Talk:Cosmoline

message: *Petroleum taste?  Citation needed?209.191.212.194 07:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "It is the purified residue obtained from the distillation of petroleum oils". Why would a citation be needed for the phrase you mention, then? Bloodshedder 10:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Taste?

message: I have heard the claim in some areas that cosmoline purchased during the Second World War by the US government was not just a heavy fraction of petroleum (this description makes it sound almost like asphalt, which it isn't) had rust-preventative additives.  These additives, from what I have read, included 1, 1, 1-trichloroethane, long-chain chlorinated paraffins, and sulfonated lard.  These were all common additives to machinists' cutting oil used at the time, and some are still used in industry; it was believed that they reduced the surface tension of melted cosmoline (cosmoline was often applied heated over a kettle of boiling water to partially melt it) and helped the rough, porous, ceramic-like phosphate surface imparted by the "parkerizing" rustproofing process absorb the oily mixture to form a barrier against moisture and corrosion.  Apparently over time the sulfur and chlorinated hydrocarbons in the mixture could react with the phosphate to change its color from black to greenish grey, though this also varied with the exact chemical composition of the "parkerizing," which during the war varied considerably from manufacturer to manufacturer.
I have read that gunsmiths currently who wish to duplicate the WWII-era "green parkerized" coating start with a zinc-based parkerizing "recipe," which makes a phosphate layer that is several shades lighter in color than the usual black, coat the fresh parkerized parts in cosmoline and/or chlorinated/sulfated cutting oil, and bake them in a hot oven for a few hours.  Supposedly the odor is memorably foul, but it turns the phosphate coating green, as the customers want.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.41.40.21 (talk) 12:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  rust preventative? 

message: theres barely any information here, what about a section for toxicity info, etc m,s,d,s, info and the like should be here with its own section too.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gawdsmak (talk • contribs) 19:40, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: also I'd strongly assume that it contains aromatic hydrocarbons, due to the mentioned slight fluorescence. Aliphatic hydrocarbons don't do that. Maybe it's phenol, as it was seemingly used for disinfection, too. 2003:ED:F739:181B:60A1:6945:62EF:98A (talk) 17:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  theres barely any information here, what about a section for toxicity etc msds info 

message: "Penetrating oil (such as WD-40"
WD-40 is not a penetrating oil. It is almost 100% white spirit, with a little added mineral oil.
86.10.62.169 (talk) 15:55, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  solvent error 

message: Since 'cosmoline' is a genericized trademark, I think it should not be capitalized. There are exceptions. Like at the beginning of a sentence. Or when referring to versions of the product before the name became genericized. But in the usual case, 'cosmoline' should not be capitalized.
Sometimes the article uses lowercase 'cosmoline'. Other times, outside the exceptions, the article uses initial uppercase 'Cosmoline'. I would like to standardize on lowercase.
Barring objections and my laziness, I will change some of the instances of 'Cosmoline' to 'cosmoline'.
72.78.138.69 (talk) 13:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization of 'Cosmoline'