- Easier to assemble and clean than most other horizontal masticating juicers we tested
- The least expensive slow juicer we tested
- Average to well below average yields in most of our juicing performance tests
- Extracts juice that’s very high in pulp content
- Comes with a very short power cord and very small juice and pulp containers
- Much less durable than other juicers of the same type – thinner plastics, less heavy duty metal parts
- A poor long term value despite its low initial price because it obtains low yields
|Ease of Use||2.5|
All category scores are out of 5.
Table of Contents
Unlike every other horizontal masticating juicer we tested, the Hamilton Beach 67950A slow juicer cannot be used for homogenizing or for making pasta. It can only be used for juicing. It therefore only includes parts for juicing which are:
Juicing – Parts List
- food pusher
- hopper (user manual calls it a funnel)
- drum, feed chute
- juicing strainer
- drum cap (user manual calls it a juicer cap)
- main body
- juice container
- pulp container
Also unlike most other horizontal masticating juicers we tested, the Hamilton Beach does not come equipped with a juicing nozzle. This is one less part to assemble, but as we will discuss at length later in the review, the few seconds having one less part removes from assembly time – a positive – is easily offset by the negative impact the lack of having this part has on the juicer’s overall performance.
Assembly of the 67950A, with even just a little bit of experience, takes only about 30 seconds to complete from beginning to end – this is with all removable parts fully disassembled to begin. This is just about as long as it takes to assemble most other masticating juicers of the same type (horizontal). Vertical masticating juicers take a little bit longer – 40 seconds on average, while centrifugal juicers take a little less time to fully set up from start to finish – about 20 to 25 seconds on average.
To begin, take the drum assembly and firmly press it into the main body of the juicer. The feed chute should be pointed slightly towards you as the whole drum assembly is pressed in initially. Once the drum is pushed in as far as it will go turn the whole assembly about 10 or 20 degrees in the counterclockwise direction and it should lock into place. Note that the end of the drum cylinder that is fitted into the main body is the end with tabs protruding from the edge of the cylinder.
The auger is fitted next. Push the metal arm extending from the base of the auger into the main body. Some adjustment may be required to firmly seat the auger in place. The juicing strainer is then fitted over the auger. The strainer is a funnel shape with a mostly metal end and a most plastic end. The latter end goes first into the drum cylinder. There is a rectangular plastic (metal covered) piece that extends from the plastic end of the strainer. This part of the strainer should face downward over the juice spout if the strainer is properly seated. To secure the strainer in place over the auger tighten the drum cap onto the drum cylinder. As a final step and in order to complete assembly place the hopper onto the feed chute.
Assembly Positives and Conclusion
Assembly of the Hamilton Beach slow juicer is actually much easier than the assembly of other juicers in its class (horizontal masticating). This is so for several reasons. For one, the Hamilton Beach requires less parts for assembly. Almost all other horizontal masticating juicers have a juicing nozzle that’s installed onto the end of their drum caps. The Hamilton Beach does not come with nor requires a juicing nozzle to be installed for juicing. Two, and more importantly, most parts on the Hamilton Beach are larger and/or fit less tightly than comparable parts on the other horizontal masticating juicers we tested. The drum has a larger diameter and the auger has a slightly smaller diameter than comparable parts of other juicers in this class. Therefore, the auger very easily fits into the drum. The drum cap is also larger than average for this category. It’s large and easy to manage.
The third factor that makes the Hamilton Beach easier to assemble than comparable juicers is the fact that its drum attaches to its main body more easily. Other juicers in this class require that the drum be attached to the juicer by fitting it onto the main body and then securing it in place by turning a locking clip in the clockwise direction. The Hamilton Beach foregoes the use of a locking clip by implementing a design that requires that you simply press the drum into the main body and turn the drum itself in the counterclockwise direction. The drum will then lock into place without any external user adjustable mechanism (a locking clip) holding it in place. Disassembly is also made easier by this design as you simply have to press a clearly marked release button and turn the drum in the opposite direction to remove it from the main body.
Finally, installing the drum cap (called a juicer cap by the manufacturer) is easier on the Hamilton Beach than it is on other comparable juicers, not only because of its larger size, but also because the direction in which it should be turned is clearly marked. As we’ve discussed in other reviews for juicers of the same type, all juicers in this class require that the drum cap be turned counterclockwise in order to fasten it to the drum assembly. This completely goes against the widely accepted convention of turning things to the right in order to tighten them. Hamilton Beach has recognized this and, unlike other manufacturers of juicers in this class, has at least attempted to allay the problem by making clear markings on the drum cap indicating which way it should be turned to tighten it. While this may seem like a small thing to make note of, we can’t stress enough how much fiddling around the average user will engage in when trying to tighten the drum cap and juice nozzle on a standard horizontal masticating juicer that doesn’t have a drum cap that’s clearly marked.
So, in conclusion, it’s easy for us to give the nod to the Hamilton Beach as the easiest to assemble horizontal masticating juicer we tested. We give it a perfect 5 out of 5 for assembly difficulty.
The manual specifies that the drum should be fitted onto the main body while pressing down the release button located on the side of the main body. We found that we were able to install the drum without holding the release button down. Of course, when it came to disassembly it was absolutely necessary for us to hold the release button down in order to remove the drum from the main body.
Food preparation for juicing with a horizontal masticating juicer is much more complex and involved than it is for most other types of juicers on the market. This is so for three reasons. First, they have smaller feeding chutes than most other types of juicers. The 67950A’s feeding chute is 1.875 inches wide and 2 inches long, which actually gives it a slightly larger feeding chute than all other juicers we tested of the same type (horizontal masticating). The Tribest Solostar 4 has a tiny 1.25-inch (diameter) feeding chute. The Kuvings NJE-3580U and Omega J8006 each have a 1.5-inch feeding chute and the Omega NC800 has a 1.5-inch-wide by 2-inch-long feeding chute, very similar in size but still slightly smaller than the 67950A’s feeding chute. Most of the vertical masticating juicers we tested have feeding chutes that are at least 2.5 inches long but still not very wide (most are about 1.25 to 1.5 inches wide) while most of the centrifugal juicers we tested have feeding chutes that are a minimum of 3 inches in diameter – much larger and requiring much less food preparation than what is required for masticating juicers.
In addition to feeding chute size two other factors contribute to the difficulty that is preparing food properly for juicing with a horizontal masticating juicer such as the 67950A. They are juicer type and produce type. For more information on these factors and their impact on food preparation requirements please see here.
Food Preparation Results
A certain amount of cutting, slicing, and dicing was required for most of the fruits or vegetables we juiced with the 67950A to test its performance. The extent to which each type of produce needed to be cut is outlined in the table below. In addition to cutting size we also list cutting time (how long it took us to make those cuts in seconds) for the 67950A, specifically, AND average cutting time that corresponds to the respective cutting size. For more information on exactly what average cutting time is, how it is calculated, and how it can be used to compare food preparation time for different juicers please see here.
|Fruit/Veg.||Size of Cuts||Time to Cut||Avg. Time to Cut|
|Grapes||no cutting required|
|Carrots||1" to 2" pieces||42||50|
|Celery||1" to 2" pieces||60||66|
|Chute Size||1.875" by 2"|
For comparison, cutting requirements and times for a few other masticating juicers we tested are listed below.
|Fruit/Veg.||Size of Cuts||Time to Cut||Avg. Time to Cut|
|Grapes||no cutting required|
|Carrots||1" to 2" pieces||46||50|
|Celery||1" to 2" pieces||76||66|
|Chute Size||1.5" by 2"|
|Fruit/Veg.||Size of Cuts||Time to Cut||Avg. Time to Cut|
|Grapes||no cutting required|
|Carrots||1" to 2" pieces||53||50|
|Celery||1" to 2" pieces||59||66|
|Chute Size||1.5" diameter|
Food Preparation Summary
As the tables above clearly show, food preparation requirements for the 67950A very closely mimic those of other juicers of the same type, despite its slightly larger than average feeding chute. In this way, juicer type is very much the greatest factor impacting what is required for food preparation when using this juicer. Unfortunately for the 67950A, it is a horizontal masticating juicer and as such requires more food preparation than almost all other juicer types we tested. It should come as no surprise then, that the 67950A receives the exact same below average score in this category as another horizontal masticating juicer we tested, the NC800. That score is a 3 out of 5.
