Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

Duane, Maybe you didn't read what I said above. I stated since carpet is porous airflow is still introduced. And when I clean commercial I'm looking for that lock. I dont call it lock I call it grab.

Wow... You're right Ara. I didn't read any of that anywhere when I posted. (Hmmm. I looked and still don't see it.)

Truly flat, CGD (commercial glue- down) is a PITR no matter how you scrub it. I used it as an example specifically because it's unique in that it's often like cleaning cardboard, and speaking of getting a "lock" on it is a good way to emphasize the importance of a balance of flow and lift.

When I cleaned, that "grab", as you call it (which is a good way to say it), was important to me, too. It let me know that I wasn't just skimming over the surface, but actually was pulling airflow through them. And that "grab" is missing with a glide. I, personally, don't like losing touch with the feel of the wand on the carpet when I clean.

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

Let me take a wild guess. You sell them right?

What, wands...? I do sell wands.

"No.", I don't sell glides of any kind, unless a customer insists that I get them for him. (It's happened twice... Once, the guy HATED the glide and returned it. The second time, the guy kept the glide.)

Personally, I'm NOT sold on glides. And I've tried them from Ken and Greenbean.

I read and follow these tests and ensuing discussion with interest. I appreciate the work that the group has done, but one comment caught my eye:

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

The proof is in the bucket. How was I able to pull 1/2 gallon more than a glided wand? I'll tell you. I applied more pressure to the wand on the dry stroke. Rather than letting a glide work off airflow. I guess if God came down from Heaven and said glides are less effective, people would still argue with Him.

Does that indicate glided wands are more/less effective than naked ones? I imagine more pressure applied to a glided wand would recover more solution too.

I have a suggestion. For future tests (if there ever are any), weight the wand heads down with sandbags or bags of lead shot. As much weight as you want, but the same weight for every test/every wand. The operator is to use one hand only, to grasp the wand and trigger the valve. He/she is not to apply leverage or even touch the forward handle.

Good science is all about eliminating variables that can skew the results.

Dgardner, I agree completely and you beat my too that point. He mentions his aggressive pressure he placed on the wand. He mentioned that the type of pressure he placed on the wand was only used during water extraction and cases that fast dry times were needed. A test that didn't use the same variables in each test is an inacurate test. Sorry this test of glides must be more consistent for me to be convinced. I could skew a test nearly any way I wanted it if you allowed me to adjust the variables of the test.

The best approach is to test one thing at a time.

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

Your idea of usind weights is a good idea but I cant imagine pushing the wand forward with one hand on dry carpet with good grab or lock.

Agreed, you wouldn't ever clean carpets that way, it would just be a way to insure accurate testing when comparing two wands, glides, etc. That way the operator couldn't (even subconsciously) skew the results. The weights would simulate the down pressure you would normally put on the forward handle.

I imagine a big guy like you would be able to muscle your way through a 4X8 piece of carpet with one hand...

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

Once again I misinterpreted what you were trying to say I apologise. [/URL]

Not a problem, Ara. As we know, that kind of thing is prone to happen on bulletin boards more than in person.

I should have "opened up" with something like, "I tend to agree with your glide vs. non- glide statement...", just to set the stage, so to speak.

I hope that you can make it to the event I'm planning for next month. My driveway at the shop is over 100 feet long. And it continues for another 50 or so beyond me. On Saturdays, there are no businesses open in the building we're in, so we can use the entire length of the driveway to stretch the hoses out straight and rule out that variable for testing purposes, etc.

Ara, I'm only making this final post to make sure you understand that I am actually agreeing with you and your results in my previous post. Most all of the wands I've ever used were unglided and I get excellent recovery from my current wand. What I don't agree with you about is that you seem to take the stance that doing it "old school" is better. This is why I posted what I said about ergonomics. The older I get the more I feel the need to make my job as easy as I can get it. I'm 53 years old and pushing a wand is not my idea of fun. People who do carpet cleaning and really put in a lot of hours a day are very susceptible to the types of injuries I spoke about in my previous post. Yes it is important to recover water, but it's also important that you don't get a slipped disk in your back or carpal tunnel syndrome while doing it. Unless you are not made out of flesh and blood any carpet cleaner is going to go home after some jobs with a sore back, hands, elbows, and other body parts will hurt. Anything that can alleviate those kinds of problems is a good thing imho. I am a sole proprietor w/o any employees. I have preferred it that way for a long time. You may be strong as an ox and very healthy right now, but I'm here to tell you that can all change in an instant and you will never be the same again. I've seen it too many times. I do care very much how much water I recover from the carpet and until I can find a glide that recovers near as much as my unglided wand I will not use them. My RX-20 locks down to the floor plenty well and gives me very good lift with fast dry times, but I used only a wand for many, many years. Anything that can make this job easier, especially for aging carpet cleaners, or any carpet cleaner for that matter, is a good thing as long as it doesn't interfere with the cleaning itself.

Originally Posted by wandwizard

. Most all of the wands I've ever used were unglided and I get excellent recovery from my current wand. The older I get the more I feel the need to make my job as easy as I can get it. I'm 53 years old and pushing a wand is not my idea of fun. Yes it is important to recover water, but it's also important that you don't get a slipped disk in your back or carpal tunnel syndrome while doing it. Anything that can alleviate those kinds of problems is a good thing imho. I do care very much how much water I recover from the carpet and until I can find a glide that recovers near as much as my unglided wand I will not use them. Anything that can make this job easier, especially for aging carpet cleaners, or any carpet cleaner for that matter, is a good thing as long as it doesn't interfere with the cleaning itself.

Wandwizard you seems like a very honest and great guy, so I'll tell you what, if YOU have a Prochem Quad Jet Wand, Ill send you a demo loner set of "Quick Change Slides" to try, so you can see for yourself that you can work easier on many jobs & recover more water at the same time!! (Also some Slides do make you work harder). you just pay for shipping back to me. And buy the Slides you like. (If you like them). Just PM ME
Cheers, AL

5 cleaners do 10 sf section side by side with out glide, mesure recovery and time it takes to be sock dry. Then the same 5 cleaners do another 10 sf section with glides and see what the difference is.

If all 5 have better dry times without glides then glides are not worth it. If all 5 have better dry times with glides, then glides rock. If the results are mixed then to each his own.

Glides do work. Harris Research would not have spent nearly $1 Million in legal bills fighting all the people they have fought over this issue if they didn't. Most testing they have done with my glides confirm this fact.

When results that seem to contridict this are obtained, it is usually because of one main reason: Air Leakage! If a TM is being used and the leakage at the Wand/Glide Interface is over 15% or more, they result will be close to what was shown here. You have to seal them if the gap at the end is anything greater than 1/16" or more. Use Marine Goop to do the job. Then your results will be different. The quality build of the glide matters too. Some glides out there are just not worth buying.

Originally Posted by Andy MC

5 cleaners do 10 sf section side by side with out glide, mesure recovery and time it takes to be sock dry. Then the same 5 cleaners do another 10 sf section with glides and see what the difference is.

If all 5 have better dry times without glides then glides are not worth it. If all 5 have better dry times with glides, then glides rock. If the results are mixed then to each his own.

Well put Andy. But the main reason glides are used is to make a job easier to perform. Period.