Expert’s Rating
Pros
- Top-mounted charging port
- Very lightweight
- Float makes for easy retrieval
Cons
- Very poor coverage
- Considerably worse performance than the same-priced competition
Our Verdict
The Ultenic Pooleco 10 is cheaper than its closest pool-cleaning competitor, but it leaves too much debris untouched.
Price When Reviewed
$199.99
Best Prices Today: Ultenic Pooleco 10 Cordless Robotic Pool Cleaner
$199.99
I did a double take when I first saw the Ultenic Pooleco 10 pool robot, immediately remembering the Aiper Seagull SE which I previously reviewed and which was now collecting dust in my storage area.
After digging it out and placing the two robots side by side, the similarities were uncanny, though on closer inspection they’re not exactly clones of one another.
Like the Seagull, the Pooleco 10 is a (very) low-end, entry-level device designed for the simplest of cleaning tasks. Unfortunately, even the most basic pool-sweeping duties can be a challenge for this bot.
The Pooleco did a dismal job in my testing, and a big part of the problem was due to one simple design flaw.
Design
The 7-pound device is about as portable as a lunch box and can be easily stashed anywhere when not in use–a stark contrast to the larger and more expensive robots designed to deliver a deeper clean.
A 5,200-mAh battery provides a running time of 90 minutes, which Ultenic says is good enough to cover an 850-square foot pool. (That’s enormous, by the way; my pool is under 500 square feet in area.)
This review is part of TechHive’s in-depth coverage of the best robot pool cleaners.
What’s different from the Seagull? Aside from some cosmetic flourishes, only a few features.
The similar Aiper Seagull SE (right) is a considerably more capable cleaner.
The similar Aiper Seagull SE (right) is a considerably more capable cleaner.
Christopher Null/Foundry
The similar Aiper Seagull SE (right) is a considerably more capable cleaner.
Christopher Null/Foundry
Christopher Null/Foundry
First, the Pooleco includes an optional float that attaches to the top of the robot and bobs at the surface level while it’s running. The float makes it easier to retrieve than the Seagull, which requires the use of a hook–though the cord attached to the float may get tangled on obstacles both in and out of the pool.
Second, the Pooleco charges via an electrical port on the top of the device instead of the bottom, like the Seagull does. This is a minor but noticeable design improvement that makes it easier to attach and detach the charging cable and ensures the plug doesn’t rest in a puddle of water.
Operation and navigation
In the water, the Pooleco scoots around quickly on four small wheels (two extras are included in the box), brushing debris into its chassis as it passes across the pool floor in fairly tight, curving arcs, though sometimes shifting rolling straight ahead.
There aren’t any real navigation smarts here: The robot moves in one direction until it is blocked, then it pauses and goes the other way. Repeat until the battery is nearly dead, when the Pooleco parks itself near a wall (successfully, in my testing.)
Performance
Unfortunately, the Pooleco did a rather dismal job in my testing, picking up only about 35 percent of organic and artificial debris in its hour-and-a-half run time. A big part of its poor performance was due to one simple design flaw.
A small float bobs on the surface, allowing for easy retrieval.
A small float bobs on the surface, allowing for easy retrieval.
Christopher Null/Foundry
A small float bobs on the surface, allowing for easy retrieval.
Christopher Null/Foundry
Christopher Null/Foundry
As noted, the robot operates by moving in circles, stopping when it hits an obstacle and then reversing. The problem is that the robot doesn’t quickly turn back when it hits a wall, pausing for up to 20 seconds during my tests, perhaps trying to plow ahead as if the wall wasn’t even there. Ultimately, that meant the robot spent too much time stopped and waiting to turn around, rather than actually cleaning the pool.
To compare, I tested the Seagull SE on this same task (I wasn’t yet using artificial leaves when I wrote my original review of the Seagull) and it achieved about a 55-percent collection rate–significantly better though hardly earth-shattering in performance.
Notably, the Seagull SE turned back more quickly when it hit a wall, which likely explains its better performance; it was simply moving around a lot more than the Pooleco.
Cleaning and maintenance
The filter cleaning process is identical on the Pooleco and the Aiper Seagull. Two clips on the front and back of the device disconnect the upper half of the robot from the lower half, essentially cleaving in two. Debris is trapped directly in this lower shell, with a filter screen in between to capture fine particles.
Cleaning it is fairly trivial, though connecting the three pieces back together with the proper alignment can take some trial and error.
Should you buy the Ultenic Pooleco 10?
The Pooleco 10 is available for a mere $160, which sounds great, but that’s the same price as the more capable Seagull SE is today.
That unfortunately makes it impossible to recommend despite the couple of minor usability improvements that it offers.
