Which solder/flux combination do you use for etched kit construction?

I'm in "exactly" the same situation - I do hope Simon is okay. As for the Finney V2 - I'm not going to let it stop me opening the boxes - a new project is on it's way!

 

As my B.O.G. flux was getting extremely low I started looking at an alternative. I've tried a few alternatives - the citric acid and phosphoric acid versions above but I didn't like them as much as the B.O.G. Safety flux. I also tried a couple of the recommended no-clean fluxes recommended on the Guild forum - these were alcohol based but I couldn't get on with them either - the flux just seemed to flash off instantly before I could get the joint up to temperature.

I then checked the Guild product directory for alternative suppliers and they also listed www.soldersandfluxes.co.uk . So I decided to give them a try. Note it is better to go to the Vehicle Restoration page Vehicle Restoration rather than the model engineering page - it seemed to have a wider range of fluxes. So I decided to try the Radsol 301 and the WL1 fluxes - I ordered online late Tuesday evening (midnight!) and they got delivered at lunchtime today - so excellent service.

So initial tests on a few pieces of scrap and I do like the WL1 flux - it certainly seems on a par with the B.O.G. flux for soldering.

The 2 photos below so from left to right 4 different tinning regimes - all using carrs solder cream.
left - solder cream no flux
then - B.O.G. flux
then - WL1 flux
right - red label phoshoric flux.





The wetting with the WL1 seemed just as good as the B.O.G. that nice flat even silver flow like water. It seems to have less residue than the other fluxes and the edges have less of a meniscus than the other fluxes - the edges of the solder seems flatten out more than the other fluxes.

So I tried a few other tests with joints, brass, castings etc. so far it I like it - I think it has a strong potential to be a worthy B.O.G. replacement. The test pieces above were washed and cleaned but the other pieces have been left as soldered to see what effect any flux residue has on the brass and nickel-silver over the next week.

I will definitely be trying this on the next build and will report after a bit more time with it.

 

Cheers - just ordered some for comparison.

As always with new sites (new to me anyway!) like this I like to see what else is on offer, especially on this one as my better half has done a few stained glass "windows" - actually framed pictures. So I was intrigued by the micro-wave kiln - just need to find a problem or a modelling task for it to solve!

HotPot Microwave Kiln Medium 110mm

 

I wouldn't say exactly the same but it's certainly the closest I've found so far.

So ordered Saturday afternoon and it turned up this morning - well packed so a thumbs up for good and prompt service.

Initial impressions are it's very similar to B.O.G. flux in that it's blue! Although a slightly different blue - I would say more aqua blue rather than a cerulean blue of the B.O.G. The other difference is the smell - not technical in anyway but it is different. Not sure how to describe the B.O.G. flux but after consulting with my offspring the verdict was that the Pearsons flux smells just like those solid blue disinfectant blocks they put in the gents urinals!



in use - I tried tinning my sample sheets used earlier - the Pearsons Safety flux used in the sample circled in red.

This was on the brass sheet - very oxidised no cleaning.



and the nickel-silver sheet.



Again wetting and flow seemed on a par with B.O.G. and WL1.

A couple of test joints, an overlap and a 90deg join.



Actually it flowed really nicely - the resultant solder joint was nice and smooth, the bead of solder in the corner of the joint was nice and tight if you know what I mean, also not too much spatter. The 90deg join it was soldered on the right hand side but it's not that clear on the photo but on the lefthand side it is possible to make out that the solder penetrated all through the join. So pretty good result as far as I'm concerned.

A couple of other points - I'm not sure whether to describe it as viscosity or surface tension but again very similar to the B.O.G. flux. As shown in the first photo I decant the flux into a little dropper bottle to apply just a drop or two from the needle to the joint. With B.O.G. and Pearsons then the flux stays as a bead drop - much like a rain drop on a freshly waxed and polished car - whereas the WL1 flux seemed to have a much lower surface tension so that when you tried to place a drop or two it immediately flattened out and washed over the entire joint - like a rain drop on a car that hasn't been polished for a month or so. The one other small difference noted so far is that with the B.O.G. flux I found some of the ingredients tends to settle out of suspension and the bottle needed a good shake prior to use - now it might be because it's been in transit or that the flux is fresher but there were no such issues with the Pearsons flux.

So there is the caveat that I need to use it few days and also see if there is any corrosion on the joints just test but overall the Pearson Safety Flux is not exactly the same as the B.O.G. flux but it's the nearest equivalent I've found so far. In some ways it slightly edges it so far as it doesn't appear to get a sediment. It is better than the WL1 flux in that it isn't plastered in hazard marking symbols and certainly the fumes were a lot less offensive.

From my very limited testing so far I think if you have been using B.O.G. flux then this is the best equivalent and appears to be equally effective and useable and one I think I will be recommending. So many thanks for the link @ScottW a brilliant find.

p.s. forgot to say total charge for 200ml incl p&p was £10.16 so it's not going to break the bank!