On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:29:14 +0100
"Colin Trunt" wrote:

It works well with a jam jar even under a hot tap, the thermal
expansions of iron and glass are not too disimmiilar 8.5 against 11.


In that case it's about reducing the partial vacuum that formed
when the contents of the jar cooled - heating the lid heats the air
above the jam and causes that to expand.

Anyway it seemed to do the trick here and I believe I have had
success loosen bolts with a similar method - basically heating
it with a blow lamp.

Boiling water 100C
Propane flame 2200C
Spot the difference. :-)

"Rob Morley" wrote in message
news:20090617062754.7ecc4938@bluemoon...
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:29:14 +0100
"Colin Trunt" wrote:

It works well with a jam jar even under a hot tap, the thermal
expansions of iron and glass are not too disimmiilar 8.5 against 11.


In that case it's about reducing the partial vacuum that formed
when the contents of the jar cooled - heating the lid heats the air
above the jam and causes that to expand.

Anyway it seemed to do the trick here and I believe I have had
success loosen bolts with a similar method - basically heating
it with a blow lamp.

Boiling water 100C
Propane flame 2200C
Spot the difference. :-)

Makes no differennce, warm water from a tap will free an
unmoveable jam jar top, it's probably no more than 60 degrees C

At 2200 you will get a heat gradient so the inner bolt might
be just 2100 or whatever.

Anyway next time you fiind something is stuck try it!!
You may be surprised!!

Frank Erskine wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:28:36 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
had this to say:

Frank Erskine wrote:

It seems to be much the same as before - except that it's now in a
naerosol can rather than a tin with a naluminium spout.

WD-40 is quite useless as a penetrating fluid.

Oh yes it is! A good penetraing fluid I mean.

Clearly you've never used real penetrating fluid.

See Peter Parry's post " WD40 outperformed most penetrating fluids
(including Plus Gas). "


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:36:12 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
had this to say:

Frank Erskine wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:28:36 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
had this to say:

Frank Erskine wrote:

It seems to be much the same as before - except that it's now in a
naerosol can rather than a tin with a naluminium spout.

WD-40 is quite useless as a penetrating fluid.

Oh yes it is! A good penetraing fluid I mean.

Clearly you've never used real penetrating fluid.

See Peter Parry's post " WD40 outperformed most penetrating fluids
(including Plus Gas). "

I'm referring to my _own_ experience.

--
Frank Erskine

On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:41:05 +0100, "Colin Trunt"
had this to say:


"Rob Morley" wrote in message
news:20090617062754.7ecc4938@bluemoon...
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:29:14 +0100
"Colin Trunt" wrote:

It works well with a jam jar even under a hot tap, the thermal
expansions of iron and glass are not too disimmiilar 8.5 against 11.


In that case it's about reducing the partial vacuum that formed
when the contents of the jar cooled - heating the lid heats the air
above the jam and causes that to expand.

Anyway it seemed to do the trick here and I believe I have had
success loosen bolts with a similar method - basically heating
it with a blow lamp.

Boiling water 100C
Propane flame 2200C
Spot the difference. :-)

Makes no differennce, warm water from a tap will free an
unmoveable jam jar top, it's probably no more than 60 degrees C

It probably softens the jam which is glueing the top on :-)

--
Frank Erskine

Frank Erskine wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:36:12 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
had this to say:

Frank Erskine wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:28:36 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
had this to say:

Frank Erskine wrote:

It seems to be much the same as before - except that it's now in a
naerosol can rather than a tin with a naluminium spout.

WD-40 is quite useless as a penetrating fluid.

Oh yes it is! A good penetraing fluid I mean.

Clearly you've never used real penetrating fluid.

See Peter Parry's post " WD40 outperformed most penetrating fluids
(including Plus Gas). "

I'm referring to my _own_ experience.

Never let a scientific study get in the way of personal predudice eh?

If WD40 is so useless why has it been around since 1953?


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:02:29 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
had this to say:

Frank Erskine wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:36:12 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
had this to say:

Frank Erskine wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:28:36 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
had this to say:

Frank Erskine wrote:

It seems to be much the same as before - except that it's now in a
naerosol can rather than a tin with a naluminium spout.

WD-40 is quite useless as a penetrating fluid.

Oh yes it is! A good penetraing fluid I mean.

Clearly you've never used real penetrating fluid.

See Peter Parry's post " WD40 outperformed most penetrating fluids
(including Plus Gas). "

I'm referring to my _own_ experience.

Never let a scientific study get in the way of personal predudice eh?

Personal experience, not personal "predudice" sic.

--
Frank Erskine

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:08:35 +0100, "Colin Trunt"
wrote:


"Peter Parry" wrote

As far as I can
remember some Astrolan liquid came top closely followed by WD40 and
then a variety of others including diesel fuel. Paraffin alone was
not recommended as if it was left it accelerated corrosion.

Astrolan does not google very well. Spelling?

Astrolan was a brand of lubricants/protective coatings produced by a
company called Astur who appear to have fallen off the planet (or more
likely been absorbed by someone else). The difference between
Astrolan and WD40 was not sufficiently great as to make it worth
spending much time looking for it.

In ,
Frank Erskine tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:

Personal experience, not personal "predudice" sic.

'ere, Frank, your glasses appear to be working properly...

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
Three blind mice, see how they run. Is this /really/ the best
way to test shampoo?

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:57:13 +0100, "Colin Trunt"
wrote:


OK I got it out!!!

I was about to suggest the method employed by a Dutch neighbour of
mine when they came here from Holland. Like all good Dutchpersons
they brought their bikes - good sturdy sit-up-straight bikes with
basket at front and proper handlebars. Certainly not the sort you
would ever ride wearing a clingy Lycra suit and a purple blob of
polystyrene with painted go faster flames on your head.

The first thing they discovered arriving here were hills. Hills in
the middle of towns instead of parked out in the countryside where
they caused no harm. The first day father set out to work on bike
with suit on and waved off by children. Coming back that evening was
not a smart executive but a steaming figure with suit jacket crumpled
in basket, tie off with shirt half undone and trailing behind like a
banner. Bike and rider fell sideways by the door and lay there
awaiting first aid in the form of Grolsch.

Several days of this led to a re-appraisal of the riding position (he
was an optimist) and need to adjust a seat which had probably not
moved since the last invasion of Holland. For the next hour we were
regaled with new Dutch words, the children were taken shopping and
wife said she would tell his Mum what he had been saying in front of
the children.

Increasing numbers of tools accumulated as neighbours came out to
watch and offer unwanted and generally impractical advice as father
wrestled with the bike. Eventually he got a 36" Stilson wrench on the
tube and with one foot on the frame heaved until he went purple in the
face and even we understood the Dutch coming out would probably not be
found in most dictionaries. At this point the Stilson slipped and
whacked him on the kneecap. He stumbled back screaming gently and put
his foot through the spokes of the back wheel. This we felt was the
turning point.

The Dutch reached fever pitch. He hopped about connected to the bike
and dragging it behind him until he fell over the curb. Grasping the
Stilson in both hands he belaboured the bike with great fury until the
wheel fell off. Still with the wheel attached to his ankle he grabbed
the rest and threw it into the hedge. After hopping about for a bit
more the remains of the wheel followed the rest of the bike into the
hedge. He calmly went inside. Showered, changed, and went out to buy
another car.

The bike is still somewhere in the hedge.

"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:41:05 +0100, "Colin Trunt"
had this to say:


"Rob Morley" wrote in message
news:20090617062754.7ecc4938@bluemoon...
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:29:14 +0100
"Colin Trunt" wrote:

It works well with a jam jar even under a hot tap, the thermal
expansions of iron and glass are not too disimmiilar 8.5 against 11.


In that case it's about reducing the partial vacuum that formed
when the contents of the jar cooled - heating the lid heats the air
above the jam and causes that to expand.

Anyway it seemed to do the trick here and I believe I have had
success loosen bolts with a similar method - basically heating
it with a blow lamp.

Boiling water 100C
Propane flame 2200C
Spot the difference. :-)

Makes no differennce, warm water from a tap will free an
unmoveable jam jar top, it's probably no more than 60 degrees C

It probably softens the jam which is glueing the top on :-)

It's normally the new jars which are the problem which should be clean.

With the old jars as you managed to put the li don there is a fair
chance you can get it back off again, unless you wait 10 years in between
in which case not being able to get the top off would be a good feaure.


--
Frank Erskine

"Peter Parry" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:57:13 +0100, "Colin Trunt"
wrote:


OK I got it out!!!

I was about to suggest the method employed by a Dutch neighbour of
mine when they came here from Holland. Like all good Dutchpersons
they brought their bikes - good sturdy sit-up-straight bikes with
basket at front and proper handlebars. Certainly not the sort you
would ever ride wearing a clingy Lycra suit and a purple blob of
polystyrene with painted go faster flames on your head.

The first thing they discovered arriving here were hills. Hills in
the middle of towns instead of parked out in the countryside where
they caused no harm. The first day father set out to work on bike
with suit on and waved off by children. Coming back that evening was
not a smart executive but a steaming figure with suit jacket crumpled
in basket, tie off with shirt half undone and trailing behind like a
banner. Bike and rider fell sideways by the door and lay there
awaiting first aid in the form of Grolsch.

Several days of this led to a re-appraisal of the riding position (he
was an optimist) and need to adjust a seat which had probably not
moved since the last invasion of Holland. For the next hour we were
regaled with new Dutch words, the children were taken shopping and
wife said she would tell his Mum what he had been saying in front of
the children.

Increasing numbers of tools accumulated as neighbours came out to
watch and offer unwanted and generally impractical advice as father
wrestled with the bike. Eventually he got a 36" Stilson wrench on the
tube and with one foot on the frame heaved until he went purple in the
face and even we understood the Dutch coming out would probably not be
found in most dictionaries. At this point the Stilson slipped and
whacked him on the kneecap. He stumbled back screaming gently and put
his foot through the spokes of the back wheel. This we felt was the
turning point.

The Dutch reached fever pitch. He hopped about connected to the bike
and dragging it behind him until he fell over the curb. Grasping the
Stilson in both hands he belaboured the bike with great fury until the
wheel fell off. Still with the wheel attached to his ankle he grabbed
the rest and threw it into the hedge. After hopping about for a bit
more the remains of the wheel followed the rest of the bike into the
hedge. He calmly went inside. Showered, changed, and went out to buy
another car.

The bike is still somewhere in the hedge.


