The wife wants to get a Polti Vaporetto steam cleaner !

How effective are steam cleaners in general and does anyone actually
use this particular model ?

Thanks

Brian

On 31 Jul 2005 14:23:45 -0700, wrote:

The wife wants to get a Polti Vaporetto steam cleaner !

How effective are steam cleaners in general and does anyone actually
use this particular model ?

Thanks

Brian

Yes. We have the 3000 model. It cleans very well and there is an
excellent iron that goes with it.





--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On 31 Jul 2005 21:26:28 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

writes:
The wife wants to get a Polti Vaporetto

A Venetian bus?


Gondolier with ice cream business....



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On 31 Jul 2005 14:23:45 -0700, wrote:


How effective are steam cleaners in general

Not very, I've owned a very similar earlier Polti (the grey one)
which came from an auction as part of a small lot of nonworking items
(I actually wanted something else in the lot). Obviously I had to
have at least an attempt at getting it working and it didn't take
long to find it was clogged by hard water scale - apparently a common
problem. It is a very simple device - a steam boiler with a pressure
release valve and solenoid controlled steam outlet - glorified
pressure cooker.

As general cleaners I'm convinced they work on the "Redex Principle".
For those who ever used it Redex was (and still is) marketed as an
instant renovator of engines by pouring a bit in the air inlet. Vast
clouds of white smoke appeared and you felt something powerful must
be going on. Actually nothing much of worth happened but you felt a
lot better.

The steam cleaner is much the same, lots of smoke and hiss but not a
lot of actual effect. Contrary to their claims they don't
"sterilise" much and are worse than a good vacuum cleaner at reducing
dust mites, allergens etc.

It is good for cleaning grout in tiles but not as good nor as quick
as a general purpose cleaner and cloth for cleaning the tiles
themselves or any other hard surface. As a floor cleaner on hard
floors it is slow and not particularly effective.

It's quite good for helping to clean some nooks a crannies in ovens -
but ineffective as an overall oven cleaner.

On carpets it is much slower than a vacuum cleaner and far less
effective than a proper carpet cleaner.

My attempt at checking if it would do magic things with curtains was
quite impressive as unbeknown to me several of our cats had taken
refuge behind them from this hissing monster. The first hiss of
steam an inch from their ears the other side of the curtain made 4
normally sedate fat cats use the curtains as an escape route. About
2 seconds after starting I was surrounded by curtain rail and
shredded curtains. I don't think it usually does this to curtains.
The cats sat outside the cat door taking turns to look in for the
rest of the day.

The water tank contains enough for about 30-40 minutes running after
which you have to wait for it to cool a bit before refilling it and
getting it back up to pressure - this process takes 10-15 minutes.

They can also damage fabrics with a nap such as velvet type materials
instantly. If you have chair coverings of this sort use with great
care as they alter the lie of the fabric and make very obvious marks
which can be impossible to put right.

I don't have an iron with mine.

As a free gift in an auction I think it was worth the money. For
GBP300 or whatever they cost they certainly are not.



--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 12:21:15 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:


It is good for cleaning grout in tiles but not as good nor as quick
as a general purpose cleaner and cloth for cleaning the tiles
themselves or any other hard surface. As a floor cleaner on hard
floors it is slow and not particularly effective.

I disagree. Mine works very effectively at both.

I wonder if you problem is because you got an old one and bits of it
are still clogged up.

We've always used soft water and there's a lot of oomph.


It's quite good for helping to clean some nooks a crannies in ovens -
but ineffective as an overall oven cleaner.

Mine works great on the Aga.



As a free gift in an auction I think it was worth the money. For
GBP300 or whatever they cost they certainly are not.


But you didn't buy a new one, only obtained a beaten up old one from
an auction....



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 12:38:00 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

I wonder if you problem is because you got an old one and bits of it
are still clogged up.

Nope, HCl is wonderful stuff :-) and I had it in many pieces. Its
rate of steam production appears to be similar to new ones I've seen,
the running pressure of 3-3.5 bar is as expected and the life you get
from a fill is exactly as expected so I'm pretty confident its
performance is within specification. It isn't a very complicated
device to start with.

Its now fed deionised water when I want to use it (because I have
lots).

We've always used soft water and there's a lot of oomph.

There is lots of oomph, as a steam generator its pretty fine, its
just that nothing much happens after that.

It's quite good for helping to clean some nooks a crannies in ovens -
but ineffective as an overall oven cleaner.

Mine works great on the Aga.

I thought you claimed Aga's never needed cleaning? :-).

As a free gift in an auction I think it was worth the money. For
GBP300 or whatever they cost they certainly are not.

But you didn't buy a new one, only obtained a beaten up old one from
an auction....

I can't see how a new one would be any better - It's not as if they
are complicated or have wear items. You boil water in a small
pressure cooker and vent steam under control. No motors or problems
as long as the boiler and pipes don't clog up. The state of the
casing doesn't affect the innards (and this one was actually in very
good condition once cleaned).

The basic problem is that steam is good at getting things most
domestic things damp and generally poor at cleaning them. I seem to
recall Which? coming to exactly the same conclusion a year or two
back.

The only dirt extracted is that absorbed by the bit of towel you tie
around the cleaning tool - comparing what you pick up from a carpet
with the amount a vacuum cleaner manages shows how ineffective the
steam cleaner is.

Moreover the water has to go somewhere and somewhere is the
atmosphere and furnishings. Using one for an hour (two tanks) dumps
three lit res of water into the house.

It has sufficient usefulness not to be thrown out but it couldn't
replace any other cleaning machine and is neither quicker nor better
for most cleaning jobs than conventional cleaning methods.
Controller (House) agrees with my conclusions.


--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 14:24:45 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:


There is lots of oomph, as a steam generator its pretty fine, its
just that nothing much happens after that.

Well I don't then. Works fine for me.



It's quite good for helping to clean some nooks a crannies in ovens -
but ineffective as an overall oven cleaner.

Mine works great on the Aga.

I thought you claimed Aga's never needed cleaning? :-).

That's the inside. The outside benefits from an occasional clean,
and the Polti does it really effectively.



The basic problem is that steam is good at getting things most
domestic things damp and generally poor at cleaning them. I seem to
recall Which? coming to exactly the same conclusion a year or two
back.

I looked at the reports. Some models are better than others and Polti
was best buy.

There are some things that I think that it is useful to clean and
others not. For hard surfaces, it is particularly effective. I
would't use it for carpets etc. except for particular applications
where vacuum cleaner doesn't do the job and chemicals are not
appropriate.




The only dirt extracted is that absorbed by the bit of towel you tie
around the cleaning tool - comparing what you pick up from a carpet
with the amount a vacuum cleaner manages shows how ineffective the
steam cleaner is.

I don't tie towels around the cleaning tool, but use separate
disposable cloths to absorb moisture and dirt. Works well.




It has sufficient usefulness not to be thrown out but it couldn't
replace any other cleaning machine and is neither quicker nor better
for most cleaning jobs than conventional cleaning methods.

I wouldn't use it to replace another cleaning machine. If it could do
that then there wouldn't be any point anyway.

I like to use it for hard surfaces because it deals with those quickly
and without the use of chemicals.

In conjunction with the special iron, it does a superb job that is
better than any conventional steam iron.




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Peter Parry wrote:
On 31 Jul 2005 14:23:45 -0700, wrote:


How effective are steam cleaners in general

Not very, I've owned a very similar earlier Polti (the grey one)
[snip]

We have the Polti that includes a wet/dry vacuum cleaner function. It
works VERY well at cleaning our uneven stone floors.

The only problems we have found so far a
a) the o-rings sealing the steam parts together tend to wear out, and
are expensive to replace
b) We had some internal screws work loose which held the rollers on -
fortunately my partner's office has access to all sorts of security
bits, so they opened it up and screwed it back together.

Very good at cleaning though

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 15:04:15 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 14:24:45 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:

The basic problem is that steam is good at getting things most
domestic things damp and generally poor at cleaning them. I seem to
recall Which? coming to exactly the same conclusion a year or two
back.

I looked at the reports. Some models are better than others and Polti
was best buy.

Actually it was the Morphy Richards Grimebuster for larger ones and
the Electrolux Enviro Steam Gun and Polti Vaporettino amongst small
hand helds (although it also said none of the hand helds were worth
buying (Aug 2002)).

Their overall conclusion was "A steam cleaner may be an indispensable
gadget for a few, but our tests show most cleaning jobs are better
tackled by the methods most of us have been using for years"

I don't tie towels around the cleaning tool, but use separate
disposable cloths to absorb moisture and dirt. Works well.

Ah - that's the correct name for the bits of towel that came with it
- thank you :-)

In conjunction with the special iron, it does a superb job that is
better than any conventional steam iron.

I understand from those who know ironing that irons with a separate
steam generator are indeed superior to conventional irons. Most have
the advantage of allowing the water supply to be topped up without
switching off and having to allow the generator to cool down.

--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 18:00:50 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 15:04:15 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 14:24:45 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:

The basic problem is that steam is good at getting things most
domestic things damp and generally poor at cleaning them. I seem to
recall Which? coming to exactly the same conclusion a year or two
back.

I looked at the reports. Some models are better than others and Polti
was best buy.

Actually it was the Morphy Richards Grimebuster for larger ones and
the Electrolux Enviro Steam Gun and Polti Vaporettino amongst small
hand helds (although it also said none of the hand helds were worth
buying (Aug 2002)).



Their overall conclusion was "A steam cleaner may be an indispensable
gadget for a few, but our tests show most cleaning jobs are better
tackled by the methods most of us have been using for years"

They also said:

"One of the potential advantages of a steam cleaner is that you should
need fewer strong chemicals to keep your kitchen and bathroom clean -
a particularly attractive feature if you're sensitive to cleaning
products. "



It's a question of purpose.

It doesn't make frothy coffee either, although I suppose with some
adaptation it could.

Used on hard surfaces it does a good job.



I don't tie towels around the cleaning tool, but use separate
disposable cloths to absorb moisture and dirt. Works well.

Ah - that's the correct name for the bits of towel that came with it
- thank you :-)

In conjunction with the special iron, it does a superb job that is
better than any conventional steam iron.

I understand from those who know ironing that irons with a separate
steam generator are indeed superior to conventional irons. Most have
the advantage of allowing the water supply to be topped up without
switching off and having to allow the generator to cool down.

If you've been ironing for an hour or more, a short break is generally
welcome, so it's a non issue.




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Steve Firth wrote:
The wife wants to get a Polti Vaporetto
A Venetian bus?
Announcement of new products from an Italian software developer.

Bet it won't be as funny as PowerGen Italia's domain name ...

Owain

Peter Parry wrote:
My attempt at checking if it would do magic things with curtains was
quite impressive as unbeknown to me several of our cats had taken
refuge behind them from this hissing monster.

Are they any good at getting saliva out of keyboards?

Owain

Peter Parry wrote:
It has sufficient usefulness not to be thrown out but it couldn't
replace any other cleaning machine and is neither quicker nor better
for most cleaning jobs than conventional cleaning methods.
Controller (House) agrees with my conclusions.

I'm told they're good for defrosting freezers, and I imagine squirting
the nozzle through the letterbox would be quite effective at dealing
with Jehova's Doorstep Magazine Sellers.

If you have a neighbour you don't like you could lend it to him to
defrost his car windscreen.

If you could arrange a remote trigger actuator and suspend the thing on
ropes on x-y coordinates it would be good for making Magic Writing In
The Snow (Without Footprints).

Owain

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 19:02:08 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:


If you've been ironing for an hour or more, a short break is generally
welcome, so it's a non issue.

On this I certainly bow to your superior experience, I have never
managed to iron for more than 5 minutes.


--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 12:21:15 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:

snip about steam cleaners

It is good for cleaning grout in tiles but not as good nor as quick
as a general purpose cleaner and cloth for cleaning the tiles
themselves or any other hard surface.

Hi,

Pretty good for hard surfaces if a wall plate is used IME, just steam
one area while wiping the previous steamed area, just as quick and
much less elbow grease and little or no chemicals needed.

Must be a student landlord's best friend, though my tiles never get
that bad

cheers,
Pete.

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 21:26:17 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 19:02:08 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:


If you've been ironing for an hour or more, a short break is generally
welcome, so it's a non issue.

On this I certainly bow to your superior experience, I have never
managed to iron for more than 5 minutes.


Delegated to OC, House? ;-)



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl