Interested In Advertising? | Contact Us Here
Warning!

 

Welcome to Clean It Up; the UK`s largest cleaning forum with over 34,000 members

 

Please login or register to post and reply to topics.      

 

Forgot your password? Click here

Len Gribble

  • Posts: 5106
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #80 on: December 18, 2011, 05:51:29 pm »
It’s totally BS trying to compare the two (and yes I had one/two or three actually one ;D)


Look at a job Thursday no way would I do it even with the most powerful porty (black max) carpets rank and two flights of stairs to cart up. Job done this morning with the reliable TM and on double yellow lines (at any time) will be changing my billboard to look more official Ghanaian (what a lovely bloke).

Ian

It dose ring and I dont advertise and with the upmost respect why respects ???

Yoda aka len
Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed is more important than any other. (Sidcup Kent)

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #81 on: December 18, 2011, 06:50:02 pm »
Performance wise a series/parallel quadvac could compete with a 13hp / roots 33

This is the only example i can find using some of the new gen motors but these are pretty much prowler figures ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVIBnuq50h4
( this could be a two cord system @ 230v)

If someone stuck two more 6.6 up the jaguars silencer they could get similar figures ...

Even though the Americans are disadvantaged electrically , entry TMs cost little more than porty over here , and gas is cheap , they still have more innovative portys than the UK .

clive ware

  • Posts: 540
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #82 on: December 18, 2011, 07:35:36 pm »
I`ve had t/ms and portables over the years and currently running a woodbridge 25. I have a ninja 2vac 400psi machine as a back up or where I cant get the t/m to. I have to say that it feels like the ninja is even working properly compared to the t/m. Very poor vacuum and waterflow but still wouldnt be without one whatever make. If I could get comparable power from an electric tm, I would buy one tomorrow!

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #83 on: December 18, 2011, 08:20:41 pm »
I`ve had t/ms and portables over the years and currently running a woodbridge 25. I have a ninja 2vac 400psi machine as a back up or where I cant get the t/m to. I have to say that it feels like the ninja is even working properly compared to the t/m. Very poor vacuum and waterflow but still wouldn't be without one whatever make. If I could get comparable power from an electric tm, I would buy one tomorrow!

likely because your series ninja has 200 " lift and about 100 cfm ... not a great setup id say especially for +25ft ...
id say you'd notice a good difference changing to a triple vac ( 140" lift and 300 cfm )  or the 6.6 machines ( which shouldn't have quite as much , but the owners say  they work well    ::)

Russ Chadd

  • Posts: 1261
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #84 on: December 19, 2011, 10:57:01 am »
A truckmount will offer better extraction and a constant supply of hot water compared to most portables, however there are a few things we need to consider here:

1 We are now in a recession and the bottom line is most  customers could not give a monkeys what gear you use as long as the job gets done and the price is right.

2 You better have a good supply of work if you have a TM because it can be a huge investment compared to a porty.

3 The general running costs will be higher in most cases, TM's need to be permanently fixed inside the vehicle (unless its a prowler) so a larger van is required

4 A porty can be removed from the vehicle and can be taken to very remote areas where as TM's cant.
 

Dont get me wrong if i had the work and the money i would have a TM, but would never get rid of my Jag

Warren Aldridge

  • Posts: 260
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #85 on: December 19, 2011, 02:32:28 pm »
If you have enough work for a TM then why would you have to worry about overheads. If you cant afford a TM its because you dont get enough business. Simple as that

You dont hear TM operators moan about costs, only former TM operators who then go on to bamboozle everyone on how you dont actually need a TM but then go and try make their portable setups as close to a TM setup as possible.

Sounds like sour grapes.

gwrightson

  • Posts: 3617
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #86 on: December 19, 2011, 02:55:08 pm »

In my earlier days of starting c.cleaning , i used as most starters   portables, raptor prob been the best , certainly for good heat, .....i still have by the way , i have seen the same arguments put over by porty owners  of which i admit was one of them untill i had an opportunity to purchase a t/m  and did so, well rest assured all of you porty owners are losing out , I am not saying finacialy in paticular although that does come into the equasion , but the simple facts of making life so much easier and speedier.
i have 2 jobs to attend a little later today , both  last minute calls for a spill of food, and one custy kid walked with mud on shoe after i had just cleaned them last week, i know for a fact i will be around 5 minutes at the latter, £55   ....    the other may take a little longer !!  again £55

the hassle of the porty for this work lmo not worth it  :)

simple facts . Wake up and smell the coffee
geoff
who ever said dont knock before u try ,i never tried dog crap but i know i wouldnt like  haha

Colin Day

Re: TM v portable
« Reply #87 on: December 19, 2011, 03:11:16 pm »
It goes round and round in circles this argument.

