New Wand Design

While sitting in my room out in Vegas during ICE, I started making notes on what I would like to see in a cleaning wand. There are many good ones out there already, but there are still things missing.

One of the problems for me are the Titanium metals being used. Great stuff, light weight and naturally corrosion resistant due to the internal oxides within the metal, but they do have some characteristics that could use some improvements as well as the over-all design of the wand itself.

For one thing, they suffer from advanced galvanic corrosion with dissimilar metals like Aluminum, Copper, and Zinc and you sure don't want to thread titanium into titanium....you might as well just weld them together.

The heads also get ugly after repeated exposures to Halides which strip away the natural corrosion resistance....ever notice that hazy or crusty Titanium head on the wand? Well, that is due to the Chlorides in our cleaning removing the metal's oxides in the wand and it doesn't polish up like Stainless once it shows up.

I figure that I have been pushing around a wand off / on for almost 30 years and have seen my share of crappy wands to know what I don't like. In that time, I have found maybe 4 wands that I felt were good enough for a professional cleaner to use on a daily basis.....that is kind of pathetic when you consider how much we spend on a wand these days.

I will be incorporating these ideas into a design for both commercial and residential with a hopeful prototype ready very soon. At that time, I will be seeking your feedback to reach the final stages of development. I will tell you that it will not be as lightweight as many of them now, but I think it is an acceptable compromise.

Until then, I would love to hear from you guys on what you feel is the most important features in a wand? For me, it is the following:

Durability
Low profile head
Full vacuum flow
Corrosion Resistance
Custom Lengths
Comfortable Grip
Balanced Jet Spray

Here's my list from most important to least important.

Lightweight.
Low profile head.
Soft touch valve.
Even jet spacing & angled / sheared towards vac slot.
Vacuum flow.
Width.
Durability.

Honestly, I really like Tony's Dev pro wand, I just hate the complicated solution lines that's not straight shot to the manifold, a couple extra fittings added a pound or more weight to otherwise almost perfect wand.

Interesting that you selected lightweight as the most important as it is my least important variable. Well, unless it was really heavy anyway.

To this day, I still can't get rid of my Prochem Quad wand despite the weight. It cleans so damn well, especially on berbers, that it always stays with the van. If that same wand was made out of Titanium and offered a larger head for commercial, I would be pretty happy.

dp1 wrote:Here's my list from most important to least important.

Lightweight.
Low profile head.
Soft touch valve.
Even jet spacing & angled / sheared towards vac slot.
Vacuum flow.
Width.
Durability.

Honestly, I really like Tony's Dev pro wand, I just hate the complicated solution lines that's not straight shot to the manifold, a couple extra fittings added a pound or more weight to otherwise almost perfect wand.

I agree DP, that light weight wand you have is a dream.

And agree also on the pound of excess fittings on Tony's wand, that's where they have really blown it on that wand.  I think I was able to come up with the best solution for eliminating most of those excess fittings, although far from ideal, but loosing 80% of that excess weight.  Mine now isn't what I would prefer, but with that split manifold with the tube being in the middle for the low head, there's only one better way to go I can see, but I think it would have to be manufactured that way. Which would be to tap the inside ends of both manifolds and connect them using a tiny 1/8' hose, then just one straight single line could feed one manifold, without that Tee and all the fittings they have now.  Why didn't they think of that?.........I bet they will as soon as Tom/Tony reads this!!

that dev pro swivel is pretty much everything I want in a wand plus 15in wide I think

ACpower1 wrote:that dev pro swivel is pretty much everything I want in a wand plus 15in wide I think

Did they ditch all those brass 1 into 2 fittings on the swivel one?

I was planning on meeting Tom and checking out that swivel wand of his, but he didn't make it to the show.

I really don't like split manifolds much. My PMF Mach 15 started out that way and I hated it. It has been argued to death, but it DID have a blind spot between the manifolds....had to steer the jets to get up gum and grease spots.

I guess my wand idea will only by liked by cavemen like me since it will be heavier than what the market is producing these days. Maybe it is a commercial vs,. residential carpet thing?

Is it possible to have a good single manifold while keeping the real low head height?

For me the biggest single advantage for Tony's PC Ti knock off wand (some call it Tom's), is the great air flow it has and recovery that comes with that........which is huge for someone like me using a 36 blower.
The next best thing I'd say would be the real low head height.

I'm really surprised at the lack of response to this thread..........It almost feels like there's only us 3 that use a wand for cleaning carpet?

I tried using a upholstery tool for a 2000 s.f. job once, but it was just hell on my back and knees.

Low profile height does make it difficult to get full air flow with a single manifold. I have a shear kit on my Quad and it can drag the jets if you aren't careful.

Part of my design thoughts could avoid this and greatly improve the soil removal, but it might not allow you to reach the baseboards as close. Of course, avoiding the baseboards might actually be an advantage these days.

Davey Cracker wrote:Is it possible to have a good single manifold while keeping the real low head height?

For me the biggest single advantage for Tony's PC Ti knock off wand (some call it Tom's), is the great air flow it has and recovery that comes with that........which is huge for someone like me using a 36 blower.
The next best thing I'd say would be the real low head height.

