CHOICE membership

Criterion for tests - storage for the bits?

When testing products could more prominence be given to the packing away ability of a product after use? Things like kitchen appliances, pressure cleaners, and really anthing that has accessories and/or attachments.

I know power cord storage is often considered, and vacuum cleaners ability to store attachments on-board is considered, but what about all the other things we use. For example not all food processors come with storage boxes for all those sharp bladed disks. What about the bits and pieces for a pressure cleaner etc. Even when storage is provided is it easily accessible, practical, and will it hold the parts securely?

This is something that is not often considered until you find the product doesn’t have proper storage for all its bits, or what is provided isn’t functional.

Thanks

11 Likes

Thanks @meltam, I’ll pass on your feedback to the product testing team :+1:

7 Likes

I’d endorse this. Two examples; our V11 Dyson - theoretically ‘broom cupboard’ - but does a broom cupboard have a power-point? Dyson does make a ‘stand’ for the item and its accessories - but it takes up more space than a standing lamp and is a little precarious. Our Dyson gets a lot of use now that I’ve spent (a number of half-days) making a wall-mount out of varnished wood near a power-point.
Our mix-master/food-processor - is a great tool, but not all the accessories fit tidily, and the base is (usefully!) very heavy. It gets less use than it should because it has to be stored in multiple inconvenient bits, with the base now in a too-heavy-for-grandma-bending (only-available) spot.
As more people are forced into ‘efficiency’ apartments, this aspect will only become more important.

5 Likes

Can’t endorse this strongly enough. Choice of old used to always consider this’d heaps of other aspects of any tested device, but over recent years they have become almost just a product review. Get you’re act together Choice, and do the job properly.

1 Like