[[GQC] Tim]

Beautifully engineered systems, hats off. But the bit on Zero ppb is quite controversial I would say. "A thousand times better", "Superior Cleaning Power" and 40% faster on less frequently cleaned windows. Also the 1ppm being one gram per thousand litres. To begin with most of our water is at 000, which therefore is already in the ppb range.

Scanned the brochure in.

http://tinyurl.com/cq53jef

I've got no doubt that the system does zero parts per billion, I just can't believe marketing talk here. Especially since the last brochure said 40% faster cleaning with hot systems (which is partially true), but I don't see how 0 ppb water can make that much of a difference. The physics just don't add up. The reaction rates should be faster, but 0 ppm water already has great capacity in absorbing impurities.

Should be easy enough to replicate though (with greater expense). UV filter after tank and replace resin with high purity nuclear grade resin. Haven't researched O3 treatment yet, not sure if that necessary. Purolite-NRW3240 is pretty expensive though.

http://www.gapswater.co.uk/acatalog/Purolite-NRW3240--prev.-NRW37--nuclear-grade-mixed-bed-resin-DI-resin--25-litres-2162.html

[bumper]

Is tap water heavier than  Purified Water

[Dave Willis]

What I don't understand is the way they are selling this. They seem to imply that the water has fantastic powers to dissolve grime because of its purity. I don't buy this dissolving bit because I see the water simply as a carrier anyway to wash away the dirt that's already been removed by the brush - it's all about the rinse in my opinion. If you don't rinse enough then your fantastically pure water isn't going to be pure anymore once the dirt particles are mixed in with it anyway.
Pure water doesn't eat dirt - if it did you wouldn't need a brush.

[[GQC] Tim]

What I don't understand is the way they are selling this. They seem to imply that the water has fantastic powers to dissolve grime because of its purity. I don't buy this dissolving bit because I see the water simply as a carrier anyway to wash away the dirt that's already been removed by the brush - it's all about the rinse in my opinion. If you don't rinse enough then your fantastically pure water isn't going to be pure anymore once the dirt particles are mixed in with it anyway.
Pure water doesn't eat dirt - if it did you wouldn't need a brush.

Water is called the great universal solvent. Almost everything can be dissolved in water, given enough time. Been years since I had chemistry at school, but on a molecular level solvent molecules can dissolve other molecules by their attracting opposite charges. Pure water has got more dissolving capability as it's got almost no impurities in it, hence the greater absorption power. Problem is, how big is the difference between 0 ppm and 0 ppb.

[Dave Willis]

Yes, but it doesn't need to dissolve anything, it just needs to carry the dirt away and leave no residue. Ever noticed how the front door frames tend to show the dirt from the last clean? Not enough rinsing that's all. If pure had this magic ability to dissolve dirt then your conny roofs would always be clean (rain being almost pure).

[andyM]

Yes im not so sure of the theory that pure water is totally effective at dissolving dirt.
The ph reading of pure water should be around the middle of the scale which will make it neither very acidic or very alkali.
After all if it did disolve dirt effectively surely on a windy day on beading glass any dust blown onto the glass would get absorbed by the water beads still on the window.
This does not happen, the droplets dry and the dust particles show up on the glass as spots.
I agree with Mark that the pure water is part of the process in carrying dirt away from the glass on the rinse leaving the window to dry without leaving a residue.
You could rinse some dirty windows all day long and still not remove some contaminants such as bird droppings and bees wax, which is why they need a good scrub with the brush. 

[Paul Coleman]

The whole industry has moved on so quickly over the last 7 years, I imagine that they're scratching their heads wondering how to set themselves apart from other companies - and to justify their pricing structure.
I'm not knocking them for that because companies do what companies do - but I think they should have either stuck with what they've got or waited until they figured out a better way.  Let's face it, whatever you might think of the company or its pricing structure, the products are good for the most part.  They did slip up with the poles though.  Being at or near the top of the game for so long can cause complacency.  They took their eye off the ball and Gardiners got in there with some quality poles that actually gave people what they wanted rather than making poles, telling people that they wanted them and finding ways to convince people that theirs were better.  Of the poles I've tried, equivalent Gardiner are lighter.  The only test not really carried out is the one of durability.  It may ultimately transpire that an equivalent Ionics pole lasts longer.  Personally I would rather have a pole changed than an elbow or shoulder joint.
No problem with hot water.  It must be quicker for some jobs and more comfortable to use in Winter.  But ppb rather than ppm seems to stretch credibility to me.  IMO they would have done better to find a way of crash testing at higher speed and marketing that.  Now that would have been a far better piece of marketing spiel.