How We Test Masticating Juicers v1.0

Do you need a $400 masticating juicer, or would a $75 one suffice? Scrolling through online reviews, you’ll find rave reviews and harsh critiques for both price points. To cut through the market clutter for the truly best juicer, we put all our juicers through the same set of tests, using identical ingredients. Beyond juicing time, juice yield, and quality, we scrutinize build quality and design for ease of use, assembly, and disassembly.

Our testing program below will guide you through the nuances of choosing a masticating juicer that is effective and a pleasure to use on a daily basis.

How We Rate Masticating Juicers

Performance - 40%

Scoring components for each ingredient include juice yield, juicing time, and for kale, foam level was also taken into account.

Our Juicer Performance Tests

Usability - 35%

Ease of use is an important criterion when buying any household appliances, but especially so for juicers. Juicing, unlike cooking, is not a “must” for most people; therefore, convenience may play a more important role than juice yield or quality. A juicer that’s good at extracting juice but too much trouble to use, will likely land up in a cupboard gathering dust after its ‘honeymoon period’. 

Therefore, we score the usability of a juicer for its ease of assembly (30%), ease of juicing (25%) and cleaning (35%), and convenient features (10%). We examine these over multiple trials and performance tests and score each machine against a list of set criteria.

Assembling - 30%

We evaluate how easily a juicer can be put together and taken apart, focusing on the design's intuitiveness and simplicity. A high score in this category means the juicer is straightforward to assemble and disassemble. We also check if the juicer is sturdy, safe, and risk-free during this process. Furthermore, we examine the relative compactness of a juicer and how parts can be separately handled, especially for storage..

Juicing - 25%

We examine whether the juicer operates smoothly without additional work such as using the plunger or the reverse button. Another factor is the juicer’s ability to accept chunky pieces of produce, which reduces the need for extensive pre-cutting.

Conveniences - 10%

This assessment covers aspects such as the inclusion of a reverse unclogging function, speed or pressure settings tailored to different produce types, and an anti-froth feature for cleaner juice. We also take note of miscellaneous or extra features.

Cleaning - 35%

We examine how fast and straightforward it is to clean a juicer after each juicing session. Removable parts that can go in a dishwasher and the inclusion of specialized cleaning tools will earn the juicer extra points.

Design - 25%

We look at a juicer's design focusing on three key points. First is how well parts fit together, paying close attention to material quality and the craftsmanship. Then, we examine relative compactness that does not compromise on functionality. Lastly, we assess how the blade or auger works for efficient juicing, minimizing waste, and the variety of produce you can juice.

Build Quality & Fit - 50%

Over months of use, we assess whether a juicer can withstand everyday use without premature wear or damage. We note during testing whether parts fit well and that no rattling noise is heard. A juicer earns points for a polished or seamless, residue-free finish, and for a stylish design with aesthetic appeal.

Size & Footprint - 40%

The dimensions and footprint of a juicer impact portability, storage, as well as functionality. We analyze the relative size of components and their impact on usability. The juice and pulp cups should be complementary in size, the feed chute suitably wide, and all removable parts should easily fit in a standard draw. Additionally, we assess the footprint of the assembled unit.

Blade/Auger - 10%

A juicer’s auger is scored for its construction or build quality and the way it’s engineered to facilitate quick cutting and efficient crushing.