Shark FlexStyle vs FlexStyle IonCurl: 100 Watts Apart

The published specifications

Six of the eight rows are identical. One differs by 100 W. And one is the entire decision.

The attachment list is the product

An air styler is a handle that blows air. What it does to your hair is decided almost entirely by what is on the end of it, which makes the attachment list less like a bonus and more like the specification sheet.

Shark publishes the FlexStyle’s set in detail, and it is broad: auto-wrap curlers, an oval brush, a paddle brush, a concentrator and a diffuser, chosen at purchase. For the IonCurl, the page we cite lists none.

That gap has direct consequences depending on what you are buying for. With curly hair, whether a diffuser is included is the whole question — which is why we name the IonCurl as the skip on the curly-hair stylers page. With short hair, whether there is a brush rather than only barrels decides it. Neither can be answered from the IonCurl page.

What the extra 100 watts actually buys

1,700 W is the highest air-styler wattage in our registry, above the Dyson Airwrap’s 1,300 W by 400 W. In running-cost terms the difference between the two Sharks is under a dollar a year, so that is not the argument.

The argument is drying capacity on dense hair. More available heat, all else equal, is a faster dry, and the FlexStyle’s known weakness on very thick hair is session length. If your complaint is specifically “this takes too long”, the IonCurl is a reasonable answer.

It is worth being careful about how much that number tells you, though. Wattage is heat, not airflow, and airflow is what removes water — the reasoning is on the drying time page. Between two tools from the same maker with the same body, more watts probably does mean faster. Across brands it stops meaning much at all.

Where more power is a disadvantage

On curls and on fine hair, 1,700 W with no published speed-setting count is the wrong combination. Curl preservation depends on running the airflow low, and neither Shark publishes how low it goes. With the higher-powered model that uncertainty covers more ground.

This is also where Dyson’s disclosure looks better than either Shark’s: three published heat settings and three published speeds, at the lowest mains wattage here. That is why the Airwrap wins the fine-hair page despite being the slowest tool in the category on dense hair.

What both do well

• They convert to a dryer. The single strongest argument for a Shark over a Dyson, because it covers the frequent job as well as the occasional one.
• 1.5 lb published, both. Lighter than the Dyson Supersonic’s published 1.8 lb, which matters when you are holding it up.
• An 8 ft cord. Ordinary rather than generous, but published, which more makers should manage.
• 1,600 W matches the Dyson Supersonic exactly. That single row is the strongest number in the dupe argument, and it is on the cheaper tool — the fuller version is on the Airwrap dupes page.

Which to buy

• Almost everyone: the standard FlexStyle. You can see what you are getting, and you choose it at purchase.
• Thick, dense hair where time is the complaint: the IonCurl — but confirm the attachment set with the retailer before you pay, because Shark will not tell you.
• Curly hair: the standard FlexStyle, for the published diffuser. This is not a close call.
• Fine or damaged hair: neither. Look at the Airwrap for its published heat and speed counts.

What we cannot tell you

We have not used either tool. Neither maker publishes a heat- or speed-setting count for these two, so we cannot tell you how gently either can be run, and no one in this category publishes airflow or decibels. Everything above is from SharkNinja’s own product pages.