Same 1,120 watts, same 11.83-ounce tank, same 150 scrubs a minute, same four pads. Two machines, one platform, and a two-pound difference that decides it.
Everyone in this category says they tested twenty vacuums. We have not tested any, and we say so. What we do instead is read the manuals, compile the published specifications, and work out what each machine costs to run for three years — the method is written out in full.
We earn a commission if you buy through the links on this page, at no extra cost to you. It never changes what we recommend or the order we recommend it in. Full disclosure.
Buy the S8001 unless you specifically want the Steam Blaster. The two machines publish the same 1,120 watts, the same 11.83-ounce removable tank, the same rotating pads at over 150 scrubs a minute and the same four washable Dirt Grip pads. What separates them, on Shark's own figures: the S8201 adds a targeted Steam Blaster burst and publishes a sanitization claim, and it weighs 8.9 lb against the S8001's 6.9. Two pounds on a mop you push around a floor is a lot, and the S8001 publishes the more checkable performance claim of the two.
What is actually the same
Almost everything. This is one platform sold twice, and it is worth seeing that plainly before weighing the differences.
Shark's published figures for both models, side by side.
Figure
S8001
S8201
Power
1,120 watts
1,120 watts
Water tank
11.83 fl oz, removable
11.83 fl oz, removable
Scrubbing
Rotating pads, over 150 scrubs per minute
Rotating pads, over 150 scrubs per minute
Pads included
4 machine-washable Dirt Grip pads
4 machine-washable Dirt Grip pads
Steam modes
3 — Light, Normal, Deep
3 — Light, Normal, Deep, plus a targeted Steam Blaster burst
Weight
6.9 lb
8.9 lb
Published claim
Up to 2x better stuck-on stain removal versus traditional steam mops, per IEC/TC SC 59F
Removes 99.9% of common household bacteria using water alone
Lighting
LED headlights
Not published
Read from each model's own retail listing. The claims differ in kind as well as in content: the S8001's names a test standard, the S8201's does not.
The three differences that matter
1. Two pounds
6.9 lb against 8.9 lb is a 29% increase on a machine you push, lift over thresholds and carry up stairs. In a category where the whole point is that a steam mop is lighter and simpler than a floor washer, that is the most consequential number on the page — and it runs against the more expensive model.
2. The Steam Blaster
The S8201 publishes a targeted burst for stuck-on spots, which the S8001 does not. This is a genuine capability rather than trim: a concentrated shot of steam at a dried spill or a grout line does something a steady output does not. Whether it is worth two pounds and the price gap depends entirely on whether your floors have baked-on spots or just need cleaning.
3. Which claim each brand chose to make
This is the interesting one. The S8001 publishes "up to 2x better stuck-on stain removal versus traditional steam mops, per IEC/TC SC 59F" — a performance claim with a named standards body behind it. The S8201 publishes "removes 99.9% of common household bacteria using water alone" — a sanitization claim with no test standard named.
One of those is checkable in principle and one is a description. Our method page sets out why we weight them differently. It is also mildly odd: the machine with the extra hardware makes the less specific claim, and the cheaper one cites a standards body.
#
Product
Best for
Score
Price
01
Shark Steam & Scrub All-in-One (S8001)Rotating pads at over 150 scrubs a minute, and Shark publishes the test standard behind the 2x stain claim rather than just asserting it.
Shark Steam & Scrub with Steam Blaster (S8201)The S8001 plus a trigger-controlled steam blast for individual spots, at the cost of two more pounds in your hands.
Bissell PowerFresh Steam Mop (1940A)Three steam settings, a flip-down scrubber and a 23-foot cord, with a two-year warranty that is double everything Shark offers.
The two Steam & Scrub models plus the two machines most often cross-shopped against them. The first two share a platform, so read the weight and the blaster rows rather than the power row.
01 · Best rotating-pad scrubber
Shark Steam & Scrub All-in-One (S8001)
Rotating pads at over 150 scrubs a minute, and Shark publishes the test standard behind the 2x stain claim rather than just asserting it.
Up to 2x better stuck-on stain removal versus traditional steam mops, per IEC/TC SC 59F (mustard), tested against the S1000
Pads
4 machine-washable Dirt Grip pads included
Lighting
LED headlights
Every figure above is the manufacturer's own published number. Where a manufacturer publishes nothing, the row says "Not published" rather than an estimate.
What the numbers say
+Names the test standard AND the model it was tested against — the most checkable performance claim on this site
+Three steam modes plus mechanical scrubbing, which is a genuinely different machine from a flat pad
+Four pads in the box, so you can clean the whole house before doing laundry
Where it stops
−11.83 fl oz is a smaller tank than the far cheaper S3601, and scrubbing uses water faster
−6.9 lb with rotating heads that pull the mop forward — an acquired feel
−Pads wear faster than on a static mop, because they are doing mechanical work
Who it is for
Kitchens with actual stuck-on messes, and homes where a flat pad has already failed.
Skip it if
Your floors are only ever dusty. You are buying a scrubber for stains you do not have, and the S3501 does maintenance cleaning for far less.
Our score: 7.5 out of 10
Steam control8.5
Tank size4.5
Weight and handling6.0
Pad system9.0
Running cost7.5
Scored against the published rubric on How We Pick. These are judgments about spec sheets, not measurements.
02 · Best for baked-on spots
Shark Steam & Scrub with Steam Blaster (S8201)
The S8001 plus a trigger-controlled steam blast for individual spots, at the cost of two more pounds in your hands.
3 — Light, Normal, Deep, plus a targeted Steam Blaster burst
Scrubbing
Rotating pads, over 150 scrubs per minute
Sanitization claim
Removes 99.9% of common household bacteria using water alone
Pads
4 machine-washable Dirt Grip pads included
Every figure above is the manufacturer's own published number. Where a manufacturer publishes nothing, the row says "Not published" rather than an estimate.
What the numbers say
+Targeted steam burst on a finger trigger, for the one spot that will not come up
+Everything the S8001 does, unchanged
+Four pads included
Where it stops
−8.9 lb is by far the heaviest steam mop here and it is a real difference over a whole floor
−Same 11.83 fl oz tank as the S8001 while using steam faster
−The blaster is the only difference for the extra money
Who it is for
People whose floors have specific recurring problem spots rather than general grime.
Skip it if
Weight matters to you at all. Two extra pounds over a whole house is the trade for a feature you will use on maybe three spots.
Our score: 7.2 out of 10
Steam control9.5
Tank size4.5
Weight and handling4.5
Pad system9.0
Running cost7.5
Scored against the published rubric on How We Pick. These are judgments about spec sheets, not measurements.
03 · Best big tank under 5 lb
Shark SteamSpot with Steam Blaster (S2001)
A 500 ml tank and three steam modes at under 5 lb — the most usable combination of numbers on this page.
3 — Light, Normal, Deep, plus a targeted Steam Blaster burst
Stain-removal claim
Up to 50% better stuck-on stain removal versus a traditional steam mop
Pads
1 Dirt Grip pad and 1 stiffer scrub pad, both washable
Sanitization claim
Removes 99.9% of common household bacteria using water alone
Rated surfaces
All sealed hard floors
Every figure above is the manufacturer's own published number. Where a manufacturer publishes nothing, the row says "Not published" rather than an estimate.
What the numbers say
+500 ml is the largest tank here and it comes in under 5 lb, which no other machine on this page manages
+Three steam modes plus the targeted blaster
+Two pad types in the box — one for maintenance, one for scrubbing
Where it stops
−Only one of each pad, so you are doing laundry sooner than with the four-pad Steam & Scrub
−No rotating scrub head, so it is 50% better rather than the Steam & Scrub's 2x
−The 50% claim does not name its test standard, unlike the S8001's
Who it is for
Anyone who wants the fewest refills and the least weight, which is most people.
Skip it if
You need mechanical scrubbing. This is steam plus a textured pad; if a flat pad has already failed on your floors, buy the S8001.
Our score: 8.6 out of 10
Steam control9.0
Tank size9.5
Weight and handling9.0
Pad system6.5
Running cost9.0
Scored against the published rubric on How We Pick. These are judgments about spec sheets, not measurements.
04 · Best for tile and grout
Bissell PowerFresh Steam Mop (1940A)
Three steam settings, a flip-down scrubber and a 23-foot cord, with a two-year warranty that is double everything Shark offers.
Flip-down Easy Scrubber for dried-on messes and grout
Cord
23 feet
Cleaning path
12 inches
Sanitization claim
Kills 99.9% of germs, bacteria and viruses when used as directed
Warranty
2-year limited
Rated surfaces
Sealed hard floors — sealed hardwood, tile and ceramic, granite, marble
Every figure above is the manufacturer's own published number. Where a manufacturer publishes nothing, the row says "Not published" rather than an estimate.
What the numbers say
+Three steam settings — the only genuinely variable machine under $110 here
+Built-in flip-down scrubber is the correct tool for grout and nobody else at this price has one
+23-foot cord, the longest published here
+2-year warranty, double Shark's across the line
Where it stops
−6.2 lb, the heaviest steam mop on this page
−Scent discs are an optional consumable that quietly adds up if you start using them
−1,500 W is the highest draw here, which matters if the outlet is shared
Who it is for
Tile and grout kitchens and bathrooms, where the mess is baked on rather than dusty.
Skip it if
Your floors are all sealed hardwood. You are paying for a grout scrubber you will never flip down, and the lighter Shark units suit hardwood better.
Our score: 7.7 out of 10
Steam control9.0
Tank size6.5
Weight and handling6.5
Pad system7.5
Running cost8.5
Scored against the published rubric on How We Pick. These are judgments about spec sheets, not measurements.
How they compare with what else is on the shelf
Against Shark's own SteamSpot S2001: the SteamSpot publishes a 500 ml tank — more than double either Steam & Scrub — at 4.8 lb, which is lighter than both, and it also has a Steam Blaster. What it does not have is the rotating-pad scrubbing action, which is the entire reason the Steam & Scrub line exists. If you want scrubbing, buy a Steam & Scrub; if you want tank size and light weight, the SteamSpot beats both of these on paper.
Against the Bissell PowerFresh 1940A: Bissell publishes 1,500 watts, a 16-ounce tank, a 23-foot cord and a flip-down scrubber for grout, at 6.2 lb — lighter than either Shark here with more published power and a longer cord. Its sanitization wording is the strongest on this page. The tile and grout roundup ranks it for exactly that job.
The verdict
For most floors, the S8001. Two pounds lighter, the same scrubbing action, the same tank, the same pads, LED headlights the S8201 does not publish, and the more specific of the two performance claims. Buy the S8201 only if baked-on spots are a recurring problem — the Steam Blaster is a real capability and the S8001 does not have it. And look at the SteamSpot S2001 before either if you find yourself refilling more often than scrubbing, because a 500 ml tank at 4.8 lb solves a different and more common complaint.
We have not used either machine. Everything here is read off Shark's own published listings. A spec sheet cannot tell you how the rotating pads feel on a rough tile, how long either takes to heat, or how the pads hold up after fifty washes. Our method page states exactly where our evidence stops.
Common questions
What is the difference between the Shark S8201 and S8001?+−
On Shark's published figures, three things: the S8201 adds a targeted Steam Blaster burst, weighs 8.9 lb against the S8001's 6.9, and publishes a 99.9% sanitization claim where the S8001 publishes a 2x stain-removal claim citing IEC/TC SC 59F. Power, tank, scrubbing speed and the four washable pads are identical.
Is the Shark S8201 worth the extra over the S8001?+−
Only if you have baked-on spots regularly. The Steam Blaster is a genuine capability the S8001 lacks. Against it, the S8201 is two pounds heavier — a 29% increase on a machine you push and carry — and the S8001 publishes LED headlights and the more specific performance claim of the two.
How big is the tank on the Shark Steam & Scrub?+−
Both models publish 11.83 fluid ounces, removable. That is small for the category: Shark's own SteamSpot S2001 publishes 500 ml and the Bissell PowerFresh 1940A publishes 16 fluid ounces. If refilling is your complaint rather than scrubbing, neither Steam & Scrub is the answer.
Do the Shark Steam & Scrub mops really scrub?+−
Both publish rotating pads at over 150 scrubs per minute, which is a mechanical action a fixed-pad steam mop does not have. That is the reason the line exists. What Shark does not publish for either model is a heat-up time, a cord length or a runtime per tank.
Which Shark steam mop is best for tile and grout?+−
Of these two, the S8201, because the targeted Steam Blaster aims a concentrated burst at a grout line. But the Bissell PowerFresh 1940A publishes 1,500 watts, a flip-down grout scrubber and a 23-foot cord at 6.2 lb, and it is the machine we rank first for tile and grout specifically.
Are the Shark Steam & Scrub pads washable?+−
Yes. Both models ship with four machine-washable Dirt Grip pads, which is the running-cost argument for a steam mop generally: tap water and washable pads mean the only recurring cost after purchase is electricity, about $15 over three years at typical use.
Sources
Manufacturer-published specifications — Every runtime, wattage, capacity, weight, filtration and warranty figure quoted on this page is the manufacturer's own published number for that model, retrieved September 1, 2026. Where a manufacturer publishes no figure, the page says 'Not published' rather than estimating one.
Sweep & Suction — How We Pick — Our published method, including the scoring rubric, the three-year running-cost formula and an explicit statement of what published specifications cannot tell you.
