Mint 4200 vs iRobot Braava 320: Comparing Entry-Level Floor Mopping Robots

In the realm of automated floor cleaning, the Mint 4200 and the iRobot Braava 320 stand as notable choices for those looking to maintain clean hard surface floors with minimal effort.

Don't Miss Out! ⏳ Click For Amazon's Exclusive Vacuum Deals!

Having thoroughly tested both devices, I’ve observed that each cleaner brings its own strengths to the table, catering to various consumer needs and preferences. Introduced by Evolution Robotics, the Mint 4200 is designed to sweep and mop floors by utilizing cleaning cloths, effectively collecting dust, dirt, and pet hair.

The model operates quietly and is straightforward to use, showcasing its efficiency in routine home cleaning.

On the other hand, the iRobot Braava 320 represents the evolution of the Mint series after iRobot’s acquisition of Evolution Robotics.

The Braava 320 continues the legacy of its predecessors with similar design features and cleaning capabilities but is also cherished for its brand reputation and post-purchase support.

Despite holding the iRobot name, the Braava 320 still faces scrutiny on whether its cleaning performance and technological features live up to customer expectations, just as with any household device.

Key Takeaways

  • The Mint 4200 focuses on simplicity and efficacy in cleaning hard surface floors.
  • The iRobot Braava 320 leverages iRobot’s market presence and customer support.
  • Both units are evaluated on design, performance, navigation, ease of use, and overall value.

Overview of Mint 4200 and IRobot Braava 320

In comparing the Mint 4200 and the IRobot Braava 320, both devices showcase their distinct features tailored for efficient floor cleaning. As someone who has put these machines through their paces, I’ll detail their specific functionalities designed for sweeping and mopping hard surface floors.

Distinguishing Features of Mint 4200

The Mint 4200, developed by Evolution Robotics, focuses primarily on sweeping and mopping. It’s equipped to handle dust and pet hair on hard surfaces, making it an excellent choice for hardwood and tile floors. The navigation relies on the NorthStar Navigation System, which acts like an indoor GPS, guiding the Mint around the room to ensure thorough coverage.

Notable Features of Mint 4200:

  • Sweeping and Mopping: Capable of dry-sweeping and damp-mopping.
  • Orientation Technology: Uses the NorthStar Navigation System.
  • Cleaning Cloths: Compatible with disposable cloths, such as Swiffer pads.

Key Characteristics of IRobot Braava 320

The IRobot Braava 320, also in the business of keeping floors spotless, works effectively on tile, vinyl, and hardwood. This robot excels in mopping, ensuring that tough spots receive ample attention, although its mopping capability has its limitations on the very persistent stains. Its cube-navigation technology may not cover as large of an area as some other devices like the Scooba or the Roomba but is reliable for designated spaces.

Primary Traits of IRobot Braava 320:

  • Navigation: Utilizes the NorthStar navigation system with room-to-room cleaning capability.
  • Mopping: Focuses on mopping with special attention to maintain clean floors.
  • Battery: Equipped with a rechargeable battery designed for prolonged cleaning sessions.

Design and Build Quality

Through extensive hands-on experience, I’ve observed that both the Mint 4200 and the iRobot Braava 320 share a commitment to sleek design, but they exhibit distinct differences in build quality and materials.

Structure and Aesthetics

The Mint 4200 presents a compact, square-shaped design that allows it to reach corners with more ease. Its aesthetics are streamlined and functional, with a simple button layout and a matte finish. In contrast, the iRobot Braava 320 maintains a similar shape but with a glossier finish that’s prone to fingerprints. It also includes a carrying handle, which makes it more convenient to transport between rooms.

Durability and Material Quality

When it comes to durability, the Mint feels sturdy with a well-clasped battery compartment and resilient outer casing. On the other hand, the iRobot Braava is built with a mix of robust and flimsier plastic components. The Braava’s water tank attachment, for example, has a less secure fit compared to the Mint’s seamless compartment design. I’ve noted no significant changes in construction or components after the manufacturing switch to China that affects the durability or reliability of the iRobot’s products.

