Cuisinart CJE-1000 Review
Pros: Makes great blended juices
Cons: Struggled with leafy greens, harder to clean
Compare to Similar Products
$179.95 at Amazon
$149.95 at Amazon
|$160 List||$65 List|
$64.99 at Amazon
|Pros||Makes great blended juices||Excellent at juicing hard produce, easy to clean, great juice quality||Extremely easy to clean, great at juicing leafy greens||Inexpensive, decently easy to clean, good juice quality||Dual-speed, good with soft produce, good juice quality|
|Cons||Struggled with leafy greens, harder to clean||Substandard at juicing leafy greens, lackluster soft produce performance||Subpar at juicing hard and soft produce||Average juice yield||So-so with carrots, beets, struggles with leafy greens|
|Bottom Line||While this juicer did great with our trio of juice cocktails, it fell short in almost every other test we conducted||This machine earns our praise for delivering an excellent performance at juicing hard produce||While this isn't the best product overall, it is the best option for juicing leafy greens on a budget||A solid juicer with a very reasonable price tag, this represents one of the best values in our review||If you are looking for a solid all-around appliance that won't break the bank, we think this is a good option|
|Rating Categories||Cuisinart CJE-1000||Breville JE98XL Jui...||Aicok Slow Masticat...||Hamilton Beach 6760...||Mueller Ultra-Juice...|
|Juice Quality (25%)|
|Soft Produce (20%)|
|Hard Produce (20%)|
|Leafy Greens (20%)|
|Specs||Cuisinart CJE-1000||Breville JE98XL Jui...||Aicok Slow Masticat...||Hamilton Beach 6760...||Mueller Ultra-Juice...|
|Warranty||3 Year||1 Year||2 Year||3 year||2 Year|
|Dimensions||14.92" x 9.37" x 16.46"||9" x 16" x 17"||17.1" x 13.1" x 8.9"||14.4"1 x 7.8" x 11.46"||16" x 8.1" x 16"|
|Dishwasher Safe?||Yes||Yes, most parts||Yes||Yes||Filter blade|
Our Analysis and Test Results
To judge the proficiency of these products and score their performance, we bought the best juicers currently available and tested them side-by-side. We evaluated each juicer in five weighted rating metrics, with the performance of the Cuisinart Juice Extractor described in the sections below.
We used a trio of different juice recipes to judge the performance of each product, evaluating the texture, thickness, and taste produced for each one. As mentioned above, the Juice Extractor delivered an excellent performance in this metric.
The Juice Extractor did an excellent job in our first test — a mixture of beets, carrots, apples, celery, cucumbers, and ginger root. It produced one of the best beverages of the bunch, creating a smooth and creamy drink that was highly tasty.
The Juice Extractor carried its excellent performance into our next test: a juice primarily made up of romaine lettuce, apples, and oranges. Again, this model delivered one of the best performances of the entire group. The texture was silky-smooth with no pulp whatsoever and tasted great.
Performance dropped a little with our third recipe, the "Sunset Blend." The finished drink of apples, carrots, beets, oranges, and sweet potatoes had some pulp in it but still tasted great and had a fantastic texture.
This metric evaluated each product's yield when using various types of soft produce, such as cucumbers, celery, apples, and oranges. We also judged the quality of the juice created, noting how much pulp or foam it had and if it separated out quickly. The Juice Extractor delivered an unimpressive performance with softer fruits and veggies.
This juicer did very poorly at juicing celery, generating an amount of juice well below average. However, there were only mild amounts of pulp and minimal separation. The Juice Extractor did a bit better at juicing cucumbers, generating an above-average amount of juice with practically no pulp.
Performance dropped in our orange juice assessment, with the Juice Extractor creating less than the average amount of orange juice. There was no pulp and only moderate amounts of foam. When juicing apples, this model generated about 20mL of juice above the average and only had mild amounts of pulp. However, this juice was quite foamy and separated out rather quickly.
Here we used carrots, sweet potatoes, and beets as our representative hard produce. The Juice Extractor did a middle-of-the-road job here as well. In our first test with carrots, it fell a little short, generating a below-average yield, about 10mL less than the average amount produced — though the juice produced only had minimal foam and pulp.
Juicing beets went a bit better with the Juice Extractor yielding almost exactly the average amount of juice. No pulp was produced, but there was moderate amounts of foam. Performance was about the same when juicing sweet potatoes. We got an average amount of juice, with only mild pulp and a tiny bit of foam.
Starting off, the Juice Extractor did an abysmal job at juicing wheatgrass, essentially failing to produce any juice at all. It did a little better with kale, as it at least created some juice this time, but it only yielded about half as much liquid as the average. This product's performance improved further when tasked with juicing spinach, but it was still one of the worst products overall in this test. It again yielded well below the average amount of juice and produced a little bit of foam.
For our final metric, we compared the difficulty in cleaning out each product after use. The Juice Extractor is relatively more complicated than many of the other models to clean. A high-quality cleaning brush is included, and it has dishwasher-safe components — which is good because it is a bit difficult to clean by hand. Both the strainer bowl and the pulp container have some hard-to-reach places that are trying to clean manually.
It is hard to recommend this juicer as a value option as it is relatively expensive and scored poorly overall.
The Cuisinart Juice Extractor isn't our favorite. It makes excellent mixed juice cocktails, so it might be worth considering if that is all you are planning on doing with it. But if you want to juice single ingredients or leafy greens, we recommend continuing your search.
— David Wise and Austin Palmer