Do you agree with this guys veiw on pre vacuuming?

[dday]

The discussion should be more about which is the better way to remove the FINE SOILS that have settled DEEP into the BOTTOM of the fibers, and wheather you should go after them first in their dry state or not.

Yess, that us exactly what it should be, and that is what my original post was about. But this is the internet, and Mikey is seeking page views ...

 

[Mikey P]

how long did your conversation go on ICS ?



David, you come off in print like a bitter prick, just thought I'd let you know.

now fill out your profile.

 

[dday]

now fill out your profile.

My profile is filled out.

 

[Goomer]

The discussion should be more about which is the better way to remove the FINE SOILS that have settled DEEP into the BOTTOM of the fibers, and wheather you should go after them first in their dry state or not.

e

Yess, that us exactly what it should be, and that is what my original post was about. But this is the internet, and Mikey is seeking page views ...

So, do you think it is better to go after the FINER DEEPER soils in their dry state first?

Page views are beneficial to everyone here, not just Mikey.

 

[Mikey P]

please put in your city and state David.

 

[Mike Draper]

and you're a f'n hack if you think a CRB makes a good resi pre scubber.

Sure it will dig out some remaining hair but they do not break grease loose like a 175 will and they ruin many piles, especially cut berbers.

Thanks for letting me post.

I have used a CRB for residential pre-scrub for over five years. No problems regardless of fiber or pile style. Use the right brushes (I have four different sets myself) for the pile with the right pre-spray and you'll have no trouble at all.

You will remove far more than "some remaining hair."

So far all you have done is elicited opinions from posters who are reacting to my original post. Why not the advice of the poster who suggested you run some tests at MF. Like I said, "seeing is believing." And if you really want to see, I would suggest you use a magnification device that you can view on a computer monitor or television screen, similar to the childrens toy by eyeclops. I do think you (and others) will be surprised by what you see.

What I don't understand is why dismiss out of hand the possibility that there may be a better way to remove non-soluble soil from a textile than a vacuum cleaner?

Problem is, many of the guys have all the tools and we know the difference in the final result. I've had a CRB machine for years, also a 360 and the nicest wands. Got a cimex as well. I use the CRB on many of my jobs, I also agree that it still will not take the place of vacuuming. However, like it says in the poll, I would probably skip vacuuming if my prices wont support it.

 

[Brian R]

Doesn't your TM have a vacuum on it? :mrgreen:

 

[Goomer]

I forgot who used a similar analogy before, but I will have to borrow it.

Try this.
Take a fine powdery white substance and cut it into a line on a table. I heard credit cards work great for this. Take a straw or a rolled up 20 dollar bill and apply suction to the other end. Note how easialy the substance becomes airborne.

Now suck down a beer, and smoke 3 cigarettes and when ready for another one, cut another line of this magical substance and before you apply suction to it, mist it with a spray bottle of water.

Note the difference in the results.

 

[Brian R]

Now take a TM with 350 cfms and see if it makes a difference

 

[Goomer]

Holding 350 cfm an inch above it without locking down and I would bet there would be some sticking behind.

What a waste that would be.

 

[Steve in Omaha]

People are filthy buggers.

& to me, the wealthier they are, the filthier they are.

Could not disagree more. Neatfreaks up in the rare air.

Customer just pre-vac, I tell em I'll vac it again to study the spots and plan my strategy.

 

[Loren Egland]

The conclusion then is that the heat chambered counter rotating twin head Rotovac or the Rotovac 360i will do a superior job of removing soil from the carpet, given the right about of time, and, that prevacuuming is a very good marketing tool that saves cleaning out the filter if a filter is used with the truckmount. Does that about sum up this discussion?

 

[Mikey P]

Loren,

You left out that by pre vacuuming heavily soiled carpet you will need to use less pre spray and less rinse passes will be required so in effect the carpet will dry quicker and have less9there is that word again) residue.

 

[Loren Egland]

Loren,

You left out that by pre vacuuming heavily soiled carpet you will need to use less pre spray and less rinse passes will be required so in effect the carpet will dry quicker and have less9there is that word again) residue.

If you say so Mike, but I'm not sure I buy all that.

 

[randy]

how long did your conversation go on ICS ?



David, you come off in print like a bitter prick, just thought I'd let you know.

now fill out your profile.

