IFO vs. EFO - A new way of thinking about contamination

[C. Charles Hahn]

IFO vs. EFO - A new way of thinking about contamination

I got to thinking the other day while using IronX on a car that perhaps we've been missing the mark in terms of categorizing finish contaminants as they relate to detailing.

As we all know, IFO stands for Industrial Fall-Out, which is a term used to describe many different surface contaminants such as acid rain, rail dust, road tar, brake dust, etc. Many also improperly use this term to describe general water spotting, among other types of contaminants.

I would contend that another category should also be recognized, which is Environmental Fall-Out, or EFO. EFO would include things such as mineral deposits from hard water (such as well water), tree sap, bird droppings, bug splatter, and even pollen and dust.

The reason I would make such a distinction is that IFO describes types of contamination that exist purely because of the man-made industrialized world in which we live. Not all vehicles come into contact with significant amounts of IFO if they are nowhere near the sources of such contamination most of the time. These vehicles instead see a large amount of EFO -- contamination that occurs naturally in the environment without any intervention from humans. Not only are IFO and EFO fundamentally different in terms of their composition and source, but despite some overlap they are also fundamentally different with regards to how they are dealt with.

Man-made Contaminants = Man-made Solutions

In many cases, IFO is dealt with using man-made solvents and strong harsh cleaners. While the detailing industry as a whole is getting better about making these cleaners environmentally friendly, there are still a number of unique challenges presented by the clean-up and disposal of industrial contamination. This in my opinion justifies their classification being held separate from the solutions available for environmentally-sourced contaminants.

Natural Contaminants = Natural Solutions

There are a wide variety of solutions for EFO, including the same types of solvents that are used for IFO removal. However in many cases, these are simply unnecessary and/or overkill. Safe, environmentally friendly solutions such as citrus based cleaners, or even just plain water are often all that are necessary to take care of the natural contaminants that make their way onto a vehicle's finish.

Anyone else have any thoughts about the concept of IFO vs. EFO?

Feed back please

[CrownKote]

I think you hit the nail on the head!

I always tell my customers that there are 2 basic types of paint destroyers... Man made and natural... The man made include everything from manufacturing pollutants all the way down to them or others causing destruction... And the natural things are things like rocks, dirt, birds, trees, etc...

Can I use your post to help my customers understand?

[C. Charles Hahn]

I think you hit the nail on the head!

I always tell my customers that there are 2 basic types of paint destroyers... Man made and natural... The man made include everything from manufacturing pollutants all the way down to them or others causing destruction... And the natural things are things like rocks, dirt, birds, trees, etc...

Can I use your post to help my customers understand?

Of course you can :xyxthumbs:

[CrownKote]

Thank you it will help with a lot of explanations I think!

[LegacyGT]

Good post, I had not thought to separate those two out, but it makes a lot of sense to address them individually. Where I live I get much more natural contaminates than man made.

[C. Charles Hahn]

Good post, I had not thought to separate those two out, but it makes a lot of sense to address them individually. Where I live I get much more natural contaminates than man made.

Thanks Bill, that's exactly what prompted my thinking. The vehicle I was working on (another AGO member's silver Camaro) I expected to see a lot of reaction from IronX on, but it didn't bleed hardly at all. Turns out he lives "out in the sticks" and thus doesn't get much industrial contamination.

On the other hand, where I live and where most of the cars I work on come from, there are a lot of manufacturing facilities, a major airport about a mile away, railroad tracks, and thus a lot of IFO.

[FUNX650]

Good topic Charlie. :)

I believe I understand, and please correct as you see fit, the direction you are asking us to envision.

To Summerize:

The following is applicable to Vehicle Care

The Classification, Description, Types, and The: Products, Tools, and Equipment For Removal Of/Protection From: Fallouts

I am going to presume that this is what you have as IFO vs. EFO (only worded much, much better :)) As I previously stated this is a good topic---to actually seperate what is needed for each specific fallout and its removal/protection, versus the mentality of "one size (or one product) fits all". I see this as a win-win for the detailer, the vehicles, and the environment.

To segue, if I may, to offer my thoughts on this concept.

I always considered the word environment to be that descriptive applied to all that encompasses what we call Earth:

-The five stratas, and their contents, above the Earth' crust
-The Earth's crust,and its contents---anything living and non-living that is naturally occuring; and, all that is influenced/built by man
-The mantle beneath the crust, and its contents--magma and radioactive elements
-The Earth's core ( hot, hot, hot) :)

Therefore, piggy-backing off of your ideas, I would proffer the following for consideration presented in a basic outline form:

I. The Environment (as listed above)

A. Natural=E.F.O.
1. This list includes but is not limited to: bird excrement, pollen, dust, volcanic ash, minerals (hard water), bug splatter, rain water, etc.
2. Removal/Protection with: products X, Y, Z, or Other

II. The Environment

B. Man-Made=I.F.O.
1. This list includes but is not limited to: rail dust, brake dust, road tar, acid rain, etc.
2. Removal/Protection with: products: X, Y, Z, or Other

Excuse the lengthiness of this post...brevity is oft-times not my forte...especially when my interest has been piqued!

{Hey Charlie: let's get together, write a couple of tomes on this subject, and make a few million each!!!}

Just a few (:D) of my thoughts on your topic.

Bob

[Ted S.]

Wow, this thread may be one of the most helpful, when trying to easily explain dull/dirty paint to customers. Thanks for the thread man.:dblthumb2:

May be a good thing to include in brochures, hint-hint..:props:

[BobbyG]

IFO vs. EFO - A new way of thinking about contamination

Anyone else have any thoughts about the concept of IFO vs. EFO?

