Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #62092
From: John Schroeder <jgschroeder2@windstream.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: loctite
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 13:17:40 -0400
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
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 <Tim@myrv10.com> 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/
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster