Just a thought from a 41 year certified welder (career, not age), a much more indicative test would be to run fillet welds instead of stringers on the face of a plate! 7014’s have iron powder in the coating to speed up the “fill” process, and they like filling up fillets! The 7024’s you showed in the first episode were fatter than their 7014 cousin, and that’s because they have an even higher concentration of iron powder in their flux than the 7014! I’m pretty sure that if your baseline test procedure had been a T fillet, you’d have had a much more satisfactory end product from either brand of electrode! If the viewer is strictly a hobbyist , and just running stringer beads on small plates for fun, then this test is fine, but if he’s actually going to build or repair something, he needs to know about performance in a T joint situation! I’ve enjoyed the tests, and appreciate the time you put into this! One question. What were you burning these on, AC or DC+-? You may have said and I just missed it!
I ran them DCEP. They definitely put down bigger welds than a lot of other rods (especially 6010/11/13. You are correct on the fillet welds, they seem to put down much better looking welds on fillet welds. I prefer how they run on fillet welds in comparison to 6013s, and they do appear to be stronger than 6013 in my testing.
I didn’t show it in the video but I ran some rods that were heated up in a rod oven, and they ran fine as well. Not sure what the deal was, they ran much better today 😀
I did read 7014 doesn't need moisture like 6010/6011so too much could be bad. Said not to "recondition" them like 7018 as too dry. Just a few hrs at 200 would be enough. I still wonder why I need 6013 & 7014 .
Interesting tests. Whether it was your arc force setting, or the amperage; the welds did appear to improve when you turned it down. Thanks for sharing your tests/information-
Just received 10 Lbs of Hobart 3/32 7018 rod and this batch is the stickiest rod at start that I have ever used. Have used Forney and Lincoln Excalibur (my favorite) as well as Esab , also excellent. Checked all the usual connections and cleaned the ground surface and upped the power but no difference. I have used this brand before and don't recall this happening so maybe it's just a bad batch or wet from the get go. Don't have an official rod oven but I will try an old toaster oven that I saved from the scrapper just for this purpose.
So I had the same thing happen with Hobart rods in my 7018 test (the one with a bunch of different rods). Even with hot start enabled the rods definitely stick on first start. Far more than any other rod I have used. Once running they are fine. If you don’t have hot start they will be worse for sure. I am a fan of esab prime and Lincoln Excalibur, those are generally what I buy now.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg I do recall watching that video but apparently I wasn't paying attention. Could have saved some money , time, and aggravation. Oh well bad on me and next time it's the Lincoln rod for sure. Keep doing those videos and I'll keep watching them, and maybe even paying attention.
@@jamesr.9239 don’t worry, the videos I have made will be a reference to me in the future too. I already went back to one to look up some stuff for another video 😅. I am glad I am not the only one that likes the Lincoln rods. I hear guys online always trashing the Excalibur rods but I never had a issue with them at all. I like them and the esab prime, they have always done good for me 😀.
A lot of those older machines outputted straight DC current via a generator and run rods like butter. They are a treat to weld with and I am not surprised at all by your story 😀
@@alauer2101 ok 😀. I would imagine it still used a generator setup and just had it setup for AC output then. Did it have a ton of “amperage” holes for where you put the leads rather than a dial? I never had a chance to weld on one of those. They still exist in running shape, I see them pop up for sale occasionally around here.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg yes you had to plug into a different tap to change the amperage. it had one outlet that was live 110 volt power to run a grinder while it was in weld mode. if you wanted to use it as a power supply generator you had to move a big knife switch that shut off the welder and powered up the other 110 outlets.
