Soldering iron of X-Tronic 9020-XTS - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: intr
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 06, 2013, 04:01:54 am
content: Hello. I recently purchased an X-Tronic 9020-XTS soldering and hot air rework station. It is relatively new to the market and there do not appear to be any extensive reviews of it yet. However, there have been positive comments in the few forum posts that mention it and in the product page on Amazon.com. Actually I might decide to undertake a video review myself.But first I am trying to decide whether I really want to keep it. Overall it does work but I have had some disappointments as far as quality and design (I mean functional aspects of the design, not how it looks). I can describe that in more detail if anyone is interested but right now my main question has to do with the soldering iron.See, part of the problem is I don't know what to expect. This is the first piece of soldering equipment I've bought beyond a cheap 25W unregulated direct plug in iron. So I come looking for advice.I was hoping that with a higher powered (70W per the vendor) temperature-regulated soldering iron I would be able to solder more easily to things with a large thermal mass, but it is not working as well as I had hoped. I just don't know if this is because my expectations are off, my technique is poor, or the tool is junk.I started trying to do a little practice soldering/desoldering on an old laptop motherboard. Of course it is a multi-layer PCB. Some areas have large copper planes and others don't, but I'd imagine in the inner layers there are probably large power or ground planes all over the place. Anyway it sucks up a lot of heat.I would think a regulated iron would kick on its heater and deliver as much power as it can until the temp rises. Of course there is some thermal gradient between the sensor and the joint, which comprises the junction from the sensor to the tip and the tip to the joint, and along the tip itself. Obviously that will never be zero, as heat transfer requires a temperature gradient, but I am assuming that in a higher quality iron that gradient will be less than in a poor one.Here's the problem though: When I apply the iron to a joint on a component, like say a medium sized SMD capacitor for example, it takes forever to heat up (yes, forever--I measured it). I contact the tip to the component end cap and board, wait a few seconds (or more), and push some solder wire next to it (touching the component and board, not the tip) but it does not melt. Nor does the solder already on the component melt such that I could remove it. I also tried applying a little fresh solder (60/40 rosin core) directly at the tip to get some flux in there and fill in the gaps to hopefully improve heat transfer.Now, the unit has an indicator to show when the heater is on, and it blinks on and off rapidly while the iron is just sitting still in free air. When I touch it to the work, I wouldexpectthat after a moment the heater would come on more steadily, or even continuously, as the board sucks down all the heat it can.Butthe heater indicator does not seem to behave any differently; it flashes on and off quickly and, just based on a crude visual estimate, at about the same duty cycle as when the iron is not touching anything. So from the look of the "heater on" indicator light, it doesn't seem to be aware that all the heat is now being sucked from the end of the tip.During this time the displayed temperature is rock solid, so I am sure it thinks the regulation is working properly--indeed, it could not do otherwise--but this is where the issue arises that there is always some difference between the actual temperature at the contact point and the sensor. I simply don't know how much of a difference is reasonable.I noticed also that the tip fits rather loosely over the ceramic heater element. The seller claims that it uses a genuine Hakko element, however I have reason to strongly suspect that the included replacement element (and the one in the iron) is counterfeit. (I can give more detail if you're interested.) The seller says that it is compatible with Hakko tips. But since I haven't used any other equipment, I do not know how tight the fit is supposed to be on genuine parts. I tried putting on one of the other tips included with the unit and both were a little wiggly on the ceramic element.I was hoping heating up these big thick boards would be like night & day compared to my 25W unregulated iron, but instead I feel the difference has been scarcely noticeable at best.A few notes:I started off at 350 deg. C and tried going up a little over 400.The metal nut that secures the tip-holder sleeve was loose I noticed, and I did tighten it. (However it seems to come loose frequently on its own due to heating and cooling, but I did tighten it a few times while working to make sure.)I used the conical tip that was already installed on the iron. I know that conical tips are not ideal for heat transfer in most situations, but I tried it because, first of all, I didn't want to use the other tips because I hadn't (still haven't) decided whether to keep the unit and, second, this particular conical tip was not too fine of a point anyway. The end is rather blunt, or I should say beveled at a much flatter angle, and looks by eye to be around 1 mm diameter (just an approximation--the tip has no markings of any sort that I could find). Also I did try holding the tip at a different angle so more of the surface area of the side of the cone would be in contact with the board and component.If the question comes up, no, unfortunately I do not have a thermocouple to test it. One new piece of equipment at a timeBottom line: is this a sign of a poor quality iron, or are my expectations (or quite possibly technique) wrong?

author: marshallh
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 06, 2013, 04:37:43 am
content: Return it and get a Hakko iron.If you need someone else to say it, sure: that iron sucks. Get rid of it

author: jebcom
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2013, 04:47:20 am
content: Hello intr,Wow, I know it's a bummer to get a new toy and it doesn't seem to work right. I saw those on Amazon. I'd be surprised if the tips are actually Hakko, because if I remember correctly they throw in something like 10 tips. The Hakko tips retail for about $7 - $10 each. My Hakko T18 series tips are marked on the barrel. It's small and very light, but readable. Looks like it might be laser etched. It has Hakko, Made in Japan, and the part number. The Hakko tips on the Hakko soldering iron have just a bit of clearance, but not much. This is difficult to quantify and compare without seeing both the Hakko and the X-Tronic together, though.Your concern about the large thermal mass is understandable; it should handle it better than a lower power iron, but as to whether it should heat a certain mass, it also depends on what large is.I think you have the right idea of getting the tip just a bit wet with solder to increase the heat transfer area. On something like an SMD connection, you shouldn't have trouble getting the solder to flow.Question 1: When you turn it on cold, what is the LED pattern? is it on full for a while, or flashing the same duty cycle from the start?Question 2: Is the tip properly tinned? Is it easy to get a good smooth, even, light layer of melted solder on the working area of the tip? Or does the melted solder act like it doesn't want to stick to the tip?I can only guess about what's happening, but here are my guesses:1. The temperature readout may only show you the setpoint. This would be a sneaky trick if they don't have good control of the temperature, but it's kind of obvious when you cool the tip and the readout doesn't change.2. Maybe they're not actually sensing the temperature, and just program a duty cycle based on the temperature setpoint. That would be totally unacceptable. Does the documentation say anything about mode of temperature control?or3. If the device is supposed to sense the temperature, then maybe they have a failure mode in case the temperature sensor fails; duty cycle based on setpoint as in #2 above.4. Can you be certain that the flashing LED does coincide with current to the heater?From what you describe, I have to agree with marshallh.

author: intr
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 07, 2013, 04:01:44 am
content: QuoteI did. Thanks.QuoteThe light is on solid when I first turn it on. With a set temperature of 350 deg. C it stays on solid until it reaches 350, which is 21 seconds from room temperature.QuoteYes. It came with some tinning applied already of course, and I added some clean solder and wiped it off and it looked fine.QuoteYes, the manual is clear on it.QuoteIt claims to use a Samsung MCU with a PID algorithm.QuoteQuoteThose are interesting points and they got me thinking...I plugged the station in through my "Kill-A-Watt" mains power plug meter. I figured this would be more accurate than eyeballing the duty cycle of the heater indicator light, and I got some interesting results. All the following tests were done with a set point of 350 deg. C.First of all, with the main switch on but everything else off (iron, hot air, display), the unit wastes 4 W with a power factor of 0.5.When I flip on the iron, it jumps to over 150 W and very quickly decreases. (Probably due to a combination of inrush/charging caps/transformer reactance and having the heater on full blast.) It gets under 100 W in about 5 seconds. By the time the temperature gets to 350 the power consumption is at 40 W and continues to decrease as all the parts of the iron warm up.My initial round of tests are using the default conical tip I mentioned in my first post. In free, still air the power consumption at the wall stabilized in the range 20-27 W, estimated time-weighted average 24 W. That's fine.The next test is to touch the tip to a big heat sink--a solid aluminum bar measuring 6" x 1" x 1/4" (152 x 25 x 6 mm). This bar has a very high heat capacity. I can leave the iron on it for minutes and still touch it with my fingers. Anyway, what I did is touch the tip on the large side (6" x 1") of the bar near the center of the long axis (i.e., 3" on either side) and I held the tip at a very shallow angle such that the entire side of the conical tip was in contact with the bar.With this heat sink, power consumption at the wall increased and fluctuated in the range 