60/40 vs. 63/37 Solder

I wasn't mislead. Given the differenc in price, it was obvious
it wasn't Kester.

But it was, grasshopper. You paid too much, because you
bought it from a hobby supplier.
Click to expand...
Actually, I bought the solder at least 20 years ago, and I believe it came
from an electronics-supply store, not a "hobby supplier". I also paid less
than $10.
 
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:i1upmh$14a$1@news.eternal-september.org:

AH-SO! At last we're communicating. Yep, usenet is tough that way
sometimes. Here's the missing piece: The solder I buy IS KESTER. The
EXACT same stuff that you buy. Only two differences: The disparity in
formulations is less, and the price is roughly half.

Fascinating. Perhaps someone, somewhere will have an explanation.
Click to expand...
different businesses mark up at different prices.
name brands often go at higher rates,and less popular items may get priced
lower to move them.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com
 
In article <Xns9DB97EF26DC04jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44>,
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:i1upmh$14a$1@news.eternal-september.org:

AH-SO! At last we're communicating. Yep, usenet is tough that way
sometimes. Here's the missing piece: The solder I buy IS KESTER. The
EXACT same stuff that you buy. Only two differences: The disparity in
formulations is less, and the price is roughly half.

Fascinating. Perhaps someone, somewhere will have an explanation.




different businesses mark up at different prices.
name brands often go at higher rates,and less popular items may get priced
lower to move them.
Click to expand...
As a side note, the wholesale pricing of solder also seems to be heavily
volume driven. A small distributor to hobbyists might buy a couple of
hundred pounds at a time, while a large industrial distributor buys tens
of thousands. They get a huge discount for that, and can easily pass
that savings on to their customers.
 
As a side note, the wholesale pricing of solder also seems to be
heavily volume-driven. A small distributor to hobbyists might buy
a couple of hundred pounds at a time, while a large industrial
distributor buys tens of thousands. They get a huge discount for
that, and can easily pass that savings on to their customers.
Click to expand...
But we still don't have an answer to the question of why there is such a
wide disparity in the /relative/ pricing of 60/40 and eutectic solders.
 
William Sommerwerck wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solder
This got my attention:
Some alloys, namely of lead and to some degree tin, contain small
but significant amounts of radioisotope impurities. The
radioisotopes undergoing alpha decay are a concern due to their
tendency to cause soft errors. Polonium-210 is especially
problematic; lead-210 beta decays to bismuth-210 which then beta
decays to polonium-210, an intense emitter of alpha particles.
Uranium-238 and thorium-232 are other significant contaminants of
lead containing alloys.
Oh swell.... something else to worry about.

sounds like bullshit, alpha particles aren't energetic enough to get
even 1/10 of the way through the encapsulation on a RAM chip.

Correct. The original writer was probably confused by the fact that the
materials ceramic ICs are made of can contain radioactive materials that can
cause errors.


No, the alphas from lead are a real problem. Ten years ago, there were
Click to expand...
folks going round to churches with lead roofs, offering them a new lead
roof in exchange for their old--and now low-alpha--lead ones.

Same with steel from old battleships.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net
 
In article <i1vfd1$o0l$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

As a side note, the wholesale pricing of solder also seems to be
heavily volume-driven. A small distributor to hobbyists might buy
a couple of hundred pounds at a time, while a large industrial
distributor buys tens of thousands. They get a huge discount for
that, and can easily pass that savings on to their customers.

But we still don't have an answer to the question of why there is such a
wide disparity in the /relative/ pricing of 60/40 and eutectic solders.
Click to expand...
At the risk of misunderstanding you yet again, and mis-responding,
here's my shot at that:

Smaller distributors play on the "new and improved" perception that
someone up-thread mentioned, so they mark up the 63/37 more.

Larger industrial distributors play it a little straighter, with more
equal markups. But my side note could actually play into this, too: If
my supplier sells 10 times as much 63/37 as he does 60/40, then he
obviously buys 10 times as much, so Kester gives him a better price
break.
 
In article <slrni46gn9.irp.gsm@cable.mendelson.com>,
"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm@mendelson.com> wrote:

William Sommerwerck wrote:

But we still don't have an answer to the question of why there is such a
wide disparity in the /relative/ pricing of 60/40 and eutectic solders.

Because 60/40 is just solder, while 63/37 solder is an allowed under special
circumstances lead-free replacement and needs certification?

I know it's not lead free, but it's the solder you use when you have to
use leaded solder under lead free regulations.