Good morning, Greg. I really do appreciate you doing this series on the 7014 rods. I feel bad that you spent the money on rods that you aren't going to use up. I probably have more 7014 rods than I'll ever use in my lifetime so I won't ask for any. However, I do have an AC Lincoln Buzz Box so I will burn a few of them just to see how it turns out. But as good a welder as you are I don't have any high expectations of how mine will turn out. I have been saving several of your videos including these two so I can go back and reference them. Again, I thank you very much. God bless. 👍👍👍
I do the videos for the channel as a fun hobby, a few bucks spent to help some people out doesn’t matter to me. I could have got a smaller pack of 7014 but bought a bigger one with the assumption I would share them 😀
The blue demon 7014 I’m using runs super clean. The slag is super thick but comes off easily and the bead underneath looks chrome plated its so shiny. No buckshot or BBs for me. 😊
I believe in the previous video you commented that there was some rust on the uncoated ends of the hobart electrodes. If that's the case, then the flux would have also been exposed to similar ambient moisture, and that rust may also have begun at a microscopic level under the flux. If that's true, then whether you bake them or not, the defects in weld appearance will persist.....that is speaking from experience. (later, after seeing results)The appearance defects in the welds from Hobart electrodes seem to have persisted. For what it's worth, to some degree, your electrode angle can cause odd things to happen to appearance. You asked "how much moisture could they have absorbed". They were not hermetically sealed, so the answer is "as much as was contained in air they were exposed to". That tape on the hobart container is not a hermetic seal. I've run the very same Esab rods(and like them quite a bit for what it's worth) are also not hermetically sealed. I've run the Hobart as well, but the ESAB is better IMO. Some manufacturers, even though the container is similar to either the ESAB or the Hobart, will have the electrodes packaged in a mylar foil bag that has clearly had all air evacuated before it was sealed. That is a hermetic seal and prevents oxygen/moisture exposure or absorption. Other manufacturers, and/or other types of electrodes, will come packaged in a sealed metal can which is also a hermetic seal. It's hard to tell from the camera angle, but it appears that you used less electrode angle on the vertical welds in this video versus the previous video. I commented on the previous video that in my experience, keeping the angle close to perpendicular worked better for me. Also, as your test illustrates, not all electrodes of the same specification run the same. Sometimes one brand will work well on your machine and be terrible on a different machine.
A 3/32 rod could run at 90, a 1/8 would have really struggled to weld at 80-90 amps. On real thin material it might be possible to run a 1/8 7014 or 7018 at 90 but it would be a struggle for sure 😀
I agree. Something just seems to be a bit off with them to me. The little 1/16th 7014 rods I have seem to run ok. I have a feeling 7014 might be better on AC than DC, but I don’t have much of a reason to try it and find out 😅.
I dont know why you are getting so much spatter , i have a box at home that i bought 2 years ago at a big box store , i dont have the box anymore but my guess is Forney , the dont produce spatter at all , and they are stored in a toolbox in my shed , not heated at all and we have freakin cold winter here around Montreal and insanely humid summer. I remember at school 20 years ago my first welds were done with 7014 and it was the same , no spatter at all. Could be the brand though. I bought as the same time a box of 6013 and i absolutely hate those , they produce slag inclusions on every pass . But this week at work , i tried another brand of 6013 ( Bonarc by vanguard steel) and they are awesome so it could be a brand specific problem
Someday soon I will have to break out 7014s again. What you mentioned about 6013 is pretty accurate. I swear those rods will randomly put down the worst looking welds of any stick rod. I can weld fillet welds all day with 7018 and have zero defects. Switch to 6013 and somehow 3 rods in have a terrible slag inclusioned weld lol. 6013 works great on thin material and on flat lap/butt welds, but fillet welds are asking for slag inclusions.
Their 7018s tend to be a very sticky rod for sure. I have never baked them out new out of the pack but I wonder if they aren’t excessively high in moisture and that lends them to poor starts vs so many other rods.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg Yeah, fine for home use, but there's probably a good reason you never see Hobarts on job sites where welds are x-rayed, at least I never have. Up here in Canada Boilermakers, Pipefitters and Iron workers mostly use Blue Shield.
ESAB data lists 7014 1/8 with an amp range of 100-150 with specific deposition rates given at 120 (2.4lb/hr, 63.9% deposit mass-efficiency) and 150 (3.1lb/hr 61.1%). Deposit mass-efficiency does not include stub loss. filler_metal_databook_us_2016 Funny their sureweld 6013 has higher strength than their sureweld 7014(yield and ultimate), but the 7014 has more area reduction (necking) and just a hair more elongation at break, so it is a bit more ductile and may be a tad tougher than the 6013. They omitted the charpy impact test from the 7014 though, so hard to say for sure.
Interesting info, thanks for looking that up. I looked up Washington alloys rods and their 7014 is slightly higher than 6013, but has virtually the same charpy and elongation. Seems like there isn’t a charpy requirement on 7014, but Washington alloy tests anyway. It seems to me like 7014 has a pretty wide range of test results depending on who made the rod.
Just a thought from a 41 year certified welder (career, not age), a much more indicative test would be to run fillet welds instead of stringers on the face of a plate! 7014’s have iron powder in the coating to speed up the “fill” process, and they like filling up fillets! The 7024’s you showed in the first episode were fatter than their 7014 cousin, and that’s because they have an even higher concentration of iron powder in their flux than the 7014! I’m pretty sure that if your baseline test procedure had been a T fillet, you’d have had a much more satisfactory end product from either brand of electrode! If the viewer is strictly a hobbyist , and just running stringer beads on small plates for fun, then this test is fine, but if he’s actually going to build or repair something, he needs to know about performance in a T joint situation! I’ve enjoyed the tests, and appreciate the time you put into this! One question. What were you burning these on, AC or DC+-? You may have said and I just missed it!
I ran them DCEP. They definitely put down bigger welds than a lot of other rods (especially 6010/11/13. You are correct on the fillet welds, they seem to put down much better looking welds on fillet welds. I prefer how they run on fillet welds in comparison to 6013s, and they do appear to be stronger than 6013 in my testing.
Hi Greg, you learn so much by going out of the boundaries to interpret what happens. Eventually we will send some pictures. Cheers.
I didn’t show it in the video but I ran some rods that were heated up in a rod oven, and they ran fine as well. Not sure what the deal was, they ran much better today 😀
I did read 7014 doesn't need moisture like 6010/6011so too much could be bad. Said not to "recondition" them like 7018 as too dry. Just a few hrs at 200 would be enough. I still wonder why I need 6013 & 7014 .
Interesting tests. Whether it was your arc force setting, or the amperage; the welds did appear to improve when you turned it down.
Thanks for sharing your tests/information-
Just received 10 Lbs of Hobart 3/32 7018 rod and this batch is the stickiest rod at start that I have ever used. Have used Forney and Lincoln Excalibur (my favorite) as well as Esab , also excellent. Checked all the usual connections and cleaned the ground surface and upped the power but no difference. I have used this brand before and don't recall this happening so maybe it's just a bad batch or wet from the get go. Don't have an official rod oven but I will try an old toaster oven that I saved from the scrapper just for this purpose.
So I had the same thing happen with Hobart rods in my 7018 test (the one with a bunch of different rods). Even with hot start enabled the rods definitely stick on first start. Far more than any other rod I have used. Once running they are fine. If you don’t have hot start they will be worse for sure. I am a fan of esab prime and Lincoln Excalibur, those are generally what I buy now.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg I do recall watching that video but apparently I wasn't paying attention. Could have saved some money , time, and aggravation. Oh well bad on me and next time it's the Lincoln rod for sure. Keep doing those videos and I'll keep watching them, and maybe even paying attention.
@@jamesr.9239 don’t worry, the videos I have made will be a reference to me in the future too. I already went back to one to look up some stuff for another video 😅. I am glad I am not the only one that likes the Lincoln rods. I hear guys online always trashing the Excalibur rods but I never had a issue with them at all. I like them and the esab prime, they have always done good for me 😀.
nicest stick welds i ever ran were with a very old 1950ish miller AEA with a onan gas engine and 6013 rods.
A lot of those older machines outputted straight DC current via a generator and run rods like butter. They are a treat to weld with and I am not surprised at all by your story 😀
@@makingmistakeswithgreg the one i had was actually ac output.
@@alauer2101 ok 😀. I would imagine it still used a generator setup and just had it setup for AC output then. Did it have a ton of “amperage” holes for where you put the leads rather than a dial? I never had a chance to weld on one of those. They still exist in running shape, I see them pop up for sale occasionally around here.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg yes you had to plug into a different tap to change the amperage. it had one outlet that was live 110 volt power to run a grinder while it was in weld mode. if you wanted to use it as a power supply generator you had to move a big knife switch that shut off the welder and powered up the other 110 outlets.
Good morning, Greg. I really do appreciate you doing this series on the 7014 rods. I feel bad that you spent the money on rods that you aren't going to use up. I probably have more 7014 rods than I'll ever use in my lifetime so I won't ask for any. However, I do have an AC Lincoln Buzz Box so I will burn a few of them just to see how it turns out. But as good a welder as you are I don't have any high expectations of how mine will turn out. I have been saving several of your videos including these two so I can go back and reference them. Again, I thank you very much. God bless. 👍👍👍
I do the videos for the channel as a fun hobby, a few bucks spent to help some people out doesn’t matter to me. I could have got a smaller pack of 7014 but bought a bigger one with the assumption I would share them 😀
@@makingmistakeswithgreg You're a good man Greg. 👍👍
That is an excellent idea of what to do also the 6013s. Give them away.
The blue demon 7014 I’m using runs super clean. The slag is super thick but comes off easily and the bead underneath looks chrome plated its so shiny. No buckshot or BBs for me.
