I am just starting to do my due diligence on the feasibility of tearing down a paid for, run down, in need of severe makeover, 8 bay SS and building an express tunnel. I've been in the SS and IBA game for 33 years but never have had anything to do with a tunnel. I guess I need to do something new. The thought of investing $100K in the 8 bay and then all I have is an 8 bay SS, is disgusting to me. While not new in concept, a tunnel is new to me. I would appreciate your input. There isn't a tunnel in this town of 13,000. There is a 4 bay SS, an 8 bay SS, a double automatic, a single automatic, and a new 4 bay SS with 1 brush IBA and 1 touchless. My proposal is to tear down the 8 bay and put in a 100 foot or so tunnel. The traffic count is 14,000cpd. It is on the main drag. Am I crazy to consider this? The closest tunnel is in a town of 200,000+ 30 miles away.
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!
converting SS to Ext tunnel
- Thread starter Deepshift
- Start date
Bubbles Galore
Active member
I was also thinking about doing this type of thing. I will be watching this thread for more input (Mr. Roman put this thought in my head =)
Bubbles Galore
Active member
What is considered a good minimum car count for a 60 ft. tunnel?
I didn't make myself clear in the original thread starter. I don't want to put in an IBA because the two IBA's I mentioned are mine also. They are only a block away. I bought them a year after I bought the 8 bay. That's why I didn't put in an IBA at the 8 bay. I realize an ext tunnel will hurt the IBA's but right now the 8 bay is killing me and is an eye sore.
I would suggest a short tunnel addition on to an existing bay (if it is physically possible to do so, don't forget to check ceiling height) and keeping the SS bays. You will of course want to remodel the outside of the entire wash and inside bays of the SS's too. The 100' tunnel sounds waaay long to me (and expensive) for a town of 13,000. The short tunnel, say 60' will wash 50 cph. The thing most operators don't tell you about is that they are capable of doing 100+ cph but only utilize that capacity 5-10 times a year. They typically run 50-75 cph (in cities much bigger than yours, with higher car counts and denser population). Let's just say that if you over run the capacity of the short tunnel, it would be a pretty high classed problem to have. Tearing down all the bays and spending a ton of cash to have a "sort of" busy 100' tunnel is a frightening thought.
Regardless of what you do, good luck.
Regardless of what you do, good luck.
I.B. Washincars
Car Washer Emeritus
I've never owned a tunnel so you can take my statement with a grain of salt. IMO, putting a tunnel in a town of 13K that already has five IBAs is very frightening 
robert roman
Bob Roman
Deepshift, I sent you a private message a few days ago. You may want to check it.
Traffic count is relative. I know of conveyors on roads with 17,000 cpd washing over 100,000 vehicles. Conversely, the wash down the street from me sits on a road with a traffic count of over 80,000 and I know the owner struggles to wash 75,000 vehicles. Traffic count is important but so is highway classification and level of service, purchasing power, retail composition, competition, etc.
Another aspect to consider is that people tend to appreciate new and modern. I have helped developers introduce conveyors, both express and flex-service, in markets that that were forever full-service and/or self-service and the concept was always well recieved by the community.
Would a mini-tunnel or mini-flex-serve work in this market? I can't speak to this because I have no analysis to support an opinion.
Would either of these models work in smaller markets as opposed to the status quo? Perhaps so. After all, when someone is use to eating peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, a Philly cheesesteak looks pretty darn good.
Traffic count is relative. I know of conveyors on roads with 17,000 cpd washing over 100,000 vehicles. Conversely, the wash down the street from me sits on a road with a traffic count of over 80,000 and I know the owner struggles to wash 75,000 vehicles. Traffic count is important but so is highway classification and level of service, purchasing power, retail composition, competition, etc.
Another aspect to consider is that people tend to appreciate new and modern. I have helped developers introduce conveyors, both express and flex-service, in markets that that were forever full-service and/or self-service and the concept was always well recieved by the community.
Would a mini-tunnel or mini-flex-serve work in this market? I can't speak to this because I have no analysis to support an opinion.
