X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 13:17:40 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from pacmmta53.windstream.net ([162.39.147.112] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.5) with ESMTP id 5560081 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 25 May 2012 12:25:51 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=162.39.147.112; envelope-from=jgschroeder2@windstream.net X-Original-Return-Path: X-WS-COS: WSOB804 X-Cloudmark-Category: Undefined:Undefined X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=ItSgKUvEgpuArvFeGcEX9ho8h0+4pTt73K5WgrMP114= c=1 sm=0 a=t394YqdB1IoA:10 a=UT_QgiwtmQIA:10 a=J6lnL92WhukA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=TTfbHe0tAAAA:8 a=A7Wvaz8EAAAA:8 a=8sHfMexN_K0bqPO6cpkA:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=VutWauUFA6sA:10 a=Iq9ARetYZYIL+APp1g0raw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 Authentication-Results: pacmmta53 smtp.user=jgschroeder2; auth=pass (LOGIN) Received: from [98.17.71.115] ([98.17.71.115:60129] helo=john-study-2) by pacmmta53 (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.47 r(39824M)) with ESMTPA id 30/61-21063-B62BFBF4; Fri, 25 May 2012 12:25:15 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: Re: [LML] Re: loctite Reply-To: jgschroeder2@windstream.net References: X-Original-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 12:25:13 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "John Schroeder" X-Original-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.64 (Win32) For those who have Continentals in their Lancairs, there is a publication, down loadable from their website, that pretty well covers what to use on all of their engine parts, nuts, bolts, fuel lines, et al. It is: SIL99-2B CURRENT LISTING OF SEALANTS, LUBRICANTS, & ADHESIVES AUTHORIZED BY TCM. It may be up to a C, D, E ... by now. Hope this helps John Schroeder Lancair ES On Fri, 25 May 2012 11:58:14 -0400, Tim Olson wrote: > I had the same question. Attached are the technical data sheets > for both. Reading them, there are things that point to either. > My guess is that they are largely similar, and probably both > acceptable. I ordered 567 and was supposed to pick it up in > a couple hours. Reading it again, 565 mentions motor oils > more specifically, which is what I'm working on tonight. > I probably could have gone 565. I don't know that there > is going to be a significant difference either way. They > both are fairly instant sealers, that are anaerobic. > So I don't know that you'll go wrong with either. > > If anyone knows the real difference, I'd love to hear it too. > Tim > > On 5/25/2012 8:59 AM, larry.eversmeyer@faa.gov wrote: >> >> I've been reading the threads using different lubricant on fittings. >> I've read where loctite 567 & 565 are being used. Does anyone know the >> difference / or advantages between these two. >> >> Legacy still building >> Larry Eversmeyer > -- Cheers, John Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/