Kumar's Auto Detailing
Where Craft Meets Clarity
Current live website for Kumar’s Auto Detailing, built in Wix and refined over a 3-year client relationship around service clarity, real work, and a call-first booking funnel.
Defining the Opportunity
Kumar's Auto Detailing ran entirely on word of mouth, Instagram DMs, texts, and calls. The in-person work was detailed and premium. Online, there was no way to verify that: no website, no service structure, no way to engage except informally.
Before any site existed, the owner was fielding roughly 2 bookings a day, almost entirely through informal channels, with daily revenue sitting around $300 to $500. Customers weren't hesitating because they didn't want detailing. They couldn't quickly tell whether the business was professional, what services actually cost, or how to get in touch.
My Role
Product Designer — UX/UI · Design System · Brand Integration
Team
Solo Designer
Owner Critiques
Timeline
4 weeks
Tools
Figma, FigJam, Wix, Indesign, Photoshop,
My Role and Constraints
I've owned this relationship end-to-end for 3 years: research, UX, visual design, build, and ongoing brand/social management, building and launching every version myself in Wix. The owner couldn't afford a developer or custom build, which is part of why Wix specifically was the right call. There was real seasonal pressure on the original launch, and real financial pressure throughout the relationship. That meant design decisions weren't abstract exercises; they had immediate consequences for his income. That dynamic also meant he pushed back on my decisions at times, not just approved them, which is detailed in the design process below.
Previous Version
A Polished Digital Start
A detailer with strong in-person work had no digital presence at all. As his product designer on an ongoing freelance basis for the past 3 years, I've designed and built the site myself in Wix through 3+ major redesign iterations, including two versions that followed Kumar's direction toward copy-heavy service clarity, and a current minimal version I built once the business had grown enough that he trusted a cleaner approach. Daily bookings grew from 2 to 5, and the site helped add approximately $80K in annual revenue.
Research and Discovery
For the first version, I ran 15 real interviews and conversations with prospective and past customers, interviewed the owner directly about objections he heard before booking, and conducted a competitive audit of local and luxury detailing sites.
The clearest finding from that round: customers wanted to see results before trusting a detailer, meaning visual proof was needed to carry the persuasion load. A second finding: customers weren't sure which service they needed, which originally led me toward a structured, tiered presentation of services to reduce that uncertainty.
What changed my direction after launch wasn't a new research round. It was a direct signal from how customers actually behaved once the site was live. The booking form wasn't getting used the way I expected. Customers were calling anyway, even with a form available, because for a service like this, where price depends on a car's actual condition, people wanted to talk to the owner directly before committing to anything.
Insight → Decision
In the first version, because customers said they wanted to see results before trusting a detailer, I built the Our Work gallery as a conversion surface and introduced a structured presentation of services to address decision uncertainty.
After launch, because the booking form wasn't matching actual customer behavior, I made the call to remove it entirely rather than iterate on its design. The reasoning was direct: pricing for detailing genuinely varies by a car's condition, which isn't something a static form can capture well, and customers in this market consistently preferred negotiating and getting fast answers over a phone call rather than filling out a form and waiting for a response.
I prioritized owner responsiveness and pricing flexibility over the self-serve convenience a booking form usually provides.
UX goals and decisions chart connecting customer needs to design choices. The site was simplified around three priorities: show the work, explain the services clearly, and make contacting the owner the easiest next step.
Design Process
My first instinct was a stripped-down, minimal version using strong automotive imagery and minimal copy. Kumar pushed back directly, he wanted pricing and service information visible immediately, because that's what his customers asked about first every time, whether through a text or a walk-up conversation.
I listened and adjusted, building service pricing and clear service framing into the homepage across the first two iterations. That copy-heavy direction worked; it gave customers what they needed to see before calling, and the business grew steadily as a result.
Once the business had a significant client base and Kumar was confident in the brand's credibility, he gave me the green light to move toward the minimal, brand-led direction I'd originally proposed. The current live site reflects that: cleaner, less copy-heavy, built around strong imagery and a single repeated CTA.
The first version's services page used tiered packages to reduce decision paralysis. That worked for comprehension, but didn't solve the real bottleneck; customers still wanted to call before committing, tier or no tier.
The booking form went through real iteration before I removed it entirely: vehicle details moved from upfront to a later confirmation step after feedback suggested it felt like too much commitment too early. That refinement improved the form's usability, but didn't change the underlying pattern that customers preferred calling.
The current version reflects a separate realization: I simplified the site down to clear service pricing, a real-work gallery, and a single "Call Now" CTA, removing a feature I'd originally designed and shipped once the data showed it wasn't serving the actual goal. AI helped speed up layout exploration for the services section and synthesis across the 15 customer interviews, though every interpretation and final call was mine.
The current live production site used by customers today. The experience is built around clear service pricing, real completed work, and a direct call-based funnel.
Impact and Outcomes
Before any site existed, the business averaged roughly 2 bookings a day with daily revenue around $300 to $500, based on owner-reported inbound DMs, texts, and calls. After launch, average daily bookings grew to 5, daily revenue grew to roughly $1,000 to $1,500 on active booking days, and the site helped add approximately $80K in annual revenue.
This is a real business outcome based on owner-reported booking and revenue patterns, not a projection. The growth reflects three years of continuous iteration, sometimes based on Kumar's direction, sometimes based on usage data, and always based on what the business actually needed at that stage.
Ceramic Coating Tier 1
Final Design
The live site is structured around three things: clear per-service pricing, a real-work gallery, and one repeated CTA: "Call Now." Pricing includes window tint starting at $499, 1-step paint correction and ceramic coating at $899, 2-step at $1,299, and standalone ceramic coating at $450.
The current homepage reflects the minimal direction I originally proposed and Kumar eventually trusted, after two earlier iterations proved the business credibility that made that trust possible. I designed this in Figma and built and launched the live site myself in Wix, across all versions over the 3-year relationship.
Our Work Section Live
Reflection
The most honest thing I learned on this project: listening to a client's instinct isn't the same as giving up your own. Kumar's copy-heavy direction was right for where the business was, customers needed to see pricing and services clearly before they'd trust enough to call. Once that trust was built at scale, the minimal direction I'd originally proposed finally had the foundation to work.
I also learned that a booking form isn't automatically the right answer just because it's the conventional best practice. I built one, shipped it, and removed it when the data told me customers preferred calling instead.
Next experiments: SMS-based quick quote requests, and testing whether a simple "text us a photo of your car" option could capture some of the pricing-flexibility benefit of a call without losing customers who'd rather not pick up the phone.
