Tecni swageless wire rigging fittings

[graham]

Hi.I am planning to re rig my 25 foot yacht and discovered Tecni 316 stainless swageless fittings on line.

They are made in UK and sold as suitable for yacht rigging.Cheaper than stalock and simpler to fit looking at the video on their site.

Has anyone here used them?

 

[Javelin]

Just had a look at them and I have a couple of issues.
1st they state that the strength is 90 to 100% of the cable where as the Stalok is at least 100% the strength of the cable.
2nd the fitting relies on friction alone, which explains the lower strength.

The stalok wedge system deforms the outer layer of strands which makes it mechanically impossible to pull out.

In practice though Tecni should be fine in most circumstances but if I was planning a trip that might encounter big winds and seas I know which system I'd rather have.

 

[sealegsjim]

I have used them on my guardrails to form a 'gate' for access. They have been fine and much cheaper than Stalock

 

[graham]

Thanks for that Javelin/Sealegs .We only do coastal cruising plus occasional Ireland in settled weather but even still you dont want any nagging doubts.Will do a bit more research.

 

[merlin3688]

We only ever use Sta Lok and most rigging companies will give you a little discount if just buying the terminals in a packet.
Its also worth doing the sums and getting quotes for swage ends as well, all you need to do is email sizes you have, guessing 5mm and it may be cheaper then buying the Sta Lok and the wire and making up yourself.

 

[Yngmar]

Just had a look at them and I have a couple of issues.
1st they state that the strength is 90 to 100% of the cable where as the Stalok is at least 100% the strength of the cable.
2nd the fitting relies on friction alone, which explains the lower strength.

The stalok wedge system deforms the outer layer of strands which makes it mechanically impossible to pull out.

In practice though Tecni should be fine in most circumstances but if I was planning a trip that might encounter big winds and seas I know which system I'd rather have.

+1 - would not use for standing rigging, might be okay for guardrails though. They don't seem to make larger than 8mm wire ones (at least eye terminal ones). Assembly instructions are dodgy, mentioning sealant in the maintenance section but not in the installation section (a matter of some dispute on other swageless fittings too) and show no illustration of the mechanism locking the fitting to the wire after compression. They actually only state 80 to 100% of the cable strength and "The terminal MUST be tightened again after the first dynamic load." The lock nut is also worrisome and should probably have threadlocker applied, which they make no mention of. I would not trust this to withstand repeated shockloads like if have a flogging sail or like to crash gybe.

 

[Gunfleet]

+1 - would not use for standing rigging, might be okay for guardrails though. They don't seem to make larger than 8mm wire ones (at least eye terminal ones). Assembly instructions are dodgy, mentioning sealant in the maintenance section but not in the installation section (a matter of some dispute on other swageless fittings too) and show no illustration of the mechanism locking the fitting to the wire after compression. They actually only state 80 to 100% of the cable strength and "The terminal MUST be tightened again after the first dynamic load." The lock nut is also worrisome and should probably have threadlocker applied, which they make no mention of. I would not trust this to withstand repeated shockloads like if have a flogging sail or like to crash gybe.

Hi,
What's the dispute you refer to? I'm intrigued as I saw a video of someone putting together a Stalock and was a bit surprised by the use of Sikkens. I thought the point of stainless steel was it needed to be exposed to the air.

 

[graham]

I am going to ask a local rigger to swage the eyes for me and use a stalock for bottom of forestay under the roller drum.Dont want anything to fret over in bad weather.
Thanks for the replies.

 

[DownWest]

Might be worth talking to S3i, who can provide a stay with one terminal rolled swaged and a Stalock for the other, after you have cut it to length .

 

[Yngmar]

Hi,
What's the dispute you refer to? I'm intrigued as I saw a video of someone putting together a Stalock and was a bit surprised by the use of Sikkens.

Whether or not sealant should be applied to keep water out of swageless fittings. Sta-lok used to mention it in their assembly instructions but no longer did when I last checked. Made a lot of sense to me though, so I put some in the one swageless fitting on my boat, on the forestay bottom, hidden away inside the Furlex drum and thus difficult to inspect. Was easy enough and makes me feel better

I gained some confirmation of this while watching DrakeParagons sailing channel - he hired a very experienced rigger and filmed the whole process, plus interviews with the guy. They not only used sealant inside the swagless (Norseman) fittings, but also showed how the old ones had sealant in them. None of them had signs of corrosion and he re-used most of them (with new cones of course).

I thought the point of stainless steel was it needed to be exposed to the air.

I'm no metallurgist, so this explanation may be somewhat simplified, but it's probably close enough: Stainless steel needs oxygen to form a passivating layer of chrome oxide. This (invisible to the naked eye) layer is what protects it from water and air which would corrode the steel. If it's surrounded by sealant, the sealant takes over that job instead. In the absence of sealant, stagnant water (deprived of oxygen) could sit in the hollow areas inside the fitting and cause corrosion that would be very difficult to observe.

Just don't use acetic curing sealant (vinegar smell) - those release acetic acid and could have the opposite of the desired effect!

 

[Gunfleet]

Whether or not sealant should be applied to keep water out of swageless fittings. Sta-lok used to mention it in their assembly instructions but no longer did when I last checked. Made a lot of sense to me though, so I put some in the one swageless fitting on my boat, on the forestay bottom, hidden away inside the Furlex drum and thus difficult to inspect. Was easy enough and makes me feel better

I gained some confirmation of this while watching DrakeParagons sailing channel - he hired a very experienced rigger and filmed the whole process, plus interviews with the guy. They not only used sealant inside the swagless (Norseman) fittings, but also showed how the old ones had sealant in them. None of them had signs of corrosion and he re-used most of them (with new cones of course).



I'm no metallurgist, so this explanation may be somewhat simplified, but it's probably close enough: Stainless steel needs oxygen to form a passivating layer of chrome oxide. This (invisible to the naked eye) layer is what protects it from water and air which would corrode the steel. If it's surrounded by sealant, the sealant takes over that job instead. In the absence of sealant, stagnant water (deprived of oxygen) could sit in the hollow areas inside the fitting and cause corrosion that would be very difficult to observe.

Just don't use acetic curing sealant (vinegar smell) - those release acetic acid and could have the opposite of the desired effect!

Thanks very much for that. Interesting!

 

[Flica]

Interesting that only the last post mentions Norseman swageless fittings - most professional riggers I know seem to prefer the Norseman, though it is probably more difficult to fit than Sta-lok.
From experience, it's considerably cheaper, if you can, to use swaged fittings, even if that's where the rigging will finally part.
When I fitted the Norseman to a new forestay, in 2016, a cyanoacrylic sealant wa recomended ie Loctite.

 

[Yngmar]

Interesting that only the last post mentions Norseman swageless fittings.

Norseman had disappeared for a while (company sold or something) and were difficult to get hold of. In some places supply is still hard to come by (I can find US and German suppliers but no UK one with a quick search). Petersen Hi-Mod however are available and offer some improvements on the Norseman design, so I would've gone with that if I hadn't gained access to a roller swager - swaged is indeed vastly cheaper

When I fitted the Norseman to a new forestay, in 2016, a cyanoacrylic sealant wa recomended ie Loctite.

That's not a sealant, that's a threadlocker. Threadlocker goes on the thread (see below photo) to prevent vibrations loosening it. Sealant goes inside the fitting (the other half - not depicted) to prevent water ingress. Norseman instructions still mention both threadlocker and sealant.

 

[Flica]

Norseman had disappeared for a while (company sold or something) and were difficult to get hold of. In some places supply is still hard to come by (I can find US and German suppliers but no UK one with a quick search). Petersen Hi-Mod however are available and offer some improvements on the Norseman design, so I would've gone with that if I hadn't gained access to a roller swager - swaged is indeed vastly cheaper



That's not a sealant, that's a threadlocker. Threadlocker goes on the thread (see below photo) to prevent vibrations loosening it. Sealant goes inside the fitting (the other half - not depicted) to prevent water ingress. Norseman instructions still mention both threadlocker and sealant.

Thanks for your correction - I am aware of the difference between a cyanoacrylic adhesive and sealants - Norseman ONLY recommended a cyanoacrylic adhesive and no sealant. In fact their kit included a miniature of Loctite 406.
Perhaps yjey are only unavailable in the UK.
Norseman are still trading - made by Navtec, in the US; here's a link
http://www.navtecriggingsolutions.com/agents--world.html

 

[Slowtack]

I note Tecni guardrail fittings use grubscrews
I had a similar sysem by Picea, that was soon corroded. I thing the grubscrew quality may be the reason.
Any opinions on Tecni vs Picea as regards quality?

 

[Kelpie]

My boat is kitted out entirely with Norseman fittings. When I looked into getting replacement cones, I discovered that some websites, e.g. Toplicht.de, listed them, but when I tried to purchase they said they were no longer available. I was fortinate to spot a forumite selling a pack which will see me through my next re-rig but after that I will have to change terminals.
When I looked into this, my conclusion was that Petersen HiMod were the best- and with no replacement parts required- followed by StaLok, with Norseman slightly behind. This was based on reliability and strength, but it was a while ago so I can't remember my sources.

 

[vyv_cox]

I'm no metallurgist, so this explanation may be somewhat simplified, but it's probably close enough: Stainless steel needs oxygen to form a passivating layer of chrome oxide. This (invisible to the naked eye) layer is what protects it from water and air which would corrode the steel. If it's surrounded by sealant, the sealant takes over that job instead. In the absence of sealant, stagnant water (deprived of oxygen) could sit in the hollow areas inside the fitting and cause corrosion that would be very difficult to observe.

I am a metallurgist and your explanation is perfectly OK:encouragement:

People get very confused about this passive layer on stainless steels and the point needs to be made that it is effective in corroding conditions. If the metal is dry then it doesn't matter a bit whether there is air around it.

There is an additional point about swageless fittings that is another reason for adding sealant. The cone, at least in all of mine, is made of brass or bronze. When water gets in it sets up a galvanic corrosion mechanism that results in degradation of the cone. Although I note in the photo you posted above that the cone looks stainless(?) Maybe this is the reason for dropping the sealant requirement, although personally I always add it.