3 ms·

Water is a lubricant as well. And yet it is not a good lubricant for all applications. WD-40 is absolutely spectacular for certain things, but if what you want

Water is a lubricant as well. And yet it is not a good lubricant for all applications. WD-40 is absolutely spectacular for certain things, but if what you want is a lubricant there are much better options. For instance, there is a silicone version that will make a sticky old lock work like new. https://www.wd40.com/products/silicone-lubricant/ https://www.wd40.com/products/silicone-lubricant/ You could probably burn WD-40 in a propane stove, but that doesn't mean it's a fuel.

knodi123 2y ago
> And yet it is not a good lubricant for all applications seems like a bit of a straw man, no? > a silicone version that will make a sticky old lock work like new. In my apartment, my deadbolt was so sticky that it was hard to turn even with the door half open. Two spritzes (keyhole and the bolt) with WD-40 classic, and it moved easily, and continued to turn easily for the remaining 6 months in my time there. Could lubricant-X have done a "better" job? Maybe, not that it mattered in practice. If NASA designed an even better lubricant, would lubricant-X no longer be a lubricant at all by your standards? Because now there's something that can also unstick your lock, but with an even lower coefficient of friction? WD-40 contains lubricants, and it can be used as a general-purpose around-the-house lubricant. Proven by my years of personal experience. Trying to claim that it isn't a lubricant is like trying to convince me that my lightbulbs are dim. I just laugh and move on.
- shkkmo 2y ago
  > In my apartment, my deadbolt was so sticky that it was hard to turn even with the door half open. Two spritzes (keyhole and the bolt) with WD-40 classic, and it moved easily, and continued to turn easily for the remaining 6 months in my time there. Could lubricant-X have done a "better" job? Maybe, not that it mattered in practice. It was likely the solvent properties of WD-40 that helped. It dissolved the old, tacky lubricant or rust and left you with a cleaner lock. For a six month fix on a rental, that is probably fine. For a long term fix on a house you own, it may be worth using one of a plethora of lubricants designed for that specific use case (including a more specific variant of WD-40 that is designed for locks and leave behind a dry lubricant when it evaporates.) > Because now there's something that can also unstick your lock, but with an even lower coefficient of friction? WD-40 is decent at removing rust, but not great at repelling water and thus preventing rust. There are a lot of things that go into picking the right lubricant for a specific application. It isn't just "which lubricant is slipperiest?". WD-40 is indeed a lubricant, but much of the benefits of using it are due to its solvent properties and people often don't understand that applying it in the wrong circumstances can lead to removing the correct lubricant and result in less lubrication.

knodi123 2y ago

> And yet it is not a good lubricant for all applications seems like a bit of a straw man, no? > a silicone version that will make a sticky old lock work like new. In my apartment, my deadbolt was so sticky that it was hard to turn even with the door half open. Two spritzes (keyhole and the bolt) with WD-40 classic, and it moved easily, and continued to turn easily for the remaining 6 months in my time there. Could lubricant-X have done a "better" job? Maybe, not that it mattered in practice. If NASA designed an even better lubricant, would lubricant-X no longer be a lubricant at all by your standards? Because now there's something that can also unstick your lock, but with an even lower coefficient of friction? WD-40 contains lubricants, and it can be used as a general-purpose around-the-house lubricant. Proven by my years of personal experience. Trying to claim that it isn't a lubricant is like trying to convince me that my lightbulbs are dim. I just laugh and move on.

shkkmo 2y ago
> In my apartment, my deadbolt was so sticky that it was hard to turn even with the door half open. Two spritzes (keyhole and the bolt) with WD-40 classic, and it moved easily, and continued to turn easily for the remaining 6 months in my time there. Could lubricant-X have done a "better" job? Maybe, not that it mattered in practice. It was likely the solvent properties of WD-40 that helped. It dissolved the old, tacky lubricant or rust and left you with a cleaner lock. For a six month fix on a rental, that is probably fine. For a long term fix on a house you own, it may be worth using one of a plethora of lubricants designed for that specific use case (including a more specific variant of WD-40 that is designed for locks and leave behind a dry lubricant when it evaporates.) > Because now there's something that can also unstick your lock, but with an even lower coefficient of friction? WD-40 is decent at removing rust, but not great at repelling water and thus preventing rust. There are a lot of things that go into picking the right lubricant for a specific application. It isn't just "which lubricant is slipperiest?". WD-40 is indeed a lubricant, but much of the benefits of using it are due to its solvent properties and people often don't understand that applying it in the wrong circumstances can lead to removing the correct lubricant and result in less lubrication.