In order to test the 67950A’s performance we subjected it to 8 different performance tests. Each test involved juicing a different fruit or vegetable individually with the exception of the 8th test, which involved juicing a combination of fruits or vegetables all at the same time. The first 6 tests involved juicing 1 lb. of each fruit or vegetable. The 7th test, our wheatgrass test, involved juicing only 4 oz. of wheatgrass. The 8th test, our combination test, involved juicing 2 lb. of produce. The 2 lb. of produce was composed of 1 lb. of oranges and 4 oz. each of spinach, celery, carrots, and apples.
For testing the 67950A, we made sure to apply the same techniques and procedure we applied for testing every other juicer we tested (we tested 31 juicers in all). Those techniques and procedures are outlined here for your reference.
The Juicing Process
The Hamilton Beach’s juicing performance is severely hampered by the fact that it lacks a juicing nozzle. Top rated juicers in this category, in addition to a drum cap, also feature a juicing nozzle. Some, like the Omega NC800, feature an adjustable juicing nozzle. A juicing nozzle serves to regulate how much pressure is applied to produce within the juicing chamber – inside the drum. High pressure in the chamber makes for high yield as the produce has maximum pressure applied to it to extract every last drop of juice out of it. The one downside of this high pressure is that it will prevent soft fruits and vegetables from successfully ejecting pulp out of the juicing nozzle. Low pressure makes for slightly lower yield but allows for soft fruit and vegetables to properly eject pulp out of the juicer.
The Hamilton Beach doesn’t come equipped with an adjustable juicing nozzle and therefore doesn’t allow the user to regulate how much pressure is applied to the produce. Thus, going into our hands on testing we fully expected that soft fruits and vegetables would have some difficulty ejecting pulp out of the juicer. Not to our surprise, our test results fully confirmed this to be the case. What did surprise us, however, was the fact that our test results showed that even firmer, fleshier produce that theoretically shouldn’t have had any problem with pulp ejection even under maximum pressure, did in fact have all kinds of trouble properly ejecting pulp out of the Hamilton Beach 67950A. This was most likely due to the fact that the 67950A didn’t have any juicing nozzle at all.
Before we continue we need to flesh out what we mean by “proper pulp ejection”. Normally, when you juice any particular fruit or vegetable, it gets pushed into the juicer through the feeding chute and into the drum where it gets crushed and chopped by the auger which also serves to push the resulting mush into a juicing strainer. On the other side of the strainer juice droplets form which fall out of the juicer into the juice container under the juicer. Remaining, fibrous materials get pushed out of the juicer through a small hole that will only allow dried fibrous materials through it. As we already discussed earlier, a juicing nozzle is normally the mechanism by which pulp ejects out of a horizontal masticating juicer. Since the Hamilton Beach doesn’t have a juicing nozzle pulp ejects out of this juicer through its non-adjustable drum cap.
Regardless of whether pulp is ejecting through a drum cap, juicing nozzle, or adjustable juicing nozzle, if the juicing process is carried out correctly pulp should eject out of either one of these mechanisms at a rate that allows for very little pulp build up within the actual juicing chamber – within the drum of the juicer where the strainer and auger are located. This is necessary because, assuming that the juicer is on and running, unjuiced pieces of produce are constantly being pushed into the juicer. If a sufficient amount of pulp isn’t leaving the juicing chamber at the same time and at close to the same rate, adding fresh produce to the mix will cause a combination of unjuiced produce and pulp to build up in the same location. This build up decreases overall juicing efficiency and can lead to this mix finding its way all the way back up the feeding chute, creating a mess and forcing the user to stop juicing and clean out the chamber by hand before continuing juicing. This is exactly what we experienced when juicing with the Hamilton Beach, although some produce items didn’t cause nearly as much trouble as others.
We started off juicing one pound of oranges and only noticed build up about midway through. This build up stayed manageable all the way up until the very end of the test. It’s fair to say that the weight that we juiced (one pound) would be the maximum that can be juiced at any one particular time. Should we have wanted to continue with the test using more oranges we definitely would have had to reset and clean the drum assembly, removing the build up of pulp that had formed there to that point. For this test and for each test moving forward we did try to briefly put the juicer in reverse to try to resolve the problem but this resolution was met with no success whatsoever.
