I need the best penetrating oil

Bear with me for just a minute on this one. I use all sorts of penetrating oil just like everyone else (Kroil, Fluid Film, Gibbs, WD-40, PB Blaster). After watching Project Farm's YouTube video and looking at the results chart, it appears the better products provide about 10% reduction in breakaway torque vs the control. 10%. I'm now asking myself, "Is 10% worth the trouble? How often do I find a situation where 10% will 'save the day'?" Seems like we all spray various types of oil at rusty nuts, loosen the rusty nuts, then attribute our success to the oil. Incidentally, Project Farm appears to have busted the myth of using candle wax on rusty nuts, yet some guys claim it works as well as penetrating oil. Maybe it's possible the nuts would have come loose anyway, regardless of using penetrating oil. I wonder what happens if we stop spraying penetrating oil at rusty nuts. I think I'm going to try it! I shudder at the thought, though.

Something I will never stop doing, however, is using anti-seize on nuts and bolts. I put anti-seize on everything with threads (except where directed not to, like head bolts with oiled threads, etc.) and even on things without threads, like garden tractor axle hubs, keys and keyways, line-to-line slip fits, etc.. Why let corrosion start in the first place? Word of caution, when using anti-seize, do NOT over-torque your fasteners. In fact, it will take about 20% less torque to achieve the same preload in the fastener compared to not using anti-seize.

My recent penetrating oil story: a lightly corroded black oxide 3/8" swivel joint on my snowthrower chute rotating rod. It was frozen stiff, corroded over the last year, and not moving by hand. I soaked it at least six times over a one-week period using Kroil. It still wouldn't move by hand. And it wouldn't move using pliers for leverage. I had to disassemble it and clamp it in a bench vise and whack it with a hammer to loosen it. Once it started moving, applying penetrating oil did appear to help further loosen the joints and allow the oxidation to be removed from the joints. After working it back and forth, repeated spraying and wiping of the joints, it returned to fully functional. The point is, the penetrating oil didn't appear to make it "unstuck" to any great degree.
 
Project farm, proved Liquid Wrench was the winner.
And helped remove something I was working on, that Aero Kroil wouldn't touch.
 
You can now, finally after a million years, get this product in the USA, it blows anything else i've tried here out of the water.

 
Bear with me for just a minute on this one. I use all sorts of penetrating oil just like everyone else (Kroil, Fluid Film, Gibbs, WD-40, PB Blaster). After watching Project Farm's YouTube video and looking at the results chart, it appears the better products provide about 10% reduction in breakaway torque vs the control. 10%. I'm now asking myself, "Is 10% worth the trouble? How often do I find a situation where 10% will 'save the day'?" Seems like we all spray various types of oil at rusty nuts, loosen the rusty nuts, then attribute our success to the oil. Incidentally, Project Farm appears to have busted the myth of using candle wax on rusty nuts, yet some guys claim it works as well as penetrating oil. Maybe it's possible the nuts would have come loose anyway, regardless of using penetrating oil. I wonder what happens if we stop spraying penetrating oil at rusty nuts. I think I'm going to try it! I shudder at the thought, though.

Something I will never stop doing, however, is using anti-seize on nuts and bolts. I put anti-seize on everything with threads (except where directed not to, like head bolts with oiled threads, etc.) and even on things without threads, like garden tractor axle hubs, keys and keyways, line-to-line slip fits, etc.. Why let corrosion start in the first place? Word of caution, when using anti-seize, do NOT over-torque your fasteners. In fact, it will take about 20% less torque to achieve the same preload in the fastener compared to not using anti-seize.

My recent penetrating oil story: a lightly corroded black oxide 3/8" swivel joint on my snowthrower chute rotating rod. It was frozen stiff, corroded over the last year, and not moving by hand. I soaked it at least six times over a one-week period using Kroil. It still wouldn't move by hand. And it wouldn't move using pliers for leverage. I had to disassemble it and clamp it in a bench vise and whack it with a hammer to loosen it. Once it started moving, applying penetrating oil did appear to help further loosen the joints and allow the oxidation to be removed from the joints. After working it back and forth, repeated spraying and wiping of the joints, it returned to fully functional. The point is, the penetrating oil didn't appear to make it "unstuck" to any great degree.
My sense is that penetrating oils work more by attacking rust that jams threads than by reducing torque. If a fastener was originally torqued to, say, 25 ft-lb, then you would expect the disassembly torque to be about 25 without rust. That's what Project Farm is measuring. Applying penetrating oil to a fastener without significant corrosion probably does reduce effort only about 10%.

But 90+% of the time you're spraying penetrant on badly rusted or seized threads. Corrosion jams everything. It changes what you have to do to get the fastener loose. It's like adding a thread locker. Rust or microwelded metal in the threads jacks up the torque needed to free the nut or bolt to the danger point (breakage or stripping).

Penetrant simply reduces the required effort back to reasonable levels. It isn't meant to reduce the required torque way below what was required to install the fastener in the first place.

That's the best explanation I can come up with. I'd say Project Farm is misrepresenting what a penetrant is meant to do.
 
My sense is that penetrating oils work more by attacking rust that jams threads than by reducing torque. If a fastener was originally torqued to, say, 25 ft-lb, then you would expect the disassembly torque to be about 25 without rust. That's what Project Farm is measuring. Applying penetrating oil to a fastener without significant corrosion probably does reduce effort only about 10%.

But 90+% of the time you're spraying penetrant on badly rusted or seized threads. Corrosion jams everything. It changes what you have to do to get the fastener loose. It's like adding a thread locker. Rust or microwelded metal in the threads jacks up the torque needed to free the nut or bolt to the danger point (breakage or stripping).

