Clean It Up
UK Floor Cleaning Forum => Carpet Cleaning Forum => Topic started by: Simon Gerrard on September 14, 2010, 06:12:39 pm
-
This is probably opening a can of worms, but which is the best LM cleaning system for domestic carpets?
Dry Fusion looks the business but are looks deceiving?
Simon
-
As requested.......
-
I just got into the carpet cleaning business 8 months ago. After countless hours of research I decided to go with the 17" Commercial Breeze Package. I dediced to purchase the Breeze based on all the unbiased feedback from carpet cleaners on online forums. Everyone who already owned one loved it. Now I had never been in the carpet cleaning biz before so I had nothing to compare the equipment to. I CAN tell you this though! My customers are thrilled with my work. About 350 jobs since last Feb. 95% Residential 5% Commercial. My customers always tell me I did a better job than the last guy who cleaned their carpet whether it was HWE or another Low Moisture cleaner.
Experienced carpet cleaners tell me how lucky I am to start off with the right equipment the first time.
With my past sales and telemarketing experience and my Commercial Breeze I was able to quit my other job after only a month of cleaning carpets. I haven't looked back once and was even able to buy a brand new home a couple of months ago.
It took me a year of staring at different machines on the internet before I clicked the Add to Cart button on the Breeze. I'am so glad I did!!
Oh yeah, I have to mention that the Customer Service form CCS is also top notch. VERY helpful to this newbie!
This is a quote from another forum about the leader in o/p'ing's machines.
-
i've got a machine that looks exactly like the breeze and it is better than any rotory.
I also have just got a machine that looks nearly the same as this.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEvPbzKHMTA&feature=related
its that good i might ring Nick and actually pay for it ;D ;D (ring you tomorrow)
it is too heavy to be my only machine as you can't carry it up stairs but for downstair its really gives good results
-
17" Commercial Breeze Package
Where do I find info on that?
Simon
-
Mike, what machine did you get ?
-
Simon...errr google?
http://www.google.com/search?q=Commercial+Breeze+Package&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-ContextMenu&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GZEV_en
Steve don't think it has a name I bought it off Nick @ solutions it was a prototype he made, but he must have seen the youtube vid i posted it looks nearly the same ;)
-
http://ccsop.com/index.php?url_channel_id=179&url_publish_channel_id=452&well_id=2
Shaun
PS years ago on one of the forums someone showed us how to make a standard rotary into a OP, because we didn't really know the benefits of an OP over a rotary the post was lost on us.
-
I have the other one Mike.... Good bit of kit isn't it?
-
how do you get it in & out of the van by yourself? it weights a ton!
we use it on probably 40% of all cleans.
-
I eat 3 Weetabix in the morning ;D
I have replaced the adjusting bar with a tubular bar to keep it rigid, this helps. I basically man handle it, but I know it won't be long before I do some damage if I'm not careful....
Do you used it a lot on domestic jobs???
-
Simon, have a word with Keith Nicolson from Chemspec Direct I believe he is developing this type of OP machine
David
-
Colin we use it on all domestic jobs on the ground floor. today we did 2 T/L & HSL on both jobs we used the T/M on the stair and top landing the through lounge and hall were 'orbited'. helper did the stairs, I worked in the lounge.
on the last job i ran the wand across the traffic area in the lounge but I needn't have bothered it made it look no cleaner.
we are using fusion clean & pureclean
some jobs we still need to extract, but they all get orbited to start with.
-
Colin and Mike
Have you got any photos ?
-
I have'nt.
i'll take some on thursday ( big day P/W tomorrow)
-
Mike is there any difference in results when using an OP and say an envirodri if you were to HWE after?
Is the reason you OP because it's quicker or drier?
Shaun
-
no difference as an agitator
but i use the op because on a lot of jobs I don't need to extract, but if I used the envirdri I would still need to extract
-
Mike is there any difference in results when using an OP and say an envirodri if you were to HWE after?
Is the reason you OP because it's quicker or drier?
Shaun
I used a grey xr pad from solutions on my rotary the other day to agitate in advance of bonnet and the results were impressive with a neutral prespray. Chemical was Fusion Clean but I can see the possibilities for agitating all sorts of presprays on lower profiles. Lots quicker than the envirodri with the added bonus of having the rotary to dry bonnet after HWE as required.
-
I have been using my rotary for a few weeks now and find the biggest downside is the weight, unlike my HWE which although heavier its easier to get in an out the van because you are never actually carrying the whole weight at any one time.
With the rotary you have to lift the whole thing in an out and have bruises where it has swung into me as i have lifted it in it is very heavy something like 40 plus kilos, it only a matter of time before i do myself a mischief :'(
-
There's a newer model than the one in Shaun's post called the Trinity ........... the main difference in John Guerlink's machines is their oscillating speed............they rotate at the same speed as the others but apparently the higher oscillating speed greatly increases productivity.
Solutions were selling one of J G's machines.
-
Jim
I can understand the weight thing for going upstairs without bashing the plaster of the walls but what's the difference between putting a rotary and a portie in the van as they are similar weight?
-
I have been using my rotary for a few weeks now and find the biggest downside is the weight, unlike my HWE which although heavier its easier to get in an out the van because you are never actually carrying the whole weight at any one time.
With the rotary you have to lift the whole thing in an out and have bruises where it has swung into me as i have lifted it in it is very heavy something like 40 plus kilos, it only a matter of time before i do myself a mischief :'(
Technique is everything when handling rotaries. That said we have a Victor Airflow and a Victor 20" Burnisher that would break Arnie's back!!
I have ramps that I use for getting our pressure washer on and off the van. Worth thinking about if you are struggling. Nothing worse, well few things, than doing your back in.
-
Simon, have a word with Keith Nicolson from Chemspec Direct I believe he is developing this type of OP machine
David
Keith came up for a day during the summer soon after Carpex.
At Carpex was a company from Lymm, Cheshire that was importing the Orbot and Keith was going to help as a distributor. So the machine is already developed and on the market in the USA.
We did a EOT flat in Manchester, and it came up well.
-
here's my orbital
-
Jim
I can understand the weight thing for going upstairs without bashing the plaster of the walls but what's the difference between putting a rotary and a portie in the van as they are similar weight?
It's a lot easier lifting even my triple vac Airflex turbo into the van than the rotary because i tilt the front wheels of my Airflex onto the van floor and am able to position myself so i just lift the back of the machine in it's very easy. the rotary is a dead weight that you have to sipport all of it yourself then lean into the van with it, while again holding, can you imagine holding 40 kilos while leaning forward
It's just much more awkward.
-
Mike,
So what is that machine actually doing, encap of conventional lm. Can you explain the system step by step and tell us how it compares to HWE which I thought you were a stalwart of?
How much is the machine?
Simon
-
Simon its basically bonnetting but slightly better, it cleans better and does no leave the swirl marks often associated with rotaries.
this machine has an onboard pump that that sprays solution as you move the machine forward, it has no torque so it you let it go it just stays in position..
any bad areas you can just pull it back and give it another quick spray.
I use it on all carpet then make the decision whether they need the T/M. (Sometimes I will just give the traffic lanes a rinse)
but it we are honest how much of a carpet needs the full treatment of a T/m probably 30% of the total surface area, so why not bonnet the bits that are only lightly soiled and T/M the rest. you will use less water so the carpet will dry quicker.
I do alot of carpets that are only lightly soiled so using this machine gives it an effective clean but has it dry very quickly (30-60mins)
-
Great post Mike , exactly why I will have a TM within 180 days.
-
Mike,
Thanks for that. Did you say you got it from NV White?
Simon
-
yes but its a bit of a prototype, I don't know if he is selling them yet.
-
Mike,
Ok, so how much, roughly?
Simon
-
£1600-£1800
-
I bet the motor weighs about 75% of the total machine, weight part of the key to this machine but I bet it weighs double an Rx20.
Shaun
-
Mike,
That's an awful lot cheaper than £3k for Orbot :o
Is it the same as the Orbot. Keith Nicolson tells me it oscillates too and hence delivers a lot more friction to the pad?
Simon
-
http://ccsop.com/index.php?url_channel_id=179&url_publish_channel_id=452&well_id=2
Shaun
-
Well this is interesting ................ a wave of passion on LM, from a number of die-hard squirters!
Who'd o'thought it eh? Did I just read above "I mean, how often do you need a T/M?" :D
Fresh light shines through old windows. ;D
I'll have one of the first orders in when Nick releases his 'Fusion LM' machine to market. Mike, you lucky devil getting a prototype. 8)
-
Great post Mike , exactly why I will have a TM within 180 days.
Funny Jason, I read Mike's post as a reason NOT to have a TM! ........... only use on 30% of jobs, on traffic lanes only. a good rotary system should be able to clear any traffic lane that a TM could, in the right hands.
-
David
Mike and others will always have a use for their t/m's as they're multi purpose machines and can be used for more than cleaning carpets.