Grapes were up next and not surprisingly we saw the same issue we saw with the oranges. To this point we expected pulp buildup because we already theorized that this would be the case based on the fact that the Hamilton Beach doesn’t come equipped with an adjustable juicing nozzle. What we didn’t expect is what follows.
Next on our list of produce items to juice was carrots. Much to our surprise we saw the same pulp build up issue on what is by all accounts a very firm vegetable. Granted, the juicer was able to eject quite a bit of pulp (to the point of overflowing the pulp container) but as we finished juicing the last few carrot pieces we definitely noted excess carrot pulp within the main drum assembly. While it didn’t appear to hurt juicing performance much it still made for extra difficult cleaning and should we have continued the test with more than one pound of carrots, we most certainly would have suffered the same fate as we did with oranges and grapes – a fate in which we would have had to stop juicing and clean the drum and associated parts before continuing to juice.
Celery was one of two produce items that did not cause any pulp build up in the drum assembly. We’re happy to report that the Hamilton Beach had no trouble juicing celery and we could have easily continued juicing even a greater quantity of celery than what was used for our test.
After juicing celery things looked promising. Oranges and grapes caused build up but we expected as much. It also didn’t do much harm. Carrots caused only a little bit of buildup which was surprising but not a deal breaker. Celery juiced fine – no issues to report. Our optimism was short lived, however, as we started our apple juicing testing. In short, juicing apples using the Hamilton Beach 67950A is an absolute nightmare. Pulp buildup was almost immediate as we started juicing apples. And it was not only immediate but severe. By the last few pieces of apple we were attempting to juice, the pulp mush had been pushed all the way back up the feed chute into the hopper. This caused pulp to splatter all over the countertop and juicer body as we desperately tried to force the buildup back down the feed chute in order to give the juicer a fair chance to produce maximum yield. And this is an important point. Yes, under normal circumstances we would not have continued juicing past the first few pieces of apples that caused the initial buildup. This initial buildup was, in fact, a sufficient amount to warrant disassembling, cleaning, and reassembling the juicer before continuing juicing. But, in the interest of fairness we wanted to subject the juicer to a full pound of apples at one time as we had done and would do in carrying out the same test when testing other juicers. Only by conducting our testing in this manner can we make fair and accurate comparisons. And so, we can unequivocally say that the Hamilton Beach is not recommended for juicing more than a very small quantity of apples at a time.
Moving on from what was a very disappointing performance juicing apples, we juiced spinach next. Again we saw the same pulp buildup problem as we had seen in almost all tests up to this point. However, it did not require us to stop juicing to clean out the drum assembly. We were able to juice the full pound of spinach without much hassle.
Juicing wheatgrass was next and it was, like celery, one of the few bright spots (at least in terms of juicing performance) for the Hamilton Beach. There was almost no pulp build up in the drum assembly and the test was carried out without a hitch.
Based on all testing done to this point we were very curious to see how the juicer would perform when juicing a combination of produce items. Yes, it wasn’t very good at juicing soft produce items and failed miserably juicing apples, but how would it perform when it came to combining these harder to juice items with easier to juice items such as celery and spinach? We were pleasantly surprised to see that the Hamilton Beach performed much better juicing a combination of different types of produce than it had juicing only one type at a time. We did notice some buildup but can confidently say that almost all of the issues caused by juicing one type of fruit or vegetable at a time appeared to be mitigated by juicing them all together.
Juicing Performance Summary and Score
This table in our general buyer’s guide shows two types of yield for each performance test for all of the juicers we tested. The first is out of juicer yield. This is the juice that was extracted directly out of the juicer. The second is after sieve yield. This is the juice that was collected after pouring the out of juicer yield through a sieve. The same sieve was used for all of the juicers we tested to ensure that the after sieve yield would not contain any extra pulp that might give one juicer (that makes juice with a lot of pulp) an advantage in this category over another (a juicer that makes juice with very little pulp). In this way, after sieve yield is perhaps the best means by which to compare the yield of one juicer compared to another.
As the general performance test results table very clearly shows, the 67950A performed very poorly in all of our juicing performance tests. Its out of juicer yields were well below average in 6 of 8 tests. Its after sieve yields were well below average in 5 of 7 tests. Not to mention the fact that the time it took to juice these produce items was also much longer than the time it took us to juice the same quantity of the same produce items with most other slow juicers we tested. Add in the poor experience we had during the actual juicing process when juicing fruits and vegetables individually with the juicer (pulp buildup and the like) and it should come as no surprise that we give the 67950A the lowest score for juicing performance we’ve given thus far – a dismal 2.5 out of 5.
Cleaning the 67950A takes about 4 minutes to do from start to finish. This time does not include disassembly. It only includes the time it took us to actually wash and scrub all parts. Most other horizontal masticating juicers we tested took about the same time to clean although most were ever so slightly more difficult to clean. The 67950A is generally easier to clean than other juicers of the same type that we tested for many of the same reasons why it was easier to assemble. Two of those reasons are (1) it has less parts to assemble and clean and (2) many of its parts are larger and more easy to handle and work with than comparable parts on other juicers we tested. These two advantages it has over other juicers of the same type are offset somewhat by the fact that there’s quite a bit more pulp to remove from the 67950A’s parts than what you’d have to remove from comparable parts on other juicers. The 67950A’s pulp build-up problems were discussed at length when we discussed its performance earlier in the review.
A cleaning brush is included with the juicer, although we only used it to clean the juicer’s strainer. All other parts were cleaned using a microfiber cleaning cloth which is not included with purchase. However, any wash cloth you have lying around in your kitchen should be able to work just as well.
All parts were washed using warm soapy water and rinsed with cold running tap water. Most parts were soaked at least for a few seconds before washing them. The only part for which we used a slightly different procedure was the juicing strainer. We made sure to soak the strainer a bit longer and also scrubbed it clean under running water – something that we didn’t need to do for all the other parts.
Staining and Deposits
The juicer is constructed using mostly black or grey plastics and so most parts do not stain very easily. The parts that we would be concerned about are the clear plastic parts – the juice and pulp containers and the drum assembly – although we didn’t notice any staining of these parts during testing.
One part in particular gave us extra concern during testing with regards to pulp depositing inside of it over time. As we show in the picture below, there is a rubber ring inside the juicing strainer that cannot be removed and that is very difficult to access to clean by hand. We noticed pulp depositing on this ring during testing for this review and would venture to guess that it’s likely to happen to you also should you also attempt to only wash it by hand.
Dishwasher Safe Parts
Perhaps the only way to clean the part we show above is to put it in the dishwasher – something that we didn’t do during testing. We cleaned all of the 67950A’s parts by hand, the same as we did for every other juicer we tested. That being said, the 67950A’s parts can absolutely be cleaned in a dishwasher. The juicer’s manual explicitly states that all of its parts including the strainer are dishwasher safe. This is something that is unique to the 67950A. Most other slow juicers we tested absolutely cannot be washed in a dishwasher. The two exceptions are the Tribest Solostar 4 and the 67950A. The Solostar 4’s manual still prohibits cleaning the juicer’s strainer in a dishwasher. As such, the 67950A is the only slow juicer we tested that can completely be cleaned using a dishwasher (outside of the main body of the juicer of course).
Cleaning Overall Score
The 67950A is fairly easy to clean to by hand, not to mention the fact that all of its parts are dishwasher safe. We give it a 4.5 out of 5 for cleaning difficulty overall.
Ease of Use
Some juicers are definitely more difficult to use than others. Some have a steeper learning curve than others while others are more difficult to use over time. We discuss the initial learning curve and continued difficulty of using the 67950A separately in the paragraphs that follow.
Initial Learning Curve
When you first receive the 67950A you’ll probably have produce ready to go – ready to be juiced. You yourself will be ready to juice also. But before you pull the juicer out of its box, assemble it, plug it into the wall outlet and start pushing produce into its feeding chute to start juicing consider the following two techniques, both of which are unique to horizontal masticating juicers and both of which are crucial to juicing with this type of juicer as efficiently as possible. They are (1) proper food preparation and (2) juicing nozzle adjustment. These two techniques will need to be mastered over time and are most difficult to employ when you first start juicing. Thus they constitute the initial learning curve associated with learning how to use the juicer properly.
