USA
Catalog   /   Small Appliances   /   Home Appliances   /   Lint Removers

Comparison Maxwell MW-3102 vs Philips GC026

Add to comparison
Maxwell MW-3102
Philips GC026
Maxwell MW-3102Philips GC026
from $7.56
Outdated Product
from $12.24 up to $22.00
Outdated Product
TOP sellers
Main
Includes batteries, an attachment for delicate fabrics and a cleaning brush.
Nozzle for delicate fabrics
Lid for blades
Brush for cleaning
Number of revolutions8800 rpm
Containerremovableremovable
Power source
batteries /2xAA/
batteries /2xAA/
Dimensions123x58x80 mm
Weight134 g
Added to E-Catalogmarch 2015march 2015

Nozzle for delicate fabrics

The purpose of this device is clear from the name: it is designed for convenient and safe cutting of lint from thin and rough-sensitive fabrics. Note that in some models, the nozzle for delicate fabrics is standard, and the possibility of installing other devices is not provided.

Lid for blades

The lid prevents contamination of the working nozzle of the remover and its contact with foreign objects. This piece of equipment is useful for storage and transportation. Of course, with proper packaging, the remover can be stored/transported without a lid — however, such packaging is not always available, and the lid, in turn, often allows you to do without improvised packaging at all.

Brush for cleaning

The brush is convenient for cleaning the blades and other elements of the remover from waste that inevitably occurs during operation. Of course, other devices can also be used for this, but in general, complete brushes are considered the most convenient and practical option: they are quite effective, and the risk of damage to remover parts is minimal.

Number of revolutions

The speed of rotation of the motor of the remover, expressed in revolutions per minute. The speed of movement of the blades directly depends on this parameter, and on it, in turn, the quality of lint removal: the faster the blades move, the more efficiently the lumps are cut.
Maxwell MW-3102 often compared
Philips GC026 often compared