Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

I noticed at Home Depot that they sell an Oatey branded "No. 95
Tinning Flux" that supposedly "pre-tins" the pips and prevents the
flux from burning out or the pipe from oxidizing ("turning
green"). They say it is especially good on larger pipes.

Has anybody had any epxerience using such tinning fluxes vs. a
standard flux like the Oatey #5 Past flux?

- Does it really work better on larger pipes?
- What about on smaller pipes?
- Any disadvantages (other than higher price) to using it all the
time?

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

My experience with the #95, is that it doesn't really add enough "tin" to
the pipe to be useful, and that it often leaves black burnt residue within
the joint, that sometimes is continuous all the way through the joint
causing a leak sometimes 6 or more weeks after completing the job.
Personally, with either standard propane or MAPS gas, good old-fashioned
solder paste still gives me the best joint when using either the easy to
work with 50/50 lead/tin solder on non-drinking lines or with new difficult
to work with lead-free solders.

"blueman" wrote in message
...
I noticed at Home Depot that they sell an Oatey branded "No. 95
Tinning Flux" that supposedly "pre-tins" the pips and prevents the
flux from burning out or the pipe from oxidizing ("turning
green"). They say it is especially good on larger pipes.

Has anybody had any epxerience using such tinning fluxes vs. a
standard flux like the Oatey #5 Past flux?

- Does it really work better on larger pipes?
- What about on smaller pipes?
- Any disadvantages (other than higher price) to using it all the
time?

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:08:50 GMT, blueman wrote:

I noticed at Home Depot that they sell an Oatey branded "No. 95
Tinning Flux" that supposedly "pre-tins" the pips and prevents the
flux from burning out or the pipe from oxidizing ("turning
green"). They say it is especially good on larger pipes.

Has anybody had any epxerience using such tinning fluxes vs. a
standard flux like the Oatey #5 Past flux?

- Does it really work better on larger pipes?
- What about on smaller pipes?
- Any disadvantages (other than higher price) to using it all the
time?

I like it because it makes it easy to tell when the joint is up to
temp. As you heat the joint, when it gets hot enough, the flux will
"flash" silver as the fine solder particles in the flux melt. At that
point, I stop heating after 1 or 2 more seconds and apply the solder.
I've not had trouble with it burning or leaking using that technique.

I rarely work with anything bigger than 1" copper, so can't comment on
how it works with larger pipe. The price of the flux is so tiny
compared to pipe and fittings that I use it for everything.

HTH,

Paul F.

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

responding to
http://www.homeownershub.com/mainten...ux-314641-.htm
skid wrote:

blueman,

Since you did request personal opinions from other homeowners, I will not
address any of the inaccurate statements made in the previous posts.

As it states on the Oatey web site:

Standard No.5 flux is intended for soldering copper joints using leaded or
unleaded solder.

No.95 “Tinning” flux is basically the same compound as No.5 flux, except
that it contains small particles of silver solder. These particles help
improve the flow of silver solder.

Since No.95 flux can be used for standard soldering as well as for silver
soldering, Oatey markets it as a dual purpose product .

BTW: silver soldering requires higher temperatures than standard soldering
and therefore tends to oxidize (aka “turn green”)

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

skid wrote the following:
responding to
http://www.homeownershub.com/mainten...ux-314641-.htm
skid wrote:


Original post dated June 23, 2008.


blueman,

Since you did request personal opinions from other homeowners, I will not
address any of the inaccurate statements made in the previous posts.

As it states on the Oatey web site:

Standard No.5 flux is intended for soldering copper joints using leaded or
unleaded solder.

No.95 “Tinning” flux is basically the same compound as No.5 flux, except
that it contains small particles of silver solder. These particles help
improve the flow of silver solder.

Since No.95 flux can be used for standard soldering as well as for silver
soldering, Oatey markets it as a dual purpose product .

BTW: silver soldering requires higher temperatures than standard soldering
and therefore tends to oxidize (aka “turn green”)






--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

On 2/28/2011 1:52 AM, skid wrote:
responding to
http://www.homeownershub.com/mainten...ux-314641-.htm
skid wrote:

blueman,

Since you did request personal opinions from other homeowners, I will not
address any of the inaccurate statements made in the previous posts.