Cleaning Performance

In my extensive testing of the Mint 4200 and iRobot Braava 320, I’ve compared their cleaning performance on a variety of surfaces to determine which device is more effective. They both operate using cleaning cloths, but their approach to navigation and mopping differ, providing distinct cleaning experiences.

Mopping Efficiency

The Braava 320 utilizes a NorthStar navigation system which, while somewhat limited according to PCMag’s review, effectively covers larger kitchen areas when compared with the Mint 4200. When testing mopping on tile and hardwood floors, I observed that the Braava 320 managed to sustain a relatively fast pace while consistently dispersing water and utilizing its reusable microfiber cloth to wipe away spills and stains. However, it doesn’t always get tougher spots clean, requiring extra attention post-cleaning.

On the other hand, the Mint 4200 has a more straightforward navigation system which can occasionally struggle with comprehensive coverage, especially in expansive spaces. Despite this, I found its mopping particularly effective on smaller, contained areas, excelling at lifting light debris and maintaining a moisture level that avoids puddling on the surfaces.

Sweeping and Dusting Capabilities

For sweeping and dusting, the Braava 320’s performance shines with its capacity to pick up a noticeable amount of dust and debris, comparable to the cleaning efficiency of a Swiffer. Its use of widely available consumables like Swiffer pads offers convenience and effectiveness, making it a versatile tool for everyday clean-up.

The Mint 4200, while it may follow a simpler path, doesn’t lag far behind in dusting. It is capable of gathering a considerable amount of dust thanks to its microfiber cloths, which are quite adept at trapping particulates. Its sweeping action is gentle yet thorough, ensuring that surfaces, be it tiles or hardwood floors, are left dust-free.

Navigation Technology

In my extensive testing of both the Mint 4200 and the iRobot Braava 320, I’ve found that their approach to navigating a space is a critical aspect of their performance.

Northstar Navigation System

The Northstar Navigation System is a cornerstone feature in both of these models. When I activated the system, I noticed that it projected an infrared signal to create a reference point on the ceiling. This acts as a guide for the robotic cleaner, allowing it to track where it has been and where it needs to go next. The Braava 320 utilizes this technology by communicating with a Northstar Navigation Cube that’s placed in the room. For edge detection and to avoid obstacles, the device uses its onboard sensors. My observations confirmed that both the Mint 4200 and the Braava 320 effectively avoided stairs and other drop-offs using this navigation system, ensuring they stayed on course without supervision.

  • Navigation Cubes: Use Northstar Navigation Cubes to expand the coverage area.
  • Infrared Lights: Guide the robot’s path and map creation process.

Map Creation and Room Tracking

In terms of map creation and room tracking, the Northstar Navigation System allows these devices to understand the layout of the cleaning area. I noticed the Braava 320’s methodical back-and-forth cleaning pattern while tracking along walls for thorough border cleaning. The Braava 380t enhances this experience with additional software that enables it to store a map of the space, ensuring more consistent room coverage during multiple cleaning sessions. During operation, I particularly appreciated the fact that if the robot encounters an obstacle, it will remember the location and avoid it in the future, showcasing the adaptability of the navigation system. The effectiveness of this navigation technology underscores its importance in maintaining the efficiency of routine cleaning tasks.

Ease of Use

When comparing the Mint 4200 and the iRobot Braava 320, I found both models are designed with user-friendliness in mind, though they have their own unique interfaces and maintenance needs.

User Interface and Control

The Mint 4200 touts a simple layout with clear buttons that start the cleaning cycle. During my tests, I could easily swap between the Swiffer dry and wet cleaners depending on the floor situation. This flexibility is useful in targeting different types of messes without hassle.

The iRobot Braava 320, on the other hand, offers intuitive controls as well. With buttons marked for ‘Power’, ‘Sweep’, and ‘Mop’, I didn’t have any trouble using the device as a floor sweeper or a mop robot. The Braava 320 works with a navigation cube, which provides guidance to the robot, ensuring efficient cleaning paths, even in rooms crowded with furniture.