Proper Food Preparation
Something that most manufacturers rarely mention with regard to getting the most out of juicing with their juicers is food preparation requirements. Preparing food properly is a skill that must be learned over time, and something that is especially difficult to master for horizontal masticating juicers. We discuss the ins and outs of this technique relative to this juicer type and others in great detail here.
Juicing Nozzle Adjustment
The 67950A doesn’t come equipped with an adjustable juicing nozzle. It doesn’t come equipped with any juicing nozzle at all. We already discussed earlier in the review, at length, how its lack of having a juicing nozzle had a profound negative impact on its performance in our juicing tests. However, with regard to ease of use and initial learning curve, the juicing nozzle’s absence is actually a positive. Its not being there means that you won’t have to learn how to use it correctly.
Once you’ve mastered proper food preparation you’ll have little to worry about in terms of learning how to use the juicer for maximum efficiency when juicing. With the initial learning curve associated with learning such techniques eliminated, the only difficulties you’ll have to face when juicing are those difficulties that aren’t eliminated with experience. Those continued difficulties are described in detail below.
How Hard Is It to Push Produce into The Juicer?
We invite you to read this part of our general buyer’s guide in which we discuss the difficulties associated with pushing produce into this type of juicer.
Other Design Choices and Features that Improve or Detract from Ease of Use
Weight and Carrying Handle
The 67950A was the lightest masticating juicer we tested. The body alone weighs in at only 7 lb. 5.3 oz. Fully assembled, the juicer weighs just under 9 lb. Compare these measured values to the approximately 10 to 11 lb. body only weight and 12 to 14 lb. fully assembled weight of most other slow juicers we tested. Not surprisingly, the 67950A is also slightly smaller than all the other horizontal masticating juicers we tested, at least in terms of its length. It was measured to be only 12.5 inches long fully assembled. Most other juicers of the same type that we tested were at least 15.5 inches long. Though they were still about the same width and height as the Hamilton Beach.
Because it’s so small and light, the 67950A is very easy to move in and out of storage despite the fact that it does not have a carrying handle.
Buttons and Controls
There are two buttons on the top side of the juicer’s main body. One button turns the juicer on. The other button puts the juicer in reverse. Both buttons are clearly labeled in both English and French.
Juicer Movement, Power Cord Length
The 67950A is equipped with 4 small rubber feet that do a great job keeping the juicer stable on the countertop when juicing, despite its light weight.
The 67950A has the shortest power cord of any of the slow juicers we tested. Most slow juicers have a power cord that’s at least 50 to 60 inches long. The Hamilton Beach’s power cord is only 29.25 inches long. Shorter power cord length equates to less flexibility in terms of where you can place the juicer on your kitchen countertop. If a juicer’s power cord is short, you’ll have less of an area next to each wall outlet in which you could possibly place the juicer when juicing.
Other Factors That Affect Ease of Use
The 67950A’s manual is similar to the type of manual you’d find included with most other basic kitchen appliances. It’s black and white with basic diagrams and a minimal amount of text explaining assembly, disassembly, and proper use and care of the juicer –only about 6 or 7 pages of the manual cover these topics. In contrast, more expensive slow juicers often have much more detailed diagrams and much more detailed text spanning many more pages, many times in full color and/or with photos instead of basic line diagrams.
Parts and Their Properties
All slow juicers we tested include a juice collection container and a pulp collection container. The size or volume of these containers relate to the ease of using the juicer in that it determines how often you need to empty and replace them when juicing large quantities of produce. The larger they are, the less frequently they need to be emptied and replaced – the easier the juicer is to use as you don’t have to go through the process of emptying and replacing them as much.
To illustrate this point imagine a scenario in which we have two juicers, juicer A and juicer B, and want to make 40 oz. of juice with each one. If juicer A’s juice collection container is 10 oz. in volume and juicer B’s container is 20 oz. in volume, juicer A’s container would have to be emptied and replaced 4 times while juicer B’s container would only have to be emptied and replaced twice when making 40 oz. of juice. The same principal applies to pulp collection. Obviously it makes things quite a bit easier the less times the container needs to be emptied and replaced. Thus, it’s much easier using juicer A to juice a large quantity of produce to make such a large volume of juice (40 oz.) than it is using juicer B.
