touchless express exterior

[briteauto]

I visited a touchless EE the other day - I had never seen one before. Any particular reason these are not as common as the friction EE's? I would have thought that an unattended location such as the EE, coupled with its purpose to clean higher volumes of cars over an IBA would lend itself to a touchless process. Wouldn't operators be more likey (in an unattended situation) to have touchless equipment?

Are these prevalent, or did I see something less common?

 

[smokun]

Touchfree = Cleanfree

The touchless systems seem to be considerably less popular due to their lack of cleaning capabilities. The major reason for their initial popularity was the poor reputation that friction washing had due to damages. So, touchless was viewed as being "safer" by default.

But, in assessing the cleaning capabilities, consumers were dissatisfied. So, as friction equipment became more effective... and considerably less of a risk, touchfree's popularity waned.

However, you bring up a good point. If there was NOONE available to field customer complaints due to very poor cleaning, it might be attractive to some absentee hands-off owners who generally prefer being disconnected from their customers.

Nevertheless, the simple fact remains that touchfree is merely a good flush & rinse appreciated by customers who seek a safe alternative to a wash that actually cleans the vehicle. Most consumers seek to avoid risk... while also getting a clean car. Imagine that!

 

[briteauto]

Thanks for the reply, Steve.

I guess I was just wondering about the lack of touchfree EE's specifically. I hear what you are saying, but I still see plenty of touchfree IBA's. I know friction has had major improvements in safety and quality over the years, but many operators are still building touchfree IBA's. If operators are satisifed with touchfree for the IBA, why are they not for the EE?

There are many posts on this forum that speak of the "expectation" of an IBA vs. a tunnel, (I'm not talking friction vs. touchfree, just IBA vs. conveyor) but with EE's pricing at $3, $4, $5 etc., are they expected to be in the league of a attended tunnel with prep workers, towelers etc.?

 

[SteveJ]

There are several touch free tunnels in the St. Louis market and I have washed at many of them. Quality is pretty darn good. However, from what I can remember most of them are priced in the $6-$12 range. The biggest problem I see with the touchless tunnel is the chemical and utility cost versus friction.

 

[rph9168]

This is a tricky issue. I think the answer is the difference in the perspective of the operator and the customer.

Steve's observations are correct. There is no doubt that friction consistently cleans better than touch free. I think at least part of the answer lies in customer perception and convenience. There is a great deal of difference among customers as to what is a clean vehicle. Some are just happy to get the visible dirt and grime off and seldom even hand dry their vehicle. I think the majority simply want their vehicle to look clean and do not really perform a close inspection of wash results. Still others like to have the vehicle so clean that even the slightest film or missed spot is not acceptable. In almost all cases it is emotionally satisfying just to have the vehicle washed.

For some reason I believe customers accept the use of friction in a conveyor system since it is the prevailing system used in conveyors. On the other hand, touch free is much more prevalent than friction in IBA's and friction is more imposing even with today's better cleaning media. The other issue is convenience. Customers seem to associate IBA's as a more convenient way to wash since it is normally on a smaller site and associated with either a c-store or free standing site with self service. Even though in reality a conveyor can handle a much greater volume, I think most feel an IBA is a faster way to go.

So I think from an operator's perspective the differences are great but to the customer not so. The bottom line is that in our business we are dealing more with a person's perception rather than reality. It is important that customers have a positive perception of the process and quality of a wash. As an operator this means to put on the best "show" possible with quality performance.

 

[robert roman]

After watching TV for a few years, I believe that you can sell anything to anyone as long as you have the ability to convince them to buy now.

Over the years, I have found that the demand for touch-less conveyor washing varies depending on the operator's preference, consumer preference by region and availability of equipment vendors. For example, touch-less conveyors seem more prevalent in the midwest and less prevalent in the northeast.

Producing a high quality end product and high sales volumes with a touch-less conveyor means having a lot of expensive equipment, adequate space for dwell time and drip space and, if the water and sewer rates are high, a reclaim system.

If you do it right, a touch-less conveyor can work quite well. Several years ago, I helped develop a 140' touch-less express exterior conveyor in O'Fallon, Missouri. This wash may use a lot of chemical but it produces a very high quality wash and dry. This is what the investor wanted because he was convinced that motorists in his market clearly favored touch-less over friction or hybrid washing.

You may also want to seek out Bill Consolo who is a frequent commentor on this site. Bill operates out of Ohio and is quite versed in the technical aspects of the touch-less vehicle cleaning process.

I hope this helps.

Bob Roman
RJR Enterprises - Carwash Consultants

 

[wood]

brite auto:

i don't know why anyone wouldn't answer your question appropriately. any experienced member of the car wash industry knows whyan in-bay touchless automatic cleans better then a touchless exterior tunnel.

the answer is: the presoak cycle (or even 2 cycles) around the vehicle sits on a car for 30 seconds on average (or 1 minute with two cycles around the car). in comparison, a touchless pre soak application in a tunnel sits on the car for an average of 5-7 seconds. therefore, the main cleaner has more time to loosen the soils prior to the high pressure wash stage, which naturally will deliver better results.

yes, i should get back into selling wash equipment again and advising and educating potential operators. sorry if i sound arrogant, i assure you i'm not. it just frustrates me sometimes with the information i see passed on that doesn't answer the question correctly more times then not.

 

[mac]

I think wood nailed a good point. Dwell time is a very big part of effective touchfree cleaning. In a conveyor operation, to get the same results, you have to juice up the concentration and ammount.

 

[robert roman]

That's very true. However, what about the opportunity cost of touch-less in-bay. Compared with a modest 60' touch-less conveyor (45 cph), you would be giving up at least 30 washes an hour for about the same capital cost.

 

[Greg Pack]

Just gut feelings from owning both touch free IBAs and a friction tunnel in the same market.

I think 70% of the people want a clean car and don't care how they get it.
the other 30% consists of those that have a preference.

When I was at my touch free I heard customers complain about how they had antenna, mirrors, and whatever else knocked off five years ago at a tunnel or friction IBA and they haven't been back. When I was working the tunnel down the street, customers told me the touch free wash was OK but it didn't wash well enough to make them happy.

In my area, touch free cleaning is tough to do on any more than 95% of the cars. If a customer starts with a clean car and comes through a touch free three times a month he'll be happy. If they wash their car with the change of the seasons they will be disappointed with touch free. You can run through as many times as you want, that film is not coming off without someone or something scrubbing it off. To clean 100% touch free would involve chemical concentrations that could be hazardous to some finishes.

Customers generally expect cleaner wheels in a tunnel, too- that's hard to get without friction or HF.

The only way I would consider a touch free tunnel is if I was going to get brave and try some sort of unattended gizmo, or was in such a huge, dense metro market that there would be a plentiful supply of touch free only customers.

 

[MEP001]

There used to be several touch-free tunnels here, but they either failed or went to friction. The only way they could clean "touch free" was to scrub the vehicles before they entered the tunnel. One place had four prep guys, two with high-pressure wands running 2,000 PSI and lots of soap, two with brushes and mitts, so the majority of the car was clean before it ever entered the tunnel. That's not touch-free at all, but this was done out of view of the customers, so they would come back for what they thought was a safe wash. It eventually failed.

 

[briteauto]

The only way I would consider a touch free tunnel is if I was going to get brave and try some sort of unattended gizmo, or was in such a huge, dense metro market that there would be a plentiful supply of touch free only customers.

That is exactly what the location I saw was - a self loading conveyor with a pay station. I realize the dwell time difference and can only assume that the concentrations are amped up, as the system was using a two-step presoak application and a slow conveyor speed, but still would push through more than an IBA. Even if it did 30 cph, what IBA will do that?

If the quality of the results could be as good as a well-run tf IBA, then I would think that the throughput option would be very appealing. But if the use of the higher chemical concentrates is not practical, I see why operators stay with the IBA model.

 

[mac]

One of the main things that seems to be ignored in the IBA vs tunnel debate is the space availabe. There is no question a conveyor wash can run a lot more cars through it. But what do you do if you have an existing place with say only room for an IBA? In that case it makes much more sense. The overall investment will also be lower, sometimes by a large margin, since you will need about twice the space, maybe more, for a conveyor setup. I also had an interesting revelation this morning while brushing my teeth. There has always been the question of friction vs touchless. I clean my teeth first with friction: brushing and flossing. I then follow up with touchless, a water pick. You will be amazed at what the water pick dislodges after all that friction. And please, no jokes about my teeth, or lack thereof.

 

[wood]

what good is the production advantage of a 100% touchless conveyor if it can't clean. you will eventually have no customers, or be forced to add a mitter/top brush and a set of wraps -end of story!

stop promoting it-it don't work-end of story! put some men at the front or back to touch up, but to suggest it as an express exterior is absolutely ridiculous. anybody who expresses them self as a car wash expert and endorses this as an alternative is a joke.

there is only one advantage to a 100% touchless that can't be disputed-MARKETING!

 

[Chiefs]

Two problems. First and foremost total touchless - inbay or tunnel is only able of getting 60-70% really clean and another 10-15% kind of clean and even those percentage fluctuate downward depending if you have dry arid condiitons or winter weather where roadsalt is present (cleaner) and extended periods of wet weather when very stubborn roadfilm (oil) is present (less clean).
Secondly, when people go to a tunnel car wash, they expect a great deal more than they do from any in-bay automatic. I have it explained to me this by numerous customers over the years when asked why they use in-bay automatics. Their reply is "They (in-bays) help me keep my car clean, then when I want or need a really good wash, I come to your car wash."
Your building is longer, you have more equipment, yet you still will be able to only get cars as clean as an in-bay automatic, you'll just be able to put out the same less than quality car wash a lot faster.
I've made and sold touchess equipment for years. When we have told people that their cost per car just for pre-soak will be between 40-60 cents per car, they have all sat there and said, " That's ok, as long as we get good cars." All of sudden, that 10,000 cars they washed last month cost them 5,000 just for pre-soak. Then the game I like to call "Name That Tune" begins. They start lowering the concentration trying to get more cars per drum of chemical. Well, what happens? I'll tell you, instead of getting 85-90% of vehicles clean, that falls to 50-60% or less. No car wash can survive at that level of customer satisfaction.

 

[beauman]

I would never have a site unattended with a conveyor - friction or touch-free. Even a convenience store/fuel site will have a cashier on site for thier "customer self-loaded conveyor wash. Regarding the dwell time for a touch-free tunnel, you can achieve the proper time if the conveyor is not too short. You need a minimum of 85-90' and at this distance it is minimal. Most express tunnels are 120' plus anyway and in case of a touch free tunnel, you will get as good of an end product as you will with an in-bay providing water quality, heated presoak and proper application are utilized, and you will wash more per hour. The problem is to achieve the right amount of water quality and using enough chemical, you exceed in cost what a friction conveyor can give you for less out of pocket. Many express tunnels are priced at $3 - $5. Not a good ROI with touchfree.