Corrosion protection comparison test - Page 3



Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 84

Thread: Corrosion protection comparison test

  1. #41
    Mig21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Vaughan
    Posts
    77

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Maybe a case from a computer you're about to scrap? It's not painted on the inside. I just gave all my old ones away..

  2. #42
    Mig21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Vaughan
    Posts
    77

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    I don't want to freak you out even more, but rust on the outside is an indication of much more of the same on the inside. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think that pipe is going to hold much longer no matter what you do to it.
    No, it's just a little bit of rust powder on the surface, it doesn't look like it ate into the metal at all. I think I'm ok, just want to make sure I take care of this bike as best as I can.

    I'll clean it with wd40 tomorrow, and spray it with something better when I get it.

    Hope this helps
    It does, thanks. I very much appreciate your advice.

    Here are some online retailers I found, have no experience with any of them though:

    http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/acf50.php
    http://www.skygeek.com/10013.html
    These guys want to charge me 100$ for shipping

    It's a paradox that ACF-50 was first developed in Canada and it's production eventually migrated to US along with engineers that made it.
    Sucks, but that's the story of just about every successful canadian company, isn't it

  3. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    High Park
    Posts
    812

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by Mig21 View Post
    Maybe a case from a computer you're about to scrap? It's not painted on the inside. I just gave all my old ones away..
    I thought about it, but I'm afraid they are mostly zinc plated. I'll figure something out. If all else fails I'll use the same subjects I did last time - they rusted just fine . I just want to make it a bit more scientific this time around .

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    High Park
    Posts
    812

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by Mig21 View Post
    No, it's just a little bit of rust powder on the surface, it doesn't look like it ate into the metal at all. I think I'm ok, just want to make sure I take care of this bike as best as I can.
    If rust is not not under the chrome (usually makes bubbles in the chrome plating) then it's probably not a cause for alarm.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mig21 View Post
    I'll clean it with wd40 tomorrow, and spray it with something better when I get it.
    Boeshield T-9 is easiest to get of the good stuff. It's sold in several stores around the city. You can also get Boeshield Rust Free while you are at it to remove all the rust first.

  5. #45
    Mig21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Vaughan
    Posts
    77

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Got my T-9 from the mailman today and will be applying it thoroughly all over.

    Also - I'd like to put in a good word for Lee Valley and Boeshield Canada, people from both have been very helpful.

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    High Park
    Posts
    812

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by Mig21 View Post
    Got my T-9 from the mailman today and will be applying it thoroughly all over.
    It seems to behave similar to ACF-50 during application. It expands quite a bit and it's hard to moderate the "dosage" and not over-spray. It might be easier to apply with a sponge or atomizing nozzle. Either way, have a rug ready to wipe off the excess.

  7. #47
    knowledge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Nowhere, really. No, really.
    Posts
    1,369

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Great thread/idea. Thanks man.
    Come he slow or come he fast. It is but death who comes at last.
    - Sir Walter Scott

    I travel and write about it when I feel inspired: http://lifewithknowledge.blogspot.ca/

  8. #48

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Thonhill
    Posts
    73

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    We use ACF-50 to fog wings and hulls of aircraft at my shop. It good stuff. Also LPS #3 is good

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    High Park
    Posts
    812

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by luap View Post
    We use ACF-50 to fog wings and hulls of aircraft at my shop. It good stuff. Also LPS #3 is good
    Good to hear, thanks. What is LPS #3, I don't recall it mentioned before?

  10. #50

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Thonhill
    Posts
    73

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad View Post
    Good to hear, thanks. What is LPS #3, I don't recall it mentioned before?
    http://www.lpslabs.com/product_pg/co...n_pg/LPS3.html

    Its very very expensive though.

  11. #51
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    High Park
    Posts
    812

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by luap View Post
    Its very very expensive though.
    Thanks. That's probably why I haven't seen it in Canadian Tire. "Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) approved." So, I can use it as cooking spray for my non-stick pans?

  12. #52

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by twinn View Post
    Check out http://www.boeshield.com/ it is by far the best anti corrision spray I have ever used. It is an industrial product that was developed by Boeing. Its safe to use on all electrical contacts.
    I picked up Boeshield a couple weeks ago, since Sears carries it now. I bought a spray can that came with a free bottle of rust remover.
    I haven't used it on my bikes yet. I need to see if it's ok if it gets on the headers and other hot surfaces. I have used it to coat my weapons collection though (several swords and spears) and while it's not very tacky going on, once it sets, it forms a nice coating that's easy to see where it is covering and where it needs to be reapplied.
    Pros: Once it sets, it forms a nice thin, almost waxy layer. Easy to see where you missed and then re-apply.
    Cons: Very runny on initial application. Doesn't 'stick' well which makes it hard to get good coverage with a single application.
    I've had my blades sitting for about 3 weeks now and they look good under the coating. One of them already has a museum quality heavy wax on it that only needs re-allied about annually. the other blades are looking very nice. Hopefully, this will cut down the cleaning to once every few months or so.
    I'm not going to put them outside to test like Vlad did.

  13. #53

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by luap View Post
    We use ACF-50 to fog wings and hulls of aircraft at my shop. It good stuff. Also LPS #3 is good
    I was also thinking about mentioning LPS-3...

    It's quite thick when compared with WD-40 etc and dries to a grimy, greasy finish, which protects extremely well but isn't very aesthetic. "Fluid Film" is a similar consumer-grade product.

    The most common uses for LPS3 on aircraft parts are for protection of parts during long-term storage, and for the internal anti-corrosion treatment of welded steel or aluminum tube-frames. Ie weld it all up, spray in LPS-3 through fastener holes, and slosh it around.

    For treatment of non-visible areas like inside frame tubes and axles etc, or for the industry-standard "GTAM Vlad Test Type 1", I bet it would beat the thinner products.

    FWIW, I spray fluid film on parts of the bike before storing it (in the damp shed) for the winter, and clean it off the shiny parts in the spring. Dunno if it makes a difference, but it seems a reasonable thing to do.

    Kudos to all

  14. #54
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    High Park
    Posts
    812

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by Worldtraveller View Post
    I picked up Boeshield a couple weeks ago, since Sears carries it now.
    Don't forget to tell the folks where you live. I doubt Sears Canuckistan carries Boeshield, but I can be wrong sometimes

    Quote Originally Posted by Worldtraveller View Post
    I'm not going to put them outside to test like Vlad did.
    You don't have to. I'm thinking of running another test, this time with more products and on more standardized subjects. To that effect, I'm looking for ideas on where/how to find not-already-rusted and not in any way already protected iron/steel specimens of the same stock. Ideally, I'd use plates (thickness pretty much irrelevant) of about 15 square inches in size all cut from the same stock. I figure I need five to ten for a good test with a control subject or two.

    Also, any chemical that claims corrosion protection properties that I don't already have is welcome to be added to the test. In order to avoid making it too big I'd concentrate on those that are also lubricants and do not need to be removed/washed before the machine is used again. So, no long term storage dip-it-in-grease kind of stuff.

    let me know what you think. I'm open to suggestions all the way to the yet undetermined start of the test.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisR View Post
    I was also thinking about mentioning LPS-3...
    Thanks for all the details, it's quite interesting. If I understood well it's a little too heavy duty for an average Joe and his 2002 Bandit . nevertheless, I would include it in the test V2 if I can get my hands on a free or cheap sample. Enough to properly cover that 15 square inch plate

  15. #55

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Interesting thread, Vlad.

    Real good to know about the product, and the attitude of S100. I am pleased to say I have never spent a dime on that stuff, nor will. Rather than threaten you, they would have been a LOT smarter to have offered you a complimentary can to replace yours. Plus there was no small amount of double talk in their browbeating note.

  16. #56
    ASHES
    Guest

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Guys, having used their products over the years, i highly recommend Krown t40. It comes in an aerosol can. This is the same stuff they use on your car for rust proofing. It's safe on rubber and paint so all you have to do is apply good wax to your paint, run fuel stabilzer and spray t40 anywhere on your bike as you please. Come next year, wash it up and you good to go. I get it from work and i know it is good stuff. There are different types of krown products though. Rust proofing, penetrants, etc. You t40 which is a rust proofing / corrosion inhibitor product. You should also unplug electrical connectors and spray it in there, and on all wiring.

