a fella posted this on anohter forum and i thought it may be an idea for the folks at Challenger to look into, if they haven't already. partially quoted:

"Today, I had an extremely worn, and matted white Berber to clean. I pre scrubbed the heck out of the worn out, heavily soiled, black traffic lanes. Then went over it at a snails pace with cotton pads. There was virtually no noticeable difference. The challenger was just spinning on top and not digging in at all. So I start to panic thinking there is no way I could charge for this job. Cry

Then I thought of trying the brush driver, so I run out to the van and grab it, slap it on and wow! Major difference. That brush driver dug in and lifted the flat matted Berber, and the black traffic lanes started to turn white . So for all you challenger owners out there, think about getting a brush driver to use on those once in a while Tuff Jobs."

so what do yall think?

and to the Watson's: do you sell a brush-driver or even considered it?

Hi Derek,

A CRB might do what you are reffering to on Berber, but if someone does not have one nor are in the budget for one, Challenger does have Encap Brush, which is $85.00. It's on their website under "Price List".

I don't own one, but i did see it on there.

Bill

good point Bill, i forgot about mine!!!

so i wonder the fella that i quoted above, if he used a brush driver with a cotton pad under it right? least that is what i assumed.

so has any1 used the grout brush on their Challenger and threw a cotton pad under it? seems like it might be a good idea!

He ran just the brush on the carpet, what he refers to brush driver, no pad would go under it. Same ones that you see under the Cimex's, same concept i mean.

So this "brush driver" that saved the day in this situation was neither the Challenger Encap Brush, nor was it the Challenger T&G brush. Just what was it, exactly? (who makes it?, and how was it attached?)

On super-trashed carpet that I think can stand the pressure, I have sometimes used one of the 10" diameter FiberPlus or FiberMax pads that are intended to be used with my 24" Cimex. With the weight of the Challenger bearing down on a pad with just a little more that half the surface area of a normal sized pad, it has helped me salvage carpet that at first glance look beyond hope. This technique, of course, just helps to break down the concentrations of soil. You still need to use absorbent pads to get soil out. This should only be done while using an encap cleaning product, as some of the soil will only ever come out during later vacuumings. I learned something similar to this at a marble refinishing course I took a few years ago. Floor machines used to grind, hone, and polish marble are very heavy. They are normally used with six "diamonds" or marble grinding pads. It was pointed out in the course that if you used only three instead of six diamonds, then the weight of a normal, lighted floor machine would be sufficient.

It was either Challenger's Encap Brush or CCS's Encap Brush.

Not 100 percent sure.

it was a CCS brush-driver. i removed the company name out of respect for the forum.

i dunno Bill, i think he was referring to this:

http://store.ccsop.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=68

here is a link to the fella who posted this so any1 can ask him...you will have to register at the forums 1st then re-click this link:

http://uscleanersnetwork.com/smf/index.php/topic,2254.0.html

thanx --- Derek

I believe he is reffering to the CCS pad driver with the brush around the edge.
I have one of the brush drivers and have used it in the past and don't remember any significant difference in the way it cleaned compared to a flat velcro pad driver, but I guess it's possible it may aid in the cleaning ability some.

It was a ccs brush driver with cotton pads. (I know cause I'm the fella) :) In normal cleaning situations I havn't noticed much difference between the two drivers, But on this job, an extreamly matted berber, it made a big improvment by allowing the machine to dig a bit deeper. I rarely use it though because the machine dosn't run very well with it.

thanx for explaining Andy