Forums :: Resources :: Features :: Photo Gallery :: Vintage Radio Shows :: Archives :: Books
Support This Site: Contributors :: Advertise


It is currently Sep Thu 20, 2018 1:39 pm


All times are UTC [ DST ]





Post New Topic Post Reply  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Mon 26, 2018 4:23 am 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 29, 2009 9:10 pm
Posts: 550
Location: central wisconsin, 54449
Hi to everyone. I am going to purchase some faderlube and deoxit. I will be using this on tube radio chassis and some solid state. Which is more practical, the spray cans, or the small tubes which should allow a more precise application. I have read some information that excess spray can damage phenalic switches, etc. I would appreciate any advice or opinions


my thanks in advance


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Mon 26, 2018 6:22 am 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jun Wed 08, 2011 2:33 am
Posts: 7141
Location: Ohio 45177
I have faderlube in the can so I can get it into a control easily. If you want to use the regular stuff on contacts, then the bottle would maybe be better for that. Apply sparingly. So both spray and bottle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Mon 26, 2018 7:20 am 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jul Mon 26, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 23346
Location: Annapolis, MD
great opportunity for ambiguity here.....
"Deoxit" is a brand name......products include D5, intended for metal to metal contacts. D5 includes an acid which adeptly removes oxide from copper and such. Definitely use it sparingly.

I cringe when I hear about people using D5 for controls---I've never seen anything from the company that even implies that one should do that.

For controls, all you need is something like WD-40. I have never used Faderlube, but I suspect it has similar properties.

_________________
-Mark http://pixellany.com

"It's always something". --Gilda Radner (1946 - 1989)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Mon 26, 2018 4:29 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jun Wed 08, 2011 2:33 am
Posts: 7141
Location: Ohio 45177
Lot of people love WD 40 but it certainly comes out in a big blast. I think you can dial in some of the Caig cans for smaller dispersals, rather than having a mess. IF you are careful. WD tends to evaporate but I think Faderlube leaves a film of lube in effect, to help extend the improvement. I just checked my little can of Faderlube F5 and on top around the nozzle it is marked "ADJUST SPRAY H M L" Otherwise using something more powerful like a can of WD, I would pack paper towels under the control to catch the runoff.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Mon 26, 2018 7:31 pm 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 4264
Location: Charleston, W.Va.
As 'pixellany' says, the term "Deoxit" is an ambiguity. CAIG makes several products using the "Deoxit" name.

I do not recommend using D5 Deoxit for pots, and I do not believe that the manufacturer CAIG recommends it either. For most common pots I have always used WD-40 with good success. After flushing, and allowing some time for drying, I usually add a small drop of turbine oil around the pot shaft to provide lubrication.

On high-quality pots, especially in audio gear, I do recommend using CAIG F5 Faderlube after previous flushing with a non-residue contact cleaner. According to CAIG, the Faderlube provides a carbon- and plastic-safe lubricant for the pot.

_________________
Poston


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Tue 27, 2018 6:59 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mar Sun 01, 2009 10:27 pm
Posts: 4546
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
pixellany wrote:
great opportunity for ambiguity here.....
"Deoxit" is a brand name......products include D5, intended for metal to metal contacts. D5 includes an acid which adeptly removes oxide from copper and such. Definitely use it sparingly.

I cringe when I hear about people using D5 for controls---I've never seen anything from the company that even implies that one should do that.

For controls, all you need is something like WD-40. I have never used Faderlube, but I suspect it has similar properties.

Well, there is nothing from the company that makes WD-40 that even implies that it can be used for controls. It is just that people have tried it and it seems to work.

Pots do contain metal to metal contacts. There is one metal to metal contact and one metal to carbon contact. So removing oxide from metal is needed in a pot. And I have tried Deoxit D5 in pots and it seems to work, just as WD-40 seems to work. But in my experience, pots treated with D5 keep working for a longer time than pots treated with WD-40. And I have never seen any indication that D5 does any damage to a pot.

I think that I will get some Faderlube and see how that works the next time I have to clean a pot.

_________________
Tom


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Tue 27, 2018 9:18 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jul Mon 26, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 23346
Location: Annapolis, MD
Tom Schulz wrote:
Well, there is nothing from the company that makes WD-40 that even implies that it can be used for controls. ......

Touché!

I confess to recommending WD-40 for two simple reasons....it has never damaged a control, and it almost always gets them working. When it doesn't, I usually find a damaged resistance element.

Never tried faderlube----no motivation.

_________________
-Mark http://pixellany.com

"It's always something". --Gilda Radner (1946 - 1989)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Wed 28, 2018 3:38 am 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 4264
Location: Charleston, W.Va.
We have had this discussion about using CAIG DeOxit D5 on pots many times in past threads here in the ARF. There are certain prejudices and pre-conceived notions against using D5 on pots--I myself have been guilty of this. So I finally decided to do some research on the subject in order to ascertain the true facts.

Over the past several days I have spent considerable time researching this. Both on the official CAIG Laboratories, Inc. website as well as various other websites, including several forums orientated toward antique/vintage radio as well as vintage and modern audio.

From information I have learned, my opinion on this subject has now changed, and can be summarized as follows:
1) CAIG DeOxit D5 should be perfectly safe to use on almost any potentiometer which is likely to be encountered in antique radio restoration, provided the instructions of its manufacturer are followed.
2) There have been a few reported cases of this product adversely affecting carbon tracks on some pots, primarily older ones. Such reports tend to be "sketchy" and poorly documented and may, or may not, be valid, but are something one should be aware of.
3) For absolute safety and assurance of positive results, the best advice is to use CAIG F5 FaderLube for any potentiometer. I believe this to be the best product for such use currently available.

I am not going to cite specific technical data or quotations here. Those desiring to research this subject can easily do so for themselves, as I have done, and I believe will reach similar conclusions. As a start, I would suggest the following:

https://system.na3.netsuite.com/core/me ... a&_xt=.pdf
http://caig.com/2017/04/11/clean-potent ... deoxit-d5/

_________________
Poston


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Wed 28, 2018 10:11 am 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jul Mon 26, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 23346
Location: Annapolis, MD
Nice work!!
One side note: I damaged the carbon tracks at least two older controls by using IPA

_________________
-Mark http://pixellany.com

"It's always something". --Gilda Radner (1946 - 1989)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Wed 28, 2018 11:14 am 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov Mon 02, 2009 7:01 am
Posts: 2982
Location: Lincoln City, OR
Greetings to the Forum:

Back in the good old days, we used to use a product called "No-Noise". At first, this came in a bottle with an eyedropper, but later in spray cans.

One sure way that I have found to ruin a pot (I did it with No-Noise, but I suspect that one can do it with any contact cleaner): Insert the spray tube into the pot for a distance equal or greater than half the diameter of the pot. Hold the tube there while spraying and crank the pot through its entire travel range.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe that the chemical composition of the cleaner has any bearing on the outcome. :D

Regards,

_________________
Jim T.
KB6GM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Wed 28, 2018 5:05 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jan Sun 18, 2009 1:40 am
Posts: 2939
Location: Lexington, KY
Poston Drake wrote:
......Over the past several days I have spent considerable time researching this. Both on the official CAIG Laboratories, Inc. website as well as various other websites, including several forums orientated toward antique/vintage radio as well as vintage and modern audio......
Excellent info Poston, thanks for posting!

_________________
John KK4ZLF


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: deoxit and faderlube question.
PostPosted: Feb Wed 28, 2018 11:41 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mar Sun 01, 2009 10:27 pm
Posts: 4546
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Reading the first link, I think that Faderlube is to be used on wire wound pots and Deoxit D is to be used on carbon pots.

_________________
Tom


Top
 Profile  
 
Post New Topic Post Reply  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Eddy, Majestic-12 [Bot], Rocco53 and 3 guests



Search for:
Jump to:  
























Privacy Policy :: Powered by phpBB