it doesn’t - in a word, i have had contact with the manufacturers of
firescoff about various issues with their product which
a) gums up your soldering area
b) had to have the MSDS changed after a discussion about the
product’s which was lacking at the point i contacted
them regarding the ceramics involved and its by-product(s)
c) pales in comparison to Cupronil- which i too swear by
d) tends to react with fluxes that some people invariably will apply
regardless of firescoff 's claims- which by the way, does not flux
correctly in my trials with gold,silver, or platinum
in addition there are concerns about the product on an environmental
level regarding the disposal of the product that i expressed to Mr.
Passe of nventa corp.that sparked an immediate revision of their
product’s documentation if you care to read on i have copied it
below. Mainly, i cannot recommend the product for performance
reasons, incomplete research and testing by Nventa and the sheer cost
of the product- which is high whether bought through a distributor or
directly from the manufacturer.
Cupronil is the superior performer in preventing fire scale and in
ease of removal of the glassy residues ( if any) that result after
the soldering or fusing process is completed. The packaging, product
safety, cost and time-( it’s been around quite a while and is based
on a Hopi recipe given to Mr. L.Epperson, who manufactures
Cupronil.) alone make it a far greater value and more suitable for
every studio than Firescoff. I might add Mr. Epperson’s knowledge,
teaching and products are more focused on the jeweler succeeding and
progressing in their skills and acquisition of knowledge than the
money to be made- I admire him for that, and his continued
contributions to the art and science of jewelry making. While you
posted this to “beth”, i feel quite strongly about the superiority of
Cupronil on every level and compelled to share that with you.
Dear Dr. Rourke,
Thank you for expressing your concerns regarding the
environmental impact of Firescoff reaching our nations
waterways. After reading your enquiry, I met with our EHS
consultants to review the Firescoff MSDS and clarify the stated
concern. Below are the findings from our meeting.
1) The spill prevention statement present in Section VI
Accidental Release Measures refers to a single chemical
compound in Firescoff that is present in trace concentration.
If separated from the ceramic matrix, this compound in its
elemental form has been shown to promote algae growth.
2) There is a typo in Section VI Accidental Release Measures
that reads "Waste Disposal Method". The statement should be
replaced with "Disposal Considerations" as a reference to
Section XIII Disposal Considerations for the review of Federal,
State, and Local regulations by a chemical waste generator.
As a result of our meeting, the following actions were
1) Section VI: Replace "Waste Disposal Method" with "Disposal
2) Make the revised MSDS available to Firescoff distributors
3) Upload revised MSDS to the Nventa.com Web site for download
by health professionals and the general public
4) Submit revised MSDS to the National Poison Control Center
Attached I have included the MSDS 896223-10008 r8 issued
05/19/2006 with the modification discussed above.
I share your concerns regarding safety and the continued
protection of our nations waterways. Further, I sincerely
appreciate your help in bringing this issue to my attention.
Please feel free to contact myself or a member of my staff
with any questions or comments.
Oliver Passe, Ch.E.