Shark Pet Cordless IX141 vs Bissell 3061: Double the Runtime, Double the Voltage

Two named, widely sold cordless sticks, a price band apart, with the same weights in both our sources. The Shark states twice the runtime on twice the voltage, but its 40 minutes is footnoted as a handheld figure.

The two listings at a glance

These two are named, widely sold, and about as clean a pair as the stick class offers: both weights agreed by our review and Amazon, both runtime fields saying the same thing, and a price band between them. That makes the differences easy to read, and the one that matters most is the one the Shark’s own footnote qualifies.

Double the runtime, double the voltage

The Shark states 40 minutes and the Bissell 20, and the class median is 45, so the Shark is a little under typical and the Bissell is at the bottom of the range. The two batteries differ in the same ratio: 21.6 volts against 10.8. Voltage is not capacity, and neither listing states a battery capacity, so we cannot say the Shark carries twice the energy. We can say the machine with twice the voltage runs twice as long, which is what you would expect and not a coincidence. Per kilogram carried, the Shark runs 12.8 minutes and the Bissell 7.6, so the heavier machine is also the more efficient one at turning weight into runtime.

There is a qualifier in the Shark’s listing that the Bissell’s does not carry. Its 40 minutes carries an asterisk: “Measured at the handheld vacuum in standard mode”. The 40-minute figure is for the handheld unit, not for the stick with its floor head attached, and a handheld mode draws less. The Bissell’s listing says only “up to 20 minutes of runtime” and does not say what it was measured on. If both figures flatter their machines, the gap between them may be smaller or larger than 20 minutes. We cannot tell which.

The lighter machine has the larger bin

The Bissell weighs 5.8 pounds against the Shark’s 6.9, is listed at 150 watts against 181, and has a dust bin of 450 millilitres against 321.8, 40 percent larger. That is the Bissell’s case in a line: lighter, cheaper, bigger bin, shorter runtime. Both list a handheld conversion, the Shark with a removable handheld unit and the Bissell by converting the stick itself.

Handheld use, storage and floor type

Both convert for above-floor cleaning, in different ways. The Shark has a removable handheld unit and a Pet Multi-Tool for upholstery. The Bissell converts the stick itself to a high-reach or handheld form, folds its handle forward and backward for compact storage, and stands on its own. On floors, the Shark’s listing describes a bristle brushroll for carpets, rugs and bare floors; the Bissell’s calls itself “great for hard floors” and talks about picking up fine dust and debris, and Amazon lists it for all floors. If most of your floor is carpet, the Shark’s own description fits better; if it is hard floor and storage space is tight, the Bissell’s does.

What neither states about suction

Neither listing gives a suction figure. The Shark’s calls its suction “HyperVelocity accelerated” and the Bissell’s says “powerful suction”, and neither gives a pascal, kilopascal or air-watt number. Among the 23 stick vacuums in our catalogue, 13 give none, so this pair is typical of the established brands, which tend to leave the number out, while the smaller brands lead with it. That makes the two easier to compare on what they do state, which is why this page is built on runtime, weight, voltage and bin size.

Noise: 80 and 84, and why 80 is not much to go on

The Shark states 80 dB and the Bissell 84, both from Amazon only. A 4 dB gap is about 2.5 times the sound power. Take it carefully: 80 dB is a recurring value. Of the 14 stick vacuums that state a noise figure, four state exactly 80, and across the uprights and handhelds in our catalogue the same figure appears again and again. A value that repeats across unrelated machines is closer to a default than a measurement, and the Bissell’s 84 is the highest in the class. Neither was measured by us.

Two listings for one model

2 listings in our catalogue carry the title “Shark Pet Cordless Stick Vacuum”, the same model in different colours, each with its own ASIN, and the figures on the other one agree with those here. That is the opposite of the 650W case: the same product described the same way twice. It is a reminder that a catalogue like ours counts listings, not models.

Which suits which

What this comparison cannot tell you

We did not test either machine, so we cannot say which picks up more, how the runtime changes on carpet, or how loud either is in use. Neither listing, in the rows we read, states a battery capacity or how the runtime degrades as the battery ages. For each in full, see our Shark Pet Cordless review and our review of the Bissell 3061.

Figures are the manufacturers’, as published on each listing and quoted in our reviews; none was measured by us. How we work · Affiliate disclosure