Maintenance and Cleaning

Both devices advocate ease of maintenance. The Mint 4200 and Braava 320 use cleaning cloths that attach to the bottom of the units. The Mint 4200 comes with both disposable and a reusable microfiber cloth, making it adaptable. I appreciated this because it meant that I could use the disposable options when I’m short on time and can’t manage laundry.

The Braava 320 employs a similar approach, using microfiber cloths for dry sweeping or damp mopping with the help of its pro-clean system. While testing, I found the Braava’s cleaning pads easy to clean and maintain, and they stuck well to the pad holder due to the rubber teeth, which enhanced the machine’s cleaning efficiency. It’s important to note that even if the use of cleaning consumables is a recurring cost, both the Mint 4200 and iRobot Braava 320 provide the option to reuse the microfiber cloths, which can be seen as a benefit in the long term.

In my experience, the floor mopping robots are only as effective as the effort you put into their upkeep. Fortunately, for both the Mint 4200 and iRobot Braava 320, this effort is limited to regular washing or replacing of cleaning pads, keeping operational maintenance quite manageable.

Accessories and Consumables

In my experience with the Mint 4200 and iRobot Braava 320, I have found that the right accessories and consumables can significantly influence the cleaning efficiency. Here are specific elements concerning their replacement cleaning pads and battery options.

Replacement Cleaning Pads

For both devices, I can opt for different cleaning pads depending on the task at hand: dry dusting or wet cleaning. The original Swiffer dry pads are compatible and can be used effectively for picking up pet hair and dust. When dealing with more challenging dirty floors or tough spots, I typically use the wet cleaners, which are slightly dampened pads that can handle grime with greater ease. Additionally, both machines can accommodate machine washable microfiber pads, which are economical and environmentally friendly for repeated use.

  • Swiffer Dry Pads: Ideal for everyday dusting and pet hair removal.
  • Wet Cleaning Pads: Better for tougher, sticky messes.
  • Microfiber Pads: Washable and reusable for both dry and damp mopping.

Battery and Charging Options

The Mint 4200 and the iRobot Braava 320 use a 1500 mAh NiMH battery. For the Braava 320, the battery lasts up to two hours damp mopping and up to three hours dry mopping. The charging time for these batteries is about 10-12 hours. However, the Mint Plus model introduces the turbo charge cradle accessory, which is a beneficial upgrade for faster charging, although it’s something I haven’t personally had the need to use.

  • Standard Battery Life: Up to 2-3 hours depending on cleaning mode.
  • Charging Time: Approximately 10-12 hours.
  • Turbo Charge Cradle: Available for the Mint Plus model for faster charging.

Through my extensive use of both devices, I’ve found these accessories and consumables essential in maintaining their performance and durability. Having additional cleaning pads and understanding the charging options helps me manage my cleaning schedule effectively, ensuring my floors remain clean without interruption.

Customer Service and Support

In my experience with both the Mint 4200 and the iRobot Braava 320, I’ve found that the support services provided by iRobot are comprehensive and user-friendly.

Warranty and Returns

For both robots, iRobot generally offers a 1-year limited warranty for the robot and a 6-month limited warranty for the battery. I verified that the return policy is quite straightforward on their platform. If purchased directly from or through authorized retailers like Amazon, you can usually return the product within 30 days if it doesn’t meet your expectations. For North American customers, iRobot provides a hassle-free process, but returns may vary in the European market due to different consumer protection laws.

Product Support and Assistance

Whenever I needed product support for my Braava 320, I reached out through multiple channels. The official iRobot Customer Care can be accessed via:

  • Phone Support for USA and Canada:
    Monday to Friday: 9:00am – 9:00pm EST
    Saturday & Sunday: 9:00am – 6:00pm EST
  • Online Messaging: Available through their iRobot Customer Care page.

It was reassuring to know that I could retrieve up-to-date documentation for my Braava 320 on their site. Also, queries about the iRobot Home App were easy to resolve, thanks to their dedicated ‘Get App Help’ support page.

Market Presence and Brand Reputation

When assessing the market presence and brand reputation of the Mint 4200 and the iRobot Braava 320, it’s evident that both devices hold their ground in the competitive world of home robotics. Their standing is a testament to the evolution of the brands and the consistent feedback from users.

Brand History and Evolution

iRobot, the company behind the Braava 320, is a well-established brand that started with the famous Roomba vacuum cleaning robots. After acquiring Evolution Robotics, the makers of the Mint series cleaners, iRobot expanded its portfolio. Throughout my experience with their various models, it’s clear that their technology and design have continuously improved, catering to the increasing demand for efficient home cleaning robots.

Evolution Robotics laid the foundation for the Mint series with innovative navigation systems, which became even more refined once iRobot took over. My time spent with these devices has shown that the integration of the brands brought together the best aspects of each company’s technology.

Market Position and Customer Feedback

The iRobot Braava 320 has maintained a strong position in North America and the European market, appealing to those who seek a simple and smart solution for mopping. The feedback I’ve come across underscores its ease of use and effectiveness. However, some customers note limitations, particularly with the NorthStar navigation system.

In contrast, the Mint 4200 had its moments pre-acquisition, especially praised by customers who desired a straightforward and somewhat “lazy” approach to floor mopping. While the Mint 4200 was often celebrated for its ease, I’ve noticed that, post-acquisition, users appreciate the technological enhancements brought by iRobot.

Both brands have cultivated loyal user bases, with the iRobot‘s reputation generally benefiting from its association with proven success in home robots. As for their market performance, both the Braava 320 and Mint 4200 have robust standings, yet it is the iRobot’s wider recognition that seems to edge out in overall brand presence, according to the customer feedback I’ve evaluated.

Price Comparison and Value for Money

When examining the price tags of the Mint 4200 and the iRobot Braava 320, I found that their cost-effectiveness is quite comparable. However, a deeper look is necessary to understand their true value for money. My experience with both units has led me to assess their value based on not just the upfront cost but also their features and performance.

Price Points:

  • Mint 4200: Historically, the price has floated around a mid-range point for robotic cleaning devices. It tends to be priced for budget-conscious consumers.
  • iRobot Braava 320: It occupies a similar pricing category as the Mint 4200, often found on Amazon and other retailers at competitive prices.

The initial investment into either of these machines is just the beginning. The real value unfolds as they take on the task of cleaning. The Mint 4200, in my use, has shown consistent performance, making it a reliable option for those who need basic floor sweeping. The Braava, on the other hand, has impressed me with its efficiency as a mop and sweeper—a dual function that adds to its value proposition.

Efficiency Comparison:

FeatureMint 4200iRobot Braava 320
MoppingNot ApplicableEfficient
Battery LifeSatisfactorySatisfactory
Overall Cost-to-Features RatioHighHigh

In terms of value for money, both the Mint 4200 and iRobot Braava 320 deliver on their promise. Although they are priced similarly, the Braava 320 offers mopping capabilities which slightly edges out the Mint in terms of functionality. Retailers like Amazon often provide deals on these models, further enhancing their value. I suggest potential buyers consider the specifics of their cleaning needs when determining which model presents the best value for them.


After extensive testing of both the Mint 4200 and the iRobot Braava 320, I’ve observed their cleaning efficiency and usability in various home environments.

The Mint 4200 is simplistic in design and suitable for those who prefer a straightforward, no-frills machine. Its performance is consistent on hard floors, but it might struggle with tougher stains.

In contrast, the iRobot Braava 320 presents a more sophisticated approach to floor-mopping. It is user-friendly and integrates smart technology, which I found effective for maintaining clean floors on a regular basis. Its NorthStar navigation system helps it cover ground methodically, though it’s not without limitations.

When considering consumables, I appreciate that the Braava 320 can use widely available cleaning cloths, which is economical and convenient.

To sum up, my experience suggests:

  • Mint 4200: Good for those preferring a basic, reliable mopping robot.
  • iRobot Braava 320: Better suited for users looking for a more advanced and smart floor-mopping solution.

The choice between the two will largely depend on your preference for ease of use and the level of smart features you desire in a cleaning robot.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *