Les Jones, Judson Jones, Greenie, and Larry Cobb

[John Watson]

Please understand, I am not trying to start a pissing contest, just trying to find out what is avalable to MB members who whant to persue these type of tests at connections and what it will help them understand about the units tested.

This started with a Mikey P thread about testing unit in Vegas.

"Truckmount review at Vegas"

link:http://www.mikeysboard.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=1&st=0&sk=t&sd=d&start=80

I asked Duane Oxley a few questions in a thread in the clean room titled "Hey, Duane O"

link:http://www.mikeysboard.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=1

if you haven't read it you might want to revue it before answering this post.

Do you have anything to add to or subtract from what Duane stated??

I myself don't want to be involved with the testing but don't mind asking for your help. I figure to let the young Bucks run around and gather all the data. Randy Hyde has already said he would make up the reading sheets so we could do a comparison of all the rigs running outside at connections, by the same people with the same meters and tools at the same distances and what ever have you.


What type of field tests can be done at a senerio like Vegas by us, laymen carpet suckers that would matter or make a difference to the members of this board and help someone choose between one unit compared to another???

 

[Bob Foster]

It is totally impractical and disruptive to exhibitors to think of testing at Connections. The playing field is not level, people are too busy and it's too damn hot.

Experience has now shown that the least people and distractions around the better for testing.

 

[John Watson]

I wasn't asking you Bobbie!!! :wink:

 

[Walt]

They may have a point about it not being a good time to do the testing - especially in afternoon. Perhaps you could get them to agree to you coming early so you can have some time with the equipment. A couple of trucks per day.

If they thought they may get free publicity on the boards they might be willing. Of course they may underestimate the influence a forum like this can have. A big mistake if you ask me.

 

[John Watson]

It would be great if they agreed if not maybe a template coulde be made up of what is needed and where to place and what reading we are looking for could be made. for those with different machines could submit but we probobly would have to sift through to much shit cause it sorta gets deep at times.

Walt would you be willing to send a test in on your new rig??

 

[Walt]

Yes it gets deep doesn't it. I would be happy to submit a review. I should have it next Sept. 4.

All I need is the parameters.

 

[Mikey P]

Good lord Watson.


Just pick out a new unit like you did that stupid hat.



With your eyes closed.

 

[John Watson]

Hey Butte wad, That stupid hat has history and a story behind it. For one it was my deceased Step fathers. I wear it proudly. They (The John B. Stetson, Company) would have to special make one to fit the gourd on the end of your neck!!!!

Also for your info It is a Royal Stetson, purchased at Stanfields in Anchorage, Alaska in the 70's


Why not have Walt, have Ronnie in Canadia do his new CanAM. CU can do his if he can see straight, You can do both of yours, But we all need the same perimeters for it to do any good.
I have no problem doing my 20 year old shaft drive and submitting the numbers New or old it don't matter just so we can see the comparisons. Hell your the one who started this quest..

Hell, I bet if you did the tests on just Vortex'es the numbers would vary as well, But we could get a feel for what a perticular unit should do and then learn what needs to be done to tweak it to optimal so that maybe you could have another side room off the High performance room for the super tweaked

 

[Duane Oxley]

all truck mount will work the same at 25 feet of hose

Huh...?

So, put a SpitFire and a Genesis side by side and they'll have the same performance at 25 feet....

Interesting...

 

[Bob Savage]

John,

You will NEVER get TM makers to agree to let you put testing equipment on their machines at a TM gathering - PERIOD.

That was tried once at Summerfest a few years ago with far reaching ill will created.

 

[rhyde]

As far as it not being fair test this is the fairest test possible temperature and humidity will affect the test numbers but they will affect every TM’s test numbers in the same environment at the same place & time. Vortex with a freshwater tank at room temp Vs. a slid-in connected to a hose bib isn’t a good comparison but a vortex Vs. AT is or a slid-in hooked to a hose bib Vs. another slid-in hooked to a hose bib, two slid-ins with the same blower but different power plants diesel Vs. gas heat numbers would be less telling than Vac/lift numbers.

A big disruption for manufacturers….LOL! They are at connections to run these things is that a polite way of them saying no we don’t want real comparisons I tend to agree with Mr. Savage


Sorry I opened my mouth ... :shock:

 

[Duane Oxley]

Vortex with a freshwater tank at room temp Vs. a slid-in connected to a hose bib isn’t a good comparison but a vortex Vs. AT is or a slid-in hooked to a hose bib Vs. another slid-in hooked to a hose bib...