26-33 W, estimated average 30 W.Next I tried a different kind of heat sink. I had on hand a steel tray from an external hard drive enclosure. It measures slightly larger than a 3.5" HDD and a little less than 1 mm thick. The main plane has a grid of holes. Also it has some tabs sticking up along the sides where screws mount the HDD. I put the iron against this piece of metal right where one of the tabs sticking up meets the large plane at the edge at a 90 degree angle so the tip touched both the large plane and the tab.In this configuration, power consumption at the wall fluctuated from 22 to 31 W, estimated average 28.Next I tried amuchlarger tip--a knife blade type. It's very thick and wide and has a diagonal, beveled front edge. I placed this against my heat sinks by putting the large flat side of the tip in full contact with the heat sink.With this tip and the aluminum bar heat sink, power was 33-40 W, 35 avg.With the external HDD enclosure's steel plane it was 27-33 W, 29 avg.Finally I tried soldering actually on the laptop motherboard by picking a spot where there is a large area of solder on a large copper plane. Probably it is a ground plane but I did not check. Anyway there are a few bare areas with lots of solder "dots" where I think some other part of the laptop's inner structure rests. I put the iron to these and gradually applied a little fresh solder to make good thermal contact and pushed it around. The most power it would take was 40 W, and even that was only for a brief second; mostly it was around 35 W.So, that pretty much affirms my subjective impressions from yesterday: it's a tiny,tinybit better than my 25 W unregulated iron, but only by the slightest bit, and certainly nowhere near what was promised.Also, by the way, the displayed temperature remained rock solid at 350 during all of this.Conclusion:It is temperature regulated, but incredibly poorly. There seems to be a steep thermal gradient such that the sensor thinks the temperature is fine when the tip temperature is actually totally inadequate. It's not any better than a 25 W unregulated iron in practice.Experiment:If anyone else is interested, I would be very interested in seeing results from some other soldering stations. This experiment is designed to test how well the soldering station's temperature feedback sensing correlates to its power delivery. It is definitely not a precise experiment by any means, as there are plenty of sources of error. But I think we should be able to get a sensible result. The idea is more to compare stations' regulation systems quasi-quantitatively rather than precisely. Also, this is not about how well the station controls the temperatureitmeasures but rather whether it accurately adjusts its power delivery to maintain what the set temperature should be at the end of the tip.If anyone feels like participating, please:Pick a moderately sized tip; the knife blade I used was a bit extreme on the large side, but not too fine a tip; a medium chisel I suppose?Set the target temp to 350 deg. C.Find a heat sink such as a bar or plate. A pipe would probably be OK, but hold the tip against it longitudinally for maximum contact area.Let temperature and power consumption stabilize a little, but not for so long that the heat sink rises in temperature too much.Report min, max, and eyeball estimate time-weighted average power consumption, and measured temperature if your station displays it.Then:Do the first test in still, free air, with the iron outside its holder.Next do test(s) with one or more heat sinks.

author: benemorius
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2013, 08:05:17 am
content: Your expectations are high for the iron you're using. The irons on the x-tronic units are decent everyday soldering irons. The mistake was to put one to a motherboard and expect magic.The main attraction of the x-tronic units is the hot air, so if you got it primarily for the soldering iron then it might be better to return it and get a better dedicated soldering iron if you need that. If you don't actuallyneeda better iron and you intend to use the hot air too, then you made a great buy.The usual problems with reworking a pc motherboard are the heatsinking copper pours and the lead-free solder. Also the conical tip is going to be rubbish for that. It sounds like you're not getting good thermal conductivity to the joint. Make sure to use molten solder on the tip to increase the amount of surface area for heat transfer to the joint. Always.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2013, 10:47:31 am
content: Quote from: benemorius on May 07, 2013, 08:05:17 amTry a Metcal or JBC for that.

author: intr
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 07, 2013, 11:13:10 pm
content: QuoteThat would be a mistake, but I would not say I expected magic. I would, however, have liked to see it put out more power. Instead power consumption at the wall went up only 10 W fully loaded over idle, and even that amounted to only 35 total, which is half of what is advertised, not to mention the fact that this is measuredat the wall, so the actual heat output is substantially less once you subtract the power consumed by the electronics and factor in the efficiency of the power supply. In contrast my 25 W direct plug in iron converts 23~24 W into pure heat.QuoteQuoteIt sounds like you did not read my post benemorius

author: benemorius
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 06:24:00 am
content: Quote from: intr on May 07, 2013, 11:13:10 pmFear not; I did. It's a long post, but fortunately I'm a good listener.Can you be more specific?It sounds as though you are not getting very much heat transferred from the tip to the joint, hence my advice on how to improve that. Do you have reason to believe that this can't be the problem? Unless I've missed something, it's either this or your new soldering iron is broken. That's possible too of course. It just seems less likely from where I sit.

author: intr
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 07:56:33 am
content: Your points are well taken.The reason I feel this way is that, as described in my 2nd post, I also did try a very large, thick knife type tip and attempted to heat up a large copper plane on a laptop motherboard, and I applied some clean solder as I did so and pushed it around a bit. Of course, I did not expect the whole thing to melt, but I was curious to see if the iron would sense the load and respond appropriately. However in that test it peaked for a brief second (like literally 1 second or less) at 40 W and was mostly around 35 W. That's power consumption at the wall. So subtract off power supply loss and the electronics and it only scarcely puts out any more than my super cheap 25 W plug in. That is my theory anyway.

author: benemorius
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 02:13:33 pm
content: I agree that something seems screwy about the power consumption, but I don't get the impression that that's what is keeping you from reflowing a single SMD pad. The thermal mass of the chisel tip alone should be sufficient for that, regardless of the power of the heating element.Did any of the lead-free solder actually melt in all of this? Maybe the temperature is just way off.I'll play around with my unit and see how it responds to thermal loads. I haven't had any trouble soldering with it, but that doesn't mean it can't still be poorly designed.

author: intr
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 05:58:39 pm
content: I did another little test today. I set the iron to the lowest temperature (200 deg. C). 60/40 solder melted readily. The solder on some very small unpopulated pads on the motherboard also melted, a bit more hesitantly, which is just what I would expect for lead free solder (actually I would think the temperature would need to be a bit higher than 200). Anyway, lacking a thermocouple to actually measure, I would say I think the temperature accuracy is pretty good, and in fact it may be a little hotter than the display actually (most lead free solders require at least 213 according to the table on Kester's web site; although, I should also point out I don't know exactly what the solder on this motherboard is).As I mentioned previously, I tested heating a large area on the motherboard with some clean solder added for better thermal contact. However I had not tried that with my aluminum bar test. Of course I did not try that because I knew that the solder would not wet on the aluminum and it could not possibly get hot enough. Nonetheless, today I tried placing a small ball of solder on top of the aluminum bar and then applying the large flat edge of the knife tip on top of it, which did cause it to melt and spread out under the iron. Of course, it did not adhere to the aluminum, and I would certainly not expect it to either; rather the point was just to get some liquid metal in the interface for better thermal conductivity. In this condition I was able to get a brief peak power draw of 45 W. Mostly it was in the upper 30's. Whether that is reasonable or not I do not yet know.Anyway, I have gone ahead and ordered a Hakko FX-888. It should be shipping out today. I will compare them and report back.By the way, I want to mention that I have been in contact with the seller, the_mercantile_station/X-Tronic, and their customer service is excellent.

author: intr
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 22, 2013, 01:30:47 am
content: Experimental ComparisonHere I compare the Hakko FX-888 and X-Tronic 9020-XTS, as well as a genuine Hakko tip and no-name Hakko-compatible tip. I got a Hakko FX-888 (the analog style control one; so much more convenient than the quirky digital interface). Graphs/tables showing H and X refer to Hakko FX-888 and X-Tronic 9020-XTS. Pictures are attached at the end of this post. (Can't insert them inline?)The same tip was used in all tests except where noted in the calorimetry experiment. The tip used was the Hakko T18-K, a knife-blade style tip. The knife tip was chosen for its high thermal conductivity due to its size. This is a genuine Hakko tip from HMC Electronics. Theexactsame tip was used with both irons, not just the same model; I swapped it back and forth.Temperature CalibrationI needed to calibrate the temperature between the two stations but, lacking a proper thermocouple, I had to try some homemade ones.1. Overview of the setup. The wire labelled "iron (?)" came from a twist-tie. It is magnetic and oxidizes fairly quickly in water (a black layer formed on it after I left the end submerged one night; later I sanded it off). So I am assuming it is iron, or maybe some sort of steel. The other wire is copper.2. The wires run into individual water baths where they are soldered to leads that then go over to the amplifier. The water is room temperature, about 20 C. A separate flask/beaker is used for each because the water is ever so slightly conductive and causes inaccuracy with the high input impedance amplifier. The two leads from the water baths to the amp are both made of the same metal.3. LM833 opamp in standard inverting configuration. Gain is about 20 and input impedance about 22 kOhm. A bypass capacitor in the feedback loop makes a low pass filter. Power supply is +/- 9 V with bypass caps on the breadboard near the chip.4. The thermocouple and amp are sensitive enough to detect the warmth of being held between finger and thumb. At room temperature it showed -8.4 mV. When touched it rose to -6.2 mV. Upon letting go it gradually went back down to -8.4. The sign is not really important but with the polarity of the leads, the temperature of the "cold" junction, and the inverting amplifier, it so happens that warmer temperatures increase the output voltage. It's negative here due to output offset of the opamp (although I did add a resistor from the non-inverting input to ground to balance the offset voltage due to input bias current). That doesn't really matter though as I'm only interested in relative values.5. Method of applying the iron to the thermocouple. Molten solder is used between the tip and the twisted wires for better thermal conductivity. The solder itself should not interfere with the thermocouple's response characteristic.6, 7. The thermocouple exhibits a non-monotonic response; as the temperature increases beyond a certain point the output voltage actually begins to drop. I am not sure why, but it is consistent. Magnetic materials exhibit a change in their thermoelectric response past their Curie temperature, but the Curie temperature of iron is much higher than what is involved here. Perhaps the iron wire is in fact some steel alloy.Note on testing: Two trials were done for each station, interleaved. So first I tested Hakko throughout its temperature range, then the X-Tronic, then Hakko again, then X-Tronic again. All 4 trials are shown in the graph. You can see that the results are quite repeatable.Result: The X-Tronic seems to be 75 to 100 C hotter than the Hakko at the same set temperature. That is quite a huge difference so of course I was skeptical of my result. However the interleaved trials of the two stations are repeatable, so I cannot really doubt it. In fact, here is a second experiment...8. The experiment described above was actually my 2nd attempt. My first thermocouple was not as reliable. It was made of aluminum (foil) and copper. Due to the nature of the materials, the construction was not as reliable. Also I was using a single water bath instead of two because I had not yet realized the significance of the water's conductivity. Therefore I put much more faith in the result presented already. Nonetheless, the earlier thermocouple results as shown in this graph, although not as clean, actually do confirm the same ~70 degree C temperature difference. Note that in this experiment the amp gain was about 10. I increased it to 20 for the latter experiment since the difference in the Seebeck coefficient between iron and copper is smaller than that between aluminum and copper.Temperature Regulation & Power: CalorimetryThe next experiment is a calorimetry style setup intended to measure the output from the irons. A theoretically ideal temperature feedback loop would sample the