My pmf ti has good single manifold with real low head height.
As far as I know Tom has nothing to do with the Dev pro wand anymore, I read it in his website a couple of weeks ago, so again as far as I know it's all Tony's.
The swivel on that is actually looks solid, it's not too loose and it's not too tight, just enough to bend to the right or left when you need to go in under the bed.
I also agreed with Dave, the recovery on that is excellent, Dave did one small bedroom with that wand and my machine, then I asked him if he needs help cause he was a "little" sweating, and without hesitation he gave the wand to me
And that's also the reason why I need lightweight wand because my blower kicks my butt all day every day, just ask Dave and Mo

And if I may add one more thing, I don't think there is ever a "perfect" wand, it might be perfect to you but it won't be perfect to someone else out there

I agree, no perfect wand out there as there are no perfect prototype cleaners.

I am just looking at a black oxide finished titanium wand with a "scooped" vac slot to improve recovery and the addition of both bypass valves and mini-gauges (temp and psi).

In the winter and especially on commercial, I can't live without that bypass valve. It lets you get rid of the cold water in your lines before you start cleaning and you can keep the water flowing when you set the wand down...keeps the temps from cooling off.

It saves me a ton of time in the winter.....a ton.

It also has a light rail and single cree bulb tac light mounted to the tube. Sure, it sounds like a military weapon more than a cleaning tool, but I do call myself milspec6 after-all.

Plus, if you have ever worked late night commercial and had to do so under reduced lighting (very common around here), getting a non-glare light to hit the carpet at just the right angle is next to impossible in your hand or even on your head in the form of headlamps.

Like I said, it will weigh a lot more than other wands, but it would be wildly valuable on my jobs. I'll take the added weight for efficiency any day of the week.

I think tony also makes the dev pro but its different from the PC ti knock off he makes.  

Ive never used a split manifold so not sure if I would like that part about it.  

everything else is nice.  super low clearance, swivels into closets but much higher quality than the mytee one,  view window,   and 15in.  

lately Ive gone back to the 360 for most jobs,    any job thats pretty clean or really light soil ill wand but nothing very dirty.

definitely getting the rotovac xl 360 this year, going to trade my current one in... been doing that every couple years for the last 10

went from the powerwand to the dhx, to older 360, then newer 360, soon XL cant wait.. that thing will really speed me up on a lot of jobs

The XL is about 20 lbs heavier than the 360i, and for residential I think the 360i will save you more time than the XL, just my opinion.
I still prefer wand for most jobs, wand is slightly faster for me for most jobs.
Are we talking about the same manifold ? PC ti uses split manifold as well and it's okay as long as you use the right jets for them.

I love a good rotary, but I don't find them any faster than a wand, but that may just be me.

The right jet fan is critical for a split manifold design and that was PMF's answer to the "blind spot" complaint as well. I don't know what to say other than I noticed a distinct difference when cleaning heavy soil with that gap. The fan coverage is there, but I don't think the impact of the water was the same across the manifold.

Now that I think about it, I question most manifolds these days. With the pressure entering one side, does the flow and pressure really exit evenly all the way across the spray bar?

It would look funny, but I wonder if it makes more sense for a squid design where the main line splits off into individual lines to each jet. Sort of like the old fuel injection systems on your vehicles.

Think about that for a minute.

It's always been Tony's wand, after all he's the one manufacturing it.

He talked Tom into helping make it better and market it because he had much better ability of doing so than Tony doing it himself, at least that's what he told me...........straight from the horses mouth.

Well the difference is Tom is also a cleaner while Tony is not, which is not necessarily a bad thing since he ( Tony ) actually asks cleaners like ourselves in how he can improve his wand, there is no manufacturers out there that I know of ever asked me how can they make the tool better, they just want to sell as much as possible, so props to Tony for requesting feedback a from cleaners to make the wand better, now please eliminate those fittings Tony, lol.

Now regarding the split manifold, I use a wider spray pattern for the 2 jets closest to the main tube so that the sprays cover the whole areas under the main tube, now that creates collision between those jets spray pattern to the middle jets, I usually just turn the middle jets just a little bit off, that way the collision is avoided. Plus with the super soiled carpets we use 360i, so that split manifold thing is not an issue for me.

By the way Tony offered to do a floater on the Dev pro swivel, not sure if that's still on the table Tony ? Also I'm not sure if Mo is okay with that or not, what say you Mo ?

We tried to do that Dev Pro Loaner and no one wanted to participate.

Just like I asked if anyone was interested in a loaner of the full version of the HCP program and got no interest.

I think y'all should try that Dev Pro wand, it has a nice design and great recovery, I think one of these days I'll drive to Garden grove and borrow one from Tony for a few days.

dp1 wrote:I think y'all should try that Dev Pro wand, it has a nice design and great recovery, I think one of these days I'll drive to Garden grove and borrow one from Tony for a few days.

Just buy one for a few years. ..............soon as he looses that extra pound/bulk of brass 1 into 2 fittings.

It's funny, when I mentioned that pound of excess weight on what he was calling his "light weight wand", he looked at me like I was crazy.

Why go out of your way to make a light aluminum/Ti wand, and then just add unnecessary weight to it, I wonder?

I think I may just go get another set of manifolds from him to see if I can drill and tap the ends like I mentioned, to connect the two together with a short 1/8" hose and then there would only be one hose running from the valve to one manifold eliminating all the spliter fittings.