Bitter prick ? LOL now that is funny coming from someone as opinionated as you !

Not as funny as Wheelwrights comments defending the IICRC board (now that he is on it) and RUTH & Jeffro are well , where ever they are selling "expert" advice on running a rug washing plant. Even though they have neither one ever run a rug plant. Funny how a few years can change things.

David has strong opinions, great he will fit in here well.
Having talked with him I can tell you he is an alright guy, so lets cut him some slack.

 

[Ken Snow]

how long did your conversation go on ICS ?



David, you come off in print like a bitter prick, just thought I'd let you know.

now fill out your profile.

I believe I have never heard a better example of the pot calling the kettle black in my life.

 

[Bob Hauser]

vacuuming is like brushing your teeth it should be done every day, why would a cusy pay for vacuuming. I dont do it ,because every
time I do when I look in my lint bag after the job is done, it is full with lint. so if my tm pulls out lint after I per vac WHY should I prevac

 

[Brian R]

Loren, I agree it is a good marketing tool when used correctly and without being condescending to the customer.
I use it in my marketing for my Low moisture cleaning...right on my home page I say "we always vacuum first".

Funny if I was ever asked if I vacuumed when I owned a TM I would say yes....considering the TM IS a big vacuum.

vacuuming is like brushing your teeth it should be done every day, why would a cusy pay for vacuuming. I don't do it ,because every
time I do when I look in my lint bag after the job is done, it is full with lint. so if my tm pulls out lint after I per vac WHY should I prevac

AND the Dentist never brushes your teeth before they start the "deep cleaning"....good point Bob.

 

[royalkid]

Brian, why do you show a video of a guy wanding on your website? I thought you were paddin' :?:

 

[sweendogg]

Some people just don't get it....
9]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lydljHs2ozI9]

 

[everfresh1]

Have the custy prevac, it also results in them picking up all the little crap you usually have to throw on beds.

Exactly!! :mrgreen:

 

[everfresh1]

I had to rake it first and then vacuum.

:shock: Rake? I thought you didn't use rakes?

 

[Brian R]

Brian, why do you show a video of a guy wanding on your website? I thought you were paddin' :?:

I still offer TM Steam Cleaning

In the Sacramento area I only offer TM Steam Cleaning

My Dallas Website doesn't have that vid...but it does show a guy cleaning tile with a Spinner.

 

[Brian R]

I had to rake it first and then vacuum.

:shock: Rake? I thought you didn't use rakes?

I was talking about a garden rake....little bit of humor but not far from the truth.

 

[ruff]

Some people just don't get it....
m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lydljHs2ozIm]

That test is flawed and in so many ways, that it makes spelling Noah with seven mistakes a breeze.

 

[Joel D]

I have to say im shocked that so many dont believe in prevacuuming. Though i do respect the different opinions.

Isnt it a fact that- 1. certain types of soil are removed easier, much better, when dry? (see the "white powder" point)

2. Every situation, carpet, is different so better to side on the side of caution and do extra steps rather than less.

3.Some soils need the combination of agitation and vacuum to be completely removed ie- a vacuum with a beater
bar.

4. More steps will almost always result in a more thorough cleaning than any single step.

5. People with excellent business minds seem to almost always lack general common sense in mechanical
type discussions.

6. There is huge difference in vacuum performance so test several before coming to a concrete opinion.

i suppose the 360i or similar would change the formula some but it still seems clear to remove whatever you can dry.

I still skip it though sometimes if i couldnt get my price, they already did it, and they dont seem to care. Survival in business comes first.

 

[Goomer]

Isnt it a fact that- 1. certain types of soil are removed easier, much better, when dry? (see the "white powder" point)

2. Every situation, carpet, is different so better to side on the side of caution and do extra steps rather than less.

3.Some soils need the combination of agitation and vacuum to be completely removed ie- a vacuum with a beater
bar.

4. More steps will almost always result in a more thorough cleaning than any single step.

Great points.

That test is flawed and in so many ways, that it makes spelling Noah with seven mistakes a breeze.

Please explain what you believe to be flaws in the testing that may have affected the results.

 

[Ron Werner]

Yes, please tell me how you, in your more experienced capacity, would have run the test differently.
I scrubbed sand and deodour powder into the carpet, steam cleaned one side with a highend TM, then vacuumed both sides to see the diff.


Now, on to David's reply

 

[Ron Werner]

... you really expect someone to "test" your theory???

No. I merely suggested that before one does a knee-jerk dismissal of it, that one might be surprised if one were to test it for himself or herself.

Knee Jerk? Really David? I've seen what comes out with just wanding and I've seen what comes out from vacuuming. Have you? You've only used a substd Sanitaire that a shop vac would out perform.

[quote="Ron Werner":33okkioy]I've been vacuuming since 95 and I've pulled enough soil to know that I don't have to test your theory.

I do not care if you test it or not. But if you are going to dismiss it based upon the fact that in your experience vacuuming removes dry soil, then you are the one making assumptions. Your experience pre-vacuuming proves only one thing: That vacuum cleaners work. The fact that a vacuum cleaner works as it is designed to do does nothing to undermine what I have said above. You bet vacuum cleaners work. They'll pull more out of a carpet than your CRB and TM, any day of the week.

Again, I'm not expecting anyone to test anything. This is America, and for the most part we are still free to do as we please so long as we do no harm to others in the process.

Let us suppose that you were to clean half a room of carpet, and then one of Ken Snow's top crews came in and cleaned the other half of the room. Based upon your opinion, you assume that you will have removed more soil than did the Hagopian crew on the basis that you pre-vacuumed, and they did not. I'm saying, "Prove it!" How is you know that you've removed more soil? On what are you basing your opinion? How do you know that whatever amount of dry soil that you pulled into you dust cup from having pre-vac'd your side of the room isn't represented in like amount in the Hagopian filter/waste tank from their cleaning of the other side of room?How do I know? Common sense and experience having seen what comes out of a carpet.

Lets look at your soil theory. Dry particulates are not suspended well by your prespray. It takes a LOT of water to suspend dry particulate so unless you're flooding the carpet or using a high flow tool, you've left it all behind.

I'm fairly sure that I was thinking in terms chemical suspension. My view is that the light pre-spray combined with agitation from the brushes provides a sort of lubricated barrier or "float" between fibers and particulate matter which facilitates removal through rinsing and extraction. You're "fairly sure".

The soil that your prespray is SUPPOSED to suspend is the fine soil that is stuck on the carpet fibres

No, the prespray dissolves and suspends the oily soils that adhere to the carpet fibers. The pre-spray does provide lubrication to facilitate the removal of larger particulate matter, hair, etc.Of course it dissolves the oils, what do you think is holding the fine soils to the carpet fibres?
Hairs? You must have more luck at lubricating and extracting hairs than I ever have. The dang things just never seem to want to come off the carpet. Guess you must be doing something the majority of us aren't. Must be your CRB, yah, that's it.

Just how is your CRB going to remove carpet deodourizing powder, or gyprock dust, etc. It won't.

I agree, the CRB will not remove those contaminants. I never said it would. The CRB does not remove anything. It agitates, it does not extract. Again, it facilitates their removal, but does not itself effect their removal. Your correct, it won't. Your wand will leave a lot too. Better buy a 360i

As for 15 min ave to vacuum a house ...

This is why bulletin boards are generally not the best forum for these discussions - I never posted that it should take 15 minutes to vacuum a house, and neither did the poster who did mention "15 minute to vaccum". He simply said that for him, the average job would take 15 minutes to vaccuum. Presumably he does far more 1-2 room jobs than he does whole houses, so a 15 minute average time to vacuum may be sufficient for him. I do far more whole houses than 1-2 room jobs, so for me, 15 minutes would not be near enough time to vacuum an average sized job.I never said it was you, I was responding to the other gents post. 15min in two rooms, I guess only if they aren't soiled. But then, since you don't vac or use a vac that shows what you're extracting, you won't know what you left behind.
45min to an hour for a whole house if you let the vacuum do it's job, of course, depends on soil level.

Really, sounds like you're just looking for a reason not to take the time to do what you KNOW you need to do. All you do with the CRB is scrub up the carpet so it LOOKS like its clean. Seems like everyone is looking for a way to speed through the job and get on to the next one.

No, not at all and nothing could be farther from the truth. The CRB does make the carpet look cleaner as it does a wonderful job of helping your pre-spray dissolve and suspend those oily based soils that create what most consider an overall soiled appearance. But, thinking in terms of the principles of cleaning (Time, Agitation, Chemical, & Heat) the carpet is not clean until the soils dissolved, suspended, loosened, and lubricated by the pre-spray (C) facillitated by dwell time (T) and the CRB agitation (A) are removed by hot water extraction (H,A, and for some, C).

So test or don't test - it matters nothing to me. You can continue to dismiss my "theory," as you call it. But in the end, Ron, all you are proving is that which needs no proof at all - most vacuum cleaners remove dry soil. I agree. So what? The fact that vacuum cleaners do so does nothing to prove your assertion that pre-vacuuming is essential to maximizing soil removal.

My customers get a cleaner carpet by my having replaced pre-vacuuming (in most cases) with pre-scrubbing/pile-lifting with a CRB (though I do still offer it as part of my most highest priced package and on an ala carte basis). I have no problems with wicking in spite of not pre-vacuuming. Wicking, after all, is more a function of not properly rinsing the carpet and excessive dry times than a simple dry soil removal issue. I have a very high repeat and referral rate. None of my customers would ever feel that I was attempting to cut corners in order to rush off to the next job. And your ad hominem argument against me will do nothing to make you right and me wrong.

So if this discussion is to continue with me in it, we should stick to the facts of cleaning, rather than impute unsavory or immoral motives to one another. I have no agenda. I have nothing to sell. I am a lone wolf, owner operator who does a very fine job of giving his customers excellent, high-quality service at a reasonable, locally competitive price, and I am quite happy to be so.[/quote:33okkioy]You haven't "replaced" vacuuming, you are simply skipping a step and justifying it.
And my customers get an even cleaner carpet because I not only do what you do, I prevac as well. So while you show them all the hair in your filter, I'll show them the hair, lint dust, powder and anything else their vacuum missed before getting it wet and getting the hairs stuck on the fibres.

Here's what you get when you vacuum. Then its gone and I don't have to even worry about cleaning it off with a CRB and wand/360i or whatever tool is the weapon of your choice.
This carpet didn't even look that bad, however:

 

[dday]

Hi Ron,

My view is that everything in that dust cup of yours would have come out after CRB pile lift followed by extraction. The basis of your assertion is your belief that dust and powder can only be removed while dry. That is simply not true. But there is no point continuing to argue with you. You already have the answer you want.

For what its worth, I pre-vacuumed every job for many, many years. I once believed as you believe. What my own experiments and live testing has shown me is that the assumption under which I was operating, i.e. that dry soil can only be removed by dry vacuuming, was wrong. Poung for pound, gram for gram, so long as I pile lift/scrub with the GLS prior to extraction, I remove more than I removed than when pre-vacuuming followed by extraction. I wish that were not so. After all, a GLS costs three to four times as much as a decent vacuum cleaner. But nonetheless it is indeed the case.

Now, for all those who are saying I am "skipping a step," consider this: Are you yourselves pre-vacuuming, then running a CRB, then extracting? Or are you all simply pre-vacuuming and then extracting. I suspect very, very few are following the vacuum with a CRB prior to extraction. In which case, I have not skipped a step. I have merely replaced a less efficient and effective cleaning step with a far more effective cleaning step.

The crux of the matter is this: Is it true that dry soil, dust, powder, etc. and so on can only be removed by dry vacuuming, or can it be removed by mechanical agitation followed by rinsing & extraction?

What I am saying is that my experience has shown that such soils/contaminants can indeed be removed by the second method, and that it is a false assumption that dry vacuum is the only method capable of removing dry soil.

You can tell me that "common sense and your own experience" tell you otherwise.

I agree that the IICRC/Vendor mantra does seem to have a prima facie "common sense" basis, and I too readily believed for many a years that by pre-vacuuming I was making the carpet "cleaner than the guys who make mud." But my own experience has shown me that this is a case in which that which seems "commonsensical" to the unexamined mind is proven false upon further empirical testing.

I really do not care if anyone believes me. I am here bowing out of this discussion here at MB. There can be no debate between you and I, Ron, as you accept the "power of vacuuming" with a fervor that prohibits you from considering that you may be wrong. I once shared the same belief as you. I have moved beyond that view, and honestly, it took my own specific experiences to move me from that view to my current view. Nothing anyone else could have said to me would have changed my view. So, absent your own willingness to consider what I have said as at least possible, and then to conduct some tests on you own, there is no need to keep this going here.

I wish you the best that life has to offer,

David