Nickel vs Copper anti-seize

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted by ron350
2015_PSD what is the color and consistency of that Fel-Pro C-100?

It is dark gray and very smooth (not grainy or gritty at all).

 

[ron350]

Thanks.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by eddy21
From Wally Hartung, an aluminum industry metallurgist, warning about using a copper-based anti-sieze.

In a galvanic corrosion situation involving aluminum and steel, we're not worried about the steel. The aluminum is the sacrificial metal and will corrode preferentially, protecting the steel. The presence of water is absolutely necessary for the reaction to occur.

Plated steel bolts (plated with either cadmium or zinc) will afford some protection to the aluminum, but only as long as the plating lasts. It's being used up as it sacrifices itself to protect the aluminum. As soon as the plating is used up, the sacrifice of the aluminum parts to the steel will begin.

The white powdery coating on one of the bolts looks a lot like aluminum oxide. Guess what part is really getting eaten up. That's right, the aluminum case.

Now if you want to really see aluminum go to pieces, get copper involved. Copper eats up aluminum in a situation of dissimilar metals with water involved. Copper based anti-seize should NEVER be used in contact with, or where it can get in contact with aluminum. Use the aluminum powder anti-seize, always.

All right, kind of what I figured that you don't know what you were talking about in terms of valence.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted by willbur
Originally Posted by Snagglefoot
Here is some correspondence from Permatex that I copied from an E mail. Also are some info sheets provided by Permatex.


I note with great interest item #6 under directions for use for each type of the Permatex Antiseize

6. Reassemble parts using normal torque values. So much for reducing torque when assembling parts. Everybody advocates doing so and it is intuitive a compound that reduces friction requires a reduction in torque to avoid overtightening a fastener( or a spark plug or wheel lugnut). Confusing


Of course Bosch recommends the exact opposite with regards to their spark plugs.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Of course seawater or some other electrolyte is needed to make this all work.

source


Edit: Cathode = current flows out. Anode = current flows in from outside This will help clear any confusion reading the table since the direction of current matters.

 

[GJM120]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl

Of course seawater or some other electrolyte is needed to make this all work.

source


Edit: Cathode = current flows out. Anode = current flows in from outside This will help clear any confusion reading the table since the direction of current matters.


Ignorant question - which way if spark plug threads are coated?

When I changed my plugs on my N52 the old ones were very hard to loosen. So I put a tiny smudge of anti-seize on the new plugs. Frankly I can't remember what anti-seize I used but think it was copper based.

I adjusted the torque value downward to account for the lubricating property of the anti-seize since I considered over tightening the biggest risk. I didn't put enough to where I'd think conductivity was an issue. FWIW - BMW TIS says no to anti-seize. Bentley says yes.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted by GJM120
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl

Of course seawater or some other electrolyte is needed to make this all work.

source


Edit: Cathode = current flows out. Anode = current flows in from outside This will help clear any confusion reading the table since the direction of current matters.


Ignorant question - which way if spark plug threads are coated?

When I changed my plugs on my N52 the old ones were very hard to loosen. So I put a tiny smudge of anti-seize on the new plugs. Frankly I can't remember what anti-seize I used but think it was copper based.

I adjusted the torque value downward to account for the lubricating property of the anti-seize since I considered over tightening the biggest risk. I didn't put enough to where I'd think conductivity was an issue. FWIW - BMW TIS says no to anti-seize. Bentley says yes.


IIRC the threads on Bosch plugs are nickel plated.

IMO BMW says no to anti-seize because they haven't found a reason to use it due to the comparatively short change intervals AND/OR the fact that they can't control the amount of anti-seize applied by the technician.

In my limited experience I would only worry about choice of anti-seize on marine applications or where the plugs are routinely exposed to water (Agriculture?).

 

[GJM120]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by GJM120
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl

Of course seawater or some other electrolyte is needed to make this all work.

source


Edit: Cathode = current flows out. Anode = current flows in from outside This will help clear any confusion reading the table since the direction of current matters.


Ignorant question - which way if spark plug threads are coated?

When I changed my plugs on my N52 the old ones were very hard to loosen. So I put a tiny smudge of anti-seize on the new plugs. Frankly I can't remember what anti-seize I used but think it was copper based.

I adjusted the torque value downward to account for the lubricating property of the anti-seize since I considered over tightening the biggest risk. I didn't put enough to where I'd think conductivity was an issue. FWIW - BMW TIS says no to anti-seize. Bentley says yes.


IIRC the threads on Bosch plugs are nickel plated.

IMO BMW says no to anti-seize because they haven't found a reason to use it due to the comparatively short change intervals AND/OR the fact that they can't control the amount of anti-seize applied by the technician.

In my limited experience I would only worry about choice of anti-seize on marine applications or where the plugs are routinely exposed to water (Agriculture?).



The plugs I put in were NGK as were the ones from the factory. NGK also advises against using anti-seize their stated reason is the possibility of over-torqueing. Since I adjusted the torque down about 20% not worried about that. Like I mentioned, the originals were extremely hard to get out (at only ~ 50,000 miles) so I went with a very small smear of anti-seize.

Hopefully the car never sees water

Thanks.

 

[KGMtech]

Thanks to this thread, I found something to do today! I had 2 small bottles of Permatex Anti Seize # 133H in the toolbox, both mostly dried up. I cut the top off one bottle and scraped out the contents into the other, added some Mercon V and now I have enough fresh spreadable stuff to last another 30 years.

And as would be standard, the fingers look like I was tasked with a digital examination of the tin man.

 

[ABN_CBT_ENGR]

Originally Posted by JHZR2
I do wish there was a single document that provided the best type for each application.


You never will because its impossible to cover every type of situation but FWIW here is the basic selection criteria pretty much used by the design industry when specifying one. ( even this is hardly comprehensive)

The universal purpose of A/S is to prevent galling ( as defined by the correct materials engineering definition of metal adhesion/transfer)

The compound accomplishes this by introduction of a surface coating ( a gilding metal for lack of a better term) to serve as a sacrificial coating but smooth various surface asperities combined with some form of grease (to do what grease does)

So the compound reduces the potential of galling by directly addressing the 2 primary failure mechanisms that cause it.

That's on any surface but now lets narrow it a bit to fastener specific (anything with threads)

Various coatings and surface finishes can not only negate but even introduce adverse effects with A/S so sometimes OEM's don't recommend it for that reason.( they already factored it in their application now a critical tolerance can be changed)

As to the various types- that's pretty well already covered- copper is the basic, nickel is higher heat and more chemically inert, graphite's are normally dielectrics, moly and others are recommended for various things and so forth.

Dissimilar metals should always be a consideration but for general use, they will all give satisfactory performance.

Regarding "torque"- that's the most misused thing out there with tons of inaccurate information.

A fastener requires TENSION to secure a clamping force properly- torque is a measure of TURNING FORCE.

Nowhere in the universe do those 2 meet or directly correlate.

wet or dry makes no difference whatsoever because the torque wrench cannot differentiate against mechanical resistance of the threads, trash in the threads, mechanical deformities, bearing surface contact of the head and so forth and tell you how much tension is on the joint. ( that's why we use UT, eddy current and thread counting methods when its really critical for proper joint load on an engineered joint)

Torque wrenches exist only because those other methods are not necessary in every application and extremely expensive and time consuming.

Torque wrenches are good at even loading ( which often solves many problems in and of itself) but functionally useless for properly tensioning a fastener.

Go to places like bolt science, Fastenal or a hundred others- watch a Junkers test on YouTube- see for yourself.

In short- for GP applications, none is really superior so use what you got. It will work just fine.

 

[borgward]

in the case of a nut and bolt If you use a moly paste and then apply to specified torque the nut will rotate more times than if you did not apply the moly paste stretching the bolt (creating too much tension) enough to court failure.

How about using a moly paste on connecting rod nut and bolt, torquing to specification and see what happens down the road!

 

[ABN_CBT_ENGR]

Originally Posted by borgward
in the case of a nut and bolt If you use a moly paste and then apply to specified torque the nut will rotate more times than if you did not apply the moly paste stretching the bolt (creating too much tension) enough to court failure.

How about using a moly paste on connecting rod nut and bolt, torquing to specification and see what happens down the road!


Respectfully that's not quite the way it works.

The "nut" cannot rotate on axis more (or less) than the threads will allow and will not tension beyond that which the properties of the metal will allow. Wet or dry makes no difference on that. If you tension in the high range of elastic you are good- hit plastic then failure from necking fatigue is going to eventually follow.

What does matter is that may times that "wetness" will create a hydraulic resistance leading to a "false tension" ( especially in a blind hole) then bad things really happen.

Go watch a Junkers test with various "lubricants" and see the immediate loss of fastener tension

 

[blupupher]

The problem with this entire thread is the OP is referring to the Ford recommendation of using nickle anti-seize on the shroud of the spark plug to prevent the carbon buildup that caused the plugs to stick and break in the 5.4 3v.
This has nothing to do with anti seize on the spark plug threads, which is what the rest of this thread is referring to (and not recommended by Ford).

Nickle anti seize has a temp range up to 2400°F, copper anti-seize is 1600°F.
Nickle will leave a coating that resists the buildup better than copper from the research I have done.

I unknowingly used some copper/aluminum based anti-seize when I did my brother in laws '04 3v and wanted to see if I needed to pull them out and re-coat them with nickle. I decided to not worry about it since I never plan on taking those plugs out again.

 

[The Critic]

Originally Posted by blupupher
The problem with this entire thread is the OP is referring to the Ford recommendation of using nickle anti-seize on the shroud of the spark plug to prevent the carbon buildup that caused the plugs to stick and break in the 5.4 3v.
This has nothing to do with anti seize on the spark plug threads, which is what the rest of this thread is referring to (and not recommended by Ford).

You are correct.
However, Honda does recommend using a small amount of anti-seize on new spark plugs and based on the temperature claims on the can of Honda anti-seize, I think their's is nickel as well:

https://www.amazon.com/Honda-08732-AS000-Seize-Compound-08732AS000/dp/B00AJV80K2

 

[borgward]

This discussion may have gone off the rails from what the Op originally posted but it has been very educational. Thanks for the many thoughts and opinions.

As for can you what Ford suggests - probably. Are they specking what kind of antiseize to use with their torque specs. I have found many errors in their owners manuals. At one place they will site one specification and further back another. That caused me a lot of grief as I was supposed to change the transmission fluid at 80,000 miles, not 160,000 as stated earlier in the manual. (5 speed manual}.

Engineers produce the correct spec - bean counters may have a different idea (the want your car to wear out before 1.000.000 miles so they can sell you another) the people that compose the manual may have not idea, and there is no checking.

 

[nthach]

I've been using Loctite C5-A on all the things needing antiseize(or copper brake lube) for years. I haven't seen a issue with corrosion but it does tend to clump up on threads. I never Never-Seez is identical; a synthetic grease base with copper, nickel and aluminum powders along with a little graphite. 3M's anti-seize and brake lube is also simliar.

But this time around, I'm going to try using no anti-seize on a spark plug replacement, if NGK's trivalent coating is to be believed.

 

[borgward]

it is wrong to say that NEVER-SEEZE is the same. There are several types of NEVER-SEEZE. One of them is as described by you. Another has Molybdenum disulfide in it. They look the same. Don't know what the other NEVER-SEEZE have in them.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted by borgward
it is wrong to say that NEVER-SEEZE is the same. There are several types of NEVER-SEEZE. One of them is as described by you. Another has Molybdenum disulfide in it. They look the same. Don't know what the other NEVER-SEEZE have in them.

I should have been more clear - Never-Seez Red Label.

 

[borgward]

I've been using Loctite C5-A on all the things needing antiseize(or copper brake lube) for years. I haven't seen a issue with corrosion but it does tend to clump up on threads. I never Never-Seez is identical; a synthetic grease base with copper, nickel and aluminum powders along with a little graphite. 3M's anti-seize and brake lube is also simliar.

But this time around, I'm going to try using no anti-seize on a spark plug replacement, if NGK's trivalent coating is to be believed.

Sorry I missed this one. Never-Seez is and is not identical. What's on the shelf most places is as you describe. They do produce one that has molybdenum in it. Expensive. They both look the same. Try the regular stuff on an exhaust manifold nut and use the molybdenum one on another exhaust manifold nut. The regular one will become hard to remove after several weeks. The molybdenum one can be removed easily years later.

 

[Jetronic]

I do wish there was a single document that provided the best type for each application.

My general observation is:

- plain silver is ok for low temp stuff
- copper is also ok but I prefer to avoid copper and aluminum together.
- nickel is more expensive and possibly worse for you if exposed, but goes on everything.
- zinc is good for alloy wheels on steel hubs.

The best anti-seize I ever used has copper and aluminium particles in it.