 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Chevrolet / Chevrolet Trucks / September 2005Are there any parts I shouldn't use Anti-Seize on?
This summer I've done more work on cars myself than ever before. I started to think that I want have this truck long enough to need to repeat some of the repairs I've done. With that in mind, I've started to use liberal amounts of Anti-Seize compound when I throw everything back together. Hence, the reason for the post. Are there any parts I should avoid using the Anti-Seize on? Are there some parts that would have their lifespan or effectiveness hindered? Thanks. head bolts, wheel studs, main and rod bolts, most hardware that has specific torque values around the engine and suspension, as this alters the torque specs. > This summer I've done more work on cars myself than ever before. I > started to think that I want have this truck long enough to need to repeat [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Thanks. > head bolts, wheel studs, main and rod bolts, most hardware that has specific > torque values around the engine and suspension, as this alters the torque > specs. I dis-agree on lug nuts. Which is probably the most over-torqued item on most vehicals on or off the road. I apply anti-seize to the lug studs on my personal vehicals that I drive on the street. Im also so Anal Retentive that I thread each lug nut down by hand. If a lug doesn't come off "just" right, Ill pitch it and get a new one. Nor will I let some idiot at a tire shop put wheels on my car. Charles Charles, the SAE torque specs for for wheel studs assume clean dry threads, that is only reason I say no antiseize. Here in upstate NY in my shop we run into so may rusted studs it is a problem. So realistically the antiseize is desirable, but technically wrong. >> head bolts, wheel studs, main and rod bolts, most hardware that has >> specific torque values around the engine and suspension, as this alters [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > will I let some idiot at a tire shop put wheels on my car. > Charles > Charles, the SAE torque specs for for wheel studs assume clean dry threads, > that is only reason I say no antiseize. Here in upstate NY in my shop we run > into so may rusted studs it is a problem. So realistically the antiseize is > desirable, but technically wrong. Thing rust nearly as bad here in Ohio. It not just from road salt either. Vehicles left sitting for a few months will develop rust in odd places. Galvanic corrosion, Rust & seized up things cost me way to much extra time. Charles sorry, but every mechanic I've talked to, and every repair manual that mentions lug studs, say not to use antiseize on them. It makes sense to me what you're doing-- but then so does the issue about proper torque values. :shrug: Somebody that knows more than me want to chime in? I wouldn't mind not having to fight rusted fasteners every time I take the wheels off my 4X4,. either.... I use Anti-Seize on my cars, been doing it for at least 20 years. I know the book says they should be clean and dry but I feel the important thing is that the torque is equal. If the studs are rusty the torque won't be equal, you know the people working in the tire shop aren't going to clean them. I put anti-seize on them once the first time I rotate my tires, I also apply it around the hub. I applied it 17 years ago to my 1988 Oldsmobile and have never had to had to re-apply it. Al Bottoms Up Diver > sorry, but every mechanic I've talked to, and every repair manual that > mentions lug studs, say not to use antiseize on them. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > want to chime in? I wouldn't mind not having to fight rusted fasteners > every time I take the wheels off my 4X4,. either.... How about the threads on either side of tie rod ends? Actually, I hope it ok because I already did it. There's a second nut to lock the tie rod end on the one side and a cotter pin in the other. I just wanted it to go easier the next time I might need to replace them. > head bolts, wheel studs, main and rod bolts, most hardware that has specific > torque values around the engine and suspension, as this alters the torque [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Jake, you are good. > How about the threads on either side of tie rod ends? Actually, I hope it > ok because I already did it. There's a second nut to lock the tie rod end [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption >> =---- if the instruction for installation says to USE LOCKTITE, then donnot use ANTI SEIZE! > This summer I've done more work on cars myself than ever before. I > started to think that I want have this truck long enough to need to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Thanks. >This summer I've done more work on cars myself than ever before. I >started to think that I want have this truck long enough to need to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Thanks. Do NOT use Anti-Seize on bearing fits or any other press fit. That nice silver color is metal powder and it takes up clearance. Metal powder is also not something you would want to wind up in bearings or gears as it accelerates wear. I don't use any lubricant at all on wheel nuts since I found that they wouldn't stay tight unless they were dry. In the old days removing the hubcaps guaranteed you would break studs. These days the nuts are not drilled through and they don't rust on like they used to even here where we have enough salt on the road in the winter to harden your arteries.  SignatureRegards Gordie >This summer I’ve done more work on cars myself than ever before. > I >started to think that I want have this truck long enough to need to >repeat some of the repairs I’ve done. With that in mind, >I’ve started >to use liberal amounts of Anti-Seize compound when I throw everything >back together. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Thanks. Not really as long as you are not using it where the anti sieze can contaminate something else. Myself I have been using grease or 90w oil for years with excellant results especailly in rust prone areas. I put a little oil on wheel studs to make sure they don't freeze. Apparaently torque against the wheel is overriding. The only time I have had trouble with wheel nuts backing off was a 73 Ford where tire dealer didn't tighten then properly after putting on snow tires. >>This summer I've done more work on cars myself than ever before. >> I [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > contaminate something else. Myself I have been using grease or 90w oil > for years with excellant results especailly in rust prone areas. > This summer I've done more work on cars myself than ever before. I > started to think that I want have this truck long enough to need to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Thanks. With the advent of 100 thousand mile spark plug change intervals, a lot of people recommend using anti-seize on the plug threads. There are pro's and con's to this, but just be sure not to get any on the insulator or the electrodes. The particles in the anti-seize are conductive and can cause a misfire. Dave uh, hello? This has NOTHING to do with 100,000 mile changes. People in the know have been putitng antiseize on spark plug threads since the 60s at least-- it all has to do with having dissimilar metals together-- the antiseize keeps them from reacting together and seizing up. I vividly remember putting antiseize on the threaqds of the spark plugs in my dad's old MGB when I was 5 years old or so. Don't think it was even an aluminum engine... > uh, hello? Hi This has NOTHING to do with 100,000 mile changes. Thanks for your opinion. Dave >uh, hello? This has NOTHING to do with 100,000 mile changes. No, but it has to do with time passing...it takes time to reach 100K, and time is what it takes for rust to form. >People in the know have been putitng antiseize on spark plug threads >since the 60s at least-- it all has to do with having dissimilar metals >together-- the antiseize keeps them from reacting together and seizing >up. Dissimilar metals isn't the only reason to use. Stainless Steel nuts and bolts need it to prevent galling. >I vividly remember putting antiseize on the threaqds of the spark plugs >in my dad's old MGB when I was 5 years old or so. Don't think it was >even an aluminum engine... I know dissimilar metals aren't the only reason to use. I also know that rust takes time to form. However, it has nothing to do, directly, with the 100,000 mile service interval [which is complete horseshit, BTW] Correlation does not equal Causation. > I know dissimilar metals aren't the only reason to use. I also know > that rust takes time to form. However, it has nothing to do, directly, > with the 100,000 mile service interval [which is complete horseshit, > BTW] > > Correlation does not equal Causation. On your period this week, huh? Take a Midol and call me in the morning. Dave The time it takes for "rust" or oxidation to form is dependent upon (1) the dissimilarity of the two metals in contact -- dissimilarity in the scale of noblest to least noble metal, i.e., the further apart in the scale the two metals are, the more galvanic action; and (2) the solution the two metals are "immersed" in, e.g., saltwater really speeding up the process. Anti-seize compound is made up of aluminum powder/paste, i.e., quite conductive, but may, in itself, be the sacrificial "anode" between two other dissimilar metals. Anti-seize' main purpose is not to halt or slow down rusting/oxidation, although it may do just that depending upon the situation -- its main purpose is to... TADA!!! prevent seizing of parts. It can be used successfully and without downstream issues on head bolts, starter bolts, intake/exhaust manifold bolts/studs, exhaust flanges, mating exhaust pipes/mufflers, (not on any internal engine component, all external applications, especially if exposed to the elements), and lug nuts. The key to using on any torque value-sensitive task is (A) cleanliness of the mating parts PRIOR to conservative application of the anti-seize compound (the micro-welds between the mating parts are decreased somewhat but not enough to affect holding capacity while the surface imperfections are filled in by the very soft aluminum powder -- end result is no galling during tightening or loosening); and (B) torquing gradually to spec, then retorquing after a certain period of time or use. Worst thing to use on closed/capped lug nuts is grease -- ask any Porsche purist... Franko > I know dissimilar metals aren't the only reason to use. I also know > that rust takes time to form. However, it has nothing to do, directly, > with the 100,000 mile service interval [which is complete horseshit, > BTW] > > Correlation does not equal Causation. very inteesting post, Frank- what's the Porsche bit about? Hello burntkat, Porsche lug nuts are of the "closed end" type and are designed to torque down leaving a very small gap to the tip of the wheel lugs/studs. Owners using axle grease on the lugs and nuts would inevitably squeeze the excess into this gap -- the grease has nowhere else to go. The owners would torque down the lug nuts to spec not knowing that the incompressible grease was not allowing the nuts to hold the wheels on tightly enough. I did not hear of any wheels flying off but common problems were bent rotors, damaged alloy wheels, and irregularly worn tires (in that order of occurrence). This was back in the 80's. I had called my close friend in Long Island who had a 911 Targa (still has it, actually) to ask him if he was still greasing the studs -- he laughed and said the anti-seize he switched to as advised by his mechanic worked "much better because your hands don't get greasy anymore rotating the tires." Conservative application of anti-seize on very clean mating parts, gradual torquing to spec, then retorquing after a certain period of time or use. Good stuff if used properly. Regards, Franko > very inteesting post, Frank- what's the Porsche bit about? Your quote: "it all has to do with having dissimilar metals together-- the antiseize keeps them from reacting together and seizing up." Well, it seems from what you said, you didn't imply any reason other than dissimilar metals. If you took the time to apply some reason, you'd see the parent to your post indicated that it would be a good idea to use the 100K service interval to apply to the plugs. Got it, Jr? >I know dissimilar metals aren't the only reason to use. I also know >that rust takes time to form. However, it has nothing to do, directly, >with the 100,000 mile service interval [which is complete horseshit, >BTW] > >Correlation does not equal Causation. > uh, hello? This has NOTHING to do with 100,000 mile changes. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > in my dad's old MGB when I was 5 years old or so. Don't think it was > even an aluminum engine... You just brought back memories of a 87 Cavalier 4 door. 2.0 fuel injected automatic. Dang number 3 spark plug siezed in the head. Left the threaded shell, broke off just above the nut. The customer decided to just part it out rather then paying me to fix it. Charles |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.