Cimex

[Mark Azevedo]

Can someone please give me an educated answer to what exactly a cimex is doing to carpet ? and please do not answer with the term cleaning in your statement. Why not throw a solution tank and white burnishing pad on your rotary you will get more coverage out of it. I wouldn't include agitation in your answer either if you do not plan on extracting the soil. The machine does have a reverse rotation mode but again it would only help in the agitation process. :? :? :?

 

[Bruce Humphrey]

http://www.encapboard.com/

 

[Mark Azevedo]

Sorry, Bruce I chose Mikeys board for this thread for a reason, intel

 

[Jeremy]

Basically you're grinding/sanding the dirt off the fiber & wrapping it up in in a non sticky brittle crystal (depending on the shampoo)... This allows it to be vacuumed out later. If you are wondering "where does the dirt go?"... It turns into deposit slips...

 

[Guest]

But WHY would you use that method to clean carpet, when a MUCH better method exist?

$$$ ? Hmmm..

 

[Bruce Humphrey]

The better method might not always be the best method in curtain situations.

 

[Jeremy]

Who determines what is better? The technician & in the end the customer. Feel free to limit yourself Stevie B... Personally, I'd rather have more tools in my tool box than less. Let the situation dictate what gets used not defense of your TM purchase.

 

[steve r]

theres at least one place thats not good to hwe, libraries. old books are very easily damaged by humidity.

 

[Bob Foster]

And stores and galleries with lots of water color paintings.

 

[The Preacher]

because the pads counter rotate of the base it actually lifts the pile while cleaning the fiber on 3 sides at the same time.

I suggest you call Ricky Cimex, he knows tons more about that machine than most here.

 

[randy]

The best method ? That depends on why you define best.

Personally I define the best method as the most PROFITABLE. On commercial work encap is a real winner $$$$$

With respect to the Cimex, I prefer the GLS type machines for several reasons.
1) cost - GLS type units for $1295- $2200
2) scrubbing ability- the GLS with the right brushes is a better machine
3) pile lifting vrs. pile grinding with the cimex

 

[Guest]

Jeremy,since when does the customer know the best method to clean their carpet?
Your lack of finances does not make VLM a better method.

Randy. Your statement says profit determines the best method.
you suck.

 

[Ron Lippold]

I used a little of Rickys juice today, super naty 15 years since last cleaning, got a 200 dollar tip on top of top dollar.

Thank god for my Vortex and my 175

 

[Mikey P]

The best method ? That depends on why you define best.

Personally I define the best method as the most PROFITABLE. On commercial work encap is a real winner $$$$$

With respect to the Cimex, I prefer the GLS type machines for several reasons.
1) cost - GLS type units for $1295- $2200
2) scrubbing ability- the GLS with the right brushes is a better machine
3) pile lifting vrs. pile grinding with the cimex

Better machine, how?

Do you have a Cimex or are you speculating?

 

[floorguy]

ok ron besides gloating.. :roll: :roll: :roll:

what exactly did you do

 

[steve frasier]

I guarantee you that I can take a cimex and in a lot of commercial situations, I can make the carpet appear cleaner then your TM and any juice you can muster up

yes
I have the tools in the tool box

appearance maintenance, sure
generate good profit, yep
happy naive customer, yep

rotary and white pad are not the same

vacuum it out is a completely out, I don't think you ever get it all out of commercial carpet unless you have maintained it from the beginning

to bad you don't have one

 

[Ron Lippold]

pre vac pre spray pre scrub extract extract extract no more dirt but after rickys juice it blender the bad areas better

 

[floorguy]

so his juice in the beginning or after the whore-tex didnt get it all

 

[Pmatte]

Hey Mark, since you "seem" to know it all already,why are you even asking?
Patrick

 

[Jeremy]

Stevie just because you "disapprove" of VLM doesn't make it inferior. I didn't bash HWE never have never will.... But do me a favor & shut the hell up already... If you don't use VLM don't comment on it's effectiveness. The customer might not know the best method, but they do know whether or not they'll use your service again. It works & works well enough for me to have repeat customers. Just so you know... I HWE'd a carpet yesterday. KMA.

That said... Arguing on the Internet is like winning a gold metal at the Special Olympics. You might win but you're still retarded. I'm done... Enjoy your medal!

