finishing in the middle of the pack, as demonstrated by the chart below.
This model required a little bit of work to switch between hard and soft flooring types, requiring you to manually switch out the brush heads. The hard floor head does not have a spinning brush, while the carpet one does. The Miele did about average in our edging test, leaving a little bit of rice behind, similar to the Bissell Zing.
The Miele did do a fantastic job at cleaning under furniture, cleaning the entire area underneath our simulated sofa.
This vacuum has a decent maximum reach — about 30' — putting it squarely in the middle of the pack, as shown by the chart below.
This model is one of the quietest models of the group, both in the opinions of our rating panel and the levels that we recorded with an SPL meter. The Miele measured in at 70 dBA with normal use and 80 dBa with the suction reducer fully open. This model tied with the Dyson Cinetic for the quietest model with the reducer closed and put it on par with the Oreck or slightly louder than the Shark Rotator with it open.
Continuing its solid performance, the Miele earned a 6 out of 10 for its good performance in our Handling metric. This metric made up 20% of the final score, encompassing a series of tests, including the pushing and pulling effort required, maneuverability, and cleaning a flight of stairs. The chart below shows how the Miele's performance compared to the rest of the pack.
This vacuum handles really well and is fantastic at getting into tight spaces. However, we found that the Dyson Ball Animal 2, Dyson Cinetic Big Ball, and the Shark Rotator were a little agiler and less prone to becoming entangled. The Miele is quite light — weighing in at 15.2 lbs — comparing very favorably with the rest of the pack, as shown by the chart below.
This meant that it required minimal effort to push or pull, even rolling easier than the much lighter Bissell Zing. The Miele also has a decent reach when it came to cleaning stairs, able to effectively clean almost eight steps before having to be relocated — an easy task, due to its light weight.
Accounting for 10% of the final score, our Hard Surface Cleaning metric is one where the Miele excelled. This vacuum earned a 7 out of 10 for its great performance in the four tests in this metric: flour, oatmeal, rice, and cereal collection from a hardwood floor. The chart below shows how this compared to the rest of the pack.
The Miele started off with a solid performance in out rice collection test, tying for third place. It collected almost all of the rice with two passes, only plowing a small amount into a tiny pile. However, it was in the flour collection test where the Miele truly shined, tying for best overall. This vacuum collected all of the flour, even cleaning deep in the cracks if the brush head was used with sufficient pressure.
The performance dropped slightly when it came to collecting Cheerios, though the Miele did outperform the other canister vacuums. The sides of the brush head were high enough to suck the Cheerios in, rather than simply plowing them around. It did about average in our oatmeal test, pushing the debris around rather than collecting it, similar to the Eureka or the Bissell Zing.
The Miele finished out our tests with an excellent performance in our Pet Hair metric, earning a 9 out of 10. This metric — responsible for the residual 10% of the score — only consisted of a single test: collecting 5 grams of pet hair that had been spread out and pressed in a section of medium-pile carpet. The chart below shows how each model ranked.
The Miele collected 92% of the hair, tying for third place with the Dyson Cinetic. This model showed no signs of difficulty or struggle and was very close to the top scoring model, the Shark Navigator, which picked up 96% of the hair.
The Miele is not a great value, offering a second-tier performance at a top-tier price.
The Miele Compact C1 Turbo, notable as the best canister vacuum in our test.
Performance Comparison
To test vacuums, we conducted hour upon hour of research online, eventually narrowing our selection down to the top models. We purchased these prime contenders, then tested them head-to-head to find the winners. The overall score, ranging from 0-100, was based on the performance of each vacuum in our five weighted rating metrics: Carpet Cleaning, Ease of Use, Handling, Hard Surface Cleaning, and Pet Hair. The following sections detail the results of the tests, specifically where the Miele excelled and where it fell a little short.
The Miele did very well at cleaning carpets, tying for the runner up position overall.
Carpet Cleaning
The Carpet Cleaning metric was worth the largest portion of the total score, accounting for 35% of the final score. To evaluate the performance of each product at cleaning carpets, we used four different debris types on both low and medium-pile carpet, comparing the amount of material collected. The Miele did very well, earning a 7 out of 10 for this metric, putting it in a tie for the runner-up position, as shown by the chart below.
The Miele did very well at collecting rice on the flat carpet, only taking two passes to collect all of the whole and partial grains, with an additional third pass to get the remaining dust and small pieces. This model thoroughly exceeded the performance of every other canister vacuum in this test, including the Dyson Cinetic Big Ball. Performance did drop slightly in the fluffier carpet test, taking about eight passes and still leaving plenty of rice behind.
This vacuum did an exceptional job in our next test: flour collection. This model tied for the second best performance of the group, only exceeded by the Shark Rotator and the Dyson Cinetic Big Ball. This performance carried over to the fluffy carpet test, where the Miele once again tied for the second place position, just slightly worse than the Kenmore Elite.
The Miele did quite well at collecting flour from flat carpet, earning the runner-up position for its performance.
The Miele did a solid performance in the oatmeal collection test. This vacuum collected all of the debris laid out, but took five passes to do it, much more than models like the Shark Navigator or Shark Rotator. The Miele did do better on the fluffy,medium-pile carpet, matching the performance exactly of the Navigator or the Kenmore.
The Miele collected the vast majority of the oats on the flat carpet.
Moving on to our cereal test, this model — along with the other canister vacuums — seemed to struggle more than the upright models. The Miele did alright on flat carpet, but occasionally would crush the cereal instead of collecting it, exacerbating the mess. However, it still outperformed the Bissell Zing and the Eureka. The Miele did a slightly subpar job at collecting the Cheerios from fluffy carpet, plowing them around a bit and missing some after multiple passes, performing on par with the Shark Navigator.
The Miele was quite easy to use.
Ease of Use
This metric — accounting for 25% of the overall score for each vacuum — consisted of evaluating the ease at swapping between different types of flooring, how well each model could clean close to edges and under furniture, as well as assessing the maximum reach of each model and its noise level. The Miele did reasonably well in this metric, earning a 6 out of 10 for its above average performance — finishing in the middle of the pack, as demonstrated by the chart below.
This model required a little bit of work to switch between hard and soft flooring types, requiring you to manually switch out the brush heads. The hard floor head does not have a spinning brush, while the carpet one does. The Miele did about average in our edging test, leaving a little bit of rice behind, similar to the Bissell Zing.
The Miele cleans in close to the edges of a room, leaving almost no rice behind.
The Miele did do a fantastic job at cleaning under furniture, cleaning the entire area underneath our simulated sofa.
This canister vacuum can clean quite far under furniture.
This vacuum has a decent maximum reach — about 30' — putting it squarely in the middle of the pack, as shown by the chart below.
This model is one of the quietest models of the group, both in the opinions of our rating panel and the levels that we recorded with an SPL meter. The Miele measured in at 70 dBA with normal use and 80 dBa with the suction reducer fully open. This model tied with the Dyson Cinetic for the quietest model with the reducer closed and put it on par with the Oreck or slightly louder than the Shark Rotator with it open.
The Miele handles well, cleaning almost the entire flight of stairs and is very light.
Handling
Continuing its solid performance, the Miele earned a 6 out of 10 for its good performance in our Handling metric. This metric made up 20% of the final score, encompassing a series of tests, including the pushing and pulling effort required, maneuverability, and cleaning a flight of stairs. The chart below shows how the Miele's performance compared to the rest of the pack.
This vacuum handles really well and is fantastic at getting into tight spaces. However, we found that the Dyson Ball Animal 2, Dyson Cinetic Big Ball, and the Shark Rotator were a little agiler and less prone to becoming entangled. The Miele is quite light — weighing in at 15.2 lbs — comparing very favorably with the rest of the pack, as shown by the chart below.
This meant that it required minimal effort to push or pull, even rolling easier than the much lighter Bissell Zing. The Miele also has a decent reach when it came to cleaning stairs, able to effectively clean almost eight steps before having to be relocated — an easy task, due to its light weight.
The Miele did well at cleaning oats, though it did leave some residual debris.
Hard Surface Cleaning
Accounting for 10% of the final score, our Hard Surface Cleaning metric is one where the Miele excelled. This vacuum earned a 7 out of 10 for its great performance in the four tests in this metric: flour, oatmeal, rice, and cereal collection from a hardwood floor. The chart below shows how this compared to the rest of the pack.
The Miele started off with a solid performance in out rice collection test, tying for third place. It collected almost all of the rice with two passes, only plowing a small amount into a tiny pile. However, it was in the flour collection test where the Miele truly shined, tying for best overall. This vacuum collected all of the flour, even cleaning deep in the cracks if the brush head was used with sufficient pressure.
The Miele matched the performance of the Rotator in our flour test.
The performance dropped slightly when it came to collecting Cheerios, though the Miele did outperform the other canister vacuums. The sides of the brush head were high enough to suck the Cheerios in, rather than simply plowing them around. It did about average in our oatmeal test, pushing the debris around rather than collecting it, similar to the Eureka or the Bissell Zing.
Pet Hair
The Miele finished out our tests with an excellent performance in our Pet Hair metric, earning a 9 out of 10. This metric — responsible for the residual 10% of the score — only consisted of a single test: collecting 5 grams of pet hair that had been spread out and pressed in a section of medium-pile carpet. The chart below shows how each model ranked.
The Miele collected 92% of the hair, tying for third place with the Dyson Cinetic. This model showed no signs of difficulty or struggle and was very close to the top scoring model, the Shark Navigator, which picked up 96% of the hair.
Value
The Miele is not a great value, offering a second-tier performance at a top-tier price.
Conclusion
The Miele Compact C1 Turbo is an all-around great bagged canister vacuum. While it couldn't quite earn an award, it's an excellent vacuum and a good bet for those that already have a strong preference for canister vacuums. However, it is quite pricey, with the additional cost of bags being something to consider as well.
— David Wise and Austin Palmer