Is the AMTECH 559 PLUNGER botched?

JDW

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
1,582
1,378
113
53
Japan
youtube.com
I've been using MG Chemicals flux, with built-in syringe and plunger. It has been great. But with so many people constantly raving about AMTECH 559, I decided to give that a try.

Sadly, only the Chinese knock-off "559" is sold here in Japan that I can see, so I purchased 559 from Amazon USA and had a family member ship it to me to ensure it's genuine. Thankfully, I got the plunger and syringe needle included, but some people buying it on Amazon US seem not so lucky. Honestly, it's absurd to me to think a tube of flux wouldn't come with those 2 critically important items. But my tube of 559 came with them, so no complaints. However, the needle nose is much shorter than the needle that comes with my MG Chemicals flux. Not a big deal most of the time, but if comparing the two, I'll prefer the longer needle.

The 559 flux itself works well enough, but I did notice it sizzle 2 times very briefly (350*C, Hakko soldering iron) during my LC575 logic board recap, whereas my MG Chemicals flux never sizzles ever. The MG is a slightly darker brown, indicating more rosin is inside, so maybe less Rosin in the 559 is why I heard a couple sizzles. Overall, I don't see any big benefit to the 559 over the MG brand flux. 559 is not bad flux, but it certainly doesn't rock my world.

Here's the thing that rocks me in a very bad way...

THE 559 PLUNGER! 😥

Let me first say that the MG guys really have their flux tubes thought out. The product clamshell pack is long enough to accommodate the tube with plunger pre-fitted. And there's a reason for that. The plunger on the MG product isn't easily removable, which is how it ought to be. Here's why. You push the plunger to get the flux out, but if you then don't pull the plunger back a bit when finished, the increased pressure inside the tube will cause some extra flux to spill out. It keeps spilling out until the internal pressure is alleviated. Sure, you can wipe it up and still use it most of the time, but the overspill can be avoided with the MG product simply by pulling the plunger back out a little bit. Not so with the AMTECH 559 plunger!

For the life of me, I cannot figure out how to fit that black rubber part of the 559 plunger deep into the white plastic slider that holds the flux inside the tube. I tried applying a huge amount of pressure, but the two pieces won't mate. And if I were to apply any more pressure, the flux would probably spew out the back end. (I am doing this with the needle removed and the stopper applied on the application end.) Since the plunger and white plastic part of the AMTECH 559 flux tube don't mate, when you try to pull the plunger back out, the whole plunger comes out, but the pressure on the flux remains the same because that little white plastic slider piece at the back of the tube remains in place. As a result, you see flux slowly trickle out and out and out the needle nose! And all you can do is sit there and watch it spill out. In other words, the AMTECH plunger forces flux out just fine but doesn't pull flux back in!

Surely, I cannot be alone in having experienced this. But maybe everyone just thinks 559 is the bee's knees and therefore the plunger issue doesn't matter to them. To me, the way the flux is dispensed and how you STOP it from trickling out is just as important as the flux itself. Maybe there are better flux syringes out there than the MG, but the 559 kit I purchased isn't one of them.
 

JDW

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
1,582
1,378
113
53
Japan
youtube.com
There's a perfect solution to this very issue: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/154201810160?hash=item23e724e4f0:g:obAAAOSwSXdftbNY

The larger nozzles are much nicer to use, too, i can be more precise and don't end up wrecking my wrists in the process, too.
So it's not just me then. You seem to understand what I mean about the included 559 plunger being inappropriate.

While it is nice to have an EBAY solution, the MG Chemicals product is functional and needs nothing extra. The best part is, I can buy it from Mouser, but I can't buy the 559 from Mouser.
 

JDW

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
1,582
1,378
113
53
Japan
youtube.com
I can send you one of mine to try if you want.
No, I'm satisfied with the MG flux for reasons mentioned in my opening post. I just had higher expectations for the AMTECH kit, and was a bit disappointed when comparing it to the MG, not simply in terms of the flux, but with regard to the dispenser. I absolutely LOVE the fact the MG plunger can be pulled back in order to stop flux from coming out. To guys like me, those little things mean a lot.

With that said, I will of course use the AMTECH flux until it's gone. I don't believe in waste. It's decent enough flux. And with all the excess spilling out, it will certain go faster than the MG! :)
 

Certificate of Excellence

Active Tinkerer
Nov 1, 2021
687
482
63
47
United Sates
No, I'm satisfied with the MG flux for reasons mentioned in my opening post. I just had higher expectations for the AMTECH kit, and was a bit disappointed when comparing it to the MG, not simply in terms of the flux, but with regard to the dispenser. I absolutely LOVE the fact the MG plunger can be pulled back in order to stop flux from coming out. To guys like me, those little things mean a lot.

With that said, I will of course use the AMTECH flux until it's gone. I don't believe in waste. It's decent enough flux. And with all the excess spilling out, it will certain go faster than the MG! :)
Did you send them your feedback/observation? Maybe they think they're crushing it and you have identified an area of improvement for their product design.
 

JDW

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
1,582
1,378
113
53
Japan
youtube.com
Did you send them your feedback/observation? Maybe they think they're crushing it and you have identified an area of improvement for their product design.
Not yet. I merely posted my "review" of sorts here. I did read through all the Amazon reviews. Not a single person mentioned what I mentioned. I guess I alone care about such things, which is rather odd.
 

Certificate of Excellence

Active Tinkerer
Nov 1, 2021
687
482
63
47
United Sates
Man you are dead on about the plunger feedback. It's irrelevant if the flux is good (or not). If the tool to use it sucks, what's the difference? Per your own experience, at this point, you are going back to your preferred flux (and plunger). I as a widget manufacturer sure would love to know such things so I can try to improve my product and keep your business. Also, feedback not only helps the individual giving it, hopefully it spawns an improved plunger design that benefits everyone moving forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDW

Elemenoh

Active Tinkerer
Oct 18, 2021
384
374
63
Bay Area
I’ve had trouble with too-small needles shipped with AmTech tubes. the biggest issue for me is it was way too hard to compress the syringe. My hands would ache for a day or so after use. Replacing with a larger diameter needle solved my problems.
 

JDW

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
1,582
1,378
113
53
Japan
youtube.com
I’ve had trouble with too-small needles shipped with AmTech tubes. the biggest issue for me is it was way too hard to compress the syringe. My hands would ache for a day or so after use. Replacing with a larger diameter needle solved my problems.
Thank you for reminding me about that difference! The hole diameter of the MG Chemicals flux syringe (needle nose) is a bit wider than the AMTECH. Even so, it takes about the same force on the plunger to get each flux out via the needle during cold weather. I guess the added rosin in the MG makes its flux a bit more firm.
 

Garth Beagle

Tinkerer
Oct 28, 2021
28
30
13
I got this excellent idea from @Branchus, take off the tip, and snip out sections of the plunger around each side so air can move in/out (I don't bother putting the tip back on, works fine)

This works great - it freely moves in and after applying some, you can easily move it back so it doesn't leak out

👍
 

Attachments

  • tempImageTwtBG1.png
    tempImageTwtBG1.png
    2.6 MB · Views: 99

Branchus

Tinker Different Public Relations Liaison 2023
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
220
476
63
My last 30cc tube was terrible. I lost so much flux, seeping out onto the bench top. Thankfully, it doesn't seem to do the same with the 10cc tubes, so that's what I use now. I also use my own 3D printed plunger. I made it so that it fits really snuggly in the tube, but also allows air to flow around the edges.
 

JDW

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
1,582
1,378
113
53
Japan
youtube.com
My last 30cc tube was terrible. I lost so much flux, seeping out onto the bench top. Thankfully, it doesn't seem to do the same with the 10cc tubes, so that's what I use now. I also use my own 3D printed plunger. I made it so that it fits really snuggly in the tube, but also allows air to flow around the edges.
Do you have a video or a portion of an existing video that shows your 3-D printed plunger in action, @Branchus ?
 

YMK

Active Tinkerer
Nov 8, 2021
359
286
63
559 allows plenty of rework time and stays put well. This also makes it a pain to clean off.

90% of the time, I use one of these two liquid fluxes:

Chipquik CQ2LF - A blue water-washable flux. It hisses, spatters and smells like burning carpet, but is easily washed away in the ultrasonic cleaner with plain water. It won't render the skin off your hands like some water-washable fluxes. Not the best to work with, but the ease of cleaning more than makes up for this.

Kester 1544 - A brown and very tacky RMA flux. More aggressive than CQ2LF, great at attacking leaked electrolyte and restoring pads. Removed by acetone, and difficult to fully clean away beneath SMD parts.
 
Last edited:

JDW

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
1,582
1,378
113
53
Japan
youtube.com
559 allows plenty of rework time and stays put well. This also makes it a pain to clean off.

90% of the time, I use one of these two liquid fluxes:

Chipquik CQ2LF - A blue water-washable flux. It hisses, spatters and smells like burning carpet, but is easily washed away in the ultrasonic cleaner with plain water. It won't render the skin off your hands like some water-washable fluxes. Not the best to work with, but the ease of cleaning more than makes up for this.

Kester 1544 - A brown and very tacky RMA flux. More aggressive than CQ2LF, great at attacking leaked electrolyte and restoring pads. Removed by acetone, and difficult to fully clean away beneath SMD parts.
Due to the increased Rosin content, the MG chemicals flux that I use takes longer to burn off than the Amtech 559, and I’ve never been able to get the MG flex to sizzle either, which is nice. But the biggest benefit is the fact it comes with a decent plunger so I don’t have to 3-D print anything or otherwise come up with a hack to prevent the flux from slowly spewing out on its own during normal usage.

I mainly bought the 559 to see what all the fuss was about, since so many people raved about how great it is. And in terms of the flex on its own, I think it’s decent enough. But like I said before, the dispenser is a big part of my own overall evaluation of a syringe tube type flux product.
 

YMK

Active Tinkerer
Nov 8, 2021
359
286
63
But the biggest benefit is the fact it comes with a decent plunger so I don’t have to 3-D print anything or otherwise come up with a hack to prevent the flux from slowly spewing out on its own during normal usage.

Could that be due to air trapped in the tube?
 

JDW

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
1,582
1,378
113
53
Japan
youtube.com
Could that be due to air trapped in the tube?
The flux comes out on its own for reasons I mentioned earlier in this thread; namely, that once you press on the plunger to push out a little bit of flux, there continues to be increased pressure by the plunger on the flux that remains in the tube and so it keeps flowing out until that increased pressure is gone. But with the plunger that comes with the MG chemicals flux, I can easily pull back on the plunger to alleviate that pressure manually, thereby preventing any more flux from coming out by accident. You cannot do that with the Amtech 559 plunger because it detaches from the little white plastic slider inside the tube.
 

davidg5678

Tinkerer
Oct 30, 2021
60
38
18
I have been using a 10cc tube of Amtech 559 flux for several years, but I've never experienced the leaking or sizzling issues described here. Something to keep in mind is that the (authentic) flux could be packaged into different kinds of syringes depending on the distributor you purchase it from. Theoretically, if the syringe it came in is defective, it should be possible to transfer the flux into a different kind of syringe that works better. A quick search for "flux syringes" revealed this product: https://www.amazon.com/BSTEAN-Syrin...9XF3XWC,B099XCWXX6,B07HPBG71M,B00HKJTJ6U&th=1

If they are of better quality than the syringe you received, then I think that they might help with the problems you have been having.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mozzwald