Head to head

Prixton BT300 or Lubluelu CHYW201: which should you choose?

Comparison of the two window-cleaning robots using our catalogue's scoring criteria, value by value. Scores are relative to all the models we have analysed.

Prixton BT300, studio product shot

Prixton BT300

7.7/10
Overall rating

Main drawbackSuction pressure sits near the bottom of advertised category figures

Read the full analysis →
Lubluelu CHYW201, studio packshot

Lubluelu CHYW201

9/10
Overall rating

Main drawbackMains power makes cord routing part of every setup

Check price on Amazon → Read the full analysis →

Our verdict based on your priority

  • Priority: “Suction pressure”Lubluelu CHYW201 8.6 / 10 vs 7.1
  • Priority: “Water tank capacity”Lubluelu CHYW201 9.5 / 10 vs 7.9
  • Priority: “Backup battery holding time”Lubluelu CHYW201 9 / 10 vs 7.5
  • Priority: “Equipment”Lubluelu CHYW201 8.9 / 10 vs 8.1

By criterion

Comparison of Prixton BT300 and Lubluelu CHYW201 by criterion
Criterion Prixton BT300 Lubluelu CHYW201
Suction pressure 7.1 8.6 advantage
Water tank capacity 7.9 9.5 advantage
Backup battery holding time 7.5 9 advantage
Equipment 8.1 8.9 advantage

A gap of less than half a point does not count as an advantage: our scores are relative to the catalogue, and using them to pick a winner would imply a level of precision we cannot offer.

Side-by-side specs

Specifications for Prixton BT300 and Lubluelu CHYW201
SpecificationPrixton BT300Lubluelu CHYW201
Suction pressure2800 Pa6500 Pa
Electrical power90 WNot provided
Water tank capacity60 ml160 ml
Backup battery holding time20 min30 min
Noise level65 dBNot provided
Power supply during cleaningMains-poweredMains-powered
Manufacturer's intended useHouseholdHousehold
Indoor / outdoor cleaningIndoorOutdoor
Window compatibilityFramedFramed
SprayingAutomaticDual spray
ControlRemote controlRemote control
Safety featuresUPS backup batteryUPS backup battery
Cleaning modesSpot cleaningQuick

Figures published by manufacturers and retailers, compiled in our reviews. “Not provided” means the figure could not be verified.

Which is right for you?

Prixton BT300

Leads on 0 criterion of 4 compared

  • No numerical specification sets it apart in this comparison.
View Prixton BT300 →

Lubluelu CHYW201

Leads on 4 criteria of 4 compared

  • Water tank capacity: 9.5/10 vs 7.9/10 (160 ml vs 60 ml)
  • Suction pressure: 8.6/10 vs 7.1/10 (6500 Pa vs 2800 Pa)
  • Backup battery holding time: 9/10 vs 7.5/10 (30 min vs 20 min)
  • Equipment: 8.9/10 vs 8.1/10
View Lubluelu CHYW201 →
Prixton BT300No verified partner offers for this modelRead the full analysis

As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Comparison based on published specifications and our scores, calculated using the same criteria for every model. Our methodology →

Frequently asked questions

Which is rated higher, Prixton BT300 or Lubluelu CHYW201?

Lubluelu CHYW201 scores 9/10, compared with 7.7/10 for Prixton BT300, using the same scoring criteria.

Which wins on “Water tank capacity”?

Lubluelu CHYW201 wins on “Water tank capacity”: 9.5/10 compared with 7.9/10 for Prixton BT300. Recorded values: 160 ml versus 60 ml.

Which wins on “Suction pressure”?

Lubluelu CHYW201 wins on “Suction pressure”: 8.6/10 compared with 7.1/10 for Prixton BT300. Recorded values: 6500 Pa versus 2800 Pa.

Which wins on “Backup battery holding time”?

Lubluelu CHYW201 wins on “Backup battery holding time”: 9/10 compared with 7.5/10 for Prixton BT300. Recorded values: 30 min versus 20 min.

Which wins on “Equipment”?

Lubluelu CHYW201 wins on “Equipment”: 8.9/10 compared with 8.1/10 for Prixton BT300.

More useful comparisons

Spotted an error on this page? Report it