Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

machinist - [machinist] Thread: What are you using for a rust preventative ? -and- Thread: Corrosion Prevention: Recent side-by-side comparison published in FIne Woodworking

machinist@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Machinist

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Lawrence London <lfljvenaura@gmail.com>
  • To: machinist@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [machinist] Thread: What are you using for a rust preventative ? -and- Thread: Corrosion Prevention: Recent side-by-side comparison published in FIne Woodworking
  • Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 14:01:13 -0500

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/general/what-you-using-rust-preventative-277300/

Thread: What are you using for a rust preventative ?

  1. 12-22-2013, 07:46 AM #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,778

    Default What are you using for a rust preventative ?

    I' am trying to find an alternate.

    Right now we are using Boeshield T9...while I think it's a pretty good product. It is expensive.

    Some of our jobs require a rust preventative on machined areas ( think large parts ) that is required to last a year. So I ask...anyone use something a little cheaper than the Boeshield ?
  2. 12-22-2013, 08:27 AM #2
    machtool is offline Titanium
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    3,048

    Default

    Jay

    Look into Fuchs Anticorite. I think you can buy it, they have sales offices near you.
  3. 12-22-2013, 09:33 AM #3
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    CRC 3-36 works way better than Boeshield and is less expensive as well. This, based on independent tests and my own experience. Before I discovered 3-36, I would have said Boeshield for inside parts and surfaces that need a clear easily removable coating, and LPS3 for outside use where one wants the best protection and is willing to put up with more labor to remove it eventually.

    But now I would recommend the 3-36 for both purposes. The Fuchs that Mach mentions may be good as well but I've not seen any comparison tests on that one. Practical Sailor magazine is one of the best sources of anti rust testing for consumer available products and there may exist industrial grade concoctions out there even better...but unlikely to match the bang for buck from CRC 3-36.

    As an aside, I never ceased to be amazed that most of the big box home supply stores, like Lowes, never carried any anti rust sprays. West Marine carries Boeshield, but their price for it is outrageous. So these often have to be ordered via UPS somewhere. I suspect Lowes and most hardware stores don't have it as they are under the delusion that WD40 serves the purpose.
    John Madarasz and Laurentian like this.
  4. 12-22-2013, 09:47 AM #4
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default

    There was a fairly lively discussion of this about 18 months ago here: Corrosion Prevention: Recent side-by-side comparison published in FIne Woodworking

    I am using CRC 3-36 and it has done very well for me here in the rather "moist" Pacific Northwest.

    Denis
    Laurentian likes this.
  5. 12-22-2013, 09:54 AM #5
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dgfoster View Post
    There was a fairly lively discussion of this about 18 months ago here: Corrosion Prevention: Recent side-by-side comparison published in FIne Woodworking

    I am using CRC 3-36 and it has done very well for me here in the rather "moist" Pacific Northwest.

    Denis
    The credibility of that study seemed highly questionable to me due to their high marks to WD40, which I still think is a joke for rust prevention. But I have since come around to believing they were correct about the CRC.
  6. 12-22-2013, 11:01 AM #6
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    The credibility of that study seemed highly questionable to me due to their high marks to WD40, which I still think is a joke for rust prevention. But I have since come around to believing they were correct about the CRC.
    Agreed on all points.
    Denis
  7. 12-22-2013, 11:07 AM #7
    Ray Behner's Avatar
    Ray Behner is online now Titanium
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Brunswick Oh USA
    Posts
    2,568

    Default

    What's the difference in CRC 3-36 and CRC 06026 heavy duty? I've never used the latter.
  8. 12-22-2013, 11:17 AM #8
    Peter Neill is offline Hot Rolled
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Suffolk, England
    Posts
    685

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    The credibility of that study seemed highly questionable to me due to their high marks to WD40, which I still think is a joke for rust prevention.
    I'd agree with that, I've seen nasty permanent staining on ground steel surfaces from WD40 sprayed on and left.

    For surface protection (and I should say I have no idea what Boeshield costs) on all our injection mould tool cores, cavities, and tool faces we use this Ambersil spray or one of the generic equivalents (Google Mould/Mold Protector Spray).

    Ambersil WebSite: Maintenance and Repair products

    Contains a non-marking dye so you can see exactly where you have sprayed, and this stuff keeps diamond polished tool moulding surfaces free from any corrosion or marking for several years in unheated storage. Removable with most solvents or by moulding it out, and completely insoluble in water.
    Laurentian and mbraddock like this.
  9. 12-22-2013, 11:44 AM #9
    MichaelP is online now Titanium
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    IL/WI border
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Behner View Post
    What's the difference in CRC 3-36 and CRC 06026 heavy duty? I've never used the latter.
    Based on its description, the Heavy Duty version creates a waxy layer on the surface that will require solvents or physical removal if you need the part to be free of it. But it'll protect the part for an indefinite period of time. It sounds like CRC 3-36 and CRC Heavy Duty is similar to LPS-2 and LPS-3 pair in this respect.
    Ray Behner and Laurentian like this.
  10. 12-22-2013, 11:52 AM #10
    jimfnd is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    169

    Default

    30 weight oil cut with Kerosene. Applied with an air sprayer.
    Works every time on ground surfaces in the summer swamp we live in.

    You can piss away your money anyway you like - I like to keep mine.
  11. 12-22-2013, 12:03 PM #11
    Heavey Metal is online now Titanium
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,405

    Default

    crc 3-36 is wax+ (5-15% propriatary blend) with a solvent carrier
    http://www.crcindustries.com/faxdocs/msds/3006.pdf

    06026 is a "propritary blend'' with a solvent carrier
    http://www.crcindustries.com/faxdocs/msds/6026.pdf
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Behner View Post
    What's the difference in CRC 3-36 and CRC 06026 heavy duty? I've never used the latter.
  12. 12-22-2013, 12:26 PM #12
    Laurentian's Avatar
    Laurentian is online now Hot Rolled
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    996

    Default

    We use CRC Engine Stor in aerosol cans on the HT and ground small tool steel tooling we make.
    Also on black oxide as a post blackening sealing oil. Let it sit over night and gets nice and gummy.
    Easy to wipe off. Product / part on can says 75027

    On edit : A quick search and the "fogging oil" we purchase is USA product 06072
  13. 12-22-2013, 12:26 PM #13
    Forrest Addy is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Bremerton WA USA
    Posts
    8,927

    Default

    Loo at Navy specs. Any oufit that's risked a $trillion(?) in rustable assets to salt water coorosion compeently has reason for feel confidence in their crrosion specs and engineering papers. In the past they've settled on a nymber of corrrosion prevention measured based on long term storage in open weather to short term applications used between manufacturing steps.

    As for parts exposed to weather I'd lookcarefully at any product colplying with MIL-PRF-16178 Grade 2 rated for 2 years offering 2 year protection in open shelter. Look it up yourself:

    https://www.google.com/#q=mil-prf-16173+grade+2

    My experience with LPS-3 in salt water spray contact with machined parts (think prototype stem fitting for a blue water racer of the 1990's) is it offers some protection even in areas of locaized dissemilar metals chafing.

    LPS3 is good stuff but a PITA to remove unless you know the tricks which are simple: putty knife off all you can and use mineral spirits and a stiff brush to apply mineral spirits paint thinner. You really cant hurry it. The solvent takes several minutes to act as it does not readily penetrate thick films well so you speed the process and reduce the mess by using the putty knife. Smoosh in the solvent with the brush until the residues form a goo. Wipe off and repeat to the degree of cleanliness required. I prefer to leave a light film unless cleanliness is required.

    I can't address other metal preservatives because onece I hit on LPS3 I had no need to look farther. Lindmark Machine works used a Rust-Lik product that was very similar. We applied it with laundry squirt bottles we filled from a drum pump. It went on to form an amber colored film you could add to by applying successive coats spaced a couple hours apart.

    There are techniques where preservative saturated cheese cloth is applied over cured films and pressed down to guard against film abrasion from accidental comtact with ropes, tarps, etc.

    I'd research the military's anti-corrosion experience and draw from their experience. I've seek WW II tank parts parts clean up good as freshly manufacvtured after 60 years in storage. I refer to parts stored for many years in open shelter then in a yard for another 20. To be fair they were coated in black cosmoline not Grade 2 preservative but you understand what I'm trying to say.

    Surface condition is an all important consideration. Parts subject ot acid fume and leaded steel parts in any condition will rust overnight. Bare clean and dry metal steel parts in a tote may take days or weeks to start rusting in the open shop but rust they will, eventually. A light coat of machine oil almost prevents corrosion in awarm dry environment for a month but it has its limits. Then there is passivation, phosphating, etc which give you almost a year of rust prevention in open shelter depending on environment. Tropical salt air is one extreme; inland high desert is the other.

    My favorite trick is to wash and clean the parts then soak then in a phosphoric acid solution (1:4 rust converter and water - my favorits is Jasco Metal Prep) for an hour untill they turn dingy gray. Scrub them with a soft brush, dry, and coat with a light preservative oil (LPS2, seeing a pattern here?). If I bag the parts in plastic bags with a small dessicant packet, the parts are good for several seasons in a crabber hold. If it's necessary to replace pins and bushings in their dek mchinery out on the bounding main they don't have to contend with removing films of gooey preservatives.

    Rust prevention is a matter of multiple levels of protection and preservitive coatings are only one level.
  14. 12-22-2013, 01:31 PM #14
    Rex TX is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    1,483

    Default

    Anhydrous lanolin. I have been using it for almost a year on everything in my unheated steel shop. No rust.
    Wipe it on straight, or dilute it with mineral spirits and spritz it on.
    $16/lb on ebay, or order it from a drugstore.
    rustytool likes this.
  15. 12-22-2013, 02:45 PM #15
    John Madarasz's Avatar
    John Madarasz is offline Stainless
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Frazer, PA.
    Posts
    1,050

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    CRC 3-36 works way better than Boeshield and is less expensive as well. This, based on independent tests and my own experience. Before I discovered 3-36, I would have said Boeshield for inside parts and surfaces that need a clear easily removable coating, and LPS3 for outside use where one wants the best protection and is willing to put up with more labor to remove it eventually.

    But now I would recommend the 3-36 for both purposes. The Fuchs that Mach mentions may be good as well but I've not seen any comparison tests on that one. Practical Sailor magazine is one of the best sources of anti rust testing for consumer available products and there may exist industrial grade concoctions out there even better...but unlikely to match the bang for buck from CRC 3-36.

    As an aside, I never ceased to be amazed that most of the big box home supply stores, like Lowes, never carried any anti rust sprays. West Marine carries Boeshield, but their price for it is outrageous. So these often have to be ordered via UPS somewhere. I suspect Lowes and most hardware stores don't have it as they are under the delusion that WD40 serves the purpose.

    I'll testify to this as well. I've been using CRC 3-36 for 20+ years when it was introduced to me through a rail yard working buddy. Great stuff with an excellent shelf life
    Laurentian likes this.
  16. 12-23-2013, 07:01 AM #16
    MilGunsmith's Avatar
    MilGunsmith is online now Hot Rolled
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Branchville, NJ
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Birchwood Casey Barricade https://www.birchwoodcasey.com/Clean...rotection.aspx
    I have used it to protect our clubs antique eqipment between fairs in an unheated metal barn. Also works well for what it was designed for on guns.
    Laurentian likes this.
  17. 12-23-2013, 08:07 AM #17
    digger doug is offline Titanium
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    erie,pa
    Posts
    2,691

    Default

    Was in a shop machining roller bearing rollers...."rust veto" is what they use.

    Rust Veto®

    I see there is several flavors though, didn't know which one they use.
  18. 12-23-2013, 08:56 AM #18
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimfnd View Post
    30 weight oil cut with Kerosene. Applied with an air sprayer.
    Works every time on ground surfaces in the summer swamp we live in.

    You can piss away your money anyway you like - I like to keep mine.
    If one is making a decent wage doing machining work I suspect one would urinate away more time (i.e. money) mixing up DIY concoctions into an air sprayer than one would by simply picking up a can of CRC and pushing the spray plunger. In the scheme of things the costs for ready to use anti rust sprays is nothing much.
    digger doug and Laurentian like this.
  19. 12-23-2013, 09:01 AM #19
    Metal Head's Avatar
    Metal Head is offline Cast Iron
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    336

    Default

    I sold my motorcycle after having my kid and had a nearly full can of Maxima chain wax left over. I've been using it for the sole purpose of rust prevention for the past year or two around the shop. I have a forged steel crank and connecting rods for a project car I'm building that has been sprayed with a light coat of that stuff for over a year with zero signs of rust or coating degradation. The shop they are stored in is unheated and my machines will develop a coat of surface rust overnight in the wintertime if I don't keep them coated with way oil. The Maxima cleans up easy with a wipe of WD-40, mineral spirits, etc.

    Chain Wax - $7.50 : Maxima Racing USA, - Power Without Sacrifice.
    Laurentian likes this.
  20. 12-23-2013, 10:09 AM #20
    Pete F is offline Stainless
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    1,357

    Default

    The lanolin based products are being pushed quite heavily down here and seem to be attracting a following. If successful and there was a lot to cover, the raw ingredient would be very cheap to obtain and mix with a solvent for application.
  1. dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default

    For some of my "high value" items like my boxed precision cylinder that are not used often, besides applying an anti-rust, CRC 3-36 in my case, I also slip them into a plastic bag. This is a pants-and-suspenders approach I guess. But it has the added advantage of keeping them free of grime and makes rusting almost impossible. Have yet to see it fail.
    Laurentian likes this.
  2. 12-23-2013, 11:18 AM #22
    BobRenz is offline Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    1,332

    Default

    Back in the '70s, I worked for Graco. Among other things, we made paint mixing tanks for the car factories - they were often up to about 150 gallon capacity. The exteriors were painted, but the interiors were just unpainted cold rolled so the car maker's paint and solvents wouldn't be affected by dissolving paint. At that time, we used SAE-30 motor oil for rust prevention, but the customers told us that the tanks would show up with rust inside, and they'd have to scrub it off with steel wool and mineral spirits.

    I did some digging, and we tried Cosmolene, but figured that Cosmolene was overkill. We then went to LPS-3, and it solved the problem. It prevented rust, and the customers could remove it with the solvent washes they used to clean the paint lines.

    We bought it in 1 gallon bottles to start, then we switched to 5 gallon cans. We applied it with a weed sprayer.

    If you use something like this, consider dipping your parts in it, and them setting them on a sloping drain surface to recover as much as possible, and to minimize dripping. A decent solvent parts washer can take it off very easily. If you need to wash a lot of it off, think about two parts washers - one for the heavy cleaning, and then another for rinsing. The dirty solvent from the clean washer becomes the makeup solvent for the "dirty" washer.
  3. 12-23-2013, 11:35 AM #23
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobRenz View Post

    I did some digging, and we tried Cosmolene, but figured that Cosmolene was overkill. We then went to LPS-3, and it solved the problem. It prevented rust, and the customers could remove it with the solvent washes they used to clean the paint lines.
    I had the impression that LPS3 was cosmolene....seems to smell the same anyway...maybe an aerosol spray version thinned out some ?
  4. 12-23-2013, 11:40 AM #24
    WILLEO6709's Avatar
    WILLEO6709 is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    WAPELLO, IA USA
    Posts
    4,400

    Default

    for relatively smaller parts vci bags work well. VCI paper is used on medium to larger parts commonly but I have never shipped an item in vci paper... most of my stuff is small enough to vci bag when required.
  5. 12-23-2013, 11:59 AM #25
    Forrest Addy is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Bremerton WA USA
    Posts
    8,927

    Default

    I neglected to mention vapor-phase corrosion (VCI) inhibitor usually used in the form of impregnated paper. A piece of this stuff sealed with the article to be protected prevents corrosion over the long term (years). The goodies are volatile so unless the packaging is sealed VCI paper's effectiveness peters out in proportion to infiltration of fresh air.

    Like this stuff: Volatile Corrosion Inhibitor Cut Length Rust Preventor Paper I METREX900MM | eBay

    Cut a piece of the paper about half the size of the article and include it in the package preferably with a charged packet of silica gel. 3 mil poly is not impermeable to organics; the volatile goodies will slowly leech out. A metal foil faced plastic heat-bonded packaging material would be best.

    VCI paper lined drawers in a closed chest may be effective for some time but in active tool chests where drawers are opening and closing several times a day the half-life of protection would at a guees be about a few days.

    This contribution is pretty much non-responsive to the OP but since the discussion of corrosion prevention has drifted from the specific to general I thought this would be of interest.


http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/general/corrosion-prevention-recent-side-side-comparison-published-fine-woodworking-247773/


Thread: Corrosion Prevention: Recent side-by-side comparison published in FIne Woodworking

  1. 06-10-2012, 05:00 PM #1
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default Corrosion Prevention: Recent side-by-side comparison published in FIne Woodworking

    This subject has come up here a few times in the past with a variety of favorites espoused based on users' experience and opinions of various experts.