Unfortunately, the 67950A has both a very small juice container and a very small pulp container. Its juice container’s volume was measured to be only 26 oz. Compare this value to the 32 to 36 oz. juice containers of most other slow juicers we tested. Its pulp container’s volume was measured to be 24 oz. Compare this value to the 36 to 48 oz. pulp containers of most other slow juicers we tested. Needless to say, the size of these containers is far from optimal should you want to use the juicer to juice a large quantity of produce to make a large volume of juice.
Ease of Use Summary and Score
The 67950A shares the same learning curve as most other horizontal masticating juicers we tested when it comes to proper food preparation. It is, after all, a horizontal masticating juicers and as such requires that you learn those food preparation techniques associated with juicing with such a type of a juicer. It does not, however, require you to master juicing nozzle adjustment – a definite positive in terms of how easy it is to learn how to use compared to those juicers that do.
The continued difficulty of using the juicer is a mixed bag. It’s very light and easy to move around but this is likely to be less of a bonus and more of a necessity when you consider how short its power cord is to that of comparable juicers. You may have a kitchen with very few wall outlets or very little counter space close to wall outlets. If so, it’s likely that you won’t be able to keep the 67950A permanently on your countertop while still having it close enough for its power cord to reach an outlet. Thus, you’ll have to store it or at least move it from one location on the countertop to another to use it (which would of course require plugging it in). You’re now in a position where you need to move it instead of being in a position where you could move it if you wanted to and thus its light weight isn’t as much of a nice bonus as it is something that’s really necessary due to the juicer’s short power cord.
Other positives in this category are that the juicer’s buttons are clearly labeled and the juicer stays stable on the countertop when juicing. Other negatives are the fact that its manual is less thorough and complete than what we’d like and its juice and pulp collection containers are very small in size. All things considered, we give the 67950A a below average 2.5 out of 5 for ease of use.
The 67950A lacks the versatility of most other horizontal masticating juicers on the market. Unlike most other such juicers it does not include a homogenizing screen or extra nozzles for different types of extrusion (pasta nozzles, for example). These parts also cannot be bought separately as the juicer is simply incapable of being used for those purposes. Needless to say, if homogenizing is something that you’re looking to do with your juicer we recommend you look elsewhere. Hamilton Beach’s horizontal slow juicer offering receives the same score we give most centrifugal juicers in this category – a 3 out of 5.
Build Quality and Materials
The 67950A, in terms of its build quality and the quality of the materials used for its construction, is much more comparable to other popular kitchen appliances manufactured by other popular brands than it is to most of the other slow juicers we tested. And this isn’t a positive. What this means that the Chinese manufactured 67950A is much less well made using much lesser quality parts than what you’d find on a comparable more expensive slow juicer – namely Korean manufactured slow juicers made by Tribest, Omega, Kuvings, and the like.
The 67950A’s plastic pieces are lighter and thinner. Metal pieces are almost nonexistent. In general, it’s simply a much lower quality appliance than what’s available for even $30 or $50 more from Kuvings and Tribest.
Critical consumer reviews confirm the concerns we voiced in the previous paragraph. There are several reports online of the 67950A’s clear plastic parts (mostly parts comprising the drum assembly) cracking within just a few days or weeks of use. Even more concerning is the fact that there are several reports of the auger chipping, something that’s far from surprising considering what we uncovered when we reviewed similar Chinese made slow juicers from lesser known brands.
Brand Reputation and Quality of Support
Hamilton Beach is a very well-known brand in the world of kitchen appliances. Chances are you’ve seen more than a few of their coffee makers, steamers, and toasters at your local department store. The company was founded in 1910 in the United States. However, various sources online confirm that as of 2012, most if not all of their appliances are manufactured in China.
