# Pressure washer test on Gadget show on 5. Now!!!



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

As per title!


----------



## rob3rto (May 23, 2007)

beat me to it.


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

That elephant looks like it's having a good time!

:lol:


----------



## stangalang (Nov 27, 2009)

Ha ha was thinking "should I start a thread, or not?" no need now :thumb:


----------



## adlem (Jul 6, 2008)

Okay the Karcher came out on top but it's nearly double the price of the other two - tad unfair?


----------



## alexandjen (Feb 24, 2008)

So there you have it, if you've got a grubby elephant then buy a Karcher


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

To be fair, the test was pretty wafty... but the Bosch seemed alright for the money as a less well associated make.

I'm surprised the Nilfisk wasn't seen to be v.good since their reputation's good on here... bit unfair comparing a £200 one to a £350 Karcher (pronouched kar-sher or kar-cher? I thought it was the latter!) though.

And was it just me who thought they used totally different jet settings to push the poo around? Of course a narrow beam is more powerful! :wall:

Should've foamed those 4x4s too  :lol:


----------



## Itchy (May 18, 2010)

adlem said:


> Okay the Karcher came out on top but it's nearly double the price of the other two - tad unfair?


Exactly what I was thinking! Why did they do that? All brands have models in a certain budget. Does seem a little unfair.

They didn't mention the plastic vs. metal pumps either!


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

I'm more interested in Polly-anna's (Sp) legs now to be fair. :thumb:


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

Annoys me when you see something like that and it get's your interest... only to find it's reaaaalllly mickey mouse.

Makes you wonder how un-representative their other test's are.... I bet R.C. Buggy fanatics, or whatever else they have on there a lot, are always pee'd off about shoddy testing for the sake of popularist entertainment!


----------



## stangalang (Nov 27, 2009)

So then the real pressing question, polyann or Suzy?


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

stangalang said:


> So then the real pressing question, polyann or Suzy?


I nearly posted that in the GC earlier :lol:... in one of those moods today! Last week, Suzi in leather! :argie: This week, short shorts on Pollyanna FTW!

The phrase "tech" - really s me off mind... even when the pretty ladies are saying it! :devil:


----------



## stangalang (Nov 27, 2009)

Dont you find the cat suit a bit old and cliche now though? I think she looks better sat in the studio personally. But polyann is HOT!


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

stangalang said:


> Dont you find the cat suit a bit old and cliche now though? I think she looks better sat in the studio personally. But polyann is HOT!


But last week she had some* quality *leather trousers on though... a bit like the old school look, but much toned down and better, and just the lower half so not too much! :thumb:

Reminds me of being young and my mate's hot mum who wore leather trousers in the nineties... :lol: On the right woman!! :argie:


----------



## HornetSting (May 26, 2010)

McClane said:


> I'm more interested in Polly-anna's (Sp) legs now to be fair. :thumb:


Cracking pair of pins, she looks great. Lucky guy that cuddles up to that at night.


----------



## Lee.GTi180 (Apr 28, 2010)

I KNEW there would be some outrage on here about it lol

What a farce! How can you compare things that are in a completely different price bracket?

The poo pushing test was a joke and how close was Mr Bently to the paint with the Karcher on it's highest setting? Ofcourse it'll strip mud, it's taken half the clear coat with it too!!

It does make you wonder what they are like with their other tests!


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

HornetSting said:


> Cracking pair of pins, she looks great. Lucky guy that cuddles up to that at night.


I'll pass on my compliments  :tumbleweed:

She did look bang-tidy tonight! One of those "not _all_ that" nomally types... but then, a little flesh on show and *hello!!!*

Edit: not sure if you clocked, but next weeks show appears to contain some "vigourous bouncing". I shall be tuning in.

Might press mute so I don't have to hear the word "tech" again however. Bouncing and mute... sounds like good old channel 5! :lol:


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Lee.GTi180 said:


> I KNEW there would be some outrage on here about it lol
> 
> What a farce! How can you compare things that are in a completely different price bracket?
> 
> ...


I didn't see the article, and the 5th gear site is out of action at the moment.
The clear coat wasn't stripped though, were they using the needle spray pattern?


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

Avanti said:


> I didn't see the article, and the 5th gear site is out of action at the moment.
> The clear coat wasn't stripped though, were they using the needle spray pattern?


This was the Gadget show Avanti... and yeah... I don't think they actually stripped clear... but he was pretty much needling the side of a 4x4 from 3-4inches and at a perpendicular angle. Not great form!

I though the same as Lee :thumb: :lol:


----------



## Lee.GTi180 (Apr 28, 2010)

Avanti said:


> I didn't see the article, and the 5th gear site is out of action at the moment.
> The clear coat wasn't stripped though, were they using the needle spray pattern?


Sorry I wasn't being serious, just trying to prove a point!


----------



## apmaman (Jun 8, 2010)

I've noticed a lot of there stuff is just down to big brands. Apple seem to win everything as soon as they're mentioned.


----------



## guy_92 (Oct 26, 2010)

Unfair test as said already, I never knew Karcher was pronounced Kersher lol.


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

McClane said:


> This was the Gadget show Avanti... and yeah... I don't think they actually stripped clear... but he was pretty much needling the side of a 4x4 from 3-4inches and at a perpendicular angle. Not great form!
> 
> I though the same as Lee :thumb: :lol:





Lee.GTi180 said:


> Sorry I wasn't being serious, just trying to prove a point!


 will check if the article is online via the gadget show 

Lee I see what you are saying, though i have read many power washer recommendation threads, I think purchases should not be made on what 'everyone else' is doing but on what really works (or more likely to ) .
The reviewers were not obliged to rate the Nilfisk just because it is a popular suggestion on DW, what if for example they considered the Nilfisk P150 and a Karcher 2 series (or say a challenger from Argos), would as many still be bleating that the test was not fair?
I suspect they were also showing the point that a priceir machine is likely to perform the same task more quickly and effectively, or if a budget cannot stretch then the viewers have an idea of what they are likely to achieve with the lower cost machines


----------



## Clio Art (Feb 16, 2011)

They're giving away the Karcher in the competition. Now are they giving it away because it won the test, or did it win the test because they were given one by Karcher to give away..?


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Clio Art said:


> They're giving away the Karcher in the competition. Now are they giving it away because it won the test, or did it win the test because they were given one by Karcher to give away..?


They don't need to be donated a machine as a prize, there will be 1000s of calls for the easy competition and so even if they were offering a top Kranzle they will still be in profit. :thumb:


----------



## Clio Art (Feb 16, 2011)

I know they don't need to be donated one, but the questions is are they, or did they buy it? It's my understanding that the manufacturers supply the prize plus pay a fee for being included. If this relates to the tests as well as the competition then there's bias.


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Clio Art said:


> I know they don't need to be donated one, but the questions is are they, or did they buy it? It's my understanding that the manufacturers supply the prize plus pay a fee for being included. If this relates to the tests as well as the competition then there's bias.


If there was bias as you suggest they could end up in court .
Do you think as many would enter the competion if the runners up machine was the prize?


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

Avanti said:


> I suspect they were also showing the point that a priceir machine is likely to perform the same task more quickly and effectively, or if a budget cannot stretch then the viewers have an idea of what they are likely to achieve with the lower cost machines


True, but they should make their reasoning clear, or use different cost machines from the same manufacturer, or at least frame the test properly! You can't introduce variables without specifying them! Well, they can, because they did... but I'll moan about it on the internet :lol:


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

McClane said:


> *True, but they should make their reasoning clear,* or use different cost machines from the same manufacturer, or at least frame the test properly! You can't introduce variables without specifying them! Well, they can, because they did... but I'll moan about it on the internet :lol:


I agree , I don't think it would offer entertainment value to test machines from the same mfr alone, and really to be fair if people are honest with themselves, they are only dissapointed that 'their' choice machine did not win 

ps nobody moaned at the AE article where collinte 476 won the polish test


----------



## Clio Art (Feb 16, 2011)

Avanti said:


> If there was bias as you suggest they could end up in court .
> Do you think as many would enter the competion if the runners up machine was the prize?


No, but any of those machines could have been made to win the test. If Nilfisk had donated a prize instead then the Karcher could have lost points for costing £150 more.

As McClane says there are so many variables, so it would be impossible to prove bias.

Either way it doesn't matter to us on here, real world reports by fellow DW users mean so much more!


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

I can own up to not owning a pressure washer... so claim no bias there.. To be fair... I might have a look at Bosch's one!

Was thinking about a Nilfisk mind... but I'd value a fair test of two price matched machines around 150-200 mark. That would be_ useful_ to me as a budget limited consumer. If a Karcher £200 one beat the Nilfisk, I'd happily buy that one! :thumb:

I'd have known more £££ = more product (generally) without watching it, what I want to know is what one is the best value... not just the most over-engineered expensive one.


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Clio Art said:


> No, but any of those machines could have been made to win the test. If Nilfisk had donated a prize instead then the Karcher could have lost points for costing £150 more.
> 
> As McClane says there are so many variables, so it would be impossible to prove bias.
> 
> *Either way it doesn't matter to us on here, real world reports by fellow DW users mean so much more!*


If that were true then yes, I have observed many "which is best" type threads, the OP often will go with the majority of response or often they already know what they want but seeking re-assurance that their choice will be ok.
Is a diesel better than petrol?
Is Karcher better than Nilfisk? (no scratch that one out)
Is a £60 wax better than a £20 wax


----------



## guy_92 (Oct 26, 2010)

To be fair though, despite the price differences etc, they did say the Nilfisk did have the highest Litres/minute flow!


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

McClane said:


> I can own up to not owning a pressure washer... so claim no bias there.. To be fair... I might have a look at Bosch's one!
> 
> Was thinking about a Nilfisk mind... but I'd value a fair test of two price matched machines around 150-200 mark. That would be_ useful_ to me as a budget limited consumer. If a Karcher £200 one beat the Nilfisk, I'd happily buy that one! :thumb:
> 
> I'd have known more £££ = more product (generally) without watching it, what I want to know is what one is the best value... not just the most over-engineered expensive one.


The budget domestic machines could be under engineered and thus prove false economy, they are all right, but often just that, I swear by my Lavor but then it is 510l/h machine, I would feel I wasted money if I bought a budget machine that did not do the task (I know one member did not have a good experience with his) but then someone said they had a high end Nilfisk that had a short life.


----------



## McClane (Dec 9, 2010)

Avanti said:


> The budget domestic machines could be under engineered and thus prove false economy, they are all right, but often just that, I swear by my Lavor but then it is 510l/h machine, I would feel I wasted money if I bought a budget machine that did not do the task (I know one member did not have a good experience with his) but then someone said they had a high end Nilfisk that had a short life.


Agree totally on false economies... I just feel that I would of expected that without having any form of pointless "comparison"... regardless of manafacturer, a £400 machine should for all intents and purposes be more robust than one half that price when you're talking about goods that are engineered rather than designed asthetically etc, such as these.

What is useful is to determine whether those characteristics are useful for day to day use (where a cheap vs. expensive comparison may be useful - so fair enough), or if a compromise on cost could be made... and if so, since there is then a price limit being set, what manufacturer then produces the best machines with useful features etc for that. Just saying - "the expensive one is best" seems to be the gadget show mantra... what might be useful is if they found one that's good without being the most expensive one all the time. :wall: :thumb:


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

McClane said:


> Agree totally on false economies... I just feel that I would of expected that without having any form of pointless "comparison"... regardless of manafacturer, a £400 machine should for all intents and purposes be more robust than one half that price when you're talking about goods that are engineered rather than designed asthetically etc, such as these.
> 
> What is useful is to determine whether those characteristics are useful for day to day use (where a cheap vs. expensive comparison may be useful - so fair enough), or if a compromise on cost could be made... and if so, since there is then a price limit being set, what manufacturer then produces the best machines with useful features etc for that. Just saying - "the expensive one is best" seems to be the gadget show mantra... *what might be useful is if they found one that's good without being the most expensive one all the time*. :wall: :thumb:


I see your point, if they for instance included a Kranzle 1115ST , do you think that would have won?

Hold on the article looks available now :thumb:

Right then, had a look at the article (and entertaining it was too) , it was easy(ish) to see where the Nilfisk lost points compared to the other two, I don't think the price is correct,I 'm sure best price is under £150 but more so the spray pattern has to be adjusted by changing nozzle heads? For me in that article the Bosch looked the most all rounder when performance and cost were considered, none looked that effective on the vehicles (but then they were not applying any detergent)


----------



## Superspec (Feb 25, 2011)

stangalang said:


> So then the real pressing question, polyann or Suzy?


Yesss


----------



## Superspec (Feb 25, 2011)

McClane said:


> What is useful is to determine whether those characteristics are useful for day to day use (where a cheap vs. expensive comparison may be useful - so fair enough), or if a compromise on cost could be made... and if so, since there is then a price limit being set, what manufacturer then produces the best machines with useful features etc for that. Just saying - "the expensive one is best" seems to be the gadget show mantra... what might be useful is if they found one that's good without being the most expensive one all the time. :wall: :thumb:


They don't always just chose the most expensive.... they tested universal remotes a couple of weeks ago and picked a Phillips unit that was about £40 cheaper than the Logitech which should have won.

Poorly thought out tests with equally poor conclusions.


----------



## james_death (Aug 9, 2010)

I went for there best ipod fm tuner a year or so ago, not happy with it after 2 days, put on ebay sold in my fastest time ever 8 seconds...:lol:
Oh and sorry for not spotting this before my post about it, i had the SDS out drilling for more shelves for more products...:lol:


----------



## Blockwax (Jan 23, 2011)

*Makita P/W*

Im still looking for a Makita P/W review or write up..........i bought one and find it quite good for the money...........anyone ever seen any review or write ups ??...........:wall:


----------



## yetizone (Jun 25, 2008)

I did see this 'test' as well! Mmmm. Different price points being the initial eyebrow raiser.

So, does the Karcher come with a free John Bentley? Or at the very least a free elephant...? Hope so! 

Looks like the poor Nilfisk only comes with the free elephant dung then, in accordance with the G Rating of course. Sigh. 

So who's going to be first and post photo's in the Showroom Section of a full detail on an Elephant (African or Indian) then...? Or at the very least a Giraffe..? No. A Wilderbeest or two then :lol:

I'll get my coat


----------



## james_death (Aug 9, 2010)

Blockwax said:


> Im still looking for a Makita P/W review or write up..........i bought one and find it quite good for the money...........anyone ever seen any review or write ups ??...........:wall:


Stick your findings up you have another view point with dissability.
Go on Do a review you dont have to have pics on..:thumb:


----------



## james_death (Aug 9, 2010)

yetizone said:


> I did see this 'test' as well! Mmmm. Different price points being the initial eyebrow raiser.
> 
> So, does the Karcher come with a free John Bentley? Or at the very least a free elephant...? Hope so!
> 
> ...


Man getting the wax buffed off all those creases jeez..:lol:


----------



## robj20 (Jan 20, 2009)

They are rubbish on the gadget show, so biased, the mountain bike test was a joke, one of the lads testing them used to ride for Orange no wonder he said it was best.


----------



## GSD (Feb 6, 2011)

The pressure washer test wasn't fair at all the "winning" Karcher was £150 more than the one that came second nott like for like at all.


----------

