Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Rusted on nuts, how to remove

Just saw this vid and thought it would be good to share it, I haven't used it myself, but the vid looks impressive.

http://www.chonday.com/Videos/rusnutcankj4

Not sure which forum to use, mods can move it to maintenance or tutorials etc if they see fit.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/469995-rusted-on-nuts-how-to-remove/
Share on other sites

OK so far the myth is busted. I have an old boat trailer which has been in the sea plenty of times so wheel nuts are pretty rusty.

I applied the candle and held the lighter under the nut til my fingers burnt (about a minute).

I tried the standard power bar with no effect. (BTW it was 24 deg outside)

If you look at the last pic you will see pieces of the candle which shows how hard I was holding it against the nut. It is my opinion that the lighter can't generate enough heat to heat the nut/stud to the point where they will melt the candle wax. After all the axle etc will act as a heat sink. I have applied CRC to another nut and will give the lighter/candle another go (not to the nut with the CRC) tomorrow and compare it with the CRC soaked nut.

I have in fact removed a wheel on the other side by soaking it in CRC and using a pipe on the end of the power bar. Thought the candle might be easier but its not looking good!

DSCF0831.JPG

DSCF0834.JPG

DSCF0832.JPG

DSCF0833.JPG

  • Like 1

In the video it looks like he melts the wax between the stud and the nut. The nut in the vid looks thinner than yours so it may have heated up enough to wick some wax into the thread. 
A jet lighter or small plumbing gas torch would get some more heat on the thicker nut.

Yeah I think the situation the video shows it is wrong. From what i've heard the best application is on exhaust nuts and bolts that may have rusted together. The wax supposedly lubes the rust rather than the rust in the thread galling and seizing the nut when undoing it.

It's nothing a bit of dubbya dee or crc can't handle though.

Google Chemresearch Yield. Thats all you need 


But can it remove RB crank sprockets is the true test of any lubricant. Especially 25 year old rusted on RB30 ones. If yes I will buy some today. Have had so many mates reccomend different products and still nothing works very well, it seems nothing can get in between the crank and the sprocket.

Crank sprocket. The big sprocket behind the harmomic balancer that you have to remove to change the oil pump or front main seal. It either practically falls off or takes the power of Thor using 11 pry bars to get off. No amount of spraying any sort of 'release liquid' works.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...