If your marketplace is for lots of restaurants/bars and generally very high soil loadings, a TM is the best way to run your business.
A TM is high on running costs and maintenance too, compared to an electric machine.
I ran a Jaguar ETM with auxiliary tanks for many years,. primarily on residential work. It was superb. With the detergent-free technology I was using, I was able to rinse with cold water. Results have been stunning and drying times, to the touch, were typically 1 to 2 hours, even with pure wool carpets. Airing time, as with all cleaning and laundering systems, was a few hours more. Running costs were negligible and I had all the benefits of a portable and some of the benefits of a TM.
On most residential work, if a TM operator was to follow IICRC teachings, time savings over an ETM would be negligible, if at all. However, my experiences have shown that many, many TM operators cut corners. many do not pre-vac/dry soil extract and likewise with agitation. I have come across so many that will merely flood a carpet with (often inappropriate) pre-spray and then just rinse and extract with the TM. Good appearance but often not good for the carpet, especially wool and some nylons.
With a portable/ETM, even a great machine like the Jaguar, you cannot cut corners so easily so you have to follow the laid down industry procedures.
As for hose length, that has been well debated here. For myself. given our typically smaller houses in the UK, running my ETM I would typically run with 50 to 70 ft hoses. Rarely 100ft and in the last 15 years, I could count on one hand the number of times I've needed more than 100ft.
For me, in my business, the Jaguar/Recoil/Scorpion ETM was king. The highest of standards at the lowest cost.
Safe and happy cleaning
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index
The JAGUAR MX-2 ETM @ cross-american.com