Re: Yet More Silicone !!

["Brian A.Tink" <batink@domain.elided>]

Mike

read your article and note that one of the manufacturers is Dow.

Did not this company have some problems with silicone Breast implants???



keep staggering  Brian


At 06:47 PM 1/09/98 -0400, you wrote:
>As a result of a member of our digest reading this correspondence, I have
>had a phone call from a senior chemist who worked for one of the major oil
>companies, but has now retired.  Unfortunately he has asked me to not to
>give his name, so lets call him Fred.
>
>Fred was responsible for introducing Silicone fluid to the UK in 1982, from
>America where it was (and still is allegedly) used in all military and Post
>Office vehicles with hydraulic brakes, also Boeing trains.  Can any USA
>members confirm/deny this?
>
>There are three manufacturers of the fluid, all USA-based and are Union
>Carbide, General Electric and Dow.  Major corporations.
>
>When originally released in 1982 in the UK, Silicone Fluid attacked natural
>rubber and leather seals, but this was promptly dealt with by a
>re-formulation.  The market release was done AFTER this modification so
>there is no reason to suspect any problems.
>
>In Freds' view, Silicone fluid has many advantages, but no disadvantages
>worth knowing, at least at a technical level.  He says the market
>penetration of silicone fluid is only about 1% where it should be 5% plus,
>and he attributes this to a whispering campaign by the major brake
>manufacturers.
>
>Lockheeds position has been published in 1992 in many places including
>their own service bulletins.  Castrol in 1997 brought out their own answer
>to Silicone fluid, and aped the very same bulletin on its release.
>
>Apparently Glycol/ester fluids cost virtually nothing to make but have a
>terrific mark-up to selling price, making lots of money for lots of
>manufacturers, distributors and stockists - every one except the poor old
>consumer.  On the other hand, Silicone fluid is expensive to make and due
>to the pricing problem versus glycol/ester, has to be of very limited
>mark-up which is not good news for the profit-hungry.
>
>Also, the corrosion brought about by glycol/ester brake fluid is also going
>to result in the regular replacement of brake system hardware due to
>corrosion and leakage.
>
>Now if I had an unscrupulous and cynical interest in making lots of money
>out of brake hardware and tins of glycol fluid, guess which product I'd be
>pushing?  In other words I believe yet again we are being manipulated by
>some people with vested interests.
>
>It's your decision which to use.
>
>Mike Wattam
>Triumph Stag Register
>
>
>