- Thread starter
- #41
that seems like the way to go !
Is there a need for water washes ?
- Thread starter muscleman
- Start date
that seems like the way to go !
RubbishReview
New member
- Mar 2, 2014
- 111
- 0
So thank you for the information and viewpoint...
I could see how on a lightly dirty car the water-less was system would be the way to go as I would think that it would save time... Would you guys agree that say on a car that is covered in winter road grime that due to the number of microfiber clothes needed and time that water would be the way to go?
ThomasonCarCare
New member
- Sep 20, 2013
- 173
- 0
That is almost what I said, the waterless will work, but for the time and materials needed for waterless to work as designed you could have washed three cars with a bucket wash haha. For really nasty vehicles I usually spray them down first or do a bucket wash.
ThomasonCarCare
New member
- Sep 20, 2013
- 173
- 0
I only use towels and I blot the car dry and that works for me because I know that the towel isn't scratching the finish. The blade works, but when used wrong it can do some damage to the finish.
goldendodo19
New member
- Jul 1, 2013
- 638
- 0
Maybe my hose pressure is bad but rinsing doesn't do much more for me than just wetting the paint. Most dirt is still there. Once I put the mitt on the paint isn't that more or less the same as putting a mitt or towel sopping wet with rinseless solution against the paint? Both feel pretty lubricated to me. Plus wouldn't pre-soaking equate to running water over the paint before a two bucket?
To whoever mentioned a speck of dirt or dust getting trapped couldn't the same happen with a mitt? Or a detail spray? Or as you wipe off a coat of wax?
I've done rinseless on my cars and noticed no new scratches or swirls. Only time I see a swirl is when I'm too heavy with the drying towel but those swirls are easily removed so in not worried.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
To whoever mentioned a speck of dirt or dust getting trapped couldn't the same happen with a mitt? Or a detail spray? Or as you wipe off a coat of wax?
I've done rinseless on my cars and noticed no new scratches or swirls. Only time I see a swirl is when I'm too heavy with the drying towel but those swirls are easily removed so in not worried.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you're washing other peoples cars, you're going to be doing it enough that you will quickly learn which system works best for you in various situations.
If you're doing your own car, I would think the biggest advantage waterless (or a hybrid of rinseless w/ waterless that I use) has is the ability to section wash your car. Hood, roof, trunk lid, front, rear and each side can be dealt with separately.
I used to think that washing only part of a car would make it look funky. But, I now think that any of these sections fully washed makes the car look better.
It's easy to carry the necessary materials in your trunk or back area to waterless wash. This, along with knowing you only need to commit to completing a section, makes it a lot easier to get started. There have been many times I started, thinking I would just clean the hood and I ended up going a lot further. It just really works well for me.
If you're doing your own car, I would think the biggest advantage waterless (or a hybrid of rinseless w/ waterless that I use) has is the ability to section wash your car. Hood, roof, trunk lid, front, rear and each side can be dealt with separately.
I used to think that washing only part of a car would make it look funky. But, I now think that any of these sections fully washed makes the car look better.
It's easy to carry the necessary materials in your trunk or back area to waterless wash. This, along with knowing you only need to commit to completing a section, makes it a lot easier to get started. There have been many times I started, thinking I would just clean the hood and I ended up going a lot further. It just really works well for me.
Personally I have concluded that waterless and rinseless washes are interesting but that there is nothing special to them. Someone commented with regards to what people think is special about shampoo to make a 2bm great but the reverse is true. After quite a bit of testing, we basically concluded that the trick with waterless washing is not the wash product, it is the technique. If you use enough cloths, you will likely be fine. If you use too few, you will do damage. It didn't really matter what product we tested, if you use too few cloths, you will cause damage. Blind testing actually placed a traditional bucket 'wash and wax' in the same performance category as some of the expensive waterless products.
There was some discussion of a vehicle looking better after a prolonged period of using a waterless wash product. Not at all surprising. Waterless type products are reliant on giving decent lubrication. Often the way of achieving this is to use chemicals which are not a million miles removed from those that are working away in other products, like glazes. So if you use them enough, it is not that you are repairing or improving the paint, you are simply filling it. As per discussions elsewhere, some of these fillers are much harder to remove than the detailing community believes so, often, people do not actually get back to naked paint and will be commenting on the appearance of the filled surface (i.e. they actually don't know how much damage has been done with the wash process, because it is masked).
Another note on waterless washing. We found it used MORE water water than a 2BM. On a dirty vehicle, we used so many cloths that it half filled the washing machine. When we considered how much water was necessary to actually wash the cloths again, we could have used two smaller buckets and even done a quick rinse with the hose, and used less water. Cost was also much higher because of the cloth usage - many of these products result in the cloths becoming water repellent (or at least not very absorbent). This is not easily removed with cleaning so the effectiveness of the cloths quickly diminished and they needed replacing.
Our conclusion was that waterless is a great way for us to make money because people use relatively more value per wash and they would need to buy more towels. We didn't conclude that it was any quicker to do nor that it actually saved water.
There was some discussion of a vehicle looking better after a prolonged period of using a waterless wash product. Not at all surprising. Waterless type products are reliant on giving decent lubrication. Often the way of achieving this is to use chemicals which are not a million miles removed from those that are working away in other products, like glazes. So if you use them enough, it is not that you are repairing or improving the paint, you are simply filling it. As per discussions elsewhere, some of these fillers are much harder to remove than the detailing community believes so, often, people do not actually get back to naked paint and will be commenting on the appearance of the filled surface (i.e. they actually don't know how much damage has been done with the wash process, because it is masked).
Another note on waterless washing. We found it used MORE water water than a 2BM. On a dirty vehicle, we used so many cloths that it half filled the washing machine. When we considered how much water was necessary to actually wash the cloths again, we could have used two smaller buckets and even done a quick rinse with the hose, and used less water. Cost was also much higher because of the cloth usage - many of these products result in the cloths becoming water repellent (or at least not very absorbent). This is not easily removed with cleaning so the effectiveness of the cloths quickly diminished and they needed replacing.
Our conclusion was that waterless is a great way for us to make money because people use relatively more value per wash and they would need to buy more towels. We didn't conclude that it was any quicker to do nor that it actually saved water.