I reckon most porty users would love a TM, but don't take my word for it, I'll do a poll...

Warren Aldridge

  • Posts: 260
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #88 on: December 19, 2011, 03:16:16 pm »
My Scorpion isnt bad at all in terms of suction, actually still love it.

But each job's setup and breakdown was 40 minutes. That to me is a waste of time.
I target 3 to 4 jobs per day. Half the day would be gone effing around and not doing what makes the money, which is wanding.

Colin Day

Re: TM v portable
« Reply #89 on: December 19, 2011, 03:17:37 pm »
My Scorpion isnt bad at all in terms of suction, actually still love it.

But each job's setup and breakdown was 40 minutes. That to me is a waste of time.
I target 3 to 4 jobs per day. Half the day would be gone effing around and not doing what makes the money, which is wanding.

I have to say, in wet weather like today, I really wish I had a TM.

Warren Aldridge

  • Posts: 260
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #90 on: December 19, 2011, 03:23:52 pm »
Makes no difference. Finished my second and final job this morning and a caller came through for a job. He said I could do it today.

It was just down the road but I booked it in for Wednesday.

Far too miserable. TV day

Stevieoneill1967

  • Posts: 23
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #91 on: December 19, 2011, 11:50:40 pm »
In my humble opinion...  From the 90 or so previous replies, only Ian Harper has spoken any sense.  Everyone else is just comparing willy sizes!  Even those well endowed can be poope in bed (im not talking from experience!)

Ian Gourlay

  • Posts: 5746
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #92 on: December 20, 2011, 12:42:32 am »
Colin

As I understand it you have a very powerful top of the range prtable set up.

From your other posts you have suggested Oven Clleaning often keeps you going.

Indicating you are not working solidly at Carpet Cleaning and sweating your  ......... off so you walk like John Wayne day in day out

Why would you want 10grands of depreciation a year  plus serving costs plus an increase in your fuel bill which will just continue to rise.

May bee its you desire to concentrate on Carpet Cleaning in that case go for it, but if you like variety sick the way you are and work at expanding your fleet

wynne jones

  • Posts: 2918
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #93 on: December 20, 2011, 12:52:16 am »
The extra capacity your TM gives you makes it a no brainer. It does cost more to buy and run but the thing almost sells itself if you have an ounce of marketing ability. Stick with a portable if you want to but how many people go back to a portable after a TM? A handful, if that.
It's not expensive, you just can't afford it.

Nigel_W

Re: TM v portable
« Reply #94 on: December 20, 2011, 07:20:43 am »
The story that tm operators are selling their units and go back to portables reminds me of the people who used to justify carrying on smoking because they knew someone who lived to be 96 and smoked 20 a day. ::)

Yes I am sure some people do go back to portables but they are in a tiny minority and I would guess they should never have gone truckmounted in the first place. Most of us have now owned multiple Tm's. Is it really beleivable that we made a big mistake and then did it again and again?

On another point we talk about TM's vs portables. This is way too general as not all portables are the same and not all TMs are either. There is a huge difference between a single vac/100 psi porty and a triple vac/500 psi model. Likewise a 13 hp prowler and a 69 hp Titan. Would I swap a top end porty for a Prowler? Maybe but maybe not because the difference is small. Would I swap for a Titan/Thermalwave? YES because the difference is enormous. Even then you have to have the work for it, be able to afford to buy it etc.

Personally i hope that anyone who is working the Central London area continues to be persuaded to remain portable. Remember you can't use them in Cities ;)


Nigel









Simon Gerrard

  • Posts: 4405

elliott cleaning

  • Posts: 778
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #96 on: December 20, 2011, 09:40:48 pm »

Personally i hope that anyone who is working the Central London area continues to be persuaded to remain portable. Remember you can't use them in Cities ;)


Nigel


Yes, but you and I both do. Fair enough, you have to be bloody minded with traffic regulations & imaginative with pipe layout but isn't that half the fun of this business

Simon
Nigel's post is excellent and does sum up this repetitive argument to a 'T'







Warren Aldridge

  • Posts: 260
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #97 on: December 20, 2011, 10:00:57 pm »
If your hose runs dont regularly exceed 50 feet, get yourself and triple vac. Onboard water tanks and Zeta heater.

You'll work just as quick as a TM operator.

elliott cleaning

  • Posts: 778
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #98 on: December 20, 2011, 10:06:20 pm »
Where in central London don't your hose runs ever exceed 50',  Warren??  ;)

Warren Aldridge

  • Posts: 260
Re: TM v portable
« Reply #99 on: December 20, 2011, 10:17:34 pm »
I work London. Just not Zone 1, dont know how anyone does it. Ball ache deluxe