Questions regarding Superglide and OP

I will gladly give you that call, funny how we meet on the Canadian BBS..

 

One thing I will say right out is, "those are not wand marks" those are vacuum lines, we vacuum EVERY carpet RIGHT after cleaning and while it is still damp.

It is "happening" because you got canned from ICS again?

LOL. I was leaving that board anyway, John.Evan just made it an official announcement is all. Too much of a distraction to my time now that product sales are taking off.Glide sales are going up, the ZRX3 skid sales are taking off, and I have 2 national distribution sales signed on them.So, you might say I got what I wanted there.More time for production and bringing out the 8 new products I have ready to go between now and next year. I got what I wanted.

Edited by Superglide Ken

I will sell you the Golden Gate Bridge

Very good price

cash only deal

Ken must be making it big with all those cars in his front yard.


LOL

that right you dont park your company trucks at home

too many cleaners tring to take a peak at your stuff.


Edited by Bjørn

Vacuum boosters are a better way of bringing CFMs to the wand

Knowing how Physics works really helps

Greetings,

I didn't mean to open up a can of worms here first of all so I apologize since I apparently opened up some old wounds here.

First of all I want to thank John for calling me and being a person that wants to see the right techniques used regardless of the system. I look forward to meeting you personally and looking at your system. If not to replace mine, certainly to offer it as an alternative to those who prefer or need a good VLM system. As we expand with our new product and service company, I am sure we will have a need for it. Also nice to hear you know about Daddy. He has been very good to me in spite of myself.

Now back to Ken and probably more importantly Bjorn.

Ken, I very much appreciate your obvious love and excitement for your invention. I personally help others with their own inventons within my church and elsewhere because I learned so much from going through the processes of protection, searches, patent filings, etc. myself. I would give you the same advice I keep in my own mind and continue to give to others which is "never fall in love with your idea." Stay realistic and be willing to look at its disadvantages as well as its advantage. Never try and over justify it to yourself or others. As good as my own invention is over many other systems, I realize the downside is that it contains more parts than a self-contained extractor or even a portable does. The continuous flow advantages help to offset this as does the cost and performance, but simple and easy to use beats out effective more times than I care to admit in this industry. Keep it real.

I do have to disagree with you on the cfm verses lift issue. I don't have the knowledge you appear to have with some of the numbers you threw out, but I have spent almost five years in prototyping and field testing and my experience has been that cfm seems to work well when the carpet has raised areas (a WalMart carpet I did, proved this point with its standard carpet having raised areas and drying very quickly) or the wand has a wider head/mouth opening.

When a regular carpet wand is applied to a low nap carpet the seal that is created appears to shut down the cfm benefits and water lift takes over. An engineer explained the difference to me in my early stages of prototyping, but more importantly, I have seen it for myself in real life situations.

That may not be real scientific wording, but I have seen it time and time again in field tests on various cfm's, waterlifts and carpet constructions.

My question was in regards to whether it would help increase the cfm's instead of whether water lift or cfm was more important. You did address the holes in the wand briefly, but you only said you found it didn't work when you tried it because you said it drew air in from the sides and not near the fibers. What about if you did it closer to the fibers? Did you try various places or just decided your glides were the way to go and you didn't want the holes to work?

Not trying to be rude here, just know that sometimes we have to step back and say, "maybe not such a good idea after all." I have a dear friend that came up with putting a strap across a wheelbarrows handles to help stabilize it and make it easier to push with your knees. I did a search and found that the same thing had already been invented. We actually almost bought the patent from the inventor in Arizona thinking he just didn't market it properly. After evaluating different angles I realize that the reason it probably wasn't in every WalMart, Lowes and Home Depot wasn't because it was a bad idea or wasn't marketed well, but that people would probably see the idea and realize they could rig up their own with an old belt or even rope instead of $19.95 (or whatever) for the one on the shelf.

If I decided to use a glide as it were, I would likely get them from PMF. I have already bought an Easy Glide fitting that they sell on their Easy Glide wands for I believe about $12.50 so $159.00 in comparison seems a little steep to me. If this is not a similar item than by all means enlighten me on the difference. My biggest concern is how I might be able to get better drying times with a normal carpet wand using 200 cfm, but less than 100" of water lift. This brings me to you Bjorn.

I appreciated your comments drilling hole on the hand tool, but you said it doesn't work so well on a carpet wand. Can you please elaborate. I am about to try several different hole ports to try different ideas, but would rather not make a bunch of unneccessary holes if someone has a good idea as to where they should go.

If you (or anyone else) on this board can give me some advice on how to increase the cfm on this system by possibly porting the wand I would be appreciative. I have already discovered a big difference in going from a 1-1/2" hose to 2" and i'm sure a wand that was 2" all the way down would help even more, but I already get a great price on my wands and don't want to manufacture my own.

I know the old Butler wands have several "V" cuts on the bottom of one of the lips and I assume this is to increase the cfm flow for the same reason. Any thoughts on this, especially from any of you that have a Butler wand like that.

Not trying to start a big controversy here and my vacuum is already good enough for tile and grout cleaning and blows away a Rainbow system and others at less than 1/3 of their cost in the residential field as well as many commercial portables.

Getting more out of the cfm would be a huge benefit however, and doing it at minimal cost is a priority for the residential system that we will be selling for well under $1,000.00.

Now everybody be nice and don't let me start anymore bickering. I would appreciate any help from anyone that has experimented with venting their wands in a similar manner. Thanks and be blessed.        &nbs p;   Van

not so ken

every one tried my Vacuum booster at summer fest

opened a few eyes from folks

even improved the vacuum on new large truck mount with large blower.

and made a small truck mount very much improved.

I have real witness to this fact!

NO hot air just let folks give it a try on several truck mounts.

My vac booster only works with PD blowers not portables.

Ed V has that market.

BTW

ED helped me make my product too.

That is why I called the first one the EDV#1