Would either of these models work in smaller markets as opposed to the status quo? Perhaps so. After all, when someone is use to eating peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, a Philly cheesesteak looks pretty darn good.
Agreed. However, the only other thing that might make a difference is if this particular town is a regional shopping destination for the surrounding area. There could be several more thousand people that live outside of town in smaller communities or rural areas that can add to the potential customer base. It might not be the case here, but that can make some difference in the potential volume.
All Options Considered
A few thoughts:
Not knowing anything about your community (demographics, site quality, marketplace, climate, Location, surrounding areas, etc), its difficult
to analyze things other than in generalities.
Yes, you would definitely benefit from upgrading to a conveyorized wash. Inbay operations are losing out to express tunnels all the time now, simply because they offer the convenience of time savings and the flexibility of enjoying peak capacities that inbay automatics find unattainable. Hence, done properly, you wind up owning the automatic market.
If you have room enough for a longer building, it makes sense. Almost every short tunnel operator, in hindsight would like more building... because building length enables you to wash a cleaner vehicle... and dry it much better. The big mistake that new operators make is building the tunnel to fit the equipment package; a huge misconception. Upfront, I compliment equipment suppliers who avoid doing this, but most will downsize a building in order to maximize their equipment installation... and use most of the budget for their stuff. And sadly, they still shoehorn it into a too-small building. If you have the room, build long, if possible. That enables you to achieve a lower operating cost and provide your customer a cleaner, drier vehicle.
Again, depending on where the other competition is located, you may wind up reassessing your marketing strategy to fit the new playing field. If you've been competing with yourself, developing an overall strategy for all of your properties makes good sense because the entry of a new much quicker automatic carwash will definitely change things.
I also suggest that you seriously consider a flex-serve operation because it provides the needed footprint to optimize your investment and gain a significant competitive advantage. Translation: YOU'LL MAKE MORE MONEY!!!
A few thoughts:
Not knowing anything about your community (demographics, site quality, marketplace, climate, Location, surrounding areas, etc), its difficult
to analyze things other than in generalities. Yes, you would definitely benefit from upgrading to a conveyorized wash. Inbay operations are losing out to express tunnels all the time now, simply because they offer the convenience of time savings and the flexibility of enjoying peak capacities that inbay automatics find unattainable. Hence, done properly, you wind up owning the automatic market.
If you have room enough for a longer building, it makes sense. Almost every short tunnel operator, in hindsight would like more building... because building length enables you to wash a cleaner vehicle... and dry it much better. The big mistake that new operators make is building the tunnel to fit the equipment package; a huge misconception. Upfront, I compliment equipment suppliers who avoid doing this, but most will downsize a building in order to maximize their equipment installation... and use most of the budget for their stuff. And sadly, they still shoehorn it into a too-small building. If you have the room, build long, if possible. That enables you to achieve a lower operating cost and provide your customer a cleaner, drier vehicle.
Again, depending on where the other competition is located, you may wind up reassessing your marketing strategy to fit the new playing field. If you've been competing with yourself, developing an overall strategy for all of your properties makes good sense because the entry of a new much quicker automatic carwash will definitely change things.
I also suggest that you seriously consider a flex-serve operation because it provides the needed footprint to optimize your investment and gain a significant competitive advantage. Translation: YOU'LL MAKE MORE MONEY!!!
I think the owner needs to understand first that the tunnel will now require labor -at least one attendant. If that is no concern then proceed to the costs associated with a small tunnel vs. IBA. There is not much interms of equipment, just a little more on the construction end for the conveyor trench. The tunnel will wash almost as much in one hour as all the IBA's in town now. If the IBA's are touch-free, the tunnel will use less chemical (more $$$ for labor) and clean better because of the friction cleaning media. The public may want a little TLC with thier vehicles interms of towel drying and some minor prep to get baked on bugs and caked up mud in the wheel wells. Regarding traffic count, Robert Roman is correct, and an IBA can only wash a fraction of the vehicles a tunnel can and if costs are similar, why not have the ability to wash more during those days when you may need the production. Just keep in mind labor.
A Little More On The Subject
Good point regarding labor.
