Dyson Slim vs. Stowaway
Dyson's two newest vacuums, the Slim, a narrower upright, and the Stowaway, a canister version, both offer the superior performance the brand's known for in (slightly) more compact designs with a few key differences between the two. We put them both to the test in our NYC apartments to see how they stood up side by side within the cramped confines.
Overall, using their trademarked "Root Cyclone" technology, the two are free from the frustrations of other vacuums' poor suction and frequent clogs. Most anything in the path of either the Slim or Stowaway gets sucked up and trapped (by filters that never need replacing) in their satisfyingly translucent canisters, which are easy to empty and also minimize mess in the process. The tech and filters also prevent any dust from coming out while trying to clean—an often futile aspect of other vacuums.
With the usual array of detachable heads, both Dysons are equipped to clean hard-to-reach corners and cracks. The Slim features a telescoping wand designed to extend for spiderwebs in corners and other high places, but we found it a little awkward to pull out and less effective in getting under low couches and the like.
The Stowaway has a similarly bulky telescoping apparatus, but its height makes it more well-suited for cleaning underneath spaces. Also making it competitive with the Slim, the Dyson has a deep-cleaning motorized brush head. At the end, choosing between the two will largely depend on whether you prefer a canister or an upright.
Both have not-quite-perfect functionality and—for designs that are supposed to be compact—they require a large volume of storage space. But if you're looking for Dyson's unrivaled performance (and don't mind your vacuum looking like a cartoon), the Stowaway and Slim will please even the most fastidious of housekeepers. You can get the Slim ($470) and the Stowaway ($500) directly from Dyson (shipping included).
Also on Cool Hunting: Dyson Root 6
