[Mike Halliday]

[

What a comical post............    You think people pay us, based on scientific proof of a % of soil removed??    People pay us and THEY choose the requirements they want. It's usually a clean looking, feeling and smelling carpet, not some sort of OCD derived certificate on sterilty levels, or the assurance of an HWE guy that "don't worry pet, that dull looking carpet is DEEP clean".

This is what so many of you HWE peeps don't get - it's a business not a washing competition.  LISTEN to your customers.   They want stains and spots removed and a nice, clean, consistent looking carpet;   the LM methods discussed here provide that, often with greater success than HWE. Adn with a host of other benefits like fast drying, slower resoiling and fewer damage risks.

you talk about comical post yours are so laughable they make the Beano look like the Times newspaper

what customers want is what they ask for a clean carpet, tell them you will give a clean looking, feeling and smelling carpet and see what they say.

and where does this sentence come from?.....don't worry pet, that dull looking carpet is DEEP clean".... out of your imagination,  made up to try and give your weak argument some sort of validity.

where is it proved that LM  has the benefit of slower resoiling and fewer damage risks? if anything LM will leave more residue that could attract soil than HWE as the chemical ratio with LM can be as low as 4-1  compare this to 900-1 with HWE and what about the freshwater rinse that a lot of HWEers use this will leave no residue unlike LM which smears a massive amount of chemical onto the carpet.

and LM bonneting and especially host dry granule has the potential to massively damage carpets

[jasonl]

Camraso carried out testing ,and published a report in 1998 , proving that LM has slower resoiling than HWE, albeit the Chemdry version of LM.

[Mike Halliday]

1998... 12 years ago it would be interesting to read it. and why have chemdry now changed to HWE after years of bonneting cleaning wouldn't they consider it a step backwards?

[robert meldrum]

And encap products have moved on a lot since then !!!!!

[Shaun_Ashmore]

Encap may have got better but I don't think it will have got visually better more of the product is easier to vac out, it's something I used for years and thing it's a better but re hashed idea.

Shaun

[jasonl]

I will attempt to dig out the report tomorrow.

[carpetworx]

I use a cimex and encap.

I do a lot of high rise offices in the city,carpets look amazing.

My ideal set up would be, a cimex, a orbot sprayborg and a small porty for spots and upholstery.

Just need to get rid of the T/M so i can buy an orbot and porty.

I do have a rotary as well, i find the best way to get these machines into the van (renault trafic) is just lean it back and put the base plate on the lower step, lift it up and slide it in a bit the lean it back on the wheels and roll into place,easy peazy.

[Graeme@Access]

What a comical post............    You think people pay us, based on scientific proof of a % of soil removed??    People pay us and THEY choose the requirements they want. It's usually a clean looking, feeling and smelling carpet, not some sort of OCD derived certificate on sterilty levels, or the assurance of an HWE guy that "don't worry pet, that dull looking carpet is DEEP clean".

This is what so many of you HWE peeps don't get - it's a business not a washing competition.  LISTEN to your customers.   They want stains and spots removed and a nice, clean, consistant looking carpet;   the LM methods discussed here provide that, often with greater success than HWE. Adn with a host of other benfits like fast drying, slower resoiling and fewer damage risks.

Listen up smart ass, explain in detail what gives you the right to have a pop at me because i want to find something out. What is comical about wanting to quantify and measure how effective a cleaning technique is?

When i "LISTEN" to my customers they want things clean? and quite frankly im tired of "LISTENING" to two-bit half wits like you who decide to believe that one method is better. Based on what?

If you listen to the so called masters of this industry they perpetuate the notion that sand/soil at the base of a construction accelerates wear. Is it true? Has anyone measured it? Does your so called soil dispersal technique remove this?

Its not like you have vast experience of LM cleaning is it? People in Glass houses mate.... after all i have a paper published in the NCCA mag, you?

Apology accepted. After all, Im not sure LM is a proven technique for removing blood from a carpet. Us Glasgow boys create a lot of that in an argument.

Graeme
Access Cleaning Solutions

[Steve Barnett (Carpet Care Plus)]

PMSL !

This is my favourite post of the year - nice one Graham 

[Steve. Taylor]

Mix 20:1 allow 10 minutes dwell for glasgow kiss. if this fails try HWE

[Simon Gerrard]

Westy,
Horses for courses, nice job, makes you feel good when you can do that.

Simon

[Dave Roberts]

Lol!............ Mike, you really are a dinosaur fella .......

You blissfully think that 10 years from now, people will still be wanting hot water extraction in either domestic or commercial premises ......... uh huh ........  The development of non rinsable colloids are making HWE (and the detergents, solvents and enzymes that most people around here are so obsessed with), harder to justify by the day.

I wonder if in the 80s there were people like you trying to hold onto carpet shampoo and foam as still being a relevent method of cleaning carpets .........

I understand why you hate me Mike....... because I keep shoving the CHANGE that you don't want to accept, in your face.   

There may still be some customers who will pay someone to put down the nuclear waste that some people on here use, in their baby's nursery.......... but not many.

Guess what?   People want SAFE products, people want low drying times.   

People who have their heads buried in the sand, often end up with a sore backside....   

[Dave Roberts]

What a comical post............    You think people pay us, based on scientific proof of a % of soil removed??    People pay us and THEY choose the requirements they want. It's usually a clean looking, feeling and smelling carpet, not some sort of OCD derived certificate on sterilty levels, or the assurance of an HWE guy that "don't worry pet, that dull looking carpet is DEEP clean".

This is what so many of you HWE peeps don't get - it's a business not a washing competition.  LISTEN to your customers.   They want stains and spots removed and a nice, clean, consistant looking carpet;   the LM methods discussed here provide that, often with greater success than HWE. Adn with a host of other benfits like fast drying, slower resoiling and fewer damage risks.

Listen up smart ass, explain in detail what gives you the right to have a pop at me because i want to find something out. What is comical about wanting to quantify and measure how effective a cleaning technique is?

When i "LISTEN" to my customers they want things clean? and quite frankly im tired of "LISTENING" to two-bit half wits like you who decide to believe that one method is better. Based on what?

If you listen to the so called masters of this industry they perpetuate the notion that sand/soil at the base of a construction accelerates wear. Is it true? Has anyone measured it? Does your so called soil dispersal technique remove this?

Its not like you have vast experience of LM cleaning is it? People in Glass houses mate.... after all i have a paper published in the NCCA mag, you?

Apology accepted. After all, Im not sure LM is a proven technique for removing blood from a carpet. Us Glasgow boys create a lot of that in an argument.

Graeme
Access Cleaning Solutions

Ah poor Graeme ...........  I touched a nerve huh?    From some of the total nonsense you've posted on here, I suspect you needed the reality check .......... happy to provide it.     Do you give out free hot air to your customers?   

[Mike Halliday]

david hate is such a negative word if you really think I hate you then you don't really understand how these forums work, I actually look forward & enjoy your post, at least you take the time time to give a thorough response ( although they tend to be waffily responses) 

 rather than copy you waffling style of writing were you use misquotes and stuff pulled from your imagination let us keep this to basic questions

do you think you know something that about carpet cleaning that has alluded everyone else? do you think you are a better, more knowledgeable carpet cleaner than everyone else? )(this requires just a yes/o answer not a long waffly answer)

answer this.... why do all the most respected carpet cleaners,( I won't mention  any names but we all know who i'm thinking of) all use HWE on domestic homes? these carpet cleaner are responsible for most of the UK training courses they are known by everyone.

are these people also dinosaurs? do they use the' nuclear waste' that you mention..... or is it they just are not as knowledgeable as you?

love & kisses

 Mike XXX
 

[Graeme@Access]

Ah poor Graeme ...........  I touched a nerve huh?    From some of the total nonsense you've posted on here, I suspect you needed the reality check .......... happy to provide it.     Do you give out free hot air to your customers?   

You may disagree with my thought experiment, but there is no need for an attitude. I treat everyone on here with respect untill they prove themselves to be an idiot. Conrats, your one of them and i wont even waste my time with a full response, got work to do.

Graeme
Access Cleaning Solutions

[Derek_Walker]

I think this thing about customers wanting ultra fast drying times is not always the case. Hwe performed properly, with the right equipment and knowledge can be dry within a short period of time. Customers want clean carpets period, and are prepared to wait a couple of hours for them to dry.

[Nick Attwood]

ChemDry have stopped promoting LM "although some franchisess still use LM" and moved to HWE is because LM is not approved by the Carpet & Rug Institute, which is a US of A thing. The isntitiute woiuld not approve LM cleaning in any form, there view "i belive" is that carpets etc can ONLY be cleaned with HWE.