BWDart
Well-Known Member
Want to clean the bulkhead connectors while motor is out I have elec spray cleaner but was wondering what ya'll use to get into the connectors and give them a good scrubbin
Cleaning bulkhead connectors
- Thread starter BWDart
- Start date
-
Terminal Cleaners
Here's a couple from MAC Tools I used to sell. Dang, I don't know if I saved some back.. The tweezers type work well for spade terminals. They are coated with diamond abrasive.
Here's a couple from MAC Tools I used to sell. Dang, I don't know if I saved some back.. The tweezers type work well for spade terminals. They are coated with diamond abrasive.
These are the ones I used for round terminal sockets:
8 PIECE MICRO BORE AND VALVE GUIDE BRUSH SET BRASS MBBS088 | Matco Tools
8 PIECE MICRO BORE AND VALVE GUIDE BRUSH SET BRASS MBBS088 | Matco Tools
BWDart
Well-Known Member
Nice I just bought a set of those last month
Pawned
N.R.A. Lifetime Member - And damn proud of it
I eliminated my bulkhead connectors entirely
Why not take each terminal out one at a time and treat it to a Scotch Brite pad ?
It's not that hard to back the terminals out and clean them individually.
The female terminals can't easily get an abrasive under the rolls without messing up the tension.
Most recently I've been using De-oxit followed by a quick dry electrical cleaner.
Each bulkhead connectors has a foam seal - DMT sells new ones.
As far as dielectric grease goes, I've been using it on some connectors but am not convinced its great for moisture protection. I've seen green oxidation in the grease when taking them apart a few years later.
The female terminals can't easily get an abrasive under the rolls without messing up the tension.
Most recently I've been using De-oxit followed by a quick dry electrical cleaner.
Each bulkhead connectors has a foam seal - DMT sells new ones.
As far as dielectric grease goes, I've been using it on some connectors but am not convinced its great for moisture protection. I've seen green oxidation in the grease when taking them apart a few years later.
I used that "DeOxit" when I did some wiring on my BIL's 72 Duster.
Another method - I haven't tried but will on a spare.
Here's some pics.
No Spark help
Yup. Once the connectors are seperated, that's the hardest part IMO.
Here's some pics.
No Spark help
Did you work it back and forth, and then leave it on or clean it off.
My only concern was that it might attack the foam or some plastics. I found it etches the plastic on the new style fuses in my '85 wagon. Oops!
The whole underhood harness is only about $130 (for my 69 cuda) on sale at year one. I think that is comparable to the amount of effort to clean one up. The underhood one takes a beating with the high temps.
I used a wire brush, then sprayed again...THEN blew it off with compressed air.
Terminals are tinned or plated and if you use an abrasive to clean them up you might expose the base metal underneath and corrosion can start.
I would use contact cleaner.
I would use contact cleaner.
OK, OK, yes I'm a little crazy but I removed the loom and then the plastic connector and bead blasted the connectors, followed by dielectric grease.
Tinned? None that I have worked with. I have saved harnesses from 10 or more cars and have not noticed any that were not brass colored. I clean them and they shine up like a penny...almost.
Charrlie_S
Well-Known Member
I removed the connectors from the firewall. Then put the connectors in a plastic bag with white vinegar tied with a rubber band , and let it soak. Then a good water rinse, then a soak in the bag with baking soda/water mix to neutrailze the acid of the vinegar. Another water rinse, blow dry with air pressure, and a hair drier. Reassemble with dielectric grease.
RE: Tinned or not tinned.
Some were originally tinned, some were not.
On my '67's bulkhead female terminals, looks like some are.
As were headlight terminals.
But others, like this one for the alternator field, were not.
So far, none of the male bulkhead terminals appear to have been plated.
Some were originally tinned, some were not.
On my '67's bulkhead female terminals, looks like some are.
As were headlight terminals.
But others, like this one for the alternator field, were not.
So far, none of the male bulkhead terminals appear to have been plated.
Re: Replacing with new.
That depends on condition etc.
The replacement harness by M&H is OK, but my experience has been that failures will show up after a while. Nothing major, just little things that result in poorer connections.
Save the original harness if you do replace. The replacement harness I bought uses some Packard 56 female terminals where Chrysler/Packard 58 originally were used. Works OK, but if/when you go to replace with the Chrysler type there's sometimes a problem. The plastic connector housings of one do not fit the other perfectly. If the terminal is loose in the connector, then the pushing on the connector does not mean a good connection by the terminals has been achieved.
Here's the field terminal of the Year One/M&H harness that was on my 67 Barracuda for 15 years or so.
Three things to observe:
1. Packard 56 type terminal (compare with original Chrysler/58 style shown in previous post)
2. Permanent set to the leaf spring portion. In this respect the Chrysler Packard 58 type might be slightly better design.
3. Second crimp no longer holding insulation (maybe it never did but it should have been).
Replacing terminals:
If there is a good reason, such as crimp is bad or the wires fraying, OK. But it does shorten the wire and there's not a lot of slack on most wires at the bulkheads. I wouldn't do it if just a cleaning is needed.
When replacing the male terminals, it seems hard to find exact replacements. There doesnt seem to be a Chrysler or Packard 58 version, just Packard 56. But amongst those sold for as that, they are not all the same.
Some have the tail 'wings' and some do not.
This one does not:
This one does:
A critical distance might be from the barb to the 'wings'.
Or it may be from the shoulder to the barb that holds it in place.
Neither of these terminals looks to be the same overall length as the originals in either my car or my Jeep (which uses mostly Packard 56). Photo is a terminal from an AMC/Jeep connector next to the same two shown above.
Don't know if that's important, but something else to try to look for when buying new.
That depends on condition etc.
The replacement harness by M&H is OK, but my experience has been that failures will show up after a while. Nothing major, just little things that result in poorer connections.
Save the original harness if you do replace. The replacement harness I bought uses some Packard 56 female terminals where Chrysler/Packard 58 originally were used. Works OK, but if/when you go to replace with the Chrysler type there's sometimes a problem. The plastic connector housings of one do not fit the other perfectly. If the terminal is loose in the connector, then the pushing on the connector does not mean a good connection by the terminals has been achieved.
Here's the field terminal of the Year One/M&H harness that was on my 67 Barracuda for 15 years or so.
Three things to observe:
1. Packard 56 type terminal (compare with original Chrysler/58 style shown in previous post)
2. Permanent set to the leaf spring portion. In this respect the Chrysler Packard 58 type might be slightly better design.
3. Second crimp no longer holding insulation (maybe it never did but it should have been).
Replacing terminals:
If there is a good reason, such as crimp is bad or the wires fraying, OK. But it does shorten the wire and there's not a lot of slack on most wires at the bulkheads. I wouldn't do it if just a cleaning is needed.
When replacing the male terminals, it seems hard to find exact replacements. There doesnt seem to be a Chrysler or Packard 58 version, just Packard 56. But amongst those sold for as that, they are not all the same.
Some have the tail 'wings' and some do not.
This one does not:
This one does:
A critical distance might be from the barb to the 'wings'.
Or it may be from the shoulder to the barb that holds it in place.
Neither of these terminals looks to be the same overall length as the originals in either my car or my Jeep (which uses mostly Packard 56). Photo is a terminal from an AMC/Jeep connector next to the same two shown above.
Don't know if that's important, but something else to try to look for when buying new.
Last edited:
Moparman1967
Member
I just went through the bulkhead connectors on my Ramcharger a month ago. I used Bar Keepers Friend soft cleanser to clean all the connections. I backed the packard terminals out one by one and cleaned them and put them back. Both sides of the bulkhead connectors. I also took my under dash harness completely out of the truck and cleaned all of those connections as well while I was testing the harness for opens and shorts. My final result was stronger ignition run current (would not easily start. Would just turn over but would not start and run) brighter headlights and dash lights. Truck used to stall coming to a stop with the headlights on. After checking the harness and cleaning all contact areas, no more stalling issues and the truck fires up easily all the time now.
I used a regular toothbrush, no wire brush needed for the cleaning. It took about 20-30 seconds to clean each one (once they were removed from the plastic connector). The result was brass that looked new. It worked great! Give this stuff a try.
I used a regular toothbrush, no wire brush needed for the cleaning. It took about 20-30 seconds to clean each one (once they were removed from the plastic connector). The result was brass that looked new. It worked great! Give this stuff a try.
MobileCustoms
Well-Known Member
Got any photos of what you did?
No I do not. I didn't think that it warranted a picture.
-
