✅ Features of Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum

The vacuum cleaner boasts impressive power with its HyperVelocity suction, all packed into an ultra-lightweight frame. This makes it easy to maneuver and carry around the house.

The device offers versatility, readily transitioning between floor and above-floor cleaning tasks. This adaptable design enhances its utility across various surfaces.

The PowerFins technology is a standout feature, promising deep cleaning on carpets while maintaining direct contact with hard floors. This addresses a key need for effective cleaning on different floor types.

The self-cleaning brushroll tackles a common annoyance by minimizing hair wrap. This feature reduces maintenance and keeps the brushroll functioning optimally.

The inclusion of a sleek, portable charging base ensures the vacuum is always charged and ready for use, contributing to user convenience.

Emptying the dust cup is simplified by a one-touch hygienic system, preventing messy disposal of collected debris.

The package includes the Shark WANDVAC System, along with a Duster Crevice Tool and a Pet Multi-Tool. These accessories expand the vacuum's capabilities and address specific cleaning needs.

✅ What we like about Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum

This vacuum cleaner offers a number of appealing features. I particularly appreciate how lightweight and maneuverable it is. Its easy to carry around and even kids can use it with ease. The detachable wand is a big plus, significantly enhancing its mobility.

Ease of use is another strength. The vacuum is simple to assemble, operate, and maintain. I found the attachments snap on without a hassle.

In terms of cleaning performance, it seems to be a mixed bag. Some users find it very effective on hard floors and rugs, perfect for quick cleanups, and capable of handling pet hair. There are claims of a self-cleaning roller. The suction power also seems to vary depending on the user, with some reporting it effectively picks up dirt and debris.

The compact size makes it a great option for smaller homes, and it's easy to store. The convenient charging base is another welcome addition. And the automated emptying of the wand/stick definitely speeds up the cleaning process.

✅ Key specs of Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum

The Shark WS642BL is a lightweight, cordless stick vacuum designed for home use. It boasts features like a headlight, bagless design, and a HEPA filter to trap allergens. It comes with a brush as an included component and operates with a lithium-ion battery.

This stick vacuum has a compact form factor and comes in a blue color. Its dimensions are 11.6"L x 11.2"W x 44"H and weighs 5.9 pounds. It uses a push button and touch control method.

It operates at 120 watts and has a noise level of 80 dB. The vacuum has 1 speed and 2 power levels, operating at 8.33 Amps.

The WS642BL falls under the Series Number 642 and is intended for indoor use. It includes 4 pieces and requires a lithium-ion battery to function.

It has a 5-year limited warranty. This product is manufactured by SharkNinja.

✅ Comparison to similar models

✔ Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum vs. Shark SV1106 Cordless Stick Vacuum

The Shark WS642BL and Shark SV1106 are both cordless vacuums designed for convenience. However, they cater to different user priorities. The WS642BL is lighter, weighing 5.9 pounds compared to the SV1106's 7.5 pounds, making it potentially easier to maneuver, especially for above-floor cleaning tasks.

In terms of capacity, the SV1106 has a significantly larger dust cup at 0.64 quarts, reducing the frequency of emptying compared to the WS642BL's 0.01 quarts. The SV1106 also boasts a slightly higher wattage at 125 watts versus the WS642BL's 120 watts, suggesting potentially stronger suction. Furthermore, the SV1106 offers a runtime of 17 minutes and a charging time of 4 hours, whereas this information is not specified for the WS642BL.

The WS642BL uses a HEPA filter, which is generally considered more effective at trapping allergens than the SV1106's washable foam filters. The WS642BL also features a self-cleaning brushroll with PowerFins technology, an upgrade compared to the SV1106's 2-speed brushroll. In addition, the WS642BL comes with a headlight and a compact design. The SV1106 offers two speeds, allowing for customized suction power based on the cleaning surface.

Customer reviews show the SV1106 has a higher rating of 4.2 out of 5 stars (23,494 ratings), indicating greater overall satisfaction. The SV1106 holds a best seller rank of #14 in Upright Vacuum Cleaners. Finally, the WS642BL comes with a 5-year limited warranty, which is significantly longer than the SV1106's one-year limited warranty. Price information is missing, making a complete comparison impossible.

✔ Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum vs. Shark IZ163H Cordless Stick Vacuum

Both the Shark WS642BL and the Shark IZ163H boast impressive suction, but the IZ163H edges out the WS642BL in many other aspects. While both models utilize PowerFins and self-cleaning brushroll technology to prevent hair wrap, their runtime differs, with the IZ163H offering up to 40 minutes of use, which the WS642BL does not have a runtime mentioned.

The IZ163H's MultiFLEX wand provides superior flexibility, allowing for easy cleaning under furniture. Further, the IZ163H includes a HEPA filter with an anti-allergen complete seal, while the WS642BL only has a HEPA filter. The IZ163H has a much larger dust cup capacity (0.34 quarts) compared to the WS642BL (0.01 quarts).

The IZ163H is also lighter (3.4 pounds vs. 5.9 pounds) and features a higher wattage motor (181 watts vs. 120 watts). Its recommended use is broader, encompassing household messes and pet hair, compared to the WS642BL's recommendation for home and floors. Customer ratings strongly favor the IZ163H (4.2 stars with 9,749 ratings) over the WS642BL (3.8 stars with 1,128 ratings).

The IZ163H also holds a significantly better best seller rank. Both models have lightweight, compact designs, a hand vac mode, one-touch emptying, and come with a Pet Multi-Tool. However, the WS642BL has dimensions that are more compact, while the IZ163H showcases desirable features like a self-cleaning brushroll and HEPA filtration.

✔ Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum vs. Kenmore DS1020 Cordless Stick Vacuum

In comparing the Shark WS642BL and the Kenmore DS1020 stick vacuums, the brands are both well-known and reputable, resulting in a draw. However, the Shark takes the lead in weight, being lighter at 5.9 pounds compared to the Kenmore's 6.86 pounds. Both models are cordless, again resulting in a draw.

The Kenmore significantly outperforms the Shark in capacity, boasting a 0.6-liter dustbin compared to the Shark's tiny 0.01-quart capacity, translating to less frequent emptying. In wattage, the Shark excels with 120 watts, suggesting potentially stronger suction, while the Kenmore has 28.8 watt-hours.

Kenmore specifies its runtime at up to 30 minutes in Eco Mode, which is better than the Shark, which does not specify the runtime. This again is the case for the charging time, where Kenmore specifies 5 hours and the Shark does not specify. The Shark has a HEPA filter, which is usually better, whereas the Kenmore uses a cloth filter.

The Shark offers more special features, including being lightweight, cordless, compact, bagless, and a headlight. Both vacuums include a headlight, resulting in a draw.

The Kenmore offers two speeds, which is better than the Shark's one speed. Similarly, the Kenmore is quieter at 70 dB compared to the Shark's 80 dB. The Shark includes a duster crevice tool and pet multi-tool, which is an advantage over the Kenmore, which includes a combination tool (dusting brush & crevice tool).

Customer reviews favor the Kenmore, with a 4.2 out of 5 stars from over 4,000 ratings, compared to the Shark's 3.8 stars from just over 1,000 ratings. The Kenmore also has a better best seller rank in the stick vacuum category, at #17, compared to the Shark's #80. Finally, the Shark offers a 5-year limited warranty while there is no specified warranty for the Kenmore.

✔ Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum vs. Ultenic U16 Flex Cordless Stick Vacuum

The Ultenic U16 Flex clearly outperforms the Shark WS642BL in several key areas. Its suction power, specified at 45Kpa, is undeniably superior to the vaguely described "HyperVelocity accelerated suction" of the Shark. While the Shark holds a marginal advantage in weight (5.9 pounds vs. 5.95 pounds), the Ultenic counters with a significantly longer runtime, boasting up to 60 minutes compared to the Shark's unspecified duration.

Charging options are comparable, with both offering convenient solutions, leading to a tie in this category. However, the Ultenic's dust cup capacity of 1.2 Liters dwarfed the Shark's paltry 0.01 Quarts (approximately 0.011 Liters), which is a huge advantage for the Ultenic.

Regarding features, the Ultenic's 180° Bendable Wand, Anti-tangle Brush, Green Laser Technology, and 6-Layer Filtration prove to be more innovative and broadly useful compared to the Shark's PowerFins, Self-cleaning brushroll, and One-touch empty. The Ultenic also operates at a considerably quieter 68 dB compared to the Shark's 80 dB. With a higher wattage (550 watts versus 120 watts), the Ultenic appears to deliver more raw power, further cementing its superior performance.

Customer reviews further validate the Ultenic's superiority, with a rating of 4.6 out of 5 stars from 1,600 ratings, substantially outperforming the Shark's 3.8 stars from 1,128 ratings. The price point is unknown and so both tie for this category. The Ultenic also offers a more compact design compared to the Shark, especially in height. The Ultenic's filtration system is also superior, due to having a 6-Layer Filtration in comparison to the Shark's HEPA Filter.

The Shark WS642BL manages to stand out with its 5-year limited warranty, exceeding the Ultenic's unspecified warranty period, providing consumers with greater assurance.

✔ Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum vs. Eureka NEC490BL Cordless Stick Vacuum

Shark wins in brand recognition due to its established presence in the vacuum cleaner market. However, Eureka typically offers a more budget-friendly option. The Shark WS642BL boasts a significantly lighter weight at 5.9 lbs compared to the Eureka NEC490BL's 17.64 lbs, enhancing maneuverability.

Both are cordless, but Eureka takes the lead with a much larger 2.5-liter dustbin capacity compared to the Shark's meager 0.01 quarts, which means less frequent emptying. Eureka also packs a punch with 350 watts of power versus Shark's 120 watts. Both vacuums feature HEPA filters for trapping allergens, a great comparison point to see both models can protect the user from allergens.

Eureka stands out with its self-emptying station and a stated run time of 15/40/60 minutes, a great edge to the Shark model where its run time is not explicitly stated. Customer reviews also favor Eureka, with a higher rating of 4.2/5 from 1,961 ratings, while Shark scores 3.8/5 from 1,128 ratings.

Eureka is also the better seller of the two with a #15 best seller rank in the stick vacuums, compared to the Shark's #80. Both have anti-tangle brushrolls, which is an excellent feature for dealing with pet hair. Shark wins out the charge time with its always charging base system that always guarantees the model is ready. Lastly, both vacuums only come with one speed setting.

✔ Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum vs. dsorupa V10 Ultra Cordless Vacuum Cleaner

Shark, being a more established brand, takes the lead in brand recognition. However, without concrete pricing, we're assuming the dsorupa is more budget-friendly, which could be a major advantage for many buyers.

The Shark WS642BL has the edge in weight, being considerably lighter at 5.9 pounds compared to the dsorupa V10 Ultra's 8 pounds. This makes the Shark potentially easier to handle and carry around the house.

Moving on to performance, the dsorupa V10 Ultra showcases a suction power of 45 KPa, a defined metric that surpasses Shark's unspecified "HyperVelocity." Additionally, dsorupa offers more wattage at 550 watts to Shark's 120 watts, suggesting more motor power.

The dsorupa V10 Ultra boasts a longer runtime of 70 minutes in Min Mode, dwarfing the Shark's runtime, which isn't explicitly stated. Dust cup capacity is another win for the dsorupa, holding 1.8 liters compared to the Shark's tiny 0.01 quarts, meaning fewer trips to the trash can.

Filtering is also better in dsorupa, with a 8-Stage Filtration System compared to Sharks HEPA filter. This suggests a more thorough cleaning and better air purification

Both machines offer advanced brushroll technology, making it a tie there, with the Shark utilizing PowerFins and a self-cleaning brushroll while the dsorupa has a V-shaped Anti-tangle Soft and Hard Brush.

The dsorupa V10 Ultra also features an LED display, providing useful information about the vacuum's operations. Moreover, it operates at a quieter 64 dB compared to the Shark's 80 dB.

Customer satisfaction seems higher with the dsorupa, scoring a 4.9 out of 5 stars from 455 ratings compared to the Shark's 3.8 out of 5 stars based on 1,128 ratings. Finally, Shark is backed by a 5-year limited warranty, however the warranty of dsorupa is not specified.

✔ Shark WS642BL Stick Vacuum vs. Shark WW201 Cordless Hard Floor Cleaning System

The Shark WW201 emerges as the more versatile cleaning tool due to its wet/dry functionality, capable of mopping, scrubbing, and vacuuming, compared to the Shark WS642BL's dry vacuuming only. The WW201 is also slightly lighter at 5 pounds, offering better maneuverability than the WS642BL's 5.9 pounds. Both models are cordless, ensuring convenient use.

The WW201 has a significantly larger dust/water capacity of 0.42 liters, dwarfing the WS642BL's 0.01 quarts. However, the WS642BL features a HEPA filter, providing superior allergen removal, whereas the WW201's filter type is not specified. Both models incorporate self-cleaning brushroll technology; the WW201 boasts an antimicrobial feature.

The WW201 includes more special features, such as on-demand spray, dry-only cleaning, and odor reduction. The WW201 comes with a charging dock, brushroll storage, a cleaning tool, and Shark Hydro Multi-Surface Concentrate. Whereas, the WS642BL offers a duster crevice tool and a pet multi-tool.

Customer reviews give the WW201 a slightly higher rating of 3.9 out of 5 stars, compared to the WS642BL's 3.8 stars. The WW201 holds a higher best-sellers rank at #35, suggesting greater popularity, while the WS642BL ranks at #80. The WS642BL has a noise level of 80 dB, the noise level of the WW201 is not specified.

The WS642BL specifies a power of 120 watts, the WW201's power is not specified. The WS642BL offers a 5-year limited warranty, while warranty information for the WW201 is not provided.

✅ Conclusion

The Shark WS642BL offers a compelling combination of lightweight design and versatile functionality, making it a convenient choice for quick cleanups and smaller homes. Its maneuverability and ease of use are definite strengths, especially for those who value portability. While cleaning performance appears to be variable depending on floor type and user expectations, the self-cleaning brushroll, hygienic dust cup emptying, and included attachments add value. The compact size and convenient charging base further enhance its appeal, though the 80dB noise level might be a consideration for some. Backed by a 5-year limited warranty, the WS642BL presents itself as a solid, if not perfect, solution for everyday cleaning needs.