water wizard ll

Hi guys , Glenn here in Australia . As mentioned earlier I am about to build a 5 and 1 using colman equipment . I have been touring around trying various equipment and talking to owners etc.While I am convinced that the water wizard does an exellent job , I am concerned about the triple shine as it does not seem to go on as effectivly as other machines that I have tried eg colors seem to blend together and and not very thick application .
Maybe any ww operators out there could advise if this is common or more likely an operators settings/chemical issue. I am also slightly concerned that the "spot free" has not always been 100%on some ww's I have tried.

Maybe this could be one for you(Greg Pack)as you have been of great help in previous replies and apreciate your vast experience with water wizards Regards Glenn Jude

The WW 2.0 applies the triple shine 1 color at a time through the same manifold and is on some kind of delay. So 1 color comes out then it quickly switches to the next color through the length of the car. I don't know if all of them are set this way, but the few that I have seen are like that. I personally like it. I think that the 2.0 is vastly more efficient than the older generation water wizards. I know it should be, but the difference is so great I had to give them credit.

Your spot free issues may be because of the gantry design. Next time you go through one look at all the water that collects around the dryer and drips on the car, not all of that water up there is spot free. To solve this problem I would have a free standing dryer outside of the bay, and have my wash programming set to do the final spot free rinse end at the back of the car, and then give the customer the exit sign so they can drive under the dryer and avoid any hard water drips on their clean car. I assume the wash can be set this way, I know new PDQ units can. I am not a fan of the on board dryer at all. (No pun intended)

Yes, I agree triple foam on WW2.0 is a step backwards form the first generation. Coleman essentially retained the same pump stand footprint and went to much larger Cat presoak pumps which took up the limited space on the pump stand. Early on before the 2.0 was released I saw it run at the factory. I suggested that the tricolor was inferior, and was told by a factory guy that essentially "that was the way it was gonna be". In my opinion Coleman went from one of the best triple foam applications in the industry to one of the worst. So much for "innovation". I have seen significant differences foam thickness by using different products. I have also seen some operators modify their foam generators by building much larger ones out of PVC to get better foaming. to be honest, I've just quit looking at it.

Spot free coverage has been fine IMO, so I would question either a faulty pump, bad RO water, or too fast a gantry speed.

Let me say that all I have owned for a long period are water wizards and I have limited experience with only one other brand (Belanger vectors) which I owned for a couple of months before I yanked them out and put water wizards in. BTW, the customer response was 100% positive on the reload. Water wizards excel at high pressure impingement on the surface of the vehicle. If you have tough cleaning conditions I think the water wizard with the right chemical will out clean most any unit on the market. But if you are one of those lucky people that live where road film is a breeze,you're washing off snow/ice/salt, or in an area where some law that mandates people wash their car once a week you can get by with other touch free unit that will be lower maintenance than the water wizard.

I still think I have probably purchased my last touch free automatic. I just can't clean every car with touch free in my area. 93% maybe, but not 100%. The next auto I buy (if any) will be a friction unit. I'll just beat the dirt off. :)

In fairness to Coleman, I should also add that the addition of the profiling eyes on the gantry on the 2.0 may very well have made the old trifoam system impractical. Those eyes are essentially where the tri foam was located.

Thanks for the replies Greg & Homer . I am still at the planing stage so any advice/opinions are warmly welcome and taken on board. Greg , just on your point re friction units . I would love to put in a friction unit as I realise that they do a superior job with less water but they still have a poorer perception with customers re damage risk to their cars and of all recently built car washes I cannot think of one friction unit being put in , they are all touchless. I think we are somewhat behind where you guys are at in carwash trends especially here in rural Australia . I hope we dont catch up to quickly or I may regret my touchless decision

kind regards Glenn