[Alan falconer]

Im just curious about something ....i currently use hw extractor on the jobs i do..but i was watching a video on youtube of the rotavac and a must say it looks extremely damaging to the carpet i guess theres some sort of pad rotating underneath but it just looks and sound really rough , but i suppose they wouldnt be using it otherwise link to video ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NowK4xfF1vk

[steven Banks]

They are fine, Rotovac would have tested them on all types of carpet before production. That is the Rotovac powerwand. The heads at the bottom are counter - rotating and have 3 spray jets and 3 vac slots that turn at speed.

[Paul Moss]

How does it look like its damaging the carpets?

[grahamwolsey]

hi the rotavac is reley good i have ad one 4 a longtime.

[bennymon]

do they get up to the edges ??

[Jim_77]

No rotary extractor will get RIGHT up to the edges, but they''ll get pretty close.  On most commercials that's good enough.  On domestics you'll no doubt need to stick a wand on afterwards to do any awkward bits, and then whizz round the edges.  Sometimes a post-wand (extraction only) over the whole carpet is needed, to pick up bits of fluff or take the swirl out. Doesn't take very long.

[Seymour Sunshine]

Please forgive me. I'm writing as a complete numpty here.

I can easily understand that the rotovac is easier to use than a regular wand and probably gives better results; you'd hope so for the price. But surely this video isn't giving a fair idea, is it? (Mind you, it IS designed to show that a wand is inferior to the rotovac.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H2HI9txosU

If the carpet had been pre-sprayed and the spray well agitated, wouldn't the wand have done a much better job? I recall someone saying that, by the time they come to do the extraction the carpet is already clean. Their point was that the spray and agitation cleans the carpet and the extraction is simply to rinse.

I'd thought that the idea was to allow the chemicals, agitation and dwell time to do as much of the work as possible and then to use the HWE/LM to remove the soiling with relatively little effort.

Or is my lack of understanding even more profound than I thought?

[Ian Gourlay]

Yes it would be good compare the results  between the various agitation devises.

Does the Rotovac justify paying £2000 plus for the improvement in result /time saving etc.

[Jim_77]

After 5 - 10 jobs using a rotary extractor (takes a little time to get the best out of it), neither of you would have to ask that question

Can't speak for the rotovac but certainly the RX-20 copes with heavy soil a lot better than a wand in many cases (not all).

Whoever says a carpet is "clean" after pre-spraying maybe needs to go on a refresher course   It ain't clean till the muck's been taken out!!

[Seymour Sunshine]

Whoever says a carpet is "clean" after pre-spraying maybe needs to go on a refresher course  It ain't clean till the muck's been taken out!!

Yes, you're right. A bit of sloppy language use there.

What I meant to say was that the pre-spray, agitation and dwell time had moistened the fibres and soil and loosened the soil from the fibres and emulsified it so that the job of the HWE/LM is mainly to remove the soil-bearing emulsion. (So the fibers are clean (= free of attached soil), but coated in a soil-laden emulsion.) The carpet is, as you say, not clean until all the soil is removed.

If I understand (which I probably don't very well!!!) HWE removes the soil-bearing emulsion by high-pressure irrigation and vacuuming the liquid away. LM methods remove the emulsion by wicking it into an absorbent pad.

Although I understand that the friction of the water (in the case of HWE) and the pad  (in the case of LM) on the fibres has an additional cleaning effect.

[Jamie Pearson]

Whoever says a carpet is "clean" after pre-spraying maybe needs to go on a refresher course  It ain't clean till the muck's been taken out!!

LM methods remove the emulsion by wicking it into an absorbent pad.

and/or by encapsulation in the case of some products.