I was there sometime enticed me to look at these sonic toothbrushes times more accurate. Is this principle really better, as is so often claimed? This must necessarily be tested times. Philips seemed here to be the market leader, which is why I opted for a Sonicare model mid price category.
In the first few weeks, I had the feeling that my Oral-B clearly is the better choice. Then the Philips was mostly rum only, I took but about once a week anyway.
Now, after 2 years, I use the Philips Sonicare rather than the Oral-B, albeit with a few restrictions. Here's the pros and cons of both technologies:
* The Philips is quieter than the Oral-B. That's quite enjoyable.
* When Philips to be very careful when it comes to the splashing around. The fast sound movements are sprayed around with it once they are taken out of the mouth. Likewise, if, for example in the anterior region dressing inside. With practice, you minimize the problem and you should always switch off as soon as you take it out of your mouth. The Oral-B has this problem due to the different technology hardly.
* In the anterior region inside the Oral-B I like much better. The round brush head can let off steam here ideal, where the long head of Philips is not optimal, since the bristles have large differences in height, which is always really present only one part of the bristles on the tooth.
* The bristles of Philips are relatively soft, similar to normal soft toothbrushes. For normal dental care certainly makes sense. Sometimes, there are more solid evidence that I better wegbekomme with the Oral-B, because here has harder bristles and you can impress so sometimes a little stronger.
* The battery life of the Philips is a major plus. Where the Oral-B breaks down after less than 1 week, the Philips is running several weeks on a single charge. To conserve battery power and to save power, I invite only when the batteries are empty.
* The Philips is much leaner and more manageable, also a plus. The Oral-B is me actually too big or too Globig.
* A major weakness in the Oral-B is that all liquids into running at the top of the device. Since there is an area between the metal pin and the casing where the Gesabbere into running and there bacterial colonies are grown. Once you've so dismantled a toothbrush, you know what kind of a disgusting affair. For me, a real construction defect. I always stay on meticulously, well rinsed and knock out this area and regularly disinfected with ethanol. The Philips does not have this shortcoming.
* The brush heads of Philips are much more expensive. For my taste already hard at breaking point. As with ink cartridges, so will the money made. The brushes keep but relatively long.
* Sensitive teeth can be irritated unpleasant at Philips. I had a job where I had to especially be careful, because otherwise it hurt so much. The Oral-B made no problems.
* The shape of the brush Philips with the many differences in altitude makes it possible that they can penetrate very well into the interdental spaces. I suspect that she then cleans better here than the Oral-B. Of course, no toothbrush can really achieve all the interstices.
* With the Philips seems to progress more quickly. Since I have after 2 minutes already feel a good cleaning result, while I need more like 3 minutes away by Oral-B. Just when I'd like to quickly switch between by brushing your teeth, I use the Philips prefer.
* Practical details: The brush heads Philips can stand without any support, that will not do at Oral-B.
* The brush head Philips has a lot fewer areas where bacteria can colonize. This also due to the technology that requires no moving parts on the brush head.
* The Oral-B has a number of special programs, which I do not use consistently and which I consider absurd gimmick. The built-in Pressure sensor is certainly a good idea, because too much pressure is a common habit and the teeth and the cleaning result is not good. The triggers quite late for my feeling.
* Processing I like both devices, since no defects in everyday use I noticed.
