Good mitt for ONR washing

R

RobD

New member
I stumbled across this shaggy-style MF mitt while shopping at Home Depot. It's a nice size (basically hand size) and seems well made. I've been using MF covered sponges (the white ones from Target) for ONR washes, and they worked OK, but this mitt is much better, IME. It glides across the paint and cleans well. It's probably good for traditional washes too, but I use a sheepskin mitt for that.



Total-Reach 7.75 In. Microfiber Mitt 962090 at The Home Depot
 
Good find! I will definitely check these out. I have been using long-fiber MF towels for my ONR washes but having to constantly fold/re-fold slows me down.
 
Yea, it seems like a good product. Compared to terry-style MF towels or sponges, the deep strands probably help keep more debris away from the paint. Also, the finish seemed smoother and slicker when drying. I haven't used it on a really dirty car, but so far it cleans well.
 
I've been using these mitts for years with ONR and they work great Neatitems | Deep Pile Microfiber Mitts The pile is longer than any of the MF covered sponges I've seen. I cut out the threads that create the finger pockets and then a grout sponge fits into the mitt--allows allot of solution to be used if the car is really dirty and allows me to remove the sponge and throw the mitt into the washer.



Their WW MF are also excellent--very soft and absorbent.
 
My favorite thing about this mitt is its size...it fits perfectly in your hand and is easy to hold. I don't even use the hand pocket.



pwaug, good tip about putting a sponge inside a mitt for really dirty cars.
 
I don't get the appeal/supposed advantages of this type of "Muppet Mitt" :confused: It seems to me that the design is a move in the wrong direction.



I prefer as many, and as fine, strands of nap as possible for the following reasons:

-smaller strands will convey less "contact weight" to the surface being washed

-more fine strands will result in a greater chance of them overlapping, resulting in fewer "missed spots" with each pass

-the fine strands will be more gentle than the larger, heavier ones

-more fine strands will provide greater surface area for the transferred contamination to stick to (especially important with ONR type washes), thus there should be a greater chance that dirt will get transferred to a "fresh" clean area rather than "piling up" on an already-dirty area

-the greater surface area will also make it more likely that dirt will become "entangled" in the nap resulting in less potential for marring (note that I do not believe that dirt "migrates" very far up the nap, but rather gets entangled in it)



As regulars here know, I'm not a big ONR user; I came up with the above thoughts when I considered this type of MF for use with my (conventional) wash method where a very light, interrupted "jiggling" motion is employed while whisking the mitt across the surface as gently as possible, but as noted I thought some of my ideas seemed especially relevant with regard to rinseless washing.



Comments/criticisms/differing opinions are invited, let's (civilly, of course ;) ) give this a well-reasoned :argue
 
I use a hydrophilic sponge with a diamond pattern cut into one side, half way through and about 3/4 of an inch apart. It rinses better than cloth, the amount of water can be controlled with a squeeze and they last a very long time. When the ones I use for the top surfaces look used up I make new ones and move the ones I've been using for the top to use below the belt line.



Hydrophilic sponges are about two dollars each and they work great cut into four pieces for putting on polish/wax as well.



Robert
 
I bounce back and forth between a MF covered sponge and a Mother's sheepskin. The MF covered sponge stays wet longer, but the sheepskin just glides along the surface. Ideally I'd have a sheepskin covered sponge. I've had the MF sponges with the fingers, not a huge fan as the fingers keep getting caught in cracks and there doesn't seem to be enough nap.
 
I'm not sure what you paid, but I bought the same thing (but mine was double sided) for $5 at walmart. Works great.
 
Accumulator said:
I don't get the appeal/supposed advantages of this type of "Muppet Mitt" :confused: It seems to me that the design is a move in the wrong direction.



I prefer as many, and as fine, strands of nap as possible for the following reasons:

-smaller strands will convey less "contact weight" to the surface being washed

-more fine strands will result in a greater chance of them overlapping, resulting in fewer "missed spots" with each pass

-the fine strands will be more gentle than the larger, heavier ones

-more fine strands will provide greater surface area for the transferred contamination to stick to (especially important with ONR type washes), thus there should be a greater chance that dirt will get transferred to a "fresh" clean area rather than "piling up" on an already-dirty area

-the greater surface area will also make it more likely that dirt will become "entangled" in the nap resulting in less potential for marring (note that I do not believe that dirt "migrates" very far up the nap, but rather gets entangled in it)



As regulars here know, I'm not a big ONR user; I came up with the above thoughts when I considered this type of MF for use with my (conventional) wash method where a very light, interrupted "jiggling" motion is employed while whisking the mitt across the surface as gently as possible, but as noted I thought some of my ideas seemed especially relevant with regard to rinseless washing.



Comments/criticisms/differing opinions are invited, let's (civilly, of course ;) ) give this a well-reasoned :argue
Click to expand...



Your reasoning is sound. I would tend to agree with you. Yet, here are my feelings on the matter...



Regarding rinse-less washing, even though I have always been leery about it, I have started using ONR successfully. That said, I always pre-soak with QD strength ONR, use a light touch and frequently rinse out the sponge/mitt while washing. I also use a bit of common sense when using ONR (I have version 2) and will perform a regular wash when I think it's necessary.



Regarding the wash mitt itself, I first used ONR with my sheepskin mitt. It worked OK, but it seemed to drag a bit and the finish did not seem slick when drying it, nor did it look glossy.



Next, I took Scottwax's suggestion and tried MF sponges. In general, they worked better than the sheepskin mitt, but they got dirty quickly and there's not much pile for absorbing grit. Though I haven't noticed significant marring, the MF sponge did sometimes feel like it was dragging dirt across the paint. Verses the sheepskin mitt, the paint felt somewhat slicker while drying, but not very slick to the touch. Gloss was also marginal.



The "Muppet Mitt" seems to work best (previously, I've never used this style mitt for any washing). I use very little pressure and it just glides over the paint. It doesn't seem to get as dirty or hold-on to as much dirt as the other mitts, yet it does clean the paint well (I haven't used it on a real dirty car, though). The rinse water gets just as dirty and the drying towels remain mostly clean. The paint feels slicker while drying and afterwards. It also looks decently glossy.
 
I am not a big fan of ONR washing in general. I think it is just another product to be pushed to the uninformed masses. ONR is for quitters.
 
opie7afe said:
I am not a big fan of ONR washing in general. I think it is just another product to be pushed to the uninformed masses. ONR is for quitters.
Click to expand...



This should be good....:hide:
 
Out of all the mitts I've tried, I always go back to using a MF towel. I don't know why but it just works better for me, easily contours around any little gap and curve, and easier to rinse/clean in the bucket, while allowing me to control how much water it's holding a bit easier also.
 
opie7afe said:
I am not a big fan of ONR washing in general. I think it is just another product to be pushed to the uninformed masses. ONR is for quitters.
Click to expand...



Ok you have peaked my interest. Would you care to share with the forum members your thoughts on this product that have shaped your opinion of ONR ? I personally was dubious of the claims by Optimum when this product was introduced. It wasn't until the reviews started coming in from people I respected and which had no connection to Opt or gain to be made from its success did I give ONR a try and have been won over ever since. As of this date the market for rinseless wash has exploded with a lot of reputable companies offering rinseless product. Not only has this market grown but has been joined with the waterless products to meet eco demands from both detailers and customers combined. So I think I'm not alone when I question the comment "the uninformed masses' or classification "quitters". Anxiously awaiting your reply.
 
opie7afe said:
I have used ONR, just not impressed. I do think it is for quitters.
Click to expand...



ONR works, period. It's not for quitters...quitters no longer keep their cars clean. If you don't like no-rinse car washes, fine, to each their own. But to claim people who use no-rinse washes are quitters, especially those around here who have been detailing cars for years, decades even, is disrespectful and flat-out incorrect.
 
RobD said:
ONR works, period. It's not for quitters...quitters no longer keep their cars clean. If you don't like no-rinse car washes, fine, to each their own. But to claim people who use no-rinse washes are quitters, especially those around here who have been detailing cars for years, decades even, is disrespectful and flat-out incorrect.
Click to expand...



In my educated opinion, I believe that ONR increases the chance for micromarring. This can occur even under the best circumstances. You would need to be really careful to even consider ONR on a black vehicle. I know that it makes a mobile detailer's job easier, but at the expense of potential micromarring of the surface.



I would bet that it is not used often on the $ 100 k plus cars. I hope the quitters remark did not offend anyone, but that is my opinion and I will be glad to debate this with anyone on the planet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top