Eldon (WA)
Well-known Member
why don't the manufacturers use it in the first place?? Wouldn't it save us all a lot of problems later on?
- Thread starter Eldon (WA)
- Start date
I've wondered the same thing for years. The only thing I can see is it would probably cost them another $5 per machine at assembly, and another $10,000 over the life of the machine in parts not broken because things actually come apart without a torch or hammer.....LOL
Seriously, I think cost, and the fact it would be the right thing to do, are the two main things that prevent the mfgs from using a bit of common sense every once in a while and doing something like this.
Seriously, I think cost, and the fact it would be the right thing to do, are the two main things that prevent the mfgs from using a bit of common sense every once in a while and doing something like this.
Traditional Farmer
Well-known Member
- Location
- Virginia
It would add up to a lot of added cost in labor and the original buyer of a machine is usually not the one that bears the cost of tearing a machine down,they use it for awhile trade it in and the 2nd or 3rd owner ends up working on it.So using anti-sieze in the machine assembling wouldn't be much of a selling point to the original buyer.
It's got to be for costs reasons, I do find loctite products used often but not anti-sieze, but a lot of bolts are zinc coated or some other type of corrosion resistance though.
Speaking about automobiles and factory service manuals, you would be surprised at all the nuts/bolts they recommend replacing after taking off, I assume that goes for many other things too that nobody follows. I think about the only thing most people are receptive on replacing are head bolts on most engines.
Speaking about automobiles and factory service manuals, you would be surprised at all the nuts/bolts they recommend replacing after taking off, I assume that goes for many other things too that nobody follows. I think about the only thing most people are receptive on replacing are head bolts on most engines.
MarkB_MI
Well-known Member
- Location
- Motown USA
You don't say for what application. Lug nuts, spark plugs, or?
For lug nuts, there is a liability issue. Anything that might encourage a lug nut to loosen will eventually be used in court as evidence of negligence, even if the nuts in question have been removed and re-installed multiple times. Manufacturers would rather their customers pay to replace broken lug bolts than sue them for wheels falling off.
Mainly it's a matter of assembly costs. In most cases it is cost-prohibitive to add sealant or anti-seize during installation. Instead, manufacturers use fasteners with pre-applied sealants. These sealants serve multiple purposes; although they're primarily locking agents, they also prevent corrosion and aid in disassembly.
For lug nuts, there is a liability issue. Anything that might encourage a lug nut to loosen will eventually be used in court as evidence of negligence, even if the nuts in question have been removed and re-installed multiple times. Manufacturers would rather their customers pay to replace broken lug bolts than sue them for wheels falling off.
Mainly it's a matter of assembly costs. In most cases it is cost-prohibitive to add sealant or anti-seize during installation. Instead, manufacturers use fasteners with pre-applied sealants. These sealants serve multiple purposes; although they're primarily locking agents, they also prevent corrosion and aid in disassembly.
tractorkrum
Member
I build large computer systems and the engineers often request Loctite be used on screws. So screws are purchased with Loctite applied at the source. Often this is just something that the engineer feels is necessary as that is something that someone told him in the past that all screws should have Loctite even though lock washers are used. Not all engineers will request it on the fasteners. These are non moving parts. We see more problems occur during assembly because of it and sometime we need to clean it off prior to assembly.
NoNewParts
Member
yep, cost
working with engineers and beancounters, they constantly go over every little thing everywhere to cut costs....or should I say maximize profit.
saw a $5 figure above.....they will work endlessly to save 5 cents on a component.
oh, and they don't give a hooey about difficulties or impossibilities
for the mechanics that have to work on em....after.
save pennies, try to design it so it will last the warranty and be 'safe' with an owner that just turns the key and puts gas in it.
also, like said, new car designers don't worry about repairs.
On the assembly line they want fasteners to be installed quickly and when torqued to spec......stay there...forever.
working with engineers and beancounters, they constantly go over every little thing everywhere to cut costs....or should I say maximize profit.
saw a $5 figure above.....they will work endlessly to save 5 cents on a component.
oh, and they don't give a hooey about difficulties or impossibilities
for the mechanics that have to work on em....after.
save pennies, try to design it so it will last the warranty and be 'safe' with an owner that just turns the key and puts gas in it.
also, like said, new car designers don't worry about repairs.
On the assembly line they want fasteners to be installed quickly and when torqued to spec......stay there...forever.
Deutz Lover
Member
Nonewparts and other posters,
You are so right. The same reason they don't use stainless bolts and nuts or brass/bronze where it would make removal easier like on exhaust parts. Costs and time.
The same reason I am dealing with a problem now. Our 2005 Camry needs new CV shafts. The older types have a castellated nut and cotter pin or nut with a stamped castellated cover and cotter pin. Now there is just a modified nut with a protrusion that has to be uncrimped from a groove to remove it. So no hole to drill or cotter pin to or slot to align at the factory. They just torque it and crimp the nut at the groove.
The problem arises with removal. None of the loaner sockets for the nut were the right size or were only 6 point. The nut has 12 points. I had to buy a deep socket at an outrageous price.
Fortunately the replacement shaft has a 6 point nut and they did have the right loaner socket.
So it has cost me several additional hours of lost time to save the manufacturers two minutes if that much plus my expense of a 12 point socket. Luckily I found one that was $14 and not $18-35.
You are so right. The same reason they don't use stainless bolts and nuts or brass/bronze where it would make removal easier like on exhaust parts. Costs and time.
The same reason I am dealing with a problem now. Our 2005 Camry needs new CV shafts. The older types have a castellated nut and cotter pin or nut with a stamped castellated cover and cotter pin. Now there is just a modified nut with a protrusion that has to be uncrimped from a groove to remove it. So no hole to drill or cotter pin to or slot to align at the factory. They just torque it and crimp the nut at the groove.
The problem arises with removal. None of the loaner sockets for the nut were the right size or were only 6 point. The nut has 12 points. I had to buy a deep socket at an outrageous price.
Fortunately the replacement shaft has a 6 point nut and they did have the right loaner socket.
So it has cost me several additional hours of lost time to save the manufacturers two minutes if that much plus my expense of a 12 point socket. Luckily I found one that was $14 and not $18-35.
Manufacturer's are using more Loctite and using lock washers less from what I'm seeing probably due to cost. I also think people would be surprised at how many bolts manufacturer's require replacement of at service. Just did a hub bearing on a Buick which required replacement of the mounting bolts upon reassembly. Service information said failure to do so could result in bolt breakage and loss of steering...and death. I wonder how often that is ignored. OEM told me it was a loss of coating issue which would encourage corrosion and ultimately failure.
showcrop
Well-known Member
The additional cost looks insignificant to us, but when you stop and think about the probably dozens of things that we would like to see done when things are manufactured, you can see significant money. In order to keep costs in line, they have to keep manufacturing lean, evaluating very small cost items.
Deutz Lover
Member
Remember one thing though. They get their parts wholesale. I once saw what it would cost to replace each part on a car. The total cost would add up to well over 10 times the original purchase price making a $10K car cost $100k or more. But I really would not want to get a car in kit form. lol. Now where are those assembly instructions?
Exactly! It's called planned obsolescence.
Yes, the upfront costs matters. But - when you're in the business of selling cars/trucks/tractors, who want's to design one that's a
pleasure to repair?
If they cared at all about making things easier to fix- the entire design of vehicles would be WAAAAYYY different.
Everything would be very modular. All components that you could pop on and off.
But - then you'd just keep popping on new components and you'd never buy a new vehicle.
Just compare a 1945 tractor (before planned obsolescence was a word) with a 1985 tractor. One's still running like it was new - guess
which one it is.
Yes, the upfront costs matters. But - when you're in the business of selling cars/trucks/tractors, who want's to design one that's a
pleasure to repair?
If they cared at all about making things easier to fix- the entire design of vehicles would be WAAAAYYY different.
Everything would be very modular. All components that you could pop on and off.
But - then you'd just keep popping on new components and you'd never buy a new vehicle.
Just compare a 1945 tractor (before planned obsolescence was a word) with a 1985 tractor. One's still running like it was new - guess
which one it is.
jimg.allentown
Well-known Member
Actually, they DO use anti-seize on many parts. Oxygen sensors are installed with anti-seize compounds on them. Any parts that use nickel alloys are also treated with anti-seize compounds.
Why don't they use it more? Well, its purpose is to prevent galling when using nickel bearing alloys. Since there are not a lot of nickel bearing alloys used in auto manufacture, use of anti-seize is of limited usefulness.
As to expense, the stuff simply is not that expensive as to be prohibitive for use in manufacture. While it may seem expensive to go to the store and buy a can of it, manufacturers buy their materials in bulk, and it is much less expensive that way.
Use of stainless alloys in automobiles is limited, and for good reason. Corrosion resistance is a primary reason for use of stainless, but there are disadvantages as well. Stainless is more expensive than standard non-stainless steels. Properties are another disadvantage. Stainless is softer than non-stainless steels. It does not hold an edge as well. It is prone to galling in fasteners. Lastly, stainless alloys are attacked by chlorides. Chlorides are the salts used on highways to melt snow and ice.
In this instance, there are a lot of good sound reasons for "why don't they...."
Why don't they use it more? Well, its purpose is to prevent galling when using nickel bearing alloys. Since there are not a lot of nickel bearing alloys used in auto manufacture, use of anti-seize is of limited usefulness.
As to expense, the stuff simply is not that expensive as to be prohibitive for use in manufacture. While it may seem expensive to go to the store and buy a can of it, manufacturers buy their materials in bulk, and it is much less expensive that way.
Use of stainless alloys in automobiles is limited, and for good reason. Corrosion resistance is a primary reason for use of stainless, but there are disadvantages as well. Stainless is more expensive than standard non-stainless steels. Properties are another disadvantage. Stainless is softer than non-stainless steels. It does not hold an edge as well. It is prone to galling in fasteners. Lastly, stainless alloys are attacked by chlorides. Chlorides are the salts used on highways to melt snow and ice.
In this instance, there are a lot of good sound reasons for "why don't they...."
like others have said its cost and time, manufactures only care about how fast and cheap they can assemble a vehicle, not common sense, every once in awhile that will come back to bite them one i remember was late 70's Lincolns, some brilliant designer got the idea to use aluminum brackets to space the steel bumpers correctly no insulators, just aluminum on steel, the cars had serious corrosion problems and ford issued a recall to fix them, new spacers with plastic insulators, wonder how much more that cost them instead of the cost of doing it right on the assembly line , no telling how many of those kits i installed while working at a ford dealer
Deutz Lover
Member
Although not in the fastener class I imagine they use stainless stee exhaustl pipes on the new diesel trucks that employ DEF or do they?
Actually I do use stainless steel or brass nuts on my tractor exhaust manifolds and apparently some OEM tractors use brass nuts too. It does not have to be terribly strong for this purpose.
Knife blades are another matter and you still run into salt corrosion with most forms of hard stainless blades. I found that 440C will pit like the dickens in some environments.
Actually I do use stainless steel or brass nuts on my tractor exhaust manifolds and apparently some OEM tractors use brass nuts too. It does not have to be terribly strong for this purpose.
Knife blades are another matter and you still run into salt corrosion with most forms of hard stainless blades. I found that 440C will pit like the dickens in some environments.
They do on some fasteners. Lots of locktite product. But the manufacturer is mostly concerned with building a quality product at a given price point. So cost is a issue.
There is no "Planned obsolescence" . There is a mean time between failure, and a projected service life. As far as a 1945 tractor still running, I'll bet that it has been rebuilt at least once, and had a bunch of parts replaced.
Determined
Well-known Member
The cost of the anti-sieze is not the issue.
It's the small fortune it would cost them in hand cleaner and paper towels for the 100's of workers walking around with silver fingers, noses and foreheads. :lol:
It's the small fortune it would cost them in hand cleaner and paper towels for the 100's of workers walking around with silver fingers, noses and foreheads. :lol:
I am reminded of cars past: Had a Ford Bronco II with alloy wheels (factory) and steel lugnuts. Every time there was a wheel to be removed you were guaranteed a fight. Finally started greasing lugs and shoulders of nuts, and that pretty well solved the problem. Otherwise they would corrode fast.
John Deere D
Well-known Member
In my career we always applied ant-seize to all fasteners on the WESTINGHOUSE STEAM TURBINES and WESTINNGHOUSE W92 Gas Turbine fasteners on the "Case Split Lines". These fasteners ran greater than 1500 deg F.
Also the HEAD BOLTS on the 4000 HP NORDEBERG,2000 HP & 4000 HP Ingersoll Rand, as well as the 9000 HP Clark/Dresser Rand units.
All HEADBOLTS,STUDDS and NUTS that required a Specific TORQUE were lubed with ANTI SIZE. Most all head bolts were torqued to 100FT LBS and then a HYDRAULIC JACK was attached to the THTREADS protruding through the NUT. The HEAD STUDDS were then stretched until all JACKS/RAMS read 10,000 PSI . At that point all NUTS were ran down until they came in contact with the head or the machined BOSS on the head. There was a Girdle that held as many RAMS as there were HEAD BOLTS so as all STUDDS were stretched the same amount at the same time.
Bob...
Also the HEAD BOLTS on the 4000 HP NORDEBERG,2000 HP & 4000 HP Ingersoll Rand, as well as the 9000 HP Clark/Dresser Rand units.
All HEADBOLTS,STUDDS and NUTS that required a Specific TORQUE were lubed with ANTI SIZE. Most all head bolts were torqued to 100FT LBS and then a HYDRAULIC JACK was attached to the THTREADS protruding through the NUT. The HEAD STUDDS were then stretched until all JACKS/RAMS read 10,000 PSI . At that point all NUTS were ran down until they came in contact with the head or the machined BOSS on the head. There was a Girdle that held as many RAMS as there were HEAD BOLTS so as all STUDDS were stretched the same amount at the same time.
Bob...
We carried spare tires on all of our rigs and had to change our flats on the road. Our garage would put wheels on dry and pull them down with a 8 foot bar. On the road we had only a 3 foot bar to break them loose and don't think that wasn't hell at times. They got mad at me because when I put lug nuts back on I would put engine oil on nuts and studs and they would draw down a lot easier.
Oil is a better lubricant on new threads than anti-sieze. Well lubricated threads produce less variation in run-down torque and achieve more consistent bolt stretch at assembly. Manufactures could simply be choosing proper assembly for longer product life over easy dis-assembly of a product that fails prematurely.
Many manufacturers use fasteners with Loc-Tite or some other adhesive pre-applied by the fastener supplier. I agree anti-sieze would be a mess around most assembly lines, it is much harder to clean-up than oil.
Many manufacturers use fasteners with Loc-Tite or some other adhesive pre-applied by the fastener supplier. I agree anti-sieze would be a mess around most assembly lines, it is much harder to clean-up than oil.
They have quit using lock washers because they don't work and are a waste of money
http://www.eng-tips.com/faqs.cfm?fid=1257
And the cost of never seize or other chemicals does make a difference to the bottom line. If you don't need it, then not using 50 cents worth of never seize on all of the bolts on 100,000 vehicles is enough to bay a man a pretty good wage.
http://www.eng-tips.com/faqs.cfm?fid=1257
And the cost of never seize or other chemicals does make a difference to the bottom line. If you don't need it, then not using 50 cents worth of never seize on all of the bolts on 100,000 vehicles is enough to bay a man a pretty good wage.
Hobo,NC
Well-known Member
- Location
- Sanford, NC
There are some areas its beneficial BUT NOT EVERY THING....
I can not imagine the mess it would make if vehicle manufacturers slobbed it on every thing :twisted:
Brendon-KS
Well-known Member
- Location
- Goessel, KS
As a project engineer in the ag machinery industry I can say that at least in our office you are
exactly right. What is often perceived by many folks as "planned obsolescence" is simply
engineering a balance between a long service life and the cost. It would be simple to double the
design life of a machine but then it would cost too much and nobody would buy it. It is
challenging to deliver what the market demands for a price that is competitive and all aspects of
the design are evaluated to make sure that the cost is justified in meeting the customer
expectations. Things like anti-seize applied to hardware strictly to make something a little
easier to take apart years down the road will rarely pass the test.
exactly right. What is often perceived by many folks as "planned obsolescence" is simply
engineering a balance between a long service life and the cost. It would be simple to double the
design life of a machine but then it would cost too much and nobody would buy it. It is
challenging to deliver what the market demands for a price that is competitive and all aspects of
the design are evaluated to make sure that the cost is justified in meeting the customer
expectations. Things like anti-seize applied to hardware strictly to make something a little
easier to take apart years down the road will rarely pass the test.
Eldon (WA)
Well-known Member
I'm not talking about using it on everything....just the things where people say "I use never-seize so next time it will come apart easier". Not sure why everyone assumed automotive....I was talking farm use.
Hobo,NC
Well-known Member
- Location
- Sanford, NC
I am sure folks would belch about something it caused if they did...
I understand some uses but not bubba applying it to every thing..
I goes to show you how bubba thinks...
Clear silicone is 10X better
than antiseize. On parts that
don't get hot anyway. Use it
at work on salt trucks on
anything without stainless
bolts. Oil pan bolts,
driveshaft Ujoint bolts,
brake backing plate bolts.
Works amazingly well on small
bolts that are prone to
seizing up and snapping off.
Ross
than antiseize. On parts that
don't get hot anyway. Use it
at work on salt trucks on
anything without stainless
bolts. Oil pan bolts,
driveshaft Ujoint bolts,
brake backing plate bolts.
Works amazingly well on small
bolts that are prone to
seizing up and snapping off.
Ross
Similar threads
We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.
Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.
Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy