/ Community

Which products from the past should we test again?

We’ve tested plenty of different product categories in our time, but which one from the past would you like to see make a comeback?

Long-term members will know that there’s not too much out there we’ve never covered – we even tested footballs way back in June 1982!

From milk frothers to sun cream……. and even contraception. Yes, I’m aware of today’s date, but this isn’t a joke!

A journey back in time

We see thousands of products a year pass through our tests, and we want to know if there’s anything you remember us testing in the past that you’d like to see us taking to trial again.

Once upon a time we were even ‘testing’ pets! (ok, that particular conversation about bringing them back was an April Fool, but the ‘tests’ did happen!) Is it time to review which animal is taking the lead a few years on?

Cast your mind back and let us know in the comments what you’d like to see tested again. Are you considering a big summer blow out and want to see our hair dryer reviews back?

You might have noticed that there are some products that we stopped testing. This is because over time we just weren’t seeing differing results between brands. For example, we pulled the plug on CFL light bulb testing – we eventually found that they were all of similar quality and it just wasn’t worth our while testing these regularly.

We’ve certainly come a long way and have covered the weird and wonderful over the years. It’s time to test your memory: let us know below which products you’d like to see return.

Comments
Em says:
1 April 2022

Probably too late for me, as I have a full house – almost literally – of power tools. I’ve done fairly well without guidance from Which? by buying Bosch Professional (blue) tools, but have probably paid somewhat over the odds to get decent products. However, as an ex-client said to me, “I would rather you spend 20% over the odds and get something that does 100% of the job required, rather than spend too little and end up with something ineffective.” Hopefully I will also be able to sell them on when I finally hang up the tool belt.

Which? used to test mains power drills, if I remember correctly. There is now such a range of special purpose tools, it is no longer the case of buying a circular saw and an orbital sanding attachment. Plus so many generic Chinese copycat power tools that are rubbish, will last no time at all and are potentially less than safe.

I believe the next generation of Which? subscribers could do with some advice and guidance, particularly as DIY is no longer exclusively a man’s domain. We all need to find new ways to save money, and I expect professional trade costs will soon rise dramatically, with increasing energy costs for transport.

I trust there is no conflict of interest with Which? Trusted Traders that would hold back promotion of more DIY.

I would be grateful if Which? would test reciprocating saws and blades. The first time I used a reciprocating saw in the garden I vowed never to use a pruning saw again. There are significant difference between saws, for example the ease of changing blades, and some blades are much more effective and durable than others, and now there are cordless saws that are convenient, especially if there is no nearby mains power.

Em says:
1 April 2022

Good shout Wavechange. I bought a Bosch GSA 1100 in 2017 to save an odd job man some time demolishing timber stud walls with a hand saw, so it paid for itself on first use. It has found double duty ever since, chopping up scrap timber to take to the tip and sawing up branches in the garden. I’ve just taken delivery of some S1531L pruning blades today, which should last longer and perform better than the construction blades I have used to date. Much safer than a chain saw for anything less than 150 mm diameter.

I am using S1531 blades at the moment, Em. I prefer the S2345X blades which are shorter and seem to cut branches faster but they are more expensive and not available from the local Screwfix. Both seem equally durable but my neighbour has twice blunted blades by cutting tree roots in soil. The second time she bought a pack of unspecified blades from Amazon and they are useless because they have no ‘set’.

My saw is just green Bosch but it has survived well despite being used for a charity as well as gardening.

Phil says:
2 April 2022

” the Which? testing lab?” “our testing labs ” Which? hasn’t had it’s own testing lab since 2002 when McKechnie gave it away. Since then all Which? testing is contracted out and done by the lowest bidder. When are you going to stop misleading people like this?

With due respect, Alice, a bench test in the office cannot be truthfully described as a laboratory test where every condition and criterion can be strictly controlled and scientifically measured. Perhaps I have misunderstood the nature of the trials you conduct at your offices, but you have acknowledged and confirmed Phil’s point that Which? does not have its own testing laboratory. I feel that in future it would be better to just refer to a ‘test’ rather than a ‘lab test’ and ‘our testing labs’ which implies something comprehensive and more rigorous. We don’t want any misleading descriptions emanating from a popular consumer organisation.

Phil says:
5 April 2022

Thank you John, a proper testing laboratory will use properly calibrated equipment, certified and traceable back to NPL, and properly trained technicians. I doubt this is the case at Mary Rd. The deception goes deeper anyway. This website carries a video purporting to show the Which? test lab at work, it shows cars being crashed (Which? has never carried out it’s own crash tests) and child seats being tested but the test facility is not even in the UK, it’s ADAC’s facility in Germany. Likewise the mattress testing is work carried out by Frankfurt University.

All this can be verified by a quick search on Google.

Concern was raised back in 2020 that closing the lab was a bad idea but technophobe Mckechnie (who thought Which? could survive without product testing!) wouldn’t listen and now it’s obviously a decision Which? has come to regret; as many predicted. Which? is always ready to point the finger at misleading claims from other organisations so it needs to practice what it preaches and stop making misleading claims itself.

Thanks for responding anyway. I hope my comments can get passed up the management chain.

Phil says:
5 April 2022

A link to the video I mentioned above:-

https://www.which.co.uk/about-which/research-methods/testing

I totally agree with the remarks about (laboratory) testing. Meaningful and comparative testing, and most particularly where standards are involved, needs equipment and expertise to achieve objective results. “They’re busy testing out air mattresses today” (in-house in the office) “It’s this team who will take on the tests for the products our members tell us they’d like to see tested again.”. I’d be interested to know just what tests are being done in the office on air mattresses, and given that many products we would like tested (reciprocating saws have been given as an example) that involve performance, durability and safety, how can they be properly assessed?

I have seen the video Phil referenced before and found it quite misleading. Why not be open that Which? sub-contract testing to commercial laboratories?

I understand that the Good Housekeeping Institute have laboratories of their own. So does Choice, the Australian equivalent of Which? My experience of a test laboratory that is part of the organisation is that you gain more useful knowledge than is possible from reading 3rd party reports.

Phil says:
5 April 2022

For ‘2020’ read ‘2002’.

I can only add that I’m extremely disappointed that Which? continues to mislead its readers with what are actually false claims. It’s akin to a manufacturer claiming to make a product when in fact all they’re doing is importing one from abroad.

Perhaps a new lab could have been built and staffed with the money lost on the Indian venture?

Reading Trust Pilot reviews of Which is also educational and depressing in equal measure.

I will add my name to also being disappointed with the continuing insinuation that Which? has its own labs. When asked, members say product testing is the most important to them.

@afenner can we see a photo of the testing area in the London office?

I don’t have any objection to Which? using independent testing establishments, and in many ways it makes sense when, unlike in manufacturing with related products under continuous development, many different types of products are each only tested occasionally. The relevant expertise for every product is unlikely to be found in a central in-house laboratory.

Different conditions affect testing whether it is done in-house or outsourced and the test specification is the critical feature requiring a considerable amount of knowledge, preparation and follow-through. Close working with the testing organisation is vital. I should think there is a slight advantage in using an in-house operation but offset by a loss of objectivity, specialised competence, and broader product awareness.

The important point of this discussion is that Which? should be open and honest about how it tests products, not make claims it cannot substantiate, and not pretend it has resources and expertise that it does not.

@gmartin, George, would Which? like to amend their video and any text to make it clear that testing is done for them by independent commercial test laboratories and that they do not have their own laboratory facilities?

You’re absolutely right – we do require scientifically controlled lab testing for the vast majority of our product reviews. Just to reassure you that we write all the testing requirements for the labs we work with so they are typically our custom, specifically designed tests, performed by independent testers. We couldn’t test the volume and range of products we assess each year using one test facility. By sub contracting out to external labs, we’re able to find the very best specialists in their fields. We take on your comments on transparency as there has been no desire to hide information (though for commercial reasons we never identify which labs we use). To reflect this, we’ve made some small changes to the text in light of your suggestions – thank you for raising it. We think of the testing lab as our lab but appreciate we could be clearer when referring to different types of tests. Your feedback has been noted.

@charlotte-slayford, thanks Charlotte 🙂 . Perhaps the “our” could be removed from “our test labs” here? https://www.which.co.uk/about-which/research-methods

The first of these comments disappeared as I returned to the web page so I assumed it was lost. So I repeated it. Seems it went into moderation.

Not sure why that happened but deleted the duplicate comment for you now, thanks

@chiragkhetiya, thanks Chirag 🙂

Phil says:
13 April 2022

Well the Which? lab used to be able to test everything. For items that were commonly available across europe the various consumer bodies would pay one lab to do the testing then pool the results. The Which? lab used to do all the fridge/freezer testing which provided 40% of its income.

Steven says:
4 April 2022

A review of cordless screwdrivers (electric screwdrivers) would be useful

John Rose says:
13 April 2022

ditto shoe cleaning tools and potions. Never done yet, I think.

Patrick Taylor says:
5 April 2022

I have one of the first version of the reciprocating saw sold by Bosch in the UK a PFZ550. Badged Bosch but according to the plate made by the then partly-owned Scintilla AG in Switzerland. Scintilla invented the electric jigsaw in 1946.

I believe it was 1980’s when I bought it and was flabberghasted when Which? did a review of saws/powertools etc six months later and did not mention it. I wrote and asked why it was not featured and was told because it was not commonly available …. I bought mine from B&Q so I was not impressed. Even without testing they should have mentioned its existence as that type of saw had been marketed in the US since the 1950’s.

Incredibly versatile and despite heavy usage over the years still works fine with the full range of blades wood/metal/plastics/wrecker blade.

In a world of mass information W? should curate the good stuff so as to what W? could do for subscribers I strongly suggest that W? makes use of the many sensible people who do carry out tests and recommend so-and-so doing sound reviews. There are poor reviewers and there are good ones and if W? narrows the field it certainly would help. Of course before suggesting them as viewing W? needs them to be assessed and I supect amongst members and Trusted Traders a concensus would be reached. Even with caveats it would still despatch 95% of the poor videos from subscribers possible viewing.

I have seen excellent videos on many any “tools” and appliances where I have felt it is a good review. And easily tentimes that many which are badly flawed or not relevant to the UK or EU. In a world of standarisation though many many things are common in the UK and the EU and I think this will continue to be so.

I do subscribe to QC and other Consumer bodies which do cover things like drills if anyone is curious : ).

We have the PFZ550E probably bought from one of the sheds. Ours appears to be the 1990’s.

It still has the original paperwork including diagrams showing every part number for several models including the PFZ550.

Phil says:
5 April 2022

Wouldn’t it be better for our health, wallets and the environment to be reducing our reliance on power tools? How about Which? tests some ‘handraulic’ alternatives.

Well, I wouldn’t want to have to a hand drill for anything other than light work, nor moulding planes when I have a router. However, good quality hand tools are essential in any decent workshop – planes, chisels, saws – just as are circular saws, routers, drills, planer-thicknesser, lathe are useful to some. I don’t expect Which? to test and review the more specialised ones but they could, as Patrick suggests, review and recommend the decent review sites that exist and point interested members to them.

Reviewing the items that are worth putting in a basic home diy tool kit would be useful.

I have a vague recollection that Which? has reviewed or done a ‘first look’ at pole saws in the past. I was with a working group today and saw three cordless models in use and was very impressed. Even though these were inexpensive models the small chainsaw at the end of the pole soon cut through branches above or at a distance. We were away from mains power, so battery-operated tools were necessary but mains power would be fine for most users.

Many of us have trees in our gardens and a review of pole pruners might be of general interest.

I always wear a safety helmet with a visor when working above head height on trees. Even if you’re careful and don’t have branches crashing down, the shower of sawdust can be a nuisance. It would be good if suitable protection was included in any report on such equipment.

“First looks” have been published from time to time. My recollection is they take no account of build quality, durability nor safety and do not compare performance with equivalent products. Is that of limited use? I think it is, particularly safety, but it may suit the very casual user. While we use some tools relatively little, if they are decently made they will last many years and see more service than you might at first imagine.

It would be more useful if Which? pointed us to those (vetted) specialised review sites that had tested a range of similar products. I found two such sites when looking to buy a bench circular saw and thicknesser.

I have found the First Look feature useful on three occasions when buying some gardening equipment – a reciprocating saw, a motor mower, and a battery-powered lawn edger. I probably would not have been aware of the products I bought [since one of them was from Aldi and another sold on-line only] or chosen them if I saw them in a DIY store or garden centre, but while my expectations were limited they were exceeded in all three cases and they have all turned out to be good value for money.

I think we have done our own testing on pole pruners and would choose petrol power over battery power unless batteries have improved greatly since we bought one. The batteries ran out far too quickly, took too long to charge and failed completely after not being used for maybe a year. The B&D pruner was heavy to use.

We now have a mains powered electric Titan pole pruner that works extremely well and cost less than 2 replacement B&D batteries. It’s much lighter to use than petrol or battery and is always ready to go.

We also wear safety helmets when cutting above head height.

Thanks Alfa. Yesterday there were three cordless pole pruners in use including Titan, Parkside and some other brand. Although I was not on polesaw duty, I was able to see how effective they were.

I in most cases I prefer mains-powered tools that won’t become useless when the batteries fail or are expensive to replace.

Em says:
6 April 2022

Another area that could do with testing is the wider range of battery-powered mowers that are now starting to appear on the market.

Sadly, my Toro Wheelhorse is no longer made and the deck will rust through after another season or two of grass cutting – nearly 20 years, so I can’t complain.

The range of alternatives is both bewildering and limited. A replacement petrol ride-on from another (often badge-engineered) source? A lithium battery Atco tractor? A Husqvarna robotic battery mower (similar in principle to a robot vacuum cleaner)?

At £2,000 to £5,000 there is a lot at stake here.

If you are happy with your Toro you should be able to protect the deck from further rusting with Waxoyl or a similar product. Back in the 60s and 70s Waxoyl etc. were used to protect cars from rusting away within a few years. At least a mower does not have to withstand road salt.

Thanks @wavechange I’ve used Waxoyl and other products in the wings and sills of rust buckets, but I don’t think it will be very effective on the mower deck, which is just pressed steel with no cavities. The Toro deck is a recycler, so any product applied under the deck will get a good scouring and is unlikely to last long. Probably not environmentally friendly to have that scraped onto the grass clippings either. Perhaps I should have tried it sooner, as the welded mounts are on their last legs.

As with car wheel arches in the days before plastic liners were fitted, mower decks would need periodic treatment. As far as I know, Waxoyl is based on petroleum waxes which are relatively harmless and do biodegrade slowly.

My smaller mower has a plastic deck and despite initial concerns it has survived for over 30 years without cracking. For a ride-on you do need a metal deck but galvanising the steel might help.

“For a ride-on you do need a metal deck but galvanising the steel might help.”
My Ride-On Honda has a poly deck. So far (9 years) so good.

Thanks Roger. It seems that better plastics are now available, so I stand corrected.

“Good plastics” have been around for many years. As stated in other discussions it is choosing the right plastics for the application.
My 20 year old Honda rotary has a composite deck – probably a compression moulded compound – that has withstood the battering of flints that inhabit my lawn and is still in good condition.

There is plenty online about broken plastic mower decks, including Honda. It makes sense to remove any large stones before mowing.

It’s not always as easy as that. Where we lived previously the soil was exceptionally sandy and light and small flints just kept appearing, especially after rain. The damage to the mower was the least of the problems. One day it flung out a stone which shattered one of the patio doors. Of course, a good greenkeeper would have gone over the lawn before mowing with a besom and a spring-tine rake.

Removing stones is really not practical. Perhaps a link to breakages of Honda plastic decks could be provided? It is certainly not my experience in 20 years of hard work.

Alan Eadie says:
13 April 2022

Not a question of bringing back but more a question when on earth will you test ladies electric shavers?

David Carver says:
13 April 2022

Would like Which to investigate the effect of BT’s decision to phase out copper landlines and to convert everyone to digital over broadband. Can I still use my existing handsets? If not, what type of handsets will work, including remote handsets working wirelessly from a master phone. Can which please do an in depth report on how the change will affect users, and recommendations as to which new equipment one should buy.

The switchover is scheduled for 2025 and instead of plugging into the master socket, internal phone wiring will plug into the broadband router. My present router was supplied with a small adapter to connect it to a UK standard phone plug.

Here is a Which? article about the forthcoming change and I expect it will be updated when more information is available: https://www.which.co.uk/reviews/broadband/article/digital-voice-and-the-landline-phone-switch-off-what-it-means-for-you-aPSOH8k1i6Vv

BT/Openreach have decided to postpone the completion target for the transition to an all digital telephone service in view of the concerns expressed by the loss of functionality in the event of a power cut and the incompatibility of the new system with various types of alarm service.

There are no doubt solutions to these problems but I cannot understand how BT, other telecom service providers, and Ofcom have gone so far down this path before realising many people depend on having a permanent telephone connection unaffected by power cuts and compatible with their safety and security devices.

Here is a useful article that covers the main issues: https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/03/isp-bt-pauses-uk-digital-voice-rollout-after-consumer-complaints.html

For the majority of customers there is no problem and hundreds of thousands have already been migrated to the digital service. It is important that solutions are found promptly because of the cost of maintaining the analogue service.

I am sure the digital service is superior to the existing network and worth the investment, but compared with the laggardly roll-out of faster broadband there seems to have been an unnecessary sense of haste with this particular exercise.

While there are obvious technological advantages in scrapping the PSTN system, the one proclaimed benefit that I would question is that it will give a greater clarity of voice communication. It is a very long time indeed since I encountered poor transmission quality on the landline network and would even go so far as to say that it cannot be improved upon. Compared to the mobile phone network it is excellent. The digital system will, of course, be far more reliable, just like smart meters always are.

Peter Hepburn says:
13 April 2022

It would be good to see a review of double/triple glazing installers now, since much of what was installed in the 90’s will now have reached the end of its life.

Phil says:
13 April 2022

A long hard look at uPVC windows generally would be a good idea. Aside from the fact that they look ugly the manufacture of PVC produces toxic waste and the end product is difficult to re-cycle. As you say longevity is also problematic; I know people who are on their third set.

Andrew Murra says:
13 April 2022

May I suggest again that water softeners should be tested because they are an expensive item but a necessary one for the many people who live in hard water areas.

Chris bagot says:
14 April 2022

you once tested tea makers with an alarm clock. Would be interested in what is out there today for wake up gadgets and tea machines. Also do not recall if there ever was a test of stock cubes OXO etc. Given the huge variety out there now would be good to know what is still value to buy.

Michael Talbot says:
15 April 2022

I joined Which in 1958 when my first magazine issue examined which national newspaper was the best one to start you sitting room fire with! Some younger members may say, “What’s a sitting room fire?” but i will not dwell on that before the Clean Air Act of 1956 began to bite in the Nation’s homes.
I bought everything for my home when I married in 1962, after consulting Which, so I knew which questions to ask my retailor, and with cash ready managed to get good discounts on many of my purchases.
I would like to see Insurance policies for domestic property and motor vehicles examined, to really establish whether or not an existing policy holder does get a poor deal when renewing and would we all be better off changing our provider at every renewal.
I feel that my ‘Which’ membership has been one of the best decisions I ever made, as they say, “Power to your elbow!”
Michael Talbot (age 91 next month)

Hi Michael, thanks for sharing your story. That’s amazing to hear. We will pass on your valued feedback to our research teams along with all the other suggestions. Thanks again and Power to your elbow too!

Interesting review! I guess it is still “The Mail”, as you don’t need to waste any time reading it first.

Crusader says:
19 April 2022

I don’t know if Which? have ever tested these before but I’d like to see little table top fridges tested to see which is best as we don’t all have families or even a partner so some of us only need a little fridge. And I have a little frigidaire one which I’ve had for 25 years and it was second hand when I got it so it’s lasted me well, I’ve only had to repair it once in 2004 when I had to replace the thermostat. But now it looks like it might be on it’s last legs as it’s struggling to stay below 5c when I’ve got my gas fire on and it’s little compressor is running awfully hot. And I’ve noticed that Which? are now only testing family size fridges which are a bit big for anyone living on their own, and there is a lot of single folk here in the UK these days who I think would benefit from some sound advice on which fridge to buy, especially as one’s health can depend on a good reliable fridge. And I’ve just had a really bad Easter where I had to throw out a load of what would’ve been perfectly good food had it not been ruined by the fridge not being cold enough, I only found out the hard way when I got a dreadful vomiting bug and afterwards I stuck the little probe of my digital thermometer in the fridge which then showed me that it was running at well over 7c so no wonder I got so dreadfully ill. And I’ve been reading reviews elsewhere about smaller fridges and I’ve seen one which was obviously no good as several folk said that the icebox door wouldn’t close properly, and a good icebox is essential for stuff like fishfingers which I really like.

I think Which? did test counter-top fridges once but it was so long ago it would not be relevant today.

My personal view is that a standard under-the-counter fridge with a one-star freezer compartment is probably the minimum that anyone needs unless a shortage of space is the real problem. It provides enough space for a reasonable selection of food for the week ahead including sufficient storage for milk, dairy products, meats and part-used containers.

Most mini-fridges seem to be designed for chilled drinks but there are some small fridges available at Argos, Amazon and other retailers. If you go for a recognised brand [such as Russell Hobbs, for example] I think you would be satisfied much quicker than waiting for a Which? report.

Crusader says:
19 April 2022

I have got room for an “under the counter” fridge, and I used to have one once, but I would never use one now to anywhere near it’s full capacity, it would spend most of it’s time nearly empty. But I think they do generally have a better specification than a little diddy one, those I’ve looked at including russel hobbs, tend to have too high a minimum ambient temperature rating and my house gets really cold, down to under 10c in some winters so I need a fridge that can handle it better, and an icebox that works and closes properly is a must as I eat a lot of fish fingers simply because they’re so tasty when grilled till they’re brownish and because they can be grilled and they don’t need to be deep frozen unlike so much other cold stuff. There is a miele one that’s a “best buy” that’s not too hugely expensive that looks a likely one for me if my current fridge does finally croak on me.

Phil says:
19 April 2022

I’ve found that the amount of stuff I have expands to fill the space available. I too live alone but manage to keep fridge and freezer full. The fridge is an under-counter type and was bought second hand in 1977!

I’ve noticed that many fridges these days don’t have freezer compartments at all. Got caught out by this when we got a new fridge at work.

Cruisader said: ‘There is a miele one that’s a “best buy” that’s not too hugely expensive that looks a likely one for me if my current fridge does finally croak on me.’

Did you mean Miele? Not too hugely expensive? The smallest one I can see in their range is 300 litres.

Otherwise, I’m sure it would be a great product.

Crusader says:
19 April 2022

It’s a Miele K12020S1 which is 128 litres and it’s listed as a best buy as it was found to chill quick and be able to hold a stable temperature in fluctuating room temperatures, which is just what I need. But whether I’ll get one or not is not a decision I would make too quickly, not with something costing nearly £400 which is more than I paid for my new washing machine last autumn. I also can’t remember if it has an icebox which is a must for storing fish fingers! So I’ll have to check that first too.

You could save one penny if you bought the Miele from Amazon who list it as an under-counter fridge but it does not appear to have an ice compartment.

There not many small fridges with an ice box these days. The “Beko 156 Litre Under Counter Freestanding Fridge” at £189.99 has an ice box and might be worth considering.

Early fridges had ice boxes for short term storage of frozen food, whereas a proper freezer can keep food at -18°C. I presume that most modern fridges are larder fridges without an ice box.

Thanks Crusader – based on your spec, I was searching for fridge-freezers. The model Which? reviewed doesn’t have an icebox. Looks like they do make an integrated undercounter model, at over £1000 (ouch!).

I have an integrated Miele larder fridge and it is perfection. Lots of shelf positions, lots of shelves, no flimsy plastics and spot on temperature control – as measured with a Fluke a/c meter. I’m now a Miele convert. Their customer service is also great – even on a Saturday morning.

I don’t think it is an unreasonable expectation of people with little space or lesser food storage needs that a small fridge would have a small frozen food compartment; a one star ice box will keep things for a short period. Families had to manage with such equipment years ago. I suppose the manufacturers assume people buying an under-counter larder fridge will also buy a matching freezer. Luckily, there are some ice-box-fitted under-counter fridges on the market, but the choice is quite limited.

With everyone doubling the size of their kitchens and installing wide double-door fridge/freezers with continuous ice-making machinery and chilled water dispensers, the needs of small households are being lost sight of. With energy costs rising steeply and a need to reduce household carbon footprints, it’s time for a rethink.

I notice that many new-build properties, especially starter homes, have quite small rooms and often a shared kitchen/living space with no room to extend or enlarge it, so smaller appliances and space-saving layouts will become the norm. Small bungalows and park homes also tend to have small kitchens and little utility space so there must be a demand for suitable refrigerators with built-in frozen food storage.

Phil says:
20 April 2022

The Miele Crusader mentions doesn’t have a freezer compartment. As an alternative there are some under counter fridge/freezers available which is what we ended up with at work. Typically 61 litres fridge and 25 litres freezer capacity.

Phil says:
20 April 2022

The Miele Crusader mentions doesn’t have a freezer compartment. As an alternative there are some under counter fridge/freezers available which is what we ended up with at work. Typically 61 litres fridge and 25 litres freezer capacity.

That seems like the right balance between the two spaces. The freezer compartment needs to have the capacity for a loaf, some frozen vegetables and — of course — plenty of fishfingers.