Re: John's flux
Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 9:40 am
Jol Wilkinson wrote:Metropolitan wrote:
Rubbish Jol. At the dilution rate at which we use flux it is pretty much non corrosive. Are you saying that Carr's flux should not be posted? I have no doubt that Carr's flux is constantly posted everywhere and anywhere without the slightest problem. Or do you think that my flux is somehow different? It ain't! It's just far cheaper.
John
I have no intention of getting in a slanging match with you. You have clearly got your own definitions what "corrosive" means.
I simply quoted what's on the Royal mail website and what London Road Models were told. If you don't want to believe it, then don't.
Jol
It's not that I don't believe you Jol. Maybe there is a difference between Royal Mail and Parcel Force? All I know is that the neat acid came by Parcel Force and was left in my porch. I have no qualms about posting it in the same way.
As far as the definition of 'corrosive' is concerned all I know is that Rust Remover is about 60% neat PA. It is therefore much much stronger than this 14% modellers flux. Water itself is very corrosive to iron, steel and many other metals.In terms of many other common kitchen or garage products it is entirely innocuous, non toxic and completely harmless. I would for instance rather take a swig of this flux than a gulp of white spirit or engine oil!!
The word 'acid' is, I think, the thing that get's everybody going. But this flux has about the same concentration of acid as vinegar and could be used in much the same way if the mood took you!
My point, once again, is that it is perfectly harmless and safe, given common sense and it should not be prortrayed as somehow noxious, sinister and capable of burning holes in everything like Alien blood! Or the EU will ban it for sure. Lead free solder, and watery meths anyone??............
