Shark WS632 WandVac Review

Shark is one of the more innovative brands in this industry, and the WandVac WS632 is another innovation.

What I mean is that they combined the lightweight properties of a handheld vacuum with the agitation of a full-sized stick vacuum.

Before testing it, I had some apprehensions since it’s (basically) a handheld masquerading as a stick vacuum, but the results exceeded expectations.

Features

The WandVac series is Shark’s new product line consisting of a mix of handheld and stick vacuums.

Whereas other brands (somewhat) utilize Dyson’s framework with a bulky frame and trigger (or switch), Shark employs a cylindrical frame with a wand-type handle.

It’s not a (completely) unique design, as the Dyson Omni-Glide utilizes something similar, but its combination with a full-sized stick vacuum nozzle is something I’ve never seen.

We’ll go through the features of this lightweight and versatile stick vacuum.

Lightweight Frame

One of the most notable characteristics of this product is the handheld frame Shark utilized.

Its cylindrical instruction is nearly identical to its handheld counterpart but slightly longer.

I’ve noticed an uptick in this design, particularly with mini-handheld products, such as various Briggi products.

The WandVac frame is larger to accommodate the larger motor and battery, providing extra power for cleaning floors.

PowerFins Nozzle

The WandVac utilizes the PowerFins nozzle, featuring the same standard brush roll found in other Shark cordless stick vacuums, such as the Vertex Pro Powered Lift-Away, Vertex, and Vertex Pro.

It features a roller with a combination of rubber fins and bristles, and here’s a close look.

It has the same width as the Vertex series brush roll, but without the soft roller piece, allowing for excellent agitation despite the low airflow (more information below).

Another similarity is the felt-like seal behind the brush, helping funnel debris toward the vacuum inlet.

Self-Standing

Most stick vacuums I’ve reviewed aren’t self-standing, meaning they need the assistance of a dock for vertical storage.

This isn’t the case for the WandVac, as consumers have several storage options available.

The first (and most convenient) method is to store it on the dock, as it doubles as the charging port.

It has a slot for storing the crevice/brush tool combo. Unfortunately, it doesn’t have any extra slots for the upholstery tool.

Another is detaching the handheld portion and sliding it into a dedicated slot on the extension tube.

Handle Control

This product has a single control at the base where the handle and body intersect. Since it only has one power setting, there’s only a single button.

You’ll also see the battery indicator in front of the quick-release latch.

Quick Release Latch

In front of the power switch is the quick-release latch that opens the dustbin for emptying debris.

It helps simplify the dirt-emptying process, and (in most cases) there’s no need to touch the dirt.

Dustbin

Unfortunately, due to its cylindrical and handheld-biased design, the WandVac has a capacity of only 0.12 liters.

One unique aspect of its design is that the container isn’t fully enclosed.

Once you push the quick-release latch, it opens, and debris falls.

It features a single filter system with seals around the edges, but unfortunately, it failed the fog test.

Detachable Battery

The Shark WandVac WS632 has a detachable battery with decent capacity (3000 mAh lithium-ion).

I tested the runtime with the nozzle; it lasted 12 minutes and 7 seconds. Not great, but with a full-sized nozzle, it’s hard to expect a higher figure.

Tools and Accessories

The Shark WandVac WS632 doesn’t have plenty, but its tools are pretty handy.

First is the dock for vacuum storage, which has a slot for the crevice tool.

There are several ways to store the vacuum, including as a stick vacuum or with the handheld portion stored separately.

Aside from the dock, it comes with two handheld tools – an upholstery tool and a crevice/brush tool.

The dock also doubles as the charging port, with pins available on both slots for the wand and handheld unit, adding to its versatility.

These tools are held securely, with the quick-release latch on the vacuum, not on the tool.

Handheld Mode

One significant selling point of the WandVac is its versatility. This product is (basically) a handheld paired with a stick vacuum attachment.

The difference with the WandVac is that it has a full-sized nozzle, helping it clean floors better than comparable products with a handheld bias.

Run Time

I tested the WandVac’s run time by timing the vacuum from a full charge to an empty state.

It lasted 12 minutes and 7 seconds with the primary nozzle, which is below average for a stick vacuum.

The battery is detachable, but Shark doesn’t have a dedicated charger, so consumers can’t charge the battery separately.

Airflow

I used an anemometer in all the vacuum reviews and did the same with the WandVac WS632.

It only has one setting, and here are the results.

• Extension tube: 28.23 CFM
• Cleaning nozzle: 22.93 CFM

It’s not a lot, but it’s enough for surface cleaning tasks, which we’ll examine next.

Cleaning Performance

Next, we’ll look at the cleaning performance where I test this product on various debris types, from Quaker Oats to sand.

• Overall: 95.81%
• Hard floors: 97.8%
• Sand on hard floors: 98.46%
• Carpets: 98.95%
• Deep cleaning: 88.05%

Despite the low airflow, the Shark WandVac results were impressive. It reached the high 90s in most surface debris experiments.

One experiment that is dragging down the score is the deep cleaning test, which scored below 90% due to the low airflow.

Nonetheless, it’s still an excellent result, given that this product is meant for quick cleaning tasks, not deep cleaning carpets.

Hard Floor Results

• Quaker oats: 100%
• Coffee grounds: 91.2%
• Quinoa: 100%
• Pet litter: 100%

Debris pick-up isn’t an issue with the WandVac, even with the low airflow.

I’ve tested this product extensively on various types of debris, and it consistently picked up well.

The “PowerFins” nozzle provides excellent agitation on this surface.

There was minimal snowplowing because a gap was left underneath to accommodate large debris piles.

It only got a low score with coffee grounds because they didn’t fit inside the tiny dustbin. Thus, fragments of it regurgitated afterward.

Sand on Hard Floors

One barometer I use to determine a stick vacuum’s hard-floor performance is how well it vacuums up sand.

The Shark WandVac WS632 achieved an average pickup rate of 98.46% across three tests, which is impressive given its lack of a soft roller and low airflow.

Additionally, the eye test confirms these results, as it detected most of them during the experiments.

Edge Cleaning

In experiments, the Shark WandVac excelled at cleaning edges, even with large amounts of debris.

The “PowerFins” nozzle was proficient at picking up debris and left (very) minimal remnants on the edges.

Hair Wrap

One of the most surprising aspects of the Shark WandVac is its hair wrap performance.

This product doesn’t profile to be something that’ll clean long hair stands since it has low airflow, but the results say otherwise.

• 5-inch strands: 100%
• 7-inch strands: 100%
• 9-inch strands: 100%
• 11-inch strands: 100%
• 13-inch strands: 100%

Yes, this isn’t a misprint. The WandVac performed flawlessly in all experiments, achieving a 100% success rate.

Unfortunately, hair can get stuck on the middle filter piece, a common issue with most stick vacuums.

Carpet Results

Low-airflow stick vacuums struggle on carpets, which was my initial concern with the Shark WandVac.

I put this product through the same experiments, and the results were surprisingly good.

Low Pile

• Quaker oats: 100%
• Coffee grounds: 95.2%
• Quinoa: 100%
• Pet litter: 98.8%

The results above are proof of the superb agitation of the “PowerFins” Nozzle. There’s no way a low-airflow stick vacuum should be picking up this much.

This product didn’t capture everything during the forward pass, but it captured nearly everything in subsequent passes.

Mid Pile

• Quaker oats: 100%
• Coffee grounds: 97.6%
• Quinoa: 100%
• Pet litter: 100%

The results on this surface are better than those on low-pile surfaces and further confirm the high-end agitation capabilities of the WandVac “Powerfins” nozzle.

Even with tough-to-clean coffee grounds, very minimal traces were left after the experiment.

Deep Cleaning

One drawback of low airflow vacuums is their inferior deep cleaning performance, as seen with the Shark WandVac.

I tested it on 100 grams of fine sand on a mid-pile carpet, and it achieved only 88.05%.

It’s not a terrible score, but it’s not as good as other premium lightweight options like the Dyson V12 (94%). The price variance is significant.

Hair Wrap

Another surprise during the experiments is the superb hair wrap results, even with long hair strands.

The Shark WandVac is one of the best stick vacuums for cleaning long hair strands (up to 13″).

• 5-inch strands: 100%
• 7-inch strands: 100%
• 9-inch strands: 100%
• 11-inch strands: 100%
• 13-inch strands: 100%

Nothing wrapped on the primary brush roll – only some (stray) strands on the small wheels, but the “PowerFins” nozzles were excellent at resisting hair tangles.

Noise Levels

Despite the low airflow, the Shark WandVac exceeded 70 decibels during the experiment (76.6 dB).

And this is the downside of Shark’s “PowerFins” nozzle.

Parts Availability

With Shark’s popularity, there will be good parts availability, but it won’t be as extensive as that of a Dyson, which offers more options, even from third-party manufacturers.

Consumers can purchase parts like the battery, filters, and (perhaps) the nozzle.

Unfortunately, I don’t see any third-party brands selling components because the WandVac isn’t as popular as any Dyson cordless vacuum.

Product Specifications

Where to Buy?

This lightweight cordless stick vacuum is available in online stores like Amazon. Check the links below for the latest pricing information.

• Shark WS632 WandVac on Amazon

Disclaimer: I’ll earn a commission if you purchase through the link above, but at no extra cost, so it’s a win-win for us!

Does the Shark WS632 WandVac offer excellent value?

Given its price-to-performance ratio, the Shark WandVac W632 offers excellent value.

Despite its low airflow output, it exceeded (my) expectations during the various cleaning experiments.

Consumers seeking a lightweight option for quick-cleaning tasks should consider this option.

There will be issues with the tiny dustbin capacity and unsealed system, but its performance on hard floors and carpets makes up for its limitations.

4 Reasons to Purchase the Shark WS632 WandVac

1. Lightweight: This stick vacuum only weighs 2.1 pounds, one of the lightest I’ve reviewed.
2. Above-average vacuuming surface debris: Despite the low airflow, it got excellent scores with surface cleaning experiments.
3. Excellent inside tiny homes: It’s possible to store this product vertically with and without the charging dock.
4. Reaches deep under furniture: The cylindrical frame enables it to reach deep underneath furniture.

The Verdict

Folks looking for a lightweight stick vacuum should put the Shark WandVac WS632 on their shortlist.

Despite its flows, the low price and above-average cleaning performance make it a compelling option.

Yes, it has a small dustbin and leaked during the fog test, but the high-end agitation enables this product to pick up debris nearly as well as a full-sized stick vacuum.