Numatic George opinions

[rutger]

Hello

Now that with your help i've decided a Henry Hound isn't to be my next Numatic purchase. I (& my other half Sophie) have decided that if we are to get another vacuum one that also cleans carpets would be a good idea.

I'm currently looking at the Numatic George.

I realise this is also a vacuum, can pump water & it can clean carpets but is it actually any good at cleaning carpets? I've read the Which magazine reviews which aren't great but other reviews seem quite good.

What are your experiences of the George & does is it being suction only without a brush bar make it less effective? What are the pro's & con's of these machines?

Sorry to ask for yet more opinions but i'd really value your input as i'd be buying a new one, so i'd be spending a few quid !

Cheers
Dave

 

[turbo500]

Well as with the Henry's, George has fantastic suction power and is very well built.

As a shampoo machines, it's fantastic. It wipes the floor (no pun intended) with the Vax 6131 and any of up the upright cleaners. It also leaves carpets very dry. My grandma recently bought a George and got 4 tanks full of black water from 1 carpet.

One of the great things about George, is that it comes with 2 hoses - a wet and a dry - so there is no down time waiting for parts to dry when switching between wet and dry cleaning

 

[kirbykid]

wow, i want a numatic george now. ive been using the kirby shampoor and it doesnt work.

 

[vintagerepairer]

Which? have a dislike of Numatic products. Well, they do at the moment. Which? often change their minds about things. Their review of Henry was not good. I know from selling Henry cleaners for almost 20 years that they do a very good job if, like anything, the user knows the limits and knows how to get the very best from it.

The results from George should be equal to any wet cleaning system which has a fish-tail extractor nozzle. Carpet cleaning is a mine field, and in my opinion best left to the professionals. However, we all may need to remove the odd mishap on occasion. The thing I dislike about 3 in 1 cleaners is that dry vacuuming forms what? 95% of the use the cleaner will get, which mean one has to pull around a large, bulky, noisier cleaner day in and day out. I would much prefer a standard dry vacuum with the 3 in 1 being used for high days and holidays. This of course means more expense and more storage space. The pay-off is two machines which are probably better at the tasks one employs them to do, and in this instance one machine (the 3 in 1) which will probably last a lifetime.

 

[baglessball]

Not keen!

I am a big fan of numatic, I thought i would try george after my rug doctor was stolen.

His hand tool is great for the car, stairs, upholstery. But i found that the main fishtail nozzle for carpets was a big disappointment.

Another problem i have found with this time of machine is if carpet has been shampooed prevoiusly you will spend a lot of time disassembling the machine and rinsing it out - even with anti foam.

Needless to say i bought another rug doctor!

 

[turbo500]

you will spend a lot of time disassembling the machine and r

Sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense. You shouldn't be using a foaming carpet shampoo in a spray extraction machine - no wonder you had issues with it. Non-foaming carpet shampoo is like using fabric softener in the rinses in your washer - it should completely dissolve into the water with no suds. If you use the correct kind of carpet shampoo, there should be no need to rinse out the tank or hose more than once. The tank can be dried using a hand towel or tea towel and the hose hung up over a bath/shower to dry out. The dry hose can then be reattached so there should be absolutely no down time when converting between wet and dry.

 

[baglessball]

turbo500

'if carpet has been shampooed previously'

There still will be dried shampoo in the carpet. If vanish or 1001 sprays have been used to spot clean the carpet it remains in there until its washed out.

 

[sensotronic]

I have owned two George cleaners from brand new and sold them on both occasions.

The plus points of this machine are it is well made, has a very long 3m shampoo hose, powerful suction and it performs very well using the small hand tool. I used it on stairs, upholstery and inside the car and it did a good job. I tried it on carpets but found it very hard work, especially after using an upright carpet washer.

There is no way that a carpet cleaner that doesn't employ some sort of brushing action like the brushroll on a Bissell or the Spinscrub brushes on a Vax Dual V or Hoover Steam Vac can clean as effectively. I have owned Hoover Aquamasters, Hoover Aquatronic, Hoover Aquajet, Hoover Jet N Wash and several Vax canisters and non of them cleaned carpets any where near as well as my old Hoover Brush N Wash or any of the upright carpet washers I own or have owned. It's like comparing a straight suction canister with one with a powerhead, you will get better performance if the cleaning solution is agitated into the pile.

The George comes with a lot of accessories which take up quite a bit of storage space. It is useful to have the separate tool kit for dry use, but don't think regular vacuuming with the George will be the same as using a Henry as it is bigger, heavier and doesn't have the handy cord rewind feature.

As far as multipurpose cleaners go, the George is probably the best and certainly better than the Chinese made Vax canisters, but for carpet cleaning, there are better models out there.

I bought my George from Cleanstore which currently have it for £167.43 which is good value. They also sell it in blue without the dry kit for £151.20 or the whole package with several bottles of detergent and the Airo brush for £219.12. I would consider buying another one as it was better for above floor jobs than the hose supplied with my upright carpet washers, but I would probably go for the Lite version without the dry tool kit.

Whatever anyone says about the George, you will never know until you try one for yourself. If you could borrow one from someone it would save you buying one and possibly regretting it. If you do decide to buy without being able to try one out, then I suggest you keep the box, take care of it while you have it and then sell it on Ebay. I sold both of mine on Ebay and because I had kept the box and had only lightly used them, I got nearly what I paid for them.

I hope this has helped.


http://www.cleanstore.co.uk/products/Product.asp?ID=206

 

[sebo_fan]

Check by previous threads on here , i.e. also <span style="font-family: Times; font-weight: normal; font-size: medium;">Post# 180866 on 2012-05-13 23:37:30 by piano_god</span>


 


<span style="font-family: Times; font-weight: normal; font-size: medium;">I was going to buy a George last year but still undecided, really. I have a Charles model which is just brilliant for wet and dry pick up. There's more of an issue with the fishtail carpet attachment though - I know there are metal ones that are available for George as opposed to the plastic ones you get as standard - apparently the metal ones are better.</span>

 

[ryry_87]

I've got a 1980s Nuvac, which was an early incarnation of George but basically the same. I'd say its a good all-rounder. Not too difficult to use and does a good enough job and as Chris says, it wipes the floor with anything i've used from Vax.

I used to be a professional carpet cleaner years ago. I think the type of carpet, how much carpet and how dirty it is should be taken into account when choosing a machine. When it comes to thicker pile carpets then you need some kind of agitation there to do a really good job and bring the pile up. it might be worth investing in a Sebo Duo P machine or low speed carpet scrubber to agitate the cleaning solution in first then rinse with clean water with the George. That way no residue is left behind. Once the residue is left behind it makes the carpet very difficult to keep clean because dirt sticks to it.

If you're cleaning relatively small areas of lower pile carpet, then you'll probably be fine with a George.

Funnily enough though, contrary to what has been said here I used to get some excellent results with my mum and dads old Hoover Aquamaster, it really used to clean deep down and was very powerful.

 

[sebo_fan]

Ugh. Not a fan of the Aquamaster. It is quieter than the Vax 121 but the reason I hate it so is because one of them fell on me when I was cleaning the stairs from the top. They are very sore and very heavy!!

 

[turbo500]

The Hoover Aquamaster/Aquajet...

...is, in my view, the ultimate 3 in 1 cleaner. And it isn't orange.

 

[ryry_87]

I agree chris, I absolutely love Aquamasters, even just to use as a regular dry vac. They have a very unique sound that I love

 

[rutger]

Hi all

Interesting stuff this guys, thanks for all the comments.

The house is a modern 2 bed semi' & we've no pets or children. The carpets aren't especially dirty we just really want to freshen them up generally & just clean the "high traffic" areas that inevitably get grubbier than the rest of it. The carpets are all quite short pile & lightish coloured.

I suppose therefore from the general opinion a George would probably do ok with this?

I do like the idea of having something in the house that can also deal with leaks (say the washing machine flooded etc) which is why I prefer the idea of a 3 in 1. Although to be honest with several other vacuums to choose from it'll probably not be used for regular vacuuming.

I do find the Which? reviews odd, it seems like no matter what Numatic do they just cannot get a high rating (the user reviews always make interesting reading as they generally disagree with Which !)

Cheers
Dave

 

[vintagerepairer]

From what you have said there, you would do better to buy a Henry and then employ a professional carpet cleaner to come in maybe once a year and go through the house for you. If a carpet was worth what you paid, it is worth having it 'serviced' by a professional. If your home is such that floods, spills, accidents from pets and so on and so forth is rife, and your carpet is cheap, then home-cleaning would be the way to go.

The George cleaner is as good as any extractor with a fish-tail attachment, as I said earlier. It would be useful if you often needed to extract a brand-new spillage and clean the area. But will it be good for cleaning a carpet with a build up of dirt? My opinion would be no. As someone else pointed out, agitation with a powered brush is what deeper stains often need. My main concern is, again as I mentioned, that you will end up with a bulkier, noisier, dry vacuum cleaner to use on a regular basis. Though I realise George has no cordwinder, it was only when someone mentioned it here that I realised it's absence is another potential downside too.

As for Which? not recommending Numatic, it could never be down to money of course, because Which? are totally independent OF COURSE and report only what they find.

Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.

And now I must leave you to make your own minds up. Smile.

 

[jmurray01]

Naturally, I'd never suspect otherwise...

How do Dysons do on their reviews I wonder...

 

[vintagerepairer]

Dyson did well on the reviews pretty much all of the time, but were never a Best-Buy due to the poor reliability of the cleaners in relation to the high retail price. It was only the introduction of a full five year guarantee around 2005 which got Dyson into the Best-Buy categories. Which? decided that even with the almost consistent problems which Dyson cleaners have had, the guarantee and the after-care offered was acceptable for the price which the consumer paid for the machine.

 

[jmurray01]

Oh yeah, it's completely acceptable to buy a cleaner with faults because it has a warranty...

Give me a Numatic any day! They don't have warranties but never break down and for over £200 less than a Dyson they are a hell of a lot cheaper too.

 

[vintagerepairer]

Well, it is about presenting someone with the facts and choices, I suppose. A good deal of people must be incredibly happy with the parts which fall off a Dyson, that is my suggestion, because Dyson seem to be in no hurry not to repeat history. I do very much understand the recent comment that once a faulty part has been made it may be cheaper to see how it goes and send out new parts than it would to remake the part altogether, but on an updated model one would expect not to see a similar fault.

But in a sentence yes, Which? were saying that the consumer could expect a rough trot in the reliability stakes, but that the cleaner was good and the faults would be put right as and when they occurred.