Agressive Agitation may be hurting your carpet.

[vegassucks]

http://www.couristan.com/Warranties/PremiereCarpetBrandWarranty.pdf

The above link link provides a recommendation from a carpet manufacture about care and vacuuming. Reading these forums post I believe too many people believe you need a brush that beats the heck out of you carpet to clean it. This actually destroys more carpet than people realize. The reason front load washing machines are so popular is because they clean with less agitation and water which means your clothes should last longer.

Most of the YouTube videos showing agressive brushes cleaning carpet are on flat carpet with a hard floor below it with no padding which makes sense. This however does not mean it is good for your carpet. You do not need to bounce dirt into your vaccum, you need strong air flow and balanced agitation.

 

[gsheen]

I have seen this many times, I have even met carpet company salesman that will tell you if you use brand X on your carpet you will void the warranty straight away.

 

[vacuumman206]

Beating your carpet.

I think for a vacuum to thoroughly clean a carpet it needs good suction and stiff bristles, no beater bar necessary., The bristles loosen it, and suction picks it up. So I don't see how beaters are of any use with good brushes. I have also found stiff-bristled vacs are pretty good at propelling themselves if the height is adjusted correctly. I certainly don't think even prolonged use of a vacuum with an aggressive beater bar will do anything to the carpet, because the brush passes over each sq. foot of carpet so quickly (unless you have a turtle that vacuums your home) it does not make a difference.

 

[gsheen]

When I owned My carpet cleaning company we used to loads of damaged wool carpets. The fibers fluffed badly. It became a standard Joke between my staff and me when I woud just look at the carpet and say to the lady of the house, You have a Kirby and she was always surprised I knew. They would be like are my carpets in good condition and I would always so No your carpets have been ripped to shreds because you set it to low.

 

[vacuumfreeeke]

I think the dirt and sand left behind by the lack of agitation would be more destructive than agitation itself...  I've done experiments where I've only used straight suction machines for a period of time and I'm always shocked at what comes up when I finally use something with a brushroll... and I have thin flat carpet, so I can't even imagine how much more magnified that would be with something more plush.

 

[nycwriter]

Bobby is right ...

If you look at the fine dirt under a microscope, you'll see that their sharp-as-a-blade edges do far more damage to carpet fibers than any brush roll.

 

[ultimatevacman]

I also agree with Bobby, you need a good brushroll to maintain your carpet.

 

[jmurray01]

"I think the dirt and sand left behind by the lack of agitation would be more destructive than agitation itself... I've done experiments where I've only used straight suction machines for a period of time and I'm always shocked at what comes up when I finally use something with a brushroll... and I have thin flat carpet, so I can't even imagine how much more magnified that would be with something more plush." My sentiments exactly! The damage caused by grit far outweighs any damage caused by agitation.

 

[vintagerepairer]

This debate has raged since the conception of cylinder and upright cleaners. Both types had their lovers and their doubters. Cylinder owners said theirs was safer as it cleaned only with gentle suction, upright owners said their cleaner preserved the carpets by sweeping away grit and dust.

Personally, I have always considered that the sweeping and beating action of an upright cleaner was nothing compared to the aggressive trampling which a carpet gets as it is walked on daily, added to which the grit and sand which gets walked in, stays in place, and gets crushed further into the pile. With the immense variation in quality of carpets and prices today, one can afford not to worry about damage from vacuuming as the carpets cost a good deal less than they ever did, so there is little requirement to make them last as long as my parents -indeed people my own age- did.

As for front-loading washing machines, I have to suggest it was simply a matter of convenience which allowed this style to flourish in the UK. Our small homes meant that for many families, the washing was always done in the kitchen. When we switched to automatic washing machines, the kitchen was the place where it went, and in so many cases they fitted under the existing counter tops. A top-loader would of course never worked in the same setting, so they never caught on in the same way. They were also a throw-back to single and twin-tub machines, whereas the front-loader was a completely new way of doing things. For what automatic machines used to cost, style was a very important aspect as the machine would be purchased with the intention that it would stay with it's owner for many, many years to follow. Lower water consumption and less aggressive washing action were two useful additional benefits of a front-loader, but it's not the reason why the success of this machine was such in the UK.

 

[nycwriter]

"carpets cost a good deal less than they ever did, so there is little requirement to make them last as long as my parents -indeed people my own age- did."

That depends on your carpets or rugs.

You can go cheap and get the synthetic fiber carpets that will for years offgas toxic and carcinogenic fumes.

Or if you prefer a rug that not only doesn't poison your environment but actually cleans the air, go with all-natural wool. But they are still are as expensive as they ever were ($5,000 or so for a high-quality room-sized rug), so YES, there is very much of a requirement to make those rugs last as long as possible.

****

"Lower water consumption and less aggressive washing action were two useful additional benefits of a front-loader."

Not all of us agree that lower water consumption is a benefit. Common sense (and my own experience) shows that the less water you use, the dirtier your clothes will come out.

 

[vintagerepairer]

I shall bow to your common sense and experience then. At 75 years of age, I suppose I have little of either.

 

[kirbymodel2c]

I

Hi I agree, A brush roll generally does clean a carpet better than "suction only" cleaners on most styles of carpet. However some machines do a better job than others. I've found a certain bagless machines to be quite aggressive on some carpets. At least Kirby doesn't damage your carpets which was shown in the demo but also backed up by the independent CRI (Carpet and rug institute) with it awarding Kirby a Gold level) http://www.carpet-rug.org/index.cfm

James)

 

[parwaz786]

Finally, more people realise, Dyson is the best for carpet. well it has the tremendous suction, and decent necessary brush bars

 

[jmurray01]

"Dyson is the best for carpet" I'm sorry, but it is not.

To find out why - watch this video by our very own Chris:

 

[parwaz786]

Chris is a good guy, I know BUT although DC14 has good suction, the vac that goes last always wins

 

[jmurray01]

It is obvious you will not listen so I shaln't waste my breath.

 

[parwaz786]

But the vacuum that goes last wins, this is with any vac, if I were to take a Sebo, then go over with a DC07, it would still pick up excess dirt, Why? because the dirt that gets trodden down from daily wear and tear of people walking on the carpets, can go in pretty deep, so when you vacuum it, it may remove most of the dust, and the dust gets loser but about to come out the carpet, but when you finished vacuuming, there is still dust in the carpet, other wise when you vacuum again, that should be able to come out.

 

[jmurray01]

You don't understand. If a vacuum cleaner picks up all the dirt it can then you go over the same piece of carpet with another vacuum - the other one must be more effective than the first - as it manages to pick up dirt the previous one left behind, otherwise there would be no dirt left for it to pick up!!

 

[parwaz786]

Well, if you vacuum with one vac, then go over with the other, then go over with the same vac again, there will still be excess dust left behind!