What's new
By:
Car Wash Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Re-formulating recipes

Waxman

Waxman

Super Moderator
I'm getting ready to re-formulate my IBA recipes.

I know Bigleo has had success up there in Canada doing this, so I am ready to give it a shot next stretch of rainy weather.

My current top wash:

1. underbody flush
2. hi ph presoak (strong)
3. 10 sec. dwell
4. hi ph presoak (weak)
5. 10 sec dwell
6. HP rinse
7. low ph foam polish
8. hp rinse
9. hp wax
10. spot free rinse
11. blowers

My proposed new top wash recipe

1. underbody with sealer added
2. double strength hi ph presoak
3. 10 sec. dwell
4. low ph foam polish
5. hp rinse
6. hp wax
7. spot free rinse
8. blowers.

Time and water savings are a given in my process, but maintaining wash quality is the question. I will post my results.
 
Do you have or use 'rain arches/manifolds' ? I have a 'productivity' rinse arch that came as an option on my PDQ M5 and I also made my own PVC rain arch to deliver my SFR.

Both of those really saves me time and does not affect wash quality.
 
Waxman,
Is there a chance that it might be too dangerous to go double the strength with the high PH? I went overboard for a while with high PH & soaking, etc and I had issues with aluminum in general and trims on some European cars. Especially the German manufacturers seem not to be able to cope with it too well. Touchless machines in Germany are almost non-existent.
 
time savers

I have done something similar to that by rinsing my Lo pres foamy polish w/ the Hp clearcoat/drying agent on water saver and it has worked out very well. Saves 1 HP pass. It will be interesting to see how that works out on your pre soaks.
 
My low ph foam polish is the kleenrite version KRC277.

I apply sealer under HP.

As far as flashing aluminum trim on vehicles, I assumed the low ph polish on top of high ph preaosk would create a neutralizing effect, much like a typical hi/low or low/hi presoak application used by some operators.
 
gearhead said:
I have done something similar to that by rinsing my Lo pres foamy polish w/ the Hp clearcoat/drying agent on water saver and it has worked out very well. Saves 1 HP pass. It will be interesting to see how that works out on your pre soaks.
Click to expand...

Yes! 1 HP pass is about a minute and 35 gallons of water I would save per wash. Over the year this would be alot of water/sewer savings as well as more CPH throughput.
 
Waxman,

As you stated, your changes are similar to mine I did a year ago.

My goal was to increase throughput without affecting wash quality. In the process, I was able to wash on avg 2 more washes per hour. I reduced water/sewer use per wash by about 40 gallons, I reduced machine movement by 1.5 full rotations and reduced pump usage. With the addition of a PVC rain arch I added for SFR which cost me under $100 (hose from SF machine to bridge was most expensive).

My changes have made me thousands of dollars in increased revenues and save me lots of cash on overhead. I'm just ****ed I didn't think of it sooner.
 
I use 2 passes high ph now but am switching to single pass at full strength ( all presoak from 2 passes delivered in 1 pass).

I began thhis yesterday; went through the manual and began studying procedure to re-program.

Found I cannot change order of things but can delete steps. Should still get me what I need in terms of water savings, chp increase and same quality wash.
 
Last edited:
Hey Waxman,

Will sealer in the underspray yield the same effect as a rust inhibitor product? I've never used one, so I am not sure if there is an advantage to using a dedicated rust inhibitor solution for the undercarriage.

Maybe it is a matter of semantics - who really wants to claim rust inhibiting qualities anyway - sounds like an empty promise. I guess undercarriage sealer sounds safer to advertise.

Good luck with the new recipe. Two hp's has always been sufficient for any of my wash programs - from basic to deluxe. Difference was always chemical applications, but never any change in hp passes.
 
Yes; that is the premise of the thread. Speeding up the wash by reformulating recipes; I plan to switch from 2 hi ph passes to one.

Did you read the original post?
 
When to switch to one pass of high ph presoak instead of doubling the strength you might first try just boosting it a little and increasing the dwell time. Even if you do go with the double strength you may have to increase the dwell time as well to give it more time on the surface to work.
 
Waxman said:
Yes; that is the premise of the thread. Speeding up the wash by reformulating recipes; I plan to switch from 2 hi ph passes to one.

Did you read the original post?
Click to expand...

Yes, I read the original post. Sorry I didn't put it all together. I was just wondering if there was an advantage to using 2 hi ph passes versus one.
 
rph9168 said:
When to switch to one pass of high ph presoak instead of doubling the strength you might first try just boosting it a little and increasing the dwell time. Even if you do go with the double strength you may have to increase the dwell time as well to give it more time on the surface to work.
Click to expand...

RPH,

I coined the term "Double Strength" so the customer would not feel cheated. I told them that putting out twice as much soap in one pass was better than two passes at half strength (which IMHO is true if you extend the dwell time a little). "You get the same total amount of soap...just faster"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top