John_H <
john...@inbox.com> wrote:
> Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>John_H <
john...@inbox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Since at least the 1980's any DSE solder I've ever used has been
>>> rebranded Multicore (it said so on the label). I'm not familiar with
>>> Digitor solder but DSE still sell Digitor brand soldering stations and
>>> multimeters.
>>
>>I've got a little bit left on an old reel branded Multicore with no
>>mention of Dick Smith, got it with some electronics parts so I don't
>>know where it was purchased.
>>Same as this:
>>
http://www.powertoolsdirect.com/multicore-m7-ersin-5-core-solder-60-40-0-7mm-diameter
>>That says this is the same as the "Savbit" stuff.
>
> FWIW what I've always known as "Savbit" isn't 60/40 since it has a
> significant copper content, otherwise it wouldn't work. It's also got
> a higher melting point (and wider molten range) than conventional
> 60/40 and hence isn't as nice to use IMHO. The "quick overview" would
> appear to be a plug for Savbit rather than a description of the
> advertised item.
Thought so, but searching online didn't quickly come up with a conclusive
description of it. I gather Ersin (who don't seem to have a website, seems
they used to have
multicore.com) make both the Multicore and Savbit
products, the latter they sometimes call Multicore Savbit.
>>I've also got a roll of plain Dick Smith branded stuff, no Multicore
>>logo.
>
> The two remnant rolls I've got both have Multicore on the label though
> DSE could well have used more than one supplier.
>
>>I guess I might have to buy some of the Chinese stuff and have a
>>"solder-off", though I'd really need a scientific way to judge
>>quality.
>
> Ease of use and final appearance are the main criteria that matter
> IMHO.
Thing is that if I do a test I tend to want it to be objective. I
think I'd end up with quite a complicated set-up if I did decide
to do this, or maybe I'll just have to wait until a Spectrometer
comes my way.
>>Here's a recent thread on the EEVblog forums that I just found:
>>
http://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/solder-quality/
>>They tend to be pretty rude about the Chinese stuff.
>
> Probably deservedly so since many Chinese manufactured devices have
> featured some pretty rough soldering in the past, but I'm still happy
> to judge it as I find it and the aforementioned solder is both nice to
> use and makes good looking joints. Whether the quality is consistent
> between batches remains to be seen although many of the once
> run-of-the mill Chinese manufacturers seem to be improving rapidly in
> that regard.
Probably the best of solders couldn't save some of the dodgy solderers
who have haunted the assembly lines up in Asia.
> Interesting comment on 63/37 as well, which I hadn't previously used.
> So far I'm impressed and can't see any problem with the lack of a
> molten temperature range. It's the reverse I find a PITA.
>
> Similar with the comment on 350? being too high for lead solders. I'd
> seriously doubt if any experienced tech would agree, with the object
> being to complete the joint as quickly as it's practical to do without
> compromising quality.
And without having to keep the heat on components too long waiting for
the solder to melt. I think I've seen 350C recommended in a few places
and its certainly around what I use.