    To its credit Fine Woodworking Magazine did a real side-by-side comparison of 20 products that have been suggested for corrosion control. This was published in their August 2012 issue. They applied the various agents to both A-2 tool steel and to cast iron and then exposed them to the elements for 10 days.

    Best overall was CRC Industrial A 3-36. Scoring nearly as well was LPS 3 and WD-40! (Interestingly, regular WD-40 performed better than WD-40 Long Term Corrosion Inhibitor. )


    Boeshield did not do well and camellia oil also did not perform well. For more details you will have to see the original article which cannot be copied and pasted here for obvious reasons.


    I have no connection to FWW or any of the products tested and limited experience with a very few of them. I reported this as few true head-to-head comparisons on this subject are available.


    Denis
  2. 06-10-2012, 06:20 PM #2
    ZAGNUT is offline Hot Rolled
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    978

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dgfoster View Post
    Scoring nearly as well was LPS 3 and WD-40!

    Denis
    this is a joke right? what kind of "elements" did they expose them to? anything protects better than wd-40, even cat piss.
  3. 06-10-2012, 06:35 PM #3
    sneed is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Riverside, Calif. USA
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Same mag. did a test a number of years ago; exposure to salt water as I recall, and got the opposite results, That was where I heard about Boshield! Unless WD-40 is now a completely different product it does not protect against long term corrosion. What it does is displace water, but only until the carrier evaporates. The gummy residue remaining does nothing except attract dirt.
  4. 06-10-2012, 07:18 PM #4
    gnorbury is online now Hot Rolled
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Oxford, MD
    Posts
    556

    Default

    WD40 evaporates rather readily and becomes worthless for intermediate or long term storage. I only use it to clean off the residual Boeshield or Corrosion-X when I'm preparing to use the lathe in my outbuilding.
  5. 06-10-2012, 07:53 PM #5
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZAGNUT View Post
    this is a joke right? what kind of "elements" did they expose them to? anything protects better than wd-40, even cat piss.
    LOL...yeah, I'm stunned by that result as well. For a *real* test of anti corrosion sprays, look to the tests done by Practical Sailor magazine...who, like Consumer Reports, carries zero advertising and of course would be putting the chemicals to the ultimate salt water spray tests.

    I think the bottom line with WD-40 is that at moderate amounts it can actually *cause* rust, since it's mostly a solvent and will dissolve oil films on items. But if you spray copious amounts of it, some waxy substance in there settles out after the solvent evaporates and it does prevent rust to some extent...but you have to spray major amounts of it to have that effect and it's still not as good as Boeshield and way worse than LPS-3.

    So, dg...which of you has been inhaling too much lacquer thinner...you or the tester at Fine Woodworking ??
    S_W_Bausch likes this.
  6. 06-10-2012, 08:07 PM #6
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZAGNUT View Post
    this is a joke right? what kind of "elements" did they expose them to? anything protects better than wd-40, even cat piss.
    I guess the reason to do a real study is to try to determine what really happens and not just what people think happens. Some enterprising person on this forum might do is a similar comparison that is more long term. That would take it from opinion to grounded-in-reality observation. There is a big difference. If you take the time to run down the article the results are pretty obvious. And it is hard to argue with those facts at least in the time interval of the study. Unless you do your own testing head to head and show us the (contrary?) results.

    I knew that there would be a pretty "strong" response to this as so many people seem to have strong opinions on this subject. But then inquiring minds want to know the truth. I would be really interested to see a similar test run over say six months. So, scientific testing or strongly stated opinion. Which do you prefer? Which are you going to believe?

    Denis

    I am not going to try to defend the article or recap it in its entirety. If you are interested, take a look at it. I am reporting it as I thought it was interesting. I still think it is interesting, credible, and helpful.
  7. 06-10-2012, 08:23 PM #7
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    LOL...yeah, I'm stunned by that result as well. For a *real* test of anti corrosion sprays, look to the tests done by Practical Sailor magazine...who, like Consumer Reports, carries zero advertising and of course would be putting the chemicals to the ultimate salt water spray tests.

    I think the bottom line with WD-40 is that at moderate amounts it can actually *cause* rust, since it's mostly a solvent and will dissolve oil films on items. But if you spray copious amounts of it, some waxy substance in there settles out after the solvent evaporates and it does prevent rust to some extent...but you have to spray major amounts of it to have that effect and it's still not as good as Boeshield and way worse than LPS-3.

    So, dg...which of you has been inhaling too much lacquer thinner...you or the tester at Fine Woodworking ??
    So, I factually report a study and then rather than read the report you just say the results published can't be true and I must be on mind altering drugs to suggest that the article may be of interest to the group?

    If you don't care to read the article that is fine. If you don't want to believe the results fine. To suggest I am on mind altering drugs for taking the time to provide possibly useful information to this group? Really? I thought the idea of this forum was to try to share useful information. I thought the personal attack thing as away of "proving a point" or to be derisive was not what we are about.

    Denis
    tomwalz and kenh like this.
  8. 06-10-2012, 09:34 PM #8
    AeroncaChamp is offline Cast Iron
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Westford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    406

    Default

    The test conditions are described in the article. What they did seems to be an "accelerated" test. They masked off and covered areas of a cast iron table saw top with the test products, then "spritzed" water on it and put it outside. They also coated tool steel samples and alternated between a freezer and a lidded container. The test lasted 10 days, but they said rust formed quickly when it did.

    Not clear where the test was performed - the publisher is in CT. Some of you live nearer the ocean, and I'd guess even the tiniest amount of salt in the air would change everything.

    Personally, I've gotten by with the "copious amounts of WD-40" because it's what we had when I was growing up, but it's been interesting to learn here (and in FWW) that there are some other products out there that are much better. Interestingly, they found that one outstanding performer interfered with glue joint strength, so that one not so good for our woodworking machines.
  9. 06-10-2012, 10:35 PM #9
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dgfoster View Post
    So, I factually report a study and then rather than read the report you just say the results published can't be true and I must be on mind altering drugs to suggest that the article may be of interest to the group?

    If you don't care to read the article that is fine.
    Since you didn't provide a link I presumed I couldn't read the article without a subscription. But FWIW, I'm going by the 1998 Practical Sailor tests* which I would trust way more than any tests from Fine Woodworking. Plus decades of my own experiences using and selling hundreds of metalworking and woodworking machines that I prefer not to rust.

    *which I would provide a link to except you have to have a subscription to read it.
  10. 06-10-2012, 11:34 PM #10
    Forrest Addy is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Bremerton WA USA
    Posts
    8,927

    Default

    About 2000, I ran a rough test myself out in my driveway in the rainy season weather. I used only 4 corrosion inhibitors on the samples but I forget the details. I can't find my notes or posts. I do recall the samples were all bare cold rolled steel scoured clean and grease free before a liberal dose of the goop under test. Each sample got one kind.

    I do recall that WD40 lasted but a week to first rust streaks and was all over rust in three. LSP several months to the first speckle and it was summer before I gave up and it still wasnt rusty all over. Only on the sun side. This is direct weather exposure. I don't see how WD40 ranked into the finals much less #2.

    Was the fix in?

    Sheet tallow was a legendary sluch in the Navy. The old gunners used to use it by the pail full keeping the gun bores spandy clean and rust free. It's been superceded by MIL PRF 18173 Grade 2 (new nomenclature)
  11. 06-10-2012, 11:53 PM #11
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    Since you didn't provide a link I presumed I couldn't read the article without a subscription. But FWIW, I'm going by the 1998 Practical Sailor tests* which I would trust way more than any tests from Fine Woodworking. Plus decades of my own experiences using and selling hundreds of metalworking and woodworking machines that I prefer not to rust.

    *which I would provide a link to except you have to have a subscription to read it.
    You're right, I did not provide a link as it is available online by subscription. The print version is is likely at most newstands/supermarkets and libraries.

    I was hoping you might provide a specific volume/date for the Practical Sailor report. I could likely run down a print version through my local library if nothing else. I would be interested in reading it. It would be intriguing to see where the two reports might agree and where they might disagree. It is unlikely they were done in the same way, so some variance would not be suprising. As I pointed out the FWW test only went on for ten days. Likely the Practical Sailor test was longer.

    Then again, machinists' needs vary too. Some might wonder what could be used to just provide short-term protection in which case WD-40 might be a convenient, nearly universally available, and cheap choice. Longer term needs (storing this currently unused but useful machine in the unheated shed) might indicate a different product.

    So, perhaps further on-topic discussion will shed some light on this subject.

    Denis
  12. 06-11-2012, 01:58 AM #12
    ZAGNUT is offline Hot Rolled
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    978

    Default

    but i have done my own tests and having grown up with wd-40 i know its limitations. the one thing it excels at is gluing on bicycle grips, much better than hairspray or anything else, the grips slide right on and 5 minutes later they are locked in place for life.

    machine tools just get a bunch of hydraulic oil which is the same that i use for ways. stuff that can't be oiled like the panel saw table get a product called "honey wax" which is a carnauba based mold release agent: Honey Wax®
  13. 06-11-2012, 04:03 AM #13
    twolluver is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Pleasant Hill, CA
    Posts
    67

    Post

    The following is a link to a Duke University study comparing the performance of several corrosion control products:

    http://www.tc.faa.gov/logistics/gran...6/96-g-001.pdf

    This study only evaluated the top ten corrosion prevention products used by members of the National Air Transportation Association. The National Air Transportation Association members are a group that takes corrosion very seriously. This was a highly controlled test. Not surprisingly WD-40 did not make the cut. I do remember reading the Practical Sailor article before it was locked, and I do remember that some of the top performers are the same as those in the Duke study.

    I read the Fine Woodworking article and believe there are a couple weaknesses in the testing. The test was only ten days in duration. I think that if tested longer some of the lighter products like WD-40 would evaporate and perform poorly in a longer test. Also there was no salt-water testing. This is the real performance test as it is simulates a much harsher environment.

    My un-scientific analysis of corrosion inhibitors is the more unpleasant they are to use the better they perform.
  14. 06-11-2012, 07:14 AM #14
    Ron of Va is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Tidewater, Va
    Posts
    194

    Default

    With respect to the Duke University test, there were no ferrous metals included in the testing. Only aluminum was used.

    Since gun owners abhor rust, many took notice of the private testing here:
    Corrosion Protection Products within AccurateShooter.com
    The testing was using a 2% salt water spray, testing 5 products over 43 hours. Later in the report, another individual tested products over an 11 week period. Photos are included in the results allowing for your own conclusions. WD-40 was not included in any of the testing. (probably because it sucks as a long term rust preventer)
  15. 06-11-2012, 08:54 AM #15
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twolluver View Post
    The following is a link to a Duke University study comparing the performance of several corrosion control products:

    http://www.tc.faa.gov/logistics/gran...6/96-g-001.pdf

    This study only evaluated the top ten corrosion prevention products used by members of the National Air Transportation Association. The National Air Transportation Association members are a group that takes corrosion very seriously. This was a highly controlled test. Not surprisingly WD-40 did not make the cut. I do remember reading the Practical Sailor article before it was locked, and I do remember that some of the top performers are the same as those in the Duke study.

