DLB
New member
- Jul 13, 2009
- 1,211
- 0
Just some thought's and observation's about Car Wash Soaps
There has been more than 1 thread on the subject, so I thought I'd make this one for open discussion.
I made this chart a while back for a thread where someone was looking at various soaps. This list is sorted by price per ounce. I don't have the numbers for dilution for every soap shown, so this is just a hard number price - not price per application.
There may be something different now as this is a few months old. I also think there have been a couple of soaps added that don't show on there.
I know that price doesn't always justify buying one soap over another - but how many soaps in the top half of that chart have you heard just pure negativity about? This brings me to the conclusion that spending a lot of money on soap is not really necessary. I didn't say that you should buy the cheapest, but if you do a lot of washing, I don't see being able to justify spending $3.00 an ounce (or even 7 times as much) more just for the soap.
Now don't get me wrong, the more expensive soaps may be a great product (I haven't tried all of them), but how justifiable are they for regular detailing use?
I see it like this - you need one of the following:
a) A pure wash with no other properties.
b) A strip wash that will clean all the old stuff off.
c) A foamy wash that can be used in a "gun."
d) A protectant wash that adds something to the paint while you wash.
e) A rinseless or waterless wash.
Maybe I am missing one (or more). Following that thought process, if a soap does it's job of safely and effectively cleaning the dirt (most important aspect of its job), then if it has other properties and it completes those tasks successfully, why would you ask for anything more out of a soap?
Right now (the majority of the time) I am using Meg's Shampoo Plus (will post a review when I get more washes with it done). Reason being, it is effective at cleaning the paint for the steps that follow, and it is cost effective. I am using it as a pure wash with no other properties. I don't care if it leaves a shine behind, or anything else, because I am following the washes it used for with polishing or waxing. Now, I do plan to step up the cost scale as it seems reasonable and try some others that I never have for comparison sake; but as of right now, the Shampoo Plus is doing a fine job.
Also, I remember a video from a while back that Mike P. made about washing (couldn't find it - maybe someone else has it bookmarked). He thoroughly covered most aspects to washing a car. One such aspect was "lubricity" of the soap.
The point really is this - the suds represent that the soap is sudsy, that's it. The lubricity (the critical part for not scratching while wash) is all in the formula of the soap. Think about it, you are mixing your soap with water. You want the water to become very slick, because this is what is coming in contact with your (or the customer's) paint. The suds are just a by-product. This is of course talking about a traditional wash, not a foam bath.
The way that I mix my wash solution up is intentionally to get the best mix of the soap into the water, and NOT create unnecessary suds.
•I fill my bucket up with about 3 gallons of water.
•Then I pour my soap in and calmly stir it into the water, mixing the two together to form a soapy water solution.
•Then I top off the wash with another bit of water to have plenty of wash solution, and this also mixes up the solution a bit more.
What you end up with is a very slick, soapy wash solution without a lot of suds. Suds do very little to clean and to protect your paint from getting scratched. In fact, if you look at how this chemically works, pouring your soap in and then blasting the bucket with a water hose could be doing more harm than good. What you are doing is taking the liquid form of the soap and turning it into suds. You then have less liquid soap mixed in with your water. The water has then become less lubricated than if you had no suds.
These are just my thoughts on the matter, and not scientific fact that I can prove.
Others?
[/end book]
DLB
There has been more than 1 thread on the subject, so I thought I'd make this one for open discussion.
I made this chart a while back for a thread where someone was looking at various soaps. This list is sorted by price per ounce. I don't have the numbers for dilution for every soap shown, so this is just a hard number price - not price per application.
There may be something different now as this is a few months old. I also think there have been a couple of soaps added that don't show on there.
I know that price doesn't always justify buying one soap over another - but how many soaps in the top half of that chart have you heard just pure negativity about? This brings me to the conclusion that spending a lot of money on soap is not really necessary. I didn't say that you should buy the cheapest, but if you do a lot of washing, I don't see being able to justify spending $3.00 an ounce (or even 7 times as much) more just for the soap.
Now don't get me wrong, the more expensive soaps may be a great product (I haven't tried all of them), but how justifiable are they for regular detailing use?
I see it like this - you need one of the following:
a) A pure wash with no other properties.
b) A strip wash that will clean all the old stuff off.
c) A foamy wash that can be used in a "gun."
d) A protectant wash that adds something to the paint while you wash.
e) A rinseless or waterless wash.
Maybe I am missing one (or more). Following that thought process, if a soap does it's job of safely and effectively cleaning the dirt (most important aspect of its job), then if it has other properties and it completes those tasks successfully, why would you ask for anything more out of a soap?
Right now (the majority of the time) I am using Meg's Shampoo Plus (will post a review when I get more washes with it done). Reason being, it is effective at cleaning the paint for the steps that follow, and it is cost effective. I am using it as a pure wash with no other properties. I don't care if it leaves a shine behind, or anything else, because I am following the washes it used for with polishing or waxing. Now, I do plan to step up the cost scale as it seems reasonable and try some others that I never have for comparison sake; but as of right now, the Shampoo Plus is doing a fine job.
Also, I remember a video from a while back that Mike P. made about washing (couldn't find it - maybe someone else has it bookmarked). He thoroughly covered most aspects to washing a car. One such aspect was "lubricity" of the soap.
The point really is this - the suds represent that the soap is sudsy, that's it. The lubricity (the critical part for not scratching while wash) is all in the formula of the soap. Think about it, you are mixing your soap with water. You want the water to become very slick, because this is what is coming in contact with your (or the customer's) paint. The suds are just a by-product. This is of course talking about a traditional wash, not a foam bath.
The way that I mix my wash solution up is intentionally to get the best mix of the soap into the water, and NOT create unnecessary suds.
•I fill my bucket up with about 3 gallons of water.
•Then I pour my soap in and calmly stir it into the water, mixing the two together to form a soapy water solution.
•Then I top off the wash with another bit of water to have plenty of wash solution, and this also mixes up the solution a bit more.
What you end up with is a very slick, soapy wash solution without a lot of suds. Suds do very little to clean and to protect your paint from getting scratched. In fact, if you look at how this chemically works, pouring your soap in and then blasting the bucket with a water hose could be doing more harm than good. What you are doing is taking the liquid form of the soap and turning it into suds. You then have less liquid soap mixed in with your water. The water has then become less lubricated than if you had no suds.
These are just my thoughts on the matter, and not scientific fact that I can prove.
Others?
[/end book]
DLB
Last edited:
