On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:42:01 -0600, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

"Jim Wilkins" fired this volley in news:jimcs3$gev$1
:

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=148176

I disagree with that. I think it depends upon the particular version
you're using.

I use 747 "removable", and it cures on both aluminum AND stainless (and in
combination).

It even cures in contact with plastics and aluminum, although it takes a
few hours.

Lloyd

Loctite uses several different adhesives for their various products,
but the original thread-locking and related products are
anaerobic-cure acrylic adhesive. It does its intended job very well,
but for the record, its shear strength and compression strength are a
fraction of the strength of good epoxy.

However, there's a lot more to it than the bulk strength and ideal
bonding strength of the adhesive itself. Epoxy can be tricky in terms
of the actual adhesive bond, and the stronger it is, the more
vulnerable it is to peel and cleavage failure.

Acrylic works better on surfaces that are less than perfectly clean.
Epoxy needs near-perfect cleanliness unless it's formulated to work on
less-clean surfaces.

One of the most interesting examples of the latter is the bead-type
thread-locking epoxies used in industrical production. The resin and
the hardener are each encapsulated in tiny, sealed beads. You mix the
two types of beads together, as a coarse, dry powder, before use and
then they're applied to the threads you want to lock, using a
temporary adhesive (sometimes just starch and water) to hold the beads
onto the threads. When the threads are engaged, the beads break and
the epoxy begins to cure. It's an epoxy formulation that seems to work
well even on oily surfaces. But they're not trying for really strong
bonds, just the kind you get with acrylic Loctite thread-locker.

--
Ed Huntress