Those sort of job are best approached with intelligence rather than brute
forc sometimes, I certaintly might have met a simiilar fate had I used brute
force
alone, my three pronged attack made it a much easier job.

I never liked stilsons very much, they are rather prone to
slipping..........


I see the long handle ensured it was his knee which got whacked rather than
his fingers crushed - owtch!

"Colin Trunt" wrote in message
...

"Peter Parry" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:57:13 +0100, "Colin Trunt"
wrote:


OK I got it out!!!

I was about to suggest the method employed by a Dutch neighbour of
mine when they came here from Holland. Like all good Dutchpersons
they brought their bikes - good sturdy sit-up-straight bikes with
basket at front and proper handlebars. Certainly not the sort you
would ever ride wearing a clingy Lycra suit and a purple blob of
polystyrene with painted go faster flames on your head.

The first thing they discovered arriving here were hills. Hills in
the middle of towns instead of parked out in the countryside where
they caused no harm. The first day father set out to work on bike
with suit on and waved off by children. Coming back that evening was
not a smart executive but a steaming figure with suit jacket crumpled
in basket, tie off with shirt half undone and trailing behind like a
banner. Bike and rider fell sideways by the door and lay there
awaiting first aid in the form of Grolsch.

Several days of this led to a re-appraisal of the riding position (he
was an optimist) and need to adjust a seat which had probably not
moved since the last invasion of Holland. For the next hour we were
regaled with new Dutch words, the children were taken shopping and
wife said she would tell his Mum what he had been saying in front of
the children.

Increasing numbers of tools accumulated as neighbours came out to
watch and offer unwanted and generally impractical advice as father
wrestled with the bike. Eventually he got a 36" Stilson wrench on the
tube and with one foot on the frame heaved until he went purple in the
face and even we understood the Dutch coming out would probably not be
found in most dictionaries. At this point the Stilson slipped and
whacked him on the kneecap. He stumbled back screaming gently and put
his foot through the spokes of the back wheel. This we felt was the
turning point.

The Dutch reached fever pitch. He hopped about connected to the bike
and dragging it behind him until he fell over the curb. Grasping the
Stilson in both hands he belaboured the bike with great fury until the
wheel fell off. Still with the wheel attached to his ankle he grabbed
the rest and threw it into the hedge. After hopping about for a bit
more the remains of the wheel followed the rest of the bike into the
hedge. He calmly went inside. Showered, changed, and went out to buy
another car.

The bike is still somewhere in the hedge.


Those sort of job are best approached with intelligence rather than brute
forc sometimes, I certaintly might have met a simiilar fate had I used
brute force
alone, my three pronged attack made it a much easier job.

I never liked stilsons very much, they are rather prone to
slipping..........


I see the long handle ensured it was his knee which got whacked rather
than
his fingers crushed - owtch!




Strange bike geometry and riding position in Holland.

Also strange riding position when you see the "heel on pedal" position of
some cyclists here.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "The Medway Handyman"
saying something like:

If WD40 is so useless why has it been around since 1953?

Skilful marketing, clueless customers.

On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:39:11 +0100, "John"
wrote:

Also strange riding position when you see the "heel on pedal" position of
some cyclists here.

I cycled with my heels on the pedals yeterday... But I did have a
child's bike bungeed to the rear rack.

On 2009-06-18, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "The Medway Handyman"
saying something like:

If WD40 is so useless why has it been around since 1953?

Skilful marketing, clueless customers.

Plus it smells nice and is harmless. It does work very well as a "water
dispersant". Ride home in the rain and then run the chain through a rag
sprayed with WD-40 and it gets cleaned a bit and isn't rusty in the
morning.

Also back in the day it was considered the panacea most likely to
bring your British car back from the dead on a damp morning.

"Ben C" wrote in message
...
On 2009-06-18, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "The Medway Handyman"
saying something like:

If WD40 is so useless why has it been around since 1953?

Skilful marketing, clueless customers.

Plus it smells nice and is harmless.

Only if used as originally intended. I would say again, bring it anywhere
near any electronic equipment with mechanics in it, and you will be sorry
when you go to pick it up from the repair shop, and it has a "BER" note on
it ...

Arfa

"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:39:11 +0100, "John"
wrote:

Also strange riding position when you see the "heel on pedal" position of
some cyclists here.

I cycled with my heels on the pedals yeterday... But I did have a
child's bike bungeed to the rear rack.

How did that work then ? Sounds like a dangerous overload to me ...

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:
"Ben C" wrote in message
...
On 2009-06-18, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when
the drugs began to take hold. I remember "The Medway Handyman"
saying something like:

If WD40 is so useless why has it been around since 1953?

Skilful marketing, clueless customers.

Plus it smells nice and is harmless.

Only if used as originally intended. I would say again, bring it
anywhere near any electronic equipment with mechanics in it, and you
will be sorry when you go to pick it up from the repair shop, and it
has a "BER" note on it ...


Why? Most of it's ingredient is mineral oil, which is pretty inert and a
good insulator. Water repelling properties will hinder corrosion of
components and solder.

Fredxx wrote:
Why? Most of it's ingredient is mineral oil, which is pretty inert and a
good insulator. Water repelling properties will hinder corrosion of
components and solder.

Speaking as someone who makes a living packaging electronics in mineral oil,
I can tell you that it's far from benign. It attacks many plastics, not
chemically as such but it's absorbed and alters their mechanical properties
quite significantly. It can make them swell significantly, and/or brittle,
and don't mention the effect on commong rubbery compounds like some nitriles.

Some nylons, for example, have a quite high proportion of water in their
structure. The mineral oil can displace the water and all hell breaks loose.

It's usually a good insulator, granted. Until it isn't!

Nobby

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 06:23:38 -0500, Nobby Anderson wrote:

Fredxx wrote:
Why? Most of it's ingredient is mineral oil, which is pretty inert and a
good insulator. Water repelling properties will hinder corrosion of
components and solder.

Speaking as someone who makes a living packaging electronics in mineral oil,
I can tell you that it's far from benign. It attacks many plastics, not
chemically as such but it's absorbed and alters their mechanical properties
quite significantly. It can make them swell significantly, and/or brittle,
and don't mention the effect on commong rubbery compounds like some nitriles.

Some nylons, for example, have a quite high proportion of water in their
structure. The mineral oil can displace the water and all hell breaks loose.

It's usually a good insulator, granted. Until it isn't!

Nobby

I still have some LPS1 left from about 25 years ago. It's better than WD40
and doesn't attack very much. It's no longer made, unfortunately, so I use
it very sparingly for things where nothing else will do.
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:45:05 +0100
PeterC wrote:

I still have some LPS1 left from about 25 years ago. It's better than
WD40 and doesn't attack very much. It's no longer made,
unfortunately, so I use it very sparingly for things where nothing
else will do.

The interweb suggests it's still made and distributed in the USA, but
the supposed UK distributors have no mention of it that I can find
except a link back to lpslabs.com

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:11:44 +0100, Rob Morley wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:45:05 +0100
PeterC wrote:

I still have some LPS1 left from about 25 years ago. It's better than
WD40 and doesn't attack very much. It's no longer made,
unfortunately, so I use it very sparingly for things where nothing
else will do.

The interweb suggests it's still made and distributed in the USA, but
the supposed UK distributors have no mention of it that I can find
except a link back to lpslabs.com

Yes, that's the promble.

It was expensive in aerosol cans so (at work) I enquired about buying it in
bulk. The cost for 1 gal./5li (can't remeber which now) was about 5% less
than in the cans!

Also have a drop of LPS3 left - that's v. good on exterior metal.
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

PeterC wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:11:44 +0100, Rob Morley wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:45:05 +0100
PeterC wrote:

I still have some LPS1 left from about 25 years ago. It's better than
WD40 and doesn't attack very much. It's no longer made,
unfortunately, so I use it very sparingly for things where nothing
else will do.
The interweb suggests it's still made and distributed in the USA, but
the supposed UK distributors have no mention of it that I can find
except a link back to lpslabs.com

Yes, that's the promble.

It was expensive in aerosol cans so (at work) I enquired about buying it in
bulk. The cost for 1 gal./5li (can't remeber which now) was about 5% less
than in the cans!

Also have a drop of LPS3 left - that's v. good on exterior metal.

LPS3 used to be my favourite chain lubricant, which prompted me to
google a bit and came up with Cromwell as a supplier (for LPS 1 too)

http://www.cromwell.co.uk/quicksearch

--
Roger Thorpe

She said her stereo was four-way, and I'd just love it in her room.....

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:53:37 +0100, Roger Thorpe wrote:

PeterC wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:11:44 +0100, Rob Morley wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:45:05 +0100
PeterC wrote:

I still have some LPS1 left from about 25 years ago. It's better than
WD40 and doesn't attack very much. It's no longer made,
unfortunately, so I use it very sparingly for things where nothing
else will do.
The interweb suggests it's still made and distributed in the USA, but
the supposed UK distributors have no mention of it that I can find
except a link back to lpslabs.com

Yes, that's the promble.

It was expensive in aerosol cans so (at work) I enquired about buying it in
bulk. The cost for 1 gal./5li (can't remeber which now) was about 5% less
than in the cans!

Also have a drop of LPS3 left - that's v. good on exterior metal.

LPS3 used to be my favourite chain lubricant, which prompted me to
google a bit and came up with Cromwell as a supplier (for LPS 1 too)

http://www.cromwell.co.uk/quicksearch

Thanks for the link.
Looks as if a lot of the products are Thermaplex and have LPS on also. Some
interesting possibilities there.


--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:23:01 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:39:11 +0100, "John"
wrote:

Also strange riding position when you see the "heel on pedal" position of
some cyclists here.

I cycled with my heels on the pedals yeterday... But I did have a
child's bike bungeed to the rear rack.

How did that work then ? Sounds like a dangerous overload to me ...

I turned the handlebars through 90 degress and bungeed the 20" wheel
bike to my rear rack with the front wheel on the left and the rear
wheel on the right. The only difficulty was that my heel made contact
with the front wheel, so I had to move my foot forward.

In what way does it sound dangerous, and in what way does it sound
like an overload?

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "The Medway Handyman"
saying something like:

If WD40 is so useless why has it been around since 1953?

Skilful marketing, clueless customers.

They're expanding into new markets now, like "WD40 Pour Homme"... now
available in Aftershave, Shower Gel, or of course Classic Aerosol.


--
Ian White

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:09:07 +0100, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:23:01 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:39:11 +0100, "John"
wrote:

Also strange riding position when you see the "heel on pedal" position of
some cyclists here.

I cycled with my heels on the pedals yeterday... But I did have a
child's bike bungeed to the rear rack.

How did that work then ? Sounds like a dangerous overload to me ...

I turned the handlebars through 90 degress and bungeed the 20" wheel
bike to my rear rack with the front wheel on the left and the rear
wheel on the right. The only difficulty was that my heel made contact
with the front wheel, so I had to move my foot forward.

In what way does it sound dangerous, and in what way does it sound
like an overload?

Some Asian riders seem to manage with things like settees or loadsa 5
gallon containers strapped on a bike - I worry with 15kg on the back!
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:49:57 +0100, Ian White had
this to say:

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "The Medway Handyman"
saying something like:

If WD40 is so useless why has it been around since 1953?

Skilful marketing, clueless customers.

They're expanding into new markets now, like "WD40 Pour Homme"... now
available in Aftershave, Shower Gel, or of course Classic Aerosol.

I read that as "Classic Arsehole", which, I suppose, is quite
appropriate for WD-40.

Seriously, as others have commented, WD-40 does have uses, for example
as a water displacement agent (probably most significantly in the
electrical (not electronic!) field) and perhaps a (very) short-term
lubricant. It's marketed as a Jack-of-all-trades stuff, which might be
ok for a "quick-fix" handyman sort of job, but to do the job properly
and permanently you really need to consider the appropriate remedy,
such as grease, oil, silicone, graphite, ptfe - or PlusGas for a
"first fix".

My late Dad used to recommend "Releasol" sp? many years ago , when
he used to order it for marine use when he was in the Merchant Navy -
it was sold as a penetrating fluid ("releasing oil") rather than as a
panacea. It was very much the same as PlusGas, but usually sold in big
cans.

--
Frank Erskine

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
Arfa Daily wrote:
"Ben C" wrote in message
...
On 2009-06-18, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when
the drugs began to take hold. I remember "The Medway Handyman"
saying something like:

If WD40 is so useless why has it been around since 1953?

Skilful marketing, clueless customers.

Plus it smells nice and is harmless.

Only if used as originally intended. I would say again, bring it
anywhere near any electronic equipment with mechanics in it, and you
will be sorry when you go to pick it up from the repair shop, and it
has a "BER" note on it ...


Why? Most of it's ingredient is mineral oil, which is pretty inert and a
good insulator. Water repelling properties will hinder corrosion of
components and solder.


Because I've been servicing electronic equipment for more than 35 years, and
I'm telling you so. If you bring WD40 anywhere near electronic equipment
with mechanics in it - that's moving parts of rubber and plastic such as
might be found in a cassette deck, or a CD / DVD deck - you will royally
**** them. If you don't believe me, give it a try, and then explain to the
nice man in the shop why he's wrong ... :-)

Arfa

"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:23:01 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:39:11 +0100, "John"
wrote:

Also strange riding position when you see the "heel on pedal" position
of
some cyclists here.

I cycled with my heels on the pedals yeterday... But I did have a
child's bike bungeed to the rear rack.

How did that work then ? Sounds like a dangerous overload to me ...

I turned the handlebars through 90 degress and bungeed the 20" wheel
bike to my rear rack with the front wheel on the left and the rear
wheel on the right. The only difficulty was that my heel made contact
with the front wheel, so I had to move my foot forward.

In what way does it sound dangerous, and in what way does it sound
like an overload?

Well, it seemed to me that it would have to go across-wise in something like
the manner you describe, which then makes you a lot 'wider' to other road
users, but not necessarily in a visible way. I know that we should all be
very observant when encountering cyclists whilst driving our cars, but there
is a range of variables that might be considered 'normal', and I would
contend that a cycle with another one strapped on the back, would not fall
into that category, and might take a driver by surprise as he calculated
clearances etc for overtaking said cyclist. The situation would be even
worse if it was dusk or raining.

Also, if your foot is making contact with the 'cargo' such that you have to
move your foot on the pedal to avoid this, then I might be inclined to
consider this as not being fully in control of the cycle. The police
consider all sorts of apparently innocuous activities whilst driving a car,
to represent "not being properly in control". It would be interesting to see
how they would view your 'abnormal load'

I suggested that it might be an 'overload' because a cycle - even a child's
one - is quite a heavy lump and, bungeed to a rear rack, I would have
thought that it would have made for quite an unstable ride, given the odd
weight distribution with its high c of g and transverse carrying
configuration.

I just felt that when I see some of the dangerous manoeuvres that some
cyclists get up to, which represent a serious hazard to both themselves and
other road users, the last thing I would want to encounter driving through
my village, was a cyclist with an 'odd' load on the back ... ??

Arfa

On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:31:00 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:23:01 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:39:11 +0100, "John"
wrote:

Also strange riding position when you see the "heel on pedal" position
of
some cyclists here.

I cycled with my heels on the pedals yeterday... But I did have a
child's bike bungeed to the rear rack.

How did that work then ? Sounds like a dangerous overload to me ...

I turned the handlebars through 90 degress and bungeed the 20" wheel
bike to my rear rack with the front wheel on the left and the rear
wheel on the right. The only difficulty was that my heel made contact
with the front wheel, so I had to move my foot forward.

In what way does it sound dangerous, and in what way does it sound
like an overload?

Well, it seemed to me that it would have to go across-wise in something like
the manner you describe, which then makes you a lot 'wider' to other road
users, but not necessarily in a visible way. I know that we should all be
very observant when encountering cyclists whilst driving our cars, but there
is a range of variables that might be considered 'normal', and I would
contend that a cycle with another one strapped on the back, would not fall
into that category, and might take a driver by surprise as he calculated
clearances etc for overtaking said cyclist. The situation would be even
worse if it was dusk or raining.

Don't you think that a cyclist with a bike strapped to a rear rack is
*more* visible than a cyclist without a bike strapped to a rear rack?
It was an assumption that I made, perhaps it was a wrong assumption.

Also, if your foot is making contact with the 'cargo' such that you have to
move your foot on the pedal to avoid this, then I might be inclined to
consider this as not being fully in control of the cycle. The police
consider all sorts of apparently innocuous activities whilst driving a car,
to represent "not being properly in control". It would be interesting to see
how they would view your 'abnormal load'

It is not for the police to decide what an abnormal load is or is not,
all they can do is interpret the law. As far as I know there is no
width restriction on bicycle loads, though there is a law which
restricts the carriage of a second person on a bicycle for which there
has been no special adaptation.

I do not believe that there is any restriction on the part of the foot
that sits on a bicycle pedal. Indeed, I have a friend who has an
entire leg missing - I would hate to think that he might be committing
an offence by cycling.

I suggested that it might be an 'overload' because a cycle - even a child's
one - is quite a heavy lump and, bungeed to a rear rack, I would have
thought that it would have made for quite an unstable ride, given the odd
weight distribution with its high c of g and transverse carrying
configuration.

The child's bike's weight is 19.4lbs. With me sitting on the saddle
about 12" higher than the bike strapped to the rear rack, and only my
lower leg below the bike, I expect the centre of gravity is lower than
usual.

I just felt that when I see some of the dangerous manoeuvres that some
cyclists get up to, which represent a serious hazard to both themselves and
other road users, the last thing I would want to encounter driving through
my village, was a cyclist with an 'odd' load on the back ... ??

I think that you will find that it is motorists that present a serious
hazard to cyclists, and not cyclists themselves: although not unheard
of, it is exceptionally rare for a cyclist to cause a death to another
road user.

If you were driving through your village and you encountered a cyclist
with another bicycle strapped to their rear rack, would it cause you
to take more care or less care around that cyclist?

My anecdotal evidence is that motorists either stayed behind me or
passed with an exceptionally wide margin. This made me feel
absolutely safe on my journey to work through London's rush hour
traffic.

On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 00:14:57 +0100, Frank Erskine wrote:

Seriously, as others have commented, WD-40 does have uses, for example
as a water displacement agent (probably most significantly in the
electrical (not electronic!) field) and perhaps a (very) short-term
lubricant. It's marketed as a Jack-of-all-trades stuff, which might be
ok for a "quick-fix" handyman sort of job, but to do the job properly
and permanently you really need to consider the appropriate remedy,
such as grease, oil, silicone, graphite, ptfe - or PlusGas for a
"first fix".

I find it useful for where I don't want proper lubrication. I've some hedge
sheras that have the 'twist'n'lock' extensible handles; these can get stiff
to turn and so don't lock properly. Oil would make them slip, but WD40
eases operation whilst having no load-bearing lubrication.
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

Tom Crispin wrote:
Don't you think that a cyclist with a bike strapped to a rear rack is
*more* visible than a cyclist without a bike strapped to a rear rack?

Strapped? Hey, I've got a bike *bolted* to my read rack, and sometimes I have
the feeling I'm invisible :-P

Nobby

Frank Erskine wrote:

Seriously, as others have commented, WD-40 does have uses, for example
as a water displacement agent (probably most significantly in the
electrical (not electronic!) field) and perhaps a (very) short-term
lubricant. It's marketed as a Jack-of-all-trades stuff, which might be
ok for a "quick-fix" handyman sort of job, but to do the job properly
and permanently you really need to consider the appropriate remedy,
such as grease, oil, silicone, graphite, ptfe - or PlusGas for a
"first fix".

My late Dad used to recommend "Releasol" sp? many years ago , when
he used to order it for marine use when he was in the Merchant Navy -
it was sold as a penetrating fluid ("releasing oil") rather than as a
panacea. It was very much the same as PlusGas, but usually sold in big
cans.


My father is a member of the PlusGas fanclub, but I always found that
the fumes made me feel like crap for an hour or so, which none of its
competitors did.

--
Roger Thorpe

She said her stereo was four-way, and I'd just love it in her room.....

In ,
Frank Erskine tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:49:57 +0100, Ian White had
this to say:

They're expanding into new markets now, like "WD40 Pour Homme"... now
available in Aftershave, Shower Gel, or of course Classic Aerosol.

I read that as "Classic Arsehole", which, I suppose, is quite
appropriate for WD-40.

Yay! Frank's glasses are back in normal working order.

Seriously, as others have commented, WD-40 does have uses, for example
as a water displacement agent (probably most significantly in the
electrical (not electronic!) field)

Well, that *is* what the "WD" part of the name is short for...

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
The System is well pleased with this Unit's performance, which
falls within expected parameters.

On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 10:10:35 +0100, Roger Thorpe
wrote:

My father is a member of the PlusGas fanclub, but I always found that
the fumes made me feel like crap for an hour or so, which none of its
competitors did.

My experience (back in the days of wielding spanners at Minis) was
that PlusGas was a massively better releasing agent than WD-40 or
graphite-based penetrating oil. I have on the shelf right now:

* Graphite penetrating oil, great for hinges, especially small ones
* Duck oil, used for lubricating anything which should be kept free of
oil, such as rubber suspension bushes
* Plus-Gas, used as a releasing agent
* Halfords Cycle Oil used for throttle linkages on the mower and
similar light oil jobs, but only because I am out of sewing machine
oil
* White Lightning wax lube, used on brake pivots and the recumbent's
chains, also very good for household locks, put a few drops on the
key, operate lock a couple of times, works a treat and no oily marks
on your clothes if you pocket the keys
* Finish Line Cross Country, my standard winter chain lubricant
* GT-85, not often used
* Pedro's wax lube, more viscous than White Lightning, I use this for
car door handles and window channels, things like that
* WD-40, rarely used other than as a cleaning agent (wipe down metal
surfaces with a cloth damped in WD-40, it removes grease stains and
all sorts)
* Engine oil, which is a good mechanical lubricant, works on things
like garden shears
* Lithium grease, used for various things including hub bearings
* Standard grease, ditto
* Copper grease, used for cable inners and as an anti-seize agent on
car brake calipers
* High melting point PTFE grease, a legacy from the days of Mini drum
brake servicing

Most of these are products I either inherited from Dad or bought as
being best for X specific job, many of which jobs are no longer part
of my daily life. Like the high melting point grease bought to
lubricate the brake shoe pivots and friction points on the Mini. The
surprise hit is Pedro's wax, which was pretty much useless on chains
but is absolutely the business for servicing car door handles. On the
Volvo I stripped the handles, cleaned them, lubricated all pivots and
the lock barrel with Pedro's, did the same for the pivots on the
locking mechanism inside the door, and they worked like new for ever
after. The wax did not seem to dry out and become gungy like oil does
in the same application.

I have long since stopped buying 3-in-1 as I found that in most cases
1 of the 3 products it supposedly replaces would do the job much
better...

I've also tried Shimano Slippery Spit, Kry-Tech and a few other bike
shop products. Slippery Spit was actually rather a good lubricant but
extremely dirty and impossible to wash out.

I've just ordered replacement sprockets for the Brom, 6% reduced
instead of 12% reduced as the London commute is flatter than the
commute the bike was originally bought for. When they arrive I will
fit them, a new chain, and switch to summer lubricant (probably Finish
Line dry PTFE lube). My experience is that small-wheel bikes seem to
like dry or wax lube in summer, to help the chain to drop dust and
grit, and a wet lube in winter as the wax (especially) and dry lubes
wash out too quickly. This could, of course, be complete ********,
it's just what seems to work on my bikes according to my own highly
subjective criteria, being how long the bike goes without having to
apply more lube. The wax on the recumbent needed topping up every
couple of days, but the chains were so bloody expensive and oil so
fantastically messy that it was worth it.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc | http://www.nohelmetlaw.org.uk/
"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken
Newsgroup may contain nuts.

On 19 Jun,
"Arfa Daily" wrote:

I suggested that it might be an 'overload' because a cycle - even a child's
one - is quite a heavy lump and, bungeed to a rear rack, I would have
thought that it would have made for quite an unstable ride, given the odd
weight distribution with its high c of g and transverse carrying
configuration.

Quite a heavy adult sized bicycle shaped object would weigh in at less than
20kg. The rider could be 90kg or more. the weight of a child sized bike would
be minimal.

In my younger days I would often see bikes used for transporting coal. 2
(hundredweight) bags was quite usual. 5 bags was not uncommon, weighing
quareter of a ton.

--
B Thumbs
Change lycos to yahoo to reply

snip


It is not for the police to decide what an abnormal load is or is not,
all they can do is interpret the law. As far as I know there is no
width restriction on bicycle loads, though there is a law which
restricts the carriage of a second person on a bicycle for which there
has been no special adaptation.

I do not believe that there is any restriction on the part of the foot
that sits on a bicycle pedal. Indeed, I have a friend who has an
entire leg missing - I would hate to think that he might be committing
an offence by cycling.

There is no law as such, which says that it is illegal to eat an apple
whilst driving a car, but if a police officer decides for whatever reason
that as a result of eating said apple, you are not "properly in control of
the vehicle", then he can decide that you have committed an offence based on
that. I don't know, however, whether the same 'interpretation' of any laws
can be applied to cyclists. As road users, allbeit unlicensed ones who don't
pay any road tax, I think that they should be subject to similar treatment
as car drivers, but I'm sure that wouldn't be the case ...

snip

I just felt that when I see some of the dangerous manoeuvres that some
cyclists get up to, which represent a serious hazard to both themselves
and
other road users, the last thing I would want to encounter driving through
my village, was a cyclist with an 'odd' load on the back ... ??

I think that you will find that it is motorists that present a serious
hazard to cyclists, and not cyclists themselves: although not unheard
of, it is exceptionally rare for a cyclist to cause a death to another
road user.

Ah, I see you are a 'Cyclist' with a capital C. That explains much ...
Whilst I am sure that many motorists represent an (unwitting) danger to
cyclists, it can equally be said that many cyclists are an utter menace on
the roads, believing as they do, that they have a divine right to be on the
road with greater status than other road users, and to use any part of the
road / footpath / traffic control systems, to expedite their journey in any
way they see fit. Woe betide any motorist who has the temerity to sound his
horn at one of these cyclists, for cutting him up. I have been gestured at
and shouted and sworn at for committing this cardinal sin ...


If you were driving through your village and you encountered a cyclist
with another bicycle strapped to their rear rack, would it cause you
to take more care or less care around that cyclist?

My anecdotal evidence is that motorists either stayed behind me or
passed with an exceptionally wide margin. This made me feel
absolutely safe on my journey to work through London's rush hour
traffic.

I don't suggest for one moment that you are, in general, a dangerous
cyclist, and I am sure that you took plenty of care on your journey. Whilst
I accept that in places such as India, everything from a single rider to
half a car is carried as the norm on a pushbike or moped, that isn't the
case here. Certainly, provided that I saw your unusual load, I would give
you a wide(r) berth, but these days, there are so many 'legitimate' hazards
on our roads - speed bumps, speed cameras, chicanes, a forest of general
road signs, idiots in invalid carriages tooling down the road, kids that
have never been taught by their half-educated parents, that cars are hard,
and so on - to contend with, that overall attention is already diverted in
many different directions, without having to take on board cyclists with
'abnormal' loads (my definition of the word). So in querying the 'safety' of
your unusually loaded cycle, I was, to some extent, playing devil's
advocate.

Arfa

On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:16:02 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


snip


It is not for the police to decide what an abnormal load is or is not,
all they can do is interpret the law. As far as I know there is no
width restriction on bicycle loads, though there is a law which
restricts the carriage of a second person on a bicycle for which there
has been no special adaptation.

I do not believe that there is any restriction on the part of the foot
that sits on a bicycle pedal. Indeed, I have a friend who has an
entire leg missing - I would hate to think that he might be committing
an offence by cycling.

There is no law as such, which says that it is illegal to eat an apple
whilst driving a car, but if a police officer decides for whatever reason
that as a result of eating said apple, you are not "properly in control of
the vehicle", then he can decide that you have committed an offence based on
that.

This is nonsense.

It is not for the police to determine guilt or otherwise - that is for
the courts. However, the police, in consultation with the alleged
offender, *might* agree guilt between them and the alleged offender
may choose to pay a fixed penalty for a limited number of offences.

I don't know, however, whether the same 'interpretation' of any laws
can be applied to cyclists. As road users, allbeit unlicensed ones who don't
pay any road tax, I think that they should be subject to similar treatment
as car drivers, but I'm sure that wouldn't be the case ...

Cyclists are dealt with very severely in proportion to the danger they
pose to others.


snip

I just felt that when I see some of the dangerous manoeuvres that some
cyclists get up to, which represent a serious hazard to both themselves
and
other road users, the last thing I would want to encounter driving through
my village, was a cyclist with an 'odd' load on the back ... ??

I think that you will find that it is motorists that present a serious
hazard to cyclists, and not cyclists themselves: although not unheard
of, it is exceptionally rare for a cyclist to cause a death to another
road user.

Ah, I see you are a 'Cyclist' with a capital C. That explains much ...
Whilst I am sure that many motorists represent an (unwitting) danger to
cyclists, it can equally be said that many cyclists are an utter menace on
the roads, believing as they do, that they have a divine right to be on the
road with greater status than other road users, and to use any part of the
road / footpath / traffic control systems, to expedite their journey in any
way they see fit. Woe betide any motorist who has the temerity to sound his
horn at one of these cyclists, for cutting him up. I have been gestured at
and shouted and sworn at for committing this cardinal sin ...

I would call it a divine right, but under law cyclists do have a right
to use the road, except motorways and a few other roads and tunnels,
without let or hinderance.

If you were driving through your village and you encountered a cyclist
with another bicycle strapped to their rear rack, would it cause you
to take more care or less care around that cyclist?

My anecdotal evidence is that motorists either stayed behind me or
passed with an exceptionally wide margin. This made me feel
absolutely safe on my journey to work through London's rush hour
traffic.

I don't suggest for one moment that you are, in general, a dangerous
cyclist, and I am sure that you took plenty of care on your journey. Whilst
I accept that in places such as India, everything from a single rider to
half a car is carried as the norm on a pushbike or moped, that isn't the
case here. Certainly, provided that I saw your unusual load, I would give
you a wide(r) berth, but these days, there are so many 'legitimate' hazards
on our roads - speed bumps, speed cameras, chicanes, a forest of general
road signs, idiots in invalid carriages tooling down the road, kids that
have never been taught by their half-educated parents, that cars are hard,
and so on - to contend with, that overall attention is already diverted in
many different directions, without having to take on board cyclists with
'abnormal' loads (my definition of the word). So in querying the 'safety' of
your unusually loaded cycle, I was, to some extent, playing devil's
advocate.

I would be very careful about a blanket label of the elderly and those
with a disability who use a "invalid carriage" as "idiots".