Keeping gym equipment hygienic is one of those operational tasks that sounds straightforward until you’re juggling different surfaces, tight schedules, and worried members. Over the years I’ve tested both steam cleaning and chemical sanitation across studios, corporate gyms and leisure centres, and I’ve found that the right choice rarely comes down to “which is better” in general — it’s about which method fits your equipment, staff skillset, budgets and risk profile. Below I walk through the practical questions I ask on site, the trade-offs I’ve seen, and a decision checklist you can use when planning your cleaning programme.
What you need to know about how each method works
Steam cleaning uses high-temperature vapour (typically 100–180°C, depending on the machine) to loosen dirt, oils and microbes. The heat itself has sanitising effects and many modern steam machines also include a slight vacuum to remove moisture and dislodged soil.
Chemical sanitation relies on disinfectants — for example alcohol-based sprays, quaternary ammonium compounds (quats), bleach solutions or hydrogen peroxide products — to kill micro-organisms. These are applied by spray-and-wipe, fogging, or with microfiber cloths and allowed to dwell for a manufacturer-specified contact time.
Effectiveness against microbes and pathogens
In my experience, both methods can achieve acceptable microbiological reduction when used correctly. Steam at the right temperature can inactivate many bacteria and viruses without chemicals, which is attractive if you’re avoiding harsh chemistries. However:
For high-touch points like fitness machine consoles, touchscreens and dumbbell grips, I often prefer chemical disinfectants that have proven virucidal/bactericidal claims because their contact times are short and the efficacy data is clear.
Material compatibility and equipment longevity
Gym equipment uses a mix of plastics, rubber grips, painted metals, chrome, upholstery and electronic displays. This is where the choice becomes equipment-specific.
When I audit sites I catalogue sensitive items — ie. TFT touchscreens, bike consoles, leather/PU seats — and mark them as “chemically-friendly” or “steam-friendly” based on manufacturer guidance. Often the answer is a hybrid approach: steam for heavy-soil areas and metal frames, chemicals for electronics and upholstery.
Safety for staff and members
Staff safety and occupant comfort are key considerations.
I always require COSHH risk assessments for chemical programmes and a short safety briefing for anyone using steam machines. For shared facilities I post signage when areas are being treated — both methods can require short re-entry restrictions.
Operational speed, downtime and member experience
Speed matters in busy gyms. Members expect equipment to be available, and long closures reduce revenue.
From experience, the best routines use a combination: rapid chemical spray-and-wipe for high-touch areas throughout the day, planned steam sessions during low-traffic windows for frameworks and non-sensitive areas.
Cost considerations
Initial and running costs differ.
I usually calculate a 12-month total cost including labour time: if steam reduces manual wipe time significantly, the machine can pay back quickly. But don’t forget cleaning consumables, PPE and training costs for either route.
Environmental impact
If sustainability is a priority, there are trade-offs:
I recommend selecting low-toxicity, biodegradable disinfectants where possible and monitoring electricity use of steam equipment. For clients keen on sustainability, a mixed programme often gives the best balance.
Regulatory and contract requirements
Some clients or contracts require documented use of specific disinfectants or validation. For example, healthcare-adjacent facilities will often specify disinfectants with certain EN standards (EN 14476 for virucidal activity, EN 1276 for bactericidal claims).
Steam rarely comes with EN claims for disinfectant activity in the same way chemical products do, so when auditing against contract specs I check whether the contract allows non-chemical methods and capture evidence of temperatures achieved and operator logs if needed.
Training and maintenance
Both methods need training. I train teams on:
Maintenance is important: steam boilers need descaling and pressure checks; chemical dispensers need calibration. I keep a simple logbook (digital or paper) for both to show compliance and to track issues.
Practical decision checklist
| Question | Steam better if... | Chemicals better if... |
|---|---|---|
| Surface types | Mostly metal frames, tiles, rubber flooring | Lots of electronics, bonded upholstery, painted finishes |
| Need documented disinfectant claims | No | Yes (EN standards) |
| Member downtime constraints | Short, rapid deep-clean windows | Spot sanitise between users; staged cleaning |
| Staff sensitivity to fumes | Prefer steam to avoid chemicals | Use low-odour or hydrogen-peroxide chemistries |
| Budget | Capex acceptable; saves consumables | Lower capex; ongoing consumable spend |
My recommended hybrid approach
From dozens of site audits I typically propose a hybrid programme:
Finally, document everything. Training records, COSHH sheets, chemical batch numbers, steam machine service logs and cleaning schedules all build a defensible cleaning programme. If you’d like a downloadable checklist or a template for a decision matrix I use on site, tell me which type of gym you manage (low-cost, boutique, corporate or leisure centre) and I’ll adapt it for you.