😊
I believe in the previous video you commented that there was some rust on the uncoated ends of the hobart electrodes. If that's the case, then the flux would have also been exposed to similar ambient moisture, and that rust may also have begun at a microscopic level under the flux. If that's true, then whether you bake them or not, the defects in weld appearance will persist.....that is speaking from experience. (later, after seeing results)The appearance defects in the welds from Hobart electrodes seem to have persisted. For what it's worth, to some degree, your electrode angle can cause odd things to happen to appearance.
You asked "how much moisture could they have absorbed". They were not hermetically sealed, so the answer is "as much as was contained in air they were exposed to". That tape on the hobart container is not a hermetic seal. I've run the very same Esab rods(and like them quite a bit for what it's worth) are also not hermetically sealed. I've run the Hobart as well, but the ESAB is better IMO. Some manufacturers, even though the container is similar to either the ESAB or the Hobart, will have the electrodes packaged in a mylar foil bag that has clearly had all air evacuated before it was sealed. That is a hermetic seal and prevents oxygen/moisture exposure or absorption. Other manufacturers, and/or other types of electrodes, will come packaged in a sealed metal can which is also a hermetic seal.
It's hard to tell from the camera angle, but it appears that you used less electrode angle on the vertical welds in this video versus the previous video. I commented on the previous video that in my experience, keeping the angle close to perpendicular worked better for me. Also, as your test illustrates, not all electrodes of the same specification run the same. Sometimes one brand will work well on your machine and be terrible on a different machine.
Have you tried turning down the amperage to 80-90? Curious...
A 3/32 rod could run at 90, a 1/8 would have really struggled to weld at 80-90 amps. On real thin material it might be possible to run a 1/8 7014 or 7018 at 90 but it would be a struggle for sure 😀
I have 7014 rods and personally I don’t care for them. I do use them for tacks(easy to start) other than that I prefer 6013
I agree. Something just seems to be a bit off with them to me. The little 1/16th 7014 rods I have seem to run ok. I have a feeling 7014 might be better on AC than DC, but I don’t have much of a reason to try it and find out 😅.
Blue Demon 5/64 runs good. They light like fresh matches, which is a good thing if you’re clumsy…
I try not to use hobart products its never been good for me
I dont know why you are getting so much spatter , i have a box at home that i bought 2 years ago at a big box store , i dont have the box anymore but my guess is Forney , the dont produce spatter at all , and they are stored in a toolbox in my shed , not heated at all and we have freakin cold winter here around Montreal and insanely humid summer. I remember at school 20 years ago my first welds were done with 7014 and it was the same , no spatter at all. Could be the brand though. I bought as the same time a box of 6013 and i absolutely hate those , they produce slag inclusions on every pass . But this week at work , i tried another brand of 6013 ( Bonarc by vanguard steel) and they are awesome so it could be a brand specific problem
Someday soon I will have to break out 7014s again. What you mentioned about 6013 is pretty accurate. I swear those rods will randomly put down the worst looking welds of any stick rod. I can weld fillet welds all day with 7018 and have zero defects. Switch to 6013 and somehow 3 rods in have a terrible slag inclusioned weld lol. 6013 works great on thin material and on flat lap/butt welds, but fillet welds are asking for slag inclusions.
160th like
Hobarts are notoriously damp rods
Their 7018s tend to be a very sticky rod for sure. I have never baked them out new out of the pack but I wonder if they aren’t excessively high in moisture and that lends them to poor starts vs so many other rods.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg Yeah, fine for home use, but there's probably a good reason you never see Hobarts on job sites where welds are x-rayed, at least I never have. Up here in Canada Boilermakers, Pipefitters and Iron workers mostly use Blue Shield.
ESAB data lists 7014 1/8 with an amp range of 100-150 with specific deposition rates given at 120 (2.4lb/hr, 63.9% deposit mass-efficiency) and 150 (3.1lb/hr 61.1%). Deposit mass-efficiency does not include stub loss. filler_metal_databook_us_2016
Funny their sureweld 6013 has higher strength than their sureweld 7014(yield and ultimate), but the 7014 has more area reduction (necking) and just a hair more elongation at break, so it is a bit more ductile and may be a tad tougher than the 6013. They omitted the charpy impact test from the 7014 though, so hard to say for sure.
Interesting info, thanks for looking that up. I looked up Washington alloys rods and their 7014 is slightly higher than 6013, but has virtually the same charpy and elongation. Seems like there isn’t a charpy requirement on 7014, but Washington alloy tests anyway. It seems to me like 7014 has a pretty wide range of test results depending on who made the rod.