Geoff.
Click to expand...
Must be cocktail hour where you are, Geoff. Either that or I'm still
hungover and don't know it.
 
But we still don't have an answer to the question of why there is such
a wide disparity in the /relative/ pricing of 60/40 and eutectic solders.

Because 60/40 is just solder, while 63/37 solder is an allowed under
special circumstances lead-free replacement and needs certification?
I know it's not lead free, but it's the solder you use when you have to
use leaded solder under lead free regulations.
Click to expand...
The difference existed at least 30 years ago, when I bought my first roll of
eutectic.
 
Correct. The original writer was probably confused by the
fact that the materials ceramic ICs are made of can contain
radioactive materials that can cause errors.

No, the alphas from lead are a real problem. Ten years ago, there were
folks going round to churches with lead roofs, offering them a new lead
roof in exchange for their old--and now low-alpha--lead ones.
Click to expand...
But where is the lead /within/ ICs? (The wires are bonded, not soldered.)
Alpha particles have poor penetrating power.
 
But we still don't have an answer to the question of why there is such
a wide disparity in the /relative/ pricing of 60/40 and eutectic solders.

At the risk of misunderstanding you yet again, and mis-responding,
here's my shot at that:
Smaller distributors play on the "new and improved" perception that
someone up-thread mentioned, so they mark up the 63/37 more.
Click to expand...
No, you're not misunderstanding, and what you say is logical. But... This
disparity existed 30 years ago, when I first bought a roll of eutectic
solder. At that time, eutectic was less-common and less asked-for. That
/might/ explain the difference.
 
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:28:06 -0500, the renowned Jim Yanik
<jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:i1upmh$14a$1@news.eternal-september.org:

AH-SO! At last we're communicating. Yep, usenet is tough that way
sometimes. Here's the missing piece: The solder I buy IS KESTER. The
EXACT same stuff that you buy. Only two differences: The disparity in
formulations is less, and the price is roughly half.

Fascinating. Perhaps someone, somewhere will have an explanation.




different businesses mark up at different prices.
name brands often go at higher rates,and less popular items may get priced
lower to move them.
Click to expand...
Solder prices for single pound lots are all over the map- they change
with voltatile metal prices and some distributors may have old stock.

http://www.lme.com/tin_graphs.asp
http://www.lme.com/lead_graphs.asp

There's been roughly a 4:1 price range in lead and 2.5:1 in tin over
the past three years. Currently tin costs about 10x as much as lead,
so you'd expect about a 10-11% price difference due to cost of the
metals. At current prices there's around $5.30 worth of metals in a
pound of solder, of which only 30 cents or so is lead. There's also
the plastic spool, the cardboard box and 10-15 grams of flux.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
 
"Spehro Pefhany" <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
news:b7i646p44pljor9299tidign5411gmnv6v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:28:06 -0500, the renowned Jim Yanik
jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:i1upmh$14a$1@news.eternal-september.org:

AH-SO! At last we're communicating. Yep, usenet is tough that way
sometimes. Here's the missing piece: The solder I buy IS KESTER. The
EXACT same stuff that you buy. Only two differences: The disparity in
formulations is less, and the price is roughly half.

Fascinating. Perhaps someone, somewhere will have an explanation.




different businesses mark up at different prices.
name brands often go at higher rates,and less popular items may get priced
lower to move them.

Solder prices for single pound lots are all over the map- they change
with voltatile metal prices and some distributors may have old stock.

http://www.lme.com/tin_graphs.asp
http://www.lme.com/lead_graphs.asp

There's been roughly a 4:1 price range in lead and 2.5:1 in tin over
the past three years. Currently tin costs about 10x as much as lead,
so you'd expect about a 10-11% price difference due to cost of the
metals. At current prices there's around $5.30 worth of metals in a
pound of solder, of which only 30 cents or so is lead. There's also
the plastic spool, the cardboard box and 10-15 grams of flux.


And then there is the shipping.
Click to expand...





--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
 
In article <b7i646p44pljor9299tidign5411gmnv6v@4ax.com>,
Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

At current prices there's around $5.30 worth of metals in a
pound of solder,
Click to expand...
No wonder I haven't seen those $4.95/lb. bar solder sales lately. I used
to wait for those and stock up a couple hundred pounds for the soldering
machine.
 
There's been roughly a 4:1 price range in lead and 2.5:1 in tin
over the past three years. Currently tin costs about 10x as
much as lead, so you'd expect about a 10-11% price difference
due to cost of the metals. At current prices there's around $5.30
worth of metals in a pound of solder, of which only 30 cents or
so is lead. There's also the plastic spool, the cardboard box
and 10-15 grams of flux.
Click to expand...
The fog is lifting...
 
William Sommerwerck wrote:

But we still don't have an answer to the question of why there is such a
wide disparity in the /relative/ pricing of 60/40 and eutectic solders.
Click to expand...
Because 60/40 is just solder, while 63/37 solder is an allowed under special
circumstances lead-free replacement and needs certification?

I know it's not lead free, but it's the solder you use when you have to
use leaded solder under lead free regulations.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
To help restaurants, as part of the "stimulus package", everyone must order
dessert. As part of the socialized health plan, you are forbidden to eat it. :)
 
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:44:51 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

Correct. The original writer was probably confused by the
fact that the materials ceramic ICs are made of can contain
radioactive materials that can cause errors.

No, the alphas from lead are a real problem. Ten years ago, there were
folks going round to churches with lead roofs, offering them a new lead
roof in exchange for their old--and now low-alpha--lead ones.

But where is the lead /within/ ICs? (The wires are bonded, not soldered.)
Alpha particles have poor penetrating power.
Click to expand...
---
In the lead frame? ;)
 
William Sommerwerck wrote:
Correct. The original writer was probably confused by the
fact that the materials ceramic ICs are made of can contain
radioactive materials that can cause errors.

No, the alphas from lead are a real problem. Ten years ago, there were
folks going round to churches with lead roofs, offering them a new lead
roof in exchange for their old--and now low-alpha--lead ones.

But where is the lead /within/ ICs? (The wires are bonded, not soldered.)
Alpha particles have poor penetrating power.
Click to expand...
Only a problem with flip-chip (C4) bonding. At one point I worked in
the packaging research group at IBM Yorktown lab (no, I'm not a
packaging guy--it's a long story).


Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net
 
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:47:15 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

William Sommerwerck wrote:
Correct. The original writer was probably confused by the
fact that the materials ceramic ICs are made of can contain
radioactive materials that can cause errors.

No, the alphas from lead are a real problem. Ten years ago, there were
folks going round to churches with lead roofs, offering them a new lead
roof in exchange for their old--and now low-alpha--lead ones.

But where is the lead /within/ ICs? (The wires are bonded, not soldered.)
Alpha particles have poor penetrating power.



Only a problem with flip-chip (C4) bonding. At one point I worked in
the packaging research group at IBM Yorktown lab (no, I'm not a
packaging guy--it's a long story).
Click to expand...
The C4 balls were lead-indium, IIRC.
 
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:47:15 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

William Sommerwerck wrote:
Correct. The original writer was probably confused by the
fact that the materials ceramic ICs are made of can contain
radioactive materials that can cause errors.
No, the alphas from lead are a real problem. Ten years ago, there were
folks going round to churches with lead roofs, offering them a new lead
roof in exchange for their old--and now low-alpha--lead ones.
But where is the lead /within/ ICs? (The wires are bonded, not soldered.)
Alpha particles have poor penetrating power.


Only a problem with flip-chip (C4) bonding. At one point I worked in
the packaging research group at IBM Yorktown lab (no, I'm not a
packaging guy--it's a long story).

The C4 balls were lead-indium, IIRC.
Click to expand...

Lead-tin eutectic in my era (1987-2008), followed by gold-tin currently,
IIRC.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net
 
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 20:32:22 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:47:15 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

William Sommerwerck wrote:
Correct. The original writer was probably confused by the
fact that the materials ceramic ICs are made of can contain
radioactive materials that can cause errors.
No, the alphas from lead are a real problem. Ten years ago, there were
folks going round to churches with lead roofs, offering them a new lead
roof in exchange for their old--and now low-alpha--lead ones.
But where is the lead /within/ ICs? (The wires are bonded, not soldered.)
Alpha particles have poor penetrating power.


Only a problem with flip-chip (C4) bonding. At one point I worked in
the packaging research group at IBM Yorktown lab (no, I'm not a
packaging guy--it's a long story).

The C4 balls were lead-indium, IIRC.


Lead-tin eutectic in my era (1987-2008), followed by gold-tin currently,
IIRC.
Click to expand...
The last time I dealt with any of this was in the mid '70s. Before TCMs, even
(LEMs). I'm pretty sure they were lead-indium, but there may have been tin in
there too. There was also an issue of polonium contamination causing
uncorrectable L1 errors, but that's a completely different issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top