 

[Guest]

Rookie.

 

[B&BGaryC]

You guys are too much fun...

 

[Ron Lippold]

if you have all the tools in the tool box you don't have to leave a job lookin like shit, or give a piss poor excuse about having to come back later to do it for free.


by the way carpet was in a wrecker yard it was the offices super nasty

 

[hogjowl]

Having used various types of vlm cleaning, along with hwe, over the years, I can tell you from my experience vlm cleaning IS inferior. It simply doesn't clean as well. However, the best cleaning is not always what the customer needs or can afford.

For instance, I just finished cleaning a 60,000 sf school today. My full-service hwe price would have been ... well, it would have been a lot. There is no way they could have afforded that. Besides, they had a bad experience a few years back where a hack molded their carpets and every book in their library. They are hwe shy, to say the least.

I got that school, and every other school in the system BECAUSE I could "dry clean."

Am I a hack for offering them what they asked for?

In many of your eyes the answer to that is a resounding YES! However, in their eyes, their carpets look great, are dry in under an hour, they have no more mold issues and they get it done for much less than what I would have to charge them to hwe.

In fact, if it wasn't for the fact that I can use vlm on their carpets, they wouldn't have been having their carpets cleaned for the years since they had the hwe hack ruin their library.

PS And to PROVE to you ICS cleaners that I am a vlm hack, I don't vacuum on these school jobs, A-N-D I use a film former instead of a crystal encapsulate.

 

[harryhides]

Besides, they had a bad experience a few years back where a hack molded their carpets and every book in their library. They are hwe shy, to say the least.
I got that school, and every other school in the system BECAUSE I could "dry clean."

Or because the level of hackdom in Alabama is an abomination, :shock:

PS And to PROVE to you ICS cleaners that I am a vlm hack, I don't vacuum on these school jobs, A-N-D I use a film former instead of a crystal encapsulate.

Would the good chemist from south Bama, care to explain in simple language the precise difference between an encapsulate and a film former. Oh an keep it brief, eh.

 

[hogjowl]

Look right down there where you quoted me, Harold. It says CRYSTAL encapsulate.

Smart ass I can stand, but dumb ass is annoying!

 

[Dion R]

I got a little confused reading your question. Are you saying the cimex is bad or are you confusing the use of a cimex with encapsulation. To say the cimex "grinds" the soil into the carpet is asinine. When I HWE I scrub the wand pretty dang hard. DO you float your wand above the fibers? do you never agitate your prespay? Do you really believe that extracting dry soil has no value? maybe you just need to get yourself educated s to what the whole entire proccess is and not just one part of it.

Did I use asinine correctly? I better look it up.

 

[steve frasier]

That said... Arguing on the Internet is like winning a gold metal at the Special Olympics. You might win but you're still retarded. I'm done... Enjoy your medal!

you just been bitch slapped by the cocky guy

 

[GRHeacock]

People with only one system always think their system is the best, and other systems are no good, or inferior to their system.

It just shows a lack of knowledge about other systems.

I say it is better to educate yourself, and to have more than one system available, because no single system is always the best under all circumstances.

Old style shampoos removed the soils on the surface, and without an extraction, re-deposited them on the backing.

That's where a machine like a Chemstractor came into it's own.

When "Steam Cleaning" came along in the 1960's, the RX-20 and other power heads were needed for more agitation than a wand could give, and less fatigue on larger jobs.

Machines like rotary shampooers and the Cimex do not "grind" the dirt.

The majority of solid soils are dry vacuumed out prior to applying the shampoo product.

The shampoo then dissolves the water soluble soils, and suspends the remaining solid particles, which re-deposit on the back.

With the recent advent of the encapsulating shampoos, the remaining solid soils are easy to vacuum out after it is dry.

Gary

 

[harryhides]

Look right down there where you quoted me, Harold. It says CRYSTAL encapsulate.

Smart ass I can stand, but dumb ass is annoying!

PS I don't vacuum on these school jobs, A-N-D I use a film former instead of a crystal encapsulate.

Would the smart ass chemist from south Bama, care to explain in simple language the precise difference between a CRYSTAL encapsulate and a film former. Oh an keep it brief, eh.

Keep in mind that if you can't . . . . . well, dumb ass quickly comes to mind.