Shampoo vs rinseless

[PiPUK]

We have tested using a rinseless methodology, but using a variant of a traditional shampoo. Honestly... It was very hard to see a difference between this and using a 'rinseless' product.

There is a lot of variation in shampoos. There are very few 'soaps' these days, this is basically archaic and I'd be horrified to hear of any detailing brand selling g such a product. Generally we will be working with synthetic surfactants and misc other odds and ends. As it happens, many of these will be classified as 'polymers'. I have never been able to discover exactly what optimum are meaning with their use of the polymer terminology. I'll have to dig into this to see if the patents divulge what optimum is actually using, but I'd doubt it. That being the case, optimum would really struggle to argue technical superiority and it is potentially plausible that the tech used by some others is comparable.

 

[DasBurninator]

See I think it possibly can if you use it differently than what it is made for. I don't see why with a pre rinse or pressure wash then using rinseless then even rinsing it off if you want, wouldn't do the job just as well.

Who knows, I just bring it up for debate. I love rinseless because it's just a neater or cleaner process. Plus I'm disappointed in megs shampoo plus. It loses its suds very quickly. I'm constantly adding water to get them back

You can get some stuff by pre-soaking, but sometimes you just have to knock off the grit with a pressure washer first. At this point I usually pre-soak anyways.

Try another shampoo if that one doesn't do what you want. Suds aren't the only indicator of lubricity or cleaning ability though. So keep that in mind.

I don't know why but it never works out that way for me. Rinseless takes me about the same time. Just a lot neater.

I factor in cleanup time for tools into this as well. And in general it is faster for me to do a rinseless than wash and dry the car.

 

[expdetailing]

I know this has nothing to do with the point of this thread, but I notice with a shampoo wash, people tend to scrub faster with more pressure than compared to a rinsless wash. If you ever see a video of the two, you will notice the gentleness of the rinsless washer's technique compared to the aggressive washing of suds user.

 

[allenk4]

I know this has nothing to do with the point of this thread, but I notice with a shampoo wash, people tend to scrub faster with more pressure than compared to a rinsless wash. If you ever see a video of the two, you will notice the gentleness of the rinsless washer's technique compared to the aggressive washing of suds user.

The "Shampoo Washer" in your example is using poor form

Regardless of 2BM or Rinseless....there shall be no "scrubbing"

 

[Blade]

Isn't rubbing a MF with Rinseless solution on it over the surface of the paint also considered agitation?

You speculate that, "With a shampoo, you're agitating and loosening the dirt, not much more". In actuality, the surfactants in the shampoo are binding with the dirt and drawing it off of the surface, just like the "polymers" in a product like ONR

Regardless of the method used (2BM, Rinseless, Waterless), a drying towel should be clean after use. If it is not, there is a problem with technique

I just go by what I do and the results I get. I'm saying, in reply to Frank's basic question, is that there's more than the difference in product. The technique differs too.

With a traditional shampoo and 2BM, my aim is to "agitate and dislodge" dirt, not to pick it up, and this is mostly done with short interrupted strokes. No scrubbing! To repeat, I do not aim to "pick up" the dirt. Think of a boar's hair brush. With this wash media, you hold the brush so that only the tips touch the paint, not the sides of the bristles. And I transfer that mindset to other wash media, when using sudsy shampoo. Just agitate and dislodge, and let the post-rinse wash away most of the dirt.

With rinseless, I do not simply agitate. I aim to pick up most (if not all) of the dirt with the wash media, as carefully as I can. I don't do what the rinseless videos show where they wipe the towels across the panel, then go back and forth. I only wipe probably 1/3 or 1/4 of the way (depends on how wide the panel is), then roll the towel, then go another 1/3 then roll the towel again, etc. That way each 1/4 or 1/3 of the way, I'm using a fresh clean section of the towel. If I'm using my trusty ProLine sponge, same thing, but I can't roll the sponge, I use its different sides. I'm being very careful, I guess you could say I wipe with a rinseless how one would normally wipe with a waterless.

That's why when comparing my 2BM rinseless with my 2BM shampoo, my rinse bucket from the rinseless is a lot blacker than the rinse bucket from my traditional method, especially when using a boar's hair brush. YMMV.

 

[allenk4]

The one thing that gets forgotten in every rinseless vs. 2BM thread is that water itself is a solvent

The reason you can use a higher dilutions as you move from waterless to rinseless to 2BM is because the water itself is a solvent

The volume of liquid that is applied to the paint in a 2BM makes it less likely to damage paint

On a slightly dirty car...are you better off rinsing the car before you touch it or not

Answering that question truthfully settles the debate about which technique is less likely to damage paint


The reason your bucket is blacker when using MF towels for Rinseless vs Boar's Hair Brush is that MF is designed to grab and hold dirt and a brush or wool wash mitt is designed to release dirt

 

[Blade]

The reason your bucket is blacker when using MF towels for Rinseless vs Boar's Hair Brush is that MF is designed to grab and hold dirt and a brush or wool wash mitt is designed to release dirt

Of course, that's a statement no one will disagree with, but it's not what I said. I said that my rinse bucket is always blacker with rinseless 2BM (no matter what wash media used), but especially compared to using a boar's hair brush with traditional 2BM. Using the same MF towel with both methods (so that we're comparing apples to apples, the product being the only difference), my rinseless rinse bucket is always darker. It's in my technique, maybe not yours, but mine.

Again, to answer Frank's question, if the products are the only difference, try using a boar's hair brush with a rinseless wash solution. (Never tried it, but if there's any adventurous souls who have, let us know how it went!)

 

[Bunky]

The reason your bucket is blacker when using MF towels for Rinseless vs Boar's Hair Brush is that MF is designed to grab and hold dirt and a brush or wool wash mitt is designed to release dirt

How does the bucket get dirtier if the mf is holding dirt. I would think using your logic the wash with the brush would rinse easier so more dirt is transferred to the bucket. Can you clarify?

For ONR and most other rinseless (think Meg's is an exception), the rinseless solution appears to hold dirt into microfiber even after rinsing in a bucket. It does not rinse out until you wash the mitts with soap. It does the same with a wool mitt -- I tried. It gets almost gummy looking.

In a traditional wash, I do not have issues with mf mitts (think the dreadlock style) to release dirt easily.

 

[Klasse Act]

Opinion:
Sure you could rinse before and after using a rinseless-wash...But:
That defeats the intent behind "rinseless"-washing.

Editorial:
OH! If the above were to become true...Then:
I can only imagine the pangs that would be associated with the necessitation of a name-changing event...for the process formerly known as: Rinseless-Wash!!


Bob

....or maybe rinseless would become a symbol

Sent from my SPH-M930 using Tapatalk 2