Outsourcing manufacturing is nothing new in the modern economy and is especially rampant in the world of kitchen appliances. We’ve discussed in various other reviews how almost every popular slow juicer manufacturer outsources to the East. The difference between Hamilton Beach and those other brands is that Hamilton Beach appliances are manufactured in China. Juicers by Omega, Tribest, and Kuvings are all manufactured in South Korea. The difference in the quality of workmanship and materials between juicers manufactured in each location was already discussed earlier.
Regardless of the fact that it’s made in China, your purchase of the 67950A does come with US customer service. Hamilton Beach offers separate 800 phone numbers and email addresses for small kitchen appliances, microwaves, water dispensers, fans, and parts and accessories. The 67950A is of course a small kitchen appliance and so you may contact Hamilton Beach via the phone number and email address given for small kitchen appliances. Due to the fact that Hamilton Beach is such a large brand, you can have confidence that their customer service will be there for you should you require it. We found very few complaints regarding their customer service online.
The 67950A comes with a 3 year warranty. Strangely, the warranty is for 5 years if you buy the juicer in Canada. This is once again a subcategory in which the 67950A pales in comparison to most other slow juicers we tested. Its 3 year warranty is extremely short when compared to the 15 and 10 year warranties common with other popular slow juicers such as the Omega NC800 or the Tribest Solostar 4. Even the Kuvings NJE-3580U comes with a 5 year warranty in the US.
The warranty language explicitly excludes glass and filters from warranty coverage. It’s safe to assume that this language is in reference to filters, not strainers and glass parts, not plastic parts. And so, all of the 67950A’s parts should be covered.
Claiming Warranty Coverage
The manufacturer instructs that all warranty claims should be made over the phone. A 1800 number is given for this purpose. You cannot file warranty claims online like you can with some other manufacturers (Kuvings, for example).
Summary and Score
The 67950A is definitely one of the least well-built slow juicers we tested which is not surprising considering it was one of only a few that are made in China and not made in South Korea. It’s also not surprising considering the fact that Hamilton Beach is most known for making budget friendly (affordable) kitchen appliances. A slow juicer is a bit of a luxury in the kitchen and as such its build quality, the quality of the materials used for its construction, and its price normally reflect this. With the 67950A it feels as if Hamilton Beach is stepping a bit out of their comfort zone – they’re trying to manufacture a luxury appliance but don’t want to invest in materials that would push up its price and make it much more expensive than all of their other kitchen products. The result is an appliance that does what more expensive juicers do, but does so much less reliably. We give the 67950A a very low score – a 2 out of 5 – for durability.
The 67950A is the only “bare bones” slow juicer we tested. It doesn’t include any accessories. All that is included with your purchase is the main body of the juicer, the parts that fit onto the main body for juicing, a juice and pulp container, a food pusher, and the juicer’s manual.
The 67950A is the least expensive slow juicer we tested. It normally retails for just under $200 (its price normally hovers around $190). This makes it about $40 less expensive than the next least expensive slow juicer we tested, the Kuvings NJE-3580U which can be found online for as little as $230 (approx.). The Hamilton Beach is about $100 less expensive than top rated horizontal masticating options (the NC800 and J8006) and about $150 less expensive than most vertical masticating options on the market.
Long Term Cost
A unique wrinkle to any analysis of juicer value is assessing the long term cost associated with owning it and how that long term cost relates to its performance. We discuss that relationship in detail here. What that particular discussion implies is that, because the 67950A is NOT a very efficient juicer it will cost more to buy produce to make the same amount of juice with this juicer than it will for most other juicers on the market. As such, while its initial cost is low, the long term cost of ownership is actually higher than it is for most other juicers we tested and most other juicers on the market.
If the above paragraph confuses you or even if it doesn’t and you just want to read more about this topic see our detailed analysis of the costs associated with long term juicer ownership here.
The 67950A is an inexpensive slow juicer. It gets you through the door juicing fruits and vegetables the same way they’re juiced with other slow juicers – with a slowly rotating auger crushing produce through a juicing strainer (the benefits associated with this method of juicing are outlined in great detail here and while they are few, they’re very important). However, it does so at a much greater long term cost because it juices so inefficiently. You will have to spend more on produce to make the same amount of juice with this juicer than you will have to for most other slow juicers on the market. It is for this reason that we give the Hamilton Beach slow juicer a below average 2.5 out of 5 for value, despite its low initial price.