However, some express exterior equipment suppliers (Sonny's and others) have suggested that the express exterior with automated transaction stations are the new self-serve, suggesting that labor has been all but eliminated.
Some express exterior operations operate with split-shift activity that uses labor on the busy times and automated tellers on slow periods.
My personal recommendation is to operate a split-shift flex-serve... and avoid the risks of unattended conveyor operation. That way, you will have staff available whenever needed, and a very prudent, cost-effective operation with hands-on only offered when the marketplace dictates.
Those who want hands-on after-care will come when that's available. Others will have a broader timeframe of choice. Some operators start out that way... and eventually grow into a balanced flex-serve that is tailored to their specific marketplace and owner preference.
Good point regarding labor.
However, some express exterior equipment suppliers (Sonny's and others) have suggested that the express exterior with automated transaction stations are the new self-serve, suggesting that labor has been all but eliminated.
Some express exterior operations operate with split-shift activity that uses labor on the busy times and automated tellers on slow periods.
My personal recommendation is to operate a split-shift flex-serve... and avoid the risks of unattended conveyor operation. That way, you will have staff available whenever needed, and a very prudent, cost-effective operation with hands-on only offered when the marketplace dictates.
Those who want hands-on after-care will come when that's available. Others will have a broader timeframe of choice. Some operators start out that way... and eventually grow into a balanced flex-serve that is tailored to their specific marketplace and owner preference.
The only point I was trying to make is other than a part time attendant, self serv sites do not require labor. A tunnel requires someone on site for at least for the safety of the moving conveyor (liability sake). When the conveyor is open, the labor needs to be on site. If the owner is not use to labor costs, he/she needs to think about that.
Don't Assume Anything!
There is a chain of carwashes that runs conveyorized exterior washes with NO employees tending the wash, so your assumption is not accurate. Sensible... but not accurate.
I've also been told of numerous express exterior washes with multiple automated tellers... and no staff tending the conveyorized carwash. In fact, equipment suppliers and some franchise operations recommend it.
I agree that any automatic carwash merits at least one staff member on-site to avoid vehicles that should not be processed. Take for example the pick-up with stuff in the bed. Or debris that can contaminate in the washing material, causing damage to vehicles that follow the material contamination. How about the guy who has a transmission or engine laying in the bed. Or even the bed with a heavy oil residue that transfers onto the washing material. BUT, some operators are content to ignore those risks.
Once again, having on-site attendant is sensible, but not compulsory.
There is a chain of carwashes that runs conveyorized exterior washes with NO employees tending the wash, so your assumption is not accurate. Sensible... but not accurate.
I've also been told of numerous express exterior washes with multiple automated tellers... and no staff tending the conveyorized carwash. In fact, equipment suppliers and some franchise operations recommend it.
I agree that any automatic carwash merits at least one staff member on-site to avoid vehicles that should not be processed. Take for example the pick-up with stuff in the bed. Or debris that can contaminate in the washing material, causing damage to vehicles that follow the material contamination. How about the guy who has a transmission or engine laying in the bed. Or even the bed with a heavy oil residue that transfers onto the washing material. BUT, some operators are content to ignore those risks.
Once again, having on-site attendant is sensible, but not compulsory.
MEP001
Well-known member
None of this is completely accurate. First, believe it or not, there are unattended tunnels. Second, "other than a part time attendant," selve serve washes do require labor in regards to equipment maintenance. Your typical come-in-and-clean-up-once-a-day guy won't be able to fix much beyond changing a damaged vac claw. It's also common that an attended self serve will do better business than an unattended one, so while it may not be necessary it will usually pay for itself and then some.my2cents said:
wardaddy
Member
Running a tunnel unattended is very problematic in my experience. I agree that a Self Serve or IBA/Self Serve benefits from someone on site most of the day who can do more than clean up but a tunnel needs someone there all the time exponentially more than an SS does.
This is where there is no economy of scale to owning a small chain like I do really...on labor. In fact it increases due to clerical and cash processing overhead.
I can get someone to clean 7 days a week for 150 cash money but my avg weekly per each of my 7 washes is far higher than that and tunnel labor weighs that.
