Rinseless washing as safe as traditional bucket?

[Old Pirate]

He was piss off so much that I took over the washing of the cars for him.....

[Reality33]

HAHA very nice!!

[imported_MI Mike]

Yes, with either method. Getting as much dirt of the surface before it`s touched with any wash method is the key to a swirl free wash. In the harsh MN winters are cars look like this after a day of driving in the slop....no way I`m taking ONR or even traditional wash to paint looking like this without a pre-rinse from a pressure washer! Period!
Rasky

Sorry for the edit Rasky !!

Question. If Chris from Optimum. is checking threads. Did they test ONR on our Northern (Salt, Sand, Slush, Snow and Sh*@) winters. If so, what were the results?? Like you I feel safer eliminating as much as possible. IMO.

[RaskyR1]

A few years back an old neighbor use a 4000PSI P/W on his car and remove some trim pieces. He was very sorry about this, because it was a MB S600....

LOL, I think that qualifies as "improper use by the operator".

[Todd@RUPES]

The following is my opinion, mixed with fact, and seasoned with experience (both detailing and in product testing).

I was wondering what specific aspect of the traditional 2 bucket wash makes it viewed as safer than a rinseless wash using ONR or DP`s product or even a waterless wash.

When the wash mitt (loaded with whatever solution) swipes over the gritty surface a lot of the solution acts to penetrate the dirt `grains`. With surfactants the water is actually made wetter (the surface tension of the water is broken) so that water (which is a fairly strong solvent in relation to dirt) can flow around it. The other option is to use a lubricant (in the case of BLACKFIRE`s newest wash products, the actual wet diamond polymers) to encapsulate the dirt and free it from the surface.

So regardless of the what type of wash, the first step is the actual `freeing` of the dirt. Enough volume of product must be used (in relation to the volume of dirt) to ensure adequate lubrication. Both a two bucket wash and a rinseless wash use a large volume of solution.

Once the dirt is encapsulated it most be removed safely. This is where a traditional wash, with the ability to use a high volume of water is going to provide more `safety. With a rinseless wash a large amount of dirt is `floated downstream` as the wash solution runs off the paint. Some is embedded into the wash mitt or sponge and some is left in the pools of water on the surface. If there is a large amount of grit on the paint it could conceivably override the amount of lubrication available.

It seems on fairly clean paint the majority opinion is that the are equally as safe using good practice techniques thus pure cleaners and providing lubricity, they seem to be rated as equal

I would say that most polymer based rinseless washes over more lubrication then most surfactant based car soaps. However the difference in flooding away the dirt vs. wiping it away is the equalizer. This is why, when formulating BLACKFIRE`s newest offering, we added high slip polymers to all of the new wash solutions.

Therefore is it the pre-rinse with a hose that really makes them equal? That is, if I hose down the car first like I would for a traditional wash it would be as safe?

The pre-rinse removes some grime using just water as a lubricant. A pre-soak (with a surfactant or polymer based solution) prior to the rinse will make the rinse even more effective. IE foaming the paint. Water, when used with some level of pressure, works fairly well at remove heavier and loose grit.

From my fun with foam guns, I have not seen that big of a benefit in removing bonded crud especially on lower sides but left on it can act as extra cushion for the wash mitt.

Using a foam gun prior to the first rinse should help remove any grit that is on the paint (during a pre-rinse) in a safer manner. It may help remove more grit during the rinse, but the premise is that it adds lubricity to the surface to help prevent surface scouring.

I guess my hypothesis is if you take the same vehicle, rinse in down well, then proceed to do either a traditional 2 bucket or a rinseless wash (washing while still damp from the rinse) then they will always be equally safe no matter the condition of the vehicle?

As long the grit on the paint doesn`t overwhelm the lubricity provided by the rinseless wash, I would agree. If it is heavily caked in abrasive grit then you risk scouring the surface as you remove the dirt. (Rinsing vs. wiping).

If you disagree, what is the extra safety done in a traditional 2 bucket without about foam down, no foaming while wiping, no prsssure washer, no modified 16 bucket method, 16 mitts or 36 towels, etc) and no radio controlled helicopters (inside joke if you know the reference) or what makes rinseless less safe,

When you agitate the solution on the surface there will be some dirt remaining. Rinsing this dirt of the paint (while it is encapsulated by water or polymers/lubricants) is more effective then wiping it off.

One thing I like to do on soiled vehicles (when using a rinseless wash) is to wash each section twice (first with a lot of solution, second with a more damp solution) to dilute and remove as much dirt as possible (via run off) prior to drying.

[CT3]

I`ve read that pressure washing can damage the paint too, I try to stay away from that now. IMO if you do a good pre-soak, either method done with proper wash technique will be fine. I`ve heard nothing but good things about ORN.

This probably was my fault, but way back in the day when I had to go to the coin operated pressure washers to wash my car, I managed to get the pressure washer too close to a paint chip and lifted the clear right off the hood. I learned my lesson.

In the harsh MN winters are cars look like this after a day of driving in the slop....no way I`m taking ONR or even traditional wash to paint looking like this without a pre-rinse from a pressure washer! Period!

I wouldn`t touch my car with it in the winter either, but that`s just me. I`m lucky if I can even see the car, with all the crud on it.

[sc_S13]

I don`t think it`s pressure washing that damages the paint I think it`s too much pressure. You don`t need 3000 psi to wash a car. Some of the smaller pressure washers are plenty to wash cars.


I think traditional washes are safer. The combination of more water and lubricants in traditional soaps make it safer.

With that said if you`re smart and rinse more often you could safely do a rinseless wash on a dirty car. But thick dirt I would do a prerinse

You`re probably right, I`m just wary about the high pressure washers at coin-op self services. Luckily I don`t have too many deep paint chips, just typical light ones on the front. Just worried about the stream scratching dirt across my paint, even after the pre-soak.

[rzatch]

In my 22 years of using a pressure washer to wash cars with I`ve never seen any damage from them that wasn`t a direct result of improper use by the operator.

Well put Rasky.

Personally I think the polymers can only encapsulate so much dirt. I think of the grainy stuff stuck to the paint as being a real problem if not rinsed off first. You can only expect so much from a WW or ONR.

[Bunky]

Well put Rasky.

Personally I think the polymers can only encapsulate so much dirt. I think of the grainy stuff stuck to the paint as being a real problem if not rinsed off first. You can only expect so much from a WW or ONR.

But you can use something like ONR like a traditional soap -- same amount in bucket, same amount solution on the paint (sans the suds), very similar process, etc. I guess the primary difference that is left is you rinse off the solution with water as opposed to wiping it off assuming the dirt is suspended in the soap.

In fact, 1z Perls to me seems like more ONR than a traditional soap so the question is where is the line.

[rzatch]

I guess I just feel better knowing that stuff like sand particals and such are rinsed away before I start rubbing on the paint with a traditional wash. May be a false sense of security I don`t know for sure.

[Todd@RUPES]

Well put Rasky.

Personally I think the polymers can only encapsulate so much dirt. I think of the grainy stuff stuck to the paint as being a real problem if not rinsed off first. You can only expect so much from a WW or ONR.

This is true. The polymers (or any lubricant) only can provide so much protection against abrasion. In my testing water that is fortified with polymers (particularly Wet Diamond polymers) provides more slip then water that is `wetted` (surfactants). Its not a matter of which formula is more slippery, it is more about how the dirt is removed once it has been suspended/lubricated/encapsulated.

[rzatch]

This is true. Its not a matter of which formula is more slippery, it is more about how the dirt is removed once it has been suspended/lubricated/encapsulated.

So if i`m understanding what your saying, is that a traditional wash even though may not be as slippery as a polymer is a better option. It`s the flooding action provided by the traditional wash which makes it better.

[sc_S13]

So if i`m understanding what your saying, is that a traditional wash even though may not be as slippery as a polymer is a better option. It`s the flooding action provided by the traditional wash which makes it better.

Makes more sense, flooding has less chance of scratches than pressure by hand. Most people on here keep their cars clean enough though so its probably not an issue.

[Todd@RUPES]

So if i`m understanding what your saying, is that a traditional wash even though may not be as slippery as a polymer is a better option. It`s the flooding action provided by the traditional wash which makes it better.

I`m not sure if I would say anything is better then the other, I would say that a polymer combined with a surfactant (assuming the polymers are in a water based emulsion) is going to deliver more polymers to the surface and provide the best lubrication.

Even traditional car soaps can be formulated with polymers, surfactants, or both.

The flushing action of the encapsulated dirt is going to provide more of a barrier to abrasion then wiping the encapsulated dirt against the surface (washing vs. rinseless).

But what about when towel drying (assuming there is no dirt left on the surface what-so-ever). The polymers in the left over rinseless wash are going to provide a greater level of protection compared to a surfactant rich soap that has been rinsed away (leaving behind only water which isn`t very slick).

[rzatch]

I`m not sure if I would say anything is better then the other, I would say that a polymer combined with a surfactant (assuming the polymers are in a water based emulsion) is going to deliver more polymers to the surface and provide the best lubrication.

Even traditional car soaps can be formulated with polymers, surfactants, or both.

The flushing action of the encapsulated dirt is going to provide more of a barrier to abrasion then wiping the encapsulated dirt against the surface (washing vs. rinseless).

But what about when towel drying (assuming there is no dirt left on the surface what-so-ever). The polymers in the left over rinseless wash are going to provide a greater level of protection compared to a surfactant rich soap that has been rinsed away (leaving behind only water which isn`t very slick).

Hmmm your not making this easy are you??? I think then reading the label of your soap of choice for a traditional wash is very important. Some people even add ONR to their wash water just for this reason to boost the polymer content. Using a quality shampoo such as Blackfire Gloss Shampoo should should all but alleviate this concern to add polymers.