I was also surprised at Jason's comment. Maybe not what he meant to say
-
David if a good rotary could have got it out in the right hands then i would have got it out ( considering not only have I got the rights hands i also have the left hand as well ;) ;) )
I would love to be a full time lm cleaner but like I said 30% of the carpet i clean need HWE and say what you like a bonnet will never get it clean. I could make excuses and tell my self and the customer I've done the job properly but i'd only be lying to to myself .
but I'll be honest and admit I want to see my future 100& using this type of machine, so I'm investigating how to get that 30% that needs HWE clean with the the hassle & time of setting up a portable or T/M.
they problem I see are...
removing spotters that we cannot leave on carpets eg; rust remover, NVspotters or bleaches
some stains need a certain amount of spotting agent to liquefy them to be removed, but making them more fluid allows them to sink deeper into the pile so they won't absorb out, they need sucking out. We've all done stains that you can tap with your knuckle and hear the knock they are so hard
plus the physical restrictions of small spaces and stairs.
L/m still is not a complete cleaning system, what we need to do is find out how to complete it.
-
David last week you saids that LM cleaning was for short sighted dwarfs who even though their heads and eye are closer to the floor, still can't tell when they've got the carpet clean, why have you now changed your opinion?
did you say this or am I'm making up this quote to prove my point?
people who rely on misquotes or just make them up to prove a point fool no one...... and it just show they have a weak argument that cannot stand on truth alone
-
I would love to actually measure total amount of soil removed by both methods.
Imagine an experiment.. i can think of some. The soil is non volatile or it wouldnt be in the carpet most of the time, its the cleaning agent offset im struggling with and how to gauge the amount of soild and agent left behind in the pad. Both areas would taint the results heavily.
Then maybe we could settle the dirt spreading argument. There is always a way, but i dont think DF would fund it lol.
While your at this thinking lark, consider a way to gauge cleaning efficiency, again i have a few, but the variables and errors would taint it.
Would love some input on this and it would be good for the industry to settle it.
Graeme
Access Cleaning Solutions
-
I used to work for a company cleaning carpets with Host on some carpets we used to dry granular clean then to improve the appearance then spray buff, the results were great and virtually dry but it took a lot longer to do.
Shaun
PS Mike and myself had some cotton bonnets I thought that they were the best way of LM extraction as they did actually absorb the soil onto them you could actually see the soil on the pad and therefore you get the feeling of you ARE removing soil.
-
There is really no point in such an experiment Graeme................the ultimate test is how pleased the customer is with the result........... and with the carpet cleaner, how well the carpets appear on the next visit.
Having used LM methods and products for a number of years it's my experience that carpets cleaned with LM look and feel at least as good as they would with HWE.
In the case of upholstery I've found suites remain clean longer and are easier to clean the next time compared with HWE.
-
this is a picture of Robert moments before he made that post..... he's starting his weekend early :D :D
-
Must laugh as it does resemble Robert in that picture, sorry Rob I do have to agree with Mike on this one and I did dry foam all upholstery for may be 10 years.
Shaun
-
Robert,
Surely when asked to "clean" something your service delivery is based on how much dirt you can remove as a %. You can hide this as whatever you want, but science would measure it this way.
I appreciate the art of sales, its not about that. I would just love one of these "LM's the Dogs dangglies" or "HWE for the win" tribal units to come forward with an actual scientific measurement. Its possible and maybe stupidly, i think i could actually carry it out? Science is about things that dont work, believe me i published 2 papers. Could of been 30 if stuff that didnt work was of interest.
Apparently we put people on the moon. This isnt actually that hard.
So I continue with this: Think of a way to compare soil removal levels accurately using LM and HWE.
Graeme
Access Cleaning Solutions
Bees are intelligent not because one bee is smart. A billion bees that communicate can kill a man.
-
It's not as easy as the cleanest carpet, the best way to thoroughly clean a carpet would be to immerse it which in the home would not be practical, weighing up to what is practical and what the customer wants is what we have to achieve.
Dry or LM cleaning was 'invented' to solve a problem where flood cleaning was not possible, then marketing came along and moisture problems caused by nasty extraction machines.
Shaun
-
I don't believe there is a right way or a wrong way, LM this HWE that and comparison is rather pointless. To offer your customer the complete service based on the situation and practicalities is the right descision. I clean a lot of schools, all LM with a 20 year old victor. They look great when they are done and it would take considerably longer to HWE. I don't think there is an argument I use LM, VLM and HWE, why would I want to restrict myself. I often use both systems and post bonnet quite a bit on domestics, it works a treat. As professionals we should all be open minded and not entrench ourselves one way or the other.
-
Not as rotund Mike and don't drink nowadays. I never thought it possible to remove soil with pads until I used a Tex' system which removed massive amounts of soil and the carpets did NOT resoil any quicker than when cleaned with HWE.
As you've recently discovered, o/p cleaning with the best products and pads can equal HWE in most cases, as been proven for some time in the US.
