Scratching the car with Rinseless/Waterless wash?

If you want to get down to the scientific level of things I can tell you the short answer is yes. I remember reading in my organic chemistry book on how soap works. It basically engulfs the dirt inside and when you wash it away it stays engulfed. I presume though when you are using a waterless wash and wiping the dirt away it still has a small possibility of scratching the paint on its way off. The way I wash my car is with the two bucket method and I find it to be the best way to go about it. That way when I wash and then rinse the soap keeps the dirt engulfed and is able to run down the car in a gentle way without scratching.

Encapsulation of soils is indeed fundamental. The encapsulation is what is better known in other industries as anti-redeposition. The dirt is surrounded by surfactant molecules which have two ends - one attracted to water and the other to oil. The oil loving end (lipophile) basically sticks into the soil (most soils are oily) and the water loving end (hydrophile) dangles out in the water. With enough of these, the soil can be totally encapsulated and basically it becomes dissolved in water. This is a somewhat non-ionic process so soaps (which are ionic) operate a bit differently but this is a fair approximation.

Waterless or low water products really need something extra and this is where I am wary of them - not all such products actually incorporate that 'extra'. Think about it, the above is a process fundamentally concerned with oils. Yes, particulate soils can often be suspended because they are surrounded by oil which can in turn be surrounded by surfactant. However, this coating is not a rigid entity. Suspended particulate soils remain abrasive, the act of suspension is rarely adequate to stop a particle from abrading a surface when physical force is applied. Good practice would be to incorporate a component which inhibits the co-efficient of friction between any particulate matter and the surface. So now you have particulate matter which is suspended in the surface and a surface which may well actually repel particulate matter so effectively making it less abrasive.

Another point of for consideration/debate is that none of these products actually succeeds in total encapsulation. Were this the case, one would need only spray the product on and rinse (without contact). Whilst we can probably all appreciate that a high pressure wash will remove much of the dirt, it is very rarely completely efficient - a touchless wash remains a bit of an unreachable height in auto cleaning. What this tells you is that at least some of the dirt is still bonded to the surface after the wash product is applied. To remove it, one needs manual interaction so you are effectively 'ripping' unencapsularted dirt off the surface. Once in solution, it might become encapsulated quite rapidly but the unavoidable reality is that much of that dirt is briefly in contact with the surface with very little inhibiting the abrasive nature.

All of this is a bit of an aside really - but I admit to being a bit of surfactants 'geek' and I am sure someone out there might be interested to read some more of the detail!
 
^^^Good Post...Mr. Megane^^^

I, for one, appreciate it.


:)

Bob
 
What dedicated microfiber towels are people using to soak and use? I have watched the videos and looked on his website but its still fuzzy as to what towels Gary uses. They look like lower quality short nap towels like the bulk available at Costco....are those safe to use with this method?

Or can someone suggest some affordable towels for this method? Perhaps from chemical guys? I'm willing to try on my black Lexus, if I swirl it I get practice correcting it right? Always have to learn, you don't learn unless you make mistakes.

I can't link to where I bought a 10 pack of these due to forum rules but have you ever heard of a large South American river?

660 GSM Eurow Shag

Wash and dry before use is a must they come with extra lint. I have 2 of AG's shag towels, they are good too if you get them on BOGO. I have Sams Club as well if you use those only use the longer nap/loop side (edit: I think they are fine but the edges are rough so I use them elsewhere now). I have higher quality 530's and such but I am keeping them for polish removal.
 
Last edited:
Waterless wash works when done properly - but then again..... I only have 3 years of a successful detailing business backing my theory :dunno:
 
Best reply ever on the subject of waterless and rinse less, mr Megane. Thanks for that post!
:xyxthumbs:
 
Mr Megan that is a great reply. If I understand you correctly water and car shampoo would be better at encapsulating than water and a high lubricity agent found in some various waterless/rinseless wash products? Water is water, no difference there after I spray a door panel heavily using the Gary Dean method. Manual agitation using a wash media also exists in both wash mechanisms the only differencr in the GDM method one doesnt reintroduce media to surface. So the remaining difference is the higher lubricity of the agent in waterless or rinseless agents versus a standard car shampoo or Dawn.

Why wouldnt the agent that encapsulates dirt better and pulls it from the surface better than shampoo be the better choice to encapsulate dirt prior to removal?
 
Mr Megan that is a great reply. If I understand you correctly water and car shampoo would be better at encapsulating than water and a high lubricity agent found in some various waterless/rinseless wash products? Water is water, no difference there after I spray a door panel heavily using the Gary Dean method. Manual agitation using a wash media also exists in both wash mechanisms the only differencr in the GDM method one doesnt reintroduce media to surface. So the remaining difference is the higher lubricity of the agent in waterless or rinseless agents versus a standard car shampoo or Dawn.

Why wouldnt the agent that encapsulates dirt better and pulls it from the surface better than shampoo be the better choice to encapsulate dirt prior to removal?

Not being Mr. Megane...
But my thoughts would be that when using a traditional car washing method...
You would utilize a free-flowing water supply (such as from a water-hose)
to flush away the encapsulated dirt/soil...Versus wiping/swiping it away with
a MF towel when performing a non-traditional car wash.

IMO...
The same overall results would be served if one uses a free-flowing water supply to also
flush away the encapsulated dirt/soil from using a non-traditional car washing method...
But that kind of defeats the intended purposes/idea of WW-QD/RW washes.


:)

Bob
 
Gotcha so its the pre-soak or pre-rinse from the hose before shampoo applied that is the difference maker? Would that be fair to say in summary?
 
I personally prefer using onr with a thick/porous ace hardware grout sponge over the "dean" method. No need to use a ton of towels and cleans up easy afterwards and holds up wash after wash.this is after hosing the car off with water or pre rinse with onr.
 
Gotcha so its the pre-soak or pre-rinse from the hose before shampoo applied that is the difference maker? Would that be fair to say in summary?

IMO...
Would also include the:
After the car wash shampoo has been applied...
"Rinseing/Flushing".

-Let me make it clear that I incorporate many methods of car washing/drying.
-Some methods are to: Just get by in the winter...
Better, IMHO, to have a few 'blemishes', than leaving snow/ice-melting corrosives on the vehicles.


-I see nothing wrong with conthedon's above posted methods...And...Per this thread:
I've noticed other AGO forum members doing similar pre-rinseing/hosing/power wash-wanding.

-But that's not what I would call a: 'True' Waterless-QD/Rinseless washing method.

-Perhaps that's where my car-wash definitions/terminology differs from others.

That, and possibly: "Blemishes".

:)

Bob
 
IMO...
Would also include the:
After the car wash shampoo has been applied...
"Rinseing/Flushing".

-Let me make it clear that I incorporate many methods of car washing/drying.
-Some methods are to: Just get by in the winter...
Better, IMHO, to have a few 'blemishes', than leaving snow/ice-melting corrosives on the vehicles.


-I see nothing wrong with conthedon's above posted methods...And...Per this thread:
I've noticed other AGO forum members doing similar pre-rinseing/hosing/power wash-wanding.

-But that's not what I would call a: 'True' Waterless-QD/Rinseless washing method.

-Perhaps that's where my car-wash definitions/terminology differs from others.

That, and possibly: "Blemishes".

:)

Bob

A waterless wash is a whole other ballgame since it's exactly that, no water is being used, it would be similar to a quick detailer being used. If water is introduced to a waterless wash then i could agree that it would not be a true waterless wash. On the other hand, Rinseless, or specifically onr, on the product itself states with an excessively dirty car a second washing may be needed before drying. Typically i do a quick spray on the entire car with a coat of normal dilution ratio onr (i save when mixing the 1oz per 2gall ratio before every wash) in a 32oz bottle and leave in my trunk for spot cleaning of bird bombs. Then as that settles for seconds on the panels loosening some dirt i hose the car down n then proceed to do a 2bucket onr wash. To me, this method or the other method when excessively dirty,pre rinsing (with a higher concentrated onr ratio), serves to address the statement on the product, that a second washing may be needed on an excessively dirty car. It skips the need for that and therefore would still be a "true" rinseless onr wash. Plus hosing the car first reduces the amount of dirt in your wash buckets. Im sure a lot of people take extra precautions just for a peace of mind (for ex. deans method) even if they dont have to. It would be no different then pre cautionary steps for someone who would hand wash their car in a traditional way. It's harder to label "true" with personal preferences, since ive read people who throw in some onr to their favorite car wash soap, would that not make it a "true" / traditional car wash anymore just because they mixed it? Or pre rinsed with onr and then did the traditional way. Idk i think onr is an effective product, but with probably everyone on here, people just take extra precautions.
 
A waterless wash is a whole other ballgame since it's exactly that, no water is being used, it would be similar to a quick detailer being used.
If water is introduced to a waterless wash then i could agree that it would not be a true waterless wash. On the other hand, Rinseless, or specifically onr, on the product itself states with an excessively dirty car a second washing may be needed before drying. Typically i do a quick spray on the entire car with a coat of normal dilution ratio onr (i save when mixing the 1oz per 2gall ratio before every wash) in a 32oz bottle and leave in my trunk for spot cleaning of bird bombs. Then as that settles for seconds on the panels loosening some dirt i hose the car down n then proceed to do a 2bucket onr wash. To me, this method or the other method when excessively dirty,pre rinsing (with a higher concentrated onr ratio), serves to address the statement on the product, that a second washing may be needed on an excessively dirty car. It skips the need for that and therefore would still be a "true" rinseless onr wash. Plus hosing the car first reduces the amount of dirt in your wash buckets. Im sure a lot of people take extra precautions just for a peace of mind (for ex. deans method) even if they dont have to. It would be no different then pre cautionary steps for someone who would hand wash their car in a traditional way. It's harder to label "true" with personal preferences, since ive read people who throw in some onr to their favorite car wash soap, would that not make it a "true" / traditional car wash anymore just because they mixed it? Or pre rinsed with onr and then did the traditional way. Idk i think onr is an effective product, but with probably everyone on here, people just take extra precautions.

^^^Personal-method(s) preferences: That's exactly what I was alluding to.^^^

So...What's your take on the: "Blemishes" aspect...I also alluded to?

:)

Bob
 
^^^Personal-method(s) preferences: That's exactly what I was alluding to.^^^

So...What's your take on the: "Blemishes" aspect...I also alluded to?

:)

Bob

Yea I mean everything comes down to personal preferences, but in no way does that take away from ONR from being an effective/great product, or because you do precautionary methods (that a traditional wash follows), that it's not a "true" rinseless washing method. Hypothetically if I do a traditional wash and choose to hose off my wash media after each panel to reduce dirt in wash buckets, that doesn't take away that at its core it's a "true" traditional wash. Since, keeping it simple (not getting into polymers/greater lubricity), ONR is similar to a traditional wash except it is rinseless, has multiple purposes, and it can be used in winter months where a traditional wash isnt possible. Therefore, if a traditional hand wash consists of pretreating areas such as bird bombs and pre-rinse hosing with water before washing with a 2bucket system w/ grit guard, which are all steps to reduce the chances of blemishes/swirls..i would think one would follow a similar logic when using a rinseless product such as ONR.

I use ONR all year long, not just for winter, as for me it is the most convenient/fastest way and I think the glossy finish it leaves is top notch. So to the blemishes comment..

-Let me make it clear that I incorporate many methods of car washing/drying.
-Some methods are to: Just get by in the winter...
Better, IMHO, to have a few 'blemishes', than leaving snow/ice-melting corrosives on the vehicles.

Youre essentially stating youre choosing the lesser of two evils so to speak, but why does there need to be blemishes if you choose a proper method with ONR and not one to "just get by in the winter"?. As the saying goes you get what you pay for, and the same applies to technique/method. In my experience, I have not created blemishes, swirls, etc using the product. With any product it comes down to common sense, knowledge, and technique, you get those down and you'll have a safe outcome.
 
IMO...
Would also include the:
After the car wash shampoo has been applied...
"Rinseing/Flushing".

-Let me make it clear that I incorporate many methods of car washing/drying.
-Some methods are to: Just get by in the winter...
Better, IMHO, to have a few 'blemishes', than leaving snow/ice-melting corrosives on the vehicles.


-I see nothing wrong with conthedon's above posted methods...And...Per this thread:
I've noticed other AGO forum members doing similar pre-rinseing/hosing/power wash-wanding.

-But that's not what I would call a: 'True' Waterless-QD/Rinseless washing method.

-Perhaps that's where my car-wash definitions/terminology differs from others.

That, and possibly: "Blemishes".

:)

Bob

Gotcha, I only ask because I smell a test coming on, not by me, but maybe someone reading this thread? :hungry: The test must include a microscope (USB camera) , only 10x mag would be required I imagine.

Probably best to have definitions clear beforehand, that way whatever th test "concludes" the "other side" (whichever one it may be) can argue with only the test methodology ! :)
 
Practically speaking based upon all the users of rinseless wash these days, it cannot be a significant issue. If it was, the opponents (a few diehards opposed to something different) would have already presented the incontrovertible evidence.

People have been marring paint using a traditional wash method since car washing began and it really gets back to technique and tools. The wash method used has to be tailored to the situation such a pre-wash, etc.
 
I see a lot of people recommending a pre-rinse before using a rinseless wash.

If that's the case, why even waste time with a rinseless? You're already sitting at the traditional method at this point, and nullifying all the reasons for going rinseless in the first place.
 
I see a lot of people recommending a pre-rinse before using a rinseless wash.

If that's the case, why even waste time with a rinseless? You're already sitting at the traditional method at this point, and nullifying all the reasons for going rinseless in the first place.

It's always evident those who dont like or never tried rinseless lol I dont get all the negativity towards it. I dont see how it nullifies all the reason for going rinseless as you would only pre rinse to loosen dirt or hose off the "loose" dirt which is fast. In a traditional wash you would be pre rinsing and rinsing post wash making sure you remove all the soapy suds..so it's one step less, so while one is rinsing all the suds off in a traditional wash, im already in the drying process. A clear benefit of a rinsless wash like ONR is winter washing, you could hose your car, pull it into your garage and do a rinseless wash indoors..try doing that with a traditional wash. If you dont have a garage, like myself, try doing winter washes outside with soapy suds sitting on your car. Also the solution leaves the car with a nice gloss to it. I could tell easily the difference on my black metallic paint. ONR can be used for clay lube and quick detailer if you choose where soap has one use. Therefore adding even more value to the product.

Just because it is a rinseless wash it doesnt mean you must throw out precautionary methods. People have different situations as well, for myself, I wash my car parked on the street with a portable hose,so it's practical/faster for me to do a rinseless wash in general regardless of weather temperature and not have to get all the soap suds off. Again people have different situations, since my car is parked outside all year long and collects dirt/dust/debris all day long from trees, bird bombs, etc. I rinse first due to this, I wouldnt want to wipe a bird bomb with my wash media n put it in my bucket (who wants bird sh!t floating around whether a rinseless or traditional). Some people have garaged cars so they dont experience/ their car isnt exposed nearly as much to all that dirt/rain/etc so pre rinse may not be needed as they may experience only light to medium dirt buildup. I would typically get a medium to heavy buildup.
 
Last edited:
Gotcha, I only ask because I smell a test coming on, not by me, but maybe someone reading this thread? :hungry: The test must include a microscope (USB camera) , only 10x mag would be required I imagine.

I've found that a 30X magnifier does the best to show:
'What's really going on down there'...with BC/CC paint systems...

And it's not because my eyes are too old...LOL!!

:)

Bob
 
Back
Top