Feed back please

Yes, yes, and yes!!

I agree with your thought process completely. Depending on your particular area one would apply more then the other allowing "us" to formulate an appropriate attack plan...

I think this is one of the more thought provoking posts I've read in a while.

Awesome thread Charlie!! :props:

This would actually be beneficial if printed on poster sized material and hung in the shop!

[C. Charles Hahn]

Good topic Charlie. :)

I believe I understand, and please correct as you see fit, the direction you are asking us to envision.

...

{Hey Charlie: let's get together, write a couple of tomes on this subject, and make a few million each!!!}

Just a few (:D) of my thoughts on your topic.

Bob

Excellent reply, Bob! Precisely on-point with where I was going when I made the thread. :props:

Perhaps with your definition of "environment" in mind, a better term would be "Natural Fall-Out" or NFO?

I think separating contamination into two categories not only makes explaining it to others much easier, it also makes it easier to break down the process when choosing how to approach the removal of contaminants from a vehicle's finish, providing an opportunity to address problems in a more precise manner which should prove beneficial.

First and foremost, just like when trying to find the least aggressive effective pad/product/technique combination to perform defect correction, one could use the "test spot" technique to determine what specific type of contamination exists to be dealt with. The advantages of doing this are many:


Potentially safer for the detailer
Safer for the vehicle
Safer for the environment


Why subject an entire vehicle to harsh solvent cleaners if something much more mild is effective? Why subject the environment to the after-effects of a harsh solvent being used if other friendlier solutions exist?

Especially when dealing with delicate finishes, the risk of damage to it is greatly reduced when decontamination is done with as mild a product as possible. Again, just like when approaching paint correction, Use the least aggressive method to get the job done.

As you also insinuated, by identifying the specific nature of the contamination a given vehicle is most exposed to, the selection of a protective product/LSP can be narrowed down based on its characteristics.

For example, a New York City taxi probably doesn't encounter much by way of pollen or dust (EFO/NFO), and therefore would not benefit much from a product with anti-static properties. On the other hand the same vehicle probably gets exposed to a ton of brake dust, road tar, and other IFO. It would most benefit from a wax, sealant, or coating which protects against the etching and staining these types of contamination are known to cause.

One-size may fit all when you're trying to get the job done quick and cheap without significant concern for the side effects, but when you're trying to get the job done right there are additional considerations that should be made. Of course at the same time I won't deny that a one-step product that safely and effectively deals with all types of fallout and decontamination duties would be an amazing thing to have. :cool:


Wow, this thread may be one of the most helpful, when trying to easily explain dull/dirty paint to customers. Thanks for the thread man.:dblthumb2:

May be a good thing to include in brochures, hint-hint..:props:


Yes, yes, and yes!!

I agree with your thought process completely. Depending on your particular area one would apply more then the other allowing "us" to formulate an appropriate attack plan...

I think this is one of the more thought provoking posts I've read in a while.

Awesome thread Charlie!! :props:

This would actually be beneficial if printed on poster sized material and hung in the shop!

Thanks guys! :cheers:

EDIT: AHA!! Finally it worked! Got my other reply through. :cool:

[FUNX650]

[QUOTE=Shiny Lil Detlr;483211]Excellent reply, Bob! Precisely on-point with where I was going when I made the thread. :props:

Thanks for your kind words, Charlie...I was hoping that I was, at least, in the same ballpark as you.

Perhaps with your definition of "environment" in mind, a better term would be "Natural Fall-Out" or NFO?

That (N.F.O.) perhaps is more definitive. ( I tried not to include U.F.O.s, though :D)

I think separating contamination into two categories not only makes explaining it to others much easier, it also makes it easier to break down the process...

The "outline form", for me, dates back to my earliest rememberances of classroom days and I always found it to be beneficial to organize topics in such a manner.

As you also insinuated, by identifying the specific nature of the contamination a given vehicle is most exposed to, the selection of a protective product/LSP can be narrowed down based on its characteristics.

As others have replied: Brochures/Posters in the shop for reference.

One-size may fit all... I won't deny that a one-step product that safely and effectively deals with all types of fallout and decontamination duties would be an amazing thing to have. :cool:
__________________________________________________ _______
__________________________________________________ _________

The quest and zeal for those "siver bullets" may be never-ending; but, I agree they would be amazing to have!

[P.S. I have already set aside a large block of my time for our "Book Signing Tour"] :)

Bob

[CrownKote]

[P.S. I have already set aside a large block of my time for our "Book Signing Tour"] :)
Bob

This is great! I want in on the action! Do you have an agent? lol... If not I can do that or maybe I can do the illustrations for the kids version?

All that aside Thank you all for the thought that has been brought up in this discussion! I feel t will be very beneficial to all!

[C. Charles Hahn]

That (N.F.O.) perhaps is more definitive. ( I tried not to include U.F.O.s, though :D)

Interestingly enough, I also posted this thread on another forum and the suggestion was made to have a "UFO" category to represent Unidentifiable Fall-Out -- substances which the detailer cannot identify definitively.

We decided we should hold casting calls for a new show, "CSI: Detailing Forensics" :laughing:


The "outline form", for me, dates back to my earliest rememberances of classroom days and I always found it to be beneficial to organize topics in such a manner.

During my college days (the first time around, anyway) I used to be a writing tutor and indeed, the first thing I would always have students do is put together an outline of their ideas in order to organize them and make sure they had enough related content to write a cohesive paper. :props:


[P.S. I have already set aside a large block of my time for our "Book Signing Tour"] :)

Bob

:righton: