Thread: Help Required Selecting Switches and Pots

i abhor throwing old switches and pots away

i prefer to rescue em first using WD40 or similar

after drenching...most scratchy/stuck issues disappear from pots espc

as for switch...maybe a resolder or checking of the contacts which sometimes comes too far apart after a long while ...

a pair of pliers to manipulate the lil pins closer together so tht the sliding thingamajig makes sure contact with the fixed 'pins'

if after these steps things are still 'problematic' ...then maybe a visit to stewmac site might be in order ...

the pots can be gotten cheaper at local electronics store btw

They dont cost much so I would prob replace them. Im about to replace the pots in a '92 Ibanez cos theyre so scratchy..You could prob get them cheaper locally but..Stewmac is a fair way just for pots..Your local guitar shop should have them..500k pots are the go and just a 5 way strat style switch

Thanks for the replies ..... I was thinking if I needed to put the pots out it would be best to replace them with new so my problems wouldn't come back. I didn't know about WD40.

I didn't think Stewmac were too bad a price .... $3.00 for the pots is only $6.00 for the guitar and local prices for the switches on line are about $15-$20. Postage from Stewmac were also good at $10.00. What I like about mail order is I don't need to worry about trying to find time to get into a store .... order during the week and they are generally available by the weekend, no problems about going into the store and not finding them in stock etc.

I will see how I go.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by R3R

i abhor throwing old switches and pots away

i prefer to rescue em first using WD40 or similar

after drenching...most scratchy/stuck issues disappear from pots espc

WD40 doesnt belong anywhere near a guitar. The stuff shouldnt go anywhere near anything that might have plastics in it (ie bushings on pots, electronic compnetry etc). Use a proper inert electrical contact cleaner on your pots. If the carbon track in the pot is worn then the pot will have to be to be replaced.

Originally Posted by kiwigeo

WD40 doesnt belong anywhere near a guitar. The stuff shouldnt go anywhere near anything that might have plastics in it (ie bushings on pots, electronic compnetry etc). Use a proper inert electrical contact cleaner on your pots. If the carbon track in the pot is worn then the pot will have to be to be replaced.

when i drench ma pots in WD40 ...it is done OUTSIDE of guitar

Originally Posted by R3R

when i drench ma pots in WD40 ...it is done OUTSIDE of guitar

Its still not good for them. They'll wear out again, and faster because WD40 will wear out the plastic parts inside the pot. I used it on a scratchy pot once, it fixed it for a few days then it came back, even worse than before.

Originally Posted by R3R

when i drench ma pots in WD40 ...it is done OUTSIDE of guitar

Re-read my post. I generally dont use any cleaner/lubricant on my guitars unless I know whats exactly in them. Pull up an MSDS for WD40 and it wont tell you exactly whats in the stuff. Judging by the smell of the stuff and its other properties Id say there are some distillates and other components that shouldnt be let anywhere near plastic.

I remember an incident here at work a few years where a bright spark decided it would be good to give a circuit board a clean up with WD40. I remember chuckling as I watched a large blister appear on the top of a couple of the plastic IC cases on the board.

The only use for WD40 in my workshop is for geting rust off old plane blades and chisels.

Originally Posted by littlephil

Its still not good for them. They'll wear out again, and faster because WD40 will wear out the plastic parts inside the pot. I used it on a scratchy pot once, it fixed it for a few days then it came back, even worse than before.

oh..sorry to hear tht

i drenched some pots in wd40 i had tht was difficult to turn as it was not used for a long while ...there was also slight scratchiness when attempting to 'sweep' the pot (make it go from 0 to 10)

after the excess has evaporated (being left out to dry) all pots worked fine and smooth

tht was 3 months ago

the pots continue to work fine and smooth

Originally Posted by kiwigeo

Re-read my post. I generally dont use any cleaner/lubricant on my guitars unless I know whats exactly in them. Pull up an MSDS for WD40 and it wont tell you exactly whats in the stuff. Judging by the smell of the stuff and its other properties Id say there are some distillates and other components that shouldnt be let anywhere near plastic.

I remember an incident here at work a few years where a bright spark decided it would be good to give a circuit board a clean up with WD40. I remember chuckling as I watched a large blister appear on the top of a couple of the plastic IC cases on the board.

The only use for WD40 in my workshop is for geting rust off old plane blades and chisels.

see above

the pots tht i drenched continue to work fine 3 months after 'drenching'

there was no plastic damage of any kind

If it worked for you thats all good.....but I reiterate my point about knowing exactly what is in anything Im using on or in my guitar. Fingerboard oils are another good example....some of these contain distillates and other components that I wouldnt want anywhere near my instruments.

Originally Posted by kiwigeo

If it worked for you thats all good.....but I reiterate my point about knowing exactly what is in anything Im using on or in my guitar. Fingerboard oils are another good example....some of these contain distillates and other components that I wouldnt want anywhere near my instruments.

i have no idea wht is in wd40

all i know is tht when i spray me pots which were stuck n scratchy ...and tweak the pot control vigorously from end to end ...they became unstuck..smooth and not scratchy

after a few months ...they continue to operate in the 'improved' post-wd40 condition without signs of physical damage

if wd40 had rendered the pots inoperable...i would not have 'advised' it be used to 'salvage' old pots

if you (or anyone else) have pics of pots rendered inoperable by wd40 ...i would like to see em as i am curious as to wht sort of 'damage' is possible on pots from wd40

Here are some tech heads discussing use of WD40 on pots. Digest and decide for yourself.

Noisy pots and switches! - diyAudio

Cheers Martin

A kiwi chemist has done some chromatograph and mass spectrometer work on WD40 and come up with following analysis:

(snip)

Newsgroups: sci.chem
From: [email protected] (Bruce Hamilton)
Subject: Re: WD 40 Ingredients
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:41:41 +12

In article <[email protected]>
[email protected] (Everett J. Harriman) writes:
...
>Does anyone know the composition of the product, "WD 40"? I'm
>especially interested in identifying the ingredient used to give
>the penetrating property to WD 40.

The WD stands for Water Displacing. I haven't analysed it,
( not commonly sold here ) but somebody ( Professor Toraki? )
squirted some down a GC/MS and confirmed the solvent was
boiling around 150-200C and only contained a minor % of
aromatics, which means it is either a narrow boiling range
kerosine fraction, or a special narrow boiling range solvent
like low aromatics white spirits.

I've analysed a similar product, and it was around 80%
kerosine, 10% acidless tallow oil, and 10% lubricating
oil light base gade - with some additional antioxidants
added to improve durability. When the composition of
WD-40 last came up in sci.chem, I wasn't sure if it was a
water displacing solvent only, but subsequently there
has been a long discussion about the film left behind in
some rec.* groups - which is why it should not be used as
a lubricant, the film is only a temporary corrosion protective
layer.

That would make WD-40 like the formulation above.
The kerosine is the solvent, the tallow oil and lubricating
base grade provide the means for the fluid to displace
water from surfaces and, when the kerosine has evaporated,
leave a thin, protective film on the surface that provides
temporary corrision protection. It is possible that it may
have some solid lubricant in it ( PTFE,Graphite,MoS2 ),
but I suspect there would not be enough to provide any
useful lubrication - and thus should not be used to wash
"proper lubricants" off bearing surfaces, chains etc..

Note that the light lubricant base grade is just the vacuum
distilled, high boiling, hydrocarbon fraction used in light
lubricants, but has minimal lubrication properties ( until all
the Extreme Pressure and other compounds are added ) other
than those conferred by the viscosity. It is not a "lubricant",
just a base grade.

So, in summary, it is a water-displacing formulation which
deposits a film that provides temporary corrosion protection
( temporary usually means days to months, depending on the
environment). The 40 is supposed to mean that it was the
40th formulation evaluated - not certain if true or not.

Bruce Hamilton (snip)

Originally Posted by kiwigeo

Here are some tech heads discussing use of WD40 on pots. Digest and decide for yourself.

Noisy pots and switches! - diyAudio

Cheers Martin

...wht i see in this thread is some ppl using it and some warning those who have used it ...

...err...like this one...

...i dunt see any hard conclusions either way...hence ma need for PICS ...not theory things

Originally Posted by kiwigeo

A kiwi chemist has done some chromatograph and mass spectrometer work on WD40 and come up with following analysis:

(snip)

Newsgroups: sci.chem
From: [email protected] (Bruce Hamilton)
Subject: Re: WD 40 Ingredients
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:41:41 +12

In article <[email protected]>
[email protected] (Everett J. Harriman) writes:
...
>Does anyone know the composition of the product, "WD 40"? I'm
>especially interested in identifying the ingredient used to give
>the penetrating property to WD 40.

The WD stands for Water Displacing. I haven't analysed it,
( not commonly sold here ) but somebody ( Professor Toraki? )
squirted some down a GC/MS and confirmed the solvent was
boiling around 150-200C and only contained a minor % of
aromatics, which means it is either a narrow boiling range
kerosine fraction, or a special narrow boiling range solvent
like low aromatics white spirits.

I've analysed a similar product, and it was around 80%
kerosine, 10% acidless tallow oil, and 10% lubricating
oil light base gade - with some additional antioxidants
added to improve durability. When the composition of
WD-40 last came up in sci.chem, I wasn't sure if it was a
water displacing solvent only, but subsequently there
has been a long discussion about the film left behind in
some rec.* groups - which is why it should not be used as
a lubricant, the film is only a temporary corrosion protective
layer.

That would make WD-40 like the formulation above.
The kerosine is the solvent, the tallow oil and lubricating
base grade provide the means for the fluid to displace
water from surfaces and, when the kerosine has evaporated,
leave a thin, protective film on the surface that provides
temporary corrision protection. It is possible that it may
have some solid lubricant in it ( PTFE,Graphite,MoS2 ),
but I suspect there would not be enough to provide any
useful lubrication - and thus should not be used to wash
"proper lubricants" off bearing surfaces, chains etc..

Note that the light lubricant base grade is just the vacuum
distilled, high boiling, hydrocarbon fraction used in light
lubricants, but has minimal lubrication properties ( until all
the Extreme Pressure and other compounds are added ) other
than those conferred by the viscosity. It is not a "lubricant",
just a base grade.

So, in summary, it is a water-displacing formulation which
deposits a film that provides temporary corrosion protection
( temporary usually means days to months, depending on the
environment). The 40 is supposed to mean that it was the
40th formulation evaluated - not certain if true or not.

Bruce Hamilton (snip)

...yup...looks like tremendous theories and analysis here

...i suppose i am to be impressed...but


...but are there pics showing damage caused to pots from wd40?

All good mate...youve made up your mind....Im sure the rest of us will do the same.

Re theory and fact. The results of analysis using a chromatograph or mass spectrometer are not theory. Both are very sensitive measuring instruments and the the guy who posted the information up is a qualified chemist.


No photos on hand of damage to plastics from WD40 but I assure you the computer motherboard I watched being drenched with WD40 was dead when the guy tried to fire it up again and the tops of the PLASTIC IC chip casings looked like someone had taken a blow lamp to them.

Im busy at work so really dont have a lot of time to devote to researching this topic but I did do a random google search on the phrase "WD40 potentiometer" and the general consensus was that 1. contact cleaner or deoxidant should be used on noisey potentiometers rather than WD40 and 2. the use of a cleaner is only a short term measure and for a permanent fix the pot should be replaced.

You can actually do a little test yourself if you dont believe there are plastic melting solvents in WD40. Open up your PC and empty a can of WD40 over the circuit board and then post up some pics here on the forum. If the circuit board survives with no damage to plastic components and there's not an oily film left on the circuit board then Ill donate $200 to a charity of your choice.

Cheers Martin