Is this $599 above-ground cordless pool cleaner worth buying? Is it truly the best above ground pool cordless vacuum on the market?

Read on to find out.

Table of Contents

Unboxing & Overview

Pros and Cons

Cleaning Performance

User Experience

Long-Term Maintenance Costs

Is It Worth It?

Unboxing & Overview

Industrial Design: The machine looks modern and tech-forward, with decent build quality and a weight that feels manageable. The filter basket is easy to take out. In the box, you get the unit itself, a user manual, a power supply, and a hook meant to help retrieve the machine from the pool. However, the handle design feels awkward and makes the unit inconvenient to carry. Honestly, the hook doesn’t add much practical value.

We ran a series of tests in a swimming pool and collected first-hand performance data. In addition to cleaning results, we also evaluated customer service, product design, and the overall user experience. Test pool setup: a concrete pool measuring 135 square feet with a water volume of 2,000 gallons.

The Aiper Scuba S1 is a Cordless Robotic Pool Cleaner. For its price, the cleaning performance is solid, though the overall experience still has room for improvement. It works well for routine cleaning in small pools. For larger pools, however, cleaning takes longer and requires multiple recharges to finish the job.

Pros and Cons

Pros

① The cleaning performance is solid and effectively removes debris like sand, dust, and hair from the pool.

② The robot consistently climbs the pool walls without falling off and is able to clean along the waterline.

③ Once in the pool, the machine automatically plans its cleaning route and follows an “N-shaped” pattern, which helps avoid repeated coverage.

④ During underwater operation, we did not observe any issues such as water leakage or short circuits.

⑤ The after-sales service experience is generally positive, with customer support responding to inquiries in a timely manner.

Cons

① Cleaning in pool corners isn’t very thorough and still requires manual touch-ups.

② The robot follows an “N-shaped” cleaning pattern, but the spacing between passes is relatively wide, which can leave some areas insufficiently cleaned.

③ Waterline cleaning on the pool walls isn’t performed horizontally, which lowers overall cleaning efficiency.

④Once the robot is submerged, retrieving it is inconvenient due to the awkward handle design, and the included hook is too short to be truly helpful.

⑤Once the machine is in the water, the app stops working, making it impossible to monitor or adjust the robot during operation.

The following test data focuses primarily on three aspects: core cleaning performance, user experience, and long-term maintenance costs.

Cleaning Performance

The machine relies on two turbine motors to draw in water at high speed, creating suction at the intake that pulls debris into the unit. At the front of the underside, it is also equipped with two active PVC rollers, which help loosen and lift debris stuck to the pool floor or walls as the robot moves along.

Cleaning Coverage

The machine offers 4 cleaning modes, including floor, wall, and automatic modes. In our testing, all modes worked as expected. Overall, the robot was able to pick up debris such as small branches, sand, and hair, but cleaning performance in corner areas fell short of expectations. In wall-cleaning mode, the machine is capable of cleaning the pool walls. However, our observations show that it follows an “N-shaped” path when cleaning vertically. This approach can leave some areas insufficiently covered. Horizontal wall cleaning would be a better option, as it could improve overall cleaning efficiency.

Cleaning Path Planning

Based on current testing, the robot is propelled by a tracked drive system and utilizes the WavePath™ 2.0 navigation system. Its underwater cleaning path is structured rather than random, following an “N-shaped” trajectory designed to reduce redundant coverage. Once deployed into the pool and activated, the robot automatically detects obstacles and adjusts its direction to avoid them.

User Experience

The machine features a simple control design without complex buttons or operating procedures, while still allowing users to select multiple operating modes. It starts automatically once placed in the water and will automatically power off if not submerged within 30 seconds. After entering the water, the machine begins operation after approximately 10 seconds. During operation, the LED indicator remains illuminated, providing clear and intuitive feedback on the device’s operating status, which is an important aspect of the user experience.

Weight and Ease of Handling

When removed from the packaging, the unit has a net weight of 7.5 kg. However, the handle design is not particularly ergonomic. Once the machine is submerged, retrieving it from the pool for inspection is difficult, as it cannot be lifted easily by hand. The included retrieval hook is also too short and can only be used effectively after the machine has completed its cleaning cycle and floated to the surface. During underwater retrieval attempts, the hook provides little practical assistance.

Filter Cleaning Convenience

The filter basket has a capacity of 3.5 liters and supports dual-stage filtration with 180 μm and 3 μm filter media. After completing the pool cleaning cycle, we cleaned the filter screens and debris basket separately. Both components are easy to remove, and maintenance can be done by simply rinsing them with clean water, making post-cleaning maintenance quick and convenient.

Fault Alerts

During testing, there were instances where the robot stopped operating unexpectedly. However, the app did not provide any alerts or notifications in such cases. In addition, the unit was unable to climb steps for cleaning, which is an area that could benefit from further improvement. Furthermore, once the robot is submerged, the app loses connection and becomes non-operational, preventing any real-time control or monitoring during underwater operation.

Long-Term Maintenance Costs

The robot’s power consumption during operation is relatively low. However, ongoing maintenance in terms of battery runtime, charging time, and filter replacement requires a noticeable time investment. For medium to large pools, completing a full cleaning cycle often necessitates multiple charging sessions.

Power Consumption and Runtime

Throughout our testing, the machine was able to operate for 235 minutes on a full charge. Charging from 0% to 100% took 223 minutes. At 100% battery capacity, the machine can clean approximately 1,800 square feet. As with battery-powered products in general, power consumption and runtime tend to decrease over time. We will continue to monitor this through ongoing testing.

Filter Replacement Costs

The filters are replaced approximately every three months. We replaced them twice at a total cost of 70$. With more frequent cleaning, replacement costs may be higher.

Warranty and After-Sales Service

According to customer service, the warranty policy currently provided is two years. During our testing, we encountered issues that required troubleshooting support, and customer service responses were very timely, with feedback provided promptly. Overall, this aspect of the experience was positive.

Should You Buy the Aiper Scuba S1 Cordless Robotic Pool Cleaner?

If your budget is around $500, the Aiper Scuba S1 is worth considering. Based on our testing, its cleaning performance and long-term ownership costs are solid, though not exceptional. It’s a good fit for small to medium-sized pools. For larger pools, however, the cleaning process becomes less convenient, as completing a full clean requires longer runtimes and multiple recharge cycles. That added time and repetition may be a drawback, and in that case, other options may be better suited.