Penetrant simply reduces the required effort back to reasonable levels. It isn't meant to reduce the required torque way below what was required to install the fastener in the first place.

That's the best explanation I can come up with. I'd say Project Farm is misrepresenting what a penetrant is meant to do.
To simplify what is needed, rust/corrosion causes excess tq requirements, as you said, the penetrant is to bring that back down again - didn't PF use rusted fasteners to test?
 
Every rusted fastener is different. Being exposed to weather is different from high heat is different from galling/seizing is different from corrosive chemicals is different from... You get the idea. Tight access in the field is another problem. That makes it hard to do controlled experiments with rusty anything. We probably don't know the whole story on prep for PF's test, and I'm not trying to knock them as their material is useful.
 
You can now, finally after a million years, get this product in the USA, it blows anything else i've tried here out of the water.



I love everything by Bilt Hamber. My garage is full of their stuff. It's amazing!

Although I have recently started using Lanogaurd and reasonably impressed considering how easy to use it is.
 
I love everything by Bilt Hamber. My garage is full of their stuff. It's amazing!

Although I have recently started using Lanogaurd and reasonably impressed considering how easy to use it is.
I've spent 11 years without Ferrosol and it's been hell, really looking forward to receiving it again now we can get it in the states.

I'd be surprised if Lanoguard out-performed Dynax S50.:unsure:
 
I've spent 11 years without Ferrosol and it's been hell, really looking forward to receiving it again now we can get it in the states.

I'd be surprised if Lanoguard out-performed Dynax S50.:unsure:

Different products. Where Lanogaurd excells is it's ease of use, simply wash, dry and spray. The Lanogaurd goes on like a penetrating oil but dries to a hydrophobic candle wax finish that is slightly tacky to touch. In the UK you need to be applying it once or twice a year to maintain it.

I used Bilt Hamber products on our Defenders chassis and I genuinley believe the chassis would outlive me. I stripped it all back to bare metal, used Deox Gel and Hydrate 80 where required and applied two coats of Electrox and two coats of Epoxy Mastic in Black. I then applied Dynax UC where I thought there would likely to be any abrasion. The internals were washed out with a drain cleaning hose on a pressure washer and then blasted out with compressed air. I then injected a thin coat of Ferrosol, left it for 24 hours before injecting 5 litres of Dynax S50. This process took me days and required a lot of dissassembly.
 
Not sure why you led S50 with Ferrosol, your description of Lanoguard is how you use S50 or it's derivatives.

To displace any moisture and it will creep into any seams that S50 otherwise isn't thin enough to run into. The Ferrosol will then 'wick' the S50 into that small gap.

Lanogaurd is far more tolerable of bad preperation than the Dynax range.
 
I didn't know that was needed for S50, it's advertised as being complete:

Bilt Hamber said:
dynax S50 is a high-performance anti-corrosion wax that provides exceptionally long-lasting protection to steel surfaces. It creeps into welded seams and seals surface defects. dynax S-50 forms a soft, brown, wax-like film that self-heals in the event of disruption. It is also able to arrest existing corrosion and to provide long-term protection to pre-corroded and corrosion-free surfaces.

Bilt Hamber said:
The advanced metal seeking anti-corrosion molecules which form dynax S-50 are able to displace water, so even damp surfaces can be protected, these same molecules arrest and prevent corrosion even on already rusty surfaces and provide remarkable self-healing abilities if the film is damaged.
 
I didn't know that was needed for S50, it's advertised as being complete:

It was a reccomendation from Peter Hamber many moons ago. I had corrosion in a door seam I was keen to halt. He advised to use Ferrosol for a few days to creep into the tight seam, then follow it up with S50 which will get wicked in by the Ferrosol. Worked well so always done the same since!

I am looking at my 5 series now which is still as-new underneath and unsure if I should go down the S50 and UC route or go with Lanogaurd.
 
You can now, finally after a million years, get this product in the USA, it blows anything else i've tried here out of the water.

Send a can to Project Farm and have them put it against Liquid Wrench. :)
 
It was a reccomendation from Peter Hamber many moons ago. I had corrosion in a door seam I was keen to halt. He advised to use Ferrosol for a few days to creep into the tight seam, then follow it up with S50 which will get wicked in by the Ferrosol. Worked well so always done the same since!

I am looking at my 5 series now which is still as-new underneath and unsure if I should go down the S50 and UC route or go with Lanogaurd.
Ahh i see, yeah that sounds like a very specific case as door seems are glued and crimped tight, it's not needed pretty much anywhere else.

UB is for high impact areas, which is mostly wheel arches, maybe some low hanging fruit of the undercarriage, otherwise S50 will work great underneath. UC is a clear formulation which is mainly designed for sills and lower doors during the winter.
 
Ahh i see, yeah that sounds like a very specific case as door seems are glued and crimped tight, it's not needed pretty much anywhere else.

UB is for high impact areas, which is mostly wheel arches, maybe some low hanging fruit of the undercarriage, otherwise S50 will work great underneath. UC is a clear formulation which is mainly designed for sills and lower doors during the winter.

It was always my understanding that UB and UC were near identical prodcuts. One was clear and one was black. That's why if I do my nearly-new 5 series with Bilt Hamber product it'll be getting UC on visible areas and S50 injected into any voids.
 
It was always my understanding that UB and UC were near identical prodcuts. One was clear and one was black. That's why if I do my nearly-new 5 series with Bilt Hamber product it'll be getting UC on visible areas and S50 injected into any voids.
Kinda - they're all S50.

UB is underbody, it's S50, with a thicker skin for high impact areas.
UC is clear, for visible areas, again, mostly designed where you don't want the dark brown/amber or black of the UB (which is just really dark brown, it'll look black in 99% of looking)
 
Back
Top