# House Washing: Pressure Washing the low pressure way



## PressurePros (May 6, 2007)

I like OneTrue Media. You can put together fast, decent looking videos that can dominate the SERP's and crowd out your competitors. Here is one I just made featuring house washing footage and some before and after pictures. Within 5 minutes it outranked my website.


----------



## aaron61 (Apr 29, 2007)

nice presentation


----------



## Lambrecht (Feb 8, 2010)

Really nice video. Great visuals!


----------



## PatsPainting (Mar 4, 2010)

If you lower the resolution of your pictures at the end of your movie to the actual size of the video it will look much better in my opinion. If you notice the edges now are really zig zaggy. I'm pretty sure this is due to large resolutions of the pictures. 

Pat


----------



## NEPS.US (Feb 6, 2008)

Great video Ken. :thumbsup:


----------



## RCP (Apr 18, 2007)

Nicely done! 
So, is the PSI the main difference between soft touch and PWing?
What are the advantages/benefits?
Thanks!


----------



## aaron61 (Apr 29, 2007)

It's the only way to do roofs!


----------



## PressurePros (May 6, 2007)

RCP said:


> Nicely done!
> So, is the PSI the main difference between soft touch and PWing?
> What are the advantages/benefits?
> Thanks!


Chris,

Yes, psi is lowered to under 500. The difference in speed is made up with flow. My machines are custom built to flow 10 gpm. The chems do the work and the pressure washer then facilitates the rinse. If you look at the video about 40 seconds in, that side of the house is high and a decent size. Between chem application and rinse down would elapse about 15 minutes and could be done by one man. Three guys on ladders would probably take an hour plus. The right chems allow me to smoke companies using smaller machines on a bid and still average double or triple the man hour rate. 

The benefits are better results, no damage to siding, no water pushed under the siding and less expense to the homeowner.


----------



## NEPS.US (Feb 6, 2008)

PressurePros said:


> The benefits are better results, no damage to siding, no water pushed under the siding and less expense to the homeowner.


Forgive me Ken, I am not questioning your methods, just trying to understand. 

When pushing that much water per minute from the groud up at the house how do you not get water under the claps? Or behind the vinyl.


----------



## PressurePros (May 6, 2007)

NEPS.US said:


> Forgive me Ken, I am not questioning your methods, just trying to understand.
> 
> When pushing that much water per minute from the groud up at the house how do you not get water under the claps? Or behind the vinyl.


Chris, the main issue we face is the weep holes. Two ways to avoid getting water under the siding are to hit the siding as perpendicular as is possible and to wash towards the back which is generally the way siding is overlapped. In a perfect world you get a cascading effect similar to a heavy rain.


----------



## NCPaint1 (Aug 6, 2009)

Great video Ken. I have a pretty short attention span, so keeping it under 2 minutes with that much good footage and info, definitely a plus. Im sold, you can come do my brick, I've got some rust stains. 

Could you add narration? That might be beneficial to residential customers. The reading, even though its short sorta takes away from the footage.


----------



## RCP (Apr 18, 2007)

I thought the same thing about the narration, but then realized most times I watch a Youtube, I have the volume off! Think about people surfing at work, or listening to music or tv?
Maybe both?


----------



## ewingpainting.net (Jun 2, 2008)

I dig it, I'm sold!


----------



## straight_lines (Oct 17, 2007)

10 gpm! What the eff! The pump must have been really expensive.

Nice video. Also I thought it was funny using the word "dwell" on the siding.


----------



## Dave Mac (May 4, 2007)

nice video, whats the most gpm you can pull from a house?? with out any help from a tank?


thanks
dave


----------



## johnpaint (Sep 20, 2008)

10 gal per min is more than a garden hose I would think.


----------



## Dave Mac (May 4, 2007)

johnpaint said:


> 10 gal per min is more than a garden hose I would think.


 
yea I was thinking 4 or 5 gpm from a garden hose was curios


----------



## NCPaint1 (Aug 6, 2009)

Tank, pump, truck mounted. He probably has his own water/chemical supply on a truck or trailer. At least thats how i've seen it done around here.


----------



## PressurePros (May 6, 2007)

I have measured quite a few houses in my work area. Most are blessed (or maybe that makes me blessed) with good municipal supply. The average flow I have measured is about 7 gpm. That 3 gpm deficit is handled by reserve tanks on the trucks. Every now and then we get a house with a well or bad flow and it halts production while tanks refill. That's rare though. Usually dwell time for chem, brushing or some other non-spraying task allows the tanks to refill to capacity.


----------



## TimberSeal (Oct 27, 2010)

Shhhhhhhhh.......... don't give away the farm Ken  We have enough competition!


----------