As it states on the Oatey web site:

Standard No.5 flux is intended for soldering copper joints using leaded or
unleaded solder.

No.95 “Tinning” flux is basically the same compound as No.5 flux, except
that it contains small particles of silver solder. These particles help
improve the flow of silver solder.

Since No.95 flux can be used for standard soldering as well as for silver
soldering, Oatey markets it as a dual purpose product .

BTW: silver soldering requires higher temperatures than standard soldering
and therefore tends to oxidize (aka “turn green”)


blueman, since you didn't represent yourself as knowing much about
anything, I'll pretend you didn't reply to a post dated June 23, 2008,
12:08 pm. If you want to learn, get off that stupid web sight and look
up "usenet". Study it well, then maybe post if you can find something
interesting from this decade.

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

Still talking to dot foo people?

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...

blueman, since you didn't represent yourself as knowing much
about
anything, I'll pretend you didn't reply to a post dated June
23, 2008,
12:08 pm. If you want to learn, get off that stupid web
sight and look
up "usenet". Study it well, then maybe post if you can find
something
interesting from this decade.

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

willshak wrote:
No.95 “Tinning” flux is basically the same compound as No.5 flux,
except that it contains small particles of silver solder. These
particles help improve the flow of silver solder.

I've had good success using the 95 flux for pipes. Ended up putting some on
a PC board I recently cooked up, and it tinned the copper traces with just a
touch of the iron.

Jon

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

"Jon Danniken" wrote in message
...
willshak wrote:
No.95 "Tinning" flux is basically the same compound as No.5 flux,
except that it contains small particles of silver solder. These
particles help improve the flow of silver solder.

I've had good success using the 95 flux for pipes. Ended up putting some
on a PC board I recently cooked up, and it tinned the copper traces with
just a touch of the iron.

Jon


Their product sheet says not for electrical parts. While it will do a good
job of soldering, it leaves behind a residue that will in time draw moisture
out of the air and corrode the electronics.

For electrical or electronics you should use the rosin core solder. With
the extra metals in the 95 mix, it may not be compatible with the normal
(not lead free) electrical solder.
If soldering some of the newer lead free electronics, then it will probably
be compatible, but there is still that long term corrosion effect.

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

On 2/28/2011 6:51 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
Still talking to dot foo people?


I'm new at this, just took it up as a hobby.

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

replying to Tony Miklos, Andy wrote:
Hi Tony,

Nothing wrong with replying to old posts, the internet keeps things for quite
some time, and is searchable, so new information can be added at any point and
still be useful. Also, blueman was the OP, so you're complaining to the wrong
guy. Also, website.

Regards,
Andy

--
for full context, visit http://www.homeownershub.com/mainten...ux-314641-.htm

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

replying to Andy, DIY Jake wrote:
Thank you. Most of the info I find useful is from years ago, just like this
one.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/mainte...ux-314641-.htm

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

replying to DIY Jake, Branson wrote:
I agree. It is 2020, and I still found useful info. in this post.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/mainte...ux-314641-.htm

Tinning Flux vs. Standard Paste Flux
 

On Monday, February 28, 2011 at 1:52:58 AM UTC-5, skid wrote:
responding to
http://www.homeownershub.com/mainten...ux-314641-.htm
skid wrote:

blueman,

Since you did request personal opinions from other homeowners, I will not
address any of the inaccurate statements made in the previous posts.

As it states on the Oatey web site:

Standard No.5 flux is intended for soldering copper joints using leaded or
unleaded solder.

No.95 €œTinning€� flux is basically the same compound as No..5 flux, except
that it contains small particles of silver solder. These particles help
improve the flow of silver solder.

Since No.95 flux can be used for standard soldering as well as for silver
soldering, Oatey markets it as a dual purpose product .

BTW: silver soldering requires higher temperatures than standard soldering
and therefore tends to oxidize (aka €œturn green€�)

There is no silver solder in tinning flux, only powdered solder. Check any mfr. site.