A test that takes into account the actual input temperature would be a step in the right direction.

Ultimately, it's not what the output temperature can be... It's what the degrees of rise over input temperature can be.

 

[Walt]

The new Vortex does not heat the water as you drive. So, it wouldn't be at a disadvantage.

 

[The Great Oz]

Testing for fun could be something you could do. I'd suggest you not work too hard at making your testing formal though. To be considered valid, the test parameters would have to be reviewed and agreed to by a panel of knowledgeable types (I would think engineers would need to be included) from a good sampling of companies, who would then publish the parameters for further review and acceptance by the industry at large. Otherwise one guy like Terry pokes a hole in the procedure and at best you could be embarrassed and have to throw your results away, at worst somebody sues you.

The only losers would be those that agree to testing and don't win. Those that refuse to allow testing might do so because they question whether the test could be manipulated to favor another manufacturer, and don't want to be embarrassed themselves. Insinuating that a non-participating manufacturer has something to hide could also get you sued.

CRI tried formal equipment testing without getting their testing procedures reviewed and accepted, and so far the losing manufacturers aren't the ones that came out looking stupid.

 

[rhyde]

The new Vortex does not heat the water as you drive. So, it wouldn't be at a disadvantage.

Maybe Walt, but I’ve heard they have they exchange system to a point where a heated fresh tank isn’t needed. This is exactly what I’m talking about no independent testing and numbers to look at

 

[Leslie Judson Jones]

John,

Testing brand new truck mounts would be kind of hard to do.
I always say that the wand does not know what it's hooked to.
If a given truck mount has 300-500 psi of water pressure, and it has at least 250-350 cfm's and the heat is between 190-220, this truckmount will clean carpets.
I don't think that if one was on the lower end of the scale that it would clean any less effectively than the one on the upper scale.
The only difference would be the speed at which you could clean the carpets.

All new truck mounts clean carpets effectively.
Do you remember the automobile that was called the Yugo? It ran just fine when you drove it off the lot.

I feel the most important thing about a truckmount is reliability first.
It should have the most common available parts, that can be found at Lowes, Auto parts, Graingers, etc.
The truckmount must be easy to access the components.
It must have a extremely simple design, so it can be repaired and diagnosed over the phone.
Not having to take the unit into a service center for repair.

I think that what would be a more fair way of testing a truckmount, is to take a old unit, something like one of our TNT's that's
20-25 years old and see how effective it still is in cleaning ability and drying times.
Pressure is pressure, vacuum is vaccum and heat is heat, and the wand does not know what's it's hooked to.

thanks

les

 

[Brian R]

yea speaking of...My WM will be in the shop tomorrow. It is a bad mo fo TM while it's working. Been in a few times. Was under warranty so no problem...not this time..We will see.

 

[Duane Oxley]

Testing brand new truck mounts would be kind of hard to do.

Not really. That's what all of the above is about. Doing an evaluation of any area: ultimate ability to generate heat, in terms of degrees of rise at a specific flow rate, is super- simple, actually. Same is true for CFM.

I always say that the wand does not know what it's hooked to.
If a given truck mount has 300-500 psi of water pressure, and it has at least 250-350 cfm's and the heat is between 190-220, this truckmount will clean carpets.

True.

I don't think that if one was on the lower end of the scale that it would clean any less effectively than the one on the upper scale.
The only difference would be the speed at which you could clean the carpets.

That, by definition, is a measure of effectiveness...

I feel the most important thing about a truckmount is reliability first.

I feel that it's a balance. Reliability is important. I don't mean to downplay it. But a reliable system that has low performance isn't in my idea of what's acceptable performance.

It should have the most common available parts, that can be found at Lowes, Auto parts, Graingers, etc.

Within reason, I agree. But you're not going to buy a state of the art heating system, whether it be Propane, Oil- fired, or Heat Exchanger, from Lowes, an auto parts store, or Grainger. You may get some of the parts, but ultimately, you have to step away from those sources, in order to be innovative. And "innovation" doesn't necessarily bring "complication" to the forefront.

The truckmount must be easy to access the components.

Absolutely

It must have a extremely simple design, so it can be repaired and diagnosed over the phone.

Absolutely

Not having to take the unit into a service center for repair.

Seems like common sense to me, too...

Pressure is pressure, vacuum is vaccum and heat is heat, and the wand does not know what's it's hooked to.

Precisely. So, forget the wand, hoses, etc., when evaluating a system. Look at the system itself.

 

[Larry Cobb]

John;

A few basic tests could be done, but a lot of significant ones would be very difficult.

"TM & wand" comparisons would be a meaningful, but difficult test

It would require several hours of testing for comparable data.

Not a job for the convention volunteer with many people to talk to and lots of booths to see.

I agree with Duane that serviceability is an important aspect.

Larry

 

[Larry Cobb]

Terry;

There is a lot more to consider than just simple design.

Materials that don't rust or deteriorate from heat are important aspects.

The most durable components are another source of controversy:

1. engines

2. blowers

3. pumps & regulators

4. tanks

5. HXs

6. Reels

Larry

 

[hogjowl]

I liked your TM better when no pictures were available.

 

[Dolly Llama]

I feel that it's a balance. Reliability is important. I don't mean to downplay it. But a reliable system that has low performance isn't in my idea of what's acceptable performance.

quote]

you don't clean carpets full time, do you?
a fire breathing super sucker ani't sheet if it shreads 3 couplers in 500 hours.
or smokes belts,
or the APO is junk on a TM with tiny waste tank.

You never know when you're going to go from CCer to grease monkey :roll:

I'm not surprised "you" think there's a "balance" between proformance and reliability


...L.T.A.

 

[Duane Oxley]

OK Dwain
how is it that the simplest of truck mounts have the best performance and longevity
Problems arise when all carpet cleaners are fooled into believing the industry hype that you can only clean carpets with a #4 blower or larger and nuclear heat and complicated beautiful design.

Terry:

Define, "performance".

I'll grant you that in terms of longevity, you're correct.

But in terms of "performance", I don't agree.

For instance, "simple" is a Bane. But any truck mount with a larger blower and more heat will clean faster.

You're absolutely right that the hype about "bigger is better", is mostly just that- "hype". And in heat exchange systems in particular, I'm as much on that bandwagon as you are.

But I actually cleaned carpet before going into manufacturing. I had several systems at the same time. And the ones that I wanted were the ones that delivered 230 to 240 at the wand. Why? Because I could clean up to twice as fast with them and reliably half again as fast.

That's why I've been a "high heat / high flow" builder since Day 1. Because I know it's more efficient. I know from 8 years of using truck mounts as a cleaner.

And I'm not the only one. People I've sold them to agree. And people who buy them from other sources agree.

Whether you agree or not, is not a big concern of mine. Nothing personal. I know you're passionate about your position. I respect that. So am I.

There can be a down side to building a system "too simply". For instance, I've seen several systems built by a well- known manufacturer, known to be simple, that had a "shortcut of questionable logic", to be polite. That shortcut was that the pump drew chemical into itself (which I agree with), but bypassed back into the fresh water tank. As a result, "Yes", it was very simple and stable. It would have been next to impossible to overheat the pump and damage it. But the fact that it bypassed solution (i.e., chemical mixed with water), back into the fresh water tank, was, "too simple". It contaminated the fresh water. As a result, the chemical mixture was simply unreliable. But hey... it kept on running like that for years. Probably still does.

(By the way "Hammer" systems I built in 1996 are still running as well... cooking along at well over 200 degrees ATW... I just shipped one of the first I ever built to a guy in California. And he's raving about it.)

If you really think that a system like a Bane, or an entry- level exchanger with #4 jets, 180 degrees and a small blower, can clean as efficiently as a system that delivers- and recovers- high heat / high flow, you and I will simply have to disagree. Because I won't argue the point with you. I don't need to. I've done it enough with countless people before you, and convinced them otherwise. (Go look it up on CleanFax, dating back to 1999 or perhaps earlier http://cleanfax.com/detail.asp?Parent_I ... =4173#4173 , and ICS http://i-boards.com/ics/messages.asp?Ms ... eadID=2950 from the day it opened in the current format.) If you're dedicated to maintaining your point on this, why should I waste my time...?

Answer: I shouldn't... And I won't.

 

[steve frasier]

Walt wrote:
The new Vortex does not heat the water as you drive. So, it wouldn't be at a disadvantage.



Maybe Walt, but I’ve heard they have they exchange system to a point where a heated fresh tank isn’t needed. This is exactly what I’m talking about no independent testing and numbers to look at

The new Vortex does not heat the water as you drive. So, it wouldn't be at a disadvantage.

Maybe Walt, but I’ve heard they have they exchange system to a point where a heated fresh tank isn’t needed. This is exactly what I’m talking about no independent testing and numbers to look at

Even if it was sitting there I don't think it would be at a disadvantage, I did 4 jobs over the course of 10 hours on Saturday. Tapped into water at each customers place. Before I started the last job I tried to wash my hands from the fresh water tank but it was too hot to the touch

when it comes to heat I have over kill

 

[Walt]

Disadvantage may have been the wrong word - Plenty of heat. However, I do believe that your machine does get hotter after a job or two? Yes?

It just goes from really hot, to mad hot, to "oh my god"!

 

[steve frasier]

If I don't do a preheat, it is pretty easily blowing steam halfway through a small ranch house if I set the therm oil at 285 but I try to tone it down a little because all the lines and tools just get to hot, that is at 1400/1500rpm

 

[clean one]

I have a 92 nitro with a 3mp blower and 4626.2 hrs on it that will clean and dry carpet against any V or AT at 200 foot or less hose run

 

[judson jones]

John, Venue for testing is not practical,suggest you contact ownwrs of units
with questions.

Now Duane,

Since you have presented yourself as the world's greatest authority on
everything,your modesty overwhelms me.

As to the contaminating of incoing water supply,the TNT has a 1.5 gal.float tank,has a positive air gap to make it legal to attach to a municipal water system. Also Larry's.
We bypass to this 1.5 gal.tank.
Rinse chemical are only in contact with carpet for a fraction ,have no dwell time or detergent value,most are wetting agents or water softners.
We are very capable of adding a chemical injector to a pump,We have tried them all including the new Cat SS model.The constant triggering of the wand
shortens their life.

As a courtesy to cleaners we try to maintain some of the machines you have built,corroded and leaking waste tanks,leaking hoses and other problems,we will picture and post them in the future.

To whom it may concern,
At no time on any of my posts do I mention or promote any products I make or sell.
We pay our way,
The stream of web sites and free ads are the purpose of his multiple posts.
How could you expect a supplier to buy ads when this is allowed.

He is promoting a heat exchanger that can be cleaned,Century did this years ago.

Gobbly gook may impress someone who knows nothing about the subject,
but I can see through it all.

My credentials, BS degree ,Textile Chemistry,Clemson Univ.
Whats yours??

You started this challenge.I accept.

Judson

 

[Fred Homan]

Tell them Judson.....

 

[Duane Oxley]

As to the contaminating of incoing water supply,the TNT has a 1.5 gal.float tank,has a positive air gap to make it legal to attach to a municipal water system. We bypass to this 1.5 gal.tank. Rinse chemical are only in contact with carpet for a fraction ,have no dwell time or detergent value,most are wetting agents or water softners. We are very capable of adding a chemical injector to a pump,We have tried them all including the new Cat SS model. The constant triggering of the wand shortens their life.
Judson

Hey, Judson...

If you re-read what I wrote, I didn't mention that you're the company that made such a system. That's not my way. I've specifically stayed from negative sales of specific systems over the years, while others have made it a mainstay of their sales strategy.

The size of the tank, by the way, is irrelevant. It's supposed to be a fresh water tank, period. Bypassing chemical- injected water to it is simply a no- no. It's not pure water when that's done. You've knowingly done that, for years.

What difference does it make, other than adding a smokescreen to the facts, how long the solution comes into contact with the carpet?

What happens if the user changes from one chemical to another and the two are incompatible? Nothing, if the chemical doesn't get to the tank. But otherwise, a sludge forms. I haven't bothered to take pictures of your systems I've seen this condition in. Because, as I said, I don't focus on negative sales when selling my systems. If I did, I'd have a collection of pictures of systems on my wall, which, apparently, you do.

One thing I said, related to the chemical injection method you use- I agree with it. Others are too fragile, complicated and unreliable. I came to that conclusion years ago before I ever built the first system, and have used the same thing on almost every system I've built. (I tried another for about 10 systems a few years ago, but abandoned it.)

Hey. I never said that I'm humble. I have no need to justify being passionate about building systems any more than you do.

To whom it may concern,
At no time on any of my posts do I mention or promote any products I make or sell.

You don't have to. Your son has that department covered pretty well, I think. Not that there's something wrong with that...