temperature right at the contact point. Of course, that is not possible, but it at least makes sense that a higher quality iron should have better temperature regulation. Therefore, if you put a heat sink in contact with the iron, an ideal regulation system would turn the iron on to full power until the heat sink reached the set temperature. Now, with the experiment here, the output power and temperature regulation are factored in together.The procedure is to heat a large steel bolt for 3 minutes, then submerge it in a known quantity of water at a known temperature and observe the maximum temperature afterward.Following the results of the temperature calibration, the X-Tronic was set to a target temperature of 225 C while the Hakko was set to 315 C. Again, this may seem like an unfair comparison then, but looking at all the thermocouple results these seem to in fact be the same temperature. I did one trial with the Hakko reduced to 300 C, which made no difference (see results table).I picked these temperatures for several reasons. First, the thermocouple readings were very repeatable at these points. Also, it is at a sloped segment of the curve, not near the peak, so it is easier to see a difference because of the greater slope. Also, the results at the next lower and higher temperature set points were highly repeatable. Therefore this is the area of the results in which I have the most confidence. However, the Al-Cu thermocouple, while less reliable I feel, showed that 315 on the Hakko might be a bit higher than 225 on the X-Tronic, so I also did a trial with the Hakko at 300.Note: I also experimented with the different tips--the genuine Hakko T18-K knife tip and the no-name knife style tip that came with the X-Tronic.9. Method of heating bolt. For each trial the tip is first cleaned and then has fresh solder applied to the beveled edge that will contact the bolt in order to improve thermal conductivity. The bolt is heated like this for three minutes. The bolt is placed on multiple layers of folded paper towel for insulation from the table beneath.10. Method of measuring temperature rise. 200 mL of room temperature (~20 C) water is placed in a styrofoam cup before the experiment begins. The bolt is placed in the cup and the water is stirred for a few minutes and the pre-heating temperature is read. The bolt is then dried off, heated as shown in the previous picture, and placed back into the water. The water is then gently stirred with the thermometer and the maximum temperature observed is recorded. Between trials the cup and bolt are returned to room temperature by washing with cool running water and letting them sit in the open air.11. Results. Multiple interleaved trials were performed (Hakko then X-Tronic then Hakko again then X-Tronic again) The Hakko T18-K tip was used (except for the last two rows; ignore those for a moment). Now, you see that both irons performed decently. Note the 5th row where I reduced the Hakko set temperature to 300 in order to test how much of a difference the temperature setting makes (and therefore how concerned I should be about error in the temperature calibration phase of the experiment) and you can see it makes little difference (or in this particular trial actually none).To summarize the difference between the stations: there is little to none. The Hakko is clearly betterin my measurements,BUTyou have to take into account the experimental error. Using a proper, accurate thermocouple and a better controlled calorimetry setup we might see less or even no difference between the two. (Build quality of the Hakko is, though, without question way beyond the X-Tronic.) The biggest source of error is probably the temperature calibration. Clearly the temperature set point will affect the results of the calorimetry experiment. Therefore it would be wise to repeat the experiment with a proper thermocouple to get an accurate calibration. Then, being certain the stations are actually maintaining the same temperature, the power output and regulation accuracy could be retested with more confidence. As it is, my confidence in the accuracy of my setup is only moderate, so that is why I say that although the Hakko measures better, I cannot conclusively say that it is better, and my experiment is not sufficient to differentiate them I feel.Finally, look at the last 2 rows. These trials used the knife tip that was included with the X-Tronic. (The X-Tronic 9020 is advertised as being compatible with the Hakko tips and ships with an assortment of no-name Hakko compatible tips.) This test was done only with the X-Tronic station. You can see that the no-name "compatible" tip is pathetic compared to the real Hakko brand tip.Regarding the Hakko heater elementsI mentioned in a previous post my reservations about the authenticity of the Hakko elements included with the X-Tronic unit. I was suspicious for a number of reasons, including subtle differences in the logo printing and a comparison of the revision dates of various copies of the A1321 element instruction manual I found around the web. After exchanging messages with the seller about some of these points, I got an interesting response. I do not want to betray the trust of private conversations, but the community should be aware, and I am quite happy with the seller's response, so I will post a couple small quotes:QuoteQuoteI am very impressed with the response from the seller. Some vendors would brush it under the rug. I am very happy with this response. Thank you. Of course now, I can't confirm that the elements are indeed from the same factory as the genuine ones, and that seems highly suspicious as well since they are supposedly made in Japan (according to the label) and re-sold through China, but I will not question further as I don't have anything else to go on and, in any case, the performance seems reasonable enough as my experiments show.A minor problem with the displayI encountered a problem where a couple elements on the VFD are not illuminating (pic #12--sleep timer is set to 20). Specifically, the left two segments of the left digit on the soldering iron sleep timer. It is a relatively minor issue. After contacting the seller, he said he has seen it before a few times but it is extremely rare--5 times in the last 4 years he estimated. Anyway, he offered me a partial refund to compensate.Again, excellent response from the_mercantile_station. He has also patiently replied to some lengthy e-mails from me. Best customer service you will find on the net.[Edited 2013-05-21 20:50 CDT - Fixed a couple minor errors and clarified some sentences.]

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 22, 2013, 05:59:33 am
content: Curious to see that ceramic heating element, please take a close-up photo near bright light at the background if you had a chance.Made threads comparing the fake A1321 heater element vs genuine one ->HERE, and also fake vs genuine 900M series soldering tips ->HERE.

author: intr
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 23, 2013, 04:07:42 am
content: I noticed that thread too. My element looks much better than the fake one in that thread.Here are some pictures. 1st picture with flash, 2nd with room lighting. In both, the X-Tronic is on top and the Hakko beneath. Notice that the metal tube on the Hakko handle is flared out at the end to provide support for the base of the tip.Both elements are very similar. It seems that the X-Tronic may be a little smaller in diameter. The tip seems to fit a little looser as you slide it over the element and wobble it back and forth. This is confirmed in my pictures; if you open them in a program where you can measure distances, the X-Tronic element is about 9 pixels wider in both pictures. (It was this way too in some other pictures I took at different angles, not shown here.) I don't have a caliper on hand to tell you what 9 "pixels" actually is.Both elements have a groove down their length, the shape of the end is the same, and the finish looks the same. They both have the "translucent" appearance and you can see some wires internally.The genuine Hakko element has a fibrous white wrapping at the bottom where the leads come out, as seen in the pics on the other thread. The X-Tronic one has some soft rubbery wrapping like Teflon or silicon. Also the Hakko one is labelled "* Hakko 003" (where * represents their pentagon logo) while the other is unmarked.Note: There are two X-Tronic elements in the picture. One is the one that came in the iron; the other is the spare included, and its packaging and instruction sheet.As a side note, not referring to the element itself, the PCB inside the handle on the Hakko has much better quality soldering. Also the X-Tronic board has a mysterious small cylindrical component on it wrapped in an unmarked black plastic sleeve.Anyway I have also posted a photo of the instruction sheet included with the spare element that is also included with the X-Tronic bundle. You can see subtle differences in the shape of the letters in the logo, and less subtle differences in spelling.An interesting thing to note is that the revision date on this sheet is April 1999 while I found a few other versions on the web and on Hakko's site that were all dated later.I wanted to reiterate about the X-Tronic tips, to make sure I am clear: they arenotfake tips, since they do not even claim to be Hakko tips. They are just advertised as compatible. They actually have no markings at all. But again I'm not saying they're fake; they're just compatible non-Hakko tips of unknown origin--and perform poorly.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2013, 04:48:43 am
content: Thanks for sharing, and I cracked up when seeing this photo, uh oh ..... SOLD ... DERING ...