    I read the Fine Woodworking article and believe there are a couple weaknesses in the testing. The test was only ten days in duration. I think that if tested longer some of the lighter products like WD-40 would evaporate and perform poorly in a longer test. Also there was no salt-water testing. This is the real performance test as it is simulates a much harsher environment.

    My un-scientific analysis of corrosion inhibitors is the more unpleasant they are to use the better they perform.
    Interesting study on aluminum. I see LPS Hardcoat listed as a very good performer. Not a product with which I am familiar. I wonder if it is similar to EEzox noted in the study linked by Ron of Va below. Thanks for pointing out a quality study.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron of Va View Post
    With respect to the Duke University test, there were no ferrous metals included in the testing. Only aluminum was used.

    Since gun owners abhor rust, many took notice of the private testing here:
    Corrosion Protection Products within AccurateShooter.com
    The testing was using a 2% salt water spray, testing 5 products over 43 hours. Later in the report, another individual tested products over an 11 week period. Photos are included in the results allowing for your own conclusions. WD-40 was not included in any of the testing. (probably because it sucks as a long term rust preventer)
    Ron, very interesting stuff. I thnk it is pretty consistently seen in the studies that have been cited in this thread so far that LPS 3 and Boeshield are not demonstrating very effective protection. That is somewhat surprising. But then Boeshield has let me down a few times in my shop..... Eezox was not tried (unfortunately!) in the FWW test. Have you used Eezox? Any downsides to application or removal after use? This stuff looks like it deserves a close look and is new to me.

    Denis

    After posting above I looked up the MSDS sheets on Eezox and LPS Hardcoat and the MSDS's don't provide much useful information that would indicate a difference in composition.
  16. 06-11-2012, 09:44 AM #16
    Ron of Va is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Tidewater, Va
    Posts
    194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dgfoster View Post
    Interesting study on aluminum. I see LPS Hardcoat listed as a very good performer. Not a product with which I am familiar. I wonder if it is similar to EEzox noted in the study linked by Ron of Va below. Thanks for pointing out a quality study.



    Ron, very interesting stuff. I thnk it is pretty consistently seen in the studies that have been cited in this thread so far that LPS 3 and Boeshield are not demonstrating very effective protection. That is somewhat surprising. But then Boeshield has let me down a few times in my shop..... Eezox was not tried (unfortunately!) in the FWW test. Have you used Eezox? Any downsides to application or removal after use? This stuff looks like it deserves a close look and is new to me.

    Denis

    After posting above I looked up the MSDS sheets on Eezox and LPS Hardcoat and the MSDS's don't provide much useful information that would indicate a difference in composition.
    I have not used Eexox. I have used Break Free CLP and like it a lot. CLP stands for Cleans, Lubricates, and Protects. I buy it at gun shows for about $10 for an aerosol can. I spray my guns and wipe them down, as well as my machine tools. I find it works quite well. Break-Free®

    >From the web site: Break-Free® is a leading manufacturer of synthetic-based cleaners, lubricants and preservative compounds for military weapon maintenance, law enforcement, civilian firearms, high performance sports equipment and industrial machinery.
  17. 06-11-2012, 10:13 AM #17
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twolluver View Post
    I read the Fine Woodworking article and believe there are a couple weaknesses in the testing. The test was only ten days in duration. I think that if tested longer some of the lighter products like WD-40 would evaporate and perform poorly in a longer test. Also there was no salt-water testing. This is the real performance test as it is simulates a much harsher environment.
    For my curiosity, did the FW article attempt to indicate the thickness of each spray coating ? I ask because as I mentioned earlier, if WD40 is really slathered on in vast quantities it does provide some protection....but if sprayed on in minimal coating it's pretty worthless for that purpose. Would also be interesting to know if the samples were sprayed horizontally or vertically since it's difficult to get vast quantities of WD40 to pool up on vertical surfaces.
  18. 06-11-2012, 11:00 AM #18
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default Better than cat piss?

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    ..... if WD40 is really slathered on in vast quantities it does provide some protection You mean better than cat piss? ;-) .....be interesting to know if the samples were sprayed horizontally or vertically since it's difficult to get vast quantities of WD40 to pool up on vertical surfaces.
    The samples were sprayed horizontally. It is not clear whether they were held vertically or horizontally for exposure testing but I think horizontally is likely.

    Do you have a month/ volume number on the Practical Sailor article?

    Denis
  19. 06-11-2012, 11:30 AM #19
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dgfoster View Post
    The samples were sprayed horizontally. It is not clear whether they were held vertically or horizontally for exposure testing but I think horizontally is likely.

    Do you have a month/ volume number on the Practical Sailor article?

    Looks like I was a year off on the 2008 estimate... Corrosion Protection Coating Test - Practical Sailor Article

    I have the actual paper issue but would take a while to find it. Re cat piss, I would imagine the ammonia in that would be rather corrosive
  20. 06-11-2012, 11:53 AM #20
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    Looks like I was a year off on the 2008 estimate... Corrosion Protection Coating Test - Practical Sailor Article

    I have the actual paper issue but would take a while to find it. Re cat piss, I would imagine the ammonia in that would be rather corrosive
    I see via the abstract on the link you posted that the PS test was for only 3 days with full immersion is salt water. Again an imperfect test as was the FWW one since it was for only ten days. But it may be possible to draw some useful conclusions. I will see if our library has a copy.