Graeme
By showing a client a clean carpet which had previously been a dirty carpet is proof enough to the client that the task has been done.
To constantly seek proof that one system will remove a a few micrograms more than another has no value to anyone other than the frustrated scientist . I f you MUST have proof lift equally soiled carpet sections............weigh them...........clean them...........dry them ...........weigh them again......simples!
-
Weight and appearance but it is as simple as what Robert has stated.
Rob what system and machinery do youtend to use these days?
Shaun
-
Mike,
what chemicals are you using with the new machine?
Many Thanks
Daryl
-
daryl.
I've used fusionclean and pureclean boith gave equally good results
-
Robert,
That would be simple, but it comes back to my point: how can you offset the cleaning agent deposited using LM? Its not soil but would add weight. If you used your method, then did a water submersion clean, i still think you would get an error from the leaching of water solubles from the carpet (assuming HWE rinsing with water).
Science is harder than carpet cleaning. I agree our debate should focus on how much the client likes the result. But it will never put an end to the dirt-spreading arguments. With design this could be ended, im sure between us we would be able to do the design.
After all, I feel we should be thinking whats the best way to actually clean a carpet. Service business is however, about making you client happiest. The conflict of these principles is the root of the disagreement.
Graeme
Access Cleaning Solutions
-
Thanks Mike
I have been using pure clean i just wanted to know if there was something better
Regards
Daryl
-
There is really no point in such an experiment Graeme................the ultimate test is how pleased the customer is with the result........... and with the carpet cleaner, how well the carpets appear on the next visit.
Having used LM methods and products for a number of years it's my experience that carpets cleaned with LM look and feel at least as good as they would with HWE.
In the case of upholstery I've found suites remain clean longer and are easier to clean the next time compared with HWE.
+1
;)
-
Robert,
Surely when asked to "clean" something your service delivery is based on how much dirt you can remove as a %. You can hide this as whatever you want, but science would measure it this way.
I appreciate the art of sales, its not about that. I would just love one of these "LM's the Dogs dangglies" or "HWE for the win" tribal units to come forward with an actual scientific measurement. Its possible and maybe stupidly, i think i could actually carry it out? Science is about things that dont work, believe me i published 2 papers. Could of been 30 if stuff that didnt work was of interest.
Apparently we put people on the moon. This isnt actually that hard.
So I continue with this: Think of a way to compare soil removal levels accurately using LM and HWE.
Graeme
Access Cleaning Solutions
Bees are intelligent not because one bee is smart. A billion bees that communicate can kill a man.
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.
-
But won't the power of HWE dislodge more soil as it's more direct to the base?
Shaun
-
Shaun
If I could justify it I'd have one of Mr Guerlink's Easyglides and import their chemicals and pads............meantime, I have a Truvox 15" which gets used with Chemblend or a Colloid plus an old Bane and a couple of portables. Still use One Step and am working my way through a tub of Bane powder.
Graeme
I fully appreciate where you're coming from, but my priority in any business I've been involved in is to make a profit while keeping within ethical boundaries.
In carpet cleaning most incidents of " bad practice " I've encountered have been from users of HWE methods which is easy to " balls up "and often is, most often by applying too much water / failing to extract enough water.
To date I've been experimenting with and using low moisture type methods for about 10 years and NEVER had a bad experience experience with them.
Buyers of carpet cleaning want a tangible result, something that's a marked improvement on what they currently have. They don't expect or seek proof that one method used is 2% or 20% better than another method. If it's clean and dry in a reasonable time and stays clean as long as any other method ............the carpet cleaner has done his job.
-
Robert,
I think you're quite right, as far as the customer is concerned if it looks clean then it is clean - whether it is or not is another matter.
Simon
-
I've been looking at the CCSOP machines, I've had a 13" floormac and found it to just skip across the carpet do you think if there was a machine that was heavier say 20kg not the 10 or 12kg like the Orecks or Floormac it would be any better?
Shaun
-
[
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
-
Camraso carried out testing ,and published a report in 1998 , proving that LM has slower resoiling than HWE, albeit the Chemdry version of LM.
-
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?
-
And encap products have moved on a lot since then !!!!!
-
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
-
I will attempt to dig out the report tomorrow.
-
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.
-
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
-
PMSL !
This is my favourite post of the year - nice one Graham ;D
-
Mix 20:1 allow 10 minutes dwell for glasgow kiss. if this fails try HWE ;D
-
Westy,
Horses for courses, nice job, makes you feel good when you can do that.
Simon
-
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.... :o
-
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? :-X
-
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
-
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? :-X
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
-
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.
-
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.