Sikaflex 292 warning

R

Resolution

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 Feb 2006
Messages
3,472
Visit site
I have been trying to purchase some Sika 292 from a well-known online chandlery, in order to stick my keel back on (sort of....)
Twice now, the chandlery has sent me a tube of Sika 291, each time with their own stock label stating Sika 292 and covering the tube's 291 lettering. If I had not removed the label on the first tube in order to read the instructions I might not have noticed the difference.
And there are two big differences: 292 has a tensile strength of 4N/mm2, whereas 291 has only 1.8N/mm2. And 292 costs about three times as much as 291.

The fact that they have done this on more than one tube suggests that there may be a whole batch that has been mis-labelled.

So if you have recently purchased any "Sika 292" online and used it in a high tension location, do go and check the labels again in case you have been sold the weaker 291.
 
This is either a major genuine mistake, or someone is really unscrupulous.

Why not name and shame them, and then give us the outcome?.

You do not want to be joining keels etc with the wrong one.

Regards

Carl
 
carl170 said:
This is either a major genuine mistake, or someone is really unscrupulous.

Why not name and shame them, and then give us the outcome?.

You do not want to be joining keels etc with the wrong one.

Regards

Carl
Click to expand...

Carl
I don't know if it is a genuine mistake or not. I would like to think it is. It would be unfair to "name & shame" without evidence of a deliberate dodge.
Peter
 
Resolution said:
Carl
I don't know if it is a genuine mistake or not. I would like to think it is. It would be unfair to "name & shame" without evidence of a deliberate dodge.
Peter
Click to expand...

It may not be a deliberate dodge, but people may have already used this thinking its 292.....At least they might be able to double check.

Is this one of the products that goes hard about 3 days after you have first used the tube? I went through a spate of getting a few fittings done on a weekend and it was useless the following weekend!

Regards

Carl
 
3M 5200 is 4.8N/mm2 and there are a few other polyurethane adhesive sealants that are stronger and much cheaper, I used to use Arbothane 1240 but they don't seem to make it any more.

But you're right there's a huge difference between 291 and 292, well spotted a very different product.
 
carl170 said:
It may not be a deliberate dodge, but people may have already used this thinking its 292.....At least they might be able to double check.

Is this one of the products that goes hard about 3 days after you have first used the tube? I went through a spate of getting a few fittings done on a weekend and it was useless the following weekend!

Regards

Carl
Click to expand...
Still waiting for the real thing, so cannot confirm whether it is another of these "sets hard in the tube the moment you put it back on the shelf" products.
Had to cancel the boatyard lift (Premier Swanwick) for the second time in a week, which was a bit embarrassing. They have been very helpful, as always, credits to Premier.
 
Resolution said:
Still waiting for the real thing, so cannot confirm whether it is another of these "sets hard in the tube the moment you put it back on the shelf" products.
Had to cancel the boatyard lift (Premier Swanwick) for the second time in a week, which was a bit embarrassing. They have been very helpful, as always, credits to Premier.
Click to expand...
There are several large chandleries very close to Swanwick, why not just go to one of those rather than cancel the lift while waiting for an online chandlery?
 
lustyd said:
There are several large chandleries very close to Swanwick, why not just go to one of those rather than cancel the lift while waiting for an online chandlery?
Click to expand...

The ones I tried mostly had sika 291, but none seem to have 292. I was told of two tubes available in Chichester, but felt that a two hour round trip was just too long.

Please don't tell me I have missed the obvious!
Peter
 
After a recent experience with Sikaflex, I won,t be using any of their products again full stop.
My boat is undergoing a major refit and I bedded in a complete set of 10 new skin fittings using Sika 291"I" at the beginning of the year. I noticed that the Sika had not gone off (still hasn,t !) and contacted the tech dept uk. A rep came and took photos,samples, and the remains of the offending tube. During the course of his inspection, he mentioned that 291 "I" is a modified product formulated to confirm with new regs on use of chemicals etc and I got the impression that I wasn,t the first complaint that they had.
Anyhow, off he went leaving assurances that he,d get right back to me - that was in August.
Despite numerous e,mails directly to the company and the rep. not a dickybird, blanked completely.
Sika your product and your after sales service sucks !
 
Just a thought, if it's for a keel that is bolted then there is no benefit in an adhesive (sealant) with greater tensile strength as you aren't using the adhesive to hold the two parts together. You will never get anywhere near the 4N/mm2 if the bolts are in place. The applications for the high tensile strength polyurethane adhesives are when they are being used as a glue to hold two parts together with little or no help from bolts or where the flex and movement gives rise to tensile forces in the adhesive. 5200
 
Resolution said:
I don't know if it is a genuine mistake or not. I would like to think it is. It would be unfair to "name & shame" without evidence of a deliberate dodge.
Click to expand...

I'm often surprised by how little information there is regarding 'big name' products with specific purposes which, whilst broadly understood, don't seem to be written down anywhere.

Plastic Padding products are widely available, but there doesn't seem to be a site which explains clearly all their functions, nor anyone to ask for a clear answer.

If any retailer is selling one product under the name of another, the error needs highlighting, and the retailer needs naming. Sikaflex 291 is okay in some uses, but it's scarcely a powerful adhesive. If it was used in the belief it was 292, there could be a serious failure, damage, injury, who knows what. Imagine if something with nuts in, was sold as nut-free...

...would we worry more about the retailer's reputation, or the customer's health and safety?
 
I have got fed up over the 50 years I have been boating .That is sailing them building them and repairing them. I have used all the Sikaflex products and in general they are ok but just ok. Their UV protection is poor to say the least and the joints break down after a couple of years> SO I changed to a product called CT1 (toolsandsealantsdirect.com)
Since then I have used CT1 on Skin fittings, deck fittings waterproof joints and even sealed the diesel tank inspection hatches. All these have now lasted several years with NO signs of breaking down. Even the deck joint on our aft cabin which I had sealed several times with Sikaflex has now been water tight for several years thanks to CT1. The cost is the same to buy but because it lasts so long and works so well it really is cheaper in the long run. Also when you have opened the tube just screw on the top and it keeps for at least a year so next time you need a little sealant it actually works unlike Sikaflex which goes hard in a matter of days. Over the years I have never believed the adverts I like to try and test things myself this is how I have been able to save money and find the best products for the jobs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top