    Thx,
    Denis


Thread: Corrosion Prevention: Recent side-by-side comparison published in FIne Woodworking

  1. 06-11-2012, 12:04 PM #21
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dgfoster View Post
    I see via the abstract on the link you posted that the PS test was for only 3 days with full immersion is salt water. Again an imperfect test as was the FWW one since it was for only ten days. But it may be possible to draw some useful conclusions. I will see if our library has a copy.
    In my own experience, it comes down to this-

    1. LPS-3 if you want longterm protection but are not actually using the machine. It's too "gooey" for actual machine use. LPS-3 if the machine is not tarped during shipping as moderate to heavy rains will wash off Boeshield at 70 mph.

    2. Boeshield if you want moderate term protection, inside only, and use the machine but have nothing actually sliding over it (i.e. like a tablesaw top)

    3. Wax on surfaces that are subject to sliding action. I presume Brasso and Nevr-Dull are a form of wax but regular paste wax might be better if you don't need to de-rust any....Brasso and Nevr-Dull will derust to some extent and leave a protecting film...but it's not a great protecting film.
    S_W_Bausch likes this.
  2. 06-11-2012, 02:25 PM #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    2,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    Looks like I was a year off on the 2008 estimate... Corrosion Protection Coating Test - Practical Sailor Article

    I have the actual paper issue but would take a while to find it. Re cat piss, I would imagine the ammonia in that would be rather corrosive
    Funny that you mention a Practical Sailor Article...WD40 is taboo for most sailors, if it gets on the wiring it eats the plastic off and destroys it. Boeshield, OTOH, can be sprayed on wiring and have no effect.

    I always have a reservation using WD40 as a lubricant, which I do on aluminum occasionally, as I don't like it around any of my machines in case it gets on any wiring. And if that is not bad, it stinks.

    One thing to be careful of though, Boeshield T9 doesn't remove rust, but their "Rust Free" product does. If you use Rust Free and then spray with T9, that combination will prevent rust pretty good, at least for me out west.
  3. 06-11-2012, 03:20 PM #23
    twolluver is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Pleasant Hill, CA
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron of Va View Post
    With respect to the Duke University test, there were no ferrous metals included in the testing. Only aluminum was used.

    Since gun owners abhor rust, many took notice of the private testing here:
    Corrosion Protection Products within AccurateShooter.com
    The testing was using a 2% salt water spray, testing 5 products over 43 hours. Later in the report, another individual tested products over an 11 week period. Photos are included in the results allowing for your own conclusions. WD-40 was not included in any of the testing. (probably because it sucks as a long term rust preventer)
    Although the Duke study did not use steel as a substrate, I believe it is valid for all metals. To the best of my knowledge all of these type of products are barrier coatings and do not chemically modify the substrate in any way. I don't know if any of these coatings have an affinity for a particular substrate, but I doubt it. Once the barrier coating is breached the external environment initiates a chemical reaction with the substrate; consequently, the substrate is immaterial to the testing other than it must be capable of degrading in the testing environment.

    All of us have our favorite corrosion inhibitor, and probably none of us have tried them all. Once we find a product that works for us, we usually stop looking.

    I generally agree with Milicron's assessment and have settled on LPS3. I bought a gallon of it and apply it by brush. I find it less messy and more precise to brush on than to spray.
  4. 06-11-2012, 04:59 PM #24
    jkilroy is offline Diamond
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Vicksburg, MS
    Posts
    4,905

    Default

    I can attest that WD-40 is better than cat piss. I my experience, cat piss is so bad it will rust glass!
  5. 06-11-2012, 05:18 PM #25
    S_W_Bausch is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    5,013

    Default

    Sheet tallow was a legendary sluch in the Navy.
    NO! NO! NO!

    NOT A GENERIC ITEM!

    AND IT DOESN'T COME IN A SPRAY CAN!

    Just joking, seems that none of these test are generic items, say linseed oil, castor oil, diluted (vegetable base) chainsaw bar oil, paraffin slush, etc.

    There needs to be a distinction between ultraviolet protection and protection against moisture.
  6. 06-11-2012, 07:00 PM #26
    John Garner is offline Stainless
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    south SF Bay area, California
    Posts
    1,280

    Default

    S_W_Bausch --

    Actually, Fluid Film A is pretty close to sheep tallow in a spray can. Fluid Film® | Corrosion Preventative, Lubricant and Rust Inhibitor

    John
    S_W_Bausch and thermite like this.
  7. 06-11-2012, 08:48 PM #27
    dgfoster's Avatar
    dgfoster is online now Stainless
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    1,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by S_W_Bausch View Post
    NO! NO! NO!

    NOT A GENERIC ITEM!

    AND IT DOESN'T COME IN A SPRAY CAN!

    Just joking, seems that none of these test are generic items, say linseed oil, castor oil, diluted (vegetable base) chainsaw bar oil, paraffin slush, etc.

    There needs to be a distinction between ultraviolet protection and protection against moisture.
    If you had read the FWW article youwould see that they did look at 3 "generic" products---jajoba oil in a bottle, camellia oil in a bottle and (far all intents a generic) Johnson's paste wax in a can. I have heard "wise old (and rather self-satisfied) timers" that were absolute believers in one or another of these products based on their long and illustrious careers in machining. Turns out that none of them were close to the top performers in the actual comparsion testing done. So, seems like testing the myths which are abundant to get at the truth which is scarce is a good idea. Not saying all the facts are in just yet. But the facts are not established by testimonials.

    I am inclined to do some objective testing over a period of 6 months of some the candidates for best rust preventive just to learn some more. Of course, once that is done, I know the objections to the methodology and test conditions will begin. As I see this field is wide open for experimentation---little cost or time is involved. The information could be documanted by periodically photographing the metal coupons used. Any one of us who is so inclined could give it a go.

    It was instructive to see how much difference there was in the tendency of tool steel to rust vs the tendency of cast iron to rust was observed in the FWW article. So testing on at least those two types of metal would be useful.

    Denis
  8. 06-18-2012, 02:44 PM #28
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dgfoster View Post
    If you had read the FWW article youwould see that they did look at 3 "generic" products---jajoba oil in a bottle, camellia oil in a bottle and (far all intents a generic) Johnson's paste wax in a can. I have heard "wise old (and rather self-satisfied) timers" that were absolute believers in one or another of these products based on their long and illustrious careers in machining. Turns out that none of them were close to the top performers in the actual comparsion testing done. So, seems like testing the myths which are abundant to get at the truth which is scarce is a good idea. Not saying all the facts are in just yet. But the facts are not established by testimonials.
    Yeah I think the waxes are only good for inside "humdity" applications and even then need to be reapplied every month or two. The Duke study seemed to favor Dinitrol AV-30, which I'd never heard of...seems to be a UK product....anyone know who might sell it on this side of the pond ?

    I don't know if CRC "Heavy Duty Corrosion Inhibitor" was tested but as I recall it seemed like a copy of LPS3 (or maybe the other way around)
  9. 06-18-2012, 06:18 PM #29
    robmc is offline Cast Iron
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Rhode Island, USA
    Posts
    277

    Default

    CLP doesn't get much enthusiasm but on just pure protection from corrosion in the short and somewhat longer term..... I think it comes out near the top in almost all tests I've seen. I use it.
  10. 06-19-2012, 01:25 AM #30
    slnielsen's Avatar
    slnielsen is offline Hot Rolled
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Viborg, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    637

    Default

    Isn't it mentioned here, but under the name Dinol AV30?

    Buy Dinitrol Online or Call Us @ (562) 432-1301. USA Quick Ship. F&L Petroleum

    As a side note, Dinitrol is big here in Denmark, but not for protecting machine tools.
    We use their products for rust--preventing on our cars.
    Thick gooey smelly stuff, but keep the little red ants from eating our cars!


    Best regards
    Søren
  11. 06-19-2012, 10:49 AM #31
    reggie_obe is offline Titanium
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Reddington, N.J., U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dgfoster View Post
    To its credit Fine Woodworking Magazine did a real side-by-side comparison of 20 products that have been suggested for corrosion control. This was published in their August 2012 issue. They applied the various agents to both A-2 tool steel and to cast iron and then exposed them to the elements for 10 days.Denis
    Didn't read the original article, but a 10 day testing cycle? 10 days is not a long term test. Had a machine sprayed down with LPS-3, tarped and stored (unfortunately) outside for about six months until I had room in the shop. No corrosion at all. Doubt that WD-40 would have provided similar protection.
  12. 06-19-2012, 11:11 AM #32
    Mud's Avatar
    Mud
    Mud is offline Diamond
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    South Central PA
    Posts
    10,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    I don't know if CRC "Heavy Duty Corrosion Inhibitor" was tested but as I recall it seemed like a copy of LPS3 (or maybe the other way around)
    CRC makes some really good corrosion inhibitors. SP250 is a liquid that dries to feel like wax, sort of like touching a dry bar of soap and is great for indoors long term protection, and doesn't gather dirt. SP400 is a thick dark goo more useful outdoors, sort of like cosmoline.

    BTW, I found a cleaner that takes cosmoline off. It's called TASC, and is basically an alkaline soap. Soak the cosmoline overnight and it floats off.

    We tested quite a few protectants. Our must have criteria was that it didn't leave a stain and was easy to clean off of intricate parts (gears, internal splines, assembled parts, etc.). The best by far was Starrett M1, which turns out to be dissolved petrolatum. We didn't like the price, so we tried another, Zurn Oil Zurnkote #3173, and it's cheaper, works just as well indoors (which is perfectly) and works even better under shelter but outdoors. We coated 2 clean steel gears and put them in the open sided outdoor air compressor doghouse, the Zurn showed only the slightest oxidation after 3 months of winter weather (snow and ice), the M1 showed approx 2X as much.

    WD40 is useless to us except as a cleaner/solvent/flush. I've rust under a layer of WD40 on a machine, I think it absorbs water from very moist air.
    thermite likes this.
  13. 06-19-2012, 11:28 AM #33
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mud View Post
    The best by far was Starrett M1, which turns out to be dissolved petrolatum. We didn't like the price, so we tried another,
    I bought a case of Starrett M1 years ago thinking it was probably the same as Boeshield. But in actual practical Boeshield seems to retard rust for longer. Apparently, of the clear non cosmoline types, CNC 3-36 is even better and cost less but I've not yet tried it.
  14. 06-19-2012, 03:36 PM #34
    scojen is online now Hot Rolled
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Zellwood, Fl.
    Posts
    924

    Default

    Take the old school approach to preventing rust find some Cosmolene wipe it on thin use WD 40 to take it off
    yes it comes in spray cans
    www.CosmoleneDirect.com
    Scott
    Last edited by scojen; 06-19-2012 at 03:41 PM. Reason: Add link
  15. 06-19-2012, 04:21 PM #35
    Milacron's Avatar
    Milacron is online now Diamond
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    42,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scojen View Post
    Take the old school approach to preventing rust find some Cosmolene wipe it on thin use WD 40 to take it off
    yes it comes in spray cans
    www.CosmoleneDirect.com
    Indeed.... it also goes by the name of LPS-3 and CRC Heavy Duty Corrosion Inhibitor...and cost less in those brands





  • [machinist] Thread: What are you using for a rust preventative ? -and- Thread: Corrosion Prevention: Recent side-by-side comparison published in FIne Woodworking, Lawrence London, 12/23/2013

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page