    BTW - WD40 IS NOT A RUST INHIBITOR. It is a penetrating solvent that is good for metal to metal. Not rubber.
    Last edited by ASHES; 10-17-2009 at 10:01 AM.

  17. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    High Park
    Posts
    812

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by thumpit View Post
    Real good to know about the product, and the attitude of S100. I am pleased to say I have never spent a dime on that stuff, nor will.
    I wouldn't extend the results of the corrosion protection test to all S100 products. I've had quite a good experience with their Total Cycle Wash, Carnauba wax polish and Engine Brightener (think of it as a sort of Armor-All on steroids).

    Quote Originally Posted by thumpit View Post
    Rather than threaten you, they would have been a LOT smarter to have offered you a complimentary can to replace yours. Plus there was no small amount of double talk in their browbeating note.
    I have no axe to grind with S100. The results of the test speak for themselves and so does their reaction.

    Quote Originally Posted by ASHES View Post
    Guys, having used their products over the years, i highly recommend Krown t40. It comes in an aerosol can.
    Where is it sold?

    Quote Originally Posted by ASHES View Post
    Come next year, wash it up and you good to go.
    This is what worries me a little. I'd prefer something that I don't have to wash off the bike before I ride it. There is a chance that I will ride several times during the winter and I don't want my bike protected to the point that it has to be unprotected to be operational.

    Quote Originally Posted by ASHES View Post
    BTW - WD40 IS NOT A RUST INHIBITOR. It is a penetrating solvent that is good for metal to metal. Not rubber.
    No matter what the can or the manufacturer claim, my test proved WD-40 to be a very good rust inhibitor. Practically unbeatable when you consider price and availability. I wonder what it would do if it was a little thicker, but it stood up to some heavy exposure to the elements better than some much stickier stuff. I'd agree it's not good for rubber and it can ruin some clear plastics.

  18. #58
    ASHES
    Guest

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    VLAD, the biggest factor in using rust protectors is not really how effective they are. Trust me, motor oil alone will protect metal if you choose to use it. The problem with wd40 and the likes is that they attack rubber and plastic parts. No matter what you choose to use, call the manufacturer and ask them if their product is safe on rubber. I called krown a long time back to verify the safeness of t40 and they told me it was safe on rubber. Also, beign a tractor trailer mechanic, i use solvents all day and can attest to it's effectivenss. Do stay away from any brake cleaners though. Major cancer causing stuff. I know guys who get high sniffing that ****.

  19. #59
    Nyx13
    Guest

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Woo-hoo! This is awesome! Thanks Thumpit for bumping this up and thanks to Vlad for doing his little mad scientist thingy in the first place.

    My guy and I looked into ACF-50 online after it was mentioned on another motorcycle forum I'm on. We've been wondering if it was as effective as people were saying... Settles it for me

  20. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    High Park
    Posts
    812

    Re: Corrosion protection comparison test

    Quote Originally Posted by ASHES View Post
    The problem with wd40 and the likes is that they attack rubber and plastic parts.
    I trust your experience and don't have anything invested in WD-40 . My concern is the balance between protection and convenience, and anything that will require washing before riding is a major turn-off. I'll try Krown when I get a chance, but if it applies like you described it will most likely be used for long term storage or car rust protection only. BTW, my car is due to be rust protected and I'll most likely take it to Krown for that - too big a job for DIY ACF-50, especially the parts that are most important to protect. I'm not even sure if I'll apply any special rust protection on the bike since it will spend the winter in the heated basement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nyx13 View Post
    My guy and I looked into ACF-50 online after it was mentioned on another motorcycle forum I'm on. We've been wondering if it was as effective as people were saying... Settles it for me
    Glad you found it informative. Maybe we can organize a group